Mettu, Niharika B

ASCO Guidelines provide recommendations with comprehensive review and analyses of the relevant literature for each recommendation, following the guideline development process as outlined in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Clinical Practice Guidelines and other guidance (“Guidance”) provided by ASCO is not a comprehensive or definitive guide to treatment options. It is intended for voluntary use by clinicians and should be used in conjunction with independent professional judgement. Guidance may not be applicable to all patients, interventions, diseases or stages of diseases. Guidance is based on review and analysis of relevant literature and is not intended as a statement of the standard-of-care. ASCO does not endorse third-party drugs, devices, services, or therapies and assumes no responsibility for any harm arising from or related to the use of this information. See complete disclaimer in Appendix 1 and 2 (online only). PURPOSE To provide evidence-based guidance for clinicians who treat patients with stage I-III anal cancer. METHODS A systematic review of the literature conducted by the Minnesota Evidence-based Practice Center provided the evidence base for this guideline. An ASCO Expert Panel reviewed this evidence and came to consensus on a set of evidence-based recommendations. RESULTS The systematic review contained three randomized controlled trials and three nonrandomized studies of interventions that were relevant to the guideline topic and informed the recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS Mitomycin-C (MMC) with a fluoropyrimidine (fluorouracil [FU] or capecitabine) is recommended as the radiosensitizing component of chemoradiation (CRT) for anal cancer; the Expert Panel recognizes that capecitabine is often used as an orally administered alternative to FU and is currently being used in ongoing clinical trials. Cisplatin with FU is an additional chemotherapy combination that may be recommended as radiosensitizing chemotherapy. Because of the myelosuppression associated with MMC, the preferable regimen for patients with immunosuppression is cisplatin and FU. Cisplatin is not recommended for patients with renal dysfunction, significant neuropathy, or hearing loss, and there is no evidence to recommend substituting carboplatin for cisplatin. Dose and schedule options for recommended chemotherapy agents are included within the full text of the guideline. Routine induction chemotherapy before CRT and additional chemotherapy after CRT are not recommended for patients with localized anal cancer. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines .

3533 Background: The BACCI trial (NCT02873195) randomized 133 mCRC pts to C+B+A (investigational) or C+B+placebo. Longer progression free survival (PFS) was observed in the investigational vs placebo arm. To investigate T-cell functional heterogeneity, we performed single-cell proteomic analyses on pts with either long or short PFS and evaluated T-cell function as a prognostic and predictive biomarker. Methods: Isolated CD8+ and CD4+ cells were analyzed at baseline and first restaging from pts with long ( > 6 mo, N = 14) or short ( < 2 mo, N = 13) PFS. Single-cell, functional proteomic analyses were conducted using the IsoLight system (Isoplexis), which assessed secretion of 32 cytokines from an average of 786 cells per sample. The cumulative readout was polyfunctional strength index (PSI), a composite score of frequency and magnitude of secreted cytokines. Cytokines are organized into effector (E), stimulatory, chemoattractive (CA), regulatory, and inflammatory (I) clusters. Differential expression analyses were done using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Potential predictive effects were assessed using logistic regressions with interaction between treatment and biomarkers. No multiple comparison control was done due to the exploratory nature of analyses. Results: Baseline CD8+ and CD4+ cells were stimulated ex vivo and single-cell cytokine analyses performed. Prognostic analyses indicated that CD8+ cells from pts with long PFS had ~3-fold higher PSI compared to pts with short PFS (p = 0.005). Further analysis identified that the E (p = 0.005) and CA clusters (p = 0.005) most impacted PSI, significant individual cytokines are listed in the table. Baseline CD8+ cell function was not predictive of outcome. Baseline CD4+ cell function was not prognostic or predictive of outcome. Analysis of CD8+ cells after treatment identified that changes in CA cluster was prognostic of long PFS (p = 0.024). Cytokine changes from CD4+ cells were not prognostic; however, early changes in the CD4+ CA cluster were predictive of outcome (p-int = 0.055). Similarly, early changes in the CD8+ I cluster were predictive of outcome (p-int = 0.073). Conclusions: These results reveal pts with long PFS had more functional CD8+ T-cells with a higher PSI than pts with short PFS. Predictive analyses suggested that early changes in the CD4+ CA and CD8+ I clusters were associated with benefit from immunotherapy. These preliminary results highlight the importance of single-cell functional proteomic analyses. [Table: see text]

