Blackford, Amanda

AbstractBackgroundPatients with gastroparesis (Gp) may need enteral nutrition (EN) or exclusive parenteral nutrition (PN). Among patients with Gp, we aimed to (1) identify the frequency of EN and exclusive PN use and (2) explore characteristics of patients using EN and/or exclusive PN compared with those using oral nutrition (ON), including changes over 48 weeks.MethodsPatients with Gp underwent history and physical examination, gastric emptying scintigraphy, water load satiety testing (WLST), and questionnaires assessing gastrointestinal symptoms and quality of life (QOL). Patients were observed 48 weeks.ResultsOf 971 patients with Gp (idiopathic, 579; diabetic, 336; post–Nissen fundoplication, 51), 939 (96.7%) were using ON only, 14 (1.4%) using exclusive PN, and 18 (1.9%) using EN. Compared with patients receiving ON, patients receiving exclusive PN and/or EN were younger, had lower body mass index, and had greater symptom severity. Patients receiving exclusive PN and/or EN had lower physical QOL but not mental QOL or Gp‐related QOL scores. Patients receiving exclusive PN and/or EN ingested less water during WLST but did not have worse gastric emptying. Of those who had been receiving exclusive PN and/or EN, 50% and 25%, respectively, resumed ON at 48‐week follow‐up.ConclusionsThis study describes patients with Gp requiring exclusive PN and/or EN for nutrition support, who represent a small (3.3%) but important subset of patients with Gp. Unique clinical and physiological parameters are associated with this subset and provide insight into the use of nutrition support in Gp.

Abstract Introduction: Identifying families with an underlying inherited cancer predisposition is a major goal of cancer prevention efforts. Mendelian risk models have been developed to better predict the risk associated with a pathogenic variant of developing breast/ovarian cancer (with BRCAPRO), and the risk of developing pancreatic cancer (PANCPRO). Given that pathogenic variants involving BRCA2 and BRCA1 predispose to all three of these cancers, we developed a joint risk model to capture shared susceptibility. Methods: We expanded the existing framework for PANCPRO and BRCAPRO to model underlying risk of pancreatic, breast, and ovarian cancer. We then validated this model on three datasets each reflecting the target populations for these models, including patients referred to a high-risk genetics clinic, patients with multiple family members with pancreatic cancer who underwent genetic testing for BRCA1/2, as well as a prospective registry of pancreatic cancer families. The new model is designated BRCAPANCPRO. Results: BRCAPANCPRO yielded good discrimination for differentiating BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers from non-carriers (AUC = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.78, 0.87) and was reasonably well-calibrated for predicting future risk of pancreatic cancer (observed-to-expected (O/E) ratio = 0.82 [0.69, 0.94]). In these families, BRCAPANCPRO outperformed both the prior BRCAPRO and PANCPRO models. Discussion: The BRCAPANCPRO model improves the identification of families with a pathogenic variant in BRCA2 or BRCA1, particularly for families where there is the co-occurrence of pancreatic cancer in addition to breast and/or ovarian cancer. The model also improves the prediction of pancreatic cancer among families with a pancreatic cancer family history, with or without breast and/or ovarian cancer. Citation Format: Amanda L. Blackford, Erica J. Childs, Nancy Porter, Gloria Petersen, Kari Rabe, Steven Gallinger, Ayelet Borgida, Sapna Syngal, Ann Schwartz, Michele Cote, Ralph Hruban, Michael Goggins, Alison P. Klein, Giovanni Parmigiani. A risk prediction tool for individuals with a family history of breast, ovarian, or pancreatic cancer: BRCAPANCPRO [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr 885.

