Citations

1 Background: To determine whether changing chemotherapy (CT) during pre-op chemoradiation (CRT) based on response to induction CT by 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose PET imaging can lead to improved pathologic complete response (pCR) in patients (pts) with resectable esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinomas. Methods: 257 eligible pts were enrolled, underwent baseline PET scan, and were randomized to one of 2 induction CT arms: Modified FOLFOX-6 (oxaliplatin, leucovorin, 5-FU), days 1, 15, 29 or Carboplatin/Paclitaxel (CP), days 1, 8, 22, 29. Repeat PET was performed days 36-42; change in max standardized uptake value (SUV) from baseline was assessed. PET non-responders (≤35% decrease in SUV – PET-NR) crossed over to alternative CT regimen during CRT (50.4Gy/28 fractions). PET responders (>35% decrease in SUV – PET-R) continued on same CT during CRT. Pts underwent surgery 6 wks post-CRT. Pts evaluable if had surgery, disease progression (PD), death due to disease, were unresectable or had adverse event (AE). Primary endpoint was pCR in PET-NR who crossed over to alternative CT (expected 5% under H0 to 20% under Ha). Results: Pre-audit PET response data after induction CT and pCR rates after CRT and surgery are shown in the table. For PET-NR who crossed over to alternative CT during CRT, pCR was 15.6%; 95% CI (0.08, 0.26). Conclusions: Efficacy criteria were met for an improvement in pCR rates among pts who were PET-NR after induction CT and received alternative CT during CRT for esophageal and GEJ adenoca. Pts receiving induction and concurrent CP had an unexpectedly low pCR. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882 Clinical trial information: NCT01333033. [Table: see text]

In this Technical Note, we describe an in‐house video goggles feedback system assembled using several commercially available products. This goggle video feedback system is currently being used at University of Louisville and Mayo Clinic for both CT simulation and linac treatment delivery. The setup details, including specific recommendations, are provided, along with an alternative option for using the video goggles system.PACS number: 07.07Hj

224 Background: In the phase 3 RADIANT-3 trial, everolimus (EVE) demonstrated significantly improved median progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo (PBO) (11.0 vs 4.6 months; HR=0.35, p < 0.0001) in patients (pts) with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNET) (Yao et al, NEJM, 2011). Here we present a planned exploratory analysis by prior chemotherapy (chemo) use. Methods: Pts with progressive low- or intermediate-grade pNET were prospectively stratified by prior chemo use and randomized (1:1) to EVE 10 mg/d (n = 207) or PBO (n = 203) plus best supportive care. Results: Of the 410 pts, 206 (50%) had received prior chemo and 204 (50%) were chemo naive. Baseline characteristics (age, sex, race, tumor type, histologic grade) and baseline tumor biomarker levels were similar for pts with/without prior chemo. More chemo-naive pts were newly diagnosed (time since initial diagnosis ≤ 6 mo: 50 [25%] vs. 7 [3%] pts with prior chemo). A lower proportion of chemo-naive pts received prior somatostatin therapy (45% vs. 54% prior chemo). EVE significantly prolonged median PFS regardless of prior chemo use (with prior chemo: 11.0 vs. 3.2 months; HR = 0.35, 95% CI 0.25-0.49, p < 0.001; chemo naive: 11.4 vs. 5.4 months; HR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.29-0.60; p < 0.001). Stable disease was the best overall response in 73% of EVE-treated pts irrespective of prior chemo use. The benefit from EVE irrespective of prior chemo was further demonstrated by disease stabilization or minor tumor shrinkage and in the lower incidence of progressive disease in waterfall plots. Safety of EVE was consistent regardless of prior chemo use. The most common drug-related adverse events (chemo vs chemo naive) included rash (53% vs. 52%), stomatitis (52% vs. 56%), diarrhea (41% vs. 52%), and fatigue (37% vs. 51%). Conclusions: This planned subgroup analysis demonstrated the beneficial effects of EVE in pts with pNET regardless of prior chemo use. These findings support the possible first-line use of EVE for pts with pNET.

