Hubbard, Joleen M.

Objectives: Survival benefit of combination over single-agent chemotherapy for metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) was demonstrated in younger patients in clinical trials. The authors aimed to evaluate whether this survival benefit of combination chemotherapy is present in elderly patients with metastatic PDAC. Materials and Methods: The authors identified elderly patients (age 65 y or older) with stage IV PDAC and extracted available clinical information from a prospectively maintained institutional pancreatic cancer registry from 2007 to 2016. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Cox proportional hazards regression was used for multivariable survival analyses. Survival outcomes for the entire cohort and by age group I (elderly, 65 to 75 y) and age group II (very elderly, older than 75 y) were assessed. Results: A total of 606 patients were included with a median age of 73.8 years. Among them, 239 patients (39%) received combination chemotherapy and 152 patients (25.1%) received single-agent chemotherapy as first-line treatment. Combination chemotherapy was associated with significantly longer median overall survival compared with single-agent chemotherapy (10.9 vs. 7.5 mo, P<0.001) with hazard ratio 0.62 (95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.81; P=0.001) after adjusting for age, sex, comorbidity, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 level. Analyses by age groups indicated that very elderly patients (age group II) benefited from combination chemotherapy compared with single-agent chemotherapy with hazard ratio 0.56 (95% confidence interval, 0.31-1; P=0.049), comparable with the age group I (P age-treatment interaction=0.81). Conclusion: Elderly patients, even those older than 75 years, with metastatic PDAC benefited from combination chemotherapy.

Background: Bevacizumab (BEV), a monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor-A (VEGF-A), is a standard component of medical therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Activation of alternative angiogenesis pathways has been implicated in resistance to BEV. This phase II study examines the activity of combined vertical blockade of VEGF signaling with sorafenib and BEV as salvage therapy in patients with progressive disease (PD) on all standard therapy in mCRC. Methods: mCRC patients with documented PD on standard therapy, received sorafenib (200 mg orally twice daily, days 1–5 and 8–12) and BEV (5 mg/kg intravenously, day 1) every 2 weeks. Primary endpoint was 3-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), response rate (RR), safety, and feasibility. Results: Of the 83 patients enrolled, 79 were evaluable. Of these, 42 (53%) were progression-free at 3 months. Median PFS was 3.5 months and median OS was 8.3 months. One patient had a partial response and 50 patients (63.3%) had at least one stable tumor assessment. Of 79 evaluable patients, 54 (68%) experienced grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) at least possibly related to treatment. Most frequent grade 3/4 AEs were: fatigue (24.1%), hypertension (16.5%), elevated lipase (8.9%), hand-foot skin reaction (8.9%), diarrhea (7.6%), and proteinuria (7.6%). Reasons for treatment discontinuation were PD (72%), AEs (18%), patient refusal (8%), physician decision (1%), and death (1%). Conclusions: The combination of BEV and sorafenib as salvage therapy in heavily pretreated mCRC patients is tolerable and manageable, with evidence of promising activity. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00826540, URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00826540

204 Background: More than 50% of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients will develop metastatic disease. Brain metastasis (BM) from colorectal cancer is uncommon (0.6-1.36%). This study aims to investigate the patient characteristics, treatment modalities and prognostic factors in this rare population. Methods: 104 patients with brain metastasis disease from CRC were identified from over 30,000 colorectal cancer patients at the Mayo Clinic Rochester between 1/1994 and 6/2019. A retrospective review was conducted by using data from electronic medical records (EMR). Statistical analysis utilized the Kaplan-Meier method, Log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazards models. Results: Among the 104 patients, 62 were male (59.6%) and 42 were female (40.4%). Median age at CRC diagnosis was 58.4 and at BM diagnosis was 61. Thirty-three patients had right-sided colon cancers, 27 patients had left-sided colon cancers and 39 patients had rectal cancer. Median time from CRC diagnosis to BM was 30.7 months. The majority of patients (58.7%) presented with a solitary brain lesion. Eighty-six patients (82.7%) had extracranial metastatic disease at BM diagnosis. Median survival was 7.0 months (95% CI 2.6-16.9) from BM diagnosis. Age <70, solitary BM, surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy were associated with statistically significant improved survival on univariate and multivariate analysis. Multi-modality treatment including surgical brain lesion resection, postoperative stereotactic radiation (SRS) with/without whole brain radiation (WBRT), and chemotherapy significantly improved median overall survival (Table). Conclusions: Although BM from CRC carries poor prognosis, multi-modality treatment (surgery, radiation and systemic chemotherapy) for patients with limited BM improves clinical outcome. [Table: see text]

