Storandt, Michael H.

200 Background: We developed and validated a quantitative segmentation algorithm (QuantCRC) to predict disease recurrence in stage I-III colorectal cancer patients (pts) based on the analysis of digitized hematoxylin and eosin (H+E) stained pathology slides. In this study, we aim to determine if QuantCRC analysis on pre-treated RC biopsies can predict pathological complete response (pCR) after NAT which include total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT), chemoradiation (CRT) and others. Methods: Stage II-IV RC pts treated with curative intent modalities between 2005-2023 at Mayo Clinic and University of Pittsburgh were evaluated. Eligible pts had pre and post-treatment tissue available for analysis. Clinical characteristics, treatment, and outcome data were extracted from the medical record. QuantCRC extracted 15 features: %tumor, %stroma, tumor:stroma ratio, %TB/PDC, %mucin, %necrosis, %high-grade, %signet ring cells, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) per cm2 of a tumor, %immature stroma (tumor bed), %inflammatory stroma (tumor bed), %mature stroma (tumor bed), %immature (stromal region), %inflammatory (stromal region), and %mature (stromal region). The associations between the QuantCRC features and pCR were evaluated using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests and logistic regression models while adjusting for primary tumor location and NAT. Results: The identified 288 pts had the following demographics: median age 60, 59% male, 52% distal tumor, 42% TNT. Pts who achieved pCR had smaller pre-treatment tumors (p=0.03), higher TILS, and lower %immature (stroma) (Table 1). After multivariable adjustment, higher TILS and lower %immature (stroma) remain to be significantly associated with a higher likelihood of pCR. A higher %mature (stroma) and %mature stroma (tumor bed) were also identified, in multivariable models, to be associated with a higher rate of pCR. NAT protocol and tumor location (proximal vs. distal) were not associated with pCR. Conclusions: The ability to integrate pathological features with AI may allow for personalized treatment. Using this technology, we recognize that patients who harbor a more mature stromal archetype and inflammatory tumor predisposition, are more likely to achieve pCR to conventional NAT. These pathological features are not currently incorporated into risk stratification in RC. Additional validation and integration into current risk stratification methods is warranted. [Table: see text]

PURPOSE Recurrence after curative-intent treatment occurs in 20%-50% of patients with stage II-IV colorectal cancer (CRC), underscoring the need for early detection of minimal residual disease (MRD) using circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). Here, we examined the pattern of use of a tumor-informed ctDNA assay in CRC MRD monitoring in routine clinical practice at Mayo Clinic, Rochester. METHODS We conducted a retrospective analysis of health records of patients with CRC who had at least one tumor-informed ctDNA assay from May 2019 through July 1, 2022. Recurrence was defined as radiographic evidence of disease. Descriptive characteristics of the cohort, ctDNA results, and subsequent interventions were recorded. RESULTS Of the 120 patients included, the median age at diagnosis was 67 years, 46% were female, and 94% were White. At diagnosis, 10 patients had stage I, 23 stage II, 60 stage III, and 25 stage IV disease. Of 476 ctDNA assays performed, 70% were performed in patients who had recurrent disease most commonly to monitor the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions and 16% resulted in a change in clinical decision making. There were 110 recurrences identified in 62 patients, as some patients experienced more than one recurrence over time. Compared with serum carcinoembryonic antigen levels, ctDNA results correlated better with radiologic imaging. CONCLUSION Routine ctDNA monitoring for MRD detection has been adopted in clinical practice; however, 84% of ctDNA assays performed did not result in a change in clinical management. This suggests the need for further clinical research data to guide routine clinical use of ctDNA MRD testing in CRC.

Primary tumor resection and liver transplantation are the only curative treatment options for the management of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). However, for patients with advanced or metastatic disease, palliative systemic therapy remains the only treatment option. The development of targeted therapeutics has begun to shift the treatment paradigm in CCA. Targets of interest in CCA include mutated isocitrate dehydrogenase-1 (mIDH-1), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) overexpression/amplification, and fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) fusion, in addition to less frequently observed targets such as BRAF V600E, deficient mismatch repair/high microsatellite instability (dMMR/MSI-H), and high tumor mutation burden (TMB-H). These targets are observed in varying frequency among patients with intrahepatic CCA and extrahepatic CCA. Multiple novel therapies have been developed to exploit each of these targets, with some having received United States Food and Drug Administration approval for use in the second-line setting. In the current review, we discuss targets of interest in CCA and summarize current evidence evaluating available therapies directed at these targets.