LBA2010 Background: RTOG 0825 evaluated the addition of BEV to standard CRT in the treatment of GBM and included molecular stratification that assessed the degree of mesenchymal (MES) gene enrichment. We investigated the ability of the MES signature to predict response to BEV. Methods: Sufficient FFPE tissue for molecular analysis was available for 650 registered, eligible patients. TaqMan PCR was performed prospectively using the molecular stratifier on all patients and an expanded 43 member MES set on 234 cases. A subset of specimens was subjected to whole genome expression profiling (GEP). Predictive models were evaluated for their ability to predict survival (overall, OS, and progression-free, PFS) in the training cohort of the BEV arm after adjusting for prognostic factors and treatment arm. Unsupervised clustering of GEP data was used to identify molecular subsets and gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) performed to evaluate for MES enrichment. Results: We observed a significant association between increasing MES signature and worse PFS and OS in the BEV arm (p=0.036 and p=0.032, respectively). Based on the association between high MES expression and poor outcome in the BEV arm, we sought to optimize a predictor using an expanded set of MES genes. Unbiased gene selection from a total of 43 genes followed by radial basis machine modeling identified a 10-gene predictor of outcome in the BEV arm (p<0.001/HR 4.04 for OS and p<0.001/HR 2.21 for PFS). To further support the association of MES enrichment and poor outcome in the BEV arm, we performed GEP. Unsupervised clustering identified a subtype of tumors with MES enrichment associated with the 10-gene predictor survival probability (p=0.0124, t-test). Ongoing studies will determine the extent to which this represents a predictive marker for BEV. Conclusions: We developed a 10-gene predictor specific to BEV treatment and suitable for FFPE that may serve to identify subsets of patients with newly diagnosed GBM who benefit from BEV. Supported by RTOG grant U10 CA21661, CCOP grant U10 CA37422, and Brain SPORE P50 CA127001 from the NCI and Genentech. Clinical trial information: NCT00884741.

1 Background: Chemoradiation (CRT) with temozolomide (TMZ/RT→TMZ) is the standard of care for newly diagnosed GBM. This trial determined if the addition of Bev to standard CRT improves survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) in newly diagnosed GBM. Methods: This phase III trial was conducted by the RTOG, NCCTG, and ECOG. Neurologically stable pts > 18 yrs with KPS ≥ 60, and > 1cm3 tumor tissue block, were randomized to Arm 1: standard CRT + placebo or Arm 2: standard CRT plus Bev (10 mg/kg iv q 2wks). Experimental treatment began at wk 4 of radiation then thru 6-12 cycles of maintenance chemotherapy. Protocol specified co-primary endpoints were OS and PFS, with significance levels of .023 and .002, respectively. At progression, treatment was unblinded and pts allowed to crossover or continue Bev. Symptom, QOL and neurocognitive (NCF) testing was performed in the majority of pts. Secondary analyses evaluated impact of MGMT methylation (meth) and prognostic 9 gene signature status. Results: From 978 registered pts, 637 were randomized. Inadequate tissue (n=105) and blood on imaging (n=40) were key reasons for non-randomization. No difference was found between arms for OS (median 16.1 vs. 15.7 mo, p = 0.11). PFS was extended for Arm 2 (7.3 vs. 10.7 mo, p = 0.004). Pts with MGMT meth had superior OS (23.2 vs. 14.3 mo, p < 0.001) and PFS (14.1 vs. 8.2 mo, p < 0.001). Neither the 9 gene signature nor MGMT predicted selective benefit for Bev treatment, but best prognosis pts (MGMT meth, favorable 9-gene), had a worse survival trend with Bev (15.7 vs 25 mo p = 0.08). To date, 128 pts were unblinded on Arm 1 (salvage Bev in 86) and 87 pts on Arm 2 (continued Bev in 39). Increased grade ≥ 3 toxicity was seen with Bev, mostly neutropenia, hypertension, and DVT/PE. Conclusions: The addition of Bev for newly diagnosed GBM did not improve OS, did improve PFS but did not reach the significance criterion. MGMT and 9 gene profile did not identify selective benefit, but risk subset results suggested strongly against the upfront use of Bev in the best prognosis pts. Full interpretation of the PFS results incorporating symptom burden, QOL, and NCF is ongoing. Support: NCI U10 CA 21661, U10 CA37422, and Genentech. Clinical trial information: NCT00884741.

