Abou‐Alfa, Ghassan K.

427 Background: Derazantinib, a potent anti- FGFR1-3 oral kinase inhibitor, has shown clinically meaningful anti-tumor activity (21%), durable responses (median, 6.4 months), and progression-free survival (median, 8.0 months) in patients (pts) with FGFR2 fusion (FGFR2F)-positive intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA), and with a manageable toxicity profile. Herein, we report an interim analysis of the clinical efficacy data of derazantinib for pts with iCCA harboring FGFR2 mutations or amplifications (FGFR2M/A), a potential therapeutic option currently not addressed by FGFR inhibitors. Methods: Study FIDES-01 enrolls in a dedicated cohort pts with FGFR2M/A+ advanced iCCA who received previous chemotherapy. Pts receive 300 mg derazantinib daily until disease progression, death or intolerance. The primary endpoint is the proportion of pts alive and free of disease progression at 3 months (PFS3; RECIST 1.1, central imaging review) using a Simon’s two-stage sample-size minimizing statistical design. The interim analysis population comprises 23 pts dosed (intention to treat) who had at least one post-baseline tumor assessment (or clinical progression, or died) by June 3, 2021, using investigator assessments based on RECIST 1.1. Results: To date, 28 pts have been enrolled and dosed. FGFR2M/A observed in these pts included missense point mutations (78%), other short variants (11%) and amplifications (11%). Transition from stage 1 to stage 2 of the study was achieved earlier than planned after 8 (67%) of 12 pts were assessed as PFS3 based on central imaging review. In 23 pts included in this interim analysis for efficacy, the best overall response (investigator assessment) was confirmed partial response in two (8.7%) and stable disease in additional 15 pts (65.2%), resulting in a disease control rate of 73.9% (95% CI, 51.6–89.8). Using Kaplan-Meier analyses, the median PFS was 7.3 months (95%CI, 3.5–16.7) and the probability of being progression-free at 3 months and at 6 months were 76.3% (95%CI, 51.9–89.4) and 50.3% (95%CI, 21.7–73.4), respectively. Clinically meaningful anti-tumor efficacy was observed across all types of genetic aberrations. The safety profile of derazantinib in FGFR2M/A+ iCCA pts was consistent with that previously reported for FGFR2F+ iCCA pts. Conclusions: This interim data in study FIDES-01 suggest that derazantinib treatment provides clinical benefit to pts with advanced iCCA harboring FGFR2M/A who progressed after at least one line of standard chemotherapy. To our knowledge, this is the first report of clinically meaningful anti-tumor efficacy in a prospectively planned cohort of iCCA pts harboring FGFR2M/A. The study is ongoing to accrue 43 patients, assessing derazantinib as a therapeutic option for FGFR2M/A+ iCCA pts after disease progression on first-line treatment. Clinical trial information: NCT03230318.

