Babiker, Hani M.

634 Background: CAT is the second leading cause of cancer-related death, yet the genetic underpinnings of VTE risk in BTC remain underexplored. The evaluation of CAT risk is based on Khorana score (KS), which is limited to clinical parameters. Incorporation of a genomic signature in CAT risk assessment may allow for individualized risk assessment. Methods: We collected data from consecutive patients (pts) with BTC treated at Mayo Clinic Hospitals (Phoenix, Rochester, Jacksonville) between 1998-2024. Genomic profiling was conducted on FFPEs and blood samples through next-generation sequencing (NGS) (NextSeq, Tempus xT CDx, FoundationOne CDx). Association between CAT and clinic-pathologic features (age, gender, race, ethnicity, BMI, tumor site (TS), surgery, stage, radiotherapy, systemic therapy, history of thromboembolism (hVTE)) were assessed with multivariate Cox regression (p<0.05). A separate Cox regression adjusting for age, hVTE, radiotherapy, systemic therapy, metastatic disease stratified for TS was used for gene associations. Benjamini–Hochberg method was applied (q<0.1) based on previous publications. Median overall survival (mOS) was calculated from the date of diagnosis to the date of death or last follow-up. Results: 740 adult pts were included, median age 62 years (IQR: 56-71), male/female (51%/49%), median BMI 26.6 (IQR: 22.8-31.1) with intrahepatic (496, 67%) and extrahepatic BTC (173, 23%), gallbladder cancer (71, 10%). 244 (33%) had metastatic disease. 216 (29%) experienced CAT. For those with CAT, 31 (14%) scored 1, 9 (4%) scored 2 and 1 (<1%) scored 3 on KS. mOS was 33 months (mos) (95% CI 28.9-38.4) vs. 55 mos (95% CI 25.1-39.1) (p=0.2) for pts with and without CAT, respectively. hVTE was associated with CAT (HR 3.14, 95% CI 1.98-4.98, p<0.001) along with systemic therapy (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.11-2.89, p<0.01) and metastatic disease (HR 1.65, 95% CI 1.11-2.44, p<0.01). 305 pts (41%) underwent NGS. The most common altered genes were TP53 (126, 41%), KRAS (64, 21%), CDKN2A (63, 21%). The most common altered currently targetable genes were FGFR2 (43, 14%), IDH1 (30, 10%) and HER2/ERBB2 (16, 5%). MYC (4, 1%) (HR 11.60, 95% CI 3.04-44.25, p<0.001, q=0.058) and HER2/ERBB2 (HR 2.45, 95% CI 1.26-4.77, p=0.008, q=0.087) alterations were significantly associated with an increased risk of CAT. MYC alterations were all copy number gains (100%). The most frequent HER2/ERBB2 alterations were copy number gains (10, 62%). FGFR2 fusions (31, 10%) were linked to a lower CAT risk (HR 0.46, 95%CI 0.22-0.93, p=0.032, q=0.075) with FGFR2-BICC1 being the most frequent (5,16%). Conclusions: MYC and HER2/ERBB2 alterations are novel predictive biomarkers for an increased risk of CAT in BTC, while FGFR2 fusions confer lower risk. The knowledge of mutational status lends insight into guidance for anticoagulant prophylaxis management for this subgroup and integration with KS.

