George, Thomas J.

TPS236 Background: For patients with oligometastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), aggressive local therapy of isolated metastases, particularly in the liver, has been associated with long-term progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) primarily based on retrospective evidence. However, in patients with limited metastatic CRC that is deemed inoperable or those with additional disease outside of the liver or lungs, the role of local ablative therapies, including microwave ablation (MWA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), to render patients disease free is less clear. Further, despite the long history of treating oligometastatic CRC with local therapy, which is provider biased and not evidence based, questions remain regarding the benefit of extending the paradigm of metastatic directed therapy to patients with more extensive disease. This trial seeks to use a pragmatic multimodality approach that mirrors the current clinical dilemma. This study is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of adding total ablative therapy (TAT) of all sites of disease to standard of care systemic treatment in those with limited metastatic CRC. Methods: A022101 is a National Clinical Trials Network randomized phase III study planned to enroll 364 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic CRC (BRAF wild-type, microsatellite stable) with ≤4 sites of metastatic disease on baseline imaging. Liver-only metastatic disease is not permitted, and lesions must be amenable to any combination of surgical resection, MWA, and/or SBRT with SBRT required for at least one lesion. Patients receive first-line systemic therapy for 4-6 months and are then randomized 1:1, stratified by number of metastatic organ sites (1-2 vs. 3-4), timing of metastatic disease diagnosis (de novo vs. secondary), and presence of metastatic disease outside the liver and lungs in at least one site. Patients in Arm 1 will receive TAT which consists of treatment of all metastatic sites with SBRT ± MWA ± surgical resection followed by standard of care systemic therapy. Patients in Arm 2 will continue with standard of care systemic therapy alone. The primary endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints include event-free survival, treatment-related toxicities, and local recurrence with exploratory biomarker analyses. The study needs 346 evaluable patients combined in the 2 arms to demonstrate an improvement in OS with a hazard ratio of 0.7 to provide 80% power with a one-sided alpha of 5%. The trial utilizes a group sequential design with two interim analyses (25% and 50% of events) for futility. The trial activated in January 2023 and recruitment is ongoing. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org. U10CA180820 (ECOG-ACRIN); U10CA180868 (NRG); U10CA180888 (SWOG). Clinical trial information: NCT05673148 .

Introduction The Florida-California Cancer Research, Education, and Engagement (CaRE 2 ) Health Equity Center is a triad partnership committed to increasing institutional capacity for cancer disparity research, the diversity of the cancer workforce, and community empowerment. This article provides an overview of the structure, process innovations, and initial outcomes from the first 4 years of the CaRE 2 triad partnership. Methods CaRE 2 serves diverse populations in Florida and California using a “molecule to the community and back” model. We prioritize research on the complex intersection of biological, environmental, and social determinants health, working together with scientific and health disparities communities, sharing expertise across institutions, bidirectional training, and community outreach. Partnership progress and outcomes were assessed using mixed methods and four Program Steering Committee meetings. Results Research capacity was increased through development of a Living Repository of 81 cancer model systems from minority patients for novel cancer drug development. CaRE 2 funded 15 scientific projects resulting in 38 publications. Workforce diversity entailed supporting 94 cancer trainees (92 URM) and 34 ESIs (32 URM) who coauthored 313 CaRE 2 -related publications and received 48 grants. Community empowerment was promoted via outreaching to more than 3000 individuals, training 145 community cancer advocates (including 28 Community Scientist Advocates), and publishing 10 community reports. CaRE 2 members and trainees together have published 639 articles, received 61 grants, and 57 awards. Conclusion The CaRE 2 partnership has achieved its initial aims. Infrastructure for translational cancer research was expanded at one partner institution, and cancer disparities research was expanded at the two cancer centers.

