Citations

Abstract Purpose: Mutations in KRAS/NRAS (RAS) predict lack of anti-EGFR efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, it is unclear if all RAS mutations have similar impact, and atypical mutations beyond those in standard guidelines exist. Experimental Design: We reviewed 7 tissue and 1 cell-free DNA cohorts of 9,485 patients to characterize atypical RAS variants. Using an in vitro cell-based assay (functional annotation for cancer treatment), Ba/F3 transformation, and in vivo xenograft models of transduced isogenic clones, we assessed signaling changes across mutations. Results: KRAS exon 2, extended RAS, and atypical RAS mutations were noted in 37.8%, 9.5%, and 1.2% of patients, respectively. Among atypical variants, KRAS L19F, Q22K, and D33E occurred at prevalence ≥0.1%, whereas no NRAS codon 117/146 and only one NRAS codon 59 mutation was noted. Atypical RAS mutations had worse overall survival than RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC (HR, 2.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.24–6.80; P = 0.014). We functionally characterized 114 variants with the FACT assay. All KRAS exon 2 and extended RAS mutations appeared activating. Of 57 atypical RAS variants characterized, 18 (31.6%) had signaling below wild-type, 23 (40.4%) had signaling between wild-type and activating control, and 16 (28.1%) were hyperactive beyond the activating control. Ba/F3 transformation (17/18 variants) and xenograft model (7/8 variants) validation was highly concordant with FACT results, and activating atypical variants were those that occurred at highest prevalence in clinical cohorts. Conclusions: We provide best available evidence to guide treatment when atypical RAS variants are identified. KRAS L19F, Q22K, D33E, and T50I are more prevalent than many guideline-included RAS variants and functionally relevant.

AbstractFerroptosis is a newly identified cell death mechanism and potential biomarker for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) therapy; however, its clinical relevance and underlying mechanism remain unclear. In this study, transcriptome and methylome data from 374 HCC cases were investigated for 41 ferroptosis‐related genes to identify ferroptosis activity‐associated subtypes. These subtypes were further investigated for associations with clinical and pathological variables, gene mutation landscapes, deregulated pathways and tumour microenvironmental immunity. A gene expression signature and predictive model were developed and validated using an additional 232 HCC cases from another independent cohort. Two distinct ferroptosis phenotypes (Ferroptosis‐H and Ferroptosis‐L) were identified according to ferroptosis gene expression and methylation in the patients with HCC. Patients with the Ferroptosis‐H had worse overall and disease‐specific survival, and the molecular subtypes were significantly associated with different clinical characteristics, mRNA expression patterns, tumour mutation profiles and microenvironmental immune status. Furthermore, a 15‐gene ferroptosis‐related prognostic model (FPM) for HCC was developed and validated which demonstrated accurate risk stratification ability. A nomogram included the FPM risk score, ECOG PS and hepatitis B status was developed for eventual clinical translation. Our results suggest that HCC subtypes defined by ferroptosis gene expression and methylation may be used to stratify patients for clinical decision‐making.

