El-Khoueiry, Anthony B.

Background : Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains a major cause of cancer-related mortality. Optimal treatment decisions are challenging, and existing treatment allocation frameworks may not fully reflect the evolving therapeutic landscape or contemporary clinical practices in North America. Methods : Using a modified Delphi process, a multidisciplinary panel of 20 North American experts in hepatology, medical oncology, surgery, radiology, and radiation oncology developed a consensus-based treatment framework for HCC, termed the BEACON-HCC system. The framework was informed by current evidence and expert opinion through iterative discussion and voting. In a pilot study using 29 real-world patient cases, we assessed concordance between external expert recommendations and BEACON-HCC recommendations and Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) 2025 treatment recommendations. Results : The BEACON-HCC treatment allocation framework diverges from prior frameworks by incorporating nuanced clinical features such as degree of intrahepatic tumor burden and vascular invasion, and adverse tumor prognostic markers, to align treatment allocation with tumor biology and therapeutic potential. Key innovations include the incorporation of emerging modalities such as external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), transarterial radioembolization (TARE), and systemic-locoregional combination therapies. In the pilot exercise, expert treatment decisions showed 96.6% concordance with BEACON-HCC recommendations and 72.4% concordance with BCLC recommendations. Conclusions : BEACON-HCC is a consensus-based framework for treatment allocation that incorporates the expanding range of therapeutic options available to patients in the North American HCC population. Expert treatment decisions showed a high concordance with the BEACON-HCC system; further validation using empiric clinical data is planned through the HCC-Live Consortium.

Abstract Purpose: Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) 1/2–isoform inhibitors have clinical efficacy in IDH1/IDH2-mutated neoplasms. However, primary resistance and secondary resistance limit their therapeutic potential. LY3410738, an oral, brain-penetrant, dual IDH1/IDH2-mutated isoform-selective inhibitor, was designed to overcome resistance. Patients and Methods: This global, multicenter, open-label, phase I study of patients with IDH-mutant solid tumors evaluated LY3410738 as monotherapy (dose escalation) for advanced solid tumors in combination with cisplatin–gemcitabine (CISGEM) for newly diagnosed cholangiocarcinoma or with durvalumab for relapsed/refractory cholangiocarcinoma (dose expansion; NCT04521686). Primary objectives were the maximum tolerated dose, recommended phase II dose, and preliminary antitumor activity. Safety, pharmacokinetics, inhibition of D-2-hydroxyglutarate, and ctDNA were assessed. Results: Overall, 119 patients received LY3410738 alone (N = 94) or in combination with CISGEM (N = 19) or durvalumab (N = 6). No dose-limiting toxicities were observed; the maximum tolerated dose was not determined. Common adverse events included nausea, vomiting, and decreased appetite. Overall response rates of 5.2% and 11.1% and disease control rates of 56.9% and 63.0% were observed for patients with relapsed/refractory IDH1- or IDH2-mutant cholangiocarcinoma or IDH1-mutant glioma, respectively. D-2-hydroxyglutarate normalization was rapid and durable. In dose-expansion cohorts, combination treatments were tolerable, with one dose-limiting toxicity in the durvalumab cohort. LY3410738 plus CISGEM demonstrated a response rate of 42.1%, a median duration of response of 8.1 months, and a median progression-free survival of 10.2 months for patients with newly diagnosed IDH-mutant cholangiocarcinoma. Conclusions: LY3410738 demonstrated largely cytostatic antitumor activity in IDH1- or IDH2-mutated cholangiocarcinoma and IDH1-mutated gliomas. LY3410738 plus CISGEM exhibited favorable antitumor activity in patients with treatment-naïve IDH-mutated cholangiocarcinoma, warranting further exploration as a treatment strategy.

