Zemla, Tyler

TPS5100 Background: First-line treatment of mRCC has rapidly changed to include IPI-NIVO or CABO, with clinical benefit of each based on the Checkmate 214 and CABOSUN (A031203) trials. Combination immunotherapy with VEGF therapies has shown benefit over sunitinib in the JAVELIN 101 and KEYNOTE 426 trials. It is yet unclear which patients (pts) benefit most from combination immunotherapy-VEGF inhibitors, and the optimal sequence of drugs. Methods: In an adaptive, randomized, multicenter phase 3 trial (Alliance A031704, PDIGREE), pts start treatment with induction IPI 1 mg/kg and NIVO 3 mg/kg intravenously (IV) once every 3 weeks. Key inclusion criteria include clear cell mRCC, International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) intermediate or poor risk, Karnofsky performance status > 70, and no prior treatments for mRCC. Based on 3-month radiographic assessment (after completing IPI-NIVO combination), pts with complete responses (CR) undergo maintenance NIVO 480 mg IV every 4 weeks; pts with progression of disease (PD) switch to CABO 60 mg oral daily; pts with non-CR/non-PD are randomized to NIVO 480 mg IV every 4 weeks versus NIVO 480 mg IV every 4 weeks with CABO 40 mg oral daily. Randomization is stratified by IMDC risk criteria and presence of bone metastases. The primary endpoint of the study is overall survival (OS). We hypothesize that 3-year OS will improve to 70% for NIVO-CABO compared to 60% for NIVO alone; to achieve 85% power with a two-sided alpha of 0.05 and exponential distribution, 696 patients will be randomized. Accounting for 30% patients with either CR or PD, and 5% dropout from toxicity, up to 1046 pts will be enrolled. Key secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, 12-month CR rate, overall response rate based on RECIST 1.1 and irRECIST criteria, and toxicity profiles. Quality of life will be assessed based on the FKSI-19, PROMIS-fatigue, and EQ5D-5L questionnaires. Biomarkers associated with CR, tissue-based and plasma-based biomarkers will be assessed. Updated enrollment through May 2020 will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT03793166 .

4086 Background: The randomized phase III CALGB/SWOG 80405 trial found no difference in overall survival (OS) in first-line mCRC pts treated with either bevacizumab (Bev) or cetuximab (Cet) combined with the same chemotherapy. We investigated the potential prognostic and predictive value of HER2 amplification and HER2 gene expression using NGS and Nanostring data. Methods: Primary tumor DNA from 559 patients (pts) was profiled for HER2 amplification by NGS (Foundation One). Tumor tissue from 925 pts was tested for Nanostring gene expression using an 800 gene panel. OS and progression free survival (PFS) were the endpoints as time-to-event variables. Cox proportional hazard models with gene expression fitted with linear spline (one internal knot at median) were used, adjusting for pts baseline characteristics, treatment assignment, and molecular features (microsatellite instability, BRAF, all RAS). Results: Of 505 tumors with both NGS and Nanostring data, 16 harbored HER2 amplification (copy number variation > 6), limited to microsatellite stable tumors and significantly associated with HER2 expression ( P < 0.001) and wild-type RAS ( P = 0.036). HER2 amplification was neither prognostic nor predictive for OS or PFS. Conversely, HER2 expression higher than median was associated with longer PFS ( P = 0.018) but not OS ( P = 0.13). Among pts with HER2 not amplified, higher HER2 expression was associated with better OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95%CI, 0.72-0.97; P = 0.016) and PFS (HR, 0.85; 95%CI, 0.74-0.98; P = 0.027) when the expression was less than median. Additionally, in pts with no HER2 amplification and HER2 expression lower than median, treatment with Cet was associated with worse PFS compared to Bev (HR, 1.46; 95%CI, 1.12-1.90; P = 0.005). This effect was not observed with expression higher than median regardless of HER2 amplification status. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the largest analysis of HER2 amplification and gene expression in mCRC pts treated with standard therapy. Our results provide novel insight on the predictive and prognostic value of HER2 gene expression in pts treated with Cet- and Bev-based regimens. Upon validation, these findings could inform pts selection and the design of more effective treatment options for pts with low HER2 expression. Clinical trial information: NCT00265850.

