Lin, Nancy U.

PURPOSE Conventional wisdom has rendered patients with brain metastases ineligible for clinical trials for fear that poor survival could mask the benefit of otherwise promising treatments. Our group previously published the diagnosis-specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA). Updates with larger contemporary cohorts using molecular markers and newly identified prognostic factors have been published. The purposes of this work are to present all the updated indices in a single report to guide treatment choice, stratify research, and define an eligibility quotient to expand eligibility. METHODS A multi-institutional database of 6,984 patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases underwent multivariable analyses of prognostic factors and treatments associated with survival for each primary site. Significant factors were used to define the updated GPA. GPAs of 4.0 and 0.0 correlate with the best and worst prognoses, respectively. RESULTS Significant prognostic factors varied by diagnosis and new prognostic factors were identified. Those factors were incorporated into the updated GPA with robust separation ( P < .01) between subgroups. Survival has improved, but varies widely by GPA for patients with non–small-cell lung, breast, melanoma, GI, and renal cancer with brain metastases from 7-47 months, 3-36 months, 5-34 months, 3-17 months, and 4-35 months, respectively. CONCLUSION Median survival varies widely and our ability to estimate survival for patients with brain metastases has improved. The updated GPA (available free at brainmetgpa.com) provides an accurate tool with which to estimate survival, individualize treatment, and stratify clinical trials. Instead of excluding patients with brain metastases, enrollment should be encouraged and those trials should be stratified by the GPA to ensure those trials make appropriate comparisons. Furthermore, we recommend the expansion of eligibility to allow for the enrollment of patients with previously treated brain metastases who have a 50% or greater probability of an additional year of survival (eligibility quotient > 0.50).

Abstract Background: It has become increasingly clear that effective treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) requires an in-depth understanding of the molecular differences between primary tumors and metastases. The AURORA US Network was established to collect primary breast cancer-metastasis pairs for multi-platform genomic profiling in order to identify the molecular drivers of metastatic disease. AURORA US has both a retrospective and prospective phase. This is the first report of the retrospective phase. Methods: Archived tissue samples from the primary tumor and at least one distant metastasis were retrospectively collected from 83 MBC patients. Following internal quality assessment, samples from 55 pts, including 105 distinct metastatic lesions, were subject to DNA low pass whole genome and exome sequencing, DNA methylation arrays, and RNA sequencing. Early analyses of these multi-platform data include: DNA methylation, tumor gene expression and microenvironmental signatures, somatic and germline variants, DNA copy number changes, and structural variants between breast primaries and matched metastases. Results: Median age at diagnosis was 49 years (25-76); 32 (58%) were Stage I or II at presentation, 27 (49%) had a family history of breast cancer, and 20 (36%) had a second breast primary. Median disease-free interval before developing MBC was 2 years (range 0-36, 5 patients presented with Stage IV). Median overall survival from initial presentation was 4 years (range 0-37). Median survival after developing MBC was 1 year (range 0-13), with a median of three treatments. Primary tissue samples were banked from 1977-2017 and metastases were banked from 1999-2017. Clinical phenotypes of the primaries included 27 HR+ (49%), 15 triple negative (TNBC, 27%), and 11 HER2+ (20%, 12 missing HER2 status). Intrinsic subtype distribution of the primaries included 17 Basal-like (31%), 17 Luminal A (31%), 7 Normal-like (13%), 5 HER2-enriched (9%), and 1 Luminal B, with 8 pending. All metastases from the Basal-like cases remained Basal-like, while metastases from luminal primaries tended to gain HER2-Enriched subtype features (5/18, p = 0.01). Overall, we identified significant metastasis-enriched alterations in metabolism pathways, an increase in proliferation, and the loss of differentiation signatures and immune infiltrates with progression; the latter being the most pronounced in brain metastases. The most frequent somatic mutations in this cohort were in TP53, NCOR1, and RUNX1. Interestingly, ERBB2, EGFR, and ATM were also mutated in ≥10% of the tumors sequenced. In almost all cases, CpG island hypermethylation was clonally present in the primary tumor and persisted stably in the majority of metastatic lesions. Promoter CpG island hypermethylation was also identified in some metastatic lesions at JAM3, an important cellular adhesion molecule,and this was accompanied by reduced mRNA expression. CONCLUSIONS: Collection of banked primary and metastatic tissue pairs identified a young MBC cohort with a high frequency of breast cancer family history and second breast primaries. Molecular characterization of luminal tumor pairs highlighted acquisition of aggressive traits including increased proliferation and loss of differentiation in the metastases. In contrast, basal-like pairs remained relatively unchanged, except for the loss of immune activation. Ongoing analyses to be presented include clonal heterogeneity and phylogeny, novel metastasis signature discovery, gene fusion, and endogenous retrovirus detection. Citation Format: Tari A King, Minetta C Liu, Marni B McClure, Toshinori Hinoue, Benjamin J Kelly, Chad J Creighton, Jay Bowen, Kristen Leraas, Robyn T Burns, Sara Coppens, Salma Rezk, Amy L Garrett, Justin M Balko, Joel S Parker, Ben H Park, Ian Krop, Carey Anders, Katherine A Hoadley, Julie Gastier-Foster, Mothaffar F Rimawi, Rita Nanda, Nancy U Lin, Claudine Isaacs, P. Kelly Marcom, Anna Maria Storniolo, Fergus J Couch, Elaine R Mardis, Adrian V Lee, Uma Chandran, Peter W Laird, Susan G Hilsenbeck, Larry Norton, Andrea L Richardson, W. Fraser Symmans, Lisa A Carey, Antonio C Wolff, Nancy E Davidson, Charles M Perou, the AURORA US Network. Multiplatform analysis of matched primary and metastatic breast tumors from the AURORA US Network [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS3-08.