Abstract Introduction The CYP2D6 enzyme metabolizes opioids commonly prescribed for cancer‐related pain, and CYP2D6 polymorphisms may contribute to variability in opioid response. We evaluated the feasibility of implementing CYP2D6 ‐guided opioid prescribing for patients with cancer and reported pilot outcome data. Methods Adult patients from two cancer centers were prospectively enrolled into a hybrid implementation‐effectiveness clinical trial and randomized to CYP2D6 ‐genotype‐guided opioid selection, with clinical recommendations, or usual care. Implementation metrics, including provider response, medication changes consistent with recommendations, and patient‐reported pain and symptom scores at baseline and up to 8 weeks, were assessed. Results Most (87/114, 76%) patients approached for the study agreed to participate. Of 85 patients randomized, 71% were prescribed oxycodone at baseline. The median (range) time to receive CYP2D6 test results was 10 (3–37) days; 24% of patients had physicians acknowledge genotype results in a clinic note. Among patients with CYP2D6 ‐genotype‐guided recommendations to change therapy ( n = 11), 18% had a change congruent with recommendations. Among patients who completed baseline and follow‐up questionnaires ( n = 48), there was no difference in change in mean composite pain score (−1.01 ± 2.1 vs. −0.41 ± 2.5; p = 0.19) or symptom severity at last follow‐up (3.96 ± 2.18 vs. 3.47 ± 1.78; p = 0.63) between the usual care arm ( n = 26) and genotype‐guided arm ( n = 22), respectively. Conclusion Our study revealed high acceptance of pharmacogenetic testing as part of a clinical trial among patients with cancer pain. However, provider response to genotype‐guided recommendations was low, impacting assessment of pain‐related outcomes. Addressing barriers to utility of pharmacogenetics results and clinical recommendations will be critical for implementation success.

PURPOSE Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) is a newly established standard treatment for rectal adenocarcinoma. Current methods to communicate magnitudes of regression during TNT are subjective and imprecise. Magnetic resonance tumor regression grade (MR-TRG) is an existing, but rarely used, regression grading system. Prospective validation of MR-TRG correlation with pathologic response in patients undergoing TNT is lacking. Utility of adding diffusion-weighted imaging to MR-TRG is also unknown. METHODS We conducted a multi-institutional prospective imaging substudy within NRG-GI002 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02921256 ) examining the ability of MR-based imaging to predict pathologic complete response (pCR) and correlate MR-TRG with the pathologic neoadjuvant response score (NAR). Serial MRIs were needed from 110 patients. Three radiologists independently, then collectively, reviewed each MRI for complete response (mriCR), which was tested for positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), sensitivity, and specificity with pCR. MR-TRG was examined for association with the pathologic NAR score. All team members were blinded to pathologic data. RESULTS A total of 121 patients from 71 institutions met criteria: 28% were female (n = 34), 84% White (n = 101), and median age was 55 (24-78 years). Kappa scores for T- and N-stage after TNT were 0.38 and 0.88, reflecting fair agreement and near-perfect agreement, respectively. Calling an mriCR resulted in a kappa score of 0.82 after chemotherapy and 0.56 after TNT reflected near-perfect agreement and moderate agreement, respectively. MR-TRG scores were associated with pCR ( P < .01) and NAR ( P < .0001), PPV for pCR was 40% (95% CI, 26 to 53), and NPV was 84% (95% CI, 75 to 94). CONCLUSION MRI alone is a poor tool to distinguish pCR in rectal adenocarcinoma undergoing TNT. However, the MR-TRG score presents a now validated method, correlated with pathologic NAR, which can objectively measure regression magnitude during TNT.

LBA2 Background: Radiation with sensitizing fluoropyrimidine (5FUCRT) is a standard curative intent treatment for LARC. It improves disease-free survival (DFS) by decreasing pelvic recurrence but has short- and long-term toxicity. The PROSPECT trial compares FOLFOX chemotherapy with selective use of 5FUCRT (intervention) to 5FUCRT (control) for neoadjuvant treatment prior to TME for LARC. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) had cT2N+, cT3N-, cT3N+ rectal cancers deemed appropriate for neoadjuvant therapy prior to low anterior resection with TME. Pts with distal, T4 tumors, threatened radial margins or > 4 enlarged lymph nodes were ineligible. Pts were randomized 1:1 without blinding. Pts in the control group received 5FUCRT with 5040 cGy over 5.5 weeks with either capecitabine or 5FU. Pts in the intervention group had 6 cycles of mFOLFOX6 followed by restaging. If tumor regression was > 20%, then TME was performed without radiation; if < 20%, 5FUCRT was given before TME. DFS was the 1°outcome, defined as time from randomization to any recurrence or death, analyzed in the per-protocol population. One interim analysis was conducted with α spending = 0.001. Noninferiority (NI) of the intervention could be claimed if the upper limit of the 2-sided 90.2% confidence interval (CI) of the DFS hazard ratio did not exceed 1.29 (NI margin). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), local recurrence free survival, R0 resection, pathologic complete response (CR), and toxicity. Results: From June 2012 to December 2018, 1194, pts were randomized and 1128 initiated protocol-assigned treatment. Median age was 57, 34.5% were women and 61.9% had clinically positive nodes. 53 of 585 pts in the intervention group (9%) received preop 5FUCRT. DFS was analyzed after 227 events and median follow-up of 58 months. Conclusions: FOLFOX chemotherapy with selective use of 5FUCRT is non-inferior to 5FUCRT for neoadjuvant treatment of LARC prior to low anterior resection with TME. Patients and physicians have alternative strategies for management of LARC. Clinical trial information: NCT01515787 . [Table: see text]