4003 Background: Aspirin and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors have been associated with a reduced risk of colorectal polyps and cancer in observational and randomized studies. CALGB/SWOG 80702 tested the effect of celecoxib, a COX-2 inhibitor, on reducing the risk of recurrence in stage III CC. Methods: CALGB/SWOG 80702 is a 2x2 randomized controlled phase III trial of 3 v 6 months of adjuvant FOLFOX (data previously reported as part of the IDEA collaboration) with concurrent celecoxib (400 mg daily) v placebo x 3 yrs for patients (pts) with resected stage III CC. The primary endpoint of the trial is disease-free survival (DFS), defined as time from randomization to recurrence or death from any cause. The trial was designed to provide 91% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.79 in favor of celecoxib with 2-sided alpha = 0.05 (775 events required); due to slowing accumulation of events 4 years after complete accrual, power was lowered to 85% with same HR and alpha assumptions (696 events required). The DSMB released data on February 24, 2020 at median f/u of 5.6 yrs with 689 DFS events. Results: Between June 2010 and November 2015, 2,526 pts were consented and randomized to the trial. Treatment arms were well balanced by patient and tumor prognostic features, as well as low-dose aspirin use. Baseline characteristics included 45% female, 18% non-White, 8% Hispanic, 15% T4, 26% N2. 3-yr DFS for celecoxib was 76.3% v 73.3% for placebo (HR 0.89 [95% CI 0.77-1.04]; P = 0.14). 5-yr overall survival (OS) was 83.9% for celecoxib v 81.7% for placebo (HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.72-1.05]; P = 0.14). When considering the 4 treatment arms separately, 3-yr DFS was 77.0% for 12 months FOLFOX + celecoxib, 74.9% for 12 months FOLFOX + placebo, 75.5% for 6 months FOLFOX + celecoxib, and 71.9% for 6 months FOLFOX + placebo (log rank P = 0.22; P interaction = 0.64). There were no significant differences in grade 3-4 toxicity with celecoxib v placebo. Compliance with protocol celecoxib treatment, defined as 3 yrs of therapy completion or recurrence/death while on treatment, was 58.1% pts on celecoxib and 60.2% pts on placebo. Conclusions: The addition of celecoxib to standard chemotherapy did not significantly improve DFS or OS. Clinical trial information: NCT01150045 .

TPS3154 Background: Immune-related Adverse Events (irAEs) are rare but serious sequelae of treatment with immuno-oncology (IO) therapeutics. These therapeutics, including monoclonal antibodies targeting programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), have had transformative effects on outcomes for patients (pts) with advanced cancers. Although most pts tolerate the therapies well, a few experience irAEs ranging in severity up to life-threatening. These irAEs involve diverse organs including the heart, kidney, liver and lung, and gastrointestinal, musculoskeletal, central and peripheral nervous systems. Because of the relatively low incidence and wide variety of irAEs due to various immunotherapies for multiple tumor types, establishment of an efficient centralized repository for acquisition and organized distribution of well-annotated biospecimens is vital for translational studies that improve understanding of the molecular pathogenesis and treatment of these significant toxicities. Methods: This multi-institutional study is open at sites across the National Clinical Trial Network to pts who received ≥ 1 IO therapeutics (e.g., CTLA-4, PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitor) and experienced 1) ≥ 1 serious (grade 3–5) adverse events that are likely immune-related, 2) rare infection or 3) tumor hyperprogression. IrAEs of interest include myocarditis, colitis, hepatitis, nephritis, myositis, pneumonitis, meningitis/encephalitis, dermatitis, endocrinopathies and neuropathy. Pts may be on an NCTN or non-NCTN IO trial or be receiving standard-of-care therapy. Registration must occur ≤ 72 hours after confirmation of the irAE event. Clinical data are collected at registration, 1 month after registration and for up to 1 year. Biospecimens (tumor blocks, biopsies of inflammatory tissues used to establish irAE diagnosis, and serial blood samples for isolation of plasma, serum and peripheral blood mononuclear cells) are collected at 1-2 timepoints. Stool samples are collected from pts experiencing colitis. Imaging data are collected for pts with hyperprogression or pneumonitis. Goal accrual is 240 pts. Biospecimens and data will be made available to investigators following future submission and approval of proposals. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171; U10CA180820 (ECOG-ACRIN); U10CA180888 (SWOG); U10CA180868 (NRG); https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org; Clinical trial information: NCT04242095 .