10008 Background: The NCI-Children’s Oncology Group (COG) Pediatric Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (MATCH) trial assigns patients age 1 to 21 years with relapsed or refractory solid tumors, lymphomas, and histiocytic disorders to phase 2 treatment arms of molecularly-targeted therapies based on genetic alterations detected in their tumor. Arm E evaluated the MEK inhibitor selumetinib (ARRY-142886) in patients whose tumors harbored activating alterations in the MAPK pathway ( ARAF, BRAF, HRAS, KRAS, NRAS, MAP2K1, GNA11, GNAQ hotspot mutations; NF1 inactivating mutations; BRAF fusions). Methods: Patients received selumetinib 25 mg/m2/dose (max 75 mg/dose) PO BID for 28-day cycles until disease progression or intolerable toxicity with response assessments obtained every 2-3 cycles. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR); secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS). Patients with low grade glioma were excluded. Results: A total of 21 patients (median age 14 years; range 5-21) were enrolled between 10/2017 and 8/2019, with 20 patients evaluable for response. Diagnoses were high grade glioma (HGG; n = 8), rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 7), adenocarcinoma (n = 2), and one each of MPNST, endodermal sinus/yolk sac tumor, plexiform neurofibroma (PN), and neuroblastoma. MAPK pathway alterations detected consisted of inactivating NF1 mutations (n = 8), hotspot mutations in KRAS (n = 8), NRAS (n = 3), and HRAS (n = 1), and BRAF V600E (n = 2). No objective responses were observed. Three patients had a best response of stable disease (HGG with NF1 mutation, 6 cycles; HGG with KRAS mutation, 12 cycles; PN with NF1 mutation, 13 cycles prior to removal for dose-limiting toxicity). Six-month PFS was 15% (95% CI: 4%, 34%). Adverse events that were deemed possibly, probably, or definitely attributable to study drug included one case each of grade 3 uveitis, lymphopenia, and thromboembolic event; one grade 4 CPK elevation; and one grade 5 thromboembolic event. Conclusions: Selumetinib did not result in tumor regression in this cohort of children and young adults with treatment-refractory tumors with activating MAPK pathway alterations. Of note, two patients with HGG initially had stable disease, but ultimately progressed after 6 and 12 cycles, respectively. Selumetinib has previously demonstrated activity in low grade glioma and PN and is now FDA-approved for PN. The results of our study indicate that MAPK pathway mutation status alone is insufficient to predict response to selumetinib monotherapy. It is likely that selumetinib and other MEK inhibitors will require combination with targeted or cytotoxic agents for optimal efficacy in children with persistent or progressive cancers after front-line chemotherapy. Clinical trial information: NCT03213691. Clinical trial information: NCT03155620.

TPS4168 Background: Metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma has a poor prognosis, and improvements in therapy have been challenging. Alongside efforts in developing novel agents, there is a need to optimize and maximize the benefit of currently approved drugs. Gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel is a frequently used regimen for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Nab-paclitaxel is albumin–bound chemotherapy; hence the role of albumin uptake is critical for its effect. Caveolae are small membrane invaginations essential for transendothelial albumin uptake. Cav-1 is the principal structural component of caveolae. Williams and colleagues have published a series of preclinical studies demonstrating that tumor cell-specific Cav-1 expression directly correlates with albumin and albumin-bound chemotherapy uptake and subsequent apoptotic response in tumor cells. In vitro studies showed that exposure of pancreatic cancer cells to Gemcitabine resulted in up-regulation of Cav-1 peaking 48 hours after gemcitabine exposure. This Cav-1 up-regulation correlated with increased temporal albumin cellular uptake. In addition, Williams and colleagues noted that exposure of pancreatic cancer cell lines to Gemcitabine resulted in a time–specific re-entry of cells into the G2/M phase (nab-paclitaxel cytotoxicity phase) between 48-60 hours after gemcitabine treatment. Collectively this data suggest that infusing nab-paclitaxel after 48 hours of gemcitabine infusion would be optimal for both increased uptake as well as increased susceptible tumor cells. We had previously shown this effect on multiple cell lines as well as mouse models. Methods: This is a phase II trial; patients will receive a standard of care chemotherapy regimen consisting of FDA-approved Gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel with modification of the schedule to deliver nab-paclitaxel 48 hours (2 days) after gemcitabine infusions. The primary endpoint is ORR, with a null hypothesis of 20% vs. a target of 35%. Employing a 2-stage design (minimax) and assuming 80% power and a 0.05 significance level, a total of 53 patients will be required. In the first stage, if at least 7/31 patients respond to therapy, an additional 22 patients will be added for a total of 53 patients. The study will be terminated early if ≤ six patients respond in the first stage. Observation of response in at least 16/53 patients would be required to warrant further investigation of this infusion schedule of combination therapy. The secondary endpoints include the safety of the regimen schedule, Relative dose intensity, disease control rate, PFS, and OS. The trial opened to enrollment in June 2020 and is accepting patients. Clinical trial information: NCT04115163.