TPS3640 Background: Recent data have demonstrated that in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), a total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) approach improves compliance with chemotherapy and increases rates of tumor response compared to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) alone. They further indicate that the optimal sequencing of TNT involves consolidation (rather than induction) chemotherapy to optimize complete response rates. Data, largely from retrospective studies, have also shown that patients (pts) with clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant therapy may be managed safely with the watch and wait approach (WW) instead of preemptive total mesorectal resection (TME). However, the optimal consolidation chemotherapy regimen to achieve cCR has not been established, and a randomized clinical trial has not robustly evaluated it as a primary endpoint. Collaborating with a multidisciplinary oncology team and pt groups, we designed this NCI-sponsored study of chemotherapy intensification to address these issues and to drive up cCR rates, to provide opportunity for organ preservation and improve quality of life for pts. Methods: In this Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology randomized phase II trial (1:1), up to 312 pts with microsatellite stable LARC, clinical stage T4N0, any T, N+ or T3N0 requiring abdominoperineal resection or coloanal anastomosis and distal margin within 12 cm of anal verge will be enrolled. Stratification factors include tumor stage (T4 vs T1-3), nodal stage (N+ vs N0) and distance from anal verge (0-4; 4-8; 8-12 cm). Pts will be randomized to receive neoadjuvant long course CRT (LCRT) followed by consolidation doublet (mFOLFOX6 or CAPOX) or triplet chemotherapy (mFOLFIRINOX) for 4 months. LCRT in both arms involves 4500 cGy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks (w) + 900 cGy boost in 5 fractions with a fluoropyrimidine (capecitabine preferred). Pts will undergo assessment 8-12 w post-TNT completion for the primary endpoint of cCR per previously validated criteria and recommended WW and surveillance if cCR is achieved or TME if an incomplete response is noted. Secondary objectives include time-to event outcomes (disease-free and overall survival, organ preservation time and time to distant metastasis) and adverse effects. Statistical power, based on cCR, incorporates a one-sided alpha = 0.048 and power = 90% yielding 312 patients (156 per arm). Biospecimens including archival tumor tissue, matched / normal blood samples and serial rectal MRI will be collected for exploratory correlative research. This study, activated in late 2022, is open across the NCTN and is actively recruiting. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24 CA196171; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . U10CA180868 (NRG); U10CA180888 (SWOG); Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT05610163 Clinical trial information: NCT05610163 .

TPS3629 Background: For patients with oligometastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), aggressive local therapy of isolated metastases, particularly in the liver, has been associated with long-term progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) primarily based on retrospective evidence. However, in patients with limited metastatic CRC that is deemed inoperable or those with additional disease outside of the liver or lungs, the role of local ablative therapies, including microwave ablation (MWA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), to render patients disease free is less clear. Further, despite the long history of treating oligometastatic CRC with local therapy, which is provider biased and not evidence based, questions remain regarding the benefit of extending the paradigm of metastatic directed therapy to patients with more extensive disease. This trial seeks to use a pragmatic multimodality approach that mirrors the current clinical dilemma. This study is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of adding total ablative therapy (TAT) of all sites of disease to standard of care systemic treatment in those with limited metastatic CRC. Methods: A022101 is a National Clinical Trials Network randomized phase III study planned to enroll 364 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic CRC (BRAF wild-type, microsatellite stable) with ≤4 sites of metastatic disease on baseline imaging. Liver-only metastatic disease is not permitted, and lesions must be amenable to any combination of surgical resection, MWA, and/or SBRT with SBRT required for at least one lesion. Patients receive first-line systemic therapy for 4-6 months and are then randomized 1:1, stratified by number of metastatic organ sites (1-2 vs. 3-4), timing of metastatic disease diagnosis (de novo vs. secondary), and presence of metastatic disease outside the liver and lungs in at least one site. Patients in Arm 1 will receive TAT which consists of treatment of all metastatic sites with SBRT ± MWA ± surgical resection followed by standard of care systemic therapy. Patients in Arm 2 will continue with standard of care systemic therapy alone. The primary endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints include event-free survival, treatment-related toxicities, and local recurrence with exploratory biomarker analyses. The study needs 346 evaluable patients combined in the 2 arms to demonstrate an improvement in OS with a hazard ratio of 0.7 to provide 80% power with a one-sided alpha of 5%. The trial utilizes a group sequential design with two interim analyses (25% and 50% of events) for futility. The trial activated in January 2023 and recruitment is ongoing. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org. U10CA180820 (ECOG-ACRIN); U10CA180868 (NRG); U10CA180888 (SWOG); Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05673148 Clinical trial information: NCT05673148 .