103 Background: Beginning in 2014, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recognized very high-risk (VHR) prostate cancer (cT3b-T4, or primary Gleason pattern 5, or more than 4 biopsy cores with Gleason score 8-10, or multiple HR features) as a classification distinct from high-risk (HR) disease. Using prospectively collected institutional data, we describe contemporary treatment patterns and short-term outcomes in the VHR population. Methods: Men who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) between January 2010 and June 2015 were identified using the Johns Hopkins RP database, and trends in management were compared across the study period. Pathological and short-term clinical outcomes were assessed in men with VHR cancer. Non organ-confined disease (NOCD) was defined as ≥ pT3 disease or lymph node positivity, persistent postoperative PSA as ≥ 0.2 ng/mL, and biochemical recurrence (BCR) as a PSA ≥ 0.2 ng/mL following an initial undetectable postoperative PSA. Results: During the study period, 4,954 men underwent RP, of which 161 (3.2%) men had VHR cancer at diagnosis. The annual proportion of men who underwent RP with VHR cancer increased over the study period (chronologically 1.8%, 1.0%, 3.3%, 4.1%, 5.6%, and 5.2%; p<0.001). Sixteen percent of men with VHR disease were enrolled in pre-surgical clinical trials, with an increase from 0% of men in 2010 to 19.1% in 2015 (p=0.11). At RP, 39% of the VHR cohort had seminal vesicle invasion, 26% had lymph node involvement, and a total of 74% had NOCD. Following surgery, 33% of men had PSA persistence, and 40% experienced either PSA persistence or BCR during follow-up (median 13.4 months). Of 136 men with at least one follow-up assessment, 15 (11.0%) developed metastasis; 33% of the cohort was treated with radiation therapy, 42% with androgen deprivation, and 15% with docetaxel. Conclusions: The VHR population carries the greatest risk of clinical progression following local treatment. Over the past five years, we have observed increasing surgical treatment and clinical trial enrollment at our institution. Continued assessment of post-operative interventions and outcomes will help to facilitate counseling and establish point estimates from which to power clinical trials.

260 Background: Recent placebo-controlled phase III trials of the mTOR inhibitor everolimus and the VEGF/ PDGF receptor inhibitor sunitinib in PNET noted improved progression-free survival (PFS). However, objective response rates (RR) with these agents are <10%. Preclinical studies suggest enhanced anti-tumor effects with combined mTOR and VEGF targeted therapy. Methods: We conducted a phase II trial of the mTOR inhibitor TEM (25 mg IV q week) and the VEGF-A monoclonal antibody BEV (10 mg/kg IV q 2 weeks) in patients (pts) with well or moderately differentiated PNET and progressive disease by RECIST within 7 months of study entry. Co-primary endpoints were RR and 6-month PFS. Planned enrollment is 50 patients, with interim analysis after the first 25 evaluable pts. Pts had no prior mTOR or VEGF targeted agents, ECOG PS 0-1, and adequate hematologic and organ function. Continued octreotide was allowed, but not required. Prior interferon, embolization, and ≤ 2 chemotherapy regimens were allowed. Results: Confirmed PR was documented in 11 of the first 25 (44%) evaluable patients. 20 of 25 (80%) patients were progression-free at 6 months. Both endpoints exceeded pre-defined criteria to continue enrollment. For 35 evaluable patients, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events attributed to therapy were leukopenia (12%), hypertension (12%), hyperglycemia (12%), mucositis (9%), and fatigue (9%). Conclusions: The combination of TEM/BEV has substantial activity in a multi-center phase II trial with RR of 44%, well in excess of single targeted agents in PNET. 6-month PFS was a notable 80% in a population of patients with RECIST criteria progression within 7 months of study entry. Accrual is ongoing. Supported by NCI N01 Contracts: 662205, 62203, 62208, 62209, 62206, 62204, 62207, 62201.

LBA2000 Background: Formalin-fixed, paraffin embedded GBM tumor tissue, adequate for conventional MGMT methylation analyses, was required for entry onto the RTOG 0525 clinical trial. Methods: Four prognostic biomarkers were evaluated on a training set of 220 retrospectively obtained GBM samples, consisting of IDH1 mutation, the glioma-CpG island methylator phenotype (G-CIMP), a microarray-based mRNA panel and a novel MGMT promoter methylation assay. For each biomarker, 2 (IDH1 and mRNA) or 3 subgroups (G-CIMP and MGMT) were defined based on associations with overall survival. All combinations (36 possible) of each of the 4 biomarker-derived subgroups were then defined and compared with survival data and then consolidated into 4 risk groups. Once created in the training set, this model was applied to the RTOG 0525 samples (n=763) for external validation. Results: Application of the molecular risk classification to RTOG 0525 samples (left table) showed a highly significant survival association (p<0.001). When compared to the recursive partitioning analysis (RPA, table on right), this composite molecular classifier better identified patients with long term survival and appears to improve resolution by revealing an additional distinct risk group. The molecular classifier was prognostic in each of the treatment arms individually. Conclusions: Four distinct biomarkers or biomarker panels were tested in GBM. These biomarkers were compared with clinical outcome in a training set to optimize a method to combine them into a classifier. This classifier was then validated on a large sample set from a large phase III clinical trial. This composite panel may represent an improvement over the existing RPA with respect to risk stratification of patients for GBM. Additionally, it has the potential to impact future clinical trial designs and provide enhanced opportunities for personalization of therapy for GBM. Support: NCI U10 CA2121661, U10 CA37422, P50 CA127001. [Table: see text]