Élez, Elena

TPS3675 Background: Multi-agent chemotherapy regimens (eg, mFOLFOX6) ± anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) or anti-epidermal growth factor regimens are currently the standard of care for patients (pts) with mCRC without targetable mutations. However, the 5-year survival rate remains low at approximately 16% (SEER, 2025). The addition of biological therapies (eg, bevacizumab [bev], an anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody) to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has demonstrated a synergistic antitumor effect in solid tumors. However, ICI monotherapy has limited activity in mismatch repair proficient (pMMR)/microsatellite stable (MSS) mCRC. Simultaneous bispecific targeting of programmed death 1 (PD-1) and VEGF in conjunction with cytotoxic chemotherapy has the potential to enhance antitumor activity. PF-08634404 is a fully human immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4) bispecific antibody targeting PD-1 and VEGF. A phase 2 study of PF-08634404 with XELOX or mFOLFOX6 demonstrated promising antitumor activity with a manageable safety profile in first-line (1L) mCRC (Xu X, ESMO 2025; Abstract 796P). Methods: Symbiotic-GI-03 (NCT07222800) is an ongoing, double-blind, randomized, phase 3 study evaluating the efficacy and safety of 1L PF-08634404 + mFOLFOX6 vs bev + mFOLFOX6. Inclusion criteria are age ≥18 y; mCRC with measurable disease per RECIST 1.1; no prior systemic therapy for metastatic disease; ECOG PS 0 or 1; and adequate hematologic, hepatic, and renal function. Pts with BRAF V600E-mutant or mismatch repair deficient (dMMR)/microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) CRC, active central nervous system metastases, or clinically significant risk of hemorrhage/fistula will be excluded. Approximately 800 pts will be randomized 1:1 to receive PF-08634404 + mFOLFOX6 or bev + mFOLFOX6 until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or death. Randomization will be stratified by region (North America, Europe, or rest of world), RAS status (mutant or wildtype), and presence of liver metastasis (yes or no). The dual primary endpoints are progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review and overall survival; for each, a stratified log-rank test will be used to compare arms. Hazard ratios with corresponding 2-sided 95% CIs will be estimated using a stratified Cox proportional hazards model, and medians will be estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method with corresponding 2-sided 95% CIs calculated using the log(-log) method. Secondary endpoints include PFS by investigator, objective response rate, duration of response, PFS after next-line therapy, safety/tolerability, pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, and patient-reported outcomes. Enrollment began in December 2025. Clinical trial information: NCT07222800 .

158 Background: PIK3CA mutations are common in CRC and may be a negative prognostic factor. INAVO is a potent and selective PI3Kα inhibitor that also promotes mut p110α degradation. BEV and CETUX are standard treatment (tx) components for RAS mut and RAS -wildtype (wt) mCRC, respectively. The Phase I/Ib INTRINSIC open-label umbrella study (NCT04929223) evaluates targeted therapies in biomarker-selected mCRC subpopulations. We report INAVO + BEV and INAVO + CETUX results. Methods: Patients (pts) with PIK3CA mut, RAS mut mCRC received INAVO (9 mg oral once daily) + BEV (intravenous [IV] 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks). Pts with PIK3CA mut, RAS wt mCRC received INAVO + CETUX (IV 400 mg/m 2 then 250 mg/m 2 weekly thereafter). Primary endpoint: confirmed objective response rate (cORR). Secondary endpoints included disease control rate (DCR), duration of response (DoR), and safety. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were exploratory. Results: At the clinical cut-off dates, 16 pts were enrolled in the BEV arm; 35, in the CETUX arm. Most had ≥2 metastatic sites at enrollment (n = 16 [100%] and 30 [85.8%], respectively) and ≥2 prior lines of metastatic therapy (16 [100%] and 28 [80.0%]). In the BEV arm, 3 pts (18.8%) had no prior BEV. In the CETUX arm, 25 pts (71.4%) had no prior CETUX; 17 (48.6%) had prior anti-EGFR therapy. All pts in the BEV arm and 34 in the CETUX arm were evaluated for efficacy and safety. Median follow-up was 9.4 months (mo; interquartile range: 5.5–14.4) and 12.6 mo (8.9–16.6), respectively. Efficacy is shown in the Table. All pts had adverse events (AEs); 15 (93.8%) and 34 (100%), respectively, had tx-related AEs (TRAEs); 5 (31.2%) and 12 (35.3%), grade 3–4 TRAEs; 2 (12.5%) and 11 (32.4%), serious AEs. One grade 5 AE (infusion-related reaction) occurred (CETUX arm). Dose reduction/interruption due to AEs occurred in 12 (75.0%) and 27 (79.4%) pts; tx withdrawal due to AEs, in 0 and 4 (11.8%) pts, respectively. Hyperglycemia was the most common AE, TRAE, and AE leading to dose reduction/interruption in both cohorts. Hypertension was observed more frequently with BEV; dermatitis acneiform and dry skin, with CETUX. Conclusions: INAVO + BEV and INAVO + CETUX showed encouraging efficacy in pts with PIK3CA mut mCRC, with no new or unexpected safety signals. Clinical trial information: NCT04929223 . INAVO + BEV(n = 16) INAVO + CETUX(n = 34) cORR, all PR, n (%) 1 (6.3) 7 (20.6)* SD, n (%) 10 (62.5) 17 (50.0) Progressive disease, n (%) 3 (18.8) 9 (26.5) Missing/NE, n (%) 2 (12.5) 1 (2.9) mDoR, mo (90% CI) 7.7 (NE) 4.4 (4.2–5.3) DCR, n (%) 11 (68.8) 15 (44.1) mPFS, mo (90% CI) 4.2 (2.8–6.8) 3.5 (2.8–4.4) mOS, mo (90% CI) 11.0 (8.5–14.5) 12.8 (10.7–13.8) CI, confidence interval; m, median; NE, not evaluable; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease. *3 pts with PRs received prior anti-EGFR therapy; 1 had a best prior response of SD (last dose 233 days before study tx) and 2 had best prior responses of PRs (last doses 134 and 171 days before study tx).

142 Background: Fruquintinib (F) is a highly selective, oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor of all 3 vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFRs -1, -2, -3) that is approved by the US FDA and in the EU, UK, and Japan for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), regardless of biomarker status. FRESCO-2 (NCT04322539) met its primary endpoint demonstrating significantly improved overall survival (OS) with F + best supportive care (BSC) vs placebo (P) + BSC. This subgroup analysis assessed landmark survival of all FRESCO-2 patients (pts), and baseline (BL) characteristics and safety data of pts treated with F who had OS ≥10 months (mos) compared with the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (pop). Methods: Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive F 5 mg or matching P, by mouth, once daily, 3 weeks on, 1 week off, + BSC. Pts had received prior chemotherapy, anti-VEGF therapy and, if RAS wild type, anti-EGFR therapy; and had prior exposure to trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) and/or regorafenib. The hazard ratio (HR) between the two treatment arms was calculated from a stratified Cox proportional hazard model with treatment group as the only covariate in the model. Results: In the ITT pop, OS was improved with F vs P (HR 0.66); OS rates (95% confidence intervals [CIs]) at 6 and 9 mos were 60.4% (55.9–64.9) vs 41.5% (35.0–48.0) and 41.1% (36.4–45.8) vs 28.2% (22.1–34.3), respectively. Progression-free survival (PFS) rates (95% CIs) at 6 and 9 mos were 23.8% (19.7–28.0) vs 1.1% (0–2.6) and 11.3% (8.1–14.6) vs 0.5% (0–1.6), respectively. Of 461 pts who received F, 113 (24.5%) had OS ≥10 mos (range 10.0–18.9) with a median duration of F treatment of 6.3 mos (range 0.7–19.1). Among pts receiving F, a higher proportion (≥10% difference) of pts with OS ≥10 mos had no liver metastases (mets) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0 at BL compared with the ITT pop (Table). In pts with OS ≥10 mos, 61.9% experienced a grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse event compared with 62.7% in the ITT pop. Conclusions: Longer-term OS and PFS rates at 6 and 9 mos were higher with F vs P in the FRESCO-2 ITT pop. The data show a higher proportion of pts with OS ≥10 mos had an absence of liver mets and ECOG PS 0 at BL than the ITT pop. The safety profile of F in pts with OS ≥10 mos was consistent with the ITT pop. Clinical trial information: NCT04322539 . BL characteristics of pts treated with F with OS ≥10 mos vs ITT pop. BL characteristic Pts with OS ≥10 mos (n=113) ITT pop(n=461) ECOG PS (0 / 1), % 54.0 / 46.0 42.5 / 57.5 Median time since 1 st CRC diagnosis, mos 52.0 47.2 Primary tumor location at 1 st diagnosis (colon / rectum / both), % 51.3 / 35.4 / 13.3 60.5 / 31.0 / 8.5 Primary site at 1 st diagnosis (colon left / colon right), % 42.5 / 15.9 41.6 / 21.0 Liver mets, % 58.4 73.5 Median duration of mCRC, mos 42.7 37.9 Prior lines of therapy for mCRC (≤3 / >3), % 26.5 / 73.5 27.1 / 72.9 Prior TAS-102, % 46.9 52.1 Prior regorafenib, % 12.4 8.7

3509 Background: HER2 overexpression/amplification (HER2+) occurs in ~3%-5% of pts with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and up to ~10% of pts with RAS/BRAF wild-type (WT) mCRC. The primary results of the MOUNTAINEER study (NCT03043313) demonstrated that the combination of tucatinib (TUC), a highly selective HER2-directed TKI, and trastuzumab (Tras) was well tolerated with clinically meaningful activity in pts with chemo-refractory HER2+ mCRC. Confirmed ORR was 38.1%, median DOR was 12.4 months, and median OS was 24.1 months. Here, we present results from the final analysis of MOUNTAINEER. Methods: MOUNTAINEER is a multi-center, open-label, randomized, phase 2 trial. Eligible pts had HER2+ and RAS WT mCRC with progression on or intolerance to last systemic therapy. Previous HER2-directed therapies were not permitted. The trial consisted of Cohort A, comprising pts treated with TUC (300 mg PO BID) + Tras (8 mg/kg IV then 6 mg/kg IV Q3W), as well as pts randomized 4:3 to receive TUC+Tras (Cohort B) or TUC monotherapy (Cohort C). Pts randomized to Cohort C were allowed to crossover and receive TUC+Tras on radiographic progression or if they did not achieve a complete or partial response by Week 12. Study endpoints evaluated at final analysis include DOR per BICR, PFS per BICR, OS, and safety. Results: The median duration of follow-up was 32.4 months (IQR, 25.1-46.7), with an additional 16.1 months of follow-up since the primary analysis (data cutoff, 02-Nov-2023). A total of 116 pts received at least 1 dose of study treatment (Cohorts A+B, N = 86; Cohort C, N = 30). In Cohorts A+B, median DOR per BICR was 15.2 months (95% CI, 8.9-20.5), median PFS per BICR was 8.1 months (95% CI, 4.2-10.2), and median OS was 23.9 months (95% CI, 18.7-28.3). In Cohort C post-crossover (N = 28), median DOR was not reached (95% CI, 2.8 months-NE). Median OS in Cohort C was 21.1 months (95% CI, 17.0-NE). The most common TEAEs in Cohorts A+B were diarrhea (66.3%), fatigue (44.2%), and nausea (34.9%). The majority of TEAEs were low grade, and rates were stable with longer follow-up. The most common grade ≥3 TEAE was hypertension (7.0%). TEAEs leading to TUC discontinuation in Cohorts A+B occurred in 5.8% of pts, which was unchanged from the primary analysis. In Cohort C, the most common TEAEs post-crossover were diarrhea (39.3%), back pain (21.4%), and pyrexia (21.4%); the most common grade ≥3 TEAE was AST increase (10.7%). No deaths resulted from TEAEs in any cohort and no new safety signals were identified. Conclusions: TUC+Tras continued to be well tolerated with sustained efficacy in pts with chemo-refractory RAS WT HER2+ mCRC, demonstrating clinically meaningful activity of the combination on longer follow-up. TUC+Tras is an important chemotherapy-free treatment option in HER2+ mCRC. TUC+Tras is being further evaluated in the first-line setting in combination with chemotherapy in the ongoing phase 3 MOUNTAINEER-03 trial (NCT05253651) for pts with HER2+ mCRC. Clinical trial information: NCT03043313 .