3536 Background: Early-onset colorectal cancer (eoCRC, initial CRC diagnosis at age < 50 years) has been increasing in the past two decades especially in Western countries. This study evaluates somatic and germline profiles in eoCRC compared to average-onset CRC (aoCRC, initial CRC diagnosis at age ≥ 50 years). Methods: This is a retrospective, cross-sectional study utilizing data from de-identified records of colorectal cancer patients tested with the Tempus xT assay from 2017 to 2022. Briefly, the assay is a targeted panel that detects single nucleotide variants, insertions and/or deletions, and copy number variants in 598-648 genes, as well as chromosomal rearrangements in 22 genes with high sensitivity and specificity. Baseline characteristics and immunologic markers were compared between eoCRC and aoCRC by Wilcoxon Rank Sum or Chi-squared test (reporting p-values). Somatic and germline mutations were compared between two age groups with false discover rate adjustments (reporting q-values). Results: In this study, 2,379 eoCRC and 8,627 aoCRC patients were included, with the majority diagnosed with stage IV disease. Additionally, germline alterations were assessed on a subset of 6,311 patients with tumor/normal match testing (eoCRC = 1,413 and aoCRC = 4,898). Left-sided primaries were more common in eoCRC (85% left/rectum in eoCRC vs. 75% left/rectum in aoCRC (p < 0.001), and rates of microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) or deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) were lower compared to aoCRC (4.2% vs. 6.8%, p < 0.001). eoCRC has a unique somatic mutation profile compared to aoCRC. A higher prevalence of germline mutations was observed in eoCRC overall (6.9% vs. 5%, p = 0.006); however, no statistically significant differences were observed in individual germline genes compared to aoCRC, likely due to relatively small numbers. Conclusions: eoCRC has a unique mutational profile and presence of germline mutations in 6.9% of eoCRC, indicating a potential role for universal germline testing in CRC. [Table: see text]

PURPOSE The standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer in North America is neoadjuvant pelvic chemoradiation with fluorouracil (5FUCRT). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) is an alternative that may spare patients the morbidity of radiation. Understanding the relative patient experiences with these options is necessary to inform treatment decisions. METHODS PROSPECT was a multicenter, unblinded, noninferiority, randomized trial of neoadjuvant FOLFOX versus 5FUCRT, which enrolled adults with rectal cancer clinically staged as T2N+, cT3N–, or cT3N+ who were candidates for sphincter-sparing surgery. Neoadjuvant FOLFOX was given in six cycles over 12 weeks, followed by surgery. Neoadjuvant 5FUCRT was delivered in 28 fractions over 5.5 weeks, followed by surgery. Adjuvant chemotherapy was suggested but not mandated in both groups. Enrolled patients were asked to provide patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at baseline, during neoadjuvant treatment, and at 12 months after surgery. PROs included 14 symptoms from the National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). Additional PRO instruments measured bowel, bladder, sexual function, and health-related quality of life (HRQL). RESULTS From June 2012 to December 2018, 1,194 patients were randomly assigned, 1,128 initiated treatment, and 940 contributed PRO-CTCAE data (493 FOLFOX; 447 5FUCRT). During neoadjuvant treatment, patients reported significantly lower rates of diarrhea and better overall bowel function with FOLFOX while anxiety, appetite loss, constipation, depression, dysphagia, dyspnea, edema, fatigue, mucositis, nausea, neuropathy, and vomiting were lower with 5FUCRT (all multiplicity adjusted P < .05). At 12 months after surgery, patients randomly assigned to FOLFOX reported significantly lower rates of fatigue and neuropathy and better sexual function versus 5FUCRT (all multiplicity adjusted P < .05). Neither bladder function nor HRQL differed between groups at any time point. CONCLUSION For patients with locally advanced rectal cancer choosing between neoadjuvant FOLFOX and 5FUCRT, the distinctive PRO profiles inform treatment selection and shared decision making.