1052 Background: TIG, an agonistic anti-DR5 monoclonal antibody, triggers apoptosis in DR5+ human tumor cells without the aid of crosslinking. TIG has shown strong in vitro and in vivo activity against basal-like breast cancer cells that is enhanced by chemotherapy like paclitaxel. Methods: Randomized 2:1 phase II trial of nab-PAC with/without TIG in TNBC patients. Patients stratified by prior exposure to chemotherapy in the metastatic setting. Patients received nab-PAC weekly x 3 and TIG every other week, every 28 days. Primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary objectives were safety, progression free survival (PFS), TIG immunogenicity, and PK. Biopsies and circulating tumor cells were collected. The trial was not powered to compare arms but allowed early stopping for futility and was sized to estimate ORR with 95% CI. Results: 64 patients enrolled, 60 treated; 39 in the combination arm and 21 in the nab-PAC arm. Of the 39 in the combination arm, there were 2 CR, 9 PR (1 near CR, 96% tumor reduction), 11 SD and 17 PD; ORR 28% (95% CI 14%-42%). Of the 21 in the single agent arm, there were no CR, 8 PR, 4 SD and 9 PD; ORR 38% (95% CI 17%-59%). Higher ORRs were seen in the chemotherapy naïve patients (58% vs. 15% combination and 42% vs. 35% single agent). 2 patients with CR, 1 near CR, and 1 PR in the combination arm are still on therapy (602+, 531+, 466+, 460+ days). PFS was similar in both groups (3.6 months); higher in chemotherapy naïve patients. Combination was well tolerated (most toxicities grade 1/2); the most common AEs were fatigue, alopecia, peripheral sensory neuropathy, anemia, neutropenia, nausea, thrombocytopenia, anorexia, diarrhea, and vomiting. No grade 4 or 5 toxicity. No apparent added toxicity with TIG was seen. Conclusions: Combination therapy with nab-PAC + TIG was well tolerated, without apparent improvement in ORR relative to nab-PAC alone; however, 4 subjects treated as first-line had prolonged clinical benefit with the combination, and correlative studies will investigate markers that might predict clinical outcome (Next-Gen genomic analysis). Clinical trial information: F101004001.

605 Background: Pre-clinical and nonrandomized clinical data support synergy of the combination of bevacizumab and trastuzumab. We conducted a randomized double-blinded phase III trial of chemotherapy/trastuzumab ± bevacizumab to evaluate efficacy (PFS after treatment initiation) of the addition of bevacizumab in first-line treatment of HER2+ MBC. Methods: Days 1, 8 and 15 paclitaxel ± carboplatin were administered with trastuzumab and either placebo or bevacizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks for a total of 6 months. Antibody therapy was then continued without chemo every 3 weeks, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Disease assessments were performed every 3 months. Results: Ninety-six of the planned 489 analyzable patients (pts) were accrued between 2007 and 2009, at which time the study terminated due to poor accrual. Seventy % of pts were post-menopausal, 60% had ER+/HER2+ BC. Median age was 55 years (28-80). Outcomes and toxicities are summarized on the tables below. Median follow-up was 30 months. Conclusions: The combination of chemotherapy, trastuzumab, and bevacizumab did not significantly increased toxicity, and was overall safe and well tolerated. No significant differences in clinical benefit were observed between both treatment arms. Data on CTCs and Quality of Life will be presented at the meeting. This study was conducted by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (Robert L. Comis, MD, Chair) and supported in part by Public Health Service Grants CA23318, CA66636, CA21115, CA32291, CA31946, CA49957, CA27525, CA14548, CA17145, CA32102, CA25224, CA49. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