3597 Background: Colon cancer (CC) incidence and mortality have decreased since the 1970s, but the incidence in young adults (20-49 years) is increasing. There are limited data suggesting that, as a group, patients with early onset CRC (eoCC) may have different phenotypic characteristics compared to those with late onset CRC (loCC, age ≥ 50 years). Methods: Individual patient data on 35,713 subjects with stage III CC from 25 randomized studies (recruiting between 1987 and 2009) in the ACCENT database were pooled. The distributions of demographics, clinicopathological features, biomarkers, and outcome data were summarized by age group. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), recurrence free rate (RFR), and survival after recurrence (SAR) were assessed by Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox models stratified by treatment arms within studies, adjusting for gender, race, body mass index, performance status, disease stage, grade, risk group, number of lymph nodes examined, disease sidedness and molecular markers. Results: Using a 5% difference between age groups as the clinically meaningful cutoff, patients with stage III eoCC (n = 6246) had similar distributions according to gender, race, PS, risk group, tumor sidedness and T/N stage compared to those with loCC (n = 29467). Patients with eoCC were significantly less likely to be overweight (30.2% vs 36.2%) but more commonly had ≥ 12 lymph nodes resected (69.5% vs 58.7%). The eoCC tumors were more frequently mismatch repair deficient (16.4% vs 11.5%), and less likely to have BRAFV600E (5.6% vs 14.0%), suggesting a higher frequency of Lynch syndrome in eoCC. In univariate analysis, patients with stage III eoCC had significantly better OS, DFS, and SAR; the difference between 3-year DFS and RFR strongly suggests the OS/DFS difference between these the eoCC and loCC may be due to increased competing risks and comorbidities in patients with loCC. In multivariate analysis, age at onset lost its prognostic value when outcome was adjusted for molecular markers. The clear relation between age of onset and KRAS/BRAF status was confirmed in the interaction analysis. Conclusions: Tumor biology was an important determinant of prognosis regardless of patient age. In multivariate analysis age of onset was not a statistically significant determinant of outcome.[Table: see text]

3030 Background: Diarrhea, HFS, and hypertension are common toxicities of sorafenib. No markers are validated to predict patients at risk of these toxicities. This study aimed to identify genetic predictors of sorafenib-induced toxicities. Methods: A two-step, discovery-validation approach was used. The discovery set included 140 renal cell carcinoma patients from the TARGET study treated with sorafenib (400 mg twice daily) and genotyped for 1040 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 56 genes. The three most statistically significant SNPs associated with grade ≥2 composite toxicity (either hypertension, diarrhea, HFS, or other skin toxicities, CTCAE v.3.0) were tested for association with grade 3 composite toxicity (either hypertension, diarrhea, or HFS, CTCAE v.4.0) in a validation set of 240 hepatocellular carcinoma patients from Alliance/CALGB 80802 treated with sorafenib (400 mg twice daily) alone or with doxorubicin. Associations between SNPs and composite toxicity was performed by logistic regression, with adjusting covariates (age, gender, race, and treatment arm, the latter two covariates for the validation set only). A meta-analysis odds ratio (OR) of each SNP-grade 3 toxicity association between the discovery and validation sets was obtained by inverse variance to point toward effects specific to a type of toxicity. Results: In the discovery set, the top three SNPs associated with grade ≥2 composite toxicity were rs12366035 (C>T, minor allele frequency, MAF 0.34) in VEGFB (p 0.0007), rs4035887 (G>A, MAF 0.49) in EPAS1 (p 0.0021), and rs4864950 (T>A, MAF 0.23) in KDR (p 0.0058). These SNPs were genotyped in the validation set and only rs4864950 in KDR was replicated. No grade 4 toxicities were reported. Similar to the discovery set (OR 2.41, 95% CI 1.29-4.51), the A allele of rs4864950 increased the risk of grade 3 composite toxicity (p 0.032, OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.70-4.27) in the validation set. Grade 3 toxicity prevalence in the discovery and validation sets were 3.6% and 7.4% diarrhea, 8.6% and 12.3% HFS, 3.6% and 8.8% hypertension, respectively. The meta-analysis of the two datasets showed that the A allele of rs4864950 increased the risk of grade 3 diarrhea (p 0.045, OR 3.09, 95% CI 1.03-9.29), grade 3 HFS (p 0.012, OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.24-5.37), but not grade 3 hypertension (p 0.207, OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.18-1.45). Conclusions: We provide the first evidence of clinical validity of a marker of sorafenib-induced diarrhea and HFS. Sorafenib inhibits VEGFR2 (coded by KDR), leading to epithelial hypoxia and causing diarrhea and HFS. Variant rs4864950 might affect the function VEGFR2, which, during VEGFR2 inhibition, increases the risk of diarrhea and HFS. This SNP is common and can be genotyped in patients before receiving sorafenib for a better risk assessment. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org ClinicalTrials.gov Id: NCT01015833.