379 Background: A single priming dose of T (anti-CTLA-4) added to D (anti-PD-L1) in the STRIDE (Single T Regular Interval D) regimen, formerly T300+D, showed encouraging clinical activity and limited toxicity in a phase 2 uHCC study (Study 22, NCT02519348), suggesting single exposure to T is sufficient to improve upon D activity. HIMALAYA (NCT03298451) evaluated the efficacy and safety of STRIDE or D vs sorafenib (S) in uHCC. Methods: HIMALAYA is an open-label, multicenter, phase 3 study, in which pts with uHCC and no prior systemic therapy were initially randomized to STRIDE (T 300 mg plus D 1500 mg [one dose] plus D 1500 mg every 4 weeks [Q4W]), D (1500 mg Q4W), S (400 mg twice daily), or T 75 mg Q4W (4 doses) plus D 1500 mg Q4W (T75+D). Recruitment to T75+D ceased after a planned analysis of Study 22 showed T75+D did not meaningfully differ from D. The primary objective was overall survival (OS) for STRIDE vs S. The secondary objective was OS noninferiority (NI) of D to S (NI margin: 1.08). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR; RECIST v.1.1), duration of response (DoR), and safety. Results: In total, 1171 pts were randomized to STRIDE (N=393), D (N=389), or S (N=389). At data cutoff (DCO), the primary objective was met: OS was significantly improved for STRIDE vs S (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 96% confidence interval [CI], 0.65–0.92; p=0.0035; Table). D met the objective of OS NI to S (HR, 0.86; 96% CI, 0.73–1.03). ORRs were higher for STRIDE (20.1%) and D (17.0%) than for S (5.1%). No new safety signals were identified. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 25.8% (STRIDE), 12.9% (D), and 36.9% (S) of pts. Grade 3/4 hepatic TRAEs occurred in 5.9% (STRIDE), 5.2% (D), and 4.5% (S) of pts. No TRAE of esophageal varices hemorrhage occurred. Rates of TRAEs leading to discontinuation were 8.2% (STRIDE), 4.1% (D), and 11.0% (S). Conclusions: HIMALAYA was the first large phase 3 trial with a diverse, representative uHCC population and extensive long-term follow-up to assess both mono- and combination immunotherapy. D was noninferior to S with favorable safety. The combination of a single priming dose of T plus D in STRIDE displayed superior efficacy and a favorable benefit-risk profile vs S. STRIDE is a proposed, novel, first-line standard of care systemic therapy for uHCC. Clinical trial information: NCT03298451. [Table: see text]

PURPOSE This phase I/II study evaluated tremelimumab (anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte–associated antigen-4 monoclonal antibody) and durvalumab (antiprogrammed death ligand-1 monoclonal antibody) as monotherapies and in combination for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), including a novel regimen featuring a single, priming dose of tremelimumab (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02519348 ). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with HCC who had progressed on, were intolerant to, or refused sorafenib were randomly assigned to receive T300 + D (tremelimumab 300 mg plus durvalumab 1,500 mg [one dose each during the first cycle] followed by durvalumab 1,500 mg once every 4 weeks), durvalumab monotherapy (1,500 mg once every 4 weeks), tremelimumab monotherapy (750 mg once every 4 weeks [seven doses] and then once every 12 weeks), or T75 + D (tremelimumab 75 mg once every 4 weeks plus durvalumab 1,500 mg once every 4 weeks [four doses] followed by durvalumab 1,500 mg once every 4 weeks). Safety was the primary end point. Secondary end points included objective response rate (ORR) by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1 and overall survival; exploratory end points included circulating lymphocyte profiles. RESULTS A total of 332 patients were enrolled (T300 + D, n = 75; durvalumab, n = 104; tremelimumab, n = 69; and T75 + D, n = 84). Tolerability was acceptable across arms, with grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events occurring in 37.8%, 20.8%, 43.5%, and 24.4%, respectively. Confirmed ORRs (95% CI) were 24.0% (14.9 to 35.3), 10.6% (5.4 to 18.1), 7.2% (2.4 to 16.1), and 9.5% (4.2 to 17.9), respectively. An early expansion of CD8+ lymphocytes was associated with response across arms, with highest proliferating CD8+ lymphocyte levels occurring in the T300 + D arm. The median (95% CI) overall survival was 18.7 (10.8 to 27.3), 13.6 (8.7 to 17.6), 15.1 (11.3 to 20.5), and 11.3 (8.4 to 15.0) months in the T300 + D, durvalumab, tremelimumab, and T75 + D arms, respectively. CONCLUSION All regimens were found to be tolerable and clinically active; however, the T300 + D regimen demonstrated the most encouraging benefit-risk profile. The unique pharmacodynamic activity and association with ORR of the T300 + D regimen further support its continued evaluation in HCC.

