Knox, Jennifer J

PURPOSE EGFR alterations occur in a subset of biliary tract cancers (BTCs) and are often linked to disease progression and poor prognosis, yet targeted approaches remain underexplored. ERRFI1 , encoding the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor MIG6, is mutated in various cancers, including BTC, representing a potential predictive biomarker. We investigated whether loss of ERRFI1 function may enhance sensitivity to EGFR-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), presenting a potential therapeutic opportunity. METHODS This is a retrospective multicenter study of patients with BTC harboring ERRFI1 alterations. Data were extracted from electronic health records following institutional approval. ERRFI1 alterations were classified based on the alteration type, variant allele frequencies were documented, and coalterations were analyzed. Treatment outcomes including response, time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS), safety profiles, and tumor marker kinetics were noted. RESULTS Fourteen BTC patients with ERRFI1 mutations were identified in our database; the median age was 50 years, 64% were males; all cases were intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas. Common coalterations included IDH1 (36%), TP53 (29%), and ARID1A (29%). All patients received gemcitabine-cisplatin as first-line treatment, and 79% received immune checkpoint inhibitors. Eight patients (57%) received EGFR TKIs. Best responses to EGFR therapy included three partial responses (2 responses lasting >20 months), four stable diseases, and one progressive disease. The median TTP was 7 months (95% CI, 6 to 21 months). Treatment was well-tolerated: toxicities included rash (n = 2), transaminitis (n = 1), and diarrhea (n = 1). The median OS was 20 months (95% CI: 8-36 months); 50% remained alive at last follow-up. CONCLUSION ERRFI1 mutations represent actionable biomarkers in BTC, with EGFR-targeted therapy demonstrating meaningful clinical benefit in this heavily pretreated population. These findings support integration of ERRFI1 testing into routine molecular profiling of BTC and other EGFR-driven malignancies.

PURPOSE Cholangiocarcinoma is a rare cancer associated with poor prognosis. Pemigatinib was the first FGFR1-3 inhibitor approved for second-line therapy and beyond, on the basis of the phase II FIGHT-202 trial. Here, we assess efficacy and safety of first-line pemigatinib. METHODS FIGHT-302 is a phase III, randomized, global trial evaluating pemigatinib as first-line therapy (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03656536 ). Adults with advanced cholangiocarcinoma with FGFR2 rearrangement were randomized 1:1 to receive pemigatinib (13.5 mg once daily) or chemotherapy (1,000 mg/m 2 gemcitabine plus 25 mg/m 2 cisplatin once per day on days 1 and 8 of every 3-week cycle for ≤8 cycles) and were stratified by prior receipt of chemotherapy, geographic region, and tumor burden. Pemigatinib crossover was allowed for patients progressing on chemotherapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary efficacy, safety, and exploratory end points were also analyzed. RESULTS Overall, 4,563 patients were prescreened, 196 were screened, and 167 randomly assigned to receive pemigatinib (n = 83) or chemotherapy (n = 84) before early closure of the study because of a change in standard of care. The median PFS was 8.3 months in the pemigatinib group versus 6.8 months in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.39 to 0.87]; nominal P = .0078); objective response rate was 47% versus 15%, and the median duration of response was 14.2 versus 6.3 months. Median overall survival was similar (24.4 v 25.0 months, respectively). In the crossover group (n = 42, second-line pemigatinib), the median PFS was 8.1 months. Safety was consistent with the known profile of pemigatinib. CONCLUSION To our knowledge, this was the largest, first-line, randomized, phase III trial of a targeted therapy for advanced FGFR2- rearranged cholangiocarcinoma. Pemigatinib demonstrated prolonged median PFS compared with chemotherapy, with no new safety findings.

