Gong, Jun

Background and Aims: In the global phase III HIMALAYA study in unresectable HCC, STRIDE significantly improved overall survival (OS) versus sorafenib; durvalumab was noninferior to sorafenib. Immune checkpoint inhibitor studies have shown an association between the occurrence of immune-mediated adverse events (imAEs) and improved OS. We assessed potential associations between the occurrence of imAEs and OS, and temporal patterns of imAEs, in HIMALAYA. Approach and Results: OS in participants who did and did not experience imAEs and the frequency and timing of imAEs were assessed for STRIDE and durvalumab in the safety analysis set of HIMALAYA. imAEs occurred in 139/388 (35.8%) and 64/388 (16.5%) participants with STRIDE and durvalumab, respectively; most were low grade. OS HRs (95% CI) in participants who experienced imAEs versus those who did not were 0.73 (0.56–0.95) for STRIDE and 1.14 (0.82–1.57) for durvalumab. The 36-month OS rate (95% CI) for STRIDE was 36.2% (28.1–46.7) and 27.7% (22.4–34.2) in participants who did and did not experience imAEs, respectively. The most common imAE category with STRIDE was endocrine events (16.5%). Most imAEs occurred ≤3 months after treatment initiation. Conclusions: Participants who experienced imAEs with STRIDE had a numerical improvement in OS versus those who did not, which was not observed for durvalumab. Long-term OS with STRIDE was observed regardless of imAEs. Most imAEs were low grade, manageable, and occurred in the first 3 months after treatment initiation. Results continue to support the benefits of STRIDE in a diverse population that reflects unresectable HCC globally.

3553 Background: Immuno-STATs are modular fusion proteins designed for the selective activation of tumor antigen specific CD8+ T cells. CUE-102, the second Immuno-STAT in clinical trials, is composed of a human leukocyte antigen (HLA) complex, HLA-A*0201, a peptide epitope derived from the Wilms Tumor 1 (WT1) protein, and 4 molecules of reduced affinity human interleukin-2 (IL-2). In preclinical studies CUE-102 binds, activates and expands WT1-specific CD8+ T cells with the potential to enhance anti-tumor immunity in patients with WT1+ cancers. Here we present the results of the dose-finding portion (Part A) of the CUE-102-01 study. Methods: CUE-102-01 is a 2 part phase 1 study. HLA-A*02:01 positive patients with WT1+ advanced colorectal (CRC), gastric (GA) and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ), pancreatic (PDAC) or ovarian (OvCa) tumors refractory to standard therapies were eligible for participation. WT1 status is determined by IHC via central testing. CUE-102 monotherapy was administered intravenously every three weeks in doses ranging from 1 mg/kg to 8 mg/kg following 3+3 design rules with a Bayesian Logistic Regression Model overlay. Dose levels that exhibit an immune or tumor response may be expanded to further characterize activity and toxicity as allowed by safety rules. Results: Dose escalation was successfully completed in 28 patients with CRC (17), PDAC (6), GA/GEJ (3) and OvCa (2). No DLTs were observed. Three dose levels (2, 4 and 8 mg/kg) exhibited evidence of immune activity and were expanded up to 9 patients each for further evaluation. CUE-102 was well-tolerated with > 96% of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) grade ≤2. The most common TRAEs, were fatigue, infusion reactions, nausea and vomiting. There were no cases of CRS Grade ≥ 2. Preliminary PK data demonstrate dose dependent increases in exposure across the dose range assessed. Preliminary analysis of patient samples demonstrates selective expansion of WT1-specific CD8+ T cells. Stable disease of ≥ 6 weeks (range 6-36 weeks), as determined by RECIST 1.1, has been observed in 10 of 23 patients (DCR 43.5%). Conclusions: CUE-102 is a novel T cell engager that demonstrates acceptable tolerability, favorable PK, and supportive preliminary PD readouts. No DLTs or drug-related SAEs have been observed in doses up to 8 mg/kg as of the data cut-off. Adverse events have been manageable and consistent with the CUE-102 mechanism of action and underlying disease. Early signs of disease stabilization and anti-tumor activity in late-stage patients are encouraging. Part B is a dose expansion that further evaluates safety, PK/PD, recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), antitumor efficacy and is currently enrolling patients. Clinical trial information: NCT05360680 .

4004 Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) studies have shown an association between the occurrence of imAEs and outcomes. In the Phase 3 HIMALAYA study (NCT03298451) in uHCC, STRIDE (Single T Regular Interval D) significantly improved overall survival (OS) vs sorafenib (S), and D monotherapy was noninferior to S. STRIDE and D had manageable safety (Abou-Alfa et al. NEJM Evid 2022). STRIDE is approved for uHCC in the United States and Japan and recommended for approval by the European Medicines Agency; D is approved in Japan. This exploratory analysis assessed the association between imAEs and outcomes in HIMALAYA. Methods: Safety was assessed in participants (pts) who received ≥1 dose of STRIDE (T 300 mg [one dose] plus D 1500 mg once every 4 weeks [Q4W]) or D (1500 mg Q4W). imAEs were AEs of special interest associated with drug exposure and consistent with an immune-mediated mechanism of action with no found alternate etiology. Median OS (mOS) and OS rates were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. OS hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were calculated using Cox modeling, with imAEs as a time-varying covariate and stratified by etiology (HBV/HCV/others), ECOG (0/1), and macro-vascular invasion (yes/no) for pts with vs without imAEs of any grade. Pts with >1 imAE were counted once. Results: In total, 388 pts (STRIDE) and 388 pts (D) were included in the analysis. Any grade imAEs, Grade 3 or 4 imAEs, and imAEs leading to discontinuation occurred in 139 (35.8%), 49 (12.6%), and 22 (5.7%) pts, respectively for STRIDE and 64 (16.5%), 25 (6.4%), and 10 (2.6%) pts, respectively for D. imAEs requiring high-dose steroids (≥40 mg prednisone or equivalent daily) occurred in 78 (20.1%) pts for STRIDE and 37 (9.5%) pts for D. An improvement in OS was seen with STRIDE in pts with imAEs vs pts without (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56–0.95). OS rates at 6, 12, and 24 months (mo) were higher for STRIDE in pts with imAEs vs pts without. The association between imAEs and OS was less clear for D and may be limited by small pt number. In a landmark analysis of pts with vs without imAEs within 6 mo of STRIDE (n=307) or D (n=287), OS HRs (95% CIs) were 0.65 (0.47–0.90) and 1.39 (0.95–2.04), respectively. Conclusions: In HIMALAYA, imAEs with STRIDE or D were manageable and generally low grade. In this exploratory analysis, the occurrence of imAEs was associated with improved OS for STRIDE, generally consistent with findings for other ICIs. Clinical trial information: NCT03298451 . [Table: see text]

