Halfdanarson, Thorvardur R

322 Background: The role of perioperative systemic therapy (PST) is unclear in the management of localized pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (pNET). We aim to evaluate the benefit of PST compared to surgical resection alone in localized pNET. Methods: We identified patients with stage I–III pNET who underwent curative-intent surgical resection in National Cancer Database from 2006 to 2014. Patients who underwent PST and surgical resection were matched with patients who received surgery alone by propensity score at 1:1 ratio with nearest neighbor method. Factors predicting the use of PST were identified from logistic regression. Survival was estimated with Kaplan-Meier method and compared with Cox proportional hazards regression. Results: 4919 patients were included in this study with median age of 60 years. 1397 (28%) patients had pNET at the head of pancreas. 2708 (55%) patients had pNET at pancreas body and tail. 334 (6.8%) patients received PST. Factors associated with significant more use of PST compared to surgery alone were age < 65 years, low income, community medical facilities, grade 3/4 tumor, tumor at the head of pancreas, T3-4 tumor and N1 tumor. 310 patients in PST group were matched with 310 patients in surgery alone group, with no significant difference for all covariates after match. For those in PST group, 64 (21%) patients received neoadjuvant systemic therapy, 173 (56%) patients received adjuvant systemic therapy, 7 (2.3%) patients received both, and 66 (21%) patients received PST without clear sequence. In the matched cohort, PST group had significantly shorter overall survival (OS) compared to surgery alone group (median OS 91.1 months versus not reached, p = 0.04). This finding was confirmed by multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression in unmatched cohort with HR 1.5 (95% CI 1.2 – 1.9, p = 0.002). Subgroup analysis in patients with grade 3/4 tumor demonstrated PST group has a trend of shorter OS compared to surgery alone group (median OS 34.1 versus 54.4 months, p = 0.1). Conclusions: PST compared to surgery alone is associated with worse OS in patients with localized pNET. This finding suggests that we may use PST in localized pNET with caution in the absence of solid clinical trial data.

321 Background: G3 NENs are aggressive, and optimal systemic treatment is unclear. Temozolomide (TEM)-based regimens have been used to treat grade 1-2 NETs, but their efficacy in G3 NENs (Ki-67 > 20%) remains undetermined. Aims: To assess the clinical efficacy of TEM-containing regimens in advanced grade III gastroenteropancreatic NENs (GEPNENs). Methods: A multicentre retrospective review (2008-2017) of patients with metastatic/unresectable G3 GEPNENs who received a TEM-containing regimen. The primary endpoint was time to treatment failure (TTF). Radiologic response was extracted from local reports without formal RECIST criteria. Results: 118 patients in six centers were included (median age 55, 65% male, 15% functional, 75% pancreatic NEN). 57% were well-differentiated, 35% poorly-differentiated, and 18% unknown based on local pathology reports. The regimen used was CAPTEM in 93% and TEM in 7%. Best radiological responses were: complete response (1%), partial response (39%), stable disease (22%), progressive disease (31%), unknown (7%) not by RECIST. Median TTF was 150 days and median overall survival (OS) 18.0 months. Fifteen patients (14%) required dose reductions/discontinuation due to adverse events. TTF was shorter for patients on TEM alone (p = 0.02, Table 1). Well-differentiated NENs had better response rate (52% vs 26%, p = 0.02) and overall survival (30.1 vs 12.0 mo, p = 0.008) compared to poorly-differentiated NEN. Conclusions: This is the largest TEM treatment series in G3 NEN, involving collaboration of several major North American NET centers. 40% of patients showed some degree of response, and treatment was generally well-tolerated. TEM-based regimens should be considered a viable treatment option in this setting. Prospective confirmatory trials (such as EA2142) may face difficulties in accrual due to disease rarity. [Table: see text]