Background: Lenvatinib, a multikinase inhibitor, is an FDA-approved treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the first-line setting. Recent trial data have established atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as well as tremelimumab plus durvalumab as preferred first-line treatment options for advanced HCC. The role of lenvatinib following progression on immunotherapy in patients with advanced HCC remains unclear. Methods: We conducted a multicentric, retrospective analysis of patients with advanced HCC diagnosed between 2010 and 2021 at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, Arizona, and Florida who received immunotherapy followed by lenvatinib. Median overall survival and progression-free survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan–Meier method, and responses were determined using RECIST 1.1. Adverse events were determined using CTCAE v 4.0. Results: We identified 53 patients with advanced HCC who received lenvatinib following progression on immunotherapy. Forty five (85%) patients had a Child Pugh class A at diagnosis, while 30 (58%) patients were still Child Pugh A at time of lenvatinib initiation. Lenvatinib was administered as a second-line treatment in 85% of the patients. The median PFS was 3.7 months (95% CI: 3.2–6.6), and the median OS from the time of lenvatinib initiation was 12.8 months (95% CI: 6.7–19.5). In patients with Child Pugh class A, the median OS and PFS was 14 and 5.2 months, respectively. Race, gender, and Child Pugh class was associated with OS on multivariate analysis. Discussion: Our study, using real-world data, suggests that patients benefit from treatment with lenvatinib following progression on immunotherapy in advanced HCC. The optimal sequencing of therapy for patients with advanced HCC following progression on immunotherapy remains unknown, and these results need to be validated in a clinical trial.

Over the past 20 years, rates of early-onset colorectal cancer (eoCRC), defined as <50 years of age at diagnosis, have increased, with 16–25% associated with a pathogenic germline variant (PGV) resulting in a hereditary cancer syndrome. In the present study, we sought to further characterize PGVs observed in patients with eoCRC. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with a history of CRC referred for genetic counseling at Mayo Clinic Rochester between April 2019 and April 2022. Three hundred and three CRC patients were referred to medical genetics, including 124 with a history of eoCRC. Only 84 patients (68%) with eoCRC referred for genetic counseling completed genetic testing, with an average of 48 genes evaluated. PGVs were identified in 27.4% with eoCRC, including 8.3% with Lynch syndrome (LS). Other detected PGVs known to increase the risk of CRC included MUTYH (4.8%), CHEK2 (3.6%), APC, BMPR1A, and TP53 (1.3% each). Among those with aoCRC, 109 patients (61%) completed genetic testing, among which 88% had either a dMMR tumor, personal history of an additional LS malignancy, or family history of LS malignancy, with PGVs detected in 23% of patients. This study reinforces the importance for all patients with CRC, especially those with eoCRC, to undergo germline testing.

PURPOSE Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is largely considered a nonimmunogenic malignancy; however, approximately 1%, of patients may have tumors with deficient mismatch repair, high microsatellite instability, or high tumor mutational burden (TMB ≥10 mutations/Mb), which may be predictive of response to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. We sought to analyze outcomes of patients with high-TMB and pathogenic genomic alterations observed in this population. METHODS This study included patients with PDAC who underwent comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) at Foundation Medicine (Cambridge, MA). Clinical data were obtained from a US-wide real-world clinicogenomic pancreatic database. We report genomic alterations in those with high and low TMB, and compare outcomes on the basis of receipt of single-agent ICI or therapy regimens not containing ICI. RESULTS We evaluated 21,932 patients with PDAC who had tissue CGP data available, including 21,639 (98.7%) with low-TMB and 293 (1.3%) with high-TMB. Among patients with high-TMB, a greater number of alterations were observed in BRCA2, BRAF, PALB2, and genes of the mismatch repair pathway, whereas fewer alterations were observed in KRAS. Among patients who received an ICI (n = 51), those with high-TMB had more favorable median overall survival when compared with the low-TMB subset (25.7 v 5.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.91; P = .034). CONCLUSION Longer survival was observed in patients with high-TMB receiving ICI compared with those with low-TMB. This supports the role of high-TMB as a predictive biomarker for efficacy of ICI therapy in PDAC. Additionally, we report higher rates of BRAF and BRCA2 mutations and lower rates of KRAS mutation among patients with PDAC and high-TMB, which to our knowledge, is a novel finding.

