Shi, Qian

AbstractBackgroundColon cancer patients have inferior overall survival than a matched general population (MGP). It is unknown if physical activity is associated with a reduction in this survival disparity.MethodsData were analyzed from two National Cancer Institute–sponsored postoperative treatment trials in stage III colon cancer, Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 89803 and 80702, with 2876 patients who self‐reported physical activity. Physical activity was converted to metabolic equivalents (MET‐hours/week). The MGP was derived from the National Center for Health Statistics and matched on age, sex, and year.ResultsIn CALGB 89803, among patients who were alive at 3 years, those with <3.0 and ≥18.0 MET‐hours/week had subsequent 3‐year overall survival rates that were −17.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], −22.4 to −11.8) and −3.5% (95% CI, −7.7 to 0.3) lower than MGP, respectively. In CALGB 80702, among patients who were alive at 3 years, those with <3.0 and ≥18.0 MET‐hours/week had subsequent 3‐year overall survival rates that were −10.8% (95% CI, −15.4 to −6.9) and −4.4% (95% CI, −7.6 to −1.6) lower than MGP, respectively. In pooled analyses, among patients who were alive and did not have tumor recurrence by year 3 (n = 1908), those with <3.0 and ≥18.0 MET‐hours/week had subsequent 3‐year overall survival rates that were −3.1% (95% CI, −6.2 to −0.3) lower and 2.9% (95% CI, 1.5–4.2) higher than MGP, respectively.ConclusionsPhysical activity is associated with an attenuation of the survival disparity between patients with stage III colon cancer participating in clinical trials and MGP. Colon cancer survivors who are physically active may achieve survival that approximates the MGP.

PURPOSE Newly approved drugs and combinations treating multiple myeloma (MM) have resulted in substantial improvements in patients' survival. To deliver rapid access to newer therapies, an earlier end point to expedite clinical trials is needed. Our objective was to evaluate the minimal residual disease–negative complete response (MRD-CR) as an intermediate end point for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in newly diagnosed (ND) transplant-eligible (NDTE) patients, ND transplant-ineligible (NDTinE) patients, and patients with relapsed/refractory (RR) MM. PATIENTS AND METHODS Individual patient data from 20 randomized multicenter trials were collected. Eleven studies (4,773 patients) with sufficient data were analyzed to evaluate whether 9- or 12-month MRD-CR classified at a 10 –5 threshold could be reasonably likely to predict the clinical benefit of new agents regarding PFS and OS. Global odds ratio (OR) was estimated using the bivariate Plackett Copula model. Supportive evaluation included correlations of the treatment effects on MRD-CR end points and PFS/OS, evaluated by both linear regression ( R 2 weighted least squared ) and Copula ( R 2 Copula ) models. RESULTS The analysis demonstrated that both 9- and 12-month MRD-CR strongly correlated with PFS at patient level in NDTE patients, NDTinE patients, and patients with RRMM. Global ORs ranged from 3.06 to 16.24, all with 95% CIs excluding 1.0. Encouraging trial-level correlations ( R 2 , 0.61-0.70) were observed by pooling three populations and were stronger ( R 2 , 0.67-0.78) in the ND population. Similar results were observed for OS. CONCLUSION Our findings provided the support for use of MRD-CR classified at a 10 –5 threshold at either 9 or 12 months after starting of the treatment, as an intermediate end point to support accelerated approvals, in future trials in NDTE patients, NDTinE patients, and patients with RRMM.

