Citations

9093 Background: Pembrolizumab interrupts PD-1/-L1 interaction and is efficacious in many cancers. However, resistance invariably emerges in the majority of patients. Potential mechanisms include activation of compensatory pathways. The inhibition of sonic hedgehog signaling (sHH) was previously shown to induce intra-tumoral (IT) infiltration by CD4+, CD8+ and HLA-DR class II cells. Our preclinical data showed sHH inhibitor enhanced IT penetration by monoclonal antibodies and induced PD-L1 expression. We conducted a phase I study using a novel sequential pulse dosing of sonedegib followed by pembrolizumab in aST with an expansion cohort to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), tolerability and preliminary efficacy. Methods: The dose escalation utilized a 3+3 design to determine the MTD and proceeded to expansion cohort upon determination of the MTD. Patients enrolled to each dose level were observed for dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) during the 1st cycle. The expansion cohort consisted of NSCLC and head/neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) previously treated by anti-PD1/-L1. The recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) was determined following the review of the toxicity profile of the combination from all cycles. The study treatment consisted of sonidegib oral daily from day 1 to 8 and pembrolizumab I.V. 200 mg on day 8 on an every 3-week cycle. The sonidegib dose levels explored were 400, 600 and 800 mg. Archival tumor and blood specimens were collected for correlative studies. Adverse events (AEs) were categorized and graded per CTCAE v5.0, and tumor response by RECIST v1.1. Results: The study enrolled a total of 33 patients and 29 received treatment (13 in escalation and 16 in expansion), including patients with NSCLC, HNSCC, skin cancer, gastric cancer and melanoma. The enrollment to the NSCLC cohort is complete and HNSCC continues. No DLT was encountered during dose escalation and the MTD was not reached. The highest planned dose level was selected to proceed to expansion (sonidegib 800mg days 1-8 in combination with pembrolizumab I.V. 200 mg on day 8 on an every 3-week cycle). The expansion cohort proceeded to enroll 15 patients evaluable for AEs (10 NSCLC and 5 HSNCC). Grade 3 and above treatment-related AEs across all patients were hyperglycemia, fatigue, dyspepsia, abdominal pain. The mature efficacy data will be reported at the meeting. Conclusions: The study successfully determined the RP2D of sonidegib when dosed sequentially with pembrolizumab in advanced solid tumors. The AE profile of the combination is similar to that for respective agents given individually. The efficacy data among anti-PD1/-PDL1-treated NSCLC will be reported at the meeting. Clinical trial information: NCT04007744 .

8032 Background: Patients (pts) with TCE RRMM have few treatment (Tx) options and poor HRQoL. Ide-cel, the first in class CAR T cell Tx for pts with TCE RRMM, improved PFS versus standard (std) regimens in the KarMMa-3 trial. We report the PRO results comparing the Tx arms. PROs provide further understanding of Tx benefit of ide-cel from the pts’ perspective. Methods: KarMMa-3 (NCT03651128) is an open-label phase 3 RCT comparing the efficacy and safety of ide-cel with std regimens in pts with TCE RRMM, who had received 2–4 prior regimens. In addition to clinical endpoints, we evaluated the impact of ide-cel compared with std regimens on the changes in HRQoL, measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-MY20, and the EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. PROs were collected at baseline (screening), day of infusion and monthly from 2–24 months (mo) and thereafter every 3 mo. This interim analysis reports PROs through 20 mo. Comparisons were performed on least squares mean (LSM) changes from baseline over time