Abstract Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are an emerging treatment option for patients with cancer and acute venous thromboembolism (VTE), but studies have reported inconsistent results. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of DOACs and low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) in these patients. MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and conference proceedings were searched to identify relevant randomized controlled trials. Additional data were obtained from the original authors to homogenize definitions for all study outcomes. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes were recurrent VTE and major bleeding, respectively. Other outcomes included the composite of recurrent VTE and major bleeding, clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (CRNMB), and all-cause mortality. Summary relative risks (RRs) were calculated in a random effects meta-analysis. In the primary analysis comprising 2607 patients, the risk of recurrent VTE was nonsignificantly lower with DOACs than with LMWHs (RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.39-1.17). Conversely, the risks of major bleeding (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.55-3.35) and CRNMB (RR, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.73-3.64) were nonsignificantly higher. The risk of the composite of recurrent VTE or major bleeding was nonsignificantly lower with DOACs than with LMWHs (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.60-1.23). Mortality was comparable in both groups (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.68-1.36). Findings were consistent during the on-treatment period and in those with incidental VTE. In conclusion, DOACs are an effective treatment option for patients with cancer and acute VTE, although caution is needed in patients at high risk of bleeding.

Abstract Background The American Joint Committee on Cancer staging and other prognostic tools fail to account for stage-independent variability in outcome. We developed a prognostic classifier adding Immunoscore to clinicopathological and molecular features in patients with stage III colon cancer. Methods Patient (n = 559) data from the FOLFOX arm of adjuvant trial NCCTG N0147 were used to construct Cox models for predicting disease-free survival (DFS). Variables included age, sex, T stage, positive lymph nodes (+LNs), N stage, performance status, histologic grade, sidedness, KRAS/BRAF, mismatch repair, and Immunoscore (CD3+, CD8+ T-cell densities). After determining optimal functional form (continuous or categorical) and within Cox models, backward selection was performed to analyze all variables as candidate predictors. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results Poorer DFS was found for tumors that were T4 vs T3 (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.19 to 2.60; P = .004), right- vs left-sided (HR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.14 to 2.04; P = .005), BRAF V600E (HR = 1.74, 95% CI = 1.26 to 2.40; P &lt; .001), mutant KRAS (HR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.08 to 2.55; P = .02), and low vs high Immunoscore (HR = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.22 to 2.33; P = .001) (all P &lt; .02). Increasing numbers of +LNs and lower continuous Immunoscore were associated with poorer DFS that achieved significance (both Ps&lt; .0001). After number of +LNs, T stage, and BRAF/KRAS, Immunoscore was the most informative predictor of DFS shown multivariately. Among T1–3 N1 tumors, Immunoscore was the only variable associated with DFS that achieved statistical significance. A nomogram was generated to determine the likelihood of being recurrence-free at 3 years. Conclusions The Immunoscore can enhance the accuracy of survival prediction among patients with stage III colon cancer.

TPS760 Background: First-line treatment of mRCC has rapidly changed to include IPI-NIVO or CABO, with clinical benefit of each based on the Checkmate 214 and CABOSUN trials. Combination immunotherapy with VEGF therapies have shown benefit in the JAVELIN 101 and KEYNOTE 426 trials over sunitinib. It is yet unclear which patients (pts) benefit most from combination immunotherapy-VEGF inhibitors, and the optimal sequence of drugs. Methods: In an adaptive, randomized, multicenter, phase 3 trial (Alliance A031704, PDIGREE), pts start treatment with induction IPI 1mg/kg and NIVO 3mg/kg intravenously (IV) once every 3 weeks. Key inclusion criteria include clear cell mRCC, IMDC intermediate or poor risk, Karnofsky performance status >70, and no prior treatments for mRCC. Based on 3-month radiographic assessment (after completing IPI-NIVO combination), pts with complete responses (CR) undergo maintenance NIVO 480mg IV every 4 weeks, pts with progression of disease (PD) switch to CABO 60mg oral daily, and pts with non-CR/non-PD are randomized to NIVO 480mg IV every 4 weeks versus NIVO 480mg IV every 4 weeks with CABO 40mg oral daily. Randomization is stratified by IMDC risk criteria and presence of bone metastases. The primary endpoint of the study is overall survival (OS). We hypothesize that 3-year OS rate will improve to 70% for NIVO-CABO compared to 60% for NIVO alone; to achieve 85% power with a two-sided alpha of 0.05 and exponential distribution, 696 patients will be randomized. Accounting for 30% patients with either CR or PD, and 5% dropout from toxicity, up to 1046 pts will be enrolled. Key secondary endpoints include PFS, 12-month CR rate, ORR based on RECIST 1.1 and irRECIST criteria, and toxicity profiles. Quality of life will be assessed based on the FKSI-19, PROMIS-fatigue, and EQ5D-5L questionnaires. Biomarkers associated with CR and association of IL-6 with treatment benefit will be assessed. Other tissue-based and plasma-based biomarkers are planned. Updated enrollment will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT03793166.