LBA22 Background: Tumor-informed circulating tumor (ct) DNA testing is recognized as a powerful predictor of CRC recurrence. However, the benefit of systemic therapy to prevent or delay clinical recurrence in patients (pts) with molecular recurrence after curative surgery remains uncertain. Methods: Pts with CRC who had undergone curative resection of primary and/or metastatic sites + standard of care (SoC) adjuvant treatment if applicable, were enrolled in ALTAIR study if they (1) prospectively tested positive for ctDNA using a clinically validated, personalized assay (Signatera™, Natera, Inc.) within 3 months before enrollment and (2) had no recurrence on radiological (CT) imaging. Pts were randomized to receive FTD/TPI or placebo for 6 months. CT and ctDNA analyses were conducted every 2 months in the first year, every 3 months in the second year, and every 6 months in the third year. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS), with secondary endpoints including ctDNA clearance, overall survival (OS), and adverse events. The study assumed a median DFS of 8 months in the placebo group, an HR of 0.667 for the FTD/TPI group, 0.05 significance level, 0.80 power, 2-year enrollment, and 1-year follow-up, requiring 240 pts and 190 DFS events. Baseline ctDNA levels were evaluated by mean tumor molecules (MTM)/ml. Results: Between July 2020 and June 2023, 243 pts were enrolled and randomized to FTD/TPI (n=122) or placebo (n=121). Baseline characteristics were balanced, and 96.3% of pts received SoC treatment postoperatively. FTD/TPI group had a median DFS of 9.30 months vs. 5.55 months in the placebo group, but this difference did not reach statistical significance in the primary population (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.60-1.05; P = 0.107). The FTD/TPI benefit was highly significant in resected oligometastatic stage IV pts as shown in Table. The baseline MTM/ml levels were significantly higher in resected oligometastatic Stage IV pts vs non-Stage IV (0.68 vs 0.32, P = 0.024). Overall, FTD/TPI benefit was significantly pronounced with higher MTM/mL, with linear benefit observed with increasing MTM/mL values at the enrollment time point. OS data remain immature, with 24 events reported across both arms. Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 73.0% of the FTD/TPI arm versus 3.3% in the placebo arm, with no new safety signals. Conclusions: Although statistical significance was not reached in the primary population, FTD/TPI showed clinically meaningful DFS benefit in pts with resected oligometastatic disease and a trend towards increasing DFS benefits with increasing MTM/mL values. Clinical trial information: NCT04457297 . Number Baseline MTM/ml Median DFS FTD/TPI(months) Placebo (months) Primary population 243 0.40 9.30 5.55 HR, 0.79 P = 0.107 Stage IV 66 0.68 9.76 3.96 HR, 0.53 P = 0.012 Non-Stage IV 177 0.32 9.26 6.05 HR, 0.86 P = 0.378

LBA14 Background: CALGB/SWOG 80702 previously showed that the addition of celecoxib to standard adjuvant chemotherapy with FOLFOX did not significantly improve disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with stage III colon cancer. Here, we evaluated the prognostic and predictive value of ctDNA in identifying a subpopulation of patients who may benefit from celecoxib. Methods: In the subset of patients with adequate biospecimens who participated in CALGB/SWOG 80702, a randomized phase III trial of 3 versus 6 months of adjuvant 5-FU, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) +/- celecoxib, ctDNA assessment was performed using a clinically validated, tumor-informed 16-plex mPCR-NGS assay (Signatera(TM), Natera, Inc.) after surgery and before the start of adjuvant therapy (baseline). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to describe the distribution of survival time based on ctDNA positivity and log-rank testing was performed. Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine unadjusted associations between ctDNA positivity and disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Two-sided P values equal to or less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant, except for interaction P values (tested with a likelihood ratio). Results: In total, 1,011 of the 2,526 patients who participated in 80702 had ctDNA testing results from baseline; 189 were ctDNA positive (18.7%). ctDNA positivity associated with male sex, higher T stage, and N2 (versus N1) stage. ctDNA positivity was significantly associated with worse DFS (hazard ratio [HR] 6.52 [95% confident interval (CI) 5.09-8.34; p<0.0001] and OS (HR 6.28 [95% CI 4.63-8.51; p<0.0001]). Three-year DFS was 86.6% in ctDNA-negative cases and 36.8% in ctDNA-positive cases. Among patients who were ctDNA negative, celecoxib use was not significantly associated with worse DFS as compared to placebo (HR 0.75 [95% CI 0.54-1.05; p=0.095]) with a three-year DFS of 87.7% versus 85.5%, respectively. Among ctDNA-positive patients, celecoxib significantly improved DFS compared to placebo (HR 0.59 [95% CI 0.42-0.85; p=0.004]) with a three-year DFS of 44.1% versus 26.6% (P interaction = 0.25). Similar results were seen for overall survival with a hazard ratio of 0.86 (95% CI 0.56-1.33; p=0.49) for ctDNA negative cases and 0.63 (95% CI 0.41-0.96; p=0.028) for ctDNA-positive cases for celecoxib versus placebo (P interaction = 0.28). Conclusion: In a randomized phase III adjuvant therapy trial for stage III colon cancer, ctDNA was highly prognostic of DFS and OS. ctDNA positivity also appeared predictive of the benefit of adjuvant celecoxib for DFS and OS. These results suggest a potential role for ctDNA in determining which patients should consider celecoxib in addition to standard FOLFOX adjuvant therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT01150045 .

