Citations

243 Background: Cbz/pred extends survival in mCRPC patients (pts) following docetaxel and first-line studies comparing Cbz to docetaxel are ongoing. Mito/pred also has anti-tumor activity in mCRPC and a non-overlapping mechanism of action and toxicity profile with Cbz. A multicenter phase I trial was initiated through the DOD PCCTC to establish the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination of Cbz, Mito, and Pred. Methods: Chemotherapy (chemo)-naive pts with mCRPC were enrolled in an accelerated titration design. The primary objective was to determine the MTD of CAMP; secondary objectives included assessing PSA and objective response rates and duration of response. Starting dose of Cbz was 25 mg/m2 (the currently approved single-agent dose) and Mito 4 mg/m2, administered on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Mito was escalated by 2 mg/m2 per dose level. Pred 5 mg BID and pegfilgrastim were administered with each cycle. Results: 9 pts were enrolled (dose level I, N = 1; dose level II, N = 1; dose level III, N = 3; dose level IV N = 4). The median age was 67 (range 55-81) and the median baseline PSA was 82.3 (range 20.4-791.2). There were 2 DLTs observed at dose level IV (Cbz 25 mg/m2 + mito 10 mg/m2), both grade 4 sepsis. The most common grade 3 adverse events were hematologic (neutropenia, n = 5; febrile neutropenia, n = 2, thrombocytopenia, n = 2). 6 of 9 pts remain on study (range 2.2 - 10.5+ months). Maximal PSA declines from baseline > 50% have been observed in 4/7 (57%) evaluable pts to date. 2 of 4 pts with measurable disease have experienced partial responses and a third has had a minor response after 4 cycles of chemo. The median progression-free survival and duration of response have not been reached. Conclusions: The approved single-agent dosage of Mito (12 mg/m2) could not be safely reached in combination with Cbz 25 mg/m2. Pre-planned evaluation of an alternate dosing strategy combining Mito with Cbz 20 mg/m2, which has demonstrated activity in mCRPC and potentially less hematologic toxicity, is underway. Preliminary efficacy data are encouraging but additional follow-up and further study of the treatment combination is required. Clinical trial information: NCT01594918.

451 Background: Classifications for molecular subtypes of colorectal cancer based on microsatellite instability (MSI), the CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP), and somatic mutations in BRAFV600E and KRAS have been proposed to reflect distinct pathways of colorectal tumorigenesis. We assessed the relationship between these subtype classifications and colorectal cancer survival in a population-based study. Methods: Tumor-markers were evaluated in incident colorectal cancer cases diagnosed between 1997-2007 in western Washington State. Cases were classified into pathway-based subtypes according to the following tumor-marker combinations: (1) traditional pathway [microsatellite stable / low MSI (MSS/MSI-L), non-CIMP, BRAF-wildtype, KRAS-wildtype, n = 631]; (2) MSI-high serrated (MSI-high, CIMP-positive, BRAF-mutated, KRAS-wildtype, N=100); (3) MSS/MSI-L serrated (MSS/MSI-L, CIMP-positive, BRAF-mutated, KRAS-wildtype, n = 55); (4) alternate pathway (MSS/MSI-L, non-CIMP, BRAF-wildtype, KRAS-mutated, n = 353); and (5) MSI-high familial (MSI-high, non-CIMP, BRAF-wildtype, KRAS-wildtype, n = 50). Multiple-imputation was used to classify tumor-marker status for cases with missing data on one to three markers. Differences in survival across subtypes were assessed through multivariable-adjusted Cox regression. Results: Relative to cases of the predominant traditional pathway subtype, cases with MSS/MSI-L serrated and alternate pathway tumor subtypes experienced statistically significantly worse disease-specific survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.25, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.50-3.36 and HR = 1.39, 95% CI: 1.12-1.71, respectively]; cases with MSI-high familial tumors had the most favorable disease-specific prognosis (HR = 0.28, 95% CI: 0.12-0.64). With respect to overall survival, associations were similar but slightly attenuated. Conclusions: In this large, population-based study, colorectal cancer subtype classifications based on integrated pathways were associated with marked differences in survival, highlighting the significance of molecular heterogeneity in colorectal cancer.