Abstract Background and Aims Immunotherapy has emerged as an effective treatment for patients with advanced‐stage HCC. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of immunotherapy for advanced HCC in a nationwide cohort and racial and ethnic disparities in access to immunotherapy. Approach and Results We used the US National Cancer Database to identify patients with tumor‐node‐metastasis stage 3 or 4 HCC between 2017 and 2018. We performed multivariable Cox regression to identify factors associated with overall survival (OS) and logistic regression to identify factors associated with receipt of immunotherapy. Of the 3,990 patients treated for advanced HCC, 3,248 (81.4%) patients received chemotherapy and 742 (18.6%) patients received immunotherapy as a first‐line treatment. Immunotherapy was associated with improved OS compared with chemotherapy (adjusted HR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.65–0.88) after adjusting for covariates. There were racial and ethnic disparities in access to immunotherapy, with Hispanic (adjusted OR [aOR]: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.46–0.83) and Black patients (aOR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.54–0.89) less likely to receive immunotherapy compared with White patients. There was a significant interaction between race‐ethnicity and facility type, with higher disparity observed in nonacademic centers (interaction p = 0.004). Conclusions Immunotherapy was associated with improved OS compared with chemotherapy in advanced HCC. There are significant disparities in early access to immunotherapy, likely due to differential access to clinical trials and experimental therapies. A comprehensive approach to monitoring and eliminating racial‐ethnic disparities in the management of advanced HCC is urgently needed.

Abstract Background and Aims: For hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with vascular invasion, systemic treatment is recommended but transarterial radioembolization (TARE) is often used in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to investigate the current usage of TARE vs. systemic therapy as a first-line treatment for HCC with vascular invasion in the United States (US). Method: We performed a retrospective cohort study using the National Cancer Database (NCDB), which represents more than 70 percent of newly diagnosed cancer cases nationwide. All HCC patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 with the tumor stage of T3BN0M0 according to the 7th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM staging system (tumor involving a major branch of a large vein of the liver without lymph nodes or extrahepatic metastasis) and received TARE or systemic treatment as a first-line treatment were included. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate factors associated with the utilization of TARE vs. systemic therapy. Results: A total of 1979 patients who received systemic treatment and 524 patients who received TARE were included. The proportion of patients receiving TARE increased from 15.7% in 2010 to 31.4% in 2015 (P<0.01). The median tumor size of the largest lesion was comparable (7.0cm for TARE vs. 7.1 cm for systemic treatment, P=0.43). Factors independently associated with increased likelihood of receiving TARE over systemic treatment were: advanced age (Odds Ratio [OR]: 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01 - 1.03, p=0.005), insurance status: private (OR: 3.06, 95% CI: 1.61 - 5.65, p<0.001), Medicaid/Medicare (OR: 2.91, 95% CI: 1.52 - 5.31, p<0.001), others (OR: 4.85, 95% CI: 1.90 - 11.62, p<0.001) vs. no insurance, and receiving care in the Midwest vs. Northeast region of the US (OR: 1.89, 95% CI: 1.38 - 2.53, p<0.001). Patients were significantly less likely to receive TARE if receiving treatment at community cancer program (OR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.098 - 0.49, p<0.001) or comprehensive community cancer program (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.48 - 0.82, p<0.001) vs. academic cancer program. Larger tumor size (OR per 1cm: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.95 - 1.00, p=0.03) and higher Charlson comorbidity index of ≥3 vs. 0 (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.38 - 0.73, p<0.001) were inversely associated with receiving TARE. Recent HCC diagnosis year was associated with an increased likelihood of receiving TARE (OR: 1.23, 95% CI:1.16 - 1.32, p<0.001). Conclusion: The proportion of patients receiving TARE as a first-line treatment for HCC with macrovascular invasion has been increasing in the US. Age, comorbidities, insurance status, tumor size, and the type and location of cancer centers are associated with the usage of TARE vs. systemic treatment in HCC patients with vascular invasion. Citation Format: Joseph C. Ahn, Michael Luu, Walid Ayoub, Alexander Kuo, Andrew Hendifar, Jun Gong, Kambiz Kosari, Shelly Lu, Nicholas Nissen, Ju Dong Yang. Transarterial radioembolization versus systemic treatment for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma with vascular invasion: Analysis of the US National Cancer Database [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020; 2020 Apr 27-28 and Jun 22-24. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(16 Suppl):Abstract nr 2350.