Alese, Olatunji B.

Background Preclinical studies showed metformin reduces exhaustion of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and potentiates programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) blockade. We hypothesized that metformin with nivolumab would elicit potent antitumor and immune modulatory activity in metastatic microsatellite stable (MSS) colorectal cancer (CRC). We evaluated this hypothesis in a phase II study. Methods Nivolumab (480 mg) was administered intravenously every 4 weeks while metformin (1000 mg) was given orally, two times per day following a 14-day metformin only lead-in phase. Patients ≥18 years of age, with previously treated, stage IV MSS CRC, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0–1, having received no prior anti-PD-1 agent were eligible. The primary endpoint was overall response rate with secondary endpoints of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Correlative studies using paired pretreatment/on-treatment biopsies and peripheral blood evaluated a series of immune biomarkers in the tumor microenvironment and systemic circulation using ChipCytometry and flow cytometry. Results A total of 24 patients were enrolled, 6 patients were replaced per protocol, 18 patients had evaluable disease. Of the 18 evaluable patients, 11/18 (61%) were women and the median age was 58 (IQR 50–67). Two patients had stable disease, but no patients had objective response, hence the study was stopped for futility. Median OS and PFS was 5.2 months (95% CI (3.2 to 11.7)) and 2.3 months (95% CI (1.7 to 2.3)). Most common grade 3/4 toxicities: Anemia (n=2), diarrhea (n=2), and fever (n=2). Metformin alone failed to increase the infiltration of T-cell subsets in the tumor, but combined metformin and nivolumab increased percentages of tumor-infiltrating leukocytes (p=0.031). Dual treatment also increased Tim3+ levels in patient tissues and decreased naïve CD8+T cells (p=0.0475). Conclusions Nivolumab and metformin were well tolerated in patients with MSS CRC but had no evidence of efficacy. Correlative studies did not reveal an appreciable degree of immune modulation from metformin alone, but showed trends in tumorous T-cell infiltration as a result of dual metformin and PD-1 blockade despite progression in a majority of patients.

Background: For patients with resected stage III colon cancer, 6 months of adjuvant fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy has been the standard of care. The IDEA collaboration aimed to evaluate whether 3 months of adjuvant chemotherapy was noninferior to 6 months. Despite failing to meet its primary endpoint, the subgroup analyses demonstrated noninferiority based on regimen and treatment duration when a risk-stratified approach was used. Patients and Methods: To evaluate the impact of the results of the IDEA collaboration, we evaluated adjuvant chemotherapy prescribing practice patterns, including planned adjuvant treatment regimen and duration from January 1, 2016, to January 31, 2021. The time period was selected to evaluate chemotherapy prescribing patterns prior to the abstract presentation of the IDEA collaboration in June 2017 and after full manuscript publication in March 2018. Results: A total of 399 patients with stage III colon cancer who received adjuvant chemotherapy were included in the analysis. A significant increasing trend for use of 3 months of adjuvant chemotherapy was observed after presentation of the IDEA abstract (P<.001). A significant change in CAPOX (capecitabine/oxaliplatin) prescribing was also observed, increasing from 14% of patients prior to presentation of the IDEA abstract to 48% after presentation (P<.001). Comparing 3 months of CAPOX with 6 months of FOLFOX (fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin), 3 months of CAPOX use also steadily increased over time (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.28; 95% CI, 1.20–1.37; P<.001). Among subgroups of interest, no differences in adoption of CAPOX were observed. The adoption of 3 months of CAPOX was similar in patients with low-risk cancer (aOR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.17–1.37) and those with high-risk cancer (aOR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.16–1.47). Conclusions: Despite the IDEA collaboration failing to demonstrate noninferiority of 3 months’ duration of adjuvant therapy compared with 6 months, the findings have influenced practice prescribing patterns, favoring CAPOX and a shorter duration of planned adjuvant treatment.

