Strosberg, Jonathan

Abstract The 6th Edition of the World Health Organization Classification of Digestive System Tumours has introduced two new categories of gastric neuroendocrine tumors, reflecting recent data on subtypes that do not conform to the three established subtypes: type 1 (associated with autoimmune gastritis), type 2 (associated with Zollinger-Ellison Syndrome) and type 3 (sporadic). The new type 4 category is exceptionally rare and is caused by endogenous dysfunction of parietal cell proton pumps, potentially secondary to mutation of ATP4A. Type 5 gastric NETs are caused by chronic pharmacologic inhibition of the parietal cell proton pump, typically due to proton pump inhibitor use, and are increasingly common. Given the relatively low malignant potential of the new subtypes compared to sporadic (type 3) gastric NETs, it is important that clinicians and pathologists recognize these entities, limiting radical surgical resections when unnecessary.

Abstract Incretin‐based therapies, including glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonists (GLP‐1RA) and dual incretin agonists, are increasingly used for the management of diabetes, obesity, and cardiometabolic disease. Although their systemic benefits are well established, uncertainty remains regarding their safety in patients with neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs), a biologically heterogeneous group of tumors with diverse molecular profiles. Preclinical studies suggest that GLP‐1 receptor activation may promote tumor growth in select receptor‐expressing models, although receptor expression varies widely across NEN subtypes and is often absent in common tumors such as ileal neuroendocrine tumors. Population‐level and retrospective clinical data have not demonstrated a consistent increase in oncologic risk but are limited by methodological constraints. In this expert consensus statement, the authors synthesize current evidence and provide a practical framework for the use of incretin mimetics in patients with NENs. The authors emphasize individualized risk assessment, shared decision‐making, and multi‐disciplinary collaboration, balancing potential but unquantified oncologic risks against substantial cardiometabolic benefits. Until prospective data are available, careful patient selection, dose optimization, and close clinical and radiologic surveillance remain essential to guide safe and effective use of these agents in this population.

4178 Background: In the CABINET trial, CABO significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) compared to placebo (PB) in patients (pts) with advanced, previously treated extrapancreatic NET (epNET) or pancreatic NET (pNET) (Chan et al., NEJM, 2025). Here we report outcomes according to functional status based on NET hormone secretion. Methods: Pts with locally advanced or metastatic epNET or pNET were randomized 2:1 in separate cohorts to receive CABO 60 mg daily vs PB. Eligibility included progression by RECIST within 12 months (mo) before registration, ≥ 1 prior systemic therapy not including somatostatin analogs (SSA). Pts with functional NET due to hormone secretion and non-functional NET were included. In this post hoc subgroup analysis, we analyzed PFS by blinded independent central review and adverse events for pts receiving CABO vs PB based on functional status. Cox regression models were used with stratification on primary tumor site (epNET vs pNET). Subset analyses to evaluate treatment arm differences were conducted in pts with functional and non-functional tumors. Due to small numbers, separate results for those with unknown functional status are not included. Results: Of the total 298 pts enrolled in both cohorts, 74 had a functional NET (CABO, n = 47; PB, n = 27); 179 had a non-functional NET (CABO, n = 123; PB, n = 56); 45 had unknown functional status (CABO, n = 28; PB, n = 17). For functional NET, primary tumor sites were GI tract (n = 50; 68%), pancreas (n = 15; 20%), unknown (n = 4; 5%), lung (n = 3; 4%), and thymus (n = 2; 3%). Secreted hormones that were reported included serotonin (55%), somatostatin (18%), gastrin (16%), glucagon (4%), insulin (4%), ACTH (1%), and vasoactive intestinal peptide (1%). For non-functional NET, primary tumor sites were pancreas (n = 75; 42%), GI tract (n = 42; 23%), lung (n = 30; 17%), unknown (n = 17; 9%), thymus (n = 8; 4%), and other (n = 7; 4%). Concurrent SSA was received by 91% and 53% of pts with functional and non-functional NET, respectively. In both subgroups, CABO was associated with improved PFS compared to PB (for functional NET: stratified hazard ratio [sHR], 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.20-0.82, P = 0.012; for non-functional NET: sHR, 0.26; 95% CI: 0.17-0.41, P < 0.001). The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) attributed to CABO vs PB in pts with functional NET included hypertension (21% vs 11%), diarrhea (9% vs 11%), and fatigue (2% vs 15%); in pts with non-functional NET, grade 3/4 AEs included hypertension (21% vs 4%) and fatigue (18% vs 4%). Conclusions: Subset analyses of the CABINET trial suggest that CABO is an effective treatment option for pts with functional and non-functional epNET or pNET. Efficacy and safety results for pts with functional or non-functional NET treated with CABO are consistent with results for the entire trial. Clinical trial information: NCT03375320 .