Abstract Germline variation and smoking are independently associated with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We conducted genome-wide smoking interaction analysis of PDAC using genotype data from four previous genome-wide association studies in individuals of European ancestry (7,937 cases and 11,774 controls). Examination of expression quantitative trait loci data from the Genotype-Tissue Expression Project followed by colocalization analysis was conducted to determine whether there was support for common SNP(s) underlying the observed associations. Statistical tests were two sided and P < 5 × 10–8 was considered statistically significant. Genome-wide significant evidence of qualitative interaction was identified on chr2q21.3 in intron 5 of the transmembrane protein 163 (TMEM163) and upstream of the cyclin T2 (CCNT2). The most significant SNP using the Empirical Bayes method, in this region that included 45 significantly associated SNPs, was rs1818613 [per allele OR in never smokers 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.82–0.93; former smokers 1.00, 95% CI, 0.91–1.07; current smokers 1.25, 95% CI 1.12–1.40, Pinteraction = 3.08 × 10–9). Examination of the Genotype-Tissue Expression Project data demonstrated an expression quantitative trait locus in this region for TMEM163 and CCNT2 in several tissue types. Colocalization analysis supported a shared SNP, rs842357, in high linkage disequilibrium with rs1818613 (r2 = 0. 94) driving both the observed interaction and the expression quantitative trait loci signals. Future studies are needed to confirm and understand the differential biologic mechanisms by smoking status that contribute to our PDAC findings. Significance: This large genome-wide interaction study identifies a susceptibility locus on 2q21.3 that significantly modified PDAC risk by smoking status, providing insight into smoking-associated PDAC, with implications for prevention.

Abstract Background: Obesity and diabetes are major modifiable risk factors for pancreatic cancer. Interactions between genetic variants and diabetes/obesity have not previously been comprehensively investigated in pancreatic cancer at the genome-wide level. Methods: We conducted a gene–environment interaction (GxE) analysis including 8,255 cases and 11,900 controls from four pancreatic cancer genome-wide association study (GWAS) datasets (Pancreatic Cancer Cohort Consortium I–III and Pancreatic Cancer Case Control Consortium). Obesity (body mass index ≥30 kg/m2) and diabetes (duration ≥3 years) were the environmental variables of interest. Approximately 870,000 SNPs (minor allele frequency ≥0.005, genotyped in at least one dataset) were analyzed. Case–control (CC), case-only (CO), and joint-effect test methods were used for SNP-level GxE analysis. As a complementary approach, gene-based GxE analysis was also performed. Age, sex, study site, and principal components accounting for population substructure were included as covariates. Meta-analysis was applied to combine individual GWAS summary statistics. Results: No genome-wide significant interactions (departures from a log-additive odds model) with diabetes or obesity were detected at the SNP level by the CC or CO approaches. The joint-effect test detected numerous genome-wide significant GxE signals in the GWAS main effects top hit regions, but the significance diminished after adjusting for the GWAS top hits. In the gene-based analysis, a significant interaction of diabetes with variants in the FAM63A (family with sequence similarity 63 member A) gene (significance threshold P < 1.25 × 10−6) was observed in the meta-analysis (PGxE = 1.2 ×10−6, PJoint = 4.2 ×10−7). Conclusions: This analysis did not find significant GxE interactions at the SNP level but found one significant interaction with diabetes at the gene level. A larger sample size might unveil additional genetic factors via GxE scans. Impact: This study may contribute to discovering the mechanism of diabetes-associated pancreatic cancer.

Abstract Background: Cytosine arabinoside (ara-C) remains the backbone of most regimens for the treatment of AML. The incorporation of ara-C into DNA activates checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) causing replication fork slowing, the accumulation of cells in S phase, and diminished ara-C cytotoxicity. The selective Chk1 inhibitor MK-8776 abrogates ara-C-induced S-phase arrest, thereby enhancing ara-C-induced apoptosis in vitro.1 A phase I trial demonstrated the safety of MK-8876 in combination with infusional ara-C and correlative studies demonstrated increased ara-C-induced H2Ax phosphorylation in AML cells, consistent with unrepaired DNA damage.2 Herein, we report data from a phase II trial comparing ara-C plus MK8876 with ara-C alone. Methods: Patients with relapsed or refractory AML were randomized to receive either ara-C 2 gm/m2 via continuous infusion (CIV) over 72 hours on days 1 and 10 with