Abstract Background Unplanned subgroup analyses from several studies have suggested primary tumor sidedness (PTS) as a potential prognostic and predictive parameter in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We aimed to investigate the impact of PTS on outcomes of mCRC patients. Methods PTS data of 9277 mCRC patients from 12 first-line randomized trials in the ARCAD database were pooled. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox models adjusting for age, sex, performance status, prior radiation/chemotherapy, and stratified by treatment arm. Predictive value was tested by interaction term between PTS and treatment (cetuximab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone). All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results Compared with right-sided metastatic colorectal cancer patients (n = 2421, 26.1%), left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer patients (n = 6856, 73.9%) had better OS (median = 21.6 vs 15.9 months; adjusted hazard ratio [HRadj] = 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.67 to 0.76; P < .001) and PFS (median = 8.6 vs 7.5 months; HRadj = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.75 to 0.84; P < .001). Interaction between PTS and KRAS mutation was statistically significant (Pinteraction < .001); left-sidedness was associated with better prognosis among KRAS wild-type (WT) (OS HRadj = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.53 to 0.66; PFS HRadj =0.68, 95% CI = 0.61 to 0.75) but not among KRAS mutated tumors. Among KRAS-WT tumors, survival benefit from anti-EGFR was confirmed for left-sidedness (OS HRadj = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.75 to 0.97; P = .01; PFS HRadj = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.67 to 0.88; P < .001) but not for right-sidedness. Conclusions The prognostic value of PTS is restricted to the KRAS-WT population. PTS is predictive of anti-EGFR efficacy, with a statistically significant improvement of survival for left-sidedness mCRC patients. These results suggest treatment choice in mCRC should be based on both PTS and KRAS status.

AbstractBackground and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue sampling is the standard of care for diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions. While many two-way comparisons between needle types have been made in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), it is unclear which size and type of needle offers the best probability of diagnosis. We therefore performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare different sized and shaped needles to rank the diagnostic performance of each needle.Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases through August, 2020 for RCTs that compared the diagnostic accuracy of EUS fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and biopsy (FNB) needles in solid pancreatic masses. Using a random-effects NMA under the frequentist framework, RCTs were analyzed to identify the best needle type and sampling technique. Performance scores (P-scores) were used to rank the different needles based on pooled diagnostic accuracy. The NMA model was used to calculate pairwise relative risk (RR) with 95 % confidence intervals.Results Review of 2577 studies yielded 29 RCTs for quantitative synthesis, comparing 13 different needle types. All 22G FNB needles had an RR > 1 compared to the reference 22G FNA (Cook) needle. The highest P-scores were seen with the 22G Medtronic FNB needle (0.9279), followed by the 22G Olympus FNB needle (0.8962) and the 22G Boston Scientific FNB needle (0.8739). Diagnostic accuracy was not significantly different between needles with or without suction.Conclusions In comparison to FNA needles, FNB needles offer the highest diagnostic performance in sampling pancreatic masses, particularly with 22G FNB needles.

AbstractIntroductionWhile most patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) receive therapy shortly after diagnosis, a subset of patients with indolent‐behaving disease can safely defer treatment. In this subgroup, we evaluated the importance of treatment intensity in patients with MCL who defer initial therapy.MethodsOut of 1134 patients with MCL from 12 academic centers, we analyzed 219 patients who initiated therapy at least 90 days after diagnosis. Patients who received induction with high‐dose cytarabine and/or autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in first remission were considered to have received intensive therapy (n = 88) while all other approaches were non‐intensive (n = 131).ResultsThere was no difference in progression‐free (PFS; P = .224) or overall survival (OS; P = .167) in deferred patients who received non‐intensive vs. intensive therapy. Additionally, univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were performed for PFS and OS. Treatment at an academic center (HR 0.43, P = .015) was associated with improved OS in both univariate and multivariate models, while intensity of treatment was not associated with improved OS in either model.ConclusionsThese results indicate that intensified initial treatment is not associated with improved survival after deferring initial therapy, although prospective studies are needed to determine which of these patients with MCL may benefit from intensive therapy.