628 Background: Biliary tract cancers (BTC) are aggressive malignancies with poor survival outcomes and limited treatment options. This study compared the epidemiological and molecular differences of advanced BTC patients through a global collaboration involving the Mayo Clinic and National Cancer Center Hospital East. Methods: We included patients with advanced BTC who underwent comprehensive tumor molecular profiling who received at least 30 days of systemic therapy. Patients were grouped based on specific alterations. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the start of first-line therapy until death and compared among subgroups using Cox regression models. Results: 332 (36%) out of 932 patients had at least one actionable mutation : somatic BRCA1/2 mutations N=106, FGFR2 fusions N=61, HER2 amplifications N=65, KRAS G12C/D mutations N=46, IDH1 mutations N=38, and TMB >10 mut/Mb N=16. BRCA1/2 -mutated BTC were more commonly found in older Asian males with intrahepatic tumors and often presented with peritoneal and liver metastases upon initial diagnosis. FGFR2 fusions were more prevalent in younger White females with intrahepatic tumors, while HER2 amplifications were mainly seen in Asian females with gallbladder tumors. KRAS mutations were primarily observed in Asian males, and IDH1 mutations were common in White males with intrahepatic tumors, frequently presenting with liver metastasis. Survival outcomes varied significantly based on the alteration type: patients with FGFR2 fusions had the longest median OS (mOS) at 23.3 months (mo) (95%CI 18.4-34.9), followed by those with IDH1 mutations (19.3 mo; 95% CI 17.4-NE) and TMB >10 mut/Mb (17.8 mo; 95% CI 13.6-NE). BRCA mutations had a mOS of 16 mo (95% CI 14.6-19.8), while HER2 amplifications and KRAS mutations had mOS of 15.5 (95% CI 11.9-20.2) and 11.6 mo (95% CI 10.0-20.9), respectively. Conclusions: These findings underscore the heterogeneity in clinical and genomic characteristics among BTC patients, highlighting the importance of tailored therapeutic approaches. Baseline patient characteristics stratified by mutation status. KRAS G12C/D (N=46) BRCA 1/2 (N=106) IDH1 (N=38) HER2 amplification(N=65) FGFR2 fusion(N=61) TMB>10 mut/Mb(N=16) P-value Median Age, year 67 68 64 66 52 73 <0.001 Female, n (%) 19 (41) 34 (32) 18(47) 34 (52) 45(74) 6 (38) <0.001 Race, n (%) <0.001 Asian 31 (67) 97 (92) 13 (34) 51 (79) 10 (16) 6 (38) White 14 (30) 8 (8) 24 (63) 13 (20) 48 (79) 10 (63) Primary tumor location, n (%) <0.001 Intrahepatic 28 (68) 45 (45) 33 (100) 19 (31) 54(95) 10 (67) Extrahepatic 9 (22) 27(27) 0 (0) 10 (16) 2 (4) 4 (27) Gallbladder 4 (10) 28 (28) 0 (0) 32 (53) 1 (2) 1 (7) Sites of Metastasis at diagnosis, n (%) Abdominal Wall / Peritoneal 9 (24) 15 (19) 4(13) 7 (12) 6 (10) 4 (27) 0.309 Bone 33 (92) 70 (90) 26 (87) 2 (3) 9(15) 0 (0) 0.212 Liver 20 (49) 52 (61) 28 (82) 45 (73) 45 (76) 6 (38) 0.001 Lung 26 (70) 65 (82) 22 (69) 36 (58) 27(45) 11 (69) 0.006

536 Background: The prognosis of advanced BTC remains poor. Although targeted agents have expanded late-line options, many patients (pts) become ineligible for these therapies after progressing on first-line treatment. Herein, we examined the real-world impact of targeted therapy on survival in advanced BTC. Methods: In this international collaborative study between the Mayo Clinic (US) and the National Cancer Center East (Japan), we included pts with advanced BTC with comprehensive tumor molecular profiling who had received at least 30 days of systemic therapy. Pts were categorized into 3 groups: 1) non-actionable, 2) pts with alterations who received matched targeted therapy at any point during their treatment (matched group), and 3) those with mutations who did not receive matched therapy (unmatched group). OS was calculated from the start date of first-line therapy until death and compared among three subgroups using Cox regression models. Results: Of 932 pts, 366 (39.3%) had an actionable alteration, and 135 of these received matched therapy. 