Citations

PURPOSE Multidisciplinary molecular tumor boards (MTBs) decode complex genomic data into clinical recommendations. Although MTBs are well-established in the oncology practice in developed countries, this strategy needs to be better explored in developing countries. Herein, we describe the possible benefits and limitations of the first MTB established in Colombia. METHODS Demographic, clinical, and genomic information was collected between August 2020 and November 2021. By mid-2020, an MTB strategy was created to discuss clinical cases with one or more genomic alterations identified by next-generation sequencing using an open-access virtual platform. We characterized the patient population as benefiting from the recommended treatment option. We assessed the benefits and access to available targeted therapies that have the potential to change clinical management by making recommendations to treating oncologists on the basis of genomic profiling. However, we did not assess the treatment oncologists' compliance with MTB recommendations because they were not intended to replace clinical judgment/standard of care. RESULTS A total of 146 patients were included in the discussions of the MTB. The median age was 59 years, and 59.6% were women. Genomic results prompting a change in therapeutic decisions were obtained in 53.1% of patients (95% CI, 44.9 to 61.3). The most prevalent malignancy was non–small-cell lung cancer (51%). Other malignancies represented 60%, 50%, and 30% of patients with soft-tissue sarcomas, brain tumors, and breast cancer, respectively. CONCLUSION Using an open-access virtual platform, MTBs were feasible in low- and middle-income countries on the basis of the capability to provide the benefits and access to available targeted therapies that are not standard of care. Furthermore, MTB recommendations were made available to the treating oncologist in different locations across Colombia, providing the option to modify clinical management in most of these patients.

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a heterogeneous disease that can evoke discordant responses to therapy among different lesions in individual patients. The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria do not take into consideration response heterogeneity. We explored and developed lesion-based measurement response criteria to evaluate their prognostic effect on overall survival (OS). Patients and Methods: Patients enrolled in 17 first-line clinical trials, who had mCRC with ≥ 2 lesions at baseline, and a restaging scan by 12 weeks were included. For each patient, lesions were categorized as a progressing lesion (PL: > 20% increase in the longest diameter (LD)), responding lesion (RL: > 30% decrease in LD), or stable lesion (SL: neither PL nor RL) based on the 12-week scan. Lesion-based response criteria were defined for each patient as follows: PL only, SL only, RL only, and varied responses (mixture of RL, SL, and PL). Lesion-based response criteria and OS were correlated using stratified multivariable Cox models. The concordance between OS and classifications was measured using the C statistic. Results: Among 10,551 patients with mCRC from 17 first-line studies, varied responses were noted in 51.6% of patients, among whom, 3.3% had RL/PL at 12 weeks. Among patients with RL/SL, 52% had stable disease (SD) by RECIST 1.1, and they had a longer OS (median OS (mOS) = 19.9 months) than those with SL only (mOS = 16.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 0.81 (0.76, 0.85), p < 0.001), although a shorter OS than those with RL only (mOS = 25.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 1.42 (1.32, 1.53), p < 0.001). Among patients with SL/PL, 74% had SD by RECIST 1.1, and they had a longer OS (mOS = 9.0 months) than those with PL only (mOS = 8.0 months, HR (95% CI) = 0.75 (0.57, 0.98), p = 0.040), yet a shorter OS than those with SL only (mOS = 16.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 1.98 (1.80, 2.18), p < 0.001). These associations were consistent across treatment regimen subgroups. The lesion-based response criteria showed slightly higher concordance than RECIST 1.1, although it was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Varied responses at first restaging are common among patients receiving first-line therapy for mCRC. Our lesion-based measurement criteria allowed for better mortality discrimination, which could potentially be informative for treatment decision-making and influence patient outcomes.

AbstractCeliac disease is a global disease requiring genetic susceptibility and gluten exposure to trigger immune‐mediated enteropathy. The effect of the degree of gluten‐containing grain availability on celiac disease prevalence is unknown. Our objective was to compare country‐based gluten availability to celiac prevalence using a systematic literature review. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus until May 2021. We included population‐based serum screening with confirmatory testing (second serological study or small intestine biopsy) and excluded specific, high‐risk, or referral populations. We determined country‐specific gluten availability using the United Nations food balance for wheat, barley, and rye. Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) frequencies were obtained from allelefrequencies.net. The primary outcome was association between gluten‐containing grain availability and celiac disease prevalence. Generalized linear mixed models method with Poisson's link was used for analysis. We identified 5641 articles and included 120 studies on 427 146 subjects from 41 countries. Celiac disease prevalence was 0–3.1%, median 0.75% (interquartile range 0.35, 1.22). Median wheat supply was 246 g/capita/day (interquartile range 214.8, 360.7). The risk ratio (RR) for wheat availability on celiac disease was 1.002 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.0001, 1.004, P = 0.036). A protective association was seen with barley, RR 0.973 (95% CI: 0.956, 0.99, P = 0.003), and rye, RR 0.989 (95% CI: 0.982, 0.997, P = 0.006). The RR for gross domestic product on celiac disease prevalence was 1.009 (95% CI: 1.005, 1.014, P < 0.001). The RR for HLA‐DQ2 was 0.982 (95% CI: 0.979, 0.986, P < 0.001), and that for HLA‐DQ8 was 0.957 (95% CI: 0.950, 0.964, P < 0.001). In this geo‐epidemiologic study, gluten‐containing grain availability showed mixed associations with celiac disease prevalence.