LBA1000 Background: The primary aims were to determine whether adjuvant DD AC→PG will be superior to DD AC→P as well as to TAC in DFS and to compare the relative DFS of TAC and DD AC→P. Secondary endpoints include survival and toxicity. Methods: From Nov 3, 2004 to May 3, 2007, 4894 women were randomized; 1630 to TAC (docetaxel [T] 75 mg/m2, doxorubicin [A] 50 mg/m2, cyclophosphamide [C] 500 mg/m2 q3 wks x 6), 1634 to DD AC→P (A 60 mg/m2 and C 600 mg/m2 q2 wks x 4 followed by P 175 mg/m2 q2 wks x 4), and 1630 to DD AC→PG (A 60 mg/m2 and C 600 mg/m2 q2 wks x 4 → P 175 mg/m2 + G 2000 mg/m2q2 wks x 4). Primary G-CSF support was required and erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) were used at investigator discretion. 52% were postmenopausal, 65% had 1 - 3 positive nodes, and 80% had HR+ breast cancer. Log-rank tests were used for pair-wise comparisons of the primary (DFS) and secondary (OS) endpoints among the three treatment arms. Results: With 64 months median follow-up, 5-year DFS in DD AC→PG group was 80.6% compared with 82.2% in DD AC→P group (HR=1.1; p=0.27) and 80.1 % (HR=0.97; p=0.71) in TAC group. 5-year OS was 90.8% in DD AC→PG group as compared with 89.1% (HR=.89; p=0.25) in DD AC→P group and 89.6 % (HR=0.90; p=0.32) in TAC group. HR for DFS and OS of DD AC→P vs. TAC were 0.89 (p=0.14) and 1.01 (p=0.92) respectively. Toxicities for TAC, DD AC→P, DD AC→PG, respectively: febrile neutropenia (Gr 3/4: 9%, 4%, 4% [p<0.001]), sensory neuropathy (Gr 3/4: <1%, 7%, 6% [p<0.001]), diarrhea (Gr 3/4: 8 %, 2%, 2% [p<0.001]). Hgb was <10 in 12%, 26%, 33% with ESA use in 35.2%, 47%, 51.6% and transfusions in 3.7%, 6.3%, 9.4%. Deaths on treatment: N=13, 5, 7 (p=0.2). AML/MDS: N=5, 8, 11. All cycles completed in 91% for TAC and 88% for DD regimens. Conclusions: Addition of G to DD AC→P did not improve outcomes. No significant differences in efficacy endpoints were identified between DD AC→P and TAC, though toxicity profiles differed. Funding: NCI PHS U10-CA-37377, -69974, -12027, -69651 and NCCTG U10-CA25224, with additional funding from Eli Lilly & Company, and Amgen, Inc.

238 Background: Cbz/pred extends survival in mCRPC patients (pts) following docetaxel and first-line studies comparing Cbz to docetaxel are ongoing. Mito/pred also has anti-tumor activity in mCRPC and a non-overlapping mechanism of action and toxicity profile with Cbz. A multicenter phase 1 trial was initiated through the DOD PCCTC to establish the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of the combination of Cbz, Mito, and Pred (CAMP). Methods: Chemotherapy (chemo)-naïve pts with mCRPC were enrolled in an accelerated titration design. The primary objective was to determine the MTD and RP2D of CAMP; secondary objectives included PSA response rate and duration of response. Cbz 20 and 25 mg/m2 were each evaluated in combination with escalating doses of Mito (starting dose 4 mg/m2), both administered on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Pred 5 mg BID and pegfilgrastim were given with each cycle. Results: 20 pts were enrolled. The median age was 66 (range 51-78) and the median baseline PSA was 62.5 (range 3.0-791.2). There were 2 DLTs observed at the dose level of Cbz 25 mg/m2 + Mito 10 mg/m2 (sepsis and febrile neutropenia). No DLTs were observed with Cbz 20 mg/m2 (N = 10), establishing Cbz 20 mg/m2 + Mito 12 mg/m2 as the MTD and RP2D. The most common grade ≥ 3 related adverse events were hematologic (neutropenia, n = 8; thrombocytopenia, n = 3; febrile neutropenia, n = 2). No cardiac adverse events were observed. The median number of treatment cycles was 9 (range 2-16), and 5 pts remain on study. Greater than 50% maximal PSA declines from baseline were observed in 8 of 18 evaluable pts (44%). Objective tumor responses have been observed in 2 of 4 pts (50%) with measurable disease, with evaluation ongoing. The median duration of response has not been reached (range 4.9-10.0+ months). Conclusions: The approved single-agent dose of Mito (12 mg/m2) was safely combined with Cbz 20 mg/m2, a dose with demonstrated activity in mCRPC and potentially less hematologic toxicity than 25 mg/m2. Preliminary efficacy data are encouraging with durable responses observed in a subset of pts. Further study of the treatment combination is warranted. Clinical trial information: NCT01594918.