MK-8776 100 mg flat dose infused over 30 minutes on days 2, 3, 11, and 12 (combo); or ara-C alone on the same schedule (control). The primary end point was response rate (CR+CRi). Adverse events (AEs) for all patients were reported according to the NCI-CTCAE version 4.0. Correlative studies were performed on blood and marrow samples collected prior to treatment on days 1, 2 and 3 and at one hour after MK-8776 infusion (PB only). Marrow and circulating blasts were analyzed using semi-quantitative flow cytometric determinations of blast cell gH2AX expression, a marker of DNA damage. Results: Thirty-two patients were treated at 4 sites with 14 assigned to the combo arm and 18 to the control arm. The study was stopped early due to lack of drug availability. The median age was 60 (range 29-72) and 17 (53%) were male. Nine (28%) had refractory AML, 16 (50%) were in first relapse, and 7 (22%) were in second relapse. Eleven (34%) had undergone a prior bone marrow transplant (BMT). Risk stratification classified 1 (3%) patient as favorable risk disease, 11 (34%) as intermediate-1, 8 (25%) as intermediate-2, and 11 (34%) as adverse risk. There were 5 (36%) responses (CR/CRi) and 1 (7%) partial response (PR) in the combo arm, and 8 (44%) responses and 1 (6%) PR in the control arm. Median survival did not differ significantly between the two groups (5.9 months in the combo arm vs. 4.2 months in the control arm). Sub-group analysis showed increased responses in the combo arm for the patients in first relapse (50% vs. 40%) and those with a prior BMT (50% vs. 29%). Most non-hematologic grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs were similar in the two groups including febrile neutropenia (64% vs. 61%), infectious complications (50% vs. 50%), and sepsis (21% vs. 17%). Patients in the combo arm experienced more QT prolongation (21% vs. 0%), hypertension (21% vs. 0%), and GI toxicities (21% vs. 0%); while those in the control arm had increased renal (0% vs. 11%) and liver toxicity (7% vs. 17%). Two deaths were attributed to treatment, and both were in the control arm. Eight combo patients had serial PB samples and 2 had serial marrow samples studied by flow cytometry. There was an increase in the percentage of gH2AX+ CD34+ cells on Day 2 directly after MK-8876 infusion (16.9% prior and 36.4% at one hour), which occurred to a lesser extent on Day 3 after MK-8876 infusion (12.7% prior and 15.6% at one hour). Three of eight patients demonstrated a sustained increase in gH2AX+ CD34+ from Day 2 to Day 3, and all three achieved either a PR or CR. Conclusion: This is the first phase II study building on prior work suggesting that inhibition of Chk1 would increase response to ara-C in patients with relapsed or refractory AML. The study confirmed that treatment with the combination is feasible with similar toxicities between the treatment and control groups. The response rates were similar between the two groups with improved responses in patients receiving the combo in first relapse and following BMT. Correlative studies support the finding that responding patients show a sustained increase in DNA damage and this may serve as a biomarker in future studies. Chk1 remains a potential target to improve treatment outcomes with ara-C. References: 1. Schenk EL et al. Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Oct 1; 18(19):5364-73. 2. Karp JE et al. Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Dec 15; 18(24):6723-31. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Among mechanisms underlying cytotoxic drug resistance is activation of diverse DNA damage response (DDR) pathways. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerases (PARP)-1/2 facilitate both single- and double-strand break (DSB) repair and play a key role in the base excision repair (BER) of chemotherapy-damaged DNA. The PARP inhibitor veliparib (V) potentiates the cytotoxicity of different chemotherapeutics, including temozolomide (TEM). TEM induces distinct alkylating events in neoplastic cells whose ultimate outcome depends on the interaction of BER, mismatch repair (MMR), O(6)-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT), and DSB repair. While clinical activity of TEM has been mainly observed in MGMT-deficient AML, V potentiated cytotoxicity of TEM in leukemia cells in vitro in the setting of MGMT overexpression or deficient MMR pathway (Mol Cancer Ther, 2009). Methods: We conducted a Phase I study to determine maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) of V+TEM, using a 3+3 dose escalation. Patients (pts) ≥60 years (yrs) with newly diagnosed poor cytogenetic-risk AML/ALL who were not candidates for intensive therapy, or ≥18 yrs with relapsed/refractory AML/ALL, secondary AML (therapy-related or arising from MDS or MPN), and CMMoL-2 were eligible. Any number of prior regimens, including allogeneic transplant (alloSCT), were allowed. V was given orally day (d)1 once, then twice a day on d4-12 at one of 6 dose levels (DL) (DL1A-B 20mg; DL2-DL3-DL4-DL5-DL6: 40-80-120-150-200 mg). TEM was given orally once a day on d3-9 (DL1A 150 mg/m2/d; DL1B-DL6 200 mg/m2/d). 