Abstract Introduction Breast cancer is uncommon in men. Almost all male breast cancers are hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, although the pathogenesis is not always attributable to an endocrine condition. A few studies have compared biological characteristics or molecular signatures with breast cancers in women. We sought to evaluate whether hormone receptor-related gene expression is different in cancers from men compared to equivalent cancers from women. SET2,3 index measures non-proliferative hormone receptor-related transcriptional activity in the cancer (SET-ER/PR index) and adjusts this for a Baseline Prognosis Index (BPI) that combines the measurements of tumor and nodal stage with a 4-gene molecular subtype (ESR1, PGR, ERBB2, and AURKA). Methods We received aliquots of total RNA from male patients with breast cancer included in the retrospective cohort study of the EORTC 10085/BCG/TBCRC/BIG/NCTN International Male Breast Cancer Program (NCT01101425). SET2,3 assay was performed using the QuantiGene assay (Thermo Fisher) using bead-based hybridization and laser spectroscopy (Luminex). The statistical analyses were performed by the EORTC statistician. The primary objective of the study was the assessment of the prognostic value of the SET2,3 index score in patients with early-stage hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative male breast cancer, treated with endocrine therapy. Clinical outcomes (recurrence-free survival – RFS; overall survival – OS) were estimated by Kaplan-Meier curves and secondarily compared using multivariable Cox models adjusted for continuous SET2,3 index, tumor size, nodal status, age, and chemotherapy and radiotherapy use. An exploratory analysis to compare the SET2,3 index scores distribution in female and male breast cancer patients was also performed using results from the same assay performed on cancers from women selected on the same inclusion criteria. Due to the low numbers of male patients treated with neoadjuvant treatment (N=6), this analysis was restricted to patients treated with adjuvant treatment (n=315 male and 660 female). Results Of the 321 male patients with breast cancer analyzed, treated between 1990 and 2010, 211 (65.7%) were categorized as high SET2,3 index score, reflecting a high endocrine activity in the cancer and low risk of recurrence, and 110 patients (34.3%) categorized as being low score, reflecting low endocrine activity and high risk of recurrence. At 5 years, the RFS was 75.0% (95% CI, 67.4-81.1) in the high SET2,3 group versus 60.7% (95% CI, 49.1-70.5) in the low SET2,3 group (HR univariate, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.34-0.70; P&lt; 0.0001). The 5-year OS rate among patients with a high SET2,3 index was 84.3% (95% CI, 45.5-73.8), in contrast of 67.8% (95% CI, 56.6-76.7) in the low SET2,3 group (HR univariate, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.30-0.65; P&lt; 0.0001). SET2,3 was independently prognostic for OS, but not RFS in multivariable Cox models. In patients classified as low SET2,3, the addition of neo/adjuvant chemotherapy to adjuvant endocrine therapy was associated with 5-year OS of 76.0% (95% CI, 59.5-86.4) and in patients who received endocrine therapy alone the 5-year OS was 61.3% (95% CI, 45.5-73.8), an absolute difference of 14.7 percentage points. Overall, we did not observe a difference in the distributions (median, interquartile range) of SET2,3 index between men (2.4, 1.9–2.6) and women (2.3, 2.0–2.7). Conclusion SET2,3 index measurements of endocrine-related transcriptional activity in male patients with breast cancer were not different from measurements in female patients with breast cancer. SET2,3 was prognostic in male breast cancer and our exploratory analysis suggests that chemotherapy might improve the poor prognosis for men with breast cancer that has low SET2,3 index. This study was funded by the Breast Cancer Research Foundation (BCRF). Citation Format: Danielle B. Zakon, Coralie Poncet, Fatima Cardoso, Neven Anouk, Vicente Valero, Stefan Aebi, Kim Benstead, Oliver Bogler, Lissandra Dal Lago, Judith Fraser, Carmela Caballero, Ingrid A. Hedenfalk, Larissa A. Korde, Barbro Linderholm, John WM Martens, Lavinia P. Middleton, Melissa Murray, Catherine M. Kelly, Cecilia Nilsson, Monika Nowaczyk, Stephanie Peeters, Melanie Beauvois, Peggy Porter, Carolien P. Schroder, Isabel T. Rubio, Kathryn Ruddy, Christi van Asperen, Danielle Van Den Weyngaert, Carolien HM van Deurzen, Elise van Leeuwen-Stok, Joanna M. Vermeij, John MS Bartlett, Antonio C. Wolff, Sharon H. Giordano, W. Fraser Symmans. PD6-11 Evaluation of the Sensitivity to Endocrine Therapy Index (SET2,3) in Early Male Breast Cancer: Results from an analysis in the EORTC 10085/TBCRC/BIG/NCTN International Male Breast Cancer Program [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr PD6-11.

