Citations

Abstract Background FGFR2 fusions occur in ~15% of patients (pts) with iCCA, a rare cancer with a poor prognosis. Futibatinib, a highly selective, irreversible FGFR1-4 inhibitor, has shown activity across tumor types, including iCCA, in a phase 1 study. The pivotal phase 2 FOENIX-CCA2 trial (NCT02052778) is evaluating futibatinib in iCCA harboring FGFR2 fusions/rearrangements. Here, we report the first efficacy, safety, and quality of life (QoL) data for the complete FOENIX-CCA2 population. Methods Eligible pts had unresectable/metastatic iCCA with an FGFR2 fusion/rearrangement and progressive disease (PD) after ≥1 prior treatment (tx; excluding FGFR inhibitors). Pts received futibatinib 20 mg QD until PD/intolerability. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1 by independent central review (target ORR: 20%). Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Subgroup analyses were performed by pt characteristic and molecular alteration. Results Among 103 pts (56% female), 53% had received ≥2 prior tx. FGFR2 fusions were present in 78% (23% had FGFR2-BICC1 fusions) and FGFR2 rearrangements in 22%. At data cutoff (Oct 1, 2020), 72 pts (70%) had discontinued tx. The study met its primary objective with a confirmed ORR of 41.7% (43/103). Responses were durable, with a median (m) DOR of 9.7 mo and 72% of responses ≥6 mo. DCR was 82.5%. mPFS was 9.0 mo; mOS was 21.7 mo, with a 12-mo OS rate of 72%. ORR was consistent across pt demographic subgroups (≥65 y: 65.2%; 2 prior tx: 38.7%). Common tx-related AEs (TRAEs) were hyperphosphatemia (85%), alopecia (33%), and dry mouth (30%). The most frequent grade 3 TRAE, hyperphosphatemia (30%), resolved with adequate management (median 7 d). Retinal disorders (all grade 1-2) were reported in 8% of pts. TRAEs were managed with dosing interruptions (50%)/reductions (54%); 2 pts discontinued tx due to TRAEs. No tx-related deaths occurred. ORRs were consistent in pts with dosing interruptions (40.2%) or reductions (46.8%). PROs were stable through 11.0 mo of tx. In exploratory biomarker analyses, ORR was consistent in pts with FGFR2 fusions (43.8%) and other FGFR2 rearrangements (34.8%) and in pts with BICC1 (41.7%) and non-BICC1 (44.6%) fusion partners. Notably, no obvious differences in ORR were observed in pts with co-occurring genetic alterations, including TP53 comutations (ORR, 38.5% [5/13]). Additional biomarker data will be presented. Conclusions Futibatinib resulted in frequent, durable objective responses in pts with iCCA harboring FGFR2 fusion/rearrangements, regardless of pt baseline characteristic, molecular alteration, or comutation. AEs were manageable with dosing modifications that did not impact response. QoL was maintained. Citation Format: Lipika Goyal, Funda Meric-Bernstam, Antoine Hollebecque, Chigusa Morizane, Juan W. Valle, Thomas B. Karasic, Thomas A. Abrams, Robin Kate Kelley, Philippe Cassier, Junji Furuse, Heinz-Josef Klümpen, Heung-Moon Chang, Li-Tzong Chen, Yoshito Komatsu, Kunihiro Masuda, Daniel Ahn, Yaohua He, Nital Soni, Karim A. Benhadji, John A. Bridgewater. Primary results of phase 2 FOENIX-CCA2: The irreversible FGFR1-4 inhibitor futibatinib in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) with FGFR2 fusions/rearrangements [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr CT010.

