Secord, Angeles Alvarez

TPS5642 Background: The landscape in the management of recurrent or persistent endometrial cancer (EC) continues to evolve. Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) as monotherapy or when combined with the VEGF-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor, lenvatinib, have demonstrated promising response rates in patients (pts) with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H)/mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) and MS-stable (MSS)/MMR-proficient (MMRp) EC, respectively. Recent studies have also shown a benefit with adding ICI to standard of care chemotherapy in the frontline setting. Pts with MSI-H/dMMR tumors seem to derive the greatest benefit. Approximately, 30% of recurrent EC pts fall into this category. Pairing ICI with targeted therapies carries the potential to elicit prolonged anti-tumor effects. Atezolizumab (Atezo) is a humanized monoclonal PD-L1 inhibitor that has demonstrated monotherapy antitumor activity in relapsed recurrent EC, and other solid tumors (e.g. NSCLC, HCC) as monotherapy and as part of combinatorial therapy. The AFT-50/EndoMAP study is a phase IB/II non-randomized, multicenter, 2-arm, multi-cohort platform trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of biomarker-driven combination regimens, both with Atezo (AFT-50A) and without Atezo (AFT-50B) with biomarker-defined targeted agents in pts with recurrent or persistent EC. Methods: Eligible pts have recurrent or persistent EC with no more than 2 prior lines of therapy. FoundationOne CDx (F1CDx) NGS assay will be used for genomic tumor profiling. In AFT-50A, pts may be eligible for one of the following doublets: Atezo+talazoparib (tumors with genomic loss of heterozygosity (gLOH ≥16%), Atezo+Trastuzumab emtansine (ERBB2/HER2 mutated or amplified tumors), and Atezo+Tiragolumab (MSI-H and/or TMB-H). The Atezo+bevacizumab (biomarker unmatched) and Atezo+ipatasertib (PIK3CA/PTEN/AKT1-altered tumors) cohorts have completed accrual. Each cohort will enroll ~20 pts with potential adjustment to account for statistical and clinical considerations. AFT-50A pts will receive Atezo in addition to a targeted agent (per study-approved dosing schedule) until progression, unacceptable toxicity, pt withdrawal, death, or study termination. AFT-50B pts will be eligible for inavolisib (PIK3CAm/PTEN and AKT1wt-altered tumors) + letrozole or giredestrant + abemaciclib (RB1wt, estrogen receptor positive tumors). The primary endpoint for AFT-50A is confirmed overall response rate (ORR) for each arm, and for AFT-50B is 6-month progression free survival. Secondary endpoints include disease control rate, duration of response, OS, safety and tolerability. As a platform study, additional arms may be added, as supported by evolving understanding of EC and molecular targets. EndoMAP is actively enrolling at 20 sites in the US with a target of 25 sites nationwide. Clinical trial information: NCT04486352 .

TPS5634 Background: The prognosis for women with recurrent or persistent EC after progressing on first-line chemotherapy is poor, with a median overall survival (OS) of 12 months, highlighting the need for more efficacious therapies for this population. Immune checkpoint inhibitors either as monotherapy or when combined with kinase inhibitors have recently demonstrated encouraging response rates in pts with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H)/mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) and MS-stable (MSS)/MMR-proficient (MMRp) EC, respectively. Atezo is a humanized monoclonal anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor that has demonstrated monotherapy antitumor activity with an acceptable safety profile in relapsed recurrent EC. Atezo has shown compelling clinical efficacy for pts with certain solid tumors (e.g., urothelial, NSCLC, triple negative breast cancer) as monotherapy and as part of combinatorial therapy. The AFT-50 EndoMAP trial is a platform trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Atezo in combination with biomarker-defined targeted agents in pts with recurrent or persistent EC. Recognizing pts may have either progressed through or received a checkpoint inhibitor in a prior line of therapy, a non atezo cohort will also be open to enrollment. Methods: This is a phase IB/II non-randomized, multicenter, multicohort, biomarker-driven platform study consisting of two cohorts: A (atezo containing) and B (non atezo). Eligible pts have recurrent or persistent EC and have received no more than 2 prior lines of therapy. FoundationOne CDx (F1CDx) NGS assay will be used for genomic tumor profiling. In cohort A, pts may be eligible for one of the following doublets: Atezo+ipatasertib (PIK3CA/PTEN/AKT1-altered cancers), Atezo+talazoparib (tumors with genomic loss of heterozygosity (LOH) ≥16%), Atezo+Trastuzumab emtansine (ERBB2/HER2 mutated and/or amplified tumors), Atezo+Tiragolumab (MSI-H and/or TMB>10 mut/MB), and Atezo+bevacizumab (biomarker unmatched). Pts will receive Atezo in addition to the targeted agent (at the study approved dosing schedule) until progression, unacceptable toxicity, pt or physician decision to withdraw from the study, death, or study termination. Pts in cohort B, will be eligible for inavolisib (PIK3CA/PTEN/AKT1-altered cancers) + letrozole. Each cohort will enroll ~20 pts; however, the exact size of the cohort may be adjusted. The primary endpoint for Cohort A is confirmed overall response rate (ORR) for each cohort, and for Cohort B is progression free survival at 6 months. Secondary endpoints include disease control rate, duration of response, OS, safety and tolerability, 6-month PFS (cohort A). As a platform study, additional arms may be added, as supported by evolving understanding of EC and molecular targets. EndoMAP is actively enrolling at 17 sites in the US with a target of 25 sites nationwide. Clinical trial information: NCT04486352 .