TPS309 Background: Patients with oligometastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) often experience long-term progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) following aggressive local treatment of isolated metastases, especially in the liver. However, the effectiveness of local ablative therapies, such as microwave ablation (MWA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), in patients with inoperable limited metastatic CRC or those with additional metastases outside the liver or lungs, remains uncertain. Despite the historical use of local therapy for oligometastatic CRC, often influenced by provider bias rather than strong evidence, questions persist about the potential benefits of applying this approach to patients with more extensive disease. This trial aims to address this clinical challenge by evaluating the safety and efficacy of adding total ablative therapy (TAT) of all disease sites to standard systemic treatment in patients with limited metastatic CRC. Methods: A022101/NRG-GI009 is a randomized phase III study within the National Clinical Trials Network, set to enroll 364 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic CRC (BRAF wild-type, microsatellite stable). Patients with liver-only metastatic disease are excluded. Pre-registration during first-line systemic therapy induction is encouraged. Eligible lesions must be treatable with surgical resection, MWA, and/or SBRT. Patients without significant radiographic progression after 12-39 weeks of first-line systemic therapy, with 4 or fewer disease sites post-induction chemotherapy, will be randomized 1:1. Randomization will be stratified by the number of metastatic organ sites (1-2 vs. 3-4), timing of metastatic disease diagnosis (de novo vs. secondary), and the presence of metastatic disease outside the liver/lungs in at least one site. Patients in Arm 1 will receive TAT, targeting all metastatic sites with a combination of surgical resection, MWA, and/or SBRT, followed by standard systemic therapy. Patients in Arm 2 will continue with standard systemic therapy alone. The choice of systemic therapy is at the discretion of the medical oncologist and may include continued therapy, maintenance chemotherapy, or observation. The primary endpoint is OS, with secondary endpoints including event-free survival, treatment-related toxicities, and local recurrence. Exploratory biomarker analyses will also be conducted. The study requires 346 evaluable patients across the two arms to demonstrate an OS improvement with a hazard ratio of 0.7, providing 80% power with a one-sided alpha of 5%. The trial employs a group sequential design with two interim analyses (at 25% and 50% of events) to assess futility. The trial began in January 2023, and patient recruitment is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT05673148 .

Abstract Background The National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) is the largest government-sponsored organization in the United States; it is tasked with funding randomized controlled trials in oncology. It is unknown whether there are differences in study design by treatment modality. We evaluated differences in methodology between trials testing radiation therapy (RT) vs systemic therapy. Methods The Clinical Trials Support Unit website was used to identify active randomized controlled trials of systemic therapy or RT across NCTN cooperative groups through December 31, 2023. Studies in disease sites with more than 5 RT trials were included. Each trial’s protocol was reviewed to obtain key design information that was descriptively compared: primary endpoint, hypothesis testing type (superiority vs noninferiority), noninferiority margin, hypothesized effect size, power, and statistical significance level. Results A total of 186 randomized controlled trials (142 systemic therapy, 44 RT) were examined. Comparing primary endpoints, 59.1% vs 26.8% of RT vs systemic therapy trials, respectively, had a primary endpoint of overall survival. Nearly one-third (31.2%) of RT trials were noninferiority vs 6.3% of systemic therapy trials. Among breast cancer trials, 75% of RT studies were noninferiority vs 11.1% systemic therapy. Target effect size, power, and statistical significance level were similar by treatment modality within tumor types and disease settings. Conclusion Among NCTN cooperative group randomized controlled trials, there were marked differences in study design between RT vs systemic therapy trials. A higher benchmark for defining success for RT interventions was observed, with greater emphasis on overall survival as the primary endpoint. This finding may reflect differences in therapeutic mechanism by modality and types of study questions posed.