4069 Background: CCA is a rare cancer for which there are limited effective therapies. IDH1 mutations occur in ̃20% of intrahepatic CCAs, resulting in production of the oncometabolite D-2-hydroxyglutarate, which promotes oncogenesis. IVO (AG-120) is a first-in-class, oral, small-molecule inhibitor of mutant IDH1 (mIDH1). ClarIDHy aimed to demonstrate the efficacy of IVO vs PBO in pts with unresectable or metastatic m IDH1 CCA. The primary endpoint was met with significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) by independent radiology center (IRC) with IVO vs PBO (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.37, p < 0.0001). Objective response rate (ORR) and stable disease for IVO were 2.4% (3 partial responses) and 50.8% (n = 63) vs 0% and 27.9% (n = 17) for PBO. IVO pts experienced significantly less decline in physical and emotional functioning domains of quality of life at cycle 2 day 1 vs PBO pts (nominal p < 0.05). Methods: Pts with m IDH1 CCA were randomized 2:1 to IVO (500 mg PO QD) or matched PBO and stratified by prior systemic therapies (1 or 2). Key eligibility: unresectable or metastatic m IDH1 CCA based on central testing; ECOG PS 0–1; measurable disease (RECIST v1.1). Crossover from PBO to IVO was permitted at radiographic progression. Primary endpoint: PFS by IRC. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS; by intent-to-treat), ORR, PFS (by investigator), safety, and quality of life. The planned crossover-adjusted OS was derived using the rank-preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) model. Results: As of 31 May 2020, ̃780 pts were prescreened for an IDH1 mutation and 187 were randomized to IVO (n = 126) or PBO (n = 61); 13 remain on IVO. Median age 62 y; M/F 68/119; 91% intrahepatic CCA; 93% metastatic disease; 47% had 2 prior therapies. 70% of PBO pts crossed over to IVO. OS data were mature, with 79% OS events in IVO arm and 82% in PBO. Median OS (mOS) was 10.3 months for IVO and 7.5 months for PBO (HR = 0.79; 95% CI 0.56–1.12; one-sided p = 0.093). The RPSFT-adjusted mOS was 5.1 months for PBO (HR = 0.49; 95% CI 0.34–0.70; p < 0.0001). Common all-grade treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs, ≥ 15%) in the IVO arm: nausea 41%, diarrhea 35%, fatigue 31%, cough 25%, abdominal pain 24%, decreased appetite 24%, ascites 23%, vomiting 23%, anemia 18%, and constipation 15%. Grade ≥ 3 TEAEs were reported in 50% of IVO pts vs 37% of PBO pts, with grade ≥ 3 treatment-related AEs in 7% of IVO pts vs 0% in PBO. 7% of IVO pts experienced an AE leading to treatment discontinuation vs 9% of PBO pts. There were no treatment-related deaths. Conclusions: IVO was well tolerated and resulted in a favorable OS trend vs PBO despite a high rate of crossover. These data – coupled with statistical improvement in PFS, supportive quality of life data, and favorable safety profile – demonstrate the clinical benefit of IVO in advanced m IDH1 CCA. Clinical trial information: NCT02989857.

e14516 Background: IEC are arguably the most promising therapy in oncology, and FDA approvals for CAR T cells are a testament to their real potential. This has led to a great growth of clinical trials (CT), making the evaluation of their associated data increasingly challenging. To facilitate this process, we performed a systematic review of ClinicalTrials.gov focused on IEC therapies in oncology. We performed an analysis of the CT data and forecast trends for 2025. Methods: CT registries were retrieved from ClinicalTrials.gov with a systematic search query. We included CT registered between 1993-2020, which used IEC-based therapies in oncology. Statistical analysis using descriptive and inferential methods allowed us to identify trends and establish forecasts. Results: We identified 938 registrations of IEC-CTs in oncology, and 51% of those were active. The most common IEC type was CAR T (51%), followed by NK (15%), TCR T (8%), TIL (8%), and CIK (3%). 69% of IEC-CTs were aimed at a specific target vs. 31% that lack that specificity. The number of annual CAR T-CTs continue to increase, and we forecast 320 registrations during 2025. Since 2018, the number of CTs using unmodified T cells and TIL has increased (largely due to metastatic melanoma studies). NK cells CTs represent 8% of all registrations, and by 2025 we anticipate that >150 NK-based CTs will be registered per year, a number similar to CAR T-CTs registered during 2020. IEC-CTs based on allogeneic sources represent 18% of all registrations and are expected to grow 2.5 fold in the next 5 years. In solid tumors, the most common IEC-CTs are based on Non-CAR studies, while in hem-malignancies 76% of CTs are CAR T. Only one solid tumor, CAR T-CT, has reached phase 2/3, while 7 CIK-CTs were used to target various organ tumors. Conclusions: IEC-CTs continue to grow exponentially and represent an active field of clinical research in oncology. Allogeneic and NK-CTs increase rapidly and are among the most promising IEC-CTs. A rising proportion of CTs in solid tumors are using CIK and TIL rather than CAR T-cells, which are more popular for treating hem-malignancies. This is a direct reflection of the challenges associated with CAR T infiltration and persistence in solid tumors. Our analyses indicate that annual IEC-CTs registrations will double by 2025. We anticipate the increase in cellular therapy options will demand an organized response, including adequate logistical planning and policy implementation in response to the landscape changes in clinical oncology during the upcoming years.[Table: see text]