4086 Background: Pemigatinib (PEMI), a potent, selective, oral FGFR1-3 inhibitor, has shown efficacy and safety in patients (pts) with CCA and FGFR2 rearrangements/fusions in FIGHT-202 (NCT02924376; objective response rate [ORR], 35.5%; duration of response [DOR], 7.2 months [mo]). Overall survival (OS: 21.1 mo) was not mature in the primary report (Abou-Alfa. Lancet Oncol 2020; cutoff: Mar 22, 2019); herein we report matured efficacy and safety data from FIGHT-202 (cutoff: Apr 7, 2020). Methods: Pts (≥18 y) with known FGF/FGFR alterations and progression after ≥1 prior therapy had FGFR2 rearrangements/fusions (cohort A), other FGF/FGFR alterations (B), or no FGF/FGFR alterations (C). Pts received PEMI 13.5 mg QD (21-d cycle; 2 wks on, 1 wk off) until progression or toxicity. Primary endpoint: independent, centrally confirmed ORR (cohort A); secondary endpoints: ORR (cohorts B, C; cohorts A and B combined); DOR, disease control rate (DCR), progression free survival (PFS), OS, and safety. A post-hoc analysis in cohort A evaluated mOS in responders (pts with complete response [CR] or partial response [PR]) vs non-responders (pts with progressive disease [PD] or stable disease (SD]). Results: At cutoff, 147 pts were enrolled (cohort A, n=108; B, n=20; C, n=17; FGF/FGFR status undetermined, n=2); median follow-up was 30.4 (range, 4.9–38.7) mo and median treatment duration was 5.9 (0.2–36.5) mo. In cohort A, 9.3% of pts remained on therapy at cutoff; in cohorts B and C, all pts had discontinued. Pts discontinued mainly for PD (67.6%, 75%, and 64.7% in cohorts A, B, and C respectively). Independent, centrally confirmed ORR was 37.0%; mOS was 17.5 mo (95% CI, 14.4-22.9) in cohort A (Table 1). mOS for responders (n=40) vs non-responders (n=68) was 30.1 (95% CI, 21.5-NE) mo vs 13.7 (9.6-16.1) mo. Overall, most common all-cause treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were hyperphosphatemia (58.5%; grade ≥3, 0%), alopecia (49.7%; 0%), diarrhea (46.9%; 3.4%), fatigue (43.5%; 5.4%), nausea (41.5%; 2%), and dysgeusia (40.8%; 0%); 10.2%, 13.6% and 42.2% of pts discontinued, had dose reduction, and treatment interruption due to TEAEs, respectively. Conclusions: These results reinforce the primary data, showing continued, durable responses and sustained tolerability in pts receiving PEMI for CCA harboring FGFR2 rearrangements/fusions. Notably, the matured OS is longer than historical data; OS for responders was more than twice as long vs for non-responders. Clinical trial information: NCT02924376. [Table: see text]

4069 Background: CCA is a rare cancer for which there are limited effective therapies. IDH1 mutations occur in ̃20% of intrahepatic CCAs, resulting in production of the oncometabolite D-2-hydroxyglutarate, which promotes oncogenesis. IVO (AG-120) is a first-in-class, oral, small-molecule inhibitor of mutant IDH1 (mIDH1). ClarIDHy aimed to demonstrate the efficacy of IVO vs PBO in pts with unresectable or metastatic m IDH1 CCA. The primary endpoint was met with significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) by independent radiology center (IRC) with IVO vs PBO (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.37, p < 0.0001). Objective response rate (ORR) and stable disease for IVO were 2.4% (3 partial responses) and 50.8% (n = 63) vs 0% and 27.9% (n = 17) for PBO. IVO pts experienced significantly less decline in physical and emotional functioning domains of quality of life at cycle 2 day 1 vs PBO pts (nominal p < 0.05). Methods: Pts with m IDH1 CCA were randomized 2:1 to IVO (500 mg PO QD) or matched PBO and stratified by prior systemic therapies (1 or 2). Key eligibility: unresectable or metastatic m IDH1 CCA based on central testing; ECOG PS 0–1; measurable disease (RECIST v1.1). Crossover from PBO to IVO was permitted at radiographic progression. Primary endpoint: PFS by IRC. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS; by intent-to-treat), ORR, PFS (by investigator), safety, and quality of life. The planned crossover-adjusted OS was derived using the rank-preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) model. Results: As of 31 May 2020, ̃780 pts were prescreened for an IDH1 mutation and 187 were randomized to IVO (n = 126) or PBO (n = 61); 13 remain on IVO. Median age 62 y; M/F 68/119; 91% intrahepatic CCA; 93% metastatic disease; 47% had 2 prior therapies. 