28-day cycles (cy) were repeated depending on response/tolerability (4-6 weeks delay allowed) with V on d1-8 and TEM d1-5. TEM was taken on empty stomach with antiemetics and V was taken irrespective of meals. Results: Forty-nine pts with median age 69 yrs (range, 22-88; 47% ≥70) were treated. Of 47 AML pts, 29 (62%) had secondary AML and 27 (57%) adverse karyotype. Median number of prior treatments for AML was 1 (range, 0-6): 18 (38%) had median 1 prior therapy (range, 1-3) for MDS; 30 (64%), 9 (18%), 34 (69%) received hypomethylating agents, alloSCT and intensive chemotherapy, respectively. Overall 42 (85%) pts were refractory to their last treatment. Pts received a median of 1 (range, 1-7) cy of therapy. Two did not complete cy 1, pt withdrawal d5 and progressive fungal pneumonia d9 with death d15 of progressive disease (PD). The MTD/RP2D was defined at V 150 mg and TEM 200 mg/m2; 2 of 4 pts treated at V 200 mg and TEM 200 mg/m2 developed dose-limiting toxicity of grade (gr) 3 oral mucositis/esophagitis. The most frequent drug-related toxicities (NCI CTC v4) were gr 1/2 nausea/vomiting (39%), fatigue (26%), oropharyngeal mucositis (26%), constipation (12%), and diarrhea (10%). Other common toxicities were infectious, including febrile neutropenia (29%), pneumonia (20%), bacteremia (18%). One (2%) pt died ≤d30 and 12 (24%) ≤d60 mainly of PD (1 pt fungal pneumonia before count recovery d31). Overall response rate was 33% (complete remission (CR), hematologic improvement (HI)/stable disease) with 8 (16%) pts achieving CR (1 CRi). Median overall survival was 5.03 months, for all responders 11.58 months, and for CR pts 19.89 months (Fig 1). Responses occurred at all DLs. Three CR pts underwent alloSCT; 2 remain in CR at ~3 yrs. Pharmacokinetics (PK): V or TEM PKs were not altered with co-administration. There was a correlation between the DLT of mucositis and V single (Cmax P=0.005; AUC P=0.009) and multiple dose exposure (Cmax P = 0.02; AUC P=0.03). Pharmacodynamics and pharmacoepigenetics: Four of 39 pts examined had MGMT methylation (3 CR; 75%) and 2 had BRCA-1 methylation (1 HI) in peripheral blood (PB) or bone marrow (BM) mononuclear cells (MC). Defective FancD2 pathway was observed in the BMMC of 19/19 pts using FancD2 ubiquitylation assays but did not correlate with response. V reduced PAR levels by >75% in PBMC of most pts and in the presence of TEM. Induction of γ-H2AX in CD34+ cells was seen upon V/V+TEM treatment. Conclusion: V plus TEM demonstrated safety and activity in this resistant and elderly leukemia population. Response rate was higher in MGMT methylated pts, but responses were also seen in pts who had no MGMT methylation, had failed multiple therapies, had secondary AML and/or adverse karyotype. Future clinical study should aim to identify pts with defective DDR pathways who are most likely to respond to this therapeutic approach. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Off Label Use: Temozolomide is not approved for AML. Beumer:Millenium: Other: Research support. Gore:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 47 Background In adults with newly diagnosed, poor-risk AML we previously demonstrated that induction therapy with Flavopiridol in combination with Ara-C and Mitoxantrone (FLAM,) in a timed-sequential manner, yields complete remission (CR) rates of 67% and median disease-free survival (DFS) of 13.6 months. These data suggest that FLAM might improve outcomes relative to standard “7+3” in newly diagnosed AML with poor-risk features. Thus, we are conducting a phase II randomized trial comparing the CR rates with FLAM vs. 7+3 induction for all newly diagnosed adult patients with AML with intermediate and poor-risk features. We also previously identified a population of CD34+CD38− cells with intermediate aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH) activity that appears to represent a leukemic stem cell (LSC) population. We are examining the effects of FLAM vs. 7+3 in eradicating this LSC population and determining if persistence of LSC's predicts for relapse. Objectives The primary objective is to compare the rate of CR after 1 cycle of FLAM vs. 1 cycle of 7+3. The secondary objectives are to compare toxicities, survival rates, and presence or absence of minimal residual disease (MRD) after both induction regimens. Methods All newly diagnosed adult patients aged 18–70 without favorable risk features were randomized in a 2:1 fashion between FLAM and 7+3 at 90 mg/m2 of Daunorubicin. To achieve balanced randomization, patients were stratified by age, secondary AML and leukocyte count. CD34+ cell subsets were analyzed by flow cytometry for CD38 expression and ALDH activity by Aldefluor. The trial is ongoing. Results To date, 62 patients are evaluable