TPS3641 Background: Patients with mismatch repair proficient (pMMR) BRAF V600E mutant high-risk stage II (T4) or stage III colon cancer have a substantial risk of recurrence despite standard adjuvant therapy. In patients with metastatic BRAF V600E mutant colorectal cancer, the combination of the RAF inhibitor encorafenib and the EGFR inhibitor cetuximab has been shown to improve overall and progression-free survival compared to standard therapy after at least one prior line of therapy. This study will evaluate if this combination improves disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with resected BRAF V600E mutant pMMR/microsatellite stable (MSS) high-risk stage II (T4) or stage III colon cancer after standard adjuvant therapy. Methods: The study has a seamless phase II/III design, enrolling a maximum of 394 patients. BRAF mutation status can be determined locally or submitted for central testing in trial pre-screening. Eligible patients will be randomized 1:1 to usual surveillance versus 6 months of treatment with encorafenib (300mg oral daily) plus cetuximab (500mg/m2 intravenous every 14 days). Stratification factors are adjuvant chemotherapy regimen (FOLFOX versus CAPOX), duration of adjuvant therapy (3 months versus > 3 months), tumor stage (T4N0 versus T1-3N1 versus T4N1/TanyN2), and ctDNA marker status (detectable versus undetectable) at randomization. Adjuvant therapy must be completed at most 8 weeks prior to registration. For the phase II component, in the ctDNA detectable cohort, the primary endpoint will be ctDNA clearance rate at 6 months, and, in the ctDNA undetectable cohort, the primary endpoint will be 6-month ctDNA recurrence-free survival, where events consist of death, recurrence, or ctDNA positivity. The primary endpoint of the phase III component is DFS, and secondary endpoints are overall survival, adverse events, and alternative DFS calculated from the date of primary resection, rather than date of study randomization. Patient reported symptoms (PRO-CTCAE) will be collected and analyzed as an exploratory endpoint, and serial blood banking will support future correlative studies. The trial will proceed to the phase III portion if either of the two endpoints in the phase II cohorts is statistically superior in patients receiving encorafenib plus cetuximab. The phase III study sample size will provide 80% power at a one-sided α of 0.05 to detect an approximately 10% improvement in the three-year DFS rate, assuming 68% in the control arm. Two interim analyses will be performed for DFS endpoint. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . U10CA180820 (ECOG-ACRIN); U10CA180868 (NRG); U10CA180888 (SWOG); Pfizer, Eli Lilly; Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT05710406. Clinical trial information: NCT05710406 .

TPS3640 Background: Recent data have demonstrated that in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), a total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) approach improves compliance with chemotherapy and increases rates of tumor response compared to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) alone. They further indicate that the optimal sequencing of TNT involves consolidation (rather than induction) chemotherapy to optimize complete response rates. Data, largely from retrospective studies, have also shown that patients (pts) with clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant therapy may be managed safely with the watch and wait approach (WW) instead of preemptive total mesorectal resection (TME). However, the optimal consolidation chemotherapy regimen to achieve cCR has not been established, and a randomized clinical trial has not robustly evaluated it as a primary endpoint. Collaborating with a multidisciplinary oncology team and pt groups, we designed this NCI-sponsored study of chemotherapy intensification to address these issues and to drive up cCR rates, to provide opportunity for organ preservation and improve quality of life for pts. Methods: In this Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology randomized phase II trial (1:1), up to 312 pts with microsatellite stable LARC, clinical stage T4N0, any T, N+ or T3N0 requiring abdominoperineal resection or coloanal anastomosis and distal margin within 12 cm of anal verge will be enrolled. Stratification factors include tumor stage (T4 vs T1-3), nodal stage (N+ vs N0) and distance from anal verge (0-4; 4-8; 8-12 cm). Pts will be randomized to receive neoadjuvant long course CRT (LCRT) followed by consolidation doublet (mFOLFOX6 or CAPOX) or triplet chemotherapy (mFOLFIRINOX) for 4 months. LCRT in both arms involves 4500 cGy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks (w) + 900 cGy boost in 5 fractions with a fluoropyrimidine (capecitabine preferred). Pts will undergo assessment 8-12 w post-TNT completion for the primary endpoint of cCR per previously validated criteria and recommended WW and surveillance if cCR is achieved or TME if an incomplete response is noted. Secondary objectives include time-to event outcomes (disease-free and overall survival, organ preservation time and time to distant metastasis) and adverse effects. Statistical power, based on cCR, incorporates a one-sided alpha = 0.048 and power = 90% yielding 312 patients (156 per arm). Biospecimens including archival tumor tissue, matched / normal blood samples and serial rectal MRI will be collected for exploratory correlative research. This study, activated in late 2022, is open across the NCTN and is actively recruiting. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24 CA196171; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . U10CA180868 (NRG); U10CA180888 (SWOG); Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT05610163 Clinical trial information: NCT05610163 .