PURPOSE BIM activation is essential for epidermal growth factor receptor ( EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)–triggered apoptosis in EGFR-mutant non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A deletion in the intron two of the BIM gene results in generation of alternatively spliced isoforms that impairs their apoptotic response to TKIs, conferring the NSCLC cells intrinsic resistance to these medications. Patients with both alterations have poor clinical evolution. The current study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy and tolerability of EGFR-TKIs plus bevacizumab (Bev) versus EGFR-TKIs alone as first-line treatment in advanced NSCLC patients with EGFR mutations and BIM deletions ( BIMdel). MATERIALS AND METHODS A retrospective analysis was conducted. BIMdel was detected using polymerase chain reaction analysis and direct sequencing of DNA. BIM protein expression was investigated by immunohistochemistry, and BIM mRNA levels by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. Clinical characteristics, overall survival, progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), and treatment-related adverse events were compared between both groups. RESULTS Thirty-three patients were included; 15 received EGFR-TKIs, and 18 received EGFR-TKIs plus Bev. The median age was 63 years, with a majority of recruited female patients. All included individuals had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 2 or less. The addition of Bev resulted in a significantly higher ORR (94.4% v 40%, P > .001). Median PFS was longer with the use of the combination therapy (11.12 v 7.87 months; P = .001). Median overall survival tended to be longer in the EGFR-TKIs plus Bev (30.9 v 25.4 months; P = .06) but failed to reach statistical significance. Response in terms of both partial and complete as well as overall favorably affected PFS. CONCLUSION EGFR-TKIs plus Bev conferred a significantly higher ORR and PFS in advanced NSCLC patients with EGFR mutation and BIMdel. Further prospective studies are needed to validate these findings.

348 Background: The proportion of females in medicine is increasing (approx. 50% in medical school/workforce), but disparities in female authorship in oncology research publications exist; female corresponding authorship reportedly ranges from 7.2-39.1% in oncology clinical trials (Ludmir et al 2019). This study aimed to describe and assess factors associated with female first and senior authorship in later phase systemic clinical trials in BTC and to identify any changes over time. Methods: Embase/Medline were used to identify final primary trial publications in BTC (2000-2020) (excluding phase I (PI) (expected to move to later phase), mixed tumour site trials, reviews, editorials and trial-in-progress publications). Gender was determined by inspection of names, google search and author communication. Chi-square tests and log regression were used to assess factors associated with female first and senior authorship, including changes over time (STATA16). Results: Of 501 publications, 163 met inclusion criteria; 80% single-arm PII and 15% and 5% randomised PII and PIII respectively; 73% enrolled ≤50 patients. Tumour primary sites were all BTC: 86%, cholangiocarcinoma: 8%, gallbladder cancer: 6%; 80% involved chemotherapy, 13% targeted therapy and 5% localised/systemic combinations; 65% were in first-line (1L) advanced setting, 17% post 1L, 13% advanced non-specified and 5% neo-adjuvant/adjuvant. Forty-eight percent received industry funding and 65% met primary end-point. Sixty-four percent were published post ABC-02 (Valle et al 2010). Publication impact factor (IF) was ≤5 in 50% and >20 in 12%. Median number of authors in all publications was 11. Geographic location of all first and senior authors were Asia (42%/42%), Europe (29%/29%), USA (24%/22%) and other (4%/6%), respectively. Median individual trial female author representation was 25%; there were no female authors in 12% of trials. Overall, female first and senior author representation was 21% and 11%, respectively. Median position of first female author was second. In publications with IF ≤20 and >20, there were 22% and 16% female first and 13% and 0% female senior authors, respectively. The phase of trial, journal IF, industry funding, or whether met primary end-point did not impact female first or senior author representation (all P>.05). There were more female senior authors associated with “other” geographic locations (40% in 10 trials) (P=.016) vs Asia (7%), Europe (8%) and USA (14%). There were no significant changes in female first or senior author representation over time (‘00-05: 21%/18%, ‘06-10: 27%/5%, ‘11-15: 15%/15%, ‘16-20: 22%/9%, P=.738, and P=.508 respectively). Conclusions: Female first and senior author representation in later phase systemic clinical trial publications in BTC is low and has not changed significantly over time. The underlying reasons for this imbalance need to be better understood and addressed.