PURPOSE SWOG S1815 was a randomized, open label phase III trial, evaluating gemcitabine, nab-paclitaxel, and cisplatin (GAP) versus gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) in patients with newly diagnosed advanced biliary tract cancers (BTCs). METHODS Patients with newly diagnosed locally advanced unresectable or metastatic BTC, including intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC) and gallbladder carcinoma (GBC), were randomly assigned 2:1 to either GAP (gemcitabine 800 mg/m 2 , cisplatin 25 mg/m 2 , and nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m 2 intravenously once per day on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle) or GC (gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m 2 and cisplatin 25 mg/m 2 intravenously once per day on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle). RESULTS Among 452 randomly assigned participants, 441 were eligible and analyzable, 67% with ICC, 16% with GBC, and 17% with ECC. There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between GAP versus GC. Median OS with GAP was 14.0 months (95% CI, 12.4 to 16.1) and 13.6 months with GC (95% CI, 9.7 to 16.6); hazard ratio (HR), 0.91 (95% CI, 0.72 to 1.14); P = .41. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was similar between groups with median PFS for GAP being 7.5 months (95% CI, 6.4 to 8.5) versus 6.3 months for GC (95% CI, 4.4 to 8.2); HR, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.71 to 1.12); P = .32. In exploratory subset analyses, the OS and PFS benefits of GAP versus GC treatment were greater in locally advanced disease compared with metastatic disease, although not statistically significant (interaction P = .14 for OS and P = .17 for PFS). Moreover, GAP versus GC showed greater improvement in PFS among participants with GBC than those with ICC or ECC (interaction P = .01), but not OS (interaction P = .28). CONCLUSION The addition of a taxane in the GAP regimen to the standard gemcitabine-cisplatin regimen did not improve OS in newly diagnosed BTC. More toxicity was encountered with GAP versus GC.

4107 Background: Aberrant Wnt/β-catenin activation has been implicated in tumor formation and progression in BTC. CTNNB1 is a key transcriptional co-activator in Wnt signaling. The impact of CTNNB1 alterations on outcomes in intrahepatic (IHCC) vs extrahepatic (EHCC) vs gallbladder (GB) tumors and patterns of gene co-expression is unclear. We examined the molecular correlates and predictive and prognostic significance of CTNNB1 expression in a real-world cohort of pts with BTC. Methods: 7450 BTC tumors were analyzed using Next Generation Sequencing (NextSeq), Whole Exome and Whole Transcriptome Sequencing (NovaSeq) at Caris Life Sciences (Phoenix, AZ). Top quartile transcripts per million (TPM) expression was considered high expressors (Q4), bottom quartile was considered low expressors (Q1) within each subtype. Real-world overall survival (OS) data was obtained from insurance claims. Hazard ratio (HR) was calculated using Cox proportional hazards model, P values were calculated using log-rank test. Significance was determined to be p <0.05. Chi-square and Mann-Whitney tests determined molecular differences between subgroups and adjusted for multiple comparisons (q<0.05). Results: The cohort was comprised of 61% IHCC, 14% EHCC, 23% GB, 2% NOS. CTNNB1 mutations are rare in BTC (1.3%). Pts with CTNNB1-wt tumors had significantly better OS vs CTNNB1-mt (13.6 vs 10.2 mo, HR 0.74, p=0.008). This association remained significant in IHCC (13.2 vs 4.5 mo, HR 0.64, p=0.031) but not EHCC (18.0 vs 11.8 mo, HR 0.87, p=0.64) or GB (12.9 vs 11.0 mo, HR 0.75, p=0.071). CTNNB1-mt tumors were more frequently TP53-mt (63% vs 41%), ERBB2-mt (9% vs 2%) and ATM-mt (9% vs 3%). CTNNB1-wt tumors were more likely BAP-mt (9% vs 0%) and IDH1-mt (10% vs 0%) (all q<0.05). CTNNB1-mt tumors had higher median CTNNB1 expression vs wt (154.9 vs 113.4, q<0.009). Pts with CTNNB1 Q1 expression had significantly better OS vs Q4 (14.5 vs 12.4 mo, HR 0.88, p=0.007). This association held in IHCC (15.0 vs 10.6 mo, HR 0.77, p<0.00001) but not EHCC (17.5 vs 19.9 mo, HR 1.05, p=0.70) or GB (12.4 vs 12.8 mo, HR 1.05, p=0.63). CTNNB1 Q4 expressing tumors were more likely to be TP53-mt (55% vs 34%), PIK3CA-mt (9% vs 5%), KRAS-mt (23% vs 12%) and less likely IDH1-mt (4% vs 14%) compared to Q1 (all q<0.05). CTNNB1 Q4 pts had higher ARID1A, CTLA4, LAG3, HIF1A, TGFB1/2/3, EPHB4, EPHA2, VEGFA expression (FC: 2.1-4.2, all q<0.05) and higher T-cell inflamed score vs Q1. There was a trend towards improved OS in pts with IHCC CTNNB1 Q1 tumors receiving gemcitabine or fluorouracil (17.5 vs 15.0 mo, HR 0.86, p=0.064); no difference in outcomes by CTNNB1 expression in pts receiving immunotherapy. Conclusions: CTNNB1 mutations and mRNA expression levels impact survival in BTC, especially IHCC, and may be associated with benefit from chemotherapy. CTNBB1 alterations are associated with immunogenic, DNA repair and angiogenic pathways and may help identify novel therapeutic strategies for BTC.

