Johnson, Elizabeth Anne

7007 Background: In 2004, preliminary results of CALGB 9633 demonstrated statistically significant evidence that adjuvant chemotherapy with paclitaxel and carboplatin (PC) improved disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in resected stage IB NSCLC. Indeed, the study was closed early by the DSMB after a planned interim analysis demonstrated a p value for OS less than a prespecified stopping boundary. However, two larger trials, NCIC-JBR10 and ANITA, have shown significant OS advantages with adjuvant chemo, but failed to demonstrate improved survival in the stage IB subset. This report provides more mature data from CALGB 9633. Methods: InCALGB 9633, stage IB patients (pts) were randomized following resection to paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC 6 q3wks ×4 cycles or to observation. While initially planned to accrue 500 pts, the accrual rate was <50% of expected. Because slow accrual allowed longer observation times for each pt, the accrual target was reduced to 384 pts. OS is the primary endpoint. The redesigned study had 80% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.67 after 150 observed deaths using a 1-tailed logrank test conducted at the 0.05 level of significance. Results: Between 9/15/96 and 11/26/03, 344 pts were randomized. Median follow-up is 54 mo. Demographics and toxicity has been previously reported (JCO Sup, 22:621a, 2004). The current intent-to-treat analysis shows a significant improvement in DFS favoring adjuvant chemo (HR=0.74; 90% 2-sided CI: 0.57–0.96; p=0.027). There is a trend toward improvement in OS that is not significant (HR=0.80; 90% CI: 0.60–1.07; p=0.10). There is, however, a significant advantage in 3-yr survival (79% vs. 70%; p=0.045). Five-yr survival is not different (60% vs. 57%; p=0.32), although median follow-up is <5 yrs and CIs are wide. Continued follow-up is planned since only 131 of 150 deaths required for final analysis have been observed. Conclusions: This updated but “preliminary” analysis no longer shows a significant OS advantage for adjuvant chemotherapy in stage IB NSCLC. However, the re-designed study does not have adequate power to detect small differences in OS that may be clinically significant. Advantages in DFS and 3-yr survival support continued consideration of adjuvant PC in stage IB NSCLC. [Table: see text]

326 Background: Review initial outcomes for patients enrolled on the University of Florida Proton Therapy Institute PC01 protocol for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer. Methods: The protocol received Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval in 7/2007. The first patient was enrolled in 4/2010. The accrual target was 66 patients to test if the Serious Adverse Event (SAE) ratecould be reduced from 15% (expected) to less than 5%. Protocol therapy consisted of proton therapy to a planning target volume (PTV) dose of 59.4 Cobalt Gray Equivalent (CGE) at 1.8CGE per fraction with concomitant oral Capecitabine (1000mg PO BID 5 days/week on radiation treatment days). Only gross disease was targeted. Results: 12 patients were enrolled. 1 patient died of a gunshot wound 5 days after starting treatment so only 11 patients are reported. Median follow up from start of treatment: 13 months (range 2 to 21 months). Median age: 68 (range 51 to 86) years. Gender: Males 5, Females 6. Race/Ethnicity: 9 White, 2 Hispanic. Overall survival: 90% at 6 months and 60% at 12 months. Freedom from progression: 80% at 6 months and 53% at one year. Local control: 100% at 6 months and 86% at 12 months. Freedom from metastasis: 80% at 6 months and 67% at 12 months.No patient experienced any grade 3 or greater toxicity during treatment or the follow up period. Grade 2 toxicity was limited to a single patient experiencing grade 2 fatigue. Median weight loss over the course of treatment was 1.7 (range: loss of 5.7 to gain of 4.9) Kg. 4 patients were deemed to have had an adequate radiographic response to radiotherapy so as to justify surgical exploration. Conclusions: Proton therapy to 59.4 CGE with concomitant Capecitabine was well tolerated with no grade 2 or greater gastrointestinal toxicities. 4 of 11 patients achieved a radiographic response allowing for attempted surgical resection. The study was closed to accrual on 9/1/2013 due to recognition that slow accrual made achievement of the primary study endpoint unlikely. At the same time, the lack of any meaningful gastrointestinal toxicity suggests significant opportunities for treatment intensification when proton therapy is used in this setting. Clinical trial information: NCT00685763.