70% of PBO pts crossed over to IVO. OS data were mature, with 79% OS events in IVO arm and 82% in PBO. Median OS (mOS) was 10.3 months for IVO and 7.5 months for PBO (HR = 0.79; 95% CI 0.56–1.12; one-sided p = 0.093). The RPSFT-adjusted mOS was 5.1 months for PBO (HR = 0.49; 95% CI 0.34–0.70; p < 0.0001). Common all-grade treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs, ≥ 15%) in the IVO arm: nausea 41%, diarrhea 35%, fatigue 31%, cough 25%, abdominal pain 24%, decreased appetite 24%, ascites 23%, vomiting 23%, anemia 18%, and constipation 15%. Grade ≥ 3 TEAEs were reported in 50% of IVO pts vs 37% of PBO pts, with grade ≥ 3 treatment-related AEs in 7% of IVO pts vs 0% in PBO. 7% of IVO pts experienced an AE leading to treatment discontinuation vs 9% of PBO pts. There were no treatment-related deaths. Conclusions: IVO was well tolerated and resulted in a favorable OS trend vs PBO despite a high rate of crossover. These data – coupled with statistical improvement in PFS, supportive quality of life data, and favorable safety profile – demonstrate the clinical benefit of IVO in advanced m IDH1 CCA. Clinical trial information: NCT02989857.

3030 Background: Diarrhea, HFS, and hypertension are common toxicities of sorafenib. No markers are validated to predict patients at risk of these toxicities. This study aimed to identify genetic predictors of sorafenib-induced toxicities. Methods: A two-step, discovery-validation approach was used. The discovery set included 140 renal cell carcinoma patients from the TARGET study treated with sorafenib (400 mg twice daily) and genotyped for 1040 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 56 genes. The three most statistically significant SNPs associated with grade ≥2 composite toxicity (either hypertension, diarrhea, HFS, or other skin toxicities, CTCAE v.3.0) were tested for association with grade 3 composite toxicity (either hypertension, diarrhea, or HFS, CTCAE v.4.0) in a validation set of 240 hepatocellular carcinoma patients from Alliance/CALGB 80802 treated with sorafenib (400 mg twice daily) alone or with doxorubicin. Associations between SNPs and composite toxicity was performed by logistic regression, with adjusting covariates (age, gender, race, and treatment arm, the latter two covariates for the validation set only). A meta-analysis odds ratio (OR) of each SNP-grade 3 toxicity association between the discovery and validation sets was obtained by inverse variance to point toward effects specific to a type of toxicity. Results: In the discovery set, the top three SNPs associated with grade ≥2 composite toxicity were rs12366035 (C>T, minor allele frequency, MAF 0.34) in VEGFB (p 0.0007), rs4035887 (G>A, MAF 0.49) in EPAS1 (p 0.0021), and rs4864950 (T>A, MAF 0.23) in KDR (p 0.0058). These SNPs were genotyped in the validation set and only rs4864950 in KDR was replicated. No grade 4 toxicities were reported. Similar to the discovery set (OR 2.41, 95% CI 1.29-4.51), the A allele of rs4864950 increased the risk of grade 3 composite toxicity (p 0.032, OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.70-4.27) in the validation set. Grade 3 toxicity prevalence in the discovery and validation sets were 3.6% and 7.4% diarrhea, 8.6% and 12.3% HFS, 3.6% and 8.8% hypertension, respectively. The meta-analysis of the two datasets showed that the A allele of rs4864950 increased the risk of grade 3 diarrhea (p 0.045, OR 3.09, 95% CI 1.03-9.29), grade 3 HFS (p 0.012, OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.24-5.37), but not grade 3 hypertension (p 0.207, OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.18-1.45). Conclusions: We provide the first evidence of clinical validity of a marker of sorafenib-induced diarrhea and HFS. Sorafenib inhibits VEGFR2 (coded by KDR), leading to epithelial hypoxia and causing diarrhea and HFS. Variant rs4864950 might affect the function VEGFR2, which, during VEGFR2 inhibition, increases the risk of diarrhea and HFS. This SNP is common and can be genotyped in patients before receiving sorafenib for a better risk assessment. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org ClinicalTrials.gov Id: NCT01015833.