4106 Background: The WNT/beta catenin (CTNNB1) pathway plays an integral role in the development of HCC. CTNNB1 has been implicated in HCC progression, metastasis, and drug resistance. We examined associations between CTNNB1 mutations and mRNA expression and clinical outcomes in a real-world cohort of patients with HCC. Methods: 1652 HCC tumors were tested at Caris Life Sciences (Phoenix, AZ) and analyzed with Whole Transcriptome Sequencing (WTS; Illumina Novaseq), Whole Exome Sequencing (NovaSeq,WES) and NextGen DNA sequencing (NextSeq, 592 genes). mRNA expression (transcripts per million) was further stratified into top (Q4) and bottom quartiles (Q1). Kaplan Meier estimates were calculated for overall survival (OS) in the molecularly defined cohorts and estimated from time of tissue collection to last contact. Significance was determined to be p <0.05. Chi-square and Mann-Whitney tests determined molecular differences between subgroups and adjusted for multiple comparisons (q<0.05). Results: Pathogenic CTNNB1 mutations were present in 32% of HCC and mutation status was not associated with CTNNB1 expression level. Pts whose tumors had lower CTNNB1 expression had significantly improved OS, 17.9 vs 12.4 months, Q1 vs Q4, HR 0.72, CI: 0.58-0.89 p=0.002. This association remained significant in patients who received first-line IO (Q1 vs Q4: OS 16.7 vs 10.6 mo, HR 0.54, CI: 0.32-0.94, p=0.025) or TKI (Q1 vs Q4: OS 27.1 vs 17.6 mo, HR 0.60, CI: 0.38-0.94, p=0.025). Low CTNNB1-expressing tumors (Q1) had more frequent ARID1A mutations (15% vs 8%); less frequent TP53 mutations (31% vs 42%); lower VEGFA, EPHB4, EPHA2, HIF1A, TGFB1/2/3 expression, lower MAPK activation and lower T-cell inflamed scores vs Q4 tumors (all q < 0.05). All tumors were MSS. CTNNB1 mutation status (MT vs WT) did not impact survival (OS 17.6 vs 15.3 mo, CTNNB1-MT vs CTNNB1-WT, HR 1.05, CI: 0.91-1.20, p=0.55). Similarly, CTNNB1 mutation status (MT vs WT) did not impact OS in pts treated with IO (19.8 vs 19.6 mo, HR 0.99, p=0.94) or TKI (23.0 vs 22.0 mo, HR 0.86, p=0.33). Conclusions: CTNNB1 mRNA expression, but not CTNNB1 mutation status, is associated with survival in HCC. Patients whose tumors had lower CTNNB1 expression appeared to derive more benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitors and TKI therapy in first line. CTNNB1 expression is associated with DNA repair, immune, neuronal and angiogenic pathways which may pave the way for potential therapeutic opportunities. Further studies are needed to prospectively evaluate CTNNB1 as a biomarker for treatment selection in HCC.