Abstract Introduction: ATRi and PARPi combinations kill tumor cells via synergistic modulation of complementary DDR pathways but clinical utility is limited by overlapping toxicities. A genome-wide CRISPR-Cas9 screen identified DDR alterations that sensitize tumors to the ATRi camonsertib (cam) plus PARPi. Based on preclinical models, tolerability and efficacy of cam plus PARPi given intermittently at low doses in pts with solid tumors with DDR alterations, including BRCA-mutated PARPi-resistant cancers, was evaluated. Methods: Pts (≥ 18 yrs) with relapsed/refractory (r/r) solid tumors with DDR alterations were treated with cam plus talazoparib (tala), niraparib (nira), or olaparib (ola) in 2 phase I trials (NCT04497116, NCT04972110). An adaptive BOIN design was used to optimize dose/schedule. Endpoints were safety, recommended phase II dose (RP2D), pharmacokinetics (PK), response (RECIST v1.1 [confirmed/unconfirmed], CA 125, or PSA), clinical benefit rate (CBR; RECIST/tumor marker response or treatment duration ≥ 16 wk), and ctDNA molecular response rate (MRR; best reduction in mean variant allele frequency [mVAF] ≥ 50%). Results: As of Nov 2022, 99 pts were enrolled (61 with ≥ 3 prior lines of therapy, 36 PARPi-pretreated); 43, 27, 29 pts in tala, nira, and ola combinations, respectively. Tumors included ovarian (n=20), prostate (n=13), breast (n=17), bile duct (n=3); most common genotypes were ATM (n=26), BRCA1 (n=19), and BRCA2 (n=33). Grade 3+ toxicities included reversible myelosuppression (neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia in 35%, 28%, and 14% of pts overall; 33%, 16%, and 11% at preliminary RP2Ds), fatigue (3%), and alkaline phosphatase increase (2%). Two pts discontinued treatment due to drug-related toxicity. Forty pts remain on therapy, up to 63 wks. Preliminary RP2Ds: cam 80 mg QD (d 5-7) + tala 0.25 mg QD, 1 wk on/1 wk off; cam 80 mg QD + nira 100 mg QD, 2 d on/5 d off; cam 50 mg QD + ola 100 mg BID, 3 d on/4 d off. As of abstract submission, response rate was 13% in 85 evaluable pts; CBR was 49%. Responders included pts with ovarian (n=6), bile duct (n=2), and breast, pancreatic, and carcinoma of unknown primary (n=1 each) cancers harboring alterations in BRCA1/2 (n=9), IDH1 (n=1), and ATM (n=1). Of 30 evaluable PARPi-pretreated pts, response rate was 23% and CBR was 52%. MRR was 64% (14/22 evaluable); change in mVAF correlated with a change in target lesion size (r=0.63, P=0.001). PK of each drug in the combination was consistent with respective monotherapy PK. Conclusion: Combination of cam plus PARPi at low doses on intermittent schedules was generally well-tolerated with clinical activity in DDR-aberrant tumors, including those pretreated with PARPi. RP2D optimization and translational correlative studies are ongoing. Citation Format: Timothy A. Yap, Siddhartha Yadav, Benjamin Herzberg, Benedito A. Carneiro, Elisa Fontana, Martin Højgaard, Michael J. Pishvaian, Ruth Plummer, Theresa L. Werner, Vaibhav Sahai, Stephanie Lheureux, Elizabeth K. Lee, Niharika B. Mettu, Gregory M. Cote, Joseph D. Schonhoft, Victoria Rimkunas, Ian M. Silverman, Marisa Wainszelbaum, Gerson Peltz, Adrian J. Fretland, Kezhen Fei, Danielle Ulanet, Insil Kim, Maria Koehler, Ezra Rosen, Michael Cecchini. Safety and efficacy of three PARP inhibitors (PARPi) combined with the ataxia telangiectasia- and Rad3-related kinase inhibitor (ATRi) camonsertib in patients (pts) with solid tumors harboring DNA damage response (DDR) alterations [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 2 (Clinical Trials and Late-Breaking Research); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(8_Suppl):Abstract nr CT018.

