Finkelmeier, Fabian

Abstract In recent years, there has been increasing interest in the possible prognostic impact of concomitant medications in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy combinations. This real‐world analysis aims to evaluate the impact of concomitant medications on survival outcomes in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTCs) treated with cisplatin, gemcitabine and durvalumab (CGD) therapy. The study cohort included patients with a diagnosis of advanced BTCs who were taking concomitant medications for their comorbidities before the start of CGD. The primary objectives were overall survival (OS) and progression‐free survival (PFS). The initial population consisted of 666 patients, who were retrospectively collected from 41 sites in 12 countries. Data on concomitant medications were available for 493 patients. After a median follow‐up of 8.8 months (95% CI: 7.8–9.8), patients who did not take steroids (prednisone >10 mg/day or equivalent) or nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids, before the start of CGD, had longer OS and PFS in univariate analysis. The multivariate analysis confirmed longer OS for patients who did not take steroids. Patients who did not take steroids had an OS of 14.8 months (95% CI: 13.1–29.1) versus 5.0 months (95% CI: 2.14–11.32) of patients who took prednisone >10 mg/day or equivalent. No differences were reported in terms of overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) ( p = 1.0 and p = .16, respectively), and safety profile between the two groups. Our analysis suggests that patients who did not receive steroids before the start of GCD had longer survival and highlighted the relevance of balancing concomitant medications and chemoimmunotherapy.

Abstract Background Cisplatin, gemcitabine, and durvalumab combination is a standard first-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer. This study aimed to assess the impact of genetic alterations on outcomes in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer treated with cisplatin, gemcitabine, and durvalumab in real-world clinical practice. Methods Patients with unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic biliary tract cancer treated with cisplatin and gemcitabine plus durvalumab across 39 centers in 11 countries in Europe, the United States, and Asia were included in this analysis. Results The cohort included 513 patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. The 5 most frequently altered genes were TP53 (22.1%), KRAS (13.7%), CDKN2A/B (13.6%), ARID1A (12.2%), and IDH1 (9.2%). In multivariate analysis, SMAD4 mutations were associated with improved progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.49, P = .018) and overall survival (HR = 0.11, P = .023), while TP53 mutations were linked to worse PFS (HR = 1.62, P = .0047) and TERT mutations to worse overall survival (HR = 8.92, P = .0012). No other genomic alterations were statistically associated with outcomes. Subgroup analysis showed that TP53 mutations negatively affected PFS and overall survival in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, while KRAS mutations were associated with poorer PFS in extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. No gene alterations were linked to outcomes in gallbladder cancer. Conclusions This large-scale analysis, with comprehensive molecular profiling, supports the positive prognostic impact of SMAD4 mutations for PFS and overall survival and highlights the negative prognostic roles of TP53 (PFS) and TERT (overall survival) mutations, providing valuable insights for personalized treatment strategies in biliary tract cancer.

ABSTRACT Background Over the years, prognostic indexes have been developed to help clinicians stratify patients with biliary tract cancers (BTC) into risk groups. This study aims to identify a new prognostic index for patients with BTC treated with cisplatin, gemcitabine and durvalumab (CGD) in the first‐line setting. Patients and Methods The study population consisted of patients with BTC from 11 Eastern and Western Countries. Using multivariate analysis for overall survival (OS), we identified 5 baseline statistically significant variables: stage, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels, albumin levels, gamma glutamyl transferase (GGT) levels, neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio (NLR). Metastatic disease is a prognostic factor with a superior weight considering the HR of 3.62, while all the others can be considered prognostic factors with equivalent weight as the HRs are quite similar (HRs between 1.55 and 1.92). Based on these reasons, we developed a prognostic model called the MAGIC‐D index by assigning a score of 2 for metastatic disease, and a score of 1 for CEA increased levels, albumin decreased levels, GGT increased levels, NLR ≥ 3. Patients were stratified into three risk groups as follows: low‐risk group (Score from 0 to 2), intermediate‐risk group (Score from 3 to 4) and high‐risk group (Score from 5 to 6). At the first data cutoff (April 2024), these data were available for 319 patients that composed the training cohort used for the analysis. At the second data cutoff (May 2025), 79 patients were further enrolled and composed the validation cohort. Results Median progression‐free survival was 11.7 months in low‐risk group (20.7%), 8.7 months in intermediate‐risk group (46.4%) and 5.4 months in high‐risk group (32.9%) [low‐risk hazard ratio (HR): 0.27, intermediate‐risk HR: 0.55, high‐risk HR: 1, p < 0.0001]. Median OS was 18.4 months in low‐risk group,15.9 months in intermediate‐risk group and 7.8 months in high‐risk group (low‐risk HR: 0.17, intermediate‐risk HR: 0.43, high‐risk HR: 1, p < 0.0001). There was no difference in overall response rate (low‐risk: 31.8%, intermediate‐risk: 36.5% and high‐risk: 25.7%; p = 0.0718), while disease control rate was significantly different across the three risk groups (low‐risk: 83.3%, intermediate‐risk: 70.9% and high‐risk: 60.9%; p < 0.0001) as well as the rate of patients receiving a second‐line therapy (low‐risk: 54.5%, intermediate‐risk: 48.6% and high‐risk: 25.7%; p = 0.0061). Finally, the prognostic role in terms of OS and PFS of the MAGIC‐D index was confirmed in a validation cohort of 79 patients. Conclusion The MAGIC‐D index is an easy‐to‐use tool able to stratify patients with BTC with different prognoses undergoing first‐line therapy with CGD.

