Citations

11008 Background: SARC028 is the first multicenter Phase II study of P monotherapy in patients (pts) with STS and BS. Designed to detect clinical efficacy signals in multiple histologies, the study collected blood & tissue samples on all pts. We report extended clinical follow-up and in-depth biomarker correlates of response. Methods: The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1. Secondary endpoints were safety, 12 wk progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The STS arm had 10 pts in each of 4 cohorts: undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS), dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLPS), synovial sarcoma (SS) and leiomyosarcoma (LMS). The BS arm included 40 pts with osteosarcoma (OS), Ewing sarcoma (ES) or dedifferentiated chondrosarcoma (CS). Pre- and on-P biopsies were required as well as blood at multiple time points. Tumor was assessed for PD-L1 expression (clone 22C3) and immune infiltrates by multi-color IHC (Vectra). Ongoing analyses include circulating cytokine and checkpoint levels and exome (DNA), transcriptome (RNA), and T-cell receptor (TCR) sequencing. Results: 86 pts were enrolled, 80 were evaluable for response. For STS, median follow-up was 14.5 months. The ORR in the overall STS cohort was 18% and the 12-wk PFS 55% [95% CI, 42-71]). Clinical activity was variable by histologic subtype with 40% ORR in UPS (1 CR and 3PR out of 10 evaluable pts), 2 PR/10 were seen in DDLPS, 1PR/10 in SS and 0/10 in LMS. For BS, median follow-up was 12.3 months (ORR 5%; 12-wk PFS 28% [95% CI, 14-41]), with 1PR/22 OS, 1PR/5 CS and 0/13 ES. 70 pre-P tissues were analyzed (11 excluded for insufficiency), with PD-L1+ in 3/70 (4%); all 3 were UPS. Of the 2 evaluable pts, 1 had CR and 1 PR. 2 OS were PD-L1+ on multi-color IHC, 1 had PR. All PD-L1+ samples had CD8+ T-cell infiltration. There were no post-P PD-L1+ samples. Conclusions: P has clinical activity in UPS and LPS, and expansion cohorts in those subtypes are planned. Pre-treatment PD-L1 expression was infrequent, but correlated with T-cell infiltration and response in UPS & OS. Ongoing biomarker analyses that may guide combination strategies are ongoing and will be presented at the meeting. Clinical trial information: NCT02301039.

11007 Background: Patients (pts) with metastatic sarcoma (SAR) have limited options. Nivolumab(N), a fully human anti-PD-1 mAb and ipilimumab (I), a humanized anti-CTLA-4 mAb, have favorable safety & efficacy in other tumors. Pembrolizumab demonstrated a response rate (RR) of 12% in SAR pts. We evaluated N, independently from N+I, in SAR pts. Methods: This open-label multi-center phase II study enrolled pts failing prior regimens. Randomized (non-comparative) pts received either N3 [N (3 mg/kg q2W)] or N3+I1 [N(3 mg/kg Q3W x4, then Q2W) & [I(1 mg/kg q3W x4)]. Treatment continued beyond progressive disease (PD) in 1st12 weeks. 5 confirmed responses in 38 evaluable pts yielded 90% power (0.05 1-sided alpha) to detect a 20% (vs 5%) confirmed RR. Other endpoints: adverse events (AEs), progression-free, overall survival (PFS, OS), and correlative studies including PD-L1 expression by IHC, mutational burden/neoantigen analysis, TCR clonality and TIL characterization. Results: 85 pts (43 - N3; 42 - N3+I1) were enrolled [mean age 54 yrs (21–81), 52% female). No significant differences in histological subtypes across cohorts: 36% LMS, 4% LPS, 10% UPS/MFH, 6% synovial, 5% bone, 5% Ewing’s, and 34% other. Pts were refractory to 1(20%), 2(22%), and ≥3 (58%) regimens. Grade 3-4 treatment related adverse events (TRAE) occurred in 7% (N3) and 14% (N3+I1) and 0 Gr 5 TRAEs. 8% of pts stopped due to AEs (2% N3, 14% N3+I1). 2/3 confirmed responses on N3, with 2 ongoing (range 1.1-3.2 months). 6/7 confirmed responses (2 complete) on N3+N1, with 5 ongoing (range 6-13 months). Responses occurred in 7 histologies. See Table for pt outcomes. Conclusions: N + I showed acceptable safety and encouraging antitumor activity with most responses ongoing across multiple SAR histologies, passing efficacy criteria. There was minimal activity observed with N alone. Increased TRAEs were observed in N3+I1. Correlative analyses ongoing. NCT02500797. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, Conquer Cancer Foundation, BMS. Clinical trial information: NCT02500797. [Table: see text]

