Ciombor, Kristen K.

e15168 Background: 2-8% of all colorectal cancer (CRC) cases are in younger adults (YAs), patients (pts) less than age 50. However, current understanding of CRC in YAs is inadequate, especially that of sporadic onset. We conducted a study to describe the landscape of genomic alterations in YA CRC pts presenting to a large academic practice. Methods: Adult pts with CRC presenting to The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center oncology clinics were offered next generation sequencing (NGS) through a customized 22-gene Ion AmpliSeq Mutation Panel as part of clinical care. Commonly mutated areas of select genes (including AKT1, ALK, BRAF, EGFR, ERBB2/4, FBXW7, FGFR1/2/3, KRAS/NRAS, MET, NOTCH1, PIK3CA, PTEN, TP53) were sequenced from tumor sections. Institutional review board approval was obtained to retrospectively analyze this NGS testing between 1/2013-3/2016. Results: 258 CRC pts underwent genomic profiling. 57 pts (22.1%) were YAs at diagnosis (range 22-49 years); 20 pts (7.8%) were 40 years old or younger. 31 YA pts (54.4%) had metastatic disease. Of the YAs with CRC, 18 pts (31.6%) were diagnosed with R-sided colon, 16 pts (28.1%) with L-sided colon, and 22 pts (38.6%) with rectal cancer. 110 genomic alterations were found in YA pts, with a mean of 1.9 mutations per tumor (range 0-6); 35 (31.8%) of these in 32 (56.1%) YA pts were actionable. Of these 110 alterations, 41.8% were in TP53, 28.2% in KRAS/NRAS, 10.0% in PIK3CA, 3.6% in BRAF, 3.6% in FBXW7, and 2.73% in PTEN. 6 YA pts (10.5%) had microsatellite instability (MSI-H). Only 1 pt had concomitant MSI-H and a BRAF mutation; 4 pts with BRAF mutations were microsatellite stable. Comparing our YA pts to a separate cohort of pts age > 50 who had testing done, no significant difference was seen in mutation incidence in KRAS/NRAS (p = 1.0), TP53 (p = 0.3), PIK3CA (p = 0.128), or BRAF (p = 1.0). Conclusions: Genomic profiling through a targeted NGS panel is feasible as part of routine clinical practice. There is disagreement in the literature on genetic mutations in YA compared to older age CRC pts. Knowledge of the genomic landscape in YAs with CRC will lead to improved understanding of the underlying biology of CRC in YAs as it differs from CRC in older pts, and could impact future care of this cohort.

4106 Background: Cancer stem cells are fundamentally important for resistance to therapy, recurrence and metastasis. Napabucasin is a first-in-class cancer stemness inhibitor in development identified by its ability to inhibit STAT3-driven gene transcription and spherogenesis of cancer stem cells (Li et al, PNAS 112(6):1839, 2015). Preclinical studies suggest that napabucasin sensitizes heterogeneous cancer cells to chemotherapy and targeted agents. Methods: A phase Ib/II multi-center study in mPDAC pts was performed to confirm the RP2D, PK profile and evidence of anticancer activity of napabucasin in combination with nabPTX and Gem. Pts received napabucasin 240 mg BID with weekly nabPTX 125 mg/m2 and gem 1000 mg/m2for 3 out of every 4 weeks until disease progression (PD) or other discontinuation criterion. Results: Of 71 intent to treat (ITT) pts enrolled, 49 (69%) were treatment-naïve and 22 (31%) received neoadjuvant treatment. There were no significant PK interactions, dose-limiting or unexpected toxicities. Most common adverse events (AEs) included grade 1 diarrhea/cramping, nausea and fatigue with grade 3 AEs noted in 12 pts: fatigue (8), electrolyte imbalance (2), diarrhea (1), dehydration (1), nausea (1) and weight loss (1). Among pts who received RECIST evaluation (60), disease control (DCR; CR+PR+SD) was observed in 55 (92%), with 1 CR (2%) and 26 PR (43%) (31 - 78% regression). Of 11 pts with non-evaluable disease, treatment stopped due to compliance (4), consent withdrawal (3), clinical PD (1), toxicity (1), insurance (1) and death (1). Among 71 ITT pts, DCR was observed in 55 (77%), with 1 CR (1.4%) and 26 PR (37%). Maturing median progression free survival and overall survival (OS) in ITT pts is >7.1 and >10.4 m, respectively. Conclusions: This study showed that napabucasin can be combined with nabPTX and gem, with encouraging signs of efficacy in mPDAC now being confirmed in a phase 3 study. Clinical trial information: NCT02231723. [Table: see text]