for the primary end point. Demographics and results are depicted in table 1. Patient characteristics were similar in both arms, although there were more patients with poor risk features in the FLAM arm than 7+3. Overall grade > 3 toxicity was similar between both arms. However, there were 3 cases of grade > 3 tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) with FLAM, with 1 death, vs. 0 with 7+3. There were also 3 deaths with FLAM before day 60 vs. 0 with 7+3. CR rate with FLAM was 68% (28/41), with 1 cycle of 7+3 was 48% (10/21) (p = 0.17), and with 2 cycles (7+3 + 5+2) was 52% (11/21). CR rates based on specific risk factors are depicted in table 2. There was a trend toward improved CR rates in patients with adverse genetics with FLAM (p = 0.17). Putative AML LSC's were distinguished from normal hematopoietic stem cells based on ALDH activity. The persistence of putative LSC's in patients after therapy was highly predictive of subsequent clinical relapse. Conclusions Based on the current CR rate of 68%, FLAM holds promise as a therapeutic option for patients with newly diagnosed AML with intermediate and poor risk features. In this preliminary analysis, there is a suggestion that FLAM leads to higher CR rates in patients with adverse genetics than 7+3. Additionally, the detection of MRD consisting of a residual putative LSC population strongly portended subsequent relapse, even in patients without evidence of leukemia. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Flavopiridol (Alvocidib) is an anti-leukemia agent.

Abstract Background: Pancreatic cancer is the fourth-leading cause of cancer death in both men and women in the United States. The currently identified common susceptibility loci account for a small fraction of estimated heritability. We sought to estimate overall heritability of pancreatic cancer and partition the heritability by variant frequencies and functional annotations. Methods: Analysis using the genome-based restricted maximum likelihood method (GREML) was conducted on Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium (PanC4) genome-wide association study (GWAS) data from 3,568 pancreatic cancer cases and 3,363 controls of European Ancestry. Results: Applying linkage disequilibrium- and minor allele frequency-stratified GREML (GREML-LDMS) method to imputed GWAS data, we estimated the overall heritability of pancreatic cancer to be 21.2% (SE = 4.8%). Across the functional groups (intronic, intergenic, coding, and regulatory variants), intronic variants account for most of the estimated heritability (12.4%). Previously identified GWAS loci explained 4.1% of the total phenotypic variation of pancreatic cancer. Mutations in hereditary pancreatic cancer susceptibility genes are present in 4% to 10% of patients with pancreatic cancer, yet our GREML-LDMS results suggested these regions explain only 0.4% of total phenotypic variance for pancreatic cancer. Conclusions: Although higher than previous studies, our estimated 21.2% overall heritability may still be downwardly biased due to the inherent limitation that the contribution of rare variants in genes with a substantive overall impact on disease are not captured when applying these commonly used methods to imputed GWAS data. Impact: Our work demonstrated the importance of rare and common variants in pancreatic cancer risk.

Background: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) affects 30% to 40% of patients with cancer with long-lasting disability. Scrambler therapy (ST) appeared to benefit patients in uncontrolled trials, so we performed a randomized sham-controlled Phase II trial of ST. Methods: The primary end point was “average pain” after 28 days on the Numeric Rating Scale. Each received ten 30-minute sessions of ST on the dermatomes above the painful areas, or sham treatment on the back, typically at L3-5 where the nerve roots would enter the spinal cord. Outcomes included the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI)-CIPN and the EORTC CIPN-20 scale. Patients were evaluated before treatment (day 0), day 10, and days 28, 60, and 90. Results: Data regarding pain as a primary outcome were collected for 33 of the 35 patients. There were no significant differences between the sham and the “real” ST group at day 10, 28, 60, or 90, for average pain, the BPI, or EORTC CIPN-20. Individual responses were noted during the ST treatment on the real arm, but most dissipated by day 30. There was improvement in the sensory subscale of the CIPN-20 at 2 months in the “real” group ( P = .14). All “real” patients wanted to continue treatment if available. Discussion: We observed no difference between sham and real ST CIPN treatment. Potential reasons include at least the following: ST does not work; the sham treatment had some effect; small sample size with heterogeneous patients; misplaced electrodes on an area of nonpainful but damaged nerves; or a combination of these factors.