Outcomes of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) for adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) have improved over time. Studies have shown that total body irradiation (TBI) is the preferable type of myeloablative conditioning (MAC). However, outcomes based on central nervous system (CNS) involvement, namely CNS-positive versus CNS-negative, have not been compared. Here, we evaluated outcomes of 547 patients (CNS-positive = 96, CNS-negative = 451) who were allografted in the first complete remission (CR1) between 2009 and 2019. Primary endpoint was leukemia-free survival (LFS). Median follow-up was not different between the CNS-positive and CNS-negative groups (79 versus 67.2 months, P = 0.58). The CNS-positive group were younger (median age 31.3 versus 39.7 years, P = 0.004) and were allografted more recently (median year 2012 versus 2010, P = 0.003). In both groups, MAC was the preferred approach (82.3% versus 85.6%, P = 0.41). On multivariate analysis, the CNS-positive group had higher incidence of relapse (RI) (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.58 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.06-2.35], P = 0.025), but no adverse effect on LFS (HR = 1.38 [95% CI = 0.99-1.92], P = 0.057) or overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.28 [95% CI = 0.89-1.85], P = 0.18). A subgroup multivariate analysis limited to CNS-positive patients showed that a TBI-based MAC regimen resulted in better LFS (HR = 0.43 [95% CI = 0.22-0.83], P = 0.01) and OS (HR = 0.44 [95% CI = 0.21-0.92], P = 0.03) and lower RI (HR = 0.35 [95% CI = 0.15-0.79], P = 0.01). Another subgroup analysis in CNS-negative patients showed that MAC-TBI preparative regimens also showed a lower RI without a benefit in LFS or OS. While a MAC-TBI allo-HCT regimen may not be suitable to all, particularly for older patients with comorbidities, this approach should be considered for patients who are deemed fit and able to tolerate.

Objective Differential diagnosis of villous atrophy (VA) without coeliac antibodies in adults includes seronegative coeliac disease (CD) and chronic enteropathies unrelated to gluten, ie. non-coeliac enteropathies (NCEs). There is currently no international consensus on the nomenclature and diagnostic criteria for these enteropathies. In this work, a Delphi process was conducted to address this diagnostic and clinical uncertainty. Design An international task force of 13 gastroenterologists from six countries was recruited at the 16th International Coeliac Disease Symposium, Paris, 2019. Between September 2019 and July 2021, a Delphi process was conducted through mail surveys to reach a consensus on which conditions to consider in the differential diagnosis of VA with negative coeliac serology and the clinical diagnostic approaches required for these conditions. A 70% agreement threshold was adopted. Results Chronic enteropathies characterised by VA and negative coeliac serology can be attributed to two main clinical scenarios: forms of CD presenting with negative serology, which also include seronegative CD and CD associated with IgA deficiency, and NCEs, with the latter recognising different underlying aetiologies. A consensus was reached on the diagnostic criteria for NCEs assisting clinicians in differentiating NCEs from seronegative CD. Although in adults seronegative CD is the most common aetiology in patients with VA and negative serology, discriminating between seronegative CD and NCEs is key to avoid unnecessary lifelong gluten-free diet, treat disease-specific morbidity and contrast poor long-term outcomes. Conclusion This paper describes the Paris consensus on the definitions and diagnostic criteria for seronegative CD and chronic NCEs in adults.