343 Background: Alliance/CALGB 80802, a randomized phase III trial, evaluated sorafenib plus doxorubicin vs. doxorubicin in pts with HCC and showed no improvement in median overall survival (OS) (HR[95CI] 1.05[0.83-1.31]) or PFS (HR[95CI] 0.93[0.75-1.16]). In HCC surrogacy of tumor response with OS remains controversial, in part due to varying criteria used for response evaluation (e.g., RECIST1.1 and mRECIST). We evaluated the performance of several models to predict OS using pretreatment clinical and radiomic variables. Methods: In CALBG 80802, we segmented all measurable tumor lesions on sequential CT scans. A lesion’s imaging phenotype was deciphered with 23 uncorrelated quantitative imaging features measured at baseline and week (wk) 10 (first follow-up). An OS landmark survival analysis was conducted at wk 10. Patients were randomly assigned (3:1) to training (n = 92) and validation (n = 37) sets. In a training set, 6 random forest predictive models (6 signatures) used features that best predicted OS using 3 sets of variables: radiomics only (n = 23), clinical only (n = 9), radiomics and clinical (n = 32). Two time points (baseline only or baseline + wk 10) were assessed. Each signature's output was an individualized prediction and a continuous value ranging from 0 to 1 (from most to least favorable predicted OS). The primary endpoint was to compare these models' performance to predict OS using error rate (Harrell's concordance-index) in the validation set. Results: Of the 6 training signatures evaluated, the one achieving the highest performance in the validation set was an 8-feature signature combining radiomics and clinical variables measured at two time points (baseline + wk 10) with an error rate of 35.6%. The variables [rank of importance] (table) selected by the signature included baseline clinical features (albumin[1], AFP[2], Child-Pugh[4]), baseline radiomics features (component 17[3], component 1[5], component 9[7], tumor volume[8]) and wk 10 radiomics features (delta tumor volume[6]). Variable delta tumor volume [6] used a more enhanced estimation of tumor burden at baseline and a delta tumor volumetric measurement; compared to RECIST1.1 measurement of percentage change in unidimensional measurement of a subset of target lesions. The four quartiles of the signature were significantly associated with OS (Log-Rank, P < 0.0001). Conclusions: The selected combined radiomic and clinical composite signature provided the best prediction for OS in the 80802 study patients’ population. It is a suggested way forward to go beyond single anatomic measurement techniques such as RECIST or mRECIST. [Table: see text]

325 Background: Alliance/CALGB 80802 randomized phase III trial evaluated DO+S vs. S in pts with aHCC, and showed no improvement in median OS. Multi-drug resistant pathway mitigation by the Ras/Raf/MEK/ERK pathway and bFGF-mediated activation of Raf-1 promotes the formation of antiapoptotic Raf-1 and ASK1 complex, induced by anthracyclines. S efficiently blocks NS5A-recruited c-Raf mediated HCV replication and viral gene expression. Once inhibited by S, VEGF expression of HepG2 may limit HCV cellular entry. Release of Raf-1-Ask-1 dimer and inhibition of Raf-1 via S putatively differ in the presence or absence of DO. We hypothesize treatment with S reduces HCV titer levels (TL) and influence pts’ outcome. Methods: In 80802 HCV pts, TL were evaluated in both arms at baseline and post-baseline at Day 1 of Cycles 2, 3, and every 2 cycles and at progression or discontinuation of therapy. HCV undetectable (HCV-UN) levels were defined as < 50 copies/mL. TL were evaluated in relation to OS and PFS. HCV RNA levels were measured by TaqMan PCR and by genotype. Results: Of 356 pts, 83 were HCV+ with more Black/African American (25/50 = 50%) vs. White (54/239 = 23%) or other race groups (4/67 = 6%) (p < 0.0001). HCV