102 Background: Combination irinotecan and cetuximab is approved for irinotecan-refractory mCRC; it is unknown if the addition of bevacizumab would improve outcomes. We studied the efficacy and safety of CBI compared with CI in patients (pts) with RAS wildtype, irinotecan-refractory mCRC. Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II trial, pts with RAS wildtype mCRC and no prior anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy who failed at least 1 irinotecan-based chemotherapy regimen and received bevacizumab in at least 1 prior line of therapy were randomized 1:1 to irinotecan 180 mg/m2 (or previously tolerated dose), cetuximab 500 mg/m2, and bevacizumab 5 mg/kg vs CI every 2 wks until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models stratified by number of prior lines of therapy and bevacizumab receipt in immediate prior line were performed. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). The study was closed early in January 2018 for reasons related to accrual and funding after enrollment of 36 out of a planned 60 pts. Results: Between July 2015 and December 2017, 36 pts were randomized (19 to CBI, 17 to CI). 34 pts (94%) were treated with 2 or more prior chemotherapy regimens. Baseline characteristics were similar between arms. Median PFS was 9.7 vs 5.5 mo for CBI and CI arms, respectively (log-rank P =0.76; multivariable HR = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.25-1.66). Median OS was 19.7 vs 10.2 mo for CBI and CI (log-rank P= 0.04; multivariable HR = 0.41; 95% CI, 0.15-1.09). ORR was 37% for CBI vs 12% for CI ( P =0.13). Grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 47% of pts receiving CBI vs 35% for CI ( P =0.46). Conclusions: In this prematurely discontinued trial, there were non-significant increases in PFS and ORR and a statistically significant 9.5 mo increase in median OS in favor of CBI compared to CI. Further investigation of CBI for treatment of irinotecan-refractory mCRC is warranted. Clinical trial information: NCT02292758.

AbstractTrial InformationClick here to access other published clinical trials.Lessons LearnedTrifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) shows promising antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with advanced biliary tract carcinoma, including patients with 5-fluorouracil refractory tumors. FTD/TPI has an acceptable safety profile and should be studied further in patients with advanced biliary tract carcinoma after progression on standard first-line therapy.BackgroundPatients with advanced biliary tract carcinoma (BTC) refractory to first-line therapy lack an established second-line option. Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) has activity in both fluoropyrimidine-sensitive and -resistant tumors, which led us to conduct a single arm phase II trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of FTD/TPI for patients previously treated for advanced BTC.MethodsPatients with advanced BTC previously treated with at least one line of chemotherapy were enrolled and treated with FTD/TPI until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint target was to have at least 6 patients who were progression free and alive at 16 weeks among 25 evaluable patients. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and toxicity.ResultsOf 27 evaluable patients, 59.3% received at least three prior lines of therapy, and 81.5% had previous exposure to fluoropyrimidine. Eight (32%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 14.9%–53.5%) patients were progression free at 16 weeks in the primary analysis population (n = 25), which met the predefined efficacy criteria. Median PFS and OS were 3.8 (95% CI, 2–5.8 months) and 6.1 (95% CI, 4.4–11.4 months) months, respectively. No objective responses were seen. There were no unexpected safety signals noted.ConclusionFTD/TPI demonstrated promising antitumor activity, with acceptable toxicity, in heavily pretreated patients with advanced BTC.