566 (61.7%) did not have an actionable alteration (Table). The most common alterations were somatic BRCA1/2 (N=106, 11.4%), HER2 amplification (N=65, 7%), FGFR2 fusion (N=61, 6.5%), KRAS G12C/D (N=46, 4.9%), and IDH1 (N=38, 4.1%). 78.7% of FGFR2 fusions were found in Caucasian pts, whereas BRCA1/2 (97.5%), HER2 (78.5%), and KRAS G12C/D (67.4%) alterations were more prevalent in Asian pts. The median OS was significantly longer in the matched group (21.4 months; 95% CI 18.4-27.9) compared to the unmatched group (14.6 months; 95% CI 12.8-17.6) and the non-actionable group (17.2 months; 95% CI 15.5-19.0). The 36-month OS rate was 33% in the matched group vs. 7% in the unmatched group (p < 0.0001). After adjusting for age, gender, prior surgical resection, primary tumor location, and country of origin, matched targeted therapy remained a strong independent predictor for improved OS (HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.48-0.79). Conclusions: These real-world findings suggest that matched targeted therapies significantly improve survival in advanced BTC, underscoring the need to incorporate them earlier in the treatment course and address barriers to treatment access. The regional prevalence of actionable alterations should also be considered when developing new targeted therapies. Patient baseline characteristics stratified by actionable alterations and targeted therapy. Non-actionable(N=566) Unmatched group(N=231) Matched group(N=135) Site, n (%) Japan 409 (72%) 166 (72%) 50 (37%) US 157 (28%) 65 (28%) 85 (63%) Age at Dx > 65, n (%) 324 (57%) 122 (53%) 54 (40%) Female, n (%) 235 (42%) 92 (40%) 77 (57%) Primary tumor location (category), n (%) Intrahepatic 217 (43%) 115 (55%) 99 (76%) Extrahepatic 150 (30%) 39 (19%) 17 (13%) Gallbladder 142 (28%) 54 (26%) 14 (11%) Prior surgical resection, n (%) 220 (42%) 74 (34%) 48 (37%)

532 Background: HCC accounts for 80% of primary liver cancers, and worldwide, is the third common cause of cancer-related death. Two FDA approved 1st line systemic treatment options include atezo/bev and durva ± treme. Herein we report outcomes of these regimens in the 1st line setting via a real-world, multi-institutional retrospective cohort study. Methods: We reviewed clinical outcomes of patients (pts) who initiated 1st line atezo/bev or durva ± treme for unresectable HCC between March 2017 and February 2024, across 5 institutions (Mayo Clinic, University of Alabama, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center and University of Michigan). Time to treatment failure (TTF) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Best (objective) response was tabulated. Multivariable analyses were performed using Cox models and logistic regression for time-to-event and binary outcomes, respectively, while adjusting for age, sex, race, HCC etiology, Child-Pugh class, and ALBI grade. Results: A total of 433 HCC pts were included; atezo/bev (336), durva ± treme (97). Median age at the start of therapy was 68 years; 77% were male, 82% were Caucasian. Etiologies of HCC were viral hepatitis (38%), MASLD (20%), alcohol (10%), non-viral multifactorial (10%), or unknown (22%). Pts receiving durva ± treme were less likely to have cirrhosis (11% vs. 28%, p<0.01) but similar in terms of macrovascular invasion (63% vs. 58%, p=0.35) compared to pts receiving atezo/bev. Reasons for treatment discontinuation were similar between the two groups, with the most common being disease progression - atezo/bev (56%) and durva ± treme (47%). The differences in clinical outcomes were not statistically significantly and remained consistent after multivariable