202 Background: Cabazitaxel and prednisone (Cbz/pred) extend survival in mCRPC patients (pts) following docetaxel and first-line studies comparing Cbz to docetaxel are ongoing. Mito/pred also has anti-tumor activity in mCRPC and a non-overlapping mechanism of action and toxicity profile with Cbz. A multicenter phase 1 trial was initiated to establish the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of the combination of Cbz, Mito, and Pred(CAMP). Methods: Chemotherapy (chemo)-naive pts with mCRPC were enrolled in an accelerated titration design. The primary objective was to determine the MTD and RP2D of CAMP; secondary objectives included PSA response rate and duration of response. Cbz 20 and 25 mg/m2 were evaluated in combination with escalating doses of Mito (starting dose 4 mg/m2), both administered on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Pred 5 mg BID and pegfilgrastim were given with each cycle. Results: 23 pts were enrolled. The median age was 66 (range 51-78) and the median baseline PSA was 62.5 (range 3-791.2). There were 2 DLTs (sepsis and febrile neutropenia) observed at the dose level of Cbz 25 mg/m2 + Mito 10 mg/m2 (n = 4). There was 1 DLT (febrile neutropenia) observed with Cbz 20 mg/m2 (N = 12), establishing Cbz 20 mg/m2 + Mito 12 mg/m2 as the MTD and RP2D. The most common grade ³ 3 related adverse events were hematologic (neutropenia, n = 9; thrombocytopenia, n = 3; febrile neutropenia, n = 3). The median number of treatment cycles was 7.5 (range 2-16), and 2 pts remain on study. Greater than or equal to 50% maximal PSA declines from baseline were observed in 12 of 19 evaluable pts(63%). The median duration of response has not been reached (range 4.9-10.0+ months). Conclusions: The approved single-agent dose of Mito (12 mg/m2) was safely combined with Cbz 20 mg/m2, a dose with demonstrated activity in mCRPC and potentially less hematologic toxicity than 25 mg/m2. Preliminary efficacy data are encouraging with durable control of disease observed in a subset of pts. Further study of the treatment combination is warranted. Clinical trial information: NCT01594918.

1 Background: To determine whether the efficacy of a hypofractionated (H) schedule is no worse than a conventional (C) schedule in men with low-risk prostate cancer. Methods: From April 2006 to December 2009, one thousand one hundred fifteen men with low-risk prostate cancer (clinical stage T1-2a, Gleason ≤ 6, PSA < 10) were randomly assigned 1:1 to a conventional (C) schedule (73.8 Gy in 41 fractions over 8.2 weeks) or to a hypofractionated (H) schedule (70 Gy in 28 fractions over 5.6 weeks). The trial was designed to establish with 90% power and alpha = 0.05 that (H) results in 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) that is not lower than (C) by more than 7% (hazard ratio (HR) < 1.52). Secondary endpoints include freedom from biochemical recurrence (FFBR) and overall survival. At the third planned interim analysis (July 2015), the NRG Oncology Data Monitoring Committee recommended that the results of the trial be reported. Results: One thousand one hundred and one protocol eligible men were randomized: 547 to C and 554 to H. Median follow-up is 5.9 years. Baseline characteristics are not different according to treatment arm. At the time of analysis 185 DFS events have been observed; 99 in the C arm and 86 in the H arm. The estimated 7-year disease-free survival is 75.6% (95% CI 70.3, 80.1) in the C arm and 81.8% (77.5, 85.3) in the H arm. The DFS HR (C/H) is 0.85 (0.64, 1.14). Comparison of biochemical recurrence (HR = 0.77, (0.51, 1.17)) and overall survival (HR = 0.95, (0.65, 1.41)) also met protocol non-inferiority criteria. Grade ≥ 3 GI toxicity is 3.0% (C) vs. 4.6% (H), Relative risk (RR) for H vs. C 1.53, (95% CI 0.86, 2.83); grade ≥ 3 GU toxicity is 4.5% (C) vs. 6.4% (H), RR = 1.43 (0.86,2.37). Conclusions: In men with low-risk prostate cancer, 70 Gy in 28 fractions over 5.6 weeks is non-inferior to 73.8 Gy in 41 fractions over 8.2 weeks. Clinical trial information: NCT00331773.

