Dasari, Arvind

e19120 Background: The incidence and prevalence of Neuroendocrine Neoplasms (NENs) are rapidly rising. Epidemiologic trends have been reported for common NENs, but specific data for lung NENs has been lacking. Methods: We conducted a retrospective population-based analysis utilizing the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, and studied lung NENs patients from 1988 to 2015. Associated population data was utilized to report the annual age-adjusted incidence and overall survival trends. Trends in the incidence and survival of large-cell lung cancer (LCLC) and atypical carcinoid (AC) were reported from 2000-2015, while that for typical carcinoid (TC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC) were reported from 1988-2015. Results: We examined a total of 115,995 lung NENs [103,980 – SCLC; 3,303 – LCLC; 8,146 – TC; 656 – AC]. The age-adjusted incidence rate revealed decline in SCLC from 8.6 in 1988 to 5.3 in 2015 per 100,000; while other NENs showed an increase: TC increased from 0.57 in 1988 to 0.77 in 2015 per 100,000, AC increased from 0.17 in 2001 to 0.22 in 2015 per 100,000, and lastly, LCLC increased from 0.35 in 2001 to 0.41 in 2015 per 100,000. On multivariable analyses, the median overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) rate varied significantly by stage, grade, age at diagnosis, histological type, insurance type, marital status, and race. The 5-year OS rate among SCLC and LCLC patients was 5% and 17%, respectively, consistent with their high-grade nature. On the other hand, TC and AC, representing low-grade neuroendocrine tumors, had good 5-year OS: 84% and 64%, respectively. Conclusions: The incidence of lung NENs is rising, possibly because of advanced radiological techniques. However, we have seen a downtrend in the incidence of SCLCs likely because of declining smoking habits. Such population-based studies are essential for resource allocation and to prioritize future research directions.

4047 Background: BRAFV600E mutations occur in fewer than 10% of all patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and arise from sessile serrated adenomas. Despite efficacy with targeted therapies against MAPK signaling and with immunotherapies in this population, survival outcomes for pts with BRAFV600E mCRC in general are poor. Characteristics distinguishing pts with BRAFV600E mCRC with favorable versus unfavorable outcomes have not been well annotated. Methods: Records of 188 pts with BRAFV600E mCRC evaluated at MD Anderson Cancer Center between 3/2010-1/2020 were reviewed. Pts with the shortest and longest metastatic survival (N = 25 for each group) were compared. Associations between prognostic group and clinical/pathologic features were measured by odds ratio and for median survival by log-rank testing. Results: Median metastatic survival differed between the 2 BRAFV600E mCRC populations (8.6 vs 84 months, p < .0001). Pts with poor survival more commonly had primary tumors arising from the hepatic flexure/proximal transverse colon (44% vs 16%, p = .04) and more frequent hepatic involvement (75% vs 28%, p = .001). Pts with favorable survival were more likely to develop metachronous metastases (52% vs 16%, p = .01), have fewer distant organ involvement (median 1 vs 2, p = .02), and undergo definitive locoregional therapy to metastatic disease (44% vs 0%, p = .01). Microsatellite instability (36% vs 4%, p = .008) and a history of tobacco use (44% vs 16%, p = .04) were associated with a favorable prognosis. Durable responses to MAPK-targeted therapies (5/25) and immunotherapy (3/25) were noted in the favorable group. Conclusions: Pts with BRAFV600E mCRC can achieve excellent long-term survival which belies conventional context and is driven by locoregional and systemic treatment options alike. Anatomic localization of the primary tumor and prior exposures may highlight environmental influences on tumor biology which account for the clinical heterogeneity of pts with BRAFV600E mCRC.