266 Background: CCA is a rare cancer for which there are limited effective therapies. IDH1 mutations occur in ~20% of intrahepatic CCAs, resulting in production of the oncometabolite D-2-hydroxyglutarate, which promotes oncogenesis. IVO (AG-120) is a first-in-class, oral, small-molecule inhibitor of mutant IDH1 (m IDH1). ClarIDHy aimed to demonstrate the efficacy of IVO vs PBO in pts with unresectable or metastatic m IDH1 CCA. The primary endpoint was met with significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) by independent radiology center (IRC) with IVO vs PBO (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.37, p < 0.0001). Objective response rate (ORR) and stable disease for IVO were 2.4% (3 partial responses) and 50.8% (n = 63) vs 0% and 27.9% (n = 17) for PBO. IVO pts experienced significantly less decline in physical and emotional functioning domains of quality of life at cycle 2 day 1 vs PBO pts (nominal p < 0.05). Methods: Pts with m IDH1 CCA were randomized 2:1 to IVO (500 mg PO QD) or matched PBO and stratified by prior systemic therapies (1 or 2). Key eligibility: unresectable or metastatic m IDH1 CCA based on central testing; ECOG PS 0–1; measurable disease (RECIST v1.1). Crossover from PBO to IVO was permitted at radiographic progression. Primary endpoint: PFS by IRC. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS; by intent-to-treat), ORR, PFS (by investigator), safety, and quality of life. The planned crossover-adjusted OS was derived using the rank-preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) model. Results: As of 31 May 2020, ~780 pts were prescreened for an IDH1 mutation and 187 were randomized to IVO (n = 126) or PBO (n = 61); 13 remain on IVO. Median age 62 y; M/F 68/119; 91% intrahepatic CCA; 93% metastatic disease; 47% had 2 prior therapies. 70% of PBO pts crossed over to IVO. OS data were mature, with 79% OS events in IVO arm and 82% in PBO. Median OS (mOS) was 10.3 months for IVO and 7.5 months for PBO (HR = 0.79; 95% CI 0.56–1.12; one-sided p = 0.093). The RPSFT-adjusted mOS was 5.1 months for PBO (HR = 0.49; 95% CI 0.34–0.70; p < 0.0001). Common all-grade treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs, ≥ 15%) in the IVO arm: nausea 41%, diarrhea 35%, fatigue 31%, cough 25%, abdominal pain 24%, decreased appetite 24%, ascites 23%, vomiting 23%, anemia 18%, and constipation 15%. Grade ≥ 3 TEAEs were reported in 50% of IVO pts vs 37% of PBO pts, with grade ≥ 3 treatment-related AEs in 7% of IVO pts vs 0% in PBO. 7% of IVO pts experienced an AE leading to treatment discontinuation vs 9% of PBO pts. There were no treatment-related deaths. Conclusions: IVO was well tolerated and resulted in a favorable OS trend vs PBO despite a high rate of crossover. These data – coupled with statistical improvement in PFS, supportive quality of life data, and favorable safety profile – demonstrate the clinical benefit of IVO in advanced m IDH1 CCA. Clinical trial information: NCT02989857.

Background: Patients with cholangiocarcinoma often have indwelling biliary stents or catheters which are prone to obstructions and/or infections; studies show that 20–40% present with fever and/or jaundice requiring urgent treatment in the outpatient setting for which there are no uniform guidelines. The goal was to develop an expert panel consensus on this topic using the modified RAND/UCLA Delphi process to rate treatment appropriateness. Methods: Thirteen expert physicians from relevant specialties, geography, and practice settings were recruited for the panel. Patient scenarios were developed and panelists rated the therapies before and after a face-to-face discussion. The appropriateness of various therapies was rated on a scale from 1–9 and classified as appropriate, inappropriate, or uncertain. Scenarios with greater than 2 (>2) ratings of 1–3 (inappropriate) and greater than 2 (>2) ratings of 7–9 (appropriate) were considered to have disagreement and were not assigned an appropriateness rating. Results: Panelists were from all US regions and the UK (8%) and had practiced for a mean 16.5 years (4–33 years). Panelists rated 480 scenarios before the meeting and re-rated 288 of the clinical scenarios after the meeting. The panelists agreed that ongoing treatment with chemotherapy did not influence decision-making and, therefore, 192 scenarios were excluded from the final list. Disagreement decreased from 37.5% before to 10.4% after the meeting. Consensus on stent/tube manipulation and inpatient antibiotic therapy was obtained and summarized in patients as “appropriate” or “maybe appropriate” based on a patient’s bilirubin level at presentation. Conclusions: The Delphi process produced consensus guidelines to fill an unmet need in the urgent management of ascending cholangitis in patients with cholangiocarcinoma.