3612 Background: The RAS/RAF/MEK signal transduction pathway is critical to the development of colorectal cancer, and tumors harboring KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF mutations were shown to be resistant to radiation. Thus, we conducted a phase I study of trametinib, a potent MEK1/2 inhibitor, in combination with CRT in patients with LARC. Methods: Phase I trial for patients with Stage II/III rectal cancers with a 3+3 design, and an expansion cohort of 12 patients at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Trametinib is given orally at 3 dose levels: 0.5mg, 1mg, and 2mg (Mon-Fri). CRT regimen is infusional 5-flourouracil (5FU) 225mg/m2/day (Mon-Fri) and daily fractions of 1.8 Gy (total 50.4Gy). There is a 5-day trametinib lead-in followed by trametinib and CRT. Six to 10 weeks after completion of CRT, patients then proceed to their surgery and adjuvant therapy. The primary endpoint is to identify the MTD and recommended phase 2 dose of trametinib with CRT. Immunohistochemistry staining for phosphorylated –ERK (pERK) and genomic profiling is performed on the tumor samples. Results: Enrollment is complete at all dose levels with18 patients, and 15 patients evaluable for toxicity and response as of Feb 6. One dose-limiting toxicity of diarrhea was observed at the 2mg dose. Grade 3 and most common toxicities are shown in Table 1. No grade 4/5 toxicities have been observed. At 2mg dose level, 3/9 (33%) patients had pathological complete response (pCR) and 2/9 (22%) had a near pCR. Correlative studies confirm decrease in pERK levels with increasing doses of trametinib. Correlation of genomic mutational status with toxicity, response, and outcomes is being analyzed. Conclusions: The combination of trametinib with 5FU CRT is tolerable with promising preliminary activity. Final results will be presented at the meeting. Toxicities. Clinical trial information: NCT01740648. [Table: see text]

Purpose No standard treatment exists for patients with cholangiocarcinoma for whom first-line gemcitabine-based therapy fails. Fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 ( FGFR2) fusions/translocations are present in 13% to 17% of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas. BGJ398, an orally bioavailable, selective pan-FGFR kinase inhibitor, has shown preliminary clinical activity against tumors with FGFR alterations. Methods A multicenter, open-label, phase II study ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02150967) evaluated BGJ398 antitumor activity in patients age ≥ 18 years with advanced or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma containing FGFR2 fusions or other FGFR alterations whose disease had progressed while receiving prior therapy. Patients received BGJ398 125 mg once daily for 21 days, then 7 days off (28-day cycles). The primary end point was investigator-assessed overall response rate. Results Sixty-one patients (35 women; median age, 57 years) with FGFR2 fusion (n = 48), mutation (n = 8), or amplification (n = 3) participated. At the prespecified data cutoff (June 30, 2016), 50 patients had discontinued treatment. All responsive tumors contained FGFR2 fusions. The overall response rate was 14.8% (18.8% FGFR2 fusions only), disease control rate was 75.4% (83.3% FGFR2 fusions only), and estimated median progression-free survival was 5.8 months (95% CI, 4.3 to 7.6 months). Adverse events included hyperphosphatemia (72.1% all grade), fatigue (36.1%), stomatitis (29.5%), and alopecia (26.2%). Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 25 patients (41%) and included hyperphosphatemia (16.4%), stomatitis (6.6%), and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (4.9%). Conclusion BGJ398 is a first-in-class FGFR kinase inhibitor with manageable toxicities that shows meaningful clinical activity against chemotherapy-refractory cholangiocarcinoma containing FGFR2 fusions. This promising antitumor activity supports continued development of BGJ398 in this highly selected patient population.