3078 Background: Q901 is a potent, covalently binding CDK7 inhibitor with excellent specificity for CDK7 against other protein kinases. Transcriptional regulation by CDK7 inhibition in cancer cells leads to DNA damage repair response inhibition and increased genomic instability. Q901 also regulates cell cycle checkpoints by inhibiting T-loop phosphorylation and transcriptionally downregulating CDK1, 2 and 4. In preclinical in vivo models, intravenous (iv) administration of Q901 once a week and once every three-week dosing regimen was well tolerated and showed significant antitumor activity. The safety profile, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD) and efficacy data for 18, 36 and 60 mg/m2 are presented. Methods: QRNT-009 (NCT05394103) is an ongoing Phase 1/2 multicenter, open-label, dose escalation and expansion study. Q901 is administered iv once weekly for four weeks, then once every two weeks thereafter in patients with advanced or metastatic ovarian cancer, castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), breast cancer, endometrial cancer, colorectal cancer, small cell lung cancer (SCLC), or pancreatic cancers. Results: As of data cutoff (12Jan2024), 17 patients received Q901 across 3 dose levels: 5 patients at 18 mg/m2, 4 patients at 36 mg/m2, and 8 patients at 60 mg/m2. The median prior lines of systemic therapy were 4 (range 2 - 17). Of 17 patients who received Q901 across all doses, there were no treatment related SAEs, treatment discontinuations, or dose reductions. Most common TRAEs ≥ 15% were nausea (29.4%), anemia (23.6%) and fatigue (23.5%). As of data cutoff, no DLTs were observed. All plasma PK analyses across dose levels showed dose dependent increase of AUC0-last and Cmax. No major metabolite was observed. POLR2A, which is a CDK7 target engagement marker showed biologically effective change starting from 18 mg/m2. 1 patient with pancreatic cancer who received 18 mg/m2 had a partial response with CA19-9 reduction from 4,632 to 219. 2 patients at 18 mg/m2 and 2 patients at 36 mg/m2 had stable disease. Additional safety and efficacy data will be presented. Conclusions: Preliminary data from QRNT-009 study showed that selective CDK7 inhibitor Q901 is well tolerated. Preliminary antitumor activity and pharmacodynamic observations are encouraging. Dose escalation is ongoing to identify MTD or recommended dose for further studies. Clinical trial information: NCT05394103 .

2526 Background: Tumor necrosis factor receptor-2 (TNFR2) is expressed on effector CD8+, CD4+, and regulatory T (Treg) cells, natural killer (NK) cells, and myeloid cells. Activation of TNFR2 is anticipated to yield effective anti-tumor immunity by stimulating T-cell and NK-cell activation and proliferation in the tumor microenvironment. HFB200301 is a first-in-class anti-TNFR2 agonistic monoclonal antibody that triggers both innate and adaptive immune stimulation by binding to a specific epitope on TNFR2. We report initial results of an ongoing Phase I dose escalation, multicenter study (NCT05238883) of HFB200301 in monotherapy and in combination with tislelizumab (TIS) in patients (pts) with advanced refractory solid tumors. Methods: A Phase I trial designed to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and initial efficacy of HFB200301 in monotherapy and in combination with TIS. Eligible pts, ≥18 years with an ECOG PS 0-1 and advanced solid tumors, will be enrolled in dose escalation at 5 different dose cohorts in monotherapy (Q4W), 3 different dose cohorts in combination with TIS (Q4W), or in dose expansion following determination of safety. Radiographic response is assessed every 8 weeks. Results: A total of 39 pts have been enrolled, 27 pts in monotherapy and 12 pts in combination. All pts received prior systemic therapy (median 2, range 1-4); 23 pts (59%) had prior checkpoint inhibitor treatment. No dose limiting toxicities were observed in either the monotherapy or combination arms. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 44% of monotherapy and in 50% of combination pts, with pruritis (11%), tremor (7%), fatigue (7%), asthenia (7%) and nausea (7%) being the most common TRAEs. No ≥ Grade 3 TRAEs were reported, and there were no drug discontinuations due to TRAEs. Preliminary HFB200301 PK analysis demonstrated non-linear clearance of HFB200301, with dose-proportional maximum concentration [Cmax], achieving sufficient exposures for peripheral target engagement in all tested doses. Emerging PD data demonstrates evidence of immune activation and expansion of CD8+ T cells, but not Tregs, in the tumor microenvironment and peripheral blood. Single cell RNAseq analysis of peripheral blood mononuclear cells demonstrated PD modulation in TNFR2 positive immune cell types post-HFB200301 treatment. Early response evaluation reveals ongoing durable clinical responses (> 6 months) in a PD-L1+ pleural mesothelioma pt and an EBV+ gastric cancer pt from combination cohorts. Conclusions: HFB200301 demonstrates a favorable safety profile, dose-dependent PK, with PD and preliminary clinical activity in monotherapy and in combination with TIS in pts with heavily pre-treated refractory solid tumors. Clinical trial information: NCT05238883 .

