Marshall, John L

505 Background: MSI is a tumor biomarker for immunotherapy efficacy that is closely associated w/deficient MMR, and is also variably associated w/somatic muts of the MMR genes, loss of MMR protein expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC), and high TMB. Germ-line muts (Lynch syndrome/LS) in the 4 MMR genes are recognized to have distinct cancer spectrums/penetrance in LS, yet across all tumors, gene-specific variability in MMR IHC, MMR muts, and TMB is understudied. Methods: Results of TGPs performed by Caris Lifesciences (2015-17) were analyzed in colorectal (CRC), endometrial (EC) and all other cancers/tumors (OT) as: 1) all MSI-H tumors (n = 1057) and 2) all tumors w/ ≥1 mut in an MMR gene (n = 470). A subset of cases had IHC for MMR protein and PD-L1 expression. MSI and TMB were determined by NGS. Results: Characteristics of MSI-H tumors and tumors w/ ≥1 MMR mut are seen in the Table. A single MSH6 mut [F1088fs] in a coding microsatellite represented 31% of all MMR muts detected. F1088fs was found in 58% tumors w/MLH1/PMS2 loss (IHC) but only 25% w/MSH2/MSH6 loss (p < 0.001), was more commonly seen in EC vs CRC/OT (p < 0.001), and was negatively associated w/somatic POLE mut (p = 0.002). Distinct mut signatures in the MMR genes (e.g. GLUàSTOP) were seen in tumors w/POLE muts and DNA repair genes. Conclusions: MSI-H and MMR mutated tumors demonstrate marked gene-specific heterogeneity in IHC patterns, TMBs, and somatic muts that may be relevant to treatment selection, resistance, and response. [Table: see text]

728 Background: Adjuvant FOLFOX therapy for stage II patients remains controversial, and selection criteria are imprecise. We examined the trend of disease-free survival (DFS: time to recurrence or death, whichever occurs first); time to recurrence (TTR: time to recurrence, censored at death without recurrence); survival after recurrence (SAR); and overall survival (OS) of pts treated with FOLFOX over a ten-year period. Methods: Outcomes of pts with stage II colon cancer enrolled in 6 adjuvant trials receiving FOLFOX alone were analyzed. Pt enrollment period was dichotomized as old (1998 – 2003) vs. new era (2004 – 2009) based on the FDA approval date of bevacizumab. 3/5yr event-free rates were estimated using adjusted Kaplan-Meier methods. Outcomes were compared between the two eras by multivariate Cox model. To control for potential confounding effects, all analyses were adjusted for age, gender, performance score, T stage, number of lymph nodes (LNs) examined, tumor side, and histologic grade. Results: In total, 1,122 pts with stage II were identified; 71% and 29% were treated in the old and new era, respectively. Pts enrolled in the new era were significantly younger and more likely to have higher tumor-grade and right-sided tumors compared to old era. More pts in the new era (71%) had ≥12 LNs examined compared to the old era (53%). After adjusting for potential confounding effects, no difference in DFS, TTR, SAR or OS between old and new eras was found (Table). Although median SAR increased from 13.6 to 26 months over time, this was not statistically significant, likely due to lack of power. An increased TTR over time (HRadj. 0.41, padj.= 0.002) was observed in pts with ≥12 LNs examined (3-yr TTR: 92% in old era vs. 96% in new era), but not pts with <12 LNs examined (pinteraction = 0.04). Conclusions: In stage II colon cancer pts who received adjuvant FOLFOX, no significant increase of DFS or OS was observed over time. However TTR was longer only in pts with ≥12 LNs examined. [Table: see text]

724 Background: Adjuvant FOLFOX is the standard of care for pts with stage III colon cancer and a platform to test new agents. Improvements in supportive care and development of newer treatments for metastatic disease impact the overall outcome of pts treated with adjuvant therapy. We examined the trend of disease-free survival (DFS), survival after recurrence (SAR), and overall survival (OS) of pts treated with FOLFOX over a ten-year period. Methods: Outcomes of colon cancer pts enrolled in 6 adjuvant trials receiving FOLFOX alone were analyzed. Pt enrollment period was dichotomized as old (1998 – 2003) vs. new era (2004 – 2009) based on the FDA approval date of bevacizumab. 3/5yr event-free rates were estimated by adjusted Kaplan-Meier methods. Outcomes were compared between the two eras by Cox model. To control for potential confounding effects, all analyses were adjusted for age, gender, performance score, T/N stage, tumor sidedness and histologic grade. Results: In total, 7,230 pts (stage II [n = 1122]; stage III [n = 6,108]) were identified; 32% and 68% were treated in the old and new era, respectively. Stage III pts enrolled in the new era were significantly younger, more likely to have T4/N2 disease, higher tumor grade, and left-sided tumors. After adjusting for pt characteristics, no difference in DFS was seen over time. However prolonged SAR and OS were observed in pts treated in the new era (Table). 5yr OS increased from 76% to 80% over time. Median SAR improved from 14.8 to 26.4 months. Conclusions: Stage III colon cancer pts who received adjuvant FOLFOX experienced significant improvements in SAR and OS—but not DFS—over time. In view of the improvements in OS and nearly doubled SAR, the optimal duration of OS follow-up to evaluate the benefits of adjuvant therapy (currently 5 years) should be reassessed, and ACCENT investigators are planning to conduct these additional analyses using their large pooled-trial database. [Table: see text]