131 Background: Trimodality therapy is the standard of care for patients with resectable cancer of the esophagus. However, patients ≥75 years have been underrepresented or excluded from landmark clinical trials to date. We investigated the feasibility and safety of treatment of esophageal cancer with trimodality therapy in patients’ ≥ 75 years. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of all patients ≥75 years who received trimodality therapy for esophageal cancer in 3 high volume tertiary cancer institutions from June 2007 to June 2013. All patients received neoadjuvant radiation with concomitant chemotherapy followed by esophagectomy. Toxicities and clinical outcomes were abstracted from the electronic medical record and partially from a prospectively maintained database. Overall and disease-free survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Five hundred seventy patients were treated with trimodality therapy for esophageal cancer from 2007-2013. Of these, 38 patients (7%) were 75 or older at the time of diagnosis. At diagnosis, comorbidities included coronary artery disease (32%), atrial fibrillation (11%) and COPD (13%). The majority of patients (87%) received 50.4Gy/28 fractions. 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/cisplatin was the most common chemotherapy regimen (37%), followed by 5-FU/docetaxel (24%). A total of 13 patients (34%) developed acute grade ≥3 toxicity associated with neoadjuvant therapy. The most common acute grade 3 toxicities were haematological (10%), nausea (8%), esophagitis (5%) and fatigue (5%). Significant postoperative complications included respiratory (empyema, ARDS, pleural effusion) (39%), arrhythmia (32%), anastomotic leak (5%), and ileus (5%). There were 2 deaths (5%) within 90 days of surgery: one was secondary to empyema, the other developed DIC and sepsis. Median overall survival and disease free survival were 4.4 and 2.3 years respectively. Conclusions: Trimodality treatment is a reasonable approach for management of carefully selected elderly patients with esophageal cancer, with similar rates of cancer outcomes, and treatment related morbidity and mortality as compared to younger patients.

121 Background: We evaluated the role of pre-treatment pulmonary function testing (PFT) in predicting the likelihood of cardiac and/or pulmonary toxicity for esophagus cancer patients receiving trimodality therapy. Methods: From 2007 to 2013, 64 patients with esophageal cancer received trimodality therapy at a single tertiary center with pre-treatment PFTs. The odds ratio of pre-treatment PFT as a predictor of cardiopulmonary toxicity was assess with univariate analysis (UVA). FEV1 (forced expiratory volume in 1 second) and DLCO (diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide) were assessed per 0.5-unit decrease. Percent FEV1 and DLCO predicted were assessed per 10% decrease. Results: The median age was 62 years (range, 41-79) with 88% male patients. A total of 70% of patients had adenocarcinoma with 66% having stage 3 disease. Most patients were former (43%) or current smokers (32%) and 18% had COPD. One or more cardiac comorbidities were observed in 54% of patients. The median RT dose was 50 Gy and the most frequent concurrent chemotherapy was cisplatin/5FU (53%). The median pre-treatment FEV1 and DLCO was 2.8 liters (range, 1-4.9) and 22.5 mL/min/mmHg (range, 17.2-25.5), respectively. This correlated to a median percent predicted value for FEV1 and DLCO of 85% (range, 30-124%) and 81.5% (range, 49-119%), respectively. The overall rate of any cardiac and pulmonary toxicity was 35% and 50%, respectively. Percent predicted value of both FEV1 and DLCO was statistically associated with pulmonary but not cardiac toxicity (Table). Conclusions: Patients with compromised pre-treatment pulmonary function are at higher risk of developing post-treatment pulmonary toxicities. Pulmonary function testing should be routinely performed prior to initiation of trimodality therapy for patient risk stratification. [Table: see text]

Abstract Lessons Learned Dual epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-directed therapy with erlotinib and panitumumab in combination with gemcitabine was superior to gemcitabine and erlotinib, but the clinical relevance is uncertain given the limited role of gemcitabine monotherapy. A significantly longer overall survival was observed in patients receiving the dual EGFR-directed therapy. The dual EGFR-directed therapy resulted in increased toxicity. Background Gemcitabine is active in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The combination of erlotinib, an oral epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor, and gemcitabine was shown to modestly prolong overall survival when compared with gemcitabine alone. The North Central Cancer Treatment Group (now part of Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology) trial N064B compared gemcitabine plus erlotinib versus gemcitabine plus combined EGFR inhibition with erlotinib and panitumumab. Methods Eligible patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were randomized to either gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle with erlotinib 100 mg p.o. daily (Arm A) or the same combination with the addition of panitumumab 4 mg/kg on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle (Arm B). The primary endpoint of the trial was overall survival. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, the confirmed response rate, and toxicity. Comparison between arms for the primary endpoint was done with a one-sided log-rank test, and a p value less than .20 was considered statistically significant. Response rate comparison was done with Fisher's exact test. All other reported p values are two-sided. Results A total of 92 patients were randomized, 46 to each arm. The median overall survival was 4.2 months in Arm A and 8.3 months in Arm B (hazard ratio, 0.817; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.530–1.260; p = .1792). The progression-free survival was 2.0 months in Arm A and 3.6 months in Arm B (hazard ratio, 0.843; 95% CI, 0.555–1.280; p = .4190). A partial confirmed response was seen in 8.7% of patients on Arm A and 6.5% on Arm B (p = .9999). No patients had a complete response. Grade 3 and higher nonhematologic toxicities were more common in patients on Arm B compared with those on Arm A (82.6% vs. 52.2%; p = .0018). Conclusion Dual EGFR-directed therapy resulted in a significant prolongation of overall survival in patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the pancreas but was associated with substantially increased toxicities. Dual EGFR-directed therapy in combination with gemcitabine alone cannot be recommended for further study, as single-agent gemcitabine is no longer considered an appropriate therapy for otherwise fit patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