175 Background: Inactivity is common in breast cancer survivors and has been linked to poor outcomes. Few trials have tested physical activity (PA) interventions in young women with breast cancer, who may face unique PA barriers due to demands of jobs and young families. Methods: Young and Strong was a cluster-randomized study evaluating the effect of education interventions for young breast cancer survivors.Sites were randomized 1:1 to a young women’s intervention (YWI), focused on fertility and other issues facing young women, or to a physical activity intervention (PAI). At PAI sites, providers were instructed to discuss PA with patients, and participants were given materials to encourage PA. PA was measured with the modified Godin Leisure Score Index at baseline, and 3, 6, and 12 months. Medical records were reviewed to assess provider attention to PA. Changes in weekly min of PA were compared between the PAI and YWI groups using general estimating equations to evaluate clustered binary and Gaussian data. Results: 467 patients enrolled between 7/12 -12/13 across 54 sites. Median age at dx was 40yrs (range 22-45). At baseline, participants were moderately active. PA increased in both groups over time (Table); there was no significant difference in PA between groups at any time (all p > 0.1). Provider attention to PA was documented in 74% of participants on PAI and 61% on YWI (p = 0.15), and correlated with PA at 12 months (median 100 min/wk of PA in participants with provider attention to PA vs. 60 min/wk in those without, p = 0.016). Participants who reported reading all or most the PAI materials reported higher levels of PA vs. those who read less (78% vs. 64%, p = 0.05) Conclusions: Young breast cancer survivors assigned to a PA intervention did not increase PA more than those assigned to an intervention focused on young women’s issues. However, the higher levels of PA among women who engaged with the PAI materials and those whose oncology providers addressed PA suggests the importance of enhancing patient and provider engagement with healthy lifestyle information and recommendations. Clinical trial information: NCT01647607. [Table: see text]

LBA500 Background: The primary endpoint of NSABP B-35, a phase III trial comparing 1 mg/day anastrozole to 20 mg/day tamoxifen, each given for 5 years, was breast cancer-free interval (BCFI), defined as the time from randomization to any breast cancer (BC) event including local, regional, or distant recurrence or contralateral disease, invasive or DCIS. Methods: Postmenopausal women with ER-receptor or PgR-receptor positive (by IHC analysis) DCIS and no invasive BC who had undergone a lumpectomy with clear resection margins were randomly assigned to receive either 20 mg/day tam or 1 mg/day A (blinded) for 5 years. Stratification was by age (<60 v ≥60). Results: From 1/6/2003 to 6/15/2006, 3,104 pts were entered and randomized (1552 in groups tam and A each). As of 2/28/15, follow-up information was available on 3,083 pts for OS and on 3,077 pts for all other disease-free endpoints, with mean time of follow-up of 8.6 years. There were 198 BCFI events, 114 in the tam group and 84 in the A group (HR, 0.73; p=0.03). 10-year point estimates for BCFI were 89.2% for tam and 93.5% for A. A significant time-by-treatment interaction (p=0.02) indicated that the effect was not evident until later in the study. There was a significant interaction between treatment and age group (p=0.04); benefit of A is only in women <60 years old. As to secondary endpoints, there were 495 DFS events, 260 in the tam group and 235 in the A group (HR, 0.89; p=0.21). 10-year point estimates for DFS were 77.9% for tam and 82.7% for A. There were 186 deaths, 88 in the tam group and 98 in the A group (HR, 1.11; p=0.48). 10-year point estimates for OS were 92.1% for tam, 92.5% for A. There were 8 deaths due to breast cancer in the tam group and 5 in the A group. There were 63 cases of invasive breast cancer in the tam group and 39 in the A group (HR, 0.61; p=0.02). There was a non-significant trend for a reduction in breast second primary cancers with A (HR, 0.68; p=0.07). Conclusions: Anastrozole provided a significant improvement compared to tamoxifen for BCFI, which was seen later in the study, primarily in women <60 years. Support: CA12027, 37377, 69651, 69974; 180868, 180822, 189867 196067, 114732; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP. Clinical trial information: NCT00053898.

PURPOSE: We sought to determine the preoperative factors associated with surgical margin status in patients who underwent radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study group consisted of 339 patients who were treated by radical retropubic prostatectomy and bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy at the Mayo Clinic. None received preoperative adjuvant therapy. The mean age at the time of surgery was 66 years (range, 45 to 79 years). All specimens were totally embedded and whole-mounted. Positive surgical margin was defined as the presence of cancer cells at the inked margins. Numerous pathologic characteristics in needle biopsies and preoperative clinical findings were analyzed. RESULTS: The overall margin positivity rate was 24%. In univariate analysis, preoperative serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, Gleason score, perineural invasion, percentage of cancer in the biopsy specimens, and number and percentage of biopsy cores involved by cancer were all associated with positive surgical margins. In multivariate analysis, preoperative serum PSA level (odds ratio for a doubling of PSA levels, 1.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.5 to 2.4; P < .001) and percentage of cancer in the biopsy specimens (odds ratio for a 10% increase, 1.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.2 to 1.4; P < .001) were predictive of margin status in radical prostatectomy. With use of preoperative serum PSA level and percentage of cancer in the biopsy as predictors of surgical margins, the overall accuracy as measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.74. CONCLUSION: Preoperative serum PSA level and percentage of cancer in the biopsy specimens were independently associated with surgical margin status in patients who underwent radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. The combination of these two factors provides a high level of predictive accuracy for margin status.