101 Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality have decreased since the 1970s, but the incidence in young adults (20-49 years, named early-onset CRC, eoCRC) has been increasing. eoCRC patients with metastatic disease are treated with the same standard regimens as late-onset CRC (loCRC, age ≥ 50 years) although detailed response data for eoCRC are largely missing. Methods: Individual patient data on 7,604 subjects with metastatic eoCRC from 11 first line randomized bevacizumab studies between 2000 and 2012 in the ARCAD advanced colorectal cancer database were pooled. The distributions of demographics, clinicopathological features, biomarkers, and outcome data were summarized by age groups. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed by Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox models stratified by treatment arms within studies, adjusting for potential confounders. Predictive value of age group was evaluated by testing interaction effect between treatment and age variables. Results: Female eoCRC are more commonly seen compared to loCRC (46.8% vs. 38.7%, p<0.0001). Patients with eoCRC (n=1,289) were significantly more likely to have had prior metastasectomy (17.5% vs. 13.5%, p=0.043) and lung metastatic disease (67% vs. 59.8%, p<0.001), but less likely to have distant lymph node metastatic disease (58.8 vs. 62.9%, p=0.036) or KRAS mutation (29.2% vs. 34.4%, p=0.042) compared to those with loCRC (n=6,315). eoCRC and loCRC patients had similar distributions according to PS, primary tumor sidedness, prior primary tumor resection, liver involvement, peritoneal involvement, number of metastatic sites, NRAS and BRAF. Age of disease onset was not a statistically significant prognostic factor for PFS in univariate and multivariate analysis (seen in table). Bevacizumab in addition to chemo improved PFS in eoCRC population (9.9 vs. 6.8 months, HR = 0.66, p<0.001), which was similar to the findings in loCRC population (9.4 vs. 7.3 months, HR= 0.73, p<0.001, interaction p=0.54). By multivariate analysis, a greater improvement in PFS was noted for the addition of bevacizumab in eoCRC relative to LoCRC patients (HR = 0.62 vs. HR = 0.82). Conclusions: Treatment naive eoCRC patients with metastatic disease derive similar benefit from bevacizumab relative to their average age counterparts.[Table: see text]

Abstract Background: A recent study from the Acute Leukemia Working Party of EBMT demonstrated that outcomes of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) for adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) have improved significantly over time and that total body irradiation (TBI) should be considered as the preferable type of myeloablative conditioning (MAC). This study, however, did not compare outcomes of allo-HCT in patients with CNS involvement (CNS-pos) vs. those without CNS disease (CNS-neg). Study population: Here, we evaluate post allo-HCT outcomes of 547 patients (CNS-pos at initial presentation=96, CNS-neg=451) who underwent the procedure in first complete remission (CR1) between 2009 and 2019 at an EBMT participating transplant center. The distribution of ALL subtypes were as follows: CNS-pos (Ph-neg B ALL=28%, Ph-pos B ALL=27%, and T-cell ALL=45%) and for CNS-neg (Ph-neg B ALL=21%, Ph-pos B ALL=44%, and T-cell ALL=35%), p=0.01. The primary endpoint was leukemia-free survival (LFS). Results: The median follow up was not statistically different between the CNS-pos (78.7 months) and the CNS-neg group (67.2 months), p=0.58. Patients in the CNS-pos group were younger (median age 31.3 vs. 39.7 years, p=0.004), received the procedure more recently (median year 2012 vs. 2010, p=0.003), were less likely to have a Karnofsky score of equal or higher than 90 (70.8% vs. 81.9%, p=0.017), or to have received peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) (61.5% vs. 72.7%, p=0.028). The groups did not differ in regards to donor source (URD, 50% vs. 56.5%, p=0.24) or the intensity of the preparative regimen (MAC, 82.3% vs. 85.6%, p=0.41). In multivariate analysis, CNS-pos were associated with higher cumulative incidence of relapse (HR=1.58 (95%CI=1.06-2.35), P=0.025) and a trend for an inferior leukemia-free survival (LFS) (HR=1.38 (95%CI=0.99-1.92), p=0.057), but did not adversely impact overall survival (OS) (HR=1.28 (95%CI=0.89-1.85), p=0.18). A subgroup multivariate analysis limited to patients with CNS-pos showed that prescribing a TBI MAC regimen (vs. others) results in a lower cumulative incidence of relapse (HR=0.35 (95%CI=0.15-0.79), p=0.012) and better LFS (HR=0.43 (95%CI=0.22-0.83), p=0.01) and OS (HR=0.44 (95%CI=0.21-0.92), p=0.03). Use of PBSC (vs. BM) was also independently associated with better OS (HR=0.53 (95%CI=0.29-0.99), p=0.046). Conclusion: Notwithstanding the inherent limitations of registry data, particularly ascertaining the absence of CNS involvement in the CNS-neg group, our results show CNS involvement as an independent risk factor for relapse following allo-HCT. Our data support, nonetheless, the choice of a TBI-based MAC regimen in this group of patients but stresses the need for close monitoring of relapse after allo-HCT. Disclosures Labopin: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Bazarbachi: Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Hikma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Astra Zeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mielke: Immunicum: Other: Data safety monitoring board; DNA Prime SA: Speakers Bureau; Gilead/KITE: Other: Travel support, Expert panel ; Miltenyi: Other: Data safety monitoring board; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Celgene/BMS: Speakers Bureau. Socie: Alexion: Research Funding. Huynh: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Yakoub-Agha: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Giebel: Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Peric: Therakos, Servier, MSD, Astellas, Novartis, Abbvie, Pfizer: Honoraria. Mohty: Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Jazz: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Honoraria.