Citations

Abstract Introduction: Rapid cell proliferation requires intact and faithful DNA damage repair mechanisms. DNA polymerase theta (POLQ) plays a key role in repairing DNA double-strand breaks through the microhomology-mediated end-joining (MMEJ), which is one of the three main pathways involved in repairing replication-induced double-strand breaks. Limited data have suggested that concurrent depletion of POLQ and ataxia-telangiectasia mutated (ATM) could be embryonic lethal. Hence, this phenomenon has the potential to be exploited for therapeutic benefit in cancers where ATM mutations are commonly seen. Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a non-Hodgkin lymphoma marked by (11;14) translocation with ATM alterations seen in 40-50% of patients. There is an unmet need to find novel therapeutic strategies, especially in relapsed and/or refractory (R/R) MCL. Here, we investigated whether targeting POLQ and ATM could be a potential therapeutic strategy in MCL. Methods: In vitro studies were conducted by using MCL cell lines. CRISPR-Cas9 system was used to genetically deplete POLQ and ATM genes and sgRNAs co-expressing fluorescence markers were used to track the cell population with respective genotypes over time. Cell viability was assessed by CellTiter-Glo assay and flow cytometry. All cell lines were profiled for ATM expression and activity. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. The combination index of <1 was defined as synergistic. Results: CRISPR-Cas9-mediated depletion of POLQ significantly decreased cell proliferation in multiple MCL cell lines. In particular, Granta-519, which possesses a single copy of kinase-dead ATM that is reduced in expression, was most sensitive to POLQ depletion. Concurrent genetic depletion of ATM and POLQ resulted in a synergistic antiproliferative effect in ATM-proficient MCL cell lines. Subsequently, this cellular phenotype caused by the genetic intervention was recapitulated by using two POLQ inhibitors (novobiocin and ART558) and an ATM inhibitor (AZD0156). In vitro, single-agent treatment with novobiocin or ART558 caused a significant cytotoxic effect at physiologically relevant concentrations in ATM-deficient cells and co-treatment of novobiocin or ART558 with AZD0156 was synergistic in killing ATM-proficient MCL cells. Importantly, POLQ inhibitors significantly decreased the cell viability of MCIR1, which is an ibrutinib-resistant MCL cell line. Mechanistically, novobiocin or ART558 treatment induced gH2AX and cleaved PARP upregulation, which was further enhanced by ATM depletion, suggesting that co-inhibition of POLQ and ATM caused apoptosis due to the accumulation of unrepaired DNA damage. Conclusion: POLQ is a promising target in MCL, especially in ATM-deficient setting. In ATM-proficient MCL, targeting ATM and POLQ is synergistic. Our data has the potential to uncover novel biomarker-driven drug therapy of POLQ inhibitors in R/R MCL. Citation Format: Jithma Prasad Abeykoon, Shuhei Asada, Kalindi Parmar, Xiaosheng Wu, Thomas Witzig, Geoffrey Shapiro, Alan D. D'Andrea. Targeting DNA polymerase theta and ATM leads to synergistic killing of mantle cell lymphoma cells. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 6208.

