Lenz, Heinz‐Josef

100 Background: CRC is a common cancer world-wide, accounting for ̃10% of cancer cases and mortality. Treatment options are limited, and survival is poor for pts with advanced disease, particularly those with mKRAS. After failure of 1L treatment for mCRC, regardless of KRAS mutation status, the ORR for FOLFIRI-bev is 5-13%, with PFS 4-6 mos, and OS 10-12 mos. Onvansertib is a highly selective, ATP-competitive, orally bioavailable PLK1 inhibitor that is synergistic with irinotecan and with 5FU in xenograft models of mKRAS CRC. We present preliminary safety, efficacy, and biomarker data from an ongoing Ph1b/2 trial of onvansertib + FOLFIRI-bev in pts with mKRAS mCRC progressing after 1L treatment with fluoropyrimidine + oxaliplatin, +/- bev. Methods: Pts with mCRC with a KRAS mutation detected by a CLIA-certified lab were eligible. In the Ph1b portion of the study, onvansertib was given on a 3+3 dose escalation at 12, 15 or 18 mg/m2 on days 1-5 and 15-19 of each 28-day cycle in combination with FOLFIRI-bev. The MTD was 15 mg/m2 and was chosen as the RP2D. The primary endpoint for the Ph2 was ORR, and radiographic response was assessed every 8 wks per RECIST v1.1. Safety was evaluated continuously, and AEs were recorded using CTCAE v5.0. Baseline and post-treatment blood samples were collected for biomarker analyses, including mutant allele frequency (MAF) of the pt’s known KRAS mutation. Results: As of 16Sep2021, a total of 50 pts had been treated: 18 on the Ph1b and 32 on the Ph2, including 35 pts at the RP2D, and median follow up was 4.7 mos (range 0.4-18). Of the 50 pts, 26 remain on treatment, as do 24 of 35 RP2D pts. The combination was well-tolerated: fatigue, neutropenia, and nausea were the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) and were generally low-grade. Neutropenia was managed by removing the 5FU bolus from subsequent cycles of FOLFIRI and adding growth factor. Of the 50 pts, 44 were evaluable for efficacy, including 31 of 35 RP2D pts. ORR was 36% for the total group (1CR and 15 PR in 44 pts) and 35% for the RP2D group (1 CR and 10 PR in 31 pts). First responses were seen between 2 and 6 months after the start of therapy. Responses were observed across different KRAS variants. Pts achieving a CR or PR showed the greatest decreases in plasma MAF after the first cycle of therapy. Of the 50 pts, 24 pts have discontinued for the following reasons: progressive disease (13), toxicity (4), patient decision (4), proceeding to potentially curative surgery or other localized therapy (3). Conclusions: The combination of onvansertib with FOLFIRI-bev was well tolerated: observed TEAEs have been generally low-grade and manageable. The combination has demonstrated a promising ORR in 2L treatment of mCRC pts harboring various KRAS mutations, and efficacy was correlated with early changes in plasma mKRAS. Updated safety, efficacy, and biomarker analyses will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT03829410.

8 Background: Standard 1L therapies for mCRC include a fluoropyrimidine with oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan, and a biologic agent. NIVO may enhance antitumor activity in combination with 1L standard therapies within a subset of patients (pts) with mCRC. CheckMate 9X8 evaluated NIVO + mFOLFOX6/BEV vs mFOLFOX6/BEV in 1L mCRC (NCT03414983). Methods: Adults with previously untreated, unresectable, mCRC were randomized 2:1 to NIVO 240 mg + mFOLFOX6/BEV Q2W (NIVO + standard-of-care [SOC]) or mFOLFOX6/BEV Q2W (SOC). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR) per RECIST v1.1. Key secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), time to response (TTR), duration of response (DOR), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: 195 pts were randomized to NIVO + SOC (n = 127) or SOC (n = 68). Median (range) follow-up was 23.7 (0–33.2) months (mo; NIVO + SOC) vs 23.2 (0–32.3) mo (SOC). Median (range) duration of therapy was 9.9 (0.1–31.8+) mo (NIVO + SOC) and 7.7 (0.1–26.7+) mo (SOC). The HR (95% CI) for PFS was 0.81 (0.53–1.23; P = 0.30), which did not meet the prespecified threshold for statistical significance (median PFS, 11.9 mo in both arms; Table). PFS rates after 12 mo were higher with NIVO + SOC vs SOC (Table). ORR was 60% (NIVO + SOC) and 46% (SOC; odds ratio 1.72 [95% CI 0.96–3.10]) and median (95% CI) DOR was 12.9 (9.0–13.1) mo (NIVO + SOC) and 9.3 (7.5–11.3) mo (SOC; Table). Rates of grade 3−4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were higher with NIVO + SOC; however, no new safety signals were identified (Table). Biomarker analyses, including tumor mutational burden and baseline CD8 levels, will be presented. Conclusions: The primary endpoint of PFS was not met; however, NIVO + SOC showed higher PFS rates after 12 mo, a higher response rate, and more durable responses compared with SOC, along with acceptable safety, in 1L mCRC. Clinical trial information: NCT03414983. [Table: see text]