Abstract BACKGROUND: Patients with ROC have limited treatment options in later lines of therapy, as many become platinum-resistant or -ineligible. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) treatment is one option, however these agents are currently not approved for BRCAwt patients in the treatment setting. Niraparib, a PARPi, has demonstrated increased progression-free survival vs placebo as maintenance therapy for platinum-responsive ROC. Niraparib was effective regardless of BRCAmut or homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status, although an increased treatment effect was observed in the HRDpos population. QUADRA (NCT02354586) evaluated niraparib treatment in heavily pretreated ROC patients, regardless of BRCAmut or HRD status, platinum sensitivity, or prior PARPi use. METHODS: Eligible patients had grade 2-3 serous ROC, ≥3 prior chemotherapy lines, and measurable disease. Patients were evaluated for BRCAmut and HRD status (MyChoice HRD Test). Patients received niraparib 300 mg once daily until progression; dose could be lowered to 200 mg or 100 mg due to treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1 in patients treated in 4th or 5th line who were HRDpos, platinum sensitive, and PARPi naïve. RESULTS: 463 patients were treated. Of these, 161 were platinum refractory, 151 platinum resistant, and 120 platinum sensitive to their last line of platinum therapy. Of note, 83 patients were primary platinum resistant or refractory (42 and 41, respectively). Median number of prior lines of therapy was 4 (range 2-16), and 27% of patients were treated in 6th or later line. 100% of patients received prior platinum, 99.6% received prior taxane, 81% received prior doxorubicin, 63% received prior bevacizumab, and 59% received prior gemcitabine. In the primary efficacy population (N=45), ORR was 29% (95% CI: 16-44, P=0.0003), disease control rate (DCR) was 71% (95% CI: 56-84), and duration of response (DOR) was 9.2 months (95% CI: 5.9-NE); overall survival (OS) was not reached (95% CI: 18.5-NE). The efficacy outcomes in all 456 patients with measurable disease at baseline treated in 4th or later line demonstrated a DCR of 49% with 2 complete responses (CR), 36 partial responses (PR), and 187 patients with stable disease (SD). The responses were durable with a median DOR of 9.4 months, a clinical benefit rate (CR+PR+SD) at 16 weeks of 29%, and median OS of 17.2 months (95% CI: 14.9-19.8) among all patients treated in 4th or later line. 266 (57.5%) patients had grade ≥3 treatment-related TEAEs. Grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia event (thrombocytopenia or decreased platelet count) by dose at onset of the event was 27.5% at 300 mg, 4.7% at 200 mg, and 2.7% at 100 mg. The other most common grade ≥3 TEAEs were anemia (26.3%) and neutropenia (8.2%). Hematologic TEAEs were most frequent in the first month and decreased in frequency and severity after dose reduction during months 2-3. CONCLUSIONS: Niraparib demonstrated durable anticancer activity in this heavily treated (≥3 lines) ROC population, including platinum-resistant or BRCAwt patients. Toxicities were consistent with previous niraparib studies. DISCLOSURE Funded by TESARO, Inc. Citation Format: Kathleen Moore, Angeles Secord, Melissa Geller, David Miller, Noelle Cloven, Gini Fleming, Andrea E. Wahner Hendrickson, Masoud Azodi, Paul Disilvestro, Amit Oza, Mihaela Cristea, Jonathan S. Berek, John Chan, Yong Li, Kaiming Sun, Katarina Luptakova, Ursula A. Matulonis, Bradley J. Monk. QUADRA: A PHASE 2, OPEN-LABEL, SINGLE-ARM STUDY TO EVALUATE SINGLE-AGENT NIRAPARIB TREATMENT IN PATIENTS WITH RELAPSED OVARIAN CANCER (ROC) WHO HAVE RECEIVED ≥3 PRIOR CHEMOTHERAPY REGIMENS [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 12th Biennial Ovarian Cancer Research Symposium; Sep 13-15, 2018; Seattle, WA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2019;25(22 Suppl):Abstract nr NT-101.