Abstract Lung squamous cell carcinoma (LUSC) is a major histological subtype of lung cancer accounting for ~30% of all lung cancer diagnoses. LUSC patients suffer from poor therapeutic response, high relapse rate, and poor prognosis. A major reason for this bleak outcome is the lack of well characterized oncogenic drivers of LUSC. This has stalled the generation of relevant genetic pre-clinical mouse models amenable to studying LUSC tumorigenesis in vivo and developing targeted therapeutics to treat LUSC patients. Our group has identified concomitant 3q26 copy number gain (CNG) and TP53 loss as defining genetic alterations present in ~90% of LUSC tumors. Furthermore, we have identified three 3q26 oncogenes (PRKCI, ECT2 and SOX2) that genetically and biochemically collaborate to drive LUSC tumor formation. Coordinate overexpression of Prkci, Ect2 and Sox2, and loss of Trp53 in ex vivo cultures of lung basal stem cells (LBSCs; a potential cell of origin for LUSC) is both necessary and sufficient to transform these cells into orthotopic LUSC tumors in syngeneic mice. These findings indicate that 3q26 amplification and TP53 loss play a critical role in the initiation and progression of LUSC. Based on these data, we have developed the first autochthonous genetically engineered mouse model (GEMM) to study the role of 3q26 CNG in LUSC tumorigenesis in vivo. Our GEMM allows inducible overexpression of Prkci, Ect2, and Sox2 and knockout of Trp53 (PES/Trp53−/−) in lung tissue. Tumorigenesis will be initiated in PES/Trp53−/− mice using an established protocol to target transgene recombination to LBSCs in vivo. These mice will be assessed for tumor latency, survival, tumor burden, and metastatic potential. In related studies, we used bioinformatics analyses on primary LUSC tumors from the Cancer Genome Atlas’ database to identify 13 genes in addition to PRKCI, ECT2 and SOX2, whose expression is driven by 3q26 amplification. These genes were functionally characterized by assessing the effect of shRNA-mediated gene silencing on soft-agar growth of human H520 LUSC cells, a cell line that harbors 3q26 amplification. Our results revealed that knockdown of each of these genes independently resulted in a significant decrease in soft agar colony formation. We further assessed these genes through RT-qPCR mRNA expression profiling comparing PES/Trp53−/- transformed LBSCs to non-transformed LBSCs. These genes were significantly upregulated in PES/Trp53−/- transformed LBSCs, suggesting that they play important roles in LBSC transformation. Future work will further assess the molecular mechanisms by which these additional 3q26 genes contribute to LUSC cell transformation and assess the role of alternate cells of origin (Club and AT2) in 3q26-driven LUSC tumor formation using our PES/Trp53−/− GEMM. Citation Format: Kayleah M. Meneses, Capella Weems, Yi Liu, Verline Justilien, Nicole R. Murray, Alan P. Fields. Characterizing 3q26 copy number gain in lung squamous cell carcinoma through a novel genetically engineered mouse model [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 27.

Cancers originating in the esophagus or esophagogastric junction constitute a major global health problem. Esophageal cancers are histologically classified as squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) or adenocarcinoma, which differ in their etiology, pathology, tumor location, therapeutics, and prognosis. In contrast to esophageal adenocarcinoma, which usually affects the lower esophagus, esophageal SCC is more likely to localize at or higher than the tracheal bifurcation. Systemic therapy can provide palliation, improved survival, and enhanced quality of life in patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. The implementation of biomarker testing, especially analysis of HER2 status, microsatellite instability status, and the expression of programmed death-ligand 1, has had a significant impact on clinical practice and patient care. Targeted therapies including trastuzumab, nivolumab, ipilimumab, and pembrolizumab have produced encouraging results in clinical trials for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Palliative management, which may include systemic therapy, chemoradiation, and/or best supportive care, is recommended for all patients with unresectable or metastatic cancer. Multidisciplinary team management is essential for all patients with locally advanced esophageal or esophagogastric junction cancers. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Cancers focuses on the management of recurrent or metastatic disease.

PURPOSE Enzalutamide and abiraterone both target androgen receptor signaling but via different mechanisms. The mechanism of action of one drug may counteract the resistance pathways of the other. We sought to determine whether the addition of abiraterone acetate and prednisone (AAP) to enzalutamide prolongs overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in the first-line setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS Men with untreated mCRPC were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive first-line enzalutamide with or without AAP. The primary end point was OS. Toxicity, prostate-specific antigen declines, pharmacokinetics, and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) were also examined. Data were analyzed using an intent-to-treat approach. The Kaplan-Meier estimate and the stratified log-rank statistic were used to compare OS between treatments. RESULTS In total, 1,311 patients were randomly assigned: 657 to enzalutamide and 654 to enzalutamide plus AAP. OS was not statistically different between the two arms (median, 32.7 [95% CI, 30.5 to 35.4] months for enzalutamide v 34.2 [95% CI, 31.4 to 37.3] months for enzalutamide and AAP; hazard ratio [HR], 0.89; one-sided P = .03; boundary nominal significance level = .02). rPFS was longer in the combination arm (median rPFS, 21.3 [95% CI, 19.4 to 22.9] months for enzalutamide v 24.3 [95% CI, 22.3 to 26.7] months for enzalutamide and AAP; HR, 0.86; two-sided P = .02). However, pharmacokinetic clearance of abiraterone was 2.2- to 2.9-fold higher when administered with enzalutamide, compared with clearance values for abiraterone alone. CONCLUSION The addition of AAP to enzalutamide for first-line treatment of mCRPC was not associated with a statistically significant benefit in OS. Drug-drug interactions between the two agents resulting in increased abiraterone clearance may partly account for this result, although these interactions did not prevent the combination regimen from having more nonhematologic toxicity.