Abstract Background The incidence of young-onset colorectal cancer (yoCRC) is increasing. It is unknown if there are survival differences between young and older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Methods We studied the association of age with survival in 2326 mCRC patients enrolled in the Cancer and Leukemia Group B and SWOG 80405 trial, a multicenter, randomized trial of first-line chemotherapy plus biologics. The primary and secondary outcomes of this study were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), respectively, which were assessed by Kaplan-Meier method and compared among younger vs older patients with the log-rank test. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated based on Cox proportional hazards modeling, adjusting for known prognostic variables. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results Of 2326 eligible subjects, 514 (22.1%) were younger than age 50 years at study entry (yoCRC cohort). The median age of yoCRC patients was 44.3 vs 62.5 years in patients aged 50 years and older. There was no statistically significant difference in OS between yoCRC vs older-onset patients (median = 27.07 vs 26.12 months; adjusted HR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.88 to 1.10; P = .78). The median PFS was also similar in yoCRC vs older patients (10.87 vs 10.55 months) with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.02 (95% CI = 0.92 to 1.13; P = .67). Patients younger than age 35 years had the shortest OS with median OS of 21.95 vs 26.12 months in older-onset patients with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.08 (95% CI = 0.81 to 1.44; Ptrend = .93). Conclusion In this large study of mCRC patients, there were no statistically significant differences in survival between patients with yoCRC and CRC patients aged 50 years and older.

BackgroundThe objective of this study was to evaluate the association between self‐identified race and overall survival (OS), progression‐free survival (PFS), and response to therapy among patients enrolled in the randomized Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB)/SWOG 80405 trial.MethodsPatients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer who were enrolled in the CALGB/SWOG 80405 trial were identified by race. On the basis of covariates (treatment arm, KRAS status, sex, age, and body mass index), each Black patient was exact matched with a White patient. The association between race and OS and PFS was examined using a marginal Cox proportional hazard model for matched pairs. The interaction between KRAS status and race was tested in the model. The association between race and response to therapy and adverse events were examined using a marginal logistic regression model.ResultsIn total, 392 patients were matched and included in the final data set. No difference in OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73‐1.16), PFS (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.78‐1.20), or response to therapy (odds ratio [OR], 1.00; 95% CI, 0.65‐1.52) was observed between Black and White patients. Patients with KRAS mutant status (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.02‐1.67), a performance statusscore of 1 (reference, a performance status of 0; HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.18‐1.88), or ≥3 metastatic sites (reference, 1 metastatic site; HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.22‐2.28) experienced worse OS. Black patients experienced lower rates and risk of grade ≥3 fatigue (6.6% vs 13.3%; OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.24‐0.91) but were equally likely to be treated with a dose reduction (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.72‐1.65).ConclusionsNo difference in OS, PFS, or response to therapy was observed between Black patients and White patients in an equal treatment setting of the CALGB/SWOG 80405 randomized controlled trial.Lay Summary Despite improvements in screening and treatment, studies have demonstrated worse outcomes in Black patients with colorectal cancer. The purpose of this study was to determine whether there was a difference in cancer‐specific outcomes among Black and White patients receiving equivalent treatment on the CALGB/SWOG 80405 randomized clinical trial. In this study, there was no difference in overall survival, progression‐free survival, or response to therapy between Black and White patients treated on a clinical trial. These findings suggest that access to care and differences in treatment may be responsible for racial disparities in colorectal cancer.