Background Standard first-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) include fluoropyrimidine-containing regimens with oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan and a biologic agent. Immunotherapy may enhance antitumor activity in combination with standard therapies in patients with mCRC. Here, we present phase 2 results of nivolumab plus standard-of-care therapy (SOC; 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin/bevacizumab) versus SOC in the first-line treatment of patients with mCRC (CheckMate 9X8). Methods CheckMate 9X8 was a multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase 2/3 trial. Eligible patients were at least 18 years of age with unresectable mCRC and no prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive nivolumab 240 mg plus SOC or SOC alone every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1. Secondary endpoints included PFS by investigator assessment; objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate, duration of response, and time to response, all by BICR and investigator assessments; overall survival; and safety. Preplanned exploratory biomarker analyses were also performed. Results From February 2018 through April 2019, 310 patients were enrolled, of which 195 patients were randomized to nivolumab plus SOC (n=127) or SOC (n=68). At 21.5-month minimum follow-up, PFS with nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC did not meet the prespecified threshold for statistical significance; median PFS by BICR was 11.9 months in both arms (HR, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.53 to 1.23); p=0.30). Higher PFS rates after 12 months (18 months: 28% vs 9%), higher ORR (60% vs 46%), and durable responses (median 12.9 vs 9.3 months) were observed with nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC. Grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 75% versus 48% of patients; no new safety signals were identified. Conclusions The CheckMate 9X8 trial investigating first-line nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC in patients with mCRC did not meet its primary endpoint of PFS by BICR. Nivolumab plus SOC showed numerically higher PFS rates after 12 months, a higher response rate, and more durable responses compared with SOC alone, with acceptable safety. Further investigation to identify subgroups of patients with mCRC that may benefit from nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC in the first-line setting is warranted. Trial registration number NCT03414983 .

3528 Background: Tucatinib (TUC) is a highly selective HER2-directed TKI approved by the FDA in combination w/trastuzumab (Tras) for treatment (tx) of pts w/ RAS wild-type HER2+ unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) that has progressed following tx w/ fluoropyrimidine-, oxaliplatin-, and irinotecan-based chemotherapy. There are currently no established best practices for HER2 testing/interpretation in mCRC. Here we present results of central HER2 testing across multiple platforms and response to tx for MOUNTAINEER pts treated w/ TUC + Tras based on central HER2 status. Methods: MOUNTAINEER (NCT03043313) enrolled pts w/ local HER2+ mCRC using ≥1 method: IHC, ISH, and/or NGS testing; retrospective central assessment of HER2 status was performed on multiple platforms. Pts in cohorts A+B were treated w/ TUC + Tras; pts in cohort C were treated w/ TUC monotherapy. Confirmed objective response rates (cORRs) using RECIST v1.1 per BICR, DOR, and PFS were calculated for pts treated w/ TUC + Tras based on each central testing method. Results: 114 pts were enrolled in cohorts A (n = 45), B (n = 39), and C (n = 30) w/ HER2+ tumors per ≥1 local testing method. Of samples submitted for central testing for Cohorts A and B, 70 per IHC/FISH, 50 per tissue NGS, and 71 per blood NGS had evaluable results. In all cohorts, there was 81.0% (95% CI, 68.6-90.1) agreement between blood and tissue NGS, 92.6% (95% CI, 83.7-97.6) between IHC/FISH and tissue NGS, and 79.5% (95% CI, 