3580 Background: TAS-102 (FTD/TPI) is a combination of a nucleoside analogue and a thymidine phosphorylase inhibitor, and has showed activity in 5FU-resistant CRC. Nal-IRI achieves higher intra-tumor concentrations than irinotecan (Iri; 142-fold) and its major metabolite, SN-38 (9-fold). This resulted in superior anti-tumor activity compared to free Iri in multiple tumor xenografts. Furthermore, multiple clinical trials have established the activity of nal-IRI in combination with 5FU in pancreaticobiliary cancers. The combination of nal-IRI with the more potent nucleoside analogue TAS-102 may thus result in a more effective systemic therapy. We conducted this study to define the safety and efficacy of the combination of TAS-102 and nal-IRI in advanced CRC. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) on this investigator-initiated phase II study had advanced CRC and must have had disease progression on at least one prior therapy. Additional inclusion criteria - measurable disease, ECOG PS 0-1 & adequate organ function. Based on previously published dose escalation phase I data, the pts were treated at the recommended phase II dose of TAS-102 (given orally at 35mg/m2 bid on days 1-5) and nal-IRI (60mg/m2 IV on day 1) in 14-day cycles. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) = complete (CR) + partial (PR) response per RECIST v1.1. Multiple secondary endpoints included safety/tolerability, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), disease control rate (DCR) and duration of response (DoR). Results: Twenty-two pts were enrolled, of whom 20 were evaluable for response. Male - 50%; ECOG PS 1 – 75%; African Americans – 38%; median age - 58yrs (interquartile range [IQR] 49-67). Median line of prior therapy was 1 (IQR 1-2) and 13.6% (3 pts enrolled during the dose escalation phase) had received prior Iri. 47.6% received concurrent Bevacizumab. ORR was 15% (3 PR, 0 CR). 60% had stable disease (SD) as best response; DCR of 75%. mPFS - 9.7 mos (95% CI: 5.6, 14.2); mOS - 10.1 mos (95% CI: 7.3, 15.9). 12-month PFS and OS rates were 34.6% and 39.5% respectively. At a median follow up of 11.9 mos, DoR was yet to be determined and 50% of the pts had maintained response for 12 mos. Median duration of progression free among pts with SD was 7.6 mos (95% CI: 4.6, 13.2), with a 12-month survival rate of 47.7% (95% CI: 15.5%, 74.5%). Median time to response (TTR) was 4.8mos. Most common treatment related toxicities included fatigue and neutropenia (G3; 27.3% each); anemia and leucopenia (G3; 18.2% each). Other G3 AEs included febrile neutropenia, diarrhea, hypokalemia, lymphopenia and nausea (4.5% each). Conclusions: We demonstrated that the combination of TAS-102 and nal-IRI had an acceptable safety profile, and showed antitumor activity in patients with advanced CRC. Additional biomarker analyses such as survival correlation with UGT1A1 phenotype and RAS mutational status are ongoing. (NCT03368963). Clinical trial information: NCT03368963 .