125 Background: Treatment for locally advanced esophageal carcinoma is radiation and chemotherapy, with or without surgery. Radiation has traditionally been delivered with 3D conformal radiation therapy (3D CRT). This study evaluates late toxicity in patients treated with IMRT as well as early outcomes and acute toxicity. Methods: This is a retrospective review of 32 patients with esophageal carcinoma treated with IMRT at Mayo Clinic Florida from 2008 -2012. Pathology includes squamous cell and adenocarcinomas. Tumor sites include middle and lower thoracic and GE junction. Clinical stages are TX-T3, N0-3, M0-1. All patients received at least one cycle of concurrent chemotherapy. IMRT dose was 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions prescribed to a target volume including the tumor and regional lymphatics. IMRT plans utilized coplaner beams in a 7-9 beam arrangement or volumetric modulated arc therapy. Results: Median follow-up is 8.9 months (range 2.4-23.0) for all patients and 13.1 months (range 2.8-23.0 months) in surviving patients. Median patient age is 69 (range 46-87). Trimodality treatment was completed in 20 patients (62.5%). Surgery was either an open or minimally invasive esophagogastrectomy. The incidence of grade 3 or greater late toxicity at 1 year was 48% in surgery patients and 26% in non-surgery patients. The most common grade 3 or higher toxicity was esophageal strictures in 25%. The incidence of any grade 3 or greater acute toxicity was 65% in the surgery patients and 75% in the non-surgery patients. Overall survival (OS) for all patients at 18 months is 57% (CI 37-86%) and progression-free survival (PFS) is 60% (36-99%). OS and PFS for trimodality therapy at 12 months is 83% (66-100%) and 81% (63-100%) respectively and for bimodality therapy is 34% (12-93%) and 70% (33-100%) respectively. Conclusions: Increased late toxicity occurs in surgery patients, and increased acute toxicity in non-surgery patients. Lower survival in non-surgery patients may be due to early progression, morbidities which preclude surgery or improved survival with surgery. Overall, IMRT is a feasible treatment modality, which may be equally efficacious to 3D CRT for the treatment of esophageal carcinoma.

211 Background: The current standard of care for locally advanced esophageal cancer includes chemoradiotherapy with or without surgery. Radiation is usually delivered via a 3D technique. IMRT has been utilized in the treatment of multiple tumors and demonstrated similar efficacy while offering the possibility of decreased toxicity. Methods: Thirty-six patients were treated with IMRT and chemotherapy. Twenty-one patients underwent surgical resection. Eleven underwent open surgery and the remainder underwent minimally invasive surgery. Chemotherapy consisted primarily of 5-FU with oxaliplatin or cisplatin. All but two patients received 50.4 Gy; one patient received 41.4 Gy without surgery and one patient discontinued treatment after 25.2 Gy. Eleven patients required a treatment break during radiotherapy. The median age was 69 (range 46-87). Approximately two-thirds of tumors were adenocarcinomas located in the lower thorax. Two thirds of patients were staged as T3 and had positive lymph nodes. The median tumor size was 5 cm (range 2-13). Results: With a median follow-up of 21.3 months (range 2.4-44.8) and 33.9 months for survivors (range 3.7-44.8), overall survival at 24 months was 55%. The 24 month overall survival was 75% vs 24% for surgical and non-surgical patients, respectively. Seven patients had a complete pathologic response. Twenty-four patients experienced grade 3 or higher acute toxicity and there was one grade 5 toxicity. Acute toxicity was similar between surgery and non-surgery patients. Fourteen patients experienced grade 3 or higher late toxicity; 9 surgery and 5 non-surgery patients. The most frequent late toxicity was grade 3 stricture (21%). On multivariate analysis, advanced age (RR [10 year increase] 2.01, p=0.032) and heart maximum dose >55 Gy (RR 3.73, p=0.011) were associated with decreased survival. Conclusions: Patients who undergo surgery after chemoradiotherapy demonstrate improved survival; however, this may be related to underlying comorbidities that preclude surgery. IMRT appears to be a reasonable treatment option that may reduce complications from radiotherapy. Careful attention should be given to heart dose during treatment planning.