AbstractObjectiveTo compute penetrance and recurrence risk using a genome‐wide PRS (including and excluding the APOE region) in families with Alzheimer's disease.MethodsGenotypes from the National Institute on Aging Late‐Onset Alzheimer's Disease Family‐Based Study and a study of familial Alzheimer's disease in Caribbean Hispanics were used to compute PRS with and without variants in the 2 MB region flanking APOE. PRS was calculated in using clumping/thresholding and Bayesian methods and was assessed for association with Alzheimer's disease and age at onset. Penetrance and recurrence risk for carriers in highest and lowest PRS quintiles were compared separately within APOE‐ε4 carriers and non‐carriers.ResultsPRS excluding the APOE region was strongly associated with clinical and neuropathological diagnosis of AD. PRS association with AD was similar in participants who did not carry an APOE‐ε4 allele (OR = 1.74 [1.53–1.91]) compared with APOE‐ε4 carriers (1.53 [1.4–1.68]). Compared to the lowest quintile, the highest PRS quintile had a 10% higher penetrance at age 70 (p = 0.0006) and a 20% higher penetrance at age 80 (p < 10e‐05). Stratifying by APOE‐ε4 allele, PRS in the highest quintile was significantly more penetrant than the lowest quintile, both, within APOE‐ε4 carriers (14.5% higher at age 80, p = 0.002) and non‐carriers (26% higher at 80, p < 10e‐05). Recurrence risk for siblings conferred by a co‐sibling in the highest PRS quintile increased from 4% between the ages of 65–74 years to 39% at age 85 and older.InterpretationPRS can be used to estimate penetrance and recurrence risk in familial Alzheimer's disease among carriers and non‐carries of APOE‐ε4.

Background: Radiation necrosis (RN) is a clinically relevant complication of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for intracranial metastasis (ICM) treatments. Radiation necrosis development is variable following SRS. It remains unclear if risk factors for and clinical outcomes following RN may be different for melanoma patients. We reviewed patients with ICM from metastatic melanoma to understand the potential impact of RN in this patient population. Methods: Patients who received SRS for ICM from melanoma at Mayo Clinic Arizona between 2013 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Data collected included demographics, tumor characteristics, radiation parameters, prior surgical and systemic treatments, and patient outcomes. Radiation necrosis was diagnosed by clinical evaluation including brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and, in some cases, tissue evaluation. Results: Radiation necrosis was diagnosed in 7 (27%) of 26 patients at 1.6 to 38 months following initial SRS. Almost 92% of all patients received systemic therapy and 35% had surgical resection prior to SRS. Patients with RN trended toward having larger ICM and a prior history of surgical resection, although statistical significance was not reached. Among patients with resection, those who developed RN had a longer period between surgery and SRS start (mean 44 vs 33 days). Clinical improvement following treatment for RN was noted in 2 (29%) patients. Conclusions: Radiation necrosis is relatively common following SRS for treatment of ICM from metastatic melanoma and clinical outcomes are poor. Further studies aimed at mitigating RN development and identifying novel approaches for treatment are warranted.

TPS589 Background: In patients (pts) with metastatic unresectable urothelial cancer, platinum-based chemotherapy remains the standard of care for first-line treatment followed by switch maintenance avelumab if disease control is achieved with chemotherapy. Outside of this setting, single agent immunotherapy is often used in pts that have recurrence after platinum-based chemotherapy or are platinum ineligible. Atezolizumab is a PD-L1 inhibitor currently approved for pts that have urothelial cancers expressing positive PD-L1 or pts ineligible for receiving platinum-based chemotherapy. Tumor-targeted radiotherapy can generate immune-stimulating effects without immune suppression as was previously thought. Moreover, it has become clear that radiotherapy can induce profound effects on tumor cells and the tumor microenvironment that can enhance or trigger an anticancer immune response. While numerous trials have investigated the abscopal effect, this trial will have specific parameters regarding drug type, radiation dose and administration. Methods: A032002 is a phase 2 trial addressing pts that are platinum ineligible or refractory to platinum-based chemotherapy. 144 pts will be randomized to receive either atezolizumab or atezolizumab and single site radiation therapy. The atezolizumab regimen is 1200 mg every 3 weeks. Administration of radiotherapy will occur to one non-target site (8 Gy x 3) for pts randomized to the atezolizumab + radiotherapy arm. All pts will undergo centralized PD-L1 testing (SP142 monoclonal primary antibody), which can be performed on archival tissue; a new biopsy is only required if no archival tissue is available. Key eligibility criteria include age ≥ 18 years, ECOG performance status 0-2, histologically confirmed metastatic urothelial cancer, having at least one measurable site per RECIST 1.1 to monitor for abscopal response, one site targetable for radiation, and tissue available for PD-L1 testing. The primary endpoint is tumor response within 6 months of randomization. Tumor response is defined as a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) as assessed by the treating physician using RECIST 1.1 criteria. For a one-sided log rank test with a type 1 error rateof 0.10, the study has 90% power to detect a 20% increase in response rate. Key secondary endpoints include tumor response using iRECIST, progression-free survival and overall survival. Quality of life assessments include EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-BLM30 and PROMIS-Fatigue. Tissue, urine and blood samples will be collected and biobanked for future correlative science. Enrollment to ART began in December 2021. The study is available for participation at all US NCTN sites with a projected enrollment of 3 years. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882. Clinical trial information: NCT04936230 .