PURPOSE The adjuvant treatment for stage III colon cancer (CC) is chemotherapy combining fluoropyrimidine (FP) and oxaliplatin (OX). FP regimen plus OX (FPOX) may benefit in high-risk stage II CC. We performed a pooled analysis of pivotal MOSAIC and C-07 studies evaluating FPOX for the treatment of high-risk stage II CC according to prognostic factors, number of high-risk factors, and current clinicopathologic risk classification on the basis of T stage, tumor perforation, and number of lymph nodes examined. PATIENTS AND METHODS One thousand five hundred and ninety-five patients with stage II CC receiving FP or FPOX were pooled. The overall survival (OS) benefit of OX was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and unadjusted Cox models stratified by study. Three thousand and fifty-nine patients with stage III CC were used only for interaction tests between the allocated chemotherapy and stage. RESULTS In the pooled analysis of stage II patients, independent prognostic factors in multivariable analysis were sex, age, perforation/obstruction, and tumor sidedness. There was a significant interaction in OS between stage and allocated chemotherapy with hazard ratios (HRs) of 1.03 for stage II (95% CI, 0.82 to 1.29; P = .813) and 0.82 for stage III (95% CI, 0.73 to 0.92; P = .001; P int = .073). There was no benefit from the addition of OX to FP for any of the prognostic factors. The number of high-risk factors tested was not predictive of OX benefit. According to the currently agreed clinicopathologic risk classification, no OS benefit of OX was observed, as HR was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.63 to 1.18; P = .349). CONCLUSION No OS benefit of adjuvant OX was found in high-risk stage II CC, regardless of the definition used to characterize tumors as having a high risk for recurrence. Hence, our analysis suggests that OX should not be the standard of care for adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II CC, even in high-risk patients.

Abstract Background Inflammation and insufficient physical inactivity contribute to individual-level risk of disease recurrence and death in stage III colon cancer. The extent to which increased inflammatory risk can be offset by sufficient physical activity remains unknown. Methods This cohort study was nested within the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (now part of the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology) and Southwest Oncology Group randomized trial. Inflammatory burden was quantified by high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and soluble tumor necrosis factor-α receptor 2 after recovery from tumor resection. Physical activity was measured during and after postoperative chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. Results The 3-year disease-free survival rate was 88.4% among patients with low inflammation and sufficient physical activity (referent group for all comparisons), 84.9% with low inflammation and insufficient physical activity (absolute risk difference = −3.5 percentage points, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −11.3 to 4.3; P = .38), 78.0% with intermediate inflammation and insufficient physical activity (absolute risk difference = −10.4 percentage points, 95% CI = −17.4 to −3.3; P = .007), and 79.7% with high inflammation and insufficient physical activity (absolute risk difference = −8.7 percentage points, 95% CI = −15.7 to −1.6; P = .022). In contrast, the 3-year disease-free survival rate was 87.3% among patients with intermediate inflammation and sufficient physical activity (absolute risk difference = −1.1 percentage points, 95% CI = −7.5 to 5.3; P = .74) and 84.4% with high inflammation and sufficient physical activity (absolute risk difference = −4.0 percentage points, 95% CI = −12.3 to 4.3; P = .34). Conclusion In this observational study of stage III colon cancer patients, physical activity was associated with improved disease-free survival despite high inflammation. Patients with intermediate or high inflammation who were physically active had disease-free survival rates that were not statistically significantly different from those with low inflammation.