2531 Background: The immune co-stimulatory receptor OX40 is expressed on CD4+ T cells, including regulatory T cells (Tregs). First generation OX40 agonists faced limitations from interference with endogenous OX40-OX40L binding, leading to decreased surface OX40 levels on T cells. Distinguished by its unique epitope on OX40, the novel next generation IgG1 monoclonal antibody (mAb) HFB301001 facilitates agonistic activity without impeding endogenous OX40 ligand binding. This allows for effective co-stimulation of T cells without diminishing OX40 levels. Additionally, HFB301001 exhibited superior in vivoanti-tumor activity and ability to enhance effector CD8+ T cell function compared to a benchmark first generation OX40 agonist in preclinical studies. Here, we report initial data of an ongoing dose-escalation study (NCT05229601) of HFB301001 in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors. Methods: A Phase I trial designed to evaluate safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and preliminary efficacy of HFB301001. Eligible pts ≥18 years old (ECOG PS 0-1) with advanced solid tumors are enrolled in 4 different dose cohorts in monotherapy (Q4W) dose escalation. Solid tumor types were selected using Drug Intelligent Science (DIS®), employing integrative bulk and single cell RNAseq (scRNAseq) analyses to confirm and prioritize prospective targets in specific immune cell types. Sequential analysis of peripheral blood and tumor tissue biomarkers is performed. Radiographic response is assessed every 8 weeks. Results: As of January 06, 2024, 26 pts were enrolled, all having received prior systemic therapy (median 2, range 1-4); 81% received prior checkpoint inhibitor treatment. The majority of pts (77%) were male, median age was 62.5 years (range 41-78). Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 34.6% of pts, none ≥ grade 3. Common TRAEs included rash (19%), pruritis (12%) and arthralgia (8%). No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. Preliminary results demonstrate dose-proportional increases in maximum concentration, typical mAb volume of distribution, and nonlinear clearance. On treatment biopsies revealed expansion of both natural killer and cytotoxic CD8+ T cells, with no notable expansion of Tregs. Analysis of peripheral blood by scRNAseq and immunophenotyping revealed expansion of cytotoxic CD8+T cells relative to CD4+ T cells post treatment. Preliminary efficacy analysis indicates a disease-control rate (DCR) of > 60% with greatest effect seen in hepato-cellular and renal cell carcinoma. Median time on treatment was 1.9 months (range 0.9-17 months). Conclusions: HFB301001 demonstrates a favorable safety profile, dose-dependent PK and PD immunomodulation, and DCR in heavily pretreated solid tumors. HFB301001 warrants further evaluation and expansion in specific tumor types is planned. Clinical trial information: NCT05229601 .

Abstract Sorafenib blocks nonstructural protein 5A (NS5A)-recruited c-Raf–mediated hepatitis C virus (HCV) replication and gene expression. Release of Raf-1-Ask-1 dimer and inhibition of Raf-1 via sorafenib putatively differ in the presence or absence of doxorubicin. Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 80802 (Alliance) randomized phase III trial of doxorubicin plus sorafenib versus sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), showed no improvement in median overall survival (OS). Whether HCV viral load impacts therapy and whether any correlation between HCV titers and outcome based on HCV was studied. In patients with HCV, HCV titer levels were evaluated at baseline and at multiple postbaseline timepoints until disease progression or treatment discontinuation. HCV titer levels were evaluated in relation to OS and progression-free survival (PFS). Among 53 patients with baseline HCV data, 12 patients had undetectable HCV (HCV-UN). Postbaseline HCV titer levels did not significantly differ between treatment arms. One patient in each arm went from detectable to HCV-UN with greater than 2 log-fold titer levels reduction. Aside from these 2 HCV-UN patients, HCV titers remained stable on treatment. Patients who had HCV-UN at baseline were 3.5 times more likely to progress and/or die from HCC compared with HCV detectable (HR = 3.51; 95% confidence interval: 1.58–7.78; P = 0.002). HCV titer levels remained unchanged, negating any sorafenib impact onto HCV titer levels. Although an overall negative phase III study, patients treated with doxorubicin plus sorafenib and sorafenib only, on CALGB 80802 had worse PFS if HCV-UN. Higher levels of HCV titers at baseline were associated with significantly improved PFS. Significance: Sorafenib therapy for HCC may impact HCV replication and viral gene expression. In HCV-positive patients accrued to CLAGB 80802 phase III study evaluating the addition of doxorubicin to sorafenib, HCV titer levels were evaluated at baseline and different timepoints. Sorafenib did not impact HCV titer levels. Despite an improved PFS in patients with detectable higher level HCV titers at baseline, no difference in OS was noted.