TPS292 Background: PT-112 is a novel small I-O molecule currently in development for several cancers. Preclinical studies have shown the robust induction of immunogenic cell death by PT-112, leading to an anti-cancer adaptive immune response. Biodistribution experiments in mice showed PT-112’s partial bone affinity. In two prior phase I studies, late-line metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients (mCRPC pts) were treated with evidence of anti-cancer activity, including tumor volume reductions, improvements in PET and bone scans, PSA and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) reductions, and anecdotal cases of improvement in disease-related pain. This, taken together with the immunogenic and osteotropic properties observed in preclinical work, provided a strong rationale to further explore PT-112 in mCRPC, an immunologically “cold” disease with a high prevalence of bone metastases. Moreover, in an analysis of >6,000 mCRPC pts, circulating tumor cell (CTC) declines (CTC0 and CTC conversions) were correlated with improvements in survival to a greater extent than PSA declines (PSA50) (Heller et al., JCO, 36:6 2017), prompting incorporation of CTC changes as a secondary endpoint. Methods: The primary objective of the study is to define the dose regimen of PT-112 for pivotal study. Pts are randomized to one of three arms, receiving IV PT-112 on 28-day cycles via one hour infusions on (1) Days 1 and 15 at 250 mg/m2, (2) Days 1 and 15 at 360 mg/m2, or (3) Days 1 and 15 of cycle 1 at 360 mg/m2 followed by 250 mg/m2 on Day 15 of subsequent cycles. Key eligibility criteria include radiographically progressive disease at study entry; ≥3 life-prolonging therapies for metastatic disease including 1-2 taxanes, ≥1 new generation anti-androgen therapies, and other drugs FDA approved on the basis of survival; and allowing bone-only metastatic disease. Efficacy assessments comprise disease control rate at 4 months (DCR4) using RECIST and PCWG3 criteria, objective response rate, CTC0 and CTC conversion, PSA50 and ALP reductions. Additionally, T cell receptor sequencing is conducted to characterize treatment-induced changes in T cell fraction and clonal expansions, as a means of generating meaningful supportive data on the immune mechanism of PT-112 monotherapy. A Fleming two-stage design will be used to assess each arm, with a 20% DCR4 as the null hypotheses, requiring ≥6 of 25 pts responding in stage one and ≥14 of 45 in total to reject the null. In addition, other efficacy measures, such as CTC responses, as well as exposure/response and exposure/safety analyses will be applied to characterize the risk/benefit ratio and select the optimal dose regimen for PT-112. As of October 11th, 2022, 38 pts have been enrolled out of a planned maximum of 135. Clinical trial information: NCT02266745 .

