Citations

5053 Background: Genomic aberrations associated with resistance/response to AA/P are not known. In a prospective study we assessed whole-exome/RNA-seq based aberrations in CRPC metastatic biopsies for identifying molecular markers associated with primary resistance and response duration. Methods: Sequencing of metastatic biopsies was performed for analyzing molecular aberrations that predict primary resistance (defined as progression at 12-weeks of therapy (non-responders) using PSA, RECIST, bone scan criteria per PCWG2). Gene network analysis was performed in genes mutated more frequently in non-responders and in genes differentially expressed between non-responders and responders using a “risk ratio” (RR) of ≥2. Cox regression models with multiple gene network pathways were used for determining association with time to treatment change (TTTC). Results: Of 92 enrolled pts 82 had complete whole-exome, RNA-seq & 12-week outcome data available for analysis. At 12-weeks 33/82 had progressed. Using a RR of ≥2, 113 genes were more frequently mutated in non-responders & 292 in responders. In non-responders, gene network analysis revealed frequent mutations in Wnt/β-catenin pathway genes; frequent deletion of negative regulators of Wnt pathway ( DKK4, SFRP2, LRP6). Gene expression analyses revealed significantly reduced expression levels of Wnt/β-catenin pathway inhibitors and increased expression levels of cell cycle proliferation (CCP) genes in non-responders. Median study follow up was 32 months during which time 58/82 pts progressed and switched treatments. Median TTTC was 10.1 months (IQR:4.4-24.1). In multivariate analysis CCP scores of ≥50 predicted shorter TTTC (HR = 2.11, 95% CI: 1.17-3.80; p = 0.01). Conclusions: In metastases Wnt/β-catenin pathway activation is associated with primary AA/P resistance and increased CCP with acquired drug resistance. These findings offer molecular based predictive biomarkers in CRPC stage treatment. Clinical trial information: NCT#01953640.

3504 Background: CALGB 80405 was a randomized phase III trial that found no difference in OS in first-line mCRC pts treated with either bevacizumab (Bev) or cetuximab (Cet). Primary tumor DNA from 361 pts, including KRAS mutant (mut) pts, has been profiled for somatic gene mutations/ML/MSI to discover molecular markers of OS. Methods: Mutations in 11 genes were determined by PCR, MSI by microsatellite analysis, and ML by next-generation sequencing (FoundationOne). Cox proportional hazard models are used, stratified by prior XRT and +/- adjuvant chemotherapy; adjusted by age, race, gender, synchronous vs. metachronous, liver metastases, sidedness, all RAS. Results: BRAF: Mut pts had shorter OS than wild-type (wt) pts (HR 1.92, 95% CI 1.34,2.75; p<0.001); HR 1.65 (1.09,2.50) after adjusting for sidedness (p 0.022). In mut pts longer OS is observed in Bev arm vs. Cet arm (p 0.041); in wt pts no arm difference is observed (p 0.291, table). MSI: OS does not differ between MSI-H and MSI-S pts (HR 0.78 [0.40, 1.52], p 0.450). In MSI-H pts longer OS is observed in Bev arm vs. Cet arm (p 0.002); in MSI-S pts no difference is observed (p 0.305, table). ML: Hypermutated MSI-H pts are excluded. In a subset of 205 pts, pts with ML>5 (N=93) have longer OS than pts with ML≤5 (N=112) (HR 0.65 [0.42,1.00], p 0.048). In Bev arm higher ML confers longer OS than lower ML (HR 0.85 [0.80,0.96], p 0.004); in Cet arm no difference is observed (HR 0.99 [0.90,1.09], p 0.862). Conclusions: BRAF is a strong negative prognostic factor in mCRC, even when sidedness is taken into account. ML is a novel marker for further evaluation. The effect of Bev and Cet in either BRAF mut or MSI-H pts should be tested in larger datasets. Updated results from more screened samples will be presented. [Table: see text]

1005 Background: Evidence-based treatments (tx) for metastatic, HER2+ BCBM are limited. We previously found a central nervous system (CNS) objective response rate (ORR) of 8% (95% CI 2-22%) for the irreversible, EGFR/HER2-targeted kinase inhibitor, neratinib. To enhance CNS activity, we evaluated the combination of neratinib + capecitabine in a subsequent cohort, and report results here. Methods: Pts with measurable BCBM (≥ 1 cm in longest dimension) and no prior lapatinib or capecitabine were eligible. All but 3 had CNS progression after local CNS tx. During 21 day cycles, pts received capecitabine 750 mg/m2 twice daily x 14 days followed by 7 days off + neratinib 240 mg orally once daily. Loperamide prophylaxis (16 mg total daily) was recommended during cycle 1. Brain MRI and non-CNS imaging were repeated every 2 cycles until 18 wks, then every 3 cycles. The primary endpoint was composite CNS ORR, requiring all of the following: ≥50% reduction in volumetric sum of target CNS lesions (central review, VORR), no progression of non-target or non-CNS lesions, no new lesions, no escalating steroids, and no progressive neurologic signs/symptoms. We used a two-stage design with hypotheses ORR 15% and 35% (error rates 5% and 20%), responses in ≥5/19 pts to enter 2ndstage; responses in ≥9/35 [26%] pts to be promising. Results: 39 pts enrolled between 4/2014-11/2016 (2 withdrew before tx, 37 analyzed); median age 51, median prior metastatic lines 2 (range 0-6), 65% had prior WBRT. As of 11/15/16, 23 (62%) patients are alive and 7 remain on protocol tx; median number of cycles initiated = 5 (range 1-26). 18 women (49%) had a VORR (95% CI 32-66%, neurologic exams not yet available on all pts). Overall 12-month survival is 63% (95% CI 43%-77%); 4/7 pts still on protocol therapy have not yet reached 6 cycles. No pts had grade 4 toxicity; 18 (49%) had grade 3 toxicity, with diarrhea most common (32%), and 6 pts discontinued tx for toxicity. Conclusions: The combination of neratinib and capecitabine is active for BCBM with VORR in nearly half of pts, supporting further development of the regimen for BCBM. Updated results will be presented at the meeting. Clinical trial information: NCT01494662.

LBA1 The full, final text of this abstract will be available at abstracts.asco.org at 7:30 AM (EDT) on Sunday, June 4, 2017, and in the Annual Meeting Proceedings online supplement to the June 20, 2017, issue of the Journal of Clinical Oncology. Onsite at the Meeting, this abstract will be printed in the Sunday edition of ASCO Daily News.