e15055 Background: An increasing number of pt and tumor c have predictive and prognostic implications in mCRC. However, there is no consensus on their reporting in trial results. Methods: Pt c and SF from 136 phase III trials of systemic therapies (Rx) in mCRC published between 1988 and 2018 (68,326 pts) were collected. Trials were also grouped per publication date (G1: 1988-97; G2: 98 – 2007; G3: 08-18). Patterns of reporting and trends across G were evaluated. Results: Pt c consistently reported were performance status, PS (98.5%), age (92.6%) and gender (90.4%); race (20.6%) & weight/BMI/BSA were not (13.2%). Tumor c frequently reported were metastatic (met) spread (70.6%) while time intervals related to disease course (25%) and synchronous met vs not (19.1%) were omitted. Of note, primary site was largely reported as colon vs rectum (69%) and sidedness or anatomical location was discernable only in 10.3%. Prior Rx reporting focused on chemo (58.5%) with radiation and surgery and reported in 34% & 28.7%. Reporting of prognostic factors was variable and limited: histology grade CEA, alk phos, LDH (range 10.3-15.4%). Only 11.8% of trials reported genomic factors - KRAS MT was included in all with BRAF MT in 4.4%. Of 140 trials used for SF analysis, 115 had ≥ 1 (range 1-7). Common SF were PS (60%), geography /institution (55.7%). Prior Rx (27%), met spread (24.3%) were sometimes used while primary site (7.8%), genomic factors (6.1%) rarely were. Trends across G are per Table. Conclusions: There is marked inconsistency in pt c & SF reporting in mCRC trials. Consensus guidelines will aid in standardization of trial interpretation and future meta-analyses; and will need to be updated based on emerging data. [Table: see text]

e14145 Background: Dysregulated translation of messenger RNA (mRNA) plays a role in the pathogenesis of solid tumors. Tomivosertib (T), a potent and highly selective small molecule inhibitor of MNK-1 and 2 blocks activation of eIF4E, a key regulator of mRNA translation, selectively regulating translation of a set of mRNAs. Preclinically, T triggers an anti-tumor immune response and enhances responses to checkpoint inhibitors. Avelumab is a fully human checkpoint inhibitor antibody directed against PD-L1. Methods: Part 1: In a 3+3 dose escalation patients (pts) with MSS CRC failing ≥2 prior therapies for metastatic disease received escalating doses of T, administered orally bid, with a fixed dose of 10 mg/kg avelumab q2w. Part 2: Pts were randomized (2:1) to combination therapy at the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) from part 1 or T alone. Primary endpoint is objective response rate. All pts have a pretreatment and on treatment biopsy to evaluate target engagement, tumor infiltrating lymphocytes and biomarkers of immune activation. Results: The RP2D for the combination was 200 mg bid T (single agent RP2D) with 10mg/kg avelumab q2w. At this dose level, 1 of 7 pts experienced a dose limiting toxicity being unable to complete the first 28 day cycle due to low grade (1/2) toxicities (nausea, fatigue, myalgia). In part 2, 30 pts were randomized to combination and 15 to monotherapy (25 male, 20 female: mean age 53.9 years, range 32-80 years). The most common adverse events, irrespective of causality were grade 1/2 gastrointestinal (including nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, constipation and diarrhea) occurring in 77% (n = 23) of the combination and 67% (n = 10) of the monotherapy arm. Toxicities occurring more frequently in the combination arm included diarrhea, constipation, fatigue, myalgia/arthralgia, hypercalcemia and skin rash. Efficacy evaluation is pending from part 2. One pt with confirmed MSS status in part 1 treated at the RP2D achieved a confirmed Partial Response of greater than 8 months. Conclusions: Preliminary data suggest that the combination of T and avelumab has an acceptable safety profile with robust target engagement and demonstrated initial signs of activity. Updated efficacy and biological biopsy data will be presented at the conference. Clinical trial information: NCT03258398.

656 Background: Despite multiple trials of new agents in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), long term outcomes remain poor. This study explores the changing trends in the design, interpretation and outcomes of phase III randomized controlled trials (RCT) in mCRC over time. Methods: Phase III RCTs of systemic therapy for mCRC with enrollment between 1986 and 2016 were identified through 4 electronic databases and grouped into 3 time periods (1986-1996 – T1; 1997-2006 – T2 & 2007-2016 – T3). Study selection, quality appraisal and data collection were performed by 2 independent investigators. Study characteristics, primary and secondary endpoints, and authors’ interpretation of results and conclusions were analyzed. Improvement in overall survival (OS) was the difference between experimental and control arms. A study was deemed positive if it met its end point, was recommended for further study or for adoption for clinical use (p ≤ 0.05 significant for all analyses). Results: One hundred fifty trials (T1=36, T2=62, T3=52) with 77494 patients (T1=12406, T2=39158, T3=25930) were included. Although 1st line therapy trials continued to be the most common across all T, the percentage (%) of trials evaluating 3rd line and beyond (T1=0, T2=3, T3=27) have increased significantly over time as have trials with targeted agents (T1=11, T2=34, T3=79). Although OS remains the most common primary end point, more trials in T2 & T3 have used progression-free survival instead (14 vs 47 & 44). The % of trials with negative results but interpreted as positive increased over time (T1=18; T2=42; T3=35). Across all T, the median improvement in OS (months, m) of these trials was significantly lower compared to the trials that met primary end point across all T (T1 = 0 vs 1.8 m, T2 = -0.1 vs 3.25, T3 = -0.25 vs 2.55). Conclusions: A significant shift has occurred over the past three decades in the design and interpretation of phase III trials in advanced CRC. Any interpretations of potential survival benefits from trials that have not met primary end point must be made with significant caution.