titer data were available on 54 pts (S: 28, DO+S: 26). At baseline, 12 pts (S: 7, DO+S: 5) were HCV-UN, and post-baseline HCV TL did not significantly differ between treatment arms; one patient in each arm went from detectable (HCV-D) to HCV-UN. Post-baseline, 40 pts were HCV-D vs. 14 who were HCV-UN (S+DO: 8, S: 6 pts). Except for the two pts who became HCV-UN, baseline HCV-D vs. HCV-UN titers was similar to that status post-baseline. PFS and OS between HCV-D and HCV-UN both at baseline and post-baseline are delineated in the table. Conclusions: We observed that S did not influence HCV TL. Pts treated with DO+S vs. S had worse PFS if they had HCV-UN, and further that higher levels of HCV titers at baseline were associated with significantly improved PFS. Given the small sample size, these findings warrant further prospective evaluation. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171; Bayer, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, and Sanofi. https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . Clinical trial information: NCT01015833. [Table: see text]

320 Background: Genomic profiling studies have reported somatic HER2 mutations in ~2–5% of biliary tract cancers (BTC). Clinical data from the SUMMIT study demonstrate that neratinib, a pan-HER irreversible tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has encouraging clinical activity in multiple types of HER2-mutant solid tumor malignancies. Methods: SUMMIT is a multi-histology, open-label, phase II ‘basket’ study of neratinib in patients with somatic HER2 mutations (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01953926). Patients with activating somatic HER2 mutations with different histologies, including BTC, received neratinib monotherapy (240 mg oral daily). Loperamide prophylaxis was mandatory during cycle 1. Efficacy endpoints: objective response rate (ORR, RECIST v1.1); clinical benefit rate (CBR); duration of response; progression-free survival (PFS). Adverse events (AEs) were assessed by CTCAE v4.0. Genomic profiling from fresh/archival tumor tissues and/or plasma cfDNA was performed retrospectively by next-generation sequencing (MSK-IMPACT). Results: As of 3-Sep-2020, 25 patients with HER2-mutant BTC were enrolled: gallbladder (40%); intrahepatic (24%); extrahepatic (20%); ampulla of Vater (16%). 68% of patients received ≥2 systemic regimens (96% received prior gemcitabine-based regimens). The S310F/Y variant accounted for nearly half of HER2 mutations (n=11). Other HER2 mutations: V777L (n=5); L755S (n=2); V842I (n=2); R678Q (n=2). Confirmed ORR in 25 evaluable patients was 12% (95% CI 3–31%) and CBR was 20% (95% CI 7–41%), including 3 confirmed PRs and 2 patients with SD for ≥16 weeks. Tumor shrinkage was observed in multiple HER2-activating mutations and enriched in gallbladder and extrahepatic subtypes of BTC. Median PFS was 2.8 (95% CI 1.1–3.7) months; median overall survival (OS) was 5.4 (95% CI 3.7–11.7) months. Nine (36%) patients (3 of whom with ECOG PS 2) came off study within 28 (range 6–47) days of treatment due to clinical deterioration (unrelated to study drug) followed by death. The most common treatment-related AEs (any grade) were diarrhea (56%) and vomiting (48%). Diarrhea was the most common Grade 3 event (24%); 4 patients (16%) required a neratinib dose reduction; no patients discontinued treatment due to diarrhea. Conclusions: Neratinib is safe and tolerable in patients with advanced BTC patients and somatic HER2 mutations. The antitumor activity of neratinib appears comparable to current standards of care, with similar PFS and OS in heavily pretreated patients. Analysis of co-occurring oncogenic mutations and response is ongoing, and consideration is being given to neratinib-based combination regimens to further improve outcomes in this setting. Clinical trial information: NCT01953926.