TPS535 Background: Small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) is a rare malignancy, possibly because of the high rate of immunosurveillance in baseline small bowel function, and is frequently diagnosed in late stages. Due to these factors, there is no consistent standard of care for metastatic disease beyond first-line where several prospective studies have confirmed activity of FOLFOX/CAPOX. Historically, second-line treatment of SBA has been extrapolated from colon/gastric cancer. Recent studies suggest that SBA has a distinct genomic profile, including higher incidence of microsatellite instability, compared to gastric and colon cancers. Additionally, the tumor microenvironment reflects a greater degree of PD-L1 expression and infiltration by lymphocytes. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have not previously been tested in SBA unselected for MSI status. Methods: The study is a phase 2, multicenter, single-arm clinical trial of pembrolizumab (200 mg IV every 3 weeks) for patients with unresectable or metastatic SBA refractory to first-line chemotherapy. Forty patients with any tumor mismatch repair status will be enrolled at 8 US sites as part of the ACCRU network and International Rare Cancer Initiative (IRCI) with a primary objective to assess the confirmed response rate (H0 p < 10%, HA: p > 30%) to pembrolizumab. Secondary endpoints include PFS, OS, and adverse events. Correlative aims include assessing blood and tissue biomarkers (i.e. PD-L1, MSI-H/MSS status, cfDNA, mutation burden, etc.) for association with clinical benefit. An interim analysis will be performed to assess efficacy after 18 patients become evaluable. The study is open with 16 patients enrolled at time of submission. Clinical trial information: NCT02949219.

TPS532 Background: Recent studies have shown that FGFR2 fusions may represent recurrent (prevalence ~10-15% in larger cohorts) driver events amenable to therapeutic targeting in patients with advanced, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Methods: This single arm pilot study (NCT02265341) is being conducted at 3 centers (Mayo Clinic Arizona, Mayo Clinic Florida and Mayo Clinic Rochester; enrollment initiated December 2014). Next-generation sequencing based assays and a FISH-break apart assay are used to identify tumors with FGFR2 fusions. Patients must additionally have histologically/cytologically confirmed cholangiocarcinoma, ECOG performance score 0-2, measurable disease, preserved hematologic/renal and hepatic function and absence of cardiac events/stroke in the preceding 6 months. Ponatinib is administered at 45 mg once daily. Patients will be treated until disease progression, intolerable toxicity or patient decision to not pursue further therapy. The primary objective of the study is to estimate the clinical benefit rate (defined as composite of partial response rate, complete response rate and stable disease rate ≥ 4 months; as defined by RECIST criteria v1.1). Secondary endpoints include estimation of progression-free survival, overall survival, CA19-9 response rate (defined as > 50% reduction from baseline) and evaluation of the overall adverse event profile of ponatinib in this patient population. Translational objectives include serial circulating DNA (ct-DNA) monitoring, target knockdown assessments in tumor tissue (p-FGFR2, p-FRS2, p-Akt and p-ERK) and evaluation of mechanisms of resistance through comparison of baseline and progression biopsy samples using multi-platform sequencing (exome, RNA-Seq and methyl-Seq). Additionally, quality of life assessments will be evaluated using EORTC-QLQ-C30 and BIL21 tools. A total of 30 patients will be enrolled into the study (12 of 30 patients have been enrolled). The trial is designed using an underlying assumption of clinical benefit rate (CBR) of 5% with significance level of 0.15 and 80% power to detect a 20% CBR. Clinical trial information: NCT02265341.