Abstract Sorafenib blocks nonstructural protein 5A (NS5A)-recruited c-Raf–mediated hepatitis C virus (HCV) replication and gene expression. Release of Raf-1-Ask-1 dimer and inhibition of Raf-1 via sorafenib putatively differ in the presence or absence of doxorubicin. Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 80802 (Alliance) randomized phase III trial of doxorubicin plus sorafenib versus sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), showed no improvement in median overall survival (OS). Whether HCV viral load impacts therapy and whether any correlation between HCV titers and outcome based on HCV was studied. In patients with HCV, HCV titer levels were evaluated at baseline and at multiple postbaseline timepoints until disease progression or treatment discontinuation. HCV titer levels were evaluated in relation to OS and progression-free survival (PFS). Among 53 patients with baseline HCV data, 12 patients had undetectable HCV (HCV-UN). Postbaseline HCV titer levels did not significantly differ between treatment arms. One patient in each arm went from detectable to HCV-UN with greater than 2 log-fold titer levels reduction. Aside from these 2 HCV-UN patients, HCV titers remained stable on treatment. Patients who had HCV-UN at baseline were 3.5 times more likely to progress and/or die from HCC compared with HCV detectable (HR = 3.51; 95% confidence interval: 1.58–7.78; P = 0.002). HCV titer levels remained unchanged, negating any sorafenib impact onto HCV titer levels. Although an overall negative phase III study, patients treated with doxorubicin plus sorafenib and sorafenib only, on CALGB 80802 had worse PFS if HCV-UN. Higher levels of HCV titers at baseline were associated with significantly improved PFS. Significance: Sorafenib therapy for HCC may impact HCV replication and viral gene expression. In HCV-positive patients accrued to CLAGB 80802 phase III study evaluating the addition of doxorubicin to sorafenib, HCV titer levels were evaluated at baseline and different timepoints. Sorafenib did not impact HCV titer levels. Despite an improved PFS in patients with detectable higher level HCV titers at baseline, no difference in OS was noted.

We assessed the efficacy and safety of combining bevacizumab with temsirolimus in patients with advanced extra-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. This NCI-sponsored multicenter, open-label, phase II study (NCT01010126) enrolled patients with advanced, recurrent, or metastatic extra-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. All patients were treated with temsirolimus and bevacizumab until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Temsirolimus 25 mg was administered i.v. on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 and bevacizumab 10 mg/kg i.v. on days 1 and 15 of a 4-week cycle. Discontinuation of temsirolimus or bevacizumab did not require discontinuation of the other agent. The primary endpoints were objective response rate and 6-month progression-free survival rate. Fifty-nine patients were enrolled in this study, and 54 were evaluated for efficacy and adverse events. While median progression-free survival was 7.1 months, the median duration of treatment with temsirolimus was 3.9 months and that with bevacizumab was 3.5 months. The objective response rate of combination therapy was 2%, and 6-month progression-free survival was 48%. The most frequently reported grade 3–4 adverse events included fatigue (13%), hypertension (13%), and bleeding (13%). Close to 54% of the patients discontinued treatment due to adverse events, refusal of further treatment, or treatment delays. Three deaths occurred in the study, of which two were due to treatment-related bowel perforations. Given the minimal efficacy and increased toxicity seen with the combination of bevacizumab and temsirolimus, we do not recommend the use of this regimen in patients with advanced extra-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Polymorphisms in the promoter of the BRM gene, a critical subunit of the chromatin remodeling SWI/SNF complex, have previously been implicated in risk and prognosis in Caucasian‐predominant lung, head and neck, esophageal, and pancreatic cancers, and in hepatocellular cancers in Asians. We investigated the role of these polymorphisms in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) risk and prognosis. HCC cases were recruited in a comprehensive cancer center while the matched controls were recruited from family practice units from the same catchment area. For risk analyses, unconditional logistic regression analyses were performed in HCC patients and matched healthy controls. Overall survival analyses were performed using Cox proportional hazard models, Kaplan‐Meier curves, and log‐rank tests. In 266 HCC cases and 536 controls, no association between either BRM promoter polymorphism (BRM‐741 or BRM‐1321) and risk of HCC was identified (P > 0.10 for all comparisons). There was significant worsening of overall survival as the number of variant alleles increased: BRM‐741 per variant allele adjusted hazards ratio (aHR) 5.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.89‐11.54 and BRM‐1321 per variant allele aHR 4.09, 95%CI 2.22‐7.51. The effects of these two polymorphisms were at least additive, where individuals who were double homozygotes for the variant alleles had a 45‐fold increase in risk of death when compared to those who were double wild‐type for the two polymorphisms. Two BRM promoter polymorphisms were strongly associated with HCC prognosis but were not associated with increased HCC susceptibility. The association was strongest in double homozygotes for the allele variants.