e20502 Background: The CNS is often a site of first disease progression in CRZ-treated ALK+ NSCLC. The ALTA trial is assessing BRG, an investigational next-generation ALK inhibitor, in pts with CRZ-refractory advanced ALK+ NSCLC, including pts with baseline brain metastases. Methods: In ALTA (NCT02094573), pts were stratified by presence of baseline brain metastases and best response to prior CRZ and randomized 1:1 to receive BRG at 90 mg qd (arm A) or 180 mg qd with a 7-d lead-in at 90 mg (arm B). Here, we show data for pts with baseline brain metastases. An independent review committee (IRC) assessed intracranial efficacy. Results: Of 222 pts (112 in arm A; 110 in arm B), 80 (71%)/74 (67%) in A/B had baseline brain metastases per investigators, with median age 49/55 y; 74%/76% had received chemotherapy. As of May 31, 2016, 51%/59% of these pts continued to receive BRG in A/B; median follow-up was 9.6/11.4 mo. Intracranial efficacy is shown in the table. Among these pts, most common treatment-emergent adverse events were: nausea 35%/46% (A/B), headache 30%/31%, vomiting 29%/31%, diarrhea 21%/38%, cough 25%/32%; grade ≥3: increased blood CPK 1%/12%, hypertension 4%/7%, increased lipase 4%/3%. Conclusions: BRG yielded substantial intracranial responses with robust iPFS and acceptable safety in ALK+ NSCLC pts with baseline brain metastases in ALTA. 180 mg (with lead-in) showed consistently improved intracranial efficacy compared with 90 mg. Clinical trial information: NCT02094573. [Table: see text]

Abstract Background: A recent exploratory subgroup analysis pooling data from over 1000 patients (pts) in MONARCH 2 (final analysis) and MONARCH 3 (interim analysis) demonstrated that pts with clinical characteristics that predict for worse outcome (e.g. liver metastases, progesterone receptor [PgR]-negative status, high-grade tumors) received the largest benefit from the addition of abemaciclib to endocrine therapy (ET). There is also interest in determining the extent to which abemaciclib improves progression-free survival (PFS) in pts with favorable prognostic factors (e.g. bone-only disease, long treatment-free interval [TFI]). Here we present an update of the subgroup analyses of the MONARCH 3 study using data from the preplanned final PFS analysis. Methods: Enrollment criteria and study designs were previously described (Sledge et al. J Clin Oncol. 2017; Goetz et al. J Clin Oncol. 2017). An exploratory pooled analysis was conducted using data from MONARCH 2 (NCT02107703) and the MONARCH 3 (NCT02246621) preplanned final PFS analysis to identify significant prognostic factors regardless of therapy received. Using the updated MONARCH 3 data, PFS and objective response rate (ORR) (in pts with measurable disease) were examined within the prognostic subgroups that had been previously identified as being statistically significant. Additionally, subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot (STEPP) methodology was used to evaluate the association between TFI following adjuvant ET and outcomes of NSAI alone or with abemaciclib. Results: Assessment of clinical factors from MONARCH 2 and MONARCH 3 (final PFS data) confirmed that the following factors remained significantly prognostic regardless of treatment received: bone-only disease, liver metastases, tumor grade, PgR status, and ECOG performance status. In MONARCH 3, prognosis was poor in pts with liver metastases, PgR-negative tumors, and high-grade tumors. While all subpopulations benefited from the addition of abemaciclib to ET regardless of prognosis, pts with these three poor prognostic factors received substantial benefit from abemaciclib, with PFS hazard ratios (HR) ranging from 0.4 to 0.5 and with differential improvement in ORR typically >30%. Furthermore, STEPP analysis of TFI (on the MONARCH 3 pts who had received adjuvant ET) demonstrated that pts who had a shorter TFI had a worse prognosis and received relatively greater benefit from abemaciclib plus NSAI than did pts with a longer TFI. Patients with bone-only disease or a long TFI also received benefit from abemaciclib, but to a relatively lesser extent (HR ranging from approximately 0.6 to 0.8). Conclusions: This exploratory analysis of the preplanned final PFS data from MONARCH 3 confirms previous findings that pts with poor prognostic factors may receive relatively greater benefit from the addition of abemaciclib to ET. Citation Format: Joyce O'Shaughnessy, Matthew P. Goetz, George W. Sledge, Miguel Martin, Yong Lin, Tammy Forrester, Ian C. Smith, Angelo Di Leo, Stephen Johnston. The benefit of abemaciclib in prognostic subgroups: An update to the pooled analysis of MONARCH 2 and 3 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT099.