adjustment. (Table, atezo/bev as the reference group). Outcomes were significantly different between Child-Pugh classes (CP: A,B,C) respectively, OS: 19.0 m, 6.4 m, 1.9 m (p<0.001); TTF: 6.1 m, 2.7 m, 1.3 m (p<0.001). Conclusions: In this real-world retrospective cohort study of unresectable HCC, the differences in overall survival, objective response, and time to treatment failure were not statistically significant between atezo/bev and durva ± treme in the 1st line setting. Outcome Atezo/bev Durva±treme Univariate p-value Multivariable adjusted hazard ratio (95% CI) Multivariable adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) Overall Survival, Median (month) 14.0 14.6 0.77 0.78 (0.54-1.14) --- Time to Treatment Failure, Median (month) 4.9 4.1 0.71 0.95 (0.72-1.26) --- Objective response, % 26.3% 21.1% 0.31 --- 0.78 (0.43-1.39)

727 Background: PARP inhibition (PARPi) is a standard maintenance therapy for patients (pts) with germline BRCA1/2 mutations in pancreatic cancer. Combination of PARPi therapy and immunotherapy has potential to increase efficacy and may offer benefit beyond germline BRCA1/2 . Methods: We performed a multisite single-arm phase 2 study using the highly potent PARPi niraparib with anti-PD1 drug dostarlimab in pts with germline or somatic HRD mutations in BRCA1/2, PALB2, RAD51C/D, or BARD1 . Pts were required to have metastasis, progressed on ≥1 regimen, and prior platinum-exposure unless refused/intolerant. Pts were treated with niraparib 200 mg orally once daily continuously. Dostarlimab 500 mg was administered IV every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, then 1000 mg IV every 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR) at 12 weeks (DCR12) using iRECIST criteria. At least 8 pts with DCR12 in the first 19 eligible pts (41%) would be considered promising for further trials. Results: 22 pts were enrolled from Dec 2020 to Oct 2023. Two pts withdrew prior to receiving therapy, and 2 were later found to be ineligible, leaving 18 eligible pts for final analyses. Median age was 63.0 yrs, 39% male, 94% non-Hispanic white, 1 black (6%). 17 pts were platinum exposed, 7 were platinum-refractory, and 5 had previously progressed on PARPi maintenance. Mutation distribution was: BRCA2 13/18 (72%), BRCA1 4/18 (22%), BARD1 2/18 (11%). One pt had both BRCA1 (somatic) and BRCA2 (germline) mutations. Germline mutations were identified in 14/18 (78%). DCR12 was achieved in 5/18 (27.8%), so the primary endpoint (>41%) was not met. Pts received a median 2 cycles (range 1-8) of niraparib + dostarlimab. No clinical factors were significantly associated with improved DCR12 (all p > 0.05) in subgroup analyses, but we did observe the following statistically nonsignificant associations. Pts who were platinum-refractory had a lower DCR12 compared to those not (14.3% vs. 36.4%). Counterintuitively, PARPi exposed/refractory pts had a higher DCR12 than non-exposed/non-refractory (50 vs 17% exposed/nonexposed and 40% vs 23% refractory/nonrefractory). Pts with germline mutations had a higher DCR12 compared to those without (38.5% vs. 0%). Non- BRCA2 mutations had a higher DCR12 than those with BRCA2 mutations (50% vs.17%), with highest DCR12 rates among BRCA1 patients (67%). Tolerability was in line with similar combinations, with 60% non-hematologic Gr3 or higher, including fatigue (15%), AST increase (10%), nausea/vomiting (10%), sepsis (10%). Two grade 5 events were not attributed to treatment. Conclusions: PARPi plus anti-PD1 checkpoint inhibition was not sufficiently active as later line therapy in metastatic pancreatic cancer for the majority of patients with HRD mutations. Additional molecular analyses to elucidate predictive markers of sensitivity/resistance are ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT04493060 .