Abstract The efficacy of immunotherapy varies widely among different gastrointestinal cancers. Response to immune checkpoint inhibitors is shown to correlate with tumor mutation load (TML), mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) status, and programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. Herein, we quantify TML, dMMR, and PD-L1 expression and determine their interrelationship in gastrointestinal cancers. Here, a total of 4,125 tumors from 14 different gastrointestinal cancer sites were studied using validated assays. Next-generation sequencing was performed on genomic DNA isolated from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor specimens using the NextSeq platform. TML was calculated using only somatic nonsynonymous missense mutations sequenced with a 592-gene panel. Microsatellite instability (MSI) was assessed using direct analysis of altered known MSI loci in the target regions of the sequenced genes. PD-L1 expression was analyzed by IHC. Interestingly, right-sided colon and small-bowel adenocarcinomas had the highest prevalence of TML-high tumors (14.6% and 10.2%, respectively). Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors and gastrointestinal stromal tumors had the lowest rates of TML-high (1.3% and 0%, respectively). TML-high was strongly associated with MSI-H (P &lt; 0.0001). However, all TML-high anal cancers (8.3%) were microsatellite stable (MSS). Higher PD-L1 expression was more likely to be seen in MSI compared with MSS tumors (20.6% vs. 7.8%, P &lt; 0.0001). Implications: TML-high rate varied widely among gastrointestinal cancers. Although MSI is conceivably the main driver for TML-high, other factors may be involved. Future clinical trials are needed to evaluate whether the integration of TML, MSI, and PD-L1 could better identify potential responders to immunotherapy. Mol Cancer Res; 16(5); 805–12. ©2018 AACR.

Abstract Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ontuxizumab (MORAb-004), a monoclonal antibody that interferes with endosialin (tumor endothelial marker-1) function, in patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer and to identify a responsive patient population based on biomarkers. Experimental Design: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II study. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive weekly intravenous ontuxizumab (8 mg/kg) or placebo plus best supportive care until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Tissue and blood biomarkers were evaluated for their ability to identify a patient population that was responsive to ontuxizumab. Results: A total of 126 patients were enrolled. No significant difference between the ontuxizumab and placebo groups was evident for the primary endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS), with a median PFS of 8.1 weeks in each group (HR, 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.76–1.67; P = 0.53). There were no significant differences between groups for overall survival (OS) or overall response rate (ORR). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in the ontuxizumab group (vs. the placebo group, respectively) were fatigue (53.7% vs. 47.5%), nausea (39.0% vs. 35.0%), decreased appetite (34.1% vs. 27.5%), and constipation (28.0% vs. 32.5%). The most common grade 3/4 TEAE in the ontuxizumab group versus placebo was back pain (11.0% vs. 0%). No single biomarker clearly identified patients responsive to ontuxizumab. Conclusions: No benefit with ontuxizumab monotherapy compared with placebo for clinical response parameters of PFS, OS, or ORR was demonstrated. Ontuxizumab was well tolerated. Clin Cancer Res; 24(2); 316–25. ©2017 AACR.

675 Background: Recent retrospective analysis of CALGB/SWOG 80405 showed that left-sided colon cancers (LCC) respond differently to biological therapy compared with right-sided tumors. However, differences between rectal cancers (RC) and LCC remain undefined. Herein, we report our exploration of differences between these two groups. Methods: Individual patient data from 4182 patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancers, enrolled onto 8 first-line randomized trials, were pooled. Only pts with tumor locations that were clearly defined as LCC (splenic flexure to sigmoid) or RC were included in this analysis. Differences in pt characteristics and disease factors according to LCC vs. RC were identified. The prognostic effect of primary tumor location on OS and PFS was quantified via multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling stratified by treatment arm within each study and adjusting for age, sex, performance status, and prior surgery. Results: In total, 2,479 (59%) pts with LCC and 1,703 (41%) pts with RC were identified. Pts with RC, compared with LCC, were more likely to be male (68% vs. 62%, p < 0.001), have lung metastases (mets) (56% vs. 37%, p < 0.001), and have 2 or more metastatic sites (64% vs. 60%, p < 0.02), whereas pts with LCC were more likely to have liver mets (84% vs. 76%, p < 0.001). RC had a greater frequency of KRAS mutations (41% vs. 37%, p = 0.04) than LCC but there were no differences in the frequency of BRAF mutations (5% vs. 4%, p = 0.2). In multivariable analysis, no differences in OS or PFS were observed between pts with LCC vs. RC. While risk of death did not differ by primary tumor location, across all pts with LCC or RC, those with liver mets had a 17% increased risk of death compared to those with lung mets (HR = 1.17, p = 0.03) after adjusting for effects of other variables. Forthcoming prognostic analysis of LCC vs. RC within grouped backbone treatments (e.g., FOLFOX and FOLFIRI) is underway. Conclusions: Tumors arising in the rectum may carry clinical and molecular features that are distinct from LCC. Further investigations are warranted to determine whether RC should be treated with the same chemo backbone and biological therapy as LCC.