Abstract The emergence of targeted therapies for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has considerably improved survival, but has also resulted in a dilemma of identifying the optimal sequence and combination of various agents in the mCRC treatment landscape. A number of cytotoxic agents, including irinotecan, oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil, capecitabine, and TAS-102, are available for treatment of mCRC. Additionally, whereas patients harboring rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (RAS)–wild type mCRC can be treated with the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibodies cetuximab and panitumumab or antiangiogenic agents (bevacizumab, ziv-aflibercept, and ramucirumab), patients with RAS-mutant mCRC are limited to antiangiogenic agents as biologic options. Regorafenib, a multikinase inhibitor, can be used in both RAS subgroups. As such, the recommended sequence of therapies that should be received by each subgroup must also be considered separately. This review provides an overview of recent clinical data for approved and investigational targeted therapies that have been studied across different mCRC treatment lines and patient subgroups. It also examines emerging trends in the treatment landscape for mCRC, including treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors and the utilization of genomic profiling. Implications for Practice Currently, there are no established guidelines for optimal sequencing of cytotoxic or targeted agents in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This review provides a snapshot of the current mCRC treatment paradigm and examines the latest clinical data that support the utilization of several targeted agents alone or in combination with backbone chemotherapy across different lines of treatment and patient populations, highlighting recommendations for their usage. Recent advances in the treatment landscape are also summarized, including genomic profiling and preliminary results with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

685 Background: RAS/BRAF mutations constitutively activate the MAPK pathway in colorectal cancer, and may promote resistance to CRT. We propose that trametinib, a MEK1/2 inhibitor, in combination with 5FU CRT for patients with LARC will improve outcome. Methods: Phase I study with standard 3+3 design in patients with Stage II/III rectal cancer with 3 dose levels of trametinib: 0.5, 1, and 2mg daily with 5FU 225mg/m2/day and 50.4 Gy. Trametinib was given over a 5-day lead-in and continued through the course of CRT. Patients undergo surgery 6-10 weeks after the completion of CRT. An expansion cohort at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) with 12 patients is ongoing. Tumor tissue is collected prior to therapy, at day 4/5 of trametinib, and at surgery. The primary endpoint is to determine the MTD of trametinib with CRT. Results: 15 patients (10 males, 5 females) have been enrolled and 14 patients are evaluable for toxicities to date. Median age is 53 years (range 35-74). Patients have completed enrollment to all dose levels, with 1 dose-limiting toxicity of diarrhea attributed to 5FU CRT. No grade 4/5 toxicities, and toxicities are shown in the table. Generalized skin rash led to trametinib discontinuation after 2 weeks of therapy for 1 patient, and was held 3 days for 2 patients. At the trametinib dose level of 2mg, 3 out of 7 (43%) patients had a pathological complete response and the average neoadjuvant rectal (NAR) score is 8.1. Tumor RAS/BRAF mutation status is determined. Analysis of tumor tissue shows dose-dependent decrease in phosphorylated-ERK1/2 with increasing doses of trametinib. Conclusions: Initial evaluation shows that the combination of trametinib with 5FU CRT is tolerable and effective, and warrants further investigation in LARC. Clinical trial information: NCT01740648. [Table: see text]

677 Background: Napabucasin a first-in-class cancer stemness inhibitor in clinical development, suppresses cancer stemness by targeting Stat3-driven gene transcription. Preclinically, potent and broad-spectrum anti-cancer activity was observed in vitro and in vivo, alone and in combination with other agents. In a phase 1 study, napabucasin monotherapy was well tolerated with encouraging signs of anti-tumor activity at the RP2D of 500 mg BID. Methods: The current open-label, multi-center study includes phase II expansion in pts with refractory, K- Raswt mCRC to confirm safety and anti-tumor activity of napabucasin administered orally at 480mg BID in combination with panitumumab (6mg/kg bi-weekly). Results: 72 pts were enrolled, 48 pts were evaluable by RECIST of which 7 (15%) and 41 (85%) had 2 or >3 prior treatment lines, respectively. Of the 48 evaluable pts, 64.6% (31/48) were previously treated with an anti-EGFR agent. No new adverse events (AEs) were observed and most common AEs included grade 1/2 diarrhea, nausea, abdominal cramps, and vomiting. Among 48 pts enrolled who received RECIST evaluation, Disease Control Rate (DCR) was observed in 25 pts (52.1%) of which 3 pts achieved PR (6%) and 22 pts achieved SD (45%). Among 31 pts previously treated with anti-EGFR therapy, DCR was observed in 15 pts (48%) compared with DCR of 59% observed in 10 out of 17 anti-EGFR naïve pts receiving a scan. Conclusions: This phase II study confirmed that napabucasin can be safely combined with panitumumab at full dose and shows encouraging anti-tumor activity in pts with K- Ras wt mCRC, regardless of prior anti-EGFR exposure, suggesting that napabucasin may sensitize pts to repeat anti-EGFR therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT01776307. [Table: see text]