Abstract Purpose: GOG-0218, a double-blind placebo-controlled phase III trial, compared carboplatin and paclitaxel with placebo, bevacizumab followed by placebo, or bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Results demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS), but no overall survival (OS) benefit with bevacizumab. Blood samples were collected for biomarker analyses. Experimental Design: Plasma samples were analyzed via multiplex ELISA technology for seven prespecified biomarkers [IL6, Ang-2, osteopontin (OPN), stromal cell–derived factor-1 (SDF-1), VEGF-D, IL6 receptor (IL6R), and GP130]. The predictive value of each biomarker with respect to PFS and OS was assessed using a protein marker by treatment interaction term within the framework of a Cox proportional hazards model. Prognostic markers were identified using Cox models adjusted for baseline covariates. Results: Baseline samples were available from 751 patients. According to our prespecified analysis plan, IL6 was predictive of a therapeutic advantage with bevacizumab for PFS (P = 0.007) and OS (P = 0.003). IL6 and OPN were found to be negative prognostic markers for both PFS and OS (P < 0.001). Patients with high median IL6 levels (dichotomized at the median) treated with bevacizumab had longer PFS (14.2 vs. 8.7 months) and OS (39.6 vs. 33.1 months) compared with placebo. Conclusions: The inflammatory cytokine IL6 may be predictive of therapeutic benefit from bevacizumab when combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel. Aligning with results observed in patients with renal cancer treated with antiangiogenic therapies, it appears plasma IL6 may also define those patients with EOC more or less likely to benefit from the addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy.

Background: Prospective, randomized trials are needed to determine optimal treatment approaches for palliative care problems such as malignant bowel obstruction (MBO). Randomization poses unique issues for such studies, especially with divergent treatment approaches and varying levels of equipoise. We report our experience accruing randomized patients to the Prospective Comparative Effectiveness Trial for Malignant Bowel Obstruction (SWOG S1316) study, comparing surgical and nonsurgical management of MBO. Methods: Patients with MBO who were surgical candidates and had treatment equipoise were accrued and offered randomization to surgical or nonsurgical management. Patients choosing nonrandomization were offered prospective observation. Trial details are listed on www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT #02270450). An accrual algorithm was developed to enhance enrollment. Results: Accrual is ongoing with 176 patients enrolled. Most (89%) patients chose nonrandomization, opting for nonsurgical management. Of 25 sites that have accrued to this study, 6 enrolled patients on the randomization arm. Approximately 59% (20/34) of the randomization accrual goal has been achieved. Patient-related factors and clinician bias have been the most prevalent reasons for lack of randomization. An algorithm was developed from clinician experience to aid randomization. Using principles in this tool, repeated physician conversations discussing treatment options and goals of care, and a supportive team–approach has helped increase accrual. Conclusions: Experience gained from the S1316 study can aid future palliative care trials. Although difficult, it is possible to randomize patients to palliative studies by giving clinicians clear recommendations utilizing an algorithm of conversation, allotment of necessary time to discuss the trial, and encouragement to overcome internal bias.