O’Reilly, Eileen M.

Abstract Background The treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer now includes “watch-and-wait” (WW) management for patients who exhibit a clinical complete response (cCR) to total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT). We assessed patients’ knowledge and preferences regarding WW with the goal of incorporating patient input into clinical trial design. Methods Rectal cancer patients in advocacy groups (COLONTOWN/Rectalburgh and Fight CRC) were surveyed regarding perceptions about treatment strategies, tolerable risks of treatment failure, and preferences on clinical trial design. Surveys were initially distributed in 2019, with the shift toward WW prompting re-survey of select questions in 2023. Results All respondents preferred enrollment in trials that incorporated patient input. Most respondents (76%) preferred treatment that incorporated chemotherapy escalation over radiation escalation. Furthermore, when presented with a hypothetical patient who developed a cCR after chemoradiation (without the option for WW), 58% of patients chose surgical treatment (with 100% risk of permanent ostomy and 80% chance of cure) over omission of surgery (with <80% chance of cure). In contrast, when the hypothetical patient developed a cCR after TNT (with an option for WW), 82% of patients opted for selective WW over surgery. Conclusions This work successfully integrated patient advocacy groups as a resource for obtaining patient input. Surveys revealed patients had a strong preference for chemotherapy escalation, for selective WW when offered, and for incorporation of input into future clinical trial design. These findings describe how well-informed patients approach complex medical decision-making and serve as a starting point for future studies seeking to incorporate patient voices.

LBA14 Background: CALGB/SWOG 80702 previously showed that the addition of celecoxib to standard adjuvant chemotherapy with FOLFOX did not significantly improve disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with stage III colon cancer. Here, we evaluated the prognostic and predictive value of ctDNA in identifying a subpopulation of patients who may benefit from celecoxib. Methods: In the subset of patients with adequate biospecimens who participated in CALGB/SWOG 80702, a randomized phase III trial of 3 versus 6 months of adjuvant 5-FU, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) +/- celecoxib, ctDNA assessment was performed using a clinically validated, tumor-informed 16-plex mPCR-NGS assay (Signatera(TM), Natera, Inc.) after surgery and before the start of adjuvant therapy (baseline). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to describe the distribution of survival time based on ctDNA positivity and log-rank testing was performed. Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine unadjusted associations between ctDNA positivity and disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Two-sided P values equal to or less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant, except for interaction P values (tested with a likelihood ratio). Results: In total, 1,011 of the 2,526 patients who participated in 80702 had ctDNA testing results from baseline; 189 were ctDNA positive (18.7%). ctDNA positivity associated with male sex, higher T stage, and N2 (versus N1) stage. ctDNA positivity was significantly associated with worse DFS (hazard ratio [HR] 6.52 [95% confident interval (CI) 5.09-8.34; p<0.0001] and OS (HR 6.28 [95% CI 4.63-8.51; p<0.0001]). Three-year DFS was 86.6% in ctDNA-negative cases and 36.8% in ctDNA-positive cases. Among patients who were ctDNA negative, celecoxib use was not significantly associated with worse DFS as compared to placebo (HR 0.75 [95% CI 0.54-1.05; p=0.095]) with a three-year DFS of 87.7% versus 85.5%, respectively. Among ctDNA-positive patients, celecoxib significantly improved DFS compared to placebo (HR 0.59 [95% CI 0.42-0.85; p=0.004]) with a three-year DFS of 44.1% versus 26.6% (P interaction = 0.25). Similar results were seen for overall survival with a hazard ratio of 0.86 (95% CI 0.56-1.33; p=0.49) for ctDNA negative cases and 0.63 (95% CI 0.41-0.96; p=0.028) for ctDNA-positive cases for celecoxib versus placebo (P interaction = 0.28). Conclusion: In a randomized phase III adjuvant therapy trial for stage III colon cancer, ctDNA was highly prognostic of DFS and OS. ctDNA positivity also appeared predictive of the benefit of adjuvant celecoxib for DFS and OS. These results suggest a potential role for ctDNA in determining which patients should consider celecoxib in addition to standard FOLFOX adjuvant therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT01150045 .