609 Background: Targeting MEK is of interest in the development of novel agents for treatment of many malignancies. However, better strategies are needed to overcome acquired resistance to MEK inhibitors. Preclinical studies have shown Wnt pathway overexpression in KRAS mutant cell lines resistant to the MEK inhibitor, Selumetinib. The combination of selumetinib and cyclosporin A (CsA), a non-canonical WnT pathway modulator, demonstrated antitumor activity in patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models. We are conducting an NCI CTEP-approved Phase I/IB trial (NCI # 9571/COMIRB # 13-2628) of selumetinib and CsA combination. Biomarkers of response to therapy are being co-developed. We hypothesize that this combination will be safe and potentially effective in patients with mCRC and that upregulation of FZD2 may predict for sensitivity. Methods: Phase I trial with initial dose escalation investigating the combination of selumetinib and CsA in patients with advanced solid tumors (n = 18) followed by an expansion cohort in patients with irinotecan and oxaliplatin-refractory mCRC (n = 20). The expansion cohort utilizes a selumetinib “run-in” to evaluate efficacy in RAS-WT and RAS-MT mCRC to identify those patients most likely to respond to the combination. Results: 18 patients were enrolled in the dose escalation phase and 10 patients have been enrolled in the dose expansion phase as of September 2016. Grade 1 or 2 nausea and rash were reported as the most common AEs. Most commonly reported Grade 3 or 4 toxicities were hypertension, elevated liver enzymes and rash. Three DLTs were reported with Grade 3 hypertension noted at dose level 1 and 2 and grade 3 rash reported at dose level 2. The maximum tolerated dose was defined as Selumetinib 75 mg BID and CsA 2 mg/kg BID on a 28-day cycle. Two partial responses and sixteen stable disease responses have been observed. Six patients have exhibited progressive disease. Conclusions: Selumetinib in combination with cyclosporin A appears to be well-tolerated with evidence of activity in solid tumors. Expansion cohort will complete enrollment this month. Clinical trial information: NCT02188264.

AbstractSrc tyrosine kinases are overexpressed in pancreatic cancers, and the oral Src inhibitor saracatinib has shown antitumor activity in preclinical models of pancreas cancer. We performed a CTEP‐sponsored Phase II clinical trial of saracatinib in previously treated pancreas cancer patients, with a primary endpoint of 6‐month survival. A Simon MinMax two‐stage phase II design was used. Saracatinib (175 mg/day) was administered orally continuously in 28‐day cycles. In the unselected portion of the study, 18 patients were evaluable. Only two (11%) patients survived for at least 6 months, and three 6‐month survivors were required to move to second stage of study as originally designed. The study was amended as a biomarker‐driven trial (leucine rich repeat containing protein 19 [LRRC19] > insulin‐like growth factor‐binding protein 2 [IGFBP2] “top scoring pairs” polymerase chain reaction [PCR] assay, and PIK3CA mutant) based on preclinical data in a human pancreas tumor explant model. In the biomarker study, archival tumor tissue or fresh tumor biopsies were tested. Biomarker‐positive patients were eligible for the study. Only one patient was PIK3CA mutant in a 3′ untranslated region (UTR) portion of the gene. This patient was enrolled in the study and failed to meet the 6‐month survival endpoint. As the frequency of biomarker‐positive patients was very low (<3%), the study was closed. Although we were unable to conclude whether enriching for a subset of second/third line pancreatic cancer patients treated with a Src inhibitor based on a biomarker would improve 6‐month survival, we demonstrate that testing pancreatic tumor samples for a biomarker‐driven, multicenter study in metastatic pancreas cancer is feasible.