3588 Background: Growing data suggest dietary factors are associated with survival among pts with non-metastatic CRC. However, data on diet and survival among pts with advanced or metastatic disease are very limited. Methods: We prospectively examined dietary fat intake assessed at initiation of treatment for advanced or metastatic CRC in relation to OS and PFS. This analysis was conducted among 1,149 pts in the CALGB 80405 randomized controlled trial who completed a validated food frequency questionnaire. We examined intakes of saturated, monounsaturated, and polyunsaturated (total n-3, long-chain n-3, and total n-6) fats as well as animal and vegetable fats. Based on data from non-metastatic CRC and other cancers, we hypothesized that higher intakes of long-chain n-3 fatty acids and vegetable fats would be associated with longer OS and PFS and higher intakes of saturated fat and animal fat would be associated with shorter OS and PFS. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Over a median follow-up of 6.1 years [y; interquartile range (IQR): 5.3, 7.2 y], we observed 974 deaths and 103 events of progression without death during follow-up. Participants in this analysis had a median age of 59 y (IQR: 51 to 67 y); 41% were female and 86% identified as white. We observed no statistically significant associations between any type of dietary fat and OS. However, vegetable fat was non-linearly associated with longer PFS (HR comparing 4th to 1st quartile: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.64, 0.96; p-trend: 0.10). We also observed a linear association between continuous saturated fat and PFS (HR per 5% kcal/d: 1.21; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.42; p-value: 0.02), perhaps driven by pts with high saturated fat intake. Conclusions: We observed no statistically significant associations between types of dietary fat and OS among pts with advanced or metastatic CRC. However, a healthy diet that includes vegetable fat and is modest in saturated fat may be associated with longer PFS. Future studies to replicate these findings and examine diet in relation to cancer survival in racially/ethnically diverse populations are needed. Support: K07CA197077, U10CA180821, U10CA180882, https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . Clinical trial information: NCT00265850.

3568 Background: Diets inducing an elevated insulin response have been associated with increased recurrence and mortality in patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer, but it remains unknown if postprandial hyperinsulinemia also affects progression and mortality in mCRC patients. The goal of this study was to assess the influence of dietary insulin load (DIL) and dietary insulin index (DII) on survival of mCRC patients. Methods: This was a prospective cohort study of 1,177 patients with previously untreated mCRC enrolled in a phase III trial of systemic chemotherapy plus biologics who reported dietary intake within one month after chemotherapy initiation. DIL was calculated as a function of food insulin index and the energy content of individual foods reported on a food frequency questionnaire. DII was calculated by dividing DIL by total energy intake. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). The primary statistical test was a test for trend, which was performed using the median value for each quintile of dietary insulin score as a continuous variable. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to adjust for potential confounders including assigned treatment arm, known prognostic factors, comorbidities, body mass index, and physical activity. Results: Higher DIL was significantly associated with worse OS (ptrend = 0.04); patients in the highest quintile survived 34.1 months, compared to 27.7 months in the lowest quintile (Cox hazard ratio [HR] 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.99 - 1.51). Higher DII was non-significantly associated with worse OS (HR 1.18, 95% CI 0.94 - 1.48, ptrend = 0.09). There was no significant association between dietary insulin scores and PFS. The influence of dietary insulin scores on survival did not differ significantly by various molecular markers involved in the insulin signaling pathway, including C-peptide, adiponectin, IGF-1, IGFBP-3, and IGFBP-7. Higher dietary insulin scores were significantly associated with greater risk of any TRAE. Those with a DIL greater than the median had a 75.4% rate of any TRAE, compared to 70.8% in those with a DIL less than or equal to the median (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.03 - 1.38, p=0.02); the most significant associations were with neutropenia (HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.05 - 1.61, p=0.01) and diarrhea (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.00 - 2.06, p=0.05). Conclusions: Higher DIL was significantly associated with worse OS, and both higher DIL and DII were significantly associated with increased TRAEs, in patients with previously untreated mCRC. These findings may inform future dietary recommendations for patients with mCRC. Further investigation into the molecular mechanisms underlying these associations is warranted. Clinical trial information: NCT00265850.