PURPOSE Patients with advanced, well-differentiated extrapancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (epNETs) have limited systemic treatment options. Pazopanib, an oral multikinase inhibitor with activity against vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-2 and -3, PDGFR-alpha and-beta, and c-Kit, was tested for efficacy in epNET. PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, phase II study of pazopanib (800 mg once daily) versus placebo in low- to intermediate-grade epNET with radiologic progressive disease (PD) within 12 months of study entry. Previous somatostatin analog (SSA) was required for midgut tumors, and concurrent SSA was allowed. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review. Unblinding and crossover were allowed if PD was confirmed by central review. RESULTS One hundred seventy-one patients (97 pazopanib and 74 placebo) were randomly assigned between September 2013 and October 2015. The majority had a midgut primary site (75%) and previous SSA treatment (93%). About half (49%) of the patients had functional tumors. The median follow-up was 61 months (95% CI, 60 to 63). Median PFS was 11.8 versus 7.6 months in pazopanib versus placebo, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.37 to 0.79]; P < .001); 49 placebo patients crossed over to pazopanib. There was no significant difference in overall survival between the treatment arms. Rates of grade 3 or greater adverse events (regardless of attribution) were higher in pazopanib versus placebo (84% v 47%; P < .001), as were grade 5 death events (8% v 0%, P = .017). CONCLUSION Pazopanib compared with placebo significantly improves PFS in patients with progressive epNET, confirming that the VEGF signaling pathway is a valid target for therapy in epNET. However, after integrating the associated risks relative to the benefits, further development of pazopanib in this clinical context is not planned.

AbstractNeuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) with peritoneal metastases (PM) represent a complex clinical challenge because of low incidence and heterogeneous phenotypes. This commentary describes the results of a national consensus aimed at addressing clinical management of patients with NENs and PM. An update of the 2018 Chicago consensus guidelines was conducted with a modified Delphi technique, which encompassed two rounds of voting. The levels of agreement for various pathway blocks were assessed, and key systemic therapy concepts were summarized by content experts. Supporting evidence was evaluated via a rapid literature review. Overall, the level of evidence for the management of PM in this disease was universally low. In total, 107 participants responded in the first round, with 88 of 107 (82%) participating in the second round. Strong consensus (>90%) was achieved in five of seven (71%) and seven of seven (100%) blocks in rounds 1 and 2, respectively. A multidisciplinary approach including psychosocial and wellness assessments received a strong positive recommendation. Management of NENs with PM was organized according to disease grade and symptom profiles. In grade 1 and 2 well‐differentiated NENs, cytoreductive surgery received strong support (>95%) after the management of functional syndromes (if present). For grade 3 well‐differentiated NENs, systemic therapy is the primary recommendation, with surgical resection considered in select cases. Given the limited evidence, the consensus‐driven clinical pathway offers vital clinical guidance for the management of NENs with PM. The need for high‐quality evidence remains critical to the field.

4020 Background: In previously treated patients (pts) with advanced extra-pancreatic NET (epNET) or pancreatic NET (pNET), cabozantinib (cabo) demonstrated improved progression-free survival compared to placebo (pbo) in the CABINET trial (NCT03375320). Here we present HRQOL data from CABINET. Methods: Pts with previously treated unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic epNET or pNET were randomized (2:1) in separate cohorts to receive cabo 60 mg daily vs pbo. HRQOL was an exploratory endpoint measured using the EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-GI.NET21, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), and PRO-CTCAE questionnaires. Optional participation was by paper surveys at baseline and every 12 weeks (wks) until disease progression or new anticancer therapy. Mean changes from baseline were compared between treatment arms at wk12 using general linear mixed models. Minimally important within-arm improvements and between-arm differences were defined as 8 points on the C30 Global Health Status (GHS)/QOL Scale. PGIC was dichotomized as improved vs unchanged/worsened and compared using Chi-squared tests. Rates of pt-reported adverse events (AEs) by PRO-CTCAE were baseline-adjusted and compared using Fisher’s exact tests. Results: 172 pts (113 cabo, 59 pbo) with epNET and 81 pts (53 cabo, 28 pbo) with pNET consented for survey participation. Pts completed 524 (82%) of 640 expected surveys across baseline, wk12, and wk24. For epNET, C30 GHS/QOL was significantly improved at wk12 in pts receiving cabo (mean change 9.5, standard error (SE) 2.2, p < 0.001) but not pbo (mean change 0.2, SE 3.1, p = 0.95) resulting in significantly different mean changes from baseline between arms (p = 0.02). For pNET, C30 QHS/QOL was significantly improved at wk12 in pts receiving cabo (mean change 8.0, SE 3.0, p = 0.008) but not pbo (mean change 6.8, SE 4.4, p = 0.12); mean changes from baseline did not statistically differ between arms (p = 0.82). No significant differences in mean changes from baseline at wk12 in C30 Physical, Role, Emotional, Cognitive and Social Function were observed between arms in the epNET or pNET cohorts. In both cohorts at wk12, pts on cabo reported improved overall status as measured by PGIC more often than those on pbo (epNET: 38% vs 19%, p = 0.04; pNET: 57% vs 18%, p = 0.006). Rates of pt-reported AEs were statistically significantly higher in cabo for diarrhea (68% vs 53%), hand-foot syndrome (57% vs 26%), mouth or throat sores (47% vs 27%), and dysgeusia (67% vs 37%) [all p < 0.05]. GI.NET21 data will be presented. Conclusions: Although cabo is associated with pt-reported AEs consistent with its known safety profile, global HRQOL was maintained. A higher proportion of patients receiving cabo reported improved overall status. Results support cabo as a treatment option for pts with previously treated advanced NET that preserves patient HRQOL. Clinical trial information: NCT03375320 .