732 Background: Ampullary carcinoma (AC) is a rare malignancy arising from the ampulla of Vater which has a more favorable prognosis compared to other pancreatic malignancies. Current guidelines favor surgical resection followed by adjuvant therapy for average risk patients (pts), however the type of regimen as well as other perioperative treatment modalities are still being explored. The objective of this retrospective study aims to provide insight into the management of locoregional disease. Methods: Pathology records from Mayo Clinic (AZ, FL, MN) denoting AC between 2010 to 2024 were searched using Mayo Data Explorer and selected for retrospective review. Pt demographics, treatment courses, and next generation sequencing (NGS) data were collected. Statistical analysis was conducted using SAS version 9.04. Results: A total of 137 pts (62% male, n = 85) were identified with median age 66 years old. Histologic subtypes were 54% pancreatobiliary (44/81), 40% intestinal (32/81), 6% mixed (5/81), with 56 pts unknown. Stages at diagnosis were 81% resectable (111/137), 11% locally advanced (15/137), and 8% metastatic (11/137). Nearly all (93%, n = 103/111) pts with localized disease had resection with a 97% R0 resection rate (100/103). Majority (68%, n = 75/111) of resectable pts had perioperative chemotherapy with 5-FU or gemcitabine-based regimens (24%, n = 18/75 neoadjuvant vs. 76%, n = 57/75 adjuvant). Perioperative chemoradiation was given in 17% (19/111) of pts. At median follow up of 30.5 months, recurrence rates were 40% (41/103), primarily to the liver (18/41). Median recurrence free survival (RFS) was 29.3 months (95% CI 24.7 – NE). Median overall survival (OS) has not been reached. The 5-year RFS and OS rates were 0.37 (95% CI 0.25 - 0.55) and 0.69 (95% CI 0.58 - 0.82), respectively. Univariate analysis showed no difference in OS with the addition of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation. Somatic NGS testing showed pathogenic mutations in 90% of pts (63/70): 57% KRAS (36/63; 44% G12D, 19% G12V, 8% G12C, 8% G12D, 19% others); 13% homologous recombination (HR) (8/63); 6% ERRB2 /Her2 amplification (4/63), and 5% mismatch repair (MMR) (3/63). Conclusions: AC has a favorable prognosis in resectable pts. However, high recurrence rates indicate the need for better systemic therapies and improved selection of pts who would benefit from these treatments. Future research should focus on refining perioperative strategies to enhance outcomes and reduce recurrence.

163 Background: CRC with PM has a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. Immunotherapy has shown promise in improving outcomes for patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H), mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR), and high tumor mutational burden (TMB-H) tumors. However the peritoneal niche has a unique microenvironment, which can influence the effectiveness of immune check point inhibitors (ICIs). We assessed the impact of ICI on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in CRC patients (pts) and PM, considering key clinical and molecular characteristics. Methods: A retrospective review aiming to identify CRC pts with MSI-H/dMMR and PM treated with immunotherapy between 2015 and 2023 was performed. Data collected included pt demographics, tumor characteristics, and treatment details. Responses were evaluated using RECIST v1.1 criteria. Results: 37 pts were included, 9 (24%) had Lynch syndrome. The median age of diagnosis was 61 years and most pts were females (65%). Most pts had MSI-H/dMMR tumors, while one pt was treated based on ultra-hypermutated phenotype (TMB 202) and POLE mutation. Among those with available TMB data, the median TMB was 52 mutations/Mb (0-202). Common mutations were PMS2 (51%), MLH1 (38%), MSH6 (16.2%), and MSH2 (16.2%). Right-sided tumors were in 54%, mucinous histology in 62%, and ascites in 54%. Pts received a median of 11 cycles of ICI (2-52). Pembrolizumab was the most frequently used ICI (78%), while Nivolumab was used either alone (11%) or in combination with Ipilimumab (11%). Median PFS in our cohort was 7.8 months and median OS was 29.9 months. The disease control rate (DCR) was 81%, with an objective response rate (ORR) of 51.3% (9 complete responses, 12 partial responses). At the time of data collection, 30% of pts were off systemic therapy and 5-FU-based chemotherapy combined with a biologic agent was the most common subsequent treatment in 32% who had PD. Univariate analysis showed no significant differences in PFS or OS based on tumor sidedness, isolated PM, liver metastases, mucinous vs. non mucinous histology or BRAF / RAS status (WT vs mutant). Malignant ascites was associated with worse OS(HR 0.3; p= 0.03). Conclusions: Treatment with ICIs in pts with MSI-H/dMMR and/or TMB-H CRC and PM improved disease control in CRC pts with PM, however, as compared to historical controls for patients with MSI-H/d-MMR disease treated with ICI, this group showed less favorable outcomes. Malignant ascites was associated with poorer overall survival. Further research of the immune response and tumor microenvironment in the peritoneal cavity is warranted.