434 Background: Based on the ABC 02 trial, standard therapy for ABTC is CG for up to 8 cycles. However, a recent abstract (Doherty et al, ASCO 2016) confirmed that a cohort of pts does benefit from continued therapy. The weekly administration of G and C can add significant toxicities that may prohibit prolonged treatment (trmt). Previous studies have shown that a biweekly schedule (Ko AH et al JCO 2012) of fixed dose rate (FDR) G helps optimize the prescribed regimen with an improved toxicity profile and added convenience to pts while maintaining efficacy. Methods: Pts with ABTC treated with FDR G (1000mg/m2 at 10mg/m2/min) with C 20mg/m2(GC) on days 1 and 15 of every 28-day cycle were included for analysis. Pts received trmt until time of progression. Data was collected including demographics, clinico-pathologic features, toxicities and survival. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to calculate the median overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). Results: The study included 109 evaluable pts with ABTC who received CG. Pts had disease that was locally advanced (16.5%) or metastatic (83.5%). Median age was 60 years (28-86). Sites of tumor included gallbladder (21.1%), ampullary (3.6%) and bile duct (75.2%). Median number of cycles was 6 (1-27). Median PFS was 8.34 (6.74, 9.23) months and median OS was 10.32 (9.10, 11.43) months. Most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events included neutropenia (11%), fatigue (10%), thrombocytopenia (TCP) (6.4%), anemia (2.8%), and abnormal liver function tests (2.8%). Fifty-two percent of pts received second line therapy. Conclusions: Biweekly CG in ABTC is associated with a more favorable toxicity profile while maintaining efficacy similar to that observed in prior clinical trials. Minimal toxicities were observed despite a prolonged course for many. Further prospective exploration should consider evaluating the role of biweekly gemcitabine and cisplatin regimen in ABTC especially as a potentially more favorable platform to combine with novel agents. [Table: see text]

Background: Treatment with nab-paclitaxel with gemcitabine demonstrates a survival advantage when compared with single-agent gemcitabine. However, the combination is associated with significant toxicities, leading to a high rate of drug discontinuation. We implemented a modified regimen of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (mGNabP) in an attempt to minimize toxicities while maintaining efficacy. Methods: A total of 79 evaluable patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPC) treated with a modified regimen of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m 2 ) and nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m 2 ) on days 1, 15 of every 28-day cycle were identified from our prospective database. A total of 57 patients received this regimen as first-line treatment and were evaluated for toxicities, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Overall, 22 patients with advanced or metastatic PC treated with the modified regimen outside the first-line setting were only evaluated for toxicities. Results: The median OS and PFS were 10 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.9–13 months] and 5.4 months (95% CI 4.1–7.4 months) for patients that received the modified regimen as first-line therapy. Neurotoxicity occurred in 27% with only 1.6% of patients experiencing grade ⩾3 toxicity. The incidence of grade ⩾3 neutropenia was 19%, resulting in growth factor support in 12% of patients. This rate was similar in patients who received the modified regimen for first-line treatment of mPC versus the overall group. Conclusions: A modified regimen of biweekly nab-paclitaxel with gemcitabine is associated with a lower cost, acceptable toxicity profile and appears to be relatively effective in pancreatic cancer. Prospective randomized studies confirming its potential benefits compared with standard weekly mGNabP are warranted.