Abstract Background: Abemaciclib is an orally administered, selective CDK4 & 6 inhibitor dosed on a continuous schedule. In patients (pts) with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC), abemaciclib demonstrated clinical activity as monotherapy in MONARCH 1 and efficacy with a generally tolerable safety profile in combination with fulvestrant in MONARCH 2. At the MONARCH 3 (NCT02246621) interim analysis, abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.543; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.409, 0.723; p=.000021) and objective response rate (ORR) (measurable disease: abemaciclib arm, 59.2%; placebo arm, 43.8%; p=.004) with a generally tolerable safety profile as initial treatment for HR+, HER2- ABC. Here we present the MONARCH 3 results from the preplanned final PFS analysis. Methods: MONARCH 3 is a double-blind, Phase 3 study of abemaciclib/placebo (150 mg, twice daily continuous schedule) + NSAI (1 mg anastrozole or 2.5 mg letrozole, daily) in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- ABC who have had no prior systemic therapy for advanced disease. Endocrine therapy (ET) naïve pts or pts with disease relapse >12 months after (neo)adjuvant ET were randomized 2:1 and stratified by metastatic site (visceral, bone-only, or other) and prior ET (aromatase inhibitor, no ET, or other). The primary objective was investigator-assessed PFS. Additional objectives included ORR, clinical benefit rate (CBR), duration of response (DoR), overall survival (OS), and safety and tolerability. The study was powered to 80% at 1-sided α=.025 assuming a HR of 0.67 in favor of abemaciclib + NSAI, with the final analysis at 240 PFS events. Results: 493 pts were randomized to abemaciclib + NSAI (n=328) or placebo + NSAI (n=165). At the final PFS analysis, 246 PFS events had occurred. Abemaciclib + NSAI significantly extended PFS (HR, 0.540; 95% CI, 0.418, 0.698; p=.000002; median: abemaciclib arm, 28.18 vs placebo arm, 14.76 months). PFS was improved across all subgroups. For pts with measurable disease, the ORR was 61.0% in the abemaciclib arm and 45.5% in the placebo arm (p=.003), and the CBR was 79.0% in the abemaciclib arm and 69.7% in the placebo arm (p=.037). The median DoR was 27.39 months in the abemaciclib arm compared to 17.46 months in the placebo arm. OS was immature at the time of analysis. Adverse events were consistent with previous reports. Conclusions: Abemaciclib + NSAI demonstrated a generally tolerable safety profile and was an effective initial treatment for pts with HR+, HER2- ABC, significantly improving PFS and ORR. Citation Format: Matthew P. Goetz, Miguel Martin, Angelo Di Leo, Seock-Ah Im, Ahmad Awada, Tammy Forrester, Martin Frenzel, Joanne Cox, Susana Barriga, Masakazu Toi, Hiroji Iwata, Stephen Johnston. MONARCH 3: Abemaciclib as initial therapy for patients with HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer - Results from the preplanned final PFS analysis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT040.

Objectives: Professional baseball pitchers are at high risk for tears of the ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) of the elbow, often requiring subsequent surgical reconstruction. Despite acceptable published return to play outcomes, multiple techniques and graft types have been described. There is a paucity of clinical data in the current literature comparing UCL reconstruction surgical technique and graft type. Even less is known about the risks for subsequent injury, surgery, or revision UCL reconstruction. Accordingly, this study compares UCL reconstruction outcomes based on tunnel configuration and graft type. Methods: Following approval from our institutional review board and Major League Baseball (MLB), 566 professional baseball pitchers who underwent UCL reconstruction between 2010 and 2014 were identified and included. The following patient demographics were analyzed: age, pitching role (starter vs. reliever), level of play (MLB vs. Minor League Baseball [MiLB]), and throwing side dominance. Surgical factors analyzed included reconstruction technique (Docking vs. Modified Jobe), graft type (palmaris longus autograft vs. gracilis autograft), and concomitant procedures. Primary outcome measures consisted of: the ability to return to play at any level (RTP), to return to the same level of play (RSL), the time to return, subsequent elbow injuries, and the need for subsequent or revision elbow surgery. The impact of the patient and surgical factors on outcomes were analyzed using multivariate linear and logistic regression modeling. Results: The overall RTP was 79.9% and RSL was 71.2%. There were no significant differences in the time to RTP or RSL based on reconstruction technique or graft type. RTP rates were similar for the Docking vs. Modified Jobe techniques (80.1% vs. 82.4%; p=0.537) and for the two primary graft types (83.1% for palmaris vs. 80.7% for gracilis; p=0.596). The risk of subsequent elbow surgery was 10.5% for the Docking Technique vs. 14.8% for the Modified Jobe (p=0.203); and the risk for subsequent UCL revision reconstruction surgery was 2.9% vs. 6.2% for the Docking vs. Modified Jobe Techniques, respectively (p=0.128). Significant trends towards an increasing use of palmaris autograft (p=0.023) and the docking technique (p=0.006) were observed. MLB pitchers were more likely than MiLB pitchers to RTP (p<0.001) and to RSL (p<0.001), but they required a longer time to return (mean difference 35 days; p=0.039), had a higher likelihood of subsequent elbow (OR 3.58; 95% CI 2.055 to 6.231; p<0.001) and forearm injuries (OR 5.695; 95% CI 1.99 to 16.302; p=0.004), but not subsequent elbow surgery. No specific variables were noted to be predictive of subsequent elbow or revision surgery in the multivariate analysis. Conclusion: Surgical outcomes in professional baseball players are not significantly influenced by ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction technique or graft type usage. Major League players are more likely to RTP and RSL, but they have a higher frequency of subsequent elbow and forearm injuries. Both the Docking Technique and palmaris autograft are increasing in popularity amongst surgeons treating professional baseball players.