167 Background: Previous studies have reported high TILs are a favorable prognostic factor in stage II CC. However, whether the impact of TILs on overall survival (OS) differs among pts who did or did not receive ADJ is still to be determined. We assessed the prognostic value of CD3+ TILs in pts with stage II CC according to whether they received ADJ or not (no-ADJ). Methods: Pts treated with curative surgery for stage II CC (2002-2013) were identified through the Santa Maria alle Scotte Hospital database. CD3+ TILs at the invasive front, center of tumor, and stroma, were determined by immunohistochemistry and manually quantified as the rate of TILs/total tissue areas. High TILs (H-TILs) was defined as > 20%. Pts were classified as high or low TILs (L-TILs) and ADJ or no-ADJ. Cox models were used to assess OS with hazard ratio estimates (95% CI). Results: Of the 678 pts included (356 deaths), 137 (20%) received ADJ while 541 (80%) did not. ADJ comprised fluoropyrimidine +/- oxaliplatin. Median follow-up was 8.5 years. The distributions of the 4 groups were: 16% (L-TIL/ADJ), 64% (L-TIL/no-ADJ), 5% (H-TIL/ADJ), 15% (H-TIL/no-ADJ). Compared to H-TILs/no-ADJ, ADJ pts had a significantly longer OS (P < .0001) regardless of the TILS rate while L-TILs/no ADJ had significantly shorter OS and higher risk of death (HR = 1.41; 95% CI, 1.06-1.88; P < .0001) [See table]. On multivariable analysis, adjusting for perforation, obstruction, T-stage, grade, < 12 lymph nodes resected, lymphovascular and perineural invasion, the adverse prognostic impact of L-TILs (vs H-TILs) in no-ADJ pts was confirmed (HR = 1.36; 95% CI 1.02, 1.82; P = .0373). Conclusions: Low CD3+ TILs rate was independently associated with shorter OS in stage II CC pts who did not receive ADJ, but was not prognostic among pts who had ADJ. These data suggest a potentially different impact of TILs in chemo-treated vs -untreated stage II CC which could affect clinical decision making. [Table: see text]

Small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) is a rare malignancy of the gastrointestinal tract that has increased in incidence across recent years. Often diagnosed at an advanced stage, outcomes for SBA are worse on average than for other related malignancies, including colorectal cancer. Due to the rarity of this disease, few studies have been done to direct optimal treatment, although recent data have shown that SBA responds to treatment differently than colorectal cancer, necessitating a separate approach to treatment. The NCCN Guidelines for Small Bowel Adenocarcinoma were created to establish an evidence-based standard of care for patients with SBA. These guidelines provide recommendations on the workup of suspected SBA, primary treatment options, adjuvant treatment, surveillance, and systemic therapy for metastatic disease. Additionally, principles of imaging and endoscopy, pathologic review, surgery, radiation therapy, and survivorship are described.