between arms using constrained longitudinal data analysis (cLDA). Results: In total, 386 pts were randomized (ide-cel, 254; std regimens, 132). PRO compliance was high over time ( > 80%). At baseline, PROs were similar between arms. LSM changes from baseline to 20 mo showed significant differences ( P < 0.05), with effect sizes of 0.3–0.7, in favor of ide-cel for most domains, including global health status/QoL, cognitive functioning, fatigue, and pain (EORTC QLQ-C30); side effects of Tx (EORTC QLQ-MY20); and the EQ-5D-5L VAS. The difference in overall LSM change reached or exceeded the pre-specified between-groups minimal importance difference (MID) for improvement in most domains in favor of ide-cel (Table). Conclusions: Ide-cel showed statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in HRQoL, including key MM symptoms and functioning, for pts with TCE RRMM compared with std regimens. The PRO data for ide-cel expands upon the clinical outcomes observed in the KarMMa-3 trial. Clinical trial information: NCT03651128 . [Table: see text]

6539 Background: HER2-enriched breast cancer (estrogen and progesterone receptors negative and HER2-positive) has no worse prognosis than other breast cancers if it is treated with HER2-targeted therapy. Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has been shown to be associated with improved access to care and outcomes for many cancers, but its impact on care for HER2-enriched breast cancer is unknown. To fill this gap, we examined the association of Medicaid expansion with receipt of guideline-concordant treatment, time to treatment, and survival among newly diagnosed nonelderly women with HER2-enriched breast cancer. Methods: Women aged 18-62 years newly diagnosed with HER2-enriched breast cancer between 2010 and 2018 were identified from the National Cancer Database. Our primary outcomes included receipt of stage-based guideline-concordant treatment, initiation of treatment <60 days, and stage-specific 2-year overall survival. A difference-in-differences (DD) approach compared outcome changes following the expansion in Medicaid expansion vs. non-expansion states. A linear probability model estimated treatment outcome, and a flexible parametric survival model evaluated survival. All models were clustered at the state level and adjusted for age group, race/ethnicity, rurality of residence, zip code-level income, comorbidity, and diagnosis year. Results: A total of 31,354 patients with HER2-enriched breast cancer were included, including 19,255 in expansion states and 12,099 in non-expansion states. Compared to patients in expansion states, patients in non-expansion states were more likely to be racial/ethnic minorities, uninsured, and diagnosed at late-stage. Medicaid expansion was not significantly associated with changes in receipt of surgery for stage I-III disease but was associated with an increase of 4.42 percentage points (ppt, 95% CI: 0.09, 8.74) in receipt of chemotherapy/targeted therapy for stage IV disease, with an increase from 90.4% pre-expansion to 92.8% post-expansion in expansion states and a decrease from 93.7% to 91.9% in non-expansion states. Medicaid expansion was also significantly associated with a 2.41 ppt increase in initiating guideline-concordant treatment within 60 days (95% CI: 0.66, 4.17; 83.5% to 82.5% in expansion states vs. 86.6% to 83.7% in non-expansion states), and a 1.18 ppt increase in two-year survival rate (95% CI: 0.03, 2.33; 94.0% to 94.9% in expansion states vs. 94.3% to 94.1% in non-expansion states). The increase in two-year survival associated with Medicaid expansion was most prominent for stage III patients (DD=3.63 ppt; 95% CI: 0.64, 6.62). Conclusions: Medicaid expansion was associated with increased receipt of timely treatment and improved 2-year survival among nonelderly women newly diagnosed with HER2-enriched breast cancer.