AbstractStandard of care first‐line systemic treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer includes chemo‐immunotherapy with gemcitabine, cisplatin, and durvalumab, followed by maintenance durvalumab monotherapy. The present work aims to investigate the differences in baseline clinical and molecular characteristics between patients with early progression during chemo‐immunotherapy and those who reach durvalumab maintenance therapy. The study population included patients with unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic BTC who received treatment at 38 clinical Institutions in 12 countries from July 2021 to December 2023. The primary objective of the study was to investigate whether baseline clinical and molecular characteristics differed between patients with early progression during chemo‐immunotherapy versus those reaching durvalumab maintenance therapy. Four hundred forty‐eight patients were included in this study. Two hundred twenty‐seven patients (50.7%) received maintenance with durvalumab monotherapy, whereas 221 (49.3%) did not receive maintenance therapy due to PD during first‐line chemo‐immunotherapy before completing 8 cycles. Results show that patients who received maintenance were more likely to be older (≥70 years), have an ECOG = 0, locally advanced disease, and a neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio (NLR) <3. A higher proportion of patients with BAP1 mutations received maintenance, while TP53 mutations were more common in those who progressed early. According to the present analysis, a substantial proportion of patients (50.7%) with advanced BTC who were treated with chemotherapy plus durvalumab proceeded to receive maintenance therapy with durvalumab monotherapy, with a median treatment duration of 4.4 cycles. Patients ≥70 years, with ECOG PS 0, with locally advanced disease, and with NLR <3 had a higher likelihood of receiving maintenance therapy.

Abstract Background In the TOPAZ-1, patients with biliary tract cancers (BTC) and recurrence within 6 months after surgery were excluded, even if this event is frequently observed in clinical practice. Our study aimed to assess if the efficacy of cisplatin-gemcitabine-durvalumab (CGD) in this population is comparable to that reported in the phase 3 trial. Methods The study cohort included patients with BTC who underwent surgery on the primary tumor, experienced disease recurrence occurring ≤6 months or &gt;6 months after surgery or after the end of adjuvant therapy and started CGD. The primary objectives were overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). Results A total of 178 patients were enrolled. No significant differences were observed between early and late relapse groups in OS (23.4 months vs not reached; HR 1.26; 95% CI, 0.67-2.37; P = .45) and PFS [7.0 months vs 9.8 months; HR 1.3(95% CI, 0.9-2.1) P = .13]. Overall response rate and disease control rate (P = .33 and P = .62) were comparable between the 2 groups, as the overall safety profile. In addition, we compared survival outcomes between the selected population and a historical cohort of patients with BTC treated with cisplatin-gemcitabine (CG) and found that despite the absence of statistical significance, CGD showed an outcome trend compared with CG regardless of the time of recurrence after surgery or adjuvant chemotherapy [(CG ≤ 6 vs CGD ≤ 6 months: HR 0.59, 95%CI, 0.35-1.01, P = .05; HR 0.70; 95%CI, 0.46-1.06, P = .09, OS and PFS, respectively) and (CG &gt; 6 vs. CGD &gt; 6 months: HR 0.50; 95%CI, 0.29-0.88, P = 0.0165; HR 0.54; 95%CI, 0.35-0.84, P = .0068, OS and PFS, respectively)]. Conclusion Our analysis suggests that CGD retains its efficacy independently of the timing of relapse after surgery or completion of adjuvant treatment in patients with advanced BTC.

4100 Background: Checkpoint inhibition with anti-PD1 is able to elicit objective response rates (ORR) of ̃ 20% in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) but molecular biomarkers predicting response remain unknown. Here, we define biomarkers of response and primary resistance to anti-PD1 in aHCC by analyzing molecular features prior to systemic therapy. Methods: Through an international consortium of 13 referral centers, we gathered 111 fresh and archived tumor samples from patients with advanced HCC treated with single agent anti- PD1 therapy. Genomic analysis was performed with whole genome expression arrays, CTNNB1 exon 3 mutation assessment and histological evaluation. Results: Overall, we performed transcriptomic analysis in 83 patients, 28 of which were treated in first-line (ORR: 42.9%) while the remaining 55 patients were treated either in 2nd (41 patients, ORR 29.3%) or 3rd line (14 patients, ORR 7.1%) after prior therapy with tyrosine- kinase inhibitors (TKI) sorafenib or lenvatinib. In patients treated in frontline, response was associated with a significant upregulation in Interferon-γ signaling (IFNγ) and genesets relatedto the antigen presentation machinery (FDR < 0.05). Through differential expression analysis we defined an 11-gene signature that was significantly associated with both major pathways (FDR < 0.01) and was capable of predicting OR as well as progression-free- (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with aHCC. The signature was validated in three independent cohorts of melanoma, lung cancer, and head and neck squamous cell cancer patients were high expression was associated with a significant increase in ORR and longer PFS. In HCC, high expression of the signature was associated with a distinct profile in the immune infiltrate, where an increase in M1 macrophages (p = 0.003), CD4 memory T cell (p < 0.01) and CD4 naïve T cell-infiltration (p = 0.026) was observed. Conversely, low expression of the signature was associated with a marked upregulation of regulatory T cells (p < 0.001). No association was found, however, between either the overall immune infiltrate or CTNNB1 mutations and response. In patients that were treated with TKIs in frontline before receiving subsequent anti-PD1 therapy, the signature was no longer able to predict either OR or PFS/OS, suggesting that TKIs may reshape the microenvironment in a way that renders previously inflamed tumors no longer amenable to anti-PD1. Conclusions: Here, we define an 11-gene signature of response to anti-PD1 in first line aHCC. The signature was validated in patients with other solid cancer types, where it retained its predictive ability. Of note, the signature was not able to identify responders among HCC patients that were treated with TKIs prior to anti-PD1 therapy. The molecular changes induced by different treatment lines would, thus, require fresh biopsies prior to anti-PD1to enable biomarker-driven treatment.