Abstract Background Regorafenib at different dosing strategies and TAS-102 are treatment options for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We aimed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness evidence supporting these different strategies. Materials and Methods We searched different databases for randomized controlled trials evaluating TAS-102 or regorafenib in patients with refractory mCRC who failed prior oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and fluoropyrimidine. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The overall effect was pooled using the DerSimonian random effects model. We conducted network meta-analysis based on White's multivariate meta-regression to pool evidence from direct and indirect comparisons. Results Six trials at low risk of bias (2,445 patients) were included. Direct comparisons showed that Rego 160 and TAS-102 as monotherapy were superior to best-supportive care (BSC) in terms of PFS (Rego 160: hazard ratio [HR], 0.4; 95% confidence ratio [CI], 0.26–0.63; TAS-102: HR, 0.46 CI, 0.40–0.52) and OS (Rego 160: HR, 0.67; CI, 0.48–0.93; TAS-102: HR, 0.67; CI, 0.57–0.80). Network analysis showed no statistically difference in PFS or OS between Rego 160 and TAS-102. Rego 80+ was superior to BSC in terms of OS (HR, 0.44; CI, 0.23–0.84) and PFS (HR, 0.37; CI, 0.21–0.66). Rego 80+ was associated with statistically nonsignificant improvement in OS and PFS compared with TAS-102 and Rego 160. Conclusion Regorafenib 160 and TAS-102 appear to have similar efficacy. Rego 80+ is shown to be superior to BSC. A trend for improved OS was observed with Rego 80+ versus Rego 160 or TAS 102. Implications for Practice Regorafenib at a dose of 160 mg and TAS-102 appear to have similar efficacy in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Regorafenib with a dose escalation strategy is superior to best-supportive care. Given its tolerability and the observed trend in survival benefit compared with regorafenib 160, dose escalation strategy of regorafenib (80+) may be the preferred option in this setting.

3599 Background: Existing tools for post-treatment CRC surveillance and monitoring are insensitive and expensive. MDMs are broadly informative for early detection of CRC but have not been extensively studied for disease monitoring. As a first step, we sought to assess the concordance of novel CRC-associated MDMs in pCRC and mCRC. Methods: A panel of 14 MDMs previously identified to be highly discriminant for pCRC was selected on the basis of high median fold-change of MDM levels relative to buffy coat (682 (IQR: 132-19347)). Surgically resected pCRC and paired mCRC were identified from institutional pathology databases. Quantitative methylation-specific PCR was used to assay MDMs. 30 paired samples per metastatic subtype were calculated to be sufficient. MDM levels were compared using two-sample and paired Wilcoxon rank sum tests. Results: 87 patients with paired pCRC and mCRC including 57 synchronous and 30 metachronous metastases were included. 41/87 (47%) had neoadjuvant and 59/87 (68%) had adjuvant chemotherapy. All synchronous metastases were to liver. Metachronous metastases were to liver in 19/30 (63%) and to lung in 11/30 (37%). The levels of 14 selected MDMs were remarkably similar between paired pCRC and mCRC (Table). Individual MDM levels and the average level of all MDMs combined were not significantly different ( p> 0.0018 by Bonferroni correction). Conclusions: MDM levels are highly concordant in pCRC and mCRC. Thus, MDMs discovered from pCRC should be further studied for non-invasive surveillance after surgical resection and monitoring of treatment response in mCRC. [Table: see text]

3557 Background: The goal of this study was to evaluate the safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of a single dose of PolyPEPI1018 as an add-on to maintenance therapy in subjects with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PolyPEPI1018 is a peptide vaccine containing 12 unique epitopes derived from 7 conserved cancer testis antigens (CTAs) frequently expressed in mCRC. These epitopes were designed to be Personal EPItopes (PEPIs), i.e. predicted by our novel PEPI test to bind to at least three autologous HLA alleles and more likely to induce T-cell responses than epitopes presented by a single HLA. Methods: mCRC patients in the first line setting received the vaccine (dose: 0.2 mg/peptide) just after the transition to maintenance therapy with a fluoropyrimidine and bevacizumab. Vaccine-specific T-cell responses were first predicted by the PEPI test (using the patient’