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 .

TPS309 Background: Patients with oligometastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) often experience long-term progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) following aggressive local treatment of isolated metastases, especially in the liver. However, the effectiveness of local ablative therapies, such as microwave ablation (MWA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), in patients with inoperable limited metastatic CRC or those with additional metastases outside the liver or lungs, remains uncertain. Despite the historical use of local therapy for oligometastatic CRC, often influenced by provider bias rather than strong evidence, questions persist about the potential benefits of applying this approach to patients with more extensive disease. This trial aims to address this clinical challenge by evaluating the safety and efficacy of adding total ablative therapy (TAT) of all disease sites to standard systemic treatment in patients with limited metastatic CRC. Methods: A022101/NRG-GI009 is a randomized phase III study within the National Clinical Trials Network, set to enroll 364 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic CRC (BRAF wild-type, microsatellite stable). Patients with liver-only metastatic disease are excluded. Pre-registration during first-line systemic therapy induction is encouraged. Eligible lesions must be treatable with surgical resection, MWA, and/or SBRT. Patients without significant radiographic progression after 12-39 weeks of first-line systemic therapy, with 4 or fewer disease sites post-induction chemotherapy, will be randomized 1:1. Randomization will be stratified by the number of metastatic organ sites (1-2 vs. 3-4), timing of metastatic disease diagnosis (de novo vs. secondary), and the presence of metastatic disease outside the liver/lungs in at least one site. Patients in Arm 1 will receive TAT, targeting all metastatic sites with a combination of surgical resection, MWA, and/or SBRT, followed by standard systemic therapy. Patients in Arm 2 will continue with standard systemic therapy alone. The choice of systemic therapy is at the discretion of the medical oncologist and may include continued therapy, maintenance chemotherapy, or observation. The primary endpoint is OS, with secondary endpoints including event-free survival, treatment-related toxicities, and local recurrence. Exploratory biomarker analyses will also be conducted. The study requires 346 evaluable patients across the two arms to demonstrate an OS improvement with a hazard ratio of 0.7, providing 80% power with a one-sided alpha of 5%. The trial employs a group sequential design with two interim analyses (at 25% and 50% of events) to assess futility. The trial began in January 2023, and patient recruitment is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT05673148 .

Importance Neoadjuvant therapy (NT) is an increasingly used treatment strategy for patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Little research has been conducted on cancer care delivery during NT, and the standards for optimal delivery of NT have not been defined. Objective To develop consensus best practices for delivering NT to patients with localized PDAC. Design, Setting, and Participants This study used a modified Delphi approach consisting of 2 rounds of voting, and a series of virtual conferences (from October to December 2023) to reach expert consensus on candidate best practice statements generated from a systematic review of the literature and expert opinion. An interdisciplinary panel was formed including 47 North American experts from surgical, medical, and radiation oncology, radiology, pathology, gastroenterology, integrative oncology, anesthesia, pharmacy, nursing, cancer care delivery research, and nutrition as well as patient and caregiver stakeholders. Main Outcome and Measures Statements that reached 75% agreement or greater were included in final consensus statements. Results Of the 47 participating panel members, 27 (57.64%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 47.6 (8.2) years. Physicians reported completing training a mean (SD) 14.6 (8.6) years prior and seeing a mean (SD) 110.6 (38.4) patients with PDAC annually; 35 (77.7%) were in academic practice. Final consensus was reached on 82 best practices for delivering NT. Of these, 38 statements focused on pre-NT practices, including diagnosis and staging (n = 15), evaluation and optimization (n = 20), and decision-making (n = 3); 29 statements defined best practices during NT, including initiation (n = 3), delivery of therapy (n = 8), restaging practices (n = 12), and management of complications during NT (n = 6); and 15 best practices were identified to guide treatment post-NT, focusing on surgery (n = 7), pathology (n = 4), and follow-up (n = 3). Conclusions Using a modified Delphi consensus technique, best practice guidelines were developed focusing on the optimal standards for delivering NT to patients with localized PDAC. Given the prognostic importance of completing multimodality therapy, efforts to standardize and optimize the delivery of NT represent an immediate opportunity to decrease care variation and improve outcomes for patients with PDAC. Future research should focus on validating and implementing best practice standards into clinical practice.