AbstractA recent meeting was held on March 22, 2019, among the FDA, clinical scientists, pharmaceutical and biotech companies, clinical trials cooperative groups, and patient advocacy groups to discuss challenges and potential solutions for increasing development of therapeutics for central nervous system metastases. A key issue identified at this meeting was the need for consistent tumor measurement for reliable tumor response assessment, including the first step of standardized image acquisition with an MRI protocol that could be implemented in multicenter studies aimed at testing new therapeutics. This document builds upon previous consensus recommendations for a standardized brain tumor imaging protocol (BTIP) in high-grade gliomas and defines a protocol for brain metastases (BTIP-BM) that addresses unique challenges associated with assessment of CNS metastases. The “minimum standard” recommended pulse sequences include: (i) parameter matched pre- and post-contrast inversion recovery (IR)–prepared, isotropic 3D T1-weighted gradient echo (IR-GRE); (ii) axial 2D T2-weighted turbo spin echo acquired after injection of gadolinium-based contrast agent and before post-contrast 3D T1-weighted images; (iii) axial 2D or 3D T2-weighted fluid attenuated inversion recovery; (iv) axial 2D, 3-directional diffusion-weighted images; and (v) post-contrast 2D T1-weighted spin echo images for increased lesion conspicuity. Recommended sequence parameters are provided for both 1.5T and 3T MR systems. An “ideal” protocol is also provided, which replaces IR-GRE with 3D TSE T1-weighted imaging pre- and post-gadolinium, and is best performed at 3T, for which dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion is included. Recommended perfusion parameters are given.

Abstract Background Breast cancer treatment is based on estrogen receptors (ERs), progesterone receptors (PRs), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). At the time of metastasis, receptor status can be discordant from that at initial diagnosis. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of discordance and its effect on survival and subsequent treatment in patients with breast cancer brain metastases (BCBM). Methods A retrospective database of 316 patients who underwent craniotomy for BCBM between 2006 and 2017 was created. Discordance was considered present if the ER, PR, or HER2 status differed between the primary tumor and the BCBM. Results The overall receptor discordance rate was 132/316 (42%), and the subtype discordance rate was 100/316 (32%). Hormone receptors (HR, either ER or PR) were gained in 40/160 (25%) patients with HR-negative primary tumors. HER2 was gained in 22/173 (13%) patients with HER2-negative primary tumors. Subsequent treatment was not adjusted for most patients who gained receptors—nonetheless, median survival (MS) improved but did not reach statistical significance (HR, 17–28 mo, P = 0.12; HER2, 15–19 mo, P = 0.39). MS for patients who lost receptors was worse (HR, 27–18 mo, P = 0.02; HER2, 30–18 mo, P = 0.08). Conclusions Receptor discordance between primary tumor and BCBM is common, adversely affects survival if receptors are lost, and represents a missed opportunity for use of effective treatments if receptors are gained. Receptor analysis of BCBM is indicated when clinically appropriate. Treatment should be adjusted accordingly. Key Points 1. Receptor discordance alters subtype in 32% of BCBM patients. 2. The frequency of receptor gain for HR and HER2 was 25% and 13%, respectively. 3. If receptors are lost, survival suffers. If receptors are gained, consider targeted treatment.

Abstract BACKGROUND A major impediment to improving neuro-oncology outcomes is poor clinical trial accrual. METHODS We convened a multi-stakeholder group including Society for Neuro-Oncology, Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology, patient advocacy groups, clinical trial cooperative groups, and other partners to determine how we can improve trial accrual. RESULTS We described selected factors contributing to poor trial accrual and possible solutions. We focused on patient and community factors, disparities, physician and provider factors, clinical trial factors, and site and organizational factors CONCLUSIONS We will implement strategies with the intent to double accrual to neuro-oncology trials over the next 5 years.

Abstract Many factors contribute to the poor survival of malignant brain tumor patients, some of which are not easily remedied. However, one contributor to the lack of progress that may be modifiable is poor clinical trial accrual. Surveys of brain tumor patients and neuro-oncology providers suggest that clinicians do a poor job of discussing clinical trials with patients and referring patients for clinical trials. Yet, data from the Cancer Action Network of the American Cancer Society suggest that most eligible oncology patients asked to enroll on a clinical trial will agree to do so. To this end, the Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO) in collaboration with the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) Working Group, patient advocacy groups, clinical trial cooperative groups, including the Adult Brain Tumor Consortium (ABTC), and other partners are working together with the intent to double clinical trial accrual over the next 5 years. Here we describe the factors contributing to poor clinical trial accrual in neuro-oncology and offer possible solutions.