ImportanceThe prognosis of patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction (AEG) is poor. From current evidence, it remains unclear to what extent preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) or preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy achieve better outcomes than surgery alone.ObjectiveTo assess the association of preoperative CRT and preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy in patients with AEG with overall survival and other outcomes.Data SourcesLiterature search in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ClinicalTrials.gov, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform was performed from inception to April 21, 2023.Study SelectionTwo blinded reviewers screened for randomized clinical trials comparing preoperative CRT plus surgery with preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy plus surgery, 1 intervention with surgery alone, or all 3 treatments. Only data from participants with AEG were included from trials that encompassed mixed histology or gastric cancer. Among 2768 initially identified studies, 17 (0.6%) met the selection criteria.Data Extraction and SynthesisThe Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines were followed for extracting data and assessing data quality by 2 independent extractors. A bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted using the 2-stage approach.Main Outcomes and MeasuresOverall and disease-free survival, postoperative morbidity, and mortality.ResultsThe analyses included 2549 patients (2206 [86.5%] male; mean [SD] age, 61.0 [9.4] years) from 17 trials (conducted from 1989-2016). Both preoperative CRT plus surgery (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75 [95% credible interval (CrI), 0.62-0.90]; 3-year difference, 105 deaths per 1000 patients) and preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy plus surgery (HR, 0.78 [95% CrI, 0.64-0.91]; 3-year difference, 90 deaths per 1000 patients) showed longer overall survival than surgery alone. Comparing the 2 modalities yielded similar overall survival (HR, 1.04 [95% CrI], 0.83-1.28]; 3-year difference, 15 deaths per 1000 patients fewer for CRT). Similarly, disease-free survival was longer for both modalities compared with surgery alone. Postoperative morbidity was more frequent after CRT plus surgery (odds ratio [OR], 2.94 [95% CrI, 1.01-8.59]) than surgery alone. Postoperative mortality was not significantly more frequent after CRT plus surgery than surgery alone (OR, 2.50 [95% CrI, 0.66-10.56]) or after chemotherapy plus surgery than CRT plus surgery (OR, 0.44 [95% CrI, 0.08-2.00]).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this meta-analysis of patients with AEG, both preoperative CRT and preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy were associated with longer survival without relevant differences between the 2 modalities. Thus, either of the 2 treatments may be recommended to patients.

TPS4208 Background: Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) carries a 5-year relative survival of 3%. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have thus far failed to improve outcomes due to an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME). Signaling through the C-X-C motif chemokine receptor 4 (CXCR4)/C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 12 (CXCL12) axis results in exclusion of anti-tumor immune cells in mouse PDAC models. Longitudinal survival studies testing combinations of CXCR4i, aPD-1, and gemcitabine in the KPC mouse model of PDAC demonstrated a survival benefit with the combination of all three agents. Results from a multicenter, investigator-initiated, single arm pilot study evaluating the preliminary safety and efficacy ofMotixafortide (CXCR4i), Cemiplimab (aPD1), Gemcitabine, and Nab-paclitaxel (MCGN) in 11 patients with treatment-naïve mPDAC were recently presented. Seven patients (64%) achieved a partial response, including 6 confirmed partial responses, and 10 patients (91%) had disease control, compared to historic partial response and disease control rates of 23% and 48%, respectively, with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (GN). Preliminary median progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.6 months compared to historic median PFS of 5.5 months with GN. Analysis of paired pre- and on-treatment biopsy samples from demonstrated an increase in CD8+ T-cell density in tumors from all 11 patients treated with MCGN (p=0.007). Based on these promising results, the protocol was amended from a single arm expansion totaling 40 patients to a randomized phase 2 study. Methods: This is an open-label, multicenter, investigator-initiated phase 2 clinical trial. Patients are randomized 2:1 to receive MCGN or GNalone (N=108). The primary endpoint is progression free survival. The study has 80% power to detect an improvement in PFS from 6 to 9.2 months (HR 0.65) with a one-sided alpha of 0.20. One interim analysis for futility is planned when 50% of the PFS events are observed. Secondary objectives include response rate, disease control rate, duration of clinical benefit and overall survival. Patients will undergo optional paired biopsies which will be analyzed in conjunction with samples collected from the phase I pilot study. Exploratory studies include interrogation of the TME using quantitative multiplex immunofluorescence and single-cell RNA sequencing. The randomized phase 2 trial is open to enrollment and one patient has been randomized as of 1/29/2024. Clinical trial information: NCT04543071 .