Abstract Background A plant-based diet is associated with better survival among patients with nonmetastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), but its association in metastatic CRC is unknown. Methods Using an National Cancer Institute–sponsored trial (CALGB/SWOG 80405), we included 1284 patients who completed validated food frequency questionnaires at the initiation of metastatic CRC treatment. We calculated 3 indices: overall plant-based diet index (PDI), which emphasized consumption of all plant foods while reducing animal food intake; healthful plant-based diet index (hPDI), which emphasized consumption of healthful plant foods such as whole grains, fruits, and vegetables; and unhealthful plant-based diet index (uPDI), which emphasized consumption of less healthful plant foods such as fruit juices, refined grains, and sugar-sweetened beverages. We estimated the associations of 3 indices (quintiles) with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. Results We observed 1100 deaths and 1204 progression events (median follow-up = 6.1 years). Compared with the lowest quintile, patients in the highest quintile of PDI had significantly better survival (hazard ratio [HR] for OS = 0.76 [0.62-0.94], Ptrend = .004; PFS = 0.81 [0.66-0.99], Ptrend = .09). Similar findings were observed for hPDI (HR for OS = 0.81 [0.65-1.01], Ptrend = .053; PFS = 0.80 [0.65-0.98], Ptrend = .04), whereas uPDI was not associated with worse survival (HR for OS = 1.16 [0.94-1.43], Ptrend = .21; PFS = 1.12 [0.92-1.36], Ptrend = .42). Conclusions Our study suggests that a plant-based diet, especially when rich in healthful plant foods, is associated with better survival among patients with metastatic CRC. The cause of survival benefits warrants further investigation.

Abstract Background Inflammation and insufficient physical inactivity contribute to individual-level risk of disease recurrence and death in stage III colon cancer. The extent to which increased inflammatory risk can be offset by sufficient physical activity remains unknown. Methods This cohort study was nested within the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (now part of the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology) and Southwest Oncology Group randomized trial. Inflammatory burden was quantified by high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and soluble tumor necrosis factor-α receptor 2 after recovery from tumor resection. Physical activity was measured during and after postoperative chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. Results The 3-year disease-free survival rate was 88.4% among patients with low inflammation and sufficient physical activity (referent group for all comparisons), 84.9% with low inflammation and insufficient physical activity (absolute risk difference = −3.5 percentage points, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −11.3 to 4.3; P = .38), 78.0% with intermediate inflammation and insufficient physical activity (absolute risk difference = −10.4 percentage points, 95% CI = −17.4 to −3.3; P = .007), and 79.7% with high inflammation and insufficient physical activity (absolute risk difference = −8.7 percentage points, 95% CI = −15.7 to −1.6; P = .022). In contrast, the 3-year disease-free survival rate was 87.3% among patients with intermediate inflammation and sufficient physical activity (absolute risk difference = −1.1 percentage points, 95% CI = −7.5 to 5.3; P = .74) and 84.4% with high inflammation and sufficient physical activity (absolute risk difference = −4.0 percentage points, 95% CI = −12.3 to 4.3; P = .34). Conclusion In this observational study of stage III colon cancer patients, physical activity was associated with improved disease-free survival despite high inflammation. Patients with intermediate or high inflammation who were physically active had disease-free survival rates that were not statistically significantly different from those with low inflammation.