TPS277 Background: Despite a growing number of treatment options for first-line mCRPC, approximately 40% of patients (pts) have radiographic progression within the first year. Co-inhibition of androgen receptor (AR) and PARP is a promising therapeutic strategy that leverages synthetic lethality induced by impaired double-strand DNA repair. Two phase III studies have shown improvement in radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) in HRR-mutant pts with abiraterone + PARPi combinations vs abiraterone alone. However, the results in HRR-wild type pts are conflicting, with only one of the studies demonstrating a benefit with the abiraterone + PARPi combination. ENZ + RUCA has shown an acceptable safety profile & no significant drug-drug interactions (S-DDI) in a phase 1b trial. This allows its evaluation in mCRPC. Methods: CASPAR (A031902) is a phase 3 study in which 984 pts will be randomized on a 1:1 basis to ENZ plus RUCA/PBO. HRR gene aberration is not required for enrollment. All pts will undergo next-generation targeted exome sequencing from archival tumor tissue (new biopsy only required if no archival tissue is available). Treatment will be continued until disease progression and crossover is not allowed. Key eligibility criteria are age ≥ 18 years, ECOG PS 0-2, biopsy-proven prostate adenocarcinoma, progressive (PSA or radiographic) disease per Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 guidelines, measurable or non-measurable disease per RECIST 1.1, no prior treatment for mCRPC (prior docetaxel, abiraterone, darolutamide, or apalutamide in non-mCRPC setting is allowed), no significant uncontrolled comorbidity, and no medications with S-DDI with ENZ/RUCA. Hierarchical co-primary endpoints are overall survival (OS) and rPFS. The OS analysis will be undertaken as a primary endpoint if the rPFS endpoint is met. For a one-sided logrank test with a type 1 error rate equal to 0.025, the study has 90% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.71 in rPFS (median rPFS of 15 and 21 months in control and combination arms, respectively), and 80% power to detect an HR of 0.80 in OS (median OS of 32 and 40 months, respectively). Key secondary endpoints are rPFS and OS in pts with vs without pathogenic BRCA1, BRCA2, or PALB2 alterations; and differences in adverse events and quality of life (QOL) outcomes between the treatment arms. QOL assessments include Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Prostate (FACT-P), Brief Pain Inventory Short Form (BPI-SF), and EQ-5D-5L. A key correlative endpoint is the sensitivity of ctDNA testing for HRR gene alterations. Enrollment began in July 2021 & the study is available for participation to all US-NCTN sites. Clinical trial information: NCT04455750 .

695 Background: Recent results from COSMIC 313 trial and updated findings from other contemporary trials have added to the existing body of evidence for 1L mRCC. Therefore, we present the most up-to-date results from our living, interactive systematic review (LISR) to facilitate the choice of optimal therapy in 1L mRCC setting. Methods: This LISR and network meta-analysis is maintained using a novel living evidence synthesis (LIvE) framework. The framework facilitates the identification of new or updated studies using an automated ‘living’ search which is followed by screening and extraction in a semi-automated fashion within a machine learning assisted graphical user interface. Relevant data is parsed and analyzed to compute mixed treatment comparisons and certainty of evidence is adjudicated using a rule-based algorithm. Detailed methods have been published before (PMID: 33824031). Results: As of October 1st 2022, this LISR includes 16 clinical trials (30 references). Mixed treatment comparisons showed statistically significant PFS benefit with lenvatinib-pembrolizumab (LenPem; rank 1) when compared to cabozantinib-nivolumab (CabNivo; rank 3; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.69, 95% confidence interval: 0.52-0.93), CaboNivo-ipilimumab (CaboNivoIpi; rank 4; HR: 0.62; 0.43-0.89), avelumab-axitinib (AveAxi; rank 5; HR: 0.56; 0.43-0.75), PemAxi (rank 6; HR: 0.55; 0.42-0.72), atezolizumab-bevacizumab (AteBev; rank 7; HR: 0.46; 0.35-0.59), and NivoIpi (rank 8; HR: 0.45; 0.35-0.59). No significant differences were observed between CaboNivoIpi and other combination therapies for PFS improvement. Similarly, for OS, LenPem (rank 1), PemAxi (rank 2) and CaboNivo (rank 3) were ranked as potentially more efficacious treatment options than other counterparts. However, no statistically significant difference was observed for OS benefit with mixed treatment comparisons. The odds of achieving an ORR were higher with LenPem (rank 1; odds ratio [OR]: 2.44; 1.43-4.17), and CaboNivo (rank 2; OR: 1.77; 1.04-3.03) when compared to CaboNivoIpi (rank 6). NivoIpi (rank 1), LenPem (rank 2), CaboNivoIpi (rank 3) were ranked potentially as more efficacious treatments for achieving a CR. In terms of grade 3 or higher treatment related adverse events, NivoIpi (rank 3) was ranked as potentially the safest option among other combinations while CaboNivoIpi (rank 12), LenPem (rank 11), and CaboNivo (rank 10) were more likely to increase the risk of toxicity compared to most other treatments. Conclusions: Triplet combination of CaboNivoIpi may not provide additional survival benefit compared to other immunotherapy combinations and may increase toxicity. Patient-level considerations such as treatment toxicity, and quality of life should be factored in when opting intensified 1L therapies in mRCC patients.