Abstract Rationale: Diffuse idiopathic pulmonary neuroendocrine cell hyperplasia (DIPNECH) is a pulmonary condition characterised by neuroendocrine cell proliferation along respiratory bronchioles resulting in tumourlet formation which may progress to pulmonary carcinoid. DIPNECH is a rare and under-recognised condition that predominantly affects females, with an estimated worldwide incidence of 5-6 people per million population. Given it's rarity and the poor understanding around the pathogenesis and treatment of this condition, we undertook the largest international case series to date of DIPNECH patients. We aim to further characterise this patient cohort to better understand the clinical features, identify common pulmonary function test (PFT) patterns and radiographic findings and describe current treatment practices. Methods: We collated data from 17 centres across 8 different countries comprising a total of 258 patients. Data collected included patient demographics, smoking history, symptoms, co-morbidities, pathological diagnosis, imaging findings, PFT pattern and therapies. Results: In total 258 patients were identified. The median age was 65 (SD+/- 10.6). 241 (93%) were female. 39% (n= 94/243) were ex-smokers. 79% (n=186/234) of patients reported pulmonary symptoms with cough being the most common symptom reported in 81% (n=151/186) of patients. Many patients were polysymptomatic, with cough and dyspnoea being the most common combination of symptoms described. (50.54%; n=94/186). Complete spirometry pattern was documented for 180 patients (69.78%) with an obstructive pattern being the most commonly observed (n=76/180; 42%). 27.5% (n=41/139) had clinically significant FEV1 reversibility post bronchodilator administration. Pathology specimens were available in 219 cases. Most common pathological features were neuroendocrine hyperplasia which was observed in 75% (n=165/219) and tumourlets in 74% (n=162/219) of cases. Carcinoid, either typical or atypical, was observed in 64% (n=141/219) of samples. 252 patients had computed tomography (CT) imaging performed. Pulmonary nodules were the most common feature identified in 99.60% of cases (248/250). Mosaic attenuation (69.30%; n=50/173) and airway dilatation (28.90%; n=50/173) were also frequently reported. There was no significant correlation between symptoms (cough, dyspnoea, wheeze) and airway dilatation (p=0.496), mosaic attenuation (p=0.496) and PFT pattern (p=0.837). There was a significant association between presence of symptoms and mosaic attenuation on CT (p=0.003). Conclusions: DIPNECH, while a rare disorder, is understudied. This international case series is the largest performed to date and highlights the complexity in management of these patients.

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 judgment. 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) for more. PURPOSE To develop a clinical practice guideline and recommendations for symptom management of patients with well-differentiated grade 1 to grade 3 metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. METHODS ASCO convened an Expert Panel to develop a clinical practice guideline by reviewing the literature for relevant guidelines, systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and observational studies to develop recommendations for clinical practice. RESULTS The literature review identified eight guidelines, 19 systematic reviews, and three RCTs that informed the development of guideline recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendations are included for carcinoid syndrome, carcinoid heart disease and carcinoid crisis, and functional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor syndromes. Recommendations are provided for surgical management, liver-directed therapy, and systemic therapy options, as well as palliative care. Limited guidance is provided for sequencing of interventions. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines .

666 Background: In the phase 3 CABINET trial (NCT03375320), cabozantinib (CABO) significantly prolonged median progression-free survival (PFS) compared to placebo (PB) in patients with advanced, previously treated, progressive extrapancreatic NET (epNET) [HR 0.38 (95% CI, 0.25-0.59, P<0.0001)] and pancreatic NET (pNET) [HR 0.23 (95% CI, 0.12-0.42, P<0.0001)] (Chan et al., NEJM, 2024). In this analysis, we focus on outcomes of patients with epNET arising in the GI tract. Methods: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic epNET or pNET were randomized 2:1 in separate cohorts to receive CABO 60 mg daily vs PB. The epNET cohort included patients with tumors arising in the GI tract (not including pancreas), lung, unknown primary, and other rare primary sites. In this subgroup analysis of the epNET cohort, patients with GI NET were included. Eligibility included progression by RECIST within 12 months (mo) prior to registration, ≥ 1 prior systemic therapy. Primary endpoint: PFS by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints: objective response rate, overall survival, safety. Results: 116 of the 203 patients in the epNET cohort had GI NET (CABO, n=70; PB, n=46). Median age was 66 yrs; females: 46%; G1/G2/G3/unknown grade: 35%/57%/6%/2%. ECOG performance status: 0/1-2: 43%/57%. White race: 86%. The most common primary tumor locations were ileum/cecum (54%), small intestine with location not specified (20%); non-cecum colon or rectum (11%), stomach (4%); duodenum (3%); jejunum and nonspecified midgut site (3% each). Prior systemic therapies included somatostatin analogs (SSA) (100%), everolimus (59%); Lu-177 dotatate (77%); temozolomide +/- capecitabine (16%). In patients with GI NET, CABO was associated with improved PFS by BICR compared to PB (stratified HR, 0.50; 95% CI: 0.28-0.88, 1-sided stratified log-rank P=0.007). Median PFS with cabozantinib was 8.5 mo (95% CI, 6.0-16.7) compared to 5.6 mo (95% CI, 3.9-11.0) with PB. CABO demonstrated potential benefit in patients with midgut GI NET and across clinical factors including grade, functional status related to hormone secretion, concurrent SSA use, and prior therapy with Lu-177 dotatate or everolimus. The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events attributed to therapy with CABO included hypertension (19%), diarrhea (13%), fatigue (10%). Conclusions: CABO is associated with improvement in PFS compared to PB in patients with advanced GI NET. Potential benefit was observed across clinical factors including grade, functional status, concurrent SSA, and prior treatment. The safety profile for CABO in patients with GI NET is consistent with that previously reported. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; U10CA180820 (ECOG-ACRIN), U10CA180868 (NRG Oncology), U10CA180888 (SWOG); Exelixis; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . Clinical trial information: NCT03375320 .

662 Background: Alkylating-based chemotherapy (ALK) is one of the main treatments used in patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs). Its use has been associated with an increased risk of grade progression and acquisition of a hypermutator phenotype, associated with frequent alterations of the mismatch repair (MMR) genes. This suggests a potential benefit of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) that are otherwise ineffective in ALK-naïve PanNETs, which are mostly hypomutated. We aimed to describe the efficacy of ICI in patients with advanced PanNET pretreated with ALK. Methods: We assembled an international retrospective cohort of patients with advanced PanNET who received at least one cycle of ICI, and who had previously received at least 3 months of ALK. Patients with poorly-differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma were excluded. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) and the secondary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR). The impact of tumor mutational burden (TMB, high being defined by >10 mut/Mb) and MMR alterations (mutations or IHC) was explored. Results: We included 39 patients (median age 58.7, male sex 62%). All PanNETs were progressive at baseline and presented a median of 3 (IQR, 2-4) metastatic sites. Tumors were predominantly classified as G2 (47%) or G3 (42%), with a median Ki-67 of 18.5% (IQR, 12-35). 23/27 patients with tumor tissue or ctDNA NGS testing had high TMB (median, 35 mut/Mb; IQR, 24-106) and 12/22 had MMR alterations. Patients had previously received an average of 14 cycles (IQR, 7-25) of ALK (temozolomide 78%, streptozotocin 18%, dacarbazine 4%), which had yielded objective response in 72% of cases. In addition, patients had received a median of 4 (IQR, 3-5) other treatments (including platinum drugs in 80% and PRRT in 51%). ICI mainly consisted in an anti-PDL1/PD1 + anti-CTLA4 combination (85%) or a monotherapy (15%), with a median of 3 (IQR, 2-8) cycles. The ORR was 18% and the disease control rate was 46%. Median PFS was 2.8 months (95% CI, 0.62-4.96) and 6-month PFS rate was 31%. 19% of patients had grade 3-4 toxicity. Patients with high TMB had higher ORR (30% vs. 0%, p=0.03) and longer median PFS (4.9 vs. 2.1 months, p=0.004) compared with patients with low/unknown TMB. Patients with altered MMR had higher ORR (42% vs. 7%, p=0.02) and longer median PFS (8.9 vs. 2.5 months, p=0.014) compared with patients with no/unknown MMR alterations. Conclusions: While ICI shows limited efficacy in unselected patients with advanced PanNETs pretreated with ALK, it may be an effective treatment option in case of high TMB and MMR alterations.