3579 Background: Panitumumab (Pmab) is a recombinant monoclonal antibody that binds specifically to the human epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and it is indicated for the treatment of metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC). However, the objective response rates (ORR) for the single agent are historically about 8-11%. EGFR inhibition induces synthetic lethality with poly ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) such as Niraparib, by attenuating DNA repair pathways. Combining PARP and EGFR inhibition has the potential to confer synergistic benefit, while also ameliorating resistance mechanism to EGFRi. We conducted this study to define the safety and efficacy of the combination of Niraparib and Pmab in RAS wildtype (WT) mCRC. Methods: Patients (pts) with RAS WT mCRC who have progressed on at least one line of systemic chemotherapy were eligible for the trial. Other selected inclusion criteria were ≥18 years of age, ECOG PS 0-1 and measurable disease per RECIST 1.1. Pmab was administered at 6 mg/kg IV on days 1 & 15 of each 28-day cycle, while Niraparib was taken orally at 200mg or 300mg (based on body weight and platelet count) daily throughout the cycle. The primary endpoint was clinical benefit rate (CBR) defined as complete (CR) + partial (PR) response + stable disease (SD) per RECIST v1.1. Multiple secondary endpoints included safety/tolerability, ORR, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and duration of response (DoR). Results: A safety run-in cohort of 6 pts was initially enrolled. Following a preplanned safety analysis showing an acceptable toxicity profile, an additional 19 pts were enrolled. Of the total 25 enrolled pts, 24 were evaluable for response. Male - 50%; Whites/African Americans/Asians – 65.2%/21.7%/13%; median age – 58.5yrs. The majority had left sided tumor (92%) and the median line of prior therapy was 2 (range 1-4). CBR was 83.3% (0 CR, 6 PR, 14 SD) and ORR was 25%. mPFS – 5.6mos (95% CI: 3.7, 6.9); mOS – 20.9mos (95% CI: 9.2, NR). Six-month PFS and OS rates were 48.4% and 100% respectively. At a median follow up time of 7.5mos (95% CI: 4.2, 10.4), 3 patients remained on treatment and DoR was yet to be determined. Muco-cutaneous adverse events (AEs) of any grade included rash (58.4%), oral mucositis (20.8%), dry skin (16.7%) and paronychia (4.2%). Most common (grade > 2) treatment related AEs (TRAEs) were anemia (G3; 12.5%), dermatitis, oral mucositis, hypertension and neutropenia (G3; 4.2% each). There were no grade 4-5 TRAEs. Conclusions: The combination of Pmab and Niraparib had an acceptable safety profile, and showed considerable antitumor activity in pts with advanced RAS WT mCRC compared to historical rates. Additional biomarker analyses such as survival correlation with immune cell infiltration in paired skin biopsies and HER2/BRAF mutational status are ongoing. Funding and product (Niraparib) for the study were provided by GSK (NCT03983993). Clinical trial information: NCT03983993 .

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common malignancy worldwide. It is projected to increase by 3.2 million new cases and account for 1.6 million deaths by 2040. Mortality is largely due to limited treatment options for patients who present with advanced disease. Thus, the development of effective and tolerable therapies is crucial. Chemotherapy has been the backbone of systemic treatment of advanced CRC, but utility has been limited because of invariable resistance to therapy, narrow mechanisms of action, and unfavorable toxicity profile. Tumors that are mismatch repair-deficient have demonstrated remarkable response to immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. However, most CRC tumors are mismatch repair-proficient and represent an unmet medical need. Although ERBB2 amplification occurs only in a few cases, it is associated with left-sided tumors and a higher incidence of brain metastasis. Numerous combinations of HER2 inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy, and antibody-drug conjugates against HER2 represent innovative strategies in this area. The KRAS protein has been classically considered undruggable. Fortunately, new agents targeting KRAS G12C mutation represent a paradigm shift in the management of affected patients and could lead the advancement in drug development for the more common KRAS mutations. Furthermore, aberrant DNA damage response is present in 15%-20% of CRCs, and emerging innovative combinations with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors could improve the current therapeutic landscape. Multiple novel biomarker-driven approaches in the management of patients with advanced CRC tumors are reviewed in this article.

Abstract Purpose: Romidepsin dosing recommendations for patients with malignancy and varying degrees of hepatic dysfunction was lacking at the time of regulatory approval for T-cell lymphoma. We conducted a multicenter phase I clinical trial (ETCTN-9008) via the NCI Organ Dysfunction Working Group to investigate safety, first cycle MTD, and pharmacokinetic profile of romidepsin in this setting. Patients and Methods: Patients with select advanced solid tumors or hematologic malignancies were stratified according to hepatic function. Romidepsin was administered intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle and escalation followed a 3 + 3 design in moderate and severe impairment cohorts. Blood samples for detailed pharmacokinetic analyses were collected after the first dose. Results: Thirty-one patients received one dose of romidepsin and were evaluable for pharmacokinetic analyses in normal (n = 12), mild (n = 8), moderate (n = 5), and severe (n = 6) cohorts. Adverse events across cohorts were similar, and dose-limiting toxicity occurred in two patients (mild and severe impairment cohorts). The MTD was not determined because the geometric mean AUC values of romidepsin in moderate (7 mg/m2) and severe (5 mg/m2) impairment cohort were 114% and 116% of the normal cohort (14 mg/m2). Conclusions: Data from the ETCTN-9008 trial led to changes in the romidepsin labeling to reflect starting dose adjustment for patients with cancer and moderate and severe hepatic impairment, with no adjustment for mild hepatic impairment.