Abstract Background Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (A/B) received FDA approval as the first-line therapy for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in 2020. However, optimal subsequent treatment options are unclear. Here, we describe clinical outcomes of advanced HCC patients following first-line treatment with A/B. Patients and Methods We conducted a multi-site analysis of patients with HCC treated with first-line A/B between January 2018 and December 2022 at Mayo Clinic. This study cohort included all patients receiving second-line systemic therapy after A/B. Median overall survival (OS) and time-to-treatment discontinuation (TTD) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Child Pugh (CP) scores are also described at diagnosis, prior to first line, and prior to second-line therapy. Results Of the 342 patients who received A/B, 107 (31.3%) received second-line treatments including anti-VEGF therapy or immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) and were included in the final analysis. Median OS for all patients was 11.1 months from initiation of second-line therapy. Median OS was 10.7 months (95% CI: 7.2-12.8) and 15.7 months (95%CI: 6.8-NE) for those receiving anti-VEGF inhibitors and ICI ( P = .50). Median TTD for second-line therapies was 2.4 months (95% CI: 1.7-3.3) and 2.6 months (95% CI: 1.5-5.1) for anti-VEGF inhibitors and ICI, respectively (P = .87). In multivariate analyses, CP was significantly associated with survival. Conclusion Following first-line A/B treatment, there is no statistically significant difference in survival between ICI and anti-VEGF therapy, nor in time to treatment discontinuation. CP score remains an important prognostic tool.

TPS2700 Background: Though immunotherapy with anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has led to improvements in clinical outcomes in patients with cancer, when used as monotherapy in the advanced setting, only 18-25% of patients respond to ICI. Notably, ICI frequently lacks anti-tumor activity in immune-cold cancers where T cell priming is missing. Recent breakthroughs in identifying personal neoantigens via a comprehensive analysis of cancer sequencing data have brought increased attention to neoantigen cancer vaccines. Personalized cancer vaccines targeting neoantigens have shown early promise. While neoantigens have recently been investigated in some cancer types, the current neoantigen prediction algorithms have often focused on the MHC class-I subtype, single nucleotide mutations (SNM), small insertions and deletions (INDEL). We recently developed an informatics workflow, REAL-neo, for the identification, quality control (QC), and prioritization of both class-I and class-II human leukocyte antigen (HLA) bound neoantigens that arise from somatic SNM, INDEL, aberrant RNA splicing, and gene fusions, generating much more potent neoantigen candidates. Furthermore, we demonstrated robust T-cell response and prolonged survival by combining ICI and cancer vaccines in preclinical models. This single-arm phase I clinical trial is in progress to assess the safety, feasibility, and immunogenicity of personalized neoantigen vaccines in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced solid cancers. Methods: The vaccine consists of up to 20 peptides (15-30 mer) comprising patient-specific neoantigens identified from tumor DNA and mRNA sequencing data using REAL-neo and delivered with GM-CSF as an adjuvant. The first cohort of three patients will be treated at dose level 1 consisting of 4 or 5 peptides at 300 mcg/peptide and GM-CSF 125 mcg per injection site in each of four limbs. After Cohort 1 is deemed safe, the study will expand to cohort 2, when patients will be enrolled at the same dose level for vaccine plus Pembrolizumab 200 mg i.v. Neoantigen vaccine will be given via subcutaneous injection on days 1, 4, 8, 15, and 21 (cohorts 1 and 2) and weeks 5 and 8 (booster dose for cohort 2 only). Cohort 1 has been completed without dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Enrollment in Cohort 2 began in January 2024. AEs are assessed according to CTCAE v5. and safety findings are reviewed by data safety medical board (DSMB). Key eligibility criteria include 1) histologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic solid malignancies and 2) cancer progression after at least one line of the standard-of-care (SOC) systemic treatment. For cohort 2, patients must be eligible to receive pembrolizumab per SOC or the treating physician’s judgment. Clinical trial information: NCT05269381 .