TPS4181 Background: The mainstay of treatment (TX) for pts with advanced or mPDAC consists of CT, with FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine (gem)/nab-paclitaxel currently representing the front-line standards of care. TX is generally continued until either dis progression (progr) or cumulative toxicity, with pts often reaching a plateau in response after 4-6 mos. For those who have achieved dis control (stable dis or better) on front-line CT, a maint TX strategy that can effectively delay dis progr while preserving quality of life with minimal cumulative toxicity is highly desirable. However, aside from PARP inhibition in the subset of PDAC pts with gBRCA mutated dis, there is no current standard of care in this maint setting. Ival is a pan-HDAC (histone deacetylation) inhibitor that increases histone acetylation (HA), suppresses PDAC cell proliferation, and promotes apoptosis in PDAC cell lines in a dose-dependent manner. It has demonstrated synergy with 5-FU in cholangiocarcinoma cell lines and shows promising antitumor activity when combined with cap in syngeneic PDAC mouse models. On these bases, we are conducting a ph1b/randomized ph2 trial of ival plus cap vs cap alone in the maint setting for pts with mPDAC who have not progressed on front-line FOLFIRINOX. Methods: Key eligibility criteria include pts with mPDAC; no evidence of dis progr following at least 16 wks of front-line FOLFIRINOX at full or modified doses; ECOG PS 0-1; and no known gBRCA1/2 mutation. The study includes an initial dose-esc ph1b evaluating 3 dose levels of ival, (60, 125, and 250mg/m2 iv weekly on days 1 and 8) in combination (comb) with cap (1000mg/m2 po BID on days 1-14) of a 21-day cycle, using a standard 3 + 3 dose-esc design. Of note, ival 250 mg/m2 represents the RP2D identified in prior clinical studies of this agent both as monotherapy in solid tumors and in comb with gem/erlotinib in advanced PDAC pts. In the ph2 portion, pts will be randomized 1:1 to receive either ival plus cap or cap alone, in 21-day cycles, until dis progr, with tumor assessments occurring at 6-wk intervals. Blood will be collected at pre-specified serial timepoints for pharmacodynamic assessments, including HA of PBMCs. Primary endpoint for ph2 is investigator-adjudicated PFS. The primary analysis will compare PFS distributions in the ival/cap and cap alone arms using a one-sided log rank test with an alpha = 0.10. The assumed true 6-mo PFS rates are 35% (cap), based on historic data, and 60% (ival/cap), which corresponds to an HR of 0.487. Assuming an accrual duration of 18 mos and a dropout/lost to follow-up rate of 10%, the estimated total number of pts in the randomized ph2 portion is 52 (26 per arm). Enrollment is expected to being in spring 2022 across 25 U.S. sites.

TPS3172 Background: Ulixertinib (BVD-523) is a small molecule inhibitor of extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1/2 (ERK1/2) in development as a novel anti-cancer drug. Early clinical data demonstrated anti-tumor activity, especially for patients with tumors harboring atypical BRAF or MEK1/2 alterations (Sullivan et al., Cancer Discov. 2018;8(2):184-195). Atypical BRAF (non-V600) alterations can be categorized according to characteristics of molecular signaling (Class II or III), are seen in approximately 3% of all human cancers, and there are currently no approved therapies for this indication. Similar to atypical BRAF alterations, the incidence of MEK1/2 alterations are rare in human tumors (< 1 %). Preclinical data have demonstrated activity of ulixertinib in MEK mutant models. Ulixertinib has FDA fast-track designation for patients with solid tumors, other than CRC, with specific BRAF mutations (G469A, L485W, or L597Q). Designed with intent to register, the BVD-523-ABC clinical trial will continue evaluation of ulixertinib in patients with tumors harboring any atypical BRAF or MEK1/2 alteration (NCT04488003). Methods: This multi-center, phase II study, will be conducted in two parts and assess the clinical benefit, safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of ulixertinib in patients with advanced malignancies. Ulixertinib will be administered at the RP2D of 600 mg BID for 28-day treatment cycles. Eligible patients will have locally advanced or metastatic cancer which progressed following standard systemic therapies, or for which the patient is not a candidate or refused systemic therapy. Planned correlative analyses include reverse phase protein array and transcriptomics of tumor tissue. Part A is open-label and tumor agnostic, except for group 4 and 6 (CRC patients only). Patients will enroll into one of six groups based on BRAF (groups 1-4) or MEK1/2 (groups 5-6) tumor alteration (38 patients per group). Overall response rate (ORR) is the primary endpoint for Part A, with secondary endpoints including duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Part B is tumor histology specific. Patients will be randomized to receive either ulixertinib or physician's choice of treatment in a 2:1 ratio. Up to three specified tumor histologies will be defined, guided by available Part A data (n = 80-100 per histology). The primary endpoint of Part B is PFS, and secondary endpoints include OS, ORR, and DOR. This study has enrolled 43 patients of the planned 228 in Part A at the time of abstract submission. Clinical trial information: NCT04488003.