4146 Background: Currently, ICI therapy is recommended for patients with metastatic PDAC whose tumors exhibit dMMR, MSI-H, or high TMB (≥10 mutations/Mb). However, due to the low prevalence of high TMB in PDAC (~1%), few studies have evaluated the role of ICI therapy in this subpopulation. This study aimed to compare GA between PDAC patients with high TMB and low TMB ( < 10 mutations/Mb) and to evaluate the effectiveness of ICIs in real-world PDAC patients by TMB status. Methods: This study included PDAC patients who underwent genomic testing using Foundation Medicine tissue comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) assays. GA were compared between tissue specimens with high and low TMB by chi-squared, adjusted for multiple comparisons. Patient clinical data was obtained by the US-wide de-identified Flatiron Health and Foundation Medicine real-world clinicogenomic pancreatic database (CGDB), originated from ~280 US cancer clinics between 01/2011 and 09/2022. Real-world overall survival (OS) and time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) were compared between patients receiving an ICI (high TMB versus low TMB) and between patients with high TMB (ICI versus other therapies) by Cox models. Results: We included 21,932 patients with PDAC with tissue CGP data available; 98.7% with low TMB and 1.3% with high TMB. Among actionable alterations, patients with high TMB had higher prevalence of mutations in BRCA2 (p < 0.0001), BRAF (p < 0.0001), PALB2 (p < 0.0001), and genes of the mismatch repair pathway ( MSH2, MSH6, MLH1, and PMS2, p < 0.0001), but lower prevalence of KRAS mutations (p < 0.0001). The most common KRAS mutation in both groups of patients was G12D. In CGDB, 51 patients received an ICI (10 with high TMB and 41 with low TMB) and 17 patients with high TMB received other therapies. Among patients receiving an ICI, those with high TMB had more favorable median OS compared to those with low TMB (25.7 versus 5.2 months, hazard ratio (HR) 0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 - 0.76, p = 0.01) and median TTD (20.7 versus 3.0 months, HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.13 - 0.82, p = 0.02). Among patients with high TMB, those receiving an ICI had more favorable OS compared to those receiving other therapies (25.7 versus 6.6 months, HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.10-0.96, p = 0.043), nominally favoring ICI use in this small cohort (n = 10 versus 17). Conclusions: There is no randomized clinical trial evaluating ICI versus other therapies in PDAC. To our knowledge, this is the largest cohort to date comparing ICI effectiveness in PDAC. We observed more favorable OS among PDAC patients with high TMB receiving ICI versus those with low TMB who received an ICI and more favorable to those with high TMB receiving other therapies. This study supports the FDA-approved use of ICIs in patients with PDAC and high TMB and demonstrates the importance of TMB assessment for patients with PDAC.

3536 Background: Early-onset colorectal cancer (eoCRC, initial CRC diagnosis at age < 50 years) has been increasing in the past two decades especially in Western countries. This study evaluates somatic and germline profiles in eoCRC compared to average-onset CRC (aoCRC, initial CRC diagnosis at age ≥ 50 years). Methods: This is a retrospective, cross-sectional study utilizing data from de-identified records of colorectal cancer patients tested with the Tempus xT assay from 2017 to 2022. Briefly, the assay is a targeted panel that detects single nucleotide variants, insertions and/or deletions, and copy number variants in 598-648 genes, as well as chromosomal rearrangements in 22 genes with high sensitivity and specificity. Baseline characteristics and immunologic markers were compared between eoCRC and aoCRC by Wilcoxon Rank Sum or Chi-squared test (reporting p-values). Somatic and germline mutations were compared between two age groups with false discover rate adjustments (reporting q-values). Results: In this study, 2,379 eoCRC and 8,627 aoCRC patients were included, with the majority diagnosed with stage IV disease. Additionally, germline alterations were assessed on a subset of 6,311 patients with tumor/normal match testing (eoCRC = 1,413 and aoCRC = 4,898). Left-sided primaries were more common in eoCRC (85% left/rectum in eoCRC vs. 75% left/rectum in aoCRC (p < 0.001), and rates of microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) or deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) were lower compared to aoCRC (4.2% vs. 6.8%, p < 0.001). eoCRC has a unique somatic mutation profile compared to aoCRC. A higher prevalence of germline mutations was observed in eoCRC overall (6.9% vs. 5%, p = 0.006); however, no statistically significant differences were observed in individual germline genes compared to aoCRC, likely due to relatively small numbers. Conclusions: eoCRC has a unique mutational profile and presence of germline mutations in 6.9% of eoCRC, indicating a potential role for universal germline testing in CRC. [Table: see text]

Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are tumor cells shed from the primary tumor into circulation, with clusters of CTCs responsible for cancer metastases. CTC detection and isolation from the bloodstream are based on properties distinguishing CTCs from normal blood cells. Current CTC detection techniques can be divided into two main categories: label dependent, which depends upon antibodies that selectively bind cell surface antigens present on CTCs, or label-independent detection, which is detection based on the size, deformability, and biophysical properties of CTCs. CTCs may play significant roles in cancer screening, diagnosis, treatment navigation, including prognostication and precision medicine, and surveillance. In cancer screening, capturing and evaluating CTCs from peripheral blood could be a strategy to detect cancer at its earliest stage. Cancer diagnosis using liquid biopsy could also have tremendous benefits. Full utilization of CTCs in the clinical management of malignancies may be feasible in the near future; however, several challenges still exist. CTC assays currently lack adequate sensitivity, especially in early-stage solid malignancies, due to low numbers of detectable CTCs. As assays improve and more trials evaluate the clinical utility of CTC detection in guiding therapies, we anticipate increased use in cancer management.

559 Background: Cabozantinib, a multikanase inhibitor, is approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for treatment of advanced stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) following progression on sorafenib. The CELESTIAL study which demonstrated benefit from cabozantinib following sorafenib included only patients with Child Pugh class A liver function. Recently, bevacizumab plus atezolizumab has replaced sorafenib as the first line treatment for HCC. It is unclear whether there is benefit from using Cabozantinib following progression on immunotherapy as CELESTIAL trial included very few patients who received prior immunotherapy. We describe the outcomes of individuals with advanced stage HCC treated with Cabozantinib following progression on immunotherapy. Methods: This was a multicenter, retrospective analysis of patients with advanced HCC diagnosed between 2010-2021 at Mayo Clinic Arizona, Florida, and Minnesota. Progression free survival (PFS) and median overall survival analysis were performed using Kaplan-Meier method. Results: We identified a total of 26 patients with advanced stage HCC who received cabozantinib following progression on immunotherapy. The median age of patients was 61 years (range, 39 – 81) and the majority were male (85%). Eighteen (72%) patients had Child Pugh A at initiation of cabozantinib therapy. Four (15%) patients received cabozantinib as second line therapy, the rest received it as third line or later. PFS on cabozantinib was 2.1 months (95% CI: 1.3 – 3.9) and median overall survival from time of cabozantinib initiation was 7.7 months (95% CI: 5.3 – 14.9). PFS was shorter with Child Pugh Class B, 1.3 months (95% CI: 0.9 – NE) compared to those with Child Pugh Class A, 2.1 months (95% CI: 1.5 – 4); although this difference was not significant (p=0.55). Common adverse events included fatigue (50%), anorexia (35%), aspartate aminotransferase (AST) elevation (35%), and diarrhea (31%); 7 (26%) patients experienced Grade 3 or greater adverse events including hypertension, diarrhea, anorexia, and bowel obstruction. Two patients discontinued cabozantinib due to side effects including one for uncontrolled blood pressure elevations and the other due to fatigue. Conclusions: The optimal sequencing of therapy for patients with advanced HCC following progression on immunotherapy is unknown. Treatment with cabozantinib may improve clinical outcomes following progression on immunotherapy with similar adverse event profile. This study included patients with Child Pugh class B liver disease (28%) and heavily pretreated population and demonstrated mPFS and mOS similar to other work examining outcomes of cabozantinib in real world setting after progression on sorafenib. Further studies to determine optimal treatment sequencing for this patient population are needed.