Mutch, Matthew G.

162 Background: In preclinical studies, the tryptophan-metabolizing enzyme, Indoleamine 2, 3-dioxygenase 1 (IDO1), promotes resistance to radiation in colorectal cancer, and IDO1 inhibition with epacadostat improves tumor radiosensitivity. In a phase 1 trial, patients (pts) with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC, n=17) were treated with epacadostat in combination with short course radiotherapy (SCRT) and CAPOX which was well-tolerated, and the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of epacadostat was 400mg BID. Here we report efficacy and safety from the NCI-supported phase 2 (NCT03516708) multicenter, open-label trial (treatment cohort). Methods: Pts were treated with standard of care (SOC) SCRT, then SOC neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) followed by SOC surgical resection or non-operative management (NOM). Epacadostat (400 mg BID) started with SCRT and continued until starting NAC (a minimum of 21 days). Eight pts were enrolled prior to discontinuation of epacadostat by Incyte in February/March 2025. The primary endpoint is Neoadjuvant Rectal (NAR) score. In patients who underwent NOM, we calculated MRI-based tumor regression grade (MR-TRG). Secondary endpoints are pathologic complete response (pCR) rate, complete clinical response (cCR) rate, and progression free survival (PFS). Results: Table 1 summarizes baseline characteristics and endpoints (primary and secondary). NOM was pursued in 7/8 (87.5%) pts, surgical resection was performed on 1/8 (12.5%). At median follow-up of 12 months, local tumor regrowth occurred in 1 pt initially treated with NOM (after tumor regrowth, he underwent salvage surgery and is currently on surveillance). Treatment with epacadostat was interrupted in 2/8 (25%) patients due to grade 3 maculopapular skin rash. Most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) regardless of causality (all grades (G)/G3-4) were bloating (75%/0%), increased ALT (62.5%/0%), increased AST (50%/0%), nausea (50%/0%), and constipation (50%/0%). Grade 3 diarrhea and grade 3 non-cardiac chest pain occurred in 1 patient each (both unrelated to epacadostat). Conclusions: Epacadostat demonstrates promising efficacy and manageable safety in patients with LARC. The biomarker cohort and correlative studies are ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT03516708 . Baseline characteristics and endpoints. Patient Age Sex Ethnicity Stage Surgery/NOM NAR MR-TRG cCR/pCR Recurrence 1 52 M Caucasian T3N1 NOM NA 2 Y/NA No 2 45 M Caucasian T3N1 NOM NA 3 Y/NA Local tumor regrowth 3 48 M Caucasian T3N2 NOM NA 3 Y/NA No 4 61 M Caucasian T4N2 NOM NA 3 Y/NA No 5 57 M Caucasian T3N0 NOM NA 1 Y/NA No 6 60 F Caucasian T3N1 Surgery 15 3 N/ypT3N0 No 7 67 M Caucasian T4N0 NOM NA 3 Y/NA No 8 51 M Caucasian T4N2 NOM NA P NA No

TPS3648 Background: Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 (IDO1) metabolizes tryptophan along the kynurenine pathway and is recognized as a potent suppressor of tumor reactive immunity. Epacadostat is an orally active, potent and selective inhibitor of IDO1. In preclinical studies, IDO1 was found to promote resistance to radiation in rectal cancer, irrespective of microsatellite instability (MSI) status. IDO1 inhibition with epacadostat improved tumor radiosensitivity by relieving immune suppression and augmenting radiation-induced apoptosis while protecting the normal intestine from radiation damage. In a phase 1 trial, 17 patients were enrolled from 4/2019 to 8/2023. Epacadostat in combination with short-course radiation therapy (SCRT) and CAPOX was well-tolerated and the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of epacadostat was determined to be 400 mg BID. An NCI supported Phase 2 trial is ongoing to further evaluate the promising disease responses reported in the dose escalation phase. Methods: This phase 2 multicenter, open-label trial includes treatment and biomarker cohorts. In the treatment cohort, epacadostat at 400 mg BID will be administered concurrently with SCRT followed by epacadostat monotherapy until 1 day prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, followed by standard-of-care (SOC) neoadjuvant chemotherapy and, ultimately, surgical resection or non-operative management (NOM). Biomarker cohort enrollment will commence at completion of treatment cohort accrual. Enrolled patients will be treated with SOC SCRT followed by SOC neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgical resection or NOM. Eligible patients must be a treatment-naïve, newly diagnosed, pathologically confirmed, locally advanced rectal cancer (defined by 8 th edition AJCC stage 2 or 3, or stage 1 not eligible for sphincter-sparing surgery) with plans to proceed with neoadjuvant SCRT and chemotherapy. The primary endpoint is the neoadjuvant rectal (NAR) score. Secondary endpoints are pathologic complete response (pCR) rate, complete clinical response (cCR) rate and progression-free survival (PFS). Exploratory endpoints are pharmacodynamics, PDX and organoid generation, identification of molecular predictors of response and resistance, correlation of radiographic and pathologic response and effect of treatment on patient quality of life. We aim to enroll 27 patients in the treatment cohort and 10 in the biomarker cohort. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03516708 .

Objective: To determine the disease-free survival (DFS) and recurrence after the treatment of patients with rectal cancer with open (OPEN) or laparoscopic (LAP) resection. Background: This randomized clinical trial (ACOSOG [Alliance] Z6051), performed between 2008 and 2013, compared LAP and OPEN resection of stage II/III rectal cancer, within 12 cm of the anal verge (T1-3, N0-2, M0) in patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The rectum and mesorectum were resected using open instruments for rectal dissection (included hybrid hand-assisted laparoscopic) or with laparoscopic instruments under pneumoperitoneum. The 2-year DFS and recurrence were secondary endpoints of Z6051. Methods: The DFS and recurrence were not powered, and are being assessed for superiority. Recurrence was determined at 3, 6, 9, 12, and every 6 months thereafter, using carcinoembryonic antigen, physical examination, computed tomography, and colonoscopy. In all, 486 patients were randomized to LAP (243) or OPEN (243), with 462 eligible for analysis (LAP = 240 and OPEN = 222). Median follow-up is 47.9 months. Results: The 2-year DFS was LAP 79.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 74.4–84.9) and OPEN 83.2% (95% CI 78.3–88.3). Local and regional recurrence was 4.6% LAP and 4.5% OPEN. Distant recurrence was 14.6% LAP and 16.7% OPEN. Disease-free survival was impacted by unsuccessful resection (hazard ratio [HR] 1.87, 95% CI 1.21–2.91): composite of incomplete specimen (HR 1.65, 95% CI 0.85–3.18); positive circumferential resection margins (HR 2.31, 95% CI 1.40–3.79); positive distal margin (HR 2.53, 95% CI 1.30–3.77). Conclusion: Laparoscopic assisted resection of rectal cancer was not found to be significantly different to OPEN resection of rectal cancer based on the outcomes of DFS and recurrence.