2651 Background: Etigilimab (etig), a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody, blocks TIGIT interaction with PVR (poliovirus receptor) and inhibits downstream signalling with target cell killing. Etig +/- nivolumab (nivo) showed acceptable safety and preliminary activity in a FIH Phase 1a/b study in solid tumors. ACTIVATE, an open-label Phase 1b/2 basket study is evaluating further efficacy, safety, tolerability and PK/PD of etig+nivo. This is a preliminary efficacy and safety analysis from ACTIVATE. Methods: Subjects with advanced/metastatic solid tumors without curative/standard of care therapies are given IV etig+nivo Q2W until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Six open cohorts are enrolling in parallel: endometrial cancer (post-front-line platinum), endometrial cancer (2-3 prior lines), PD-L1+ checkpoint-inhibitor-naïve (CPI-n) cervical cancer, rare cancers (germ cell tumor (GCT), sarcoma, uveal melanoma), ovarian cancer (post-front-line platinum) and TMB-h/MSS, (TMB >10mut/mb) tumors. Tumor assessments are done every 8 weeks following baseline scan. Primary endpoint is investigator-assessed ORR by RECIST 1.1. Secondary endpoints include duration of response and safety. Results: Of 27 efficacy-evaluable subjects enrolled in the 6 open cohorts with minimum 1 staging scan or radiological/clinical progression at data cut-off of 02/10/22, 12 had clinical benefit with 1 complete response (CR), 2 partial responses (PRs) and 9 stable diseases (SDs) and 15 had radiological/clinical progressive disease (PD), with an overall response rate (ORR) of 11% and disease control rate (DCR) of 44%. Conclusions: Etig+nivo is safe and well tolerated with no new safety signals. Early efficacy was noted in cervical cancer (1CR, 1PR and 1SD) and uveal melanoma (3 SDs >20 weeks). Encouraging activity was also noted in ovarian cancer and post-CPI treated TMB-H/MSS NSCLC. These early data support continued evaluation of the combination of etig+nivo. Clinical activity was notable as below. Clinical trial information: NCT04761198. [Table: see text]

TPS873 Background: Initial treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) involves a 5-fluorouracil based chemotherapy regimen, often in combination with anti-VEGF therapy. Upon disease progression, multiple studies have suggested a benefit for continued anti-VEGF therapy. There is increasing evidence that VEGF plays a role in cancer immune evasion. Targeting of inflammatory and immune checkpoints are attractive approaches to enhance the benefits of anti-VEGF therapy. The safety and activity of the anti-PD-L1 antibody atezolizumab with bevacizumab and with 5-FU, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab have been recently reported; the combinations were well-tolerated and suggested clinical activity. Therefore, bevacizumab may increase the immunogenicity of colorectal cancers, and the combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab may be associated with clinically meaningful response rates and disease control. Furthermore, there may be candidate biomarkers that may identify those patients most likely to benefit from this combination. Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled phase II study, 135 patients with mCRC will be randomized 2:1 to receive capecitabine/bevacizumab/atezolizumab or capecitabine/bevacizumab/placebo. Patients with prior PD-L1/PD-1 therapy are ineligible. Primary and secondary efficacy will be conducted using ITT analysis. Safety analyses will include all randomized patients who receive at least one dose of study treatment. The primary objective is PFS. The secondary objectives are ORR, OS, safety, and tolerability. The primary comparison will be superiority of the active treatment for the PFS endpoint, atezolizumab versus placebo testing at 1-sided α = 0.1 (log rank test). A PFS hazard ratio of 0.618 (active treatment versus placebo) is detectable with 86% power (1 sided α = 0.1). No interim analyses for futility or efficacy will be conducted. A subset analysis will be performed in the microsatellite-high patients looking at potential differences in PFS and OS. Trial is active and currently recruiting patients. Clinical trial information: NCT02873195.