3515 Background: CALGB/SWOG 80405 was a randomized phase III trial in first-line mCRC patients treated with Bev, Cet, or both, plus chemotherapy. No difference in OS was found between Bev and Cet. We tested the effect of immune signatures on OS in all the three arms of the study and analyzed differences in OS between the Cet and Bev arms. Methods: 578 primary tumors were profiled by RNAseq. Immune signatures of TGF-β, cytotoxic T cells, wound healing, macrophages, lymphocytes, and INF-γ, as well as relative frequencies of CD8+ T-cells, memory resting CD4+ T cells, memory activated CD4+ T cells, macrophages M1 and M2, and activated mast cells were measured. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were applied using elastic-net penalization with covariates (age, race, gender, all RAS and BRAF V600E mutations). For relevant signatures, optimal cut-offs for OS were calculated. Results: In all the three arms of the study, high expression of macrophages M2 (HR 6.81, 95% CI 3.56-30.16) and TGF-β (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.03-2.10) conferred reduced OS compared to low expression; high expression of plasma cells (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.27-0.83) and memory-activated CD4+ T cells (HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.10-0.65) conferred increased OS compared to low expression. Using optimal cut-offs from these 4 signatures, pts have been categorized as to whether they had either 4, 3, 2, 1, or 0 beneficial signatures associated with increased OS. In all arms of the study (N = 469, after accounting for covariates), the median (95% CI) OS decreased from 42.5 (35.8-47.8; N = 79), to 31.0 (28.8-34.4; N = 177), 25.2 (20.6-27.9; N = 144), and 17.0 (13.5-20.4; N = 69) months when the number of beneficial signatures decreased from 4, to 3, 2, and 0-1 (combined due to a low number of pts), respectively (p = 3.48e-11). In the Bev arm (N = 205), high expression of macrophages M2 conferred reduced OS compared to low expression (HR 6.6, 95% CI 2.7-67.1). In the Cet arm (N = 165), high expression of macrophages M2 conferred reduced OS compared to low expression (HR 4.3, 95% CI 2.1-79.8); high expression of plasma cells (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.06-0.55) and memory activated CD4+ T cells (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.03-0.98) conferred increased OS compared to low expression of either signatures. The plasma cell signature interacted with Bev and Cet on the OS of pts (interaction p = 0.009). Conclusions: Tumor immune signatures in mCRC pts are determinants of survival. In pts treated with Bev- and Cet-combination therapies that are standard of care, immune signatures affect response to therapy. These results, provide new markers for treatment selection and for the development of novel active combinations including immune checkpoint inhibitors. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org

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.

Abstract Background First-line therapeutic strategies for patients with BRAFV600E-mutated (BRAFmt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) mainly rely on subgroup analyses from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We aimed to assess the prognostic and predictive impact of BRAFmt on the efficacy of targeted therapies with first-line chemotherapy. Methods Individual patient data from first-line RCTs with BRAF and KRAS status data in the ARCAD database were pooled. Progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox models. Outcomes were compared between treatment groups that were concurrently randomly assigned whenever possible. Results A total of 6391 patients from 10 RCTs were included: 573 BRAFmt (9.0%), 2059 KRASmt (32.2%), and 3759 double wild type (58.8%). BRAFmt mCRC patients experienced statistically significantly poorer OS than those with KRASmt (adjusted hazard ratio [HRadj] = 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.30 to 1.64) and patients with double wild-type tumors (HRadj = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.94 to 2.36). Anti-EGFR agents did not improve progression-free survival or OS of BRAFmt mCRC patients, based on 4 RCTs testing chemotherapy with or without anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) (HRadj = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.71 to 1.30; and HRadj = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.66 to 1.14, respectively). Conclusions Our data suggest that the addition of anti-EGFR agents to chemotherapy is ineffective as first-line treatment for BRAFmt mCRC patients.

Abstract Background Hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) is the most common regorafenib-induced adverse event and is in need of effective prevention and palliation. Materials and Methods The Regorafenib Dose Optimization Study (ReDOS), a four-arm, previously published trial with a 1:1:1:1 randomization scheme, was analyzed in a manner in keeping with the original protocol to assess whether clobetasol 0.05% cream (a corticosteroid) applied to the palms and soles twice per day for 8 weeks was more effective when prescribed preemptively (before the development of HFSR) versus reactively (after the development of HFSR). Patients were assessed during the first two cycles of regorafenib. Results Sixty-one patients received preemptive clobetasol, and 55 received reactive clobetasol. Groups were balanced on demographics. Over the first two cycles, no evidence of HFSR occurred in 30% with preemptive clobetasol versus 13% with reactive clobetasol (p = .03). During the first cycle, 54% and 45% of patients had no HFSR with preemptive and reactive clobetasol, respectively (p = .35). During the second cycle, 33% and 15% had no HFSR with preemptive and reactive clobetasol, respectively (p = .02). During the second cycle, rates of grade 1, 2, and 3 HFSR were 30%, 8%, and 3%, respectively, with preemptive clobetasol and 43%, 18%, and 7%, respectively, with reactive clobetasol (p = .12). Patient-reported outcomes showed HFSR compromised nearly all activities of daily living with worse quality of life in patients who received reactive versus preemptive clobetasol. No clobetasol-induced adverse events were reported. Conclusion Preemptive clobetasol might lessen regorafenib-induced hand-foot reactions compared with reactive therapy. Further confirmatory studies are needed in a larger patient cohort. Implications for Practice Regorafenib causes hand-foot skin reactions. Preemptive clobetasol, a high-potency topical corticosteroid, appears to lessen the severity of this adverse event. Although further study is needed, the favorable adverse event profile of this intervention might prompt clinicians to discuss this option with their patients.