e16242 Background: Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) are rare cancers with highly heterogeneous growth rates, yielding very broad ranges of radiographic imaging intervals in standard guidelines, with a multitude of risk for patients. Better tools are needed to reduce risks for these patients. Chromogranin A (CgA) is released by GEP-NET cells and has been associated with increased tumor burden. The European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS) considers CgA to be the most practical and useful general serum tumor marker in patients with NETs. However, clinical utility has been limited by the lack of prospective validation studies and by different sensitivity of CgA according to NET tumor type and volume. Accordingly, expert consensus guidelines have offered varying advice regarding the use of CgA to practicing clinicians. The aim was to evaluate the performance of the B·R·A·H·M·S CgA II KRYPTOR immunoassay to monitor the course of disease in patients with well-differentiated GEP-NETs (grade 1 and grade 2). This is the first prospective validation of a clinical algorithm for the interpretation of CgA values in patients with advanced GEP-NETs. Methods: This prospective, multi-center, observational study was designed to validate the performance of the B·R·A·H·M·S CgA II KRYPTOR assay in monitoring disease progression in a defined population of GEP-NET patients with minimal confounding from end organ dysfunction or concomitant medications (e.g. PPIs). Patients were followed for up to 36 months including the evaluation of tumor burden with RECIST 1.1 categorization by imaging (CT/MRI scans). A clinical cut-off for changes in CgA levels over time to indicate the risk that a tumor progression occurred was derived from a retrospective, bicentric observational pilot study. A change in CgA levels between visits was considered positive, if the CgA concentration increased by more than 50% to an absolute value of >100 ng/ml. Results: A total of 175 adult patients were enrolled, and 153 patients had measurable disease at baseline and ≥1 follow-up visit. Using the cut-off for CgA increase defined above resulted in a sensitivity of 34.4% (95%-CI: 25.6% - 44.3%, p < 0.001) and a specificity of 93.4% (95%-CI: 90.4% – 95.5%, p < 0.001). Positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (LR+) and negative likelihood ratio (LR-) to diagnose whether a tumor progression occurred according RECIST 1.1 criteria were 57.9% (95% CI: 45.0-69.8), 84.3% (95% CI: 80.5-87.6), 5.20 (95% CI: 3.23-8.36), and 0.70 (95% CI: 0.61-0.81), respectively. The AUC was estimated at 0.731 (95% CI: 0.670-0.793). Conclusions: B·R·A·H·M·S CgA II KRYPTOR can be used in conjunction with other clinical methods as an aid in monitoring of disease progression during the course of disease and treatment in patients with gastroentero-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs, grade 1 and grade 2).

TPS4200 Background: Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) is a uniformly fatal disease for which treatments result in limited benefit. Failure of immune checkpoint blockade is attributed to multiple immunosuppressive pathways within the tumor microenvironment. The C-X-C motif chemokine receptor 4 (CXCR4)/C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 12 (CXCL12) axis results in exclusion of anti-tumor immune cells. Preclinical studies demonstrated that simultaneous CXCR4 inhibition (CXCR4i) and anti-programmed cell death 1 (aPD1) resulted in tumor stabilization. We extended these findings by testing multiple combinations of CXCR4i, aPD1, and gemcitabine in the KPC mouse model of PDAC. Mice treated with gemcitabine, CXCR4i, and aPD1 (triple therapy) experienced a survival benefit compared to mice treated with either gemcitabine alone, or with CXCR4i/aPD1. Tumors from mice treated with triple therapy demonstrated increased apoptosis and a favorable tumor immune microenvironment (TIME). Motixafortide with pembrolizumab, fluorouracil, and nanoliposomal irinotecan has shown encouraging results in the second-line setting in mPDAC with a confirmed ORR of 13.2% and progression free survival (PFS) of 3.8 months (m). The goal of this first-in-man trial is to test preliminary safety and efficacy of Motixafortide (CXCR4i), Cemiplimab (aPD1), Gemcitabine, and Nab-paclitaxel (MCGN) in treatment naïve mPDAC. Methods: This is an open label, multicenter, investigator-initiated simon-2-stage phase 2 clinical trial in mPDAC testing MCGN. The study includes a six-patient safety run-in cohort and an additional 4 patients comprising a pilot efficacy signal seeking study (N=10). If ≥3 of the 10 patients within the pilot stage were to experience a partial response (PR) by RECIST criteria within 16 weeks, the combination would be considered promising and an expansion cohort of an additional 30 patients was planned. On 09/21/22, we amended the study to forego the planned open-label expansion cohort (N=30) and transition directly to a randomized phase 2 trial testing MCGN compared toGemcitabine and Nab-paclitaxel (GN) alone (N=102), after completion of the pilot phase of the study. The primary endpoint is PFS. The study has 80% power to detect an improvement in PFS from 6 to 9.2 m (HR 0.65) with a one-sided alpha of 0.20. One interim analysis for futility is planned when 50% of the PFS events are observed. Secondary objectives include ORR, disease control rate, duration of clinical benefit and OS. Required (pilot portion) and optional (randomized portion) paired tumor biopsies will undergo exploratory analysis including interrogation of the TIME. This trial was started in September 2020 and has enrolled 10 patients to the pilot stage as of 02/2023. Clinical trial information: NCT04543071 .

TPS3641 Background: Patients with mismatch repair proficient (pMMR) BRAF V600E mutant high-risk stage II (T4) or stage III colon cancer have a substantial risk of recurrence despite standard adjuvant therapy. In patients with metastatic BRAF V600E mutant colorectal cancer, the combination of the RAF inhibitor encorafenib and the EGFR inhibitor cetuximab has been shown to improve overall and progression-free survival compared to standard therapy after at least one prior line of therapy. This study will evaluate if this combination improves disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with resected BRAF V600E mutant pMMR/microsatellite stable (MSS) high-risk stage II (T4) or stage III colon cancer after standard adjuvant therapy. Methods: The study has a seamless phase II/III design, enrolling a maximum of 394 patients. BRAF mutation status can be determined locally or submitted for central testing in trial pre-screening. Eligible patients will be randomized 1:1 to usual surveillance versus 6 months of treatment with encorafenib (300mg oral daily) plus cetuximab (500mg/m2 intravenous every 14 days). Stratification factors are adjuvant chemotherapy regimen (FOLFOX versus CAPOX), duration of adjuvant therapy (3 months versus > 3 months), tumor stage (T4N0 versus T1-3N1 versus T4N1/TanyN2), and ctDNA marker status (detectable versus undetectable) at randomization. Adjuvant therapy must be completed at most 8 weeks prior to registration. For the phase II component, in the ctDNA detectable cohort, the primary endpoint will be ctDNA clearance rate at 6 months, and, in the ctDNA undetectable cohort, the primary endpoint will be 6-month ctDNA recurrence-free survival, where events consist of death, recurrence, or ctDNA positivity. The primary endpoint of the phase III component is DFS, and secondary endpoints are overall survival, adverse events, and alternative DFS calculated from the date of primary resection, rather than date of study randomization. Patient reported symptoms (PRO-CTCAE) will be collected and analyzed as an exploratory endpoint, and serial blood banking will support future correlative studies. The trial will proceed to the phase III portion if either of the two endpoints in the phase II cohorts is statistically superior in patients receiving encorafenib plus cetuximab. The phase III study sample size will provide 80% power at a one-sided α of 0.05 to detect an approximately 10% improvement in the three-year DFS rate, assuming 68% in the control arm. Two interim analyses will be performed for DFS endpoint. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . U10CA180820 (ECOG-ACRIN); U10CA180868 (NRG); U10CA180888 (SWOG); Pfizer, Eli Lilly; Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT05710406. Clinical trial information: NCT05710406 .

TPS3640 Background: Recent data have demonstrated that in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), a total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) approach improves compliance with chemotherapy and increases rates of tumor response compared to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) alone. They further indicate that the optimal sequencing of TNT involves consolidation (rather than induction) chemotherapy to optimize complete response rates. Data, largely from retrospective studies, have also shown that patients (pts) with clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant therapy may be managed safely with the watch and wait approach (WW) instead of preemptive total mesorectal resection (TME). However, the optimal consolidation chemotherapy regimen to achieve cCR has not been established, and a randomized clinical trial has not robustly evaluated it as a primary endpoint. Collaborating with a multidisciplinary oncology team and pt groups, we designed this NCI-sponsored study of chemotherapy intensification to address these issues and to drive up cCR rates, to provide opportunity for organ preservation and improve quality of life for pts. Methods: In this Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology randomized phase II trial (1:1), up to 312 pts with microsatellite stable LARC, clinical stage T4N0, any T, N+ or T3N0 requiring abdominoperineal resection or coloanal anastomosis and distal margin within 12 cm of anal verge will be enrolled. Stratification factors include tumor stage (T4 vs T1-3), nodal stage (N+ vs N0) and distance from anal verge (0-4; 4-8; 8-12 cm). Pts will be randomized to receive neoadjuvant long course CRT (LCRT) followed by consolidation doublet (mFOLFOX6 or CAPOX) or triplet chemotherapy (mFOLFIRINOX) for 4 months. LCRT in both arms involves 4500 cGy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks (w) + 900 cGy boost in 5 fractions with a fluoropyrimidine (capecitabine preferred). Pts will undergo assessment 8-12 w post-TNT completion for the primary endpoint of cCR per previously validated criteria and recommended WW and surveillance if cCR is achieved or TME if an incomplete response is noted. Secondary objectives include time-to event outcomes (disease-free and overall survival, organ preservation time and time to distant metastasis) and adverse effects. Statistical power, based on cCR, incorporates a one-sided alpha = 0.048 and power = 90% yielding 312 patients (156 per arm). Biospecimens including archival tumor tissue, matched / normal blood samples and serial rectal MRI will be collected for exploratory correlative research. This study, activated in late 2022, is open across the NCTN and is actively recruiting. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24 CA196171; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . U10CA180868 (NRG); U10CA180888 (SWOG); Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT05610163 Clinical trial information: NCT05610163 .

TPS3629 Background: For patients with oligometastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), aggressive local therapy of isolated metastases, particularly in the liver, has been associated with long-term progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) primarily based on retrospective evidence. However, in patients with limited metastatic CRC that is deemed inoperable or those with additional disease outside of the liver or lungs, the role of local ablative therapies, including microwave ablation (MWA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), to render patients disease free is less clear. Further, despite the long history of treating oligometastatic CRC with local therapy, which is provider biased and not evidence based, questions remain regarding the benefit of extending the paradigm of metastatic directed therapy to patients with more extensive disease. This trial seeks to use a pragmatic multimodality approach that mirrors the current clinical dilemma. This study is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of adding total ablative therapy (TAT) of all sites of disease to standard of care systemic treatment in those with limited metastatic CRC. Methods: A022101 is a National Clinical Trials Network randomized phase III study planned to enroll 364 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic CRC (BRAF wild-type, microsatellite stable) with ≤4 sites of metastatic disease on baseline imaging. Liver-only metastatic disease is not permitted, and lesions must be amenable to any combination of surgical resection, MWA, and/or SBRT with SBRT required for at least one lesion. Patients receive first-line systemic therapy for 4-6 months and are then randomized 1:1, stratified by number of metastatic organ sites (1-2 vs. 3-4), timing of metastatic disease diagnosis (de novo vs. secondary), and presence of metastatic disease outside the liver and lungs in at least one site. Patients in Arm 1 will receive TAT which consists of treatment of all metastatic sites with SBRT ± MWA ± surgical resection followed by standard of care systemic therapy. Patients in Arm 2 will continue with standard of care systemic therapy alone. The primary endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints include event-free survival, treatment-related toxicities, and local recurrence with exploratory biomarker analyses. The study needs 346 evaluable patients combined in the 2 arms to demonstrate an improvement in OS with a hazard ratio of 0.7 to provide 80% power with a one-sided alpha of 5%. The trial utilizes a group sequential design with two interim analyses (25% and 50% of events) for futility. The trial activated in January 2023 and recruitment is ongoing. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org. U10CA180820 (ECOG-ACRIN); U10CA180868 (NRG); U10CA180888 (SWOG); Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05673148 Clinical trial information: NCT05673148 .

3588 Background: Although anti-EGFR antibody plus doublet chemotherapy has become the standard of first-line treatment for RAS wild-type (wt), left sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the optimal molecular-targeted therapy for RAS wt, right-sided mCRC is not clear. Methods: To evaluate the efficacy between anti-EGFR antibody vs. bevacizumab combination therapy, from 40,889 Individual patient (pt) data from 59 studies in ARCAD mCRC database, 723 pts with RAS wt, right-sided mCRC who received a first-line molecular-targeted therapy with backbone chemotherapy (FOLFOX/FOLFIRI when anti-EGFR antibody combination, and FOLFOX/FOLFIRI/CAPOX/FOLFOXIRI when bevacizumab combination) were selected from 10 randomized studies (FIRE-3, CALGB80495, CRYSTAL, PRIME, CAIRO2, OPUS, TRIBE, TRIBE2, ATOM, and CCOG1201). Primary objective was overall survival (OS), and secondary objectives were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR); Hazard ratio (HR) and Odds ratio (OR) were adjusted for ECOG-PS, age, and gender. Propensity score matching (PSM) and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) as sensitivity analysis were also performed. Secondary analyses were limited to BRAF wt pts. Results: Anti-EGFR antibody and bevacizumab were administrated in 329 and 394 pts, respectively, of whom 162 and 151 pts were BRAF wt, respectively. Baseline characteristics were as follows (anti-EGFR antibody/bevacizumab): median age, 63.0 years both; female, 47.1/46.4%; and ECOG-PS 0, 53.2/65.2%. The OS and PFS were significantly prolonged in pts receiving bevacizumab combination therapy compared to those receiving anti-EGFR antibody combination therapy (Table). These trends were more pronounced when limited to BRAF wt pts (Table). There were no significant differences in ORR for both overall and BRAF wt pts. These results were similar in the sensitivity analysis (Table). Conclusions: For patients with RAS wt or RAS/ BRAF wt, right-sided mCRC, bevacizumab combination therapy is preferred first-line treatment. [Table: see text]

3566 Background: According to the various types of clinical trials for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), ETS and DpR are suggested as the surrogates of OS. Whereas associations between ETS/DpR and OS/PPS in the era of chemotherapy (chemo) +anti-EGFR antibody (ab)/bevacizumab (bev) in 1st line therapy have not been elucidated. Methods: From 40,889 Individual patient data (IPD) from 59 studies in ARCAD mCRC database, 2,138 treatment-naïve pts with RAS wild-type (wt) mCRC were selected from 7 randomized studies (PRIME, CAIRO2, CRYSTAL, OPUS, CALGB80495, WJOG4407G, ATOM) of chemo with/without anti-EGFR ab or bev. The ETS was defined as 20%≥ tumor shrinkage at 8 ± 2wks (ETS+: ≥20%, ETS-: <20%). Multivariate Cox regression models for OS/PPS were performed to investigate associations between ETS+ and ETS- by primary tumor location (overall/left-sided/right-sided), adjusting for potential confounders. DpR was defined as tumor shrinkage at nadir. OS/PPS were evaluated across quartile limits of DpR by multivariate Cox regression models. Results: In pts with overall or left-sided RAS wt mCRC, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of OS/PPS between ETS- and ETS+ for chemo +anti-EGFR ab, chemo +bev, and chemo alone showed great improvement, respectively (Table). In pts with overall or left-sided RAS wt mCRC, HRs of ETS for OS/PPS are higher in pts treated with chemo +anti-EGFR ab compared to those treated with chemo +bev or chemo alone. Compared to the pts with highest quartile (defined as ≥ 75th percentile (Q3)) of DpR, HRs of OS/PPS for lower quartile groups showed upward trends in pts with RAS wt & overall (Table). Conclusions: ETS/DpR in pts with RAS wt mCRC might be a potential prognostic marker of OS/PPS regardless of targeted therapy and primary tumor location. Superior prognostic values of ETS+ are expected in pts treated with anti-EGFR ab. [Table: see text]