TPS600 Background: Pts with adv CCA have poor survival outcomes, and chemotherapy offers limited survival benefit (5-year survival rates, 5–10%; median overall survival [OS], 8–12 months). FGFR2 gene rearrangements are known to be early drivers of oncogenesis in ~15% of pts with intrahepatic (i) CCA. Futibatinib, an oral, highly selective, irreversible FGFR1-4 inhibitor has shown antitumor activity against a broad spectrum of FGFR-deregulated tumors in preclinical studies. In a previous study, futibatinib demonstrated clinical activity and tolerability in heavily pretreated pts with adv CCA harboring FGFR2 gene rearrangements. This phase 3 trial (FOENIX-CCA3) is designed to evaluate futibatinib vs gem-cis as 1L therapy for pts with adv iCCA harboring FGFR2 rearrangements. Methods: FOENIX-CCA3 is a multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 3 study that will be conducted in pts with metastatic or unresectable iCCA harboring FGFR2 rearrangements (assessed at screening by a central laboratory). Pts must have an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1 and should not have received previous systemic anticancer therapy for adv disease (adjuvant/neoadjuvant therapy ≥6 mo prior to randomization is permissible). Pts with clinically-significant alterations in calcium-phosphorus homeostasis or ectopic mineralization/calcification will be excluded. Approximately 216 pts will be randomized (1:1 ratio) to receive 20 mg futibatinib once daily until disease progression or other discontinuation criteria are met or gem-cis (on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle) for 8 cycles or until disease progression, whichever occurs first. Pts will be stratified by prior surgical excision (yes vs no), geographic region, and locally adv vs metastatic disease. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by independent central review (ICR). Secondary endpoints include objective response rate and disease control rate based on ICR, OS, PFS per investigator assessment, and safety. The anticipated start date is in April, 2020.

TPS592 Background: For advanced CCA, standard of care 1L systemic treatment is GEM + CIS. Genetic alterations in intrahepatic CCA provide potential therapeutic targets. Fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) 2 gene rearrangements driving CCA tumorigenesis were identified almost exclusively in intrahepatic CCA patients (pts) (incidence, 10–16%). In phase 2, PEM (INCB054828), a selective, potent, oral FGFR1–3 inhibitor elicited an objective response rate (ORR) of 35.5% and median progression-free survival (PFS) of 6.9 months (mo) in previously treated, locally advanced or metastatic CCA with FGFR2 rearrangements (NCT02924376). FIGHT-302, a randomized, open-label, phase 3 study will evaluate efficacy and safety of 1L PEM vs GEM + CIS in unresectable/metastatic CCA with FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements (NCT03656536). Methods: Eligible pts are adults with confirmed unresectable/metastatic CCA; no prior systemic therapy for advanced disease < 6 mo before enrollment; radiographically measurable/evaluable disease (per RECIST v1.1); ECOG PS ≤1; documented FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements. Exclusions include clinically significant corneal or retinal disorder; history of calcium and phosphate homeostasis disorder or systemic mineral imbalance with ectopic soft tissue calcification; untreated CNS metastases or history of uncontrolled seizures. Pts will be randomized (1:1; stratified by region and tumor burden) to PEM 13.5 mg QD on a 21-day (d) cycle or GEM (1000 mg/m2) + CIS (25 mg/m2) on D1 and D8 of 21-d cycles (max 8). Crossover to PEM allowed after confirmed progression. PEM titration to 18 mg from cycle 2 allowed for pts without hyperphosphatemia (serum phosphate > 5.5 mg/dL) and Grade ≥2 treatment-related adverse events during cycle 1. Hyperphosphatemia will be managed with diet modifications, phosphate binders, diuretics, or dose adjustments. Treatment will continue until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint is PFS (by independent review). Secondary endpoints are ORR, overall survival, duration of response, disease control rate, safety, and quality of life. Four pts (target N = 432) are enrolled as of Sep 25, 2019. Clinical trial information: NCT03656536.