69.2-87.6) between IHC/FISH and blood NGS. In cohorts A and B, pts w/ HER2+ tumors by central IHC/ISH had a mDOR of 16.4 months (95% CI: 10.6-25.5) and mPFS of 10.1 months (95% CI: 4.2-15.2). cORR was 41.1% to 47.7% for the 3 assays. Detailed HER2 results are presented in the Table. Conclusions: Percent agreement of HER2 status was highest w/ tissue-based platforms. Detection of HER2 amplification by ctNDA NGS is useful; however, pts w/o HER2 amplification should be confirmed w/ a tissue-based assay. HER2 status by all 3 platforms predicted tx response to TUC + Tras. cORR in IHC2+/ISH+ was numerically lower but remained clinically relevant. These data support use of the above methods to identify HER2+ mCRC patients that may benefit from TUC + Tras. Clinical trial information: NCT03043313 . [Table: see text]

198 Background: HER2 overexpression/amplification (HER2+) occurs in 3%-5% of patients (pts) w/ metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Rates of HER2+ can increase to ~10% in pts w/ RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC tumors. The MOUNTAINEER trial (NCT03043313) evaluated the efficacy and safety of the investigational combination of tucatinib with trastuzumab in pts with HER2+ and RAS wild-type mCRC. Established regional guidelines for mCRC recommend HER2 testing and HER2-directed treatment options; however, there is currently no established best practice for HER2 testing and interpretation in mCRC. Here, we present data from a concordance analysis comparing breast and gastric HER2 testing algorithms in the mCRC setting. Methods: The MOUNTAINEER trial enrolled pts w/ HER2+ mCRC identified using ≥1 method: tissue-based local immunohistochemistry (IHC), in situ hybridization (ISH), and/or next-generation sequencing (NGS) testing. Archival or fresh tumor tissue was submitted to a sponsor-designated central laboratory for confirmatory HER2 testing w/ IHC/FISH per the package insert of the FDA approved assay and scored by both the breast and gastric algorithms for HER2 IHC. A positive result per the breast scoring criteria for IHC requires circumferential membrane staining for HER2, while the gastric criteria allows for circumferential, basolateral, or lateral staining patterns. Results: A total of 114 pts were enrolled with HER2+ tumors per ≥1 local testing methods; 69 pts were HER2+ by NGS, 46 by IHC 3+, and 36 by ISH. Of 105 pts who had tissue available for central HER2 testing w/IHC/FISH, 98 had valid HER2 results; 82/98 (83.7%) of pts had tumors centrally confirmed as HER2+ using both the breast and gastric algorithms. Tissue samples from pts in the MOUNTAINEER trial had 100% concordance between breast and gastric algorithms in HER2 status and 99% concordance in HER2 IHC score. Conclusions: Central pathology testing using both the breast and gastric criteria showed high concordance between these two commonly used algorithms. A high central confirmation rate of local HER2+ results was also observed. These data support the use of either the breast or gastric algorithms to identify HER2+ mCRC tumors until an FDA-approved HER2 assay is available for mCRC. Clinical trial information: NCT03043313 . [Table: see text]

8 Background: Standard 1L therapies for mCRC include a fluoropyrimidine with oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan, and a biologic agent. NIVO may enhance antitumor activity in combination with 1L standard therapies within a subset of patients (pts) with mCRC. CheckMate 9X8 evaluated NIVO + mFOLFOX6/BEV vs mFOLFOX6/BEV in 1L mCRC (NCT03414983). Methods: Adults with previously untreated, unresectable, mCRC were randomized 2:1 to NIVO 240 mg + mFOLFOX6/BEV Q2W (NIVO + standard-of-care [SOC]) or mFOLFOX6/BEV Q2W (SOC). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR) per RECIST v1.1. Key secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), time to response (TTR), duration of response (DOR), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: 195 pts were randomized to NIVO + SOC (n = 127) or SOC (n = 68). Median (range) follow-up was 23.7 (0–33.2) months (mo; NIVO + SOC) vs 23.2 (0–32.3) mo (SOC). Median (range) duration of therapy was 9.9 (0.1–31.8+) mo (NIVO + SOC) and 7.7 (0.1–26.7+) mo (SOC). The HR (95% CI) for PFS was 0.81 (0.53–1.23; P = 0.30), which did not meet the prespecified threshold for statistical significance (median PFS, 11.9 mo in both arms; Table). PFS rates after 12 mo were higher with NIVO + SOC vs SOC (Table). ORR was 60% (NIVO + SOC) and 46% (SOC; odds ratio 1.72 [95% CI 0.96–3.10]) and median (95% CI) DOR was 12.9 (9.0–13.1) mo (NIVO + SOC) and 9.3 (7.5–11.3) mo (SOC; Table). Rates of grade 3−4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were higher with NIVO + SOC; however, no new safety signals were identified (Table). Biomarker analyses, including tumor mutational burden and baseline CD8 levels, will be presented. Conclusions: The primary endpoint of PFS was not met; however, NIVO + SOC showed higher PFS rates after 12 mo, a higher response rate, and more durable responses compared with SOC, along with acceptable safety, in 1L mCRC. Clinical trial information: NCT03414983. [Table: see text]

TPS149 Background: METamp is a secondary, or co-driving, genetic change in pts with mCRC and acquired resistance to anti-EGFR therapy, which can contribute to disease progression. In EGFR-resistant pts with mCRC and METamp, MET inhibition + an anti-EGFR agent could achieve disease control by targeting emerging MET pathway activation and maintaining EGFR pathway inhibition. Tepotinib is an oral, once-daily, highly selective, potent MET tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). Tepotinib + the EGFR TKI gefitinib demonstrated improved outcomes in pts with EGFR-mutant METamp non-small cell lung cancer and acquired EGFR TKI resistance vs chemotherapy (INSIGHT: NCT01982955). In these pts, progression-free survival (PFS) was 16.6 vs 4.2 months (HR = 0.13; 90% CI: 0.04, 0.43) and overall survival (OS) was 37.3 vs 13.1 months (HR = 0.08; 90% CI: 0.01, 0.51). In pts with mCRC and acquired resistance to anti-EGFR antibody therapy due to METamp, tepotinib + anti-EGFR antibody cetuximab may be active and therefore provide an effective therapeutic option. Methods: This Phase II, multicenter, single-arm, open-label study will assess preliminary antitumor activity, safety and tolerability, and explore pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles of tepotinib + cetuximab in pts with RAS/BRAF wild-type left-sided mCRC and acquired resistance to anti-EGFR antibody-targeted therapy due to METamp. A safety run-in (6-12 pts) will evaluate the recommended Phase II dose of tepotinib to be used in combination with cetuximab (endpoint:dose-limiting toxicities). Enrollment is based on a confirmed advanced left-sided CRC diagnosis, with RAS/BRAF wild-type, documented previous anti-EGFR therapy and acquired resistance on the most recent anti-EGFR antibody and METamp confirmed by liquid and/or tissue biopsy. Pts must be ≥18 years old and have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0/1 and normal organ function. The study will screen sufficient pts to account for setting-specific METamp heterogenicity. Approximately 42 pts are planned to receive study treatment: ~22 in Cohort A (tepotinib second-line, outside US) and 20 in Cohort B (tepotinib ≥third-line, US only). Primary endpoint:investigator-assessed objective response (RECIST 1.1). Secondary endpoints are investigator-assessed duration of response (DoR) and PFS (RECIST 1.1), OS, tolerability and safety (NCI-CTCAE v5.0) and cetuximab immunogenicity (measured by antidrug antibody assays at the start and end of treatment). Additional endpoints include assessment of tepotinib and cetuximab PK profiles and expression of biomarkers of resistance (from blood and/or tissue samples). Retrospective assessment of best overall response, DoR and PFS by an independent review committee may be conducted. No formal statistical hypothesis will be tested in this exploratory study. Clinical trial information: NCT04515394.