289 Background: Cholangiocarcinoma (CC), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are all devastating malignancies. Limited data exists about PD-1 and PDL1 expression in these cancers. We assessed expression of PD1/PDL1 in a large cohort of patients with hepato-pancreatico-biliary (HPB) cancers and explored the existence of accompanying genomic mutations associated with expression of PD-1/PD-L1. Methods: 524 patients with HPB cancers (354 PDAC, 58 HCC, 54 intrahepatic (ICC), 18 extrahepatic (ECC), and 40 gallbladder (GBC)) were included in the study and tumors tested centrally at a CLIA lab (Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ). Tests included one or more of the following: gene sequencing (next generation sequencing, Illumina TruSeq), protein expression (immunohistochemistry [IHC]) and gene amplification). PD-1 (SP142 antibody) and PD-L1 (MRQ-22 antibody) status was tested in all samples. Two-tailed Fisher's exact test was performed to test where proportions of positive results were different by subgroup (p²0.05). Results: Among those with PDAC, HCC, ICC, ECC, and GBC, rates of PD1 expression on tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and PD-L1 expression on tumor cells is detailed in the Table. In PD-1+, compared with PD-1- HPB cancers, mutations in the following were more prevalent, though not statistically significant: BRCA2, ATM, CTNNB1, and PIK3CA. Among all theranostic biomarkers tested, TOP2A expression (IHC) was significantly increased in PD-L1+ versus PD-L1- tumors (82% vs 60%; p=0.0083). Conclusions: HPB tumors express PD-L1 at a frequency of 4-18%, and PD-1 at a frequency of 29-45%. A statistically significant association of mutations with PD-1+ or PD-L1+ tumors was not identified in this group of tumors. PD-L1 expression associates with TOP2a expression, a marker of proliferation and also anthracycline sensitivity. Further evaluation of this correlation and PDL1/PD-1 + anthracycline combination therapy may be warranted. [Table: see text]

Purpose Adjuvant chemotherapy for resected non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is now accepted on the basis of several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that demonstrated improved survival. Although there is strong evidence that adjuvant chemotherapy is effective in stages II and IIIA NSCLC, its utility in stage IB disease is unclear. This report provides a mature analysis of Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 9633, the only RCT designed specifically for stage IB NSCLC. Patients and Methods Within 4 to 8 weeks of resection, patients were randomly assigned to adjuvant chemotherapy or observation. Eligible patients had pathologically confirmed T2N0 NSCLC and had undergone lobectomy or pneumonectomy. Chemotherapy consisted of paclitaxel 200 mg/m 2 intravenously over 3 hours and carboplatin at an area under the curve dose of 6 mg/mL per minute intravenously over 45 to 60 minutes every 3 weeks for four cycles. The primary end point was overall survival. Results Three hundred-forty-four patients were randomly assigned. Median follow-up was 74 months. Groups were well-balanced with regard to demographics, histology, and extent of surgery. Grades 3 to 4 neutropenia were the predominant toxicity; there were no treatment-related deaths. Survival was not significantly different (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; CI, 0.64 to 1.08; P = .12). However, exploratory analysis demonstrated a significant survival difference in favor of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients who had tumors ≥ 4 cm in diameter (HR, 0.69; CI, 0.48 to 0.99; P = .043). Conclusion Because a significant survival advantage was not observed across the entire cohort, adjuvant chemotherapy should not be considered standard care in stage IB NSCLC. Given the magnitude of observed survival differences, CALGB 9633 was underpowered to detect small but clinically meaningful improvements. A statistically significant survival advantage for patients who had tumors ≥ 4 cm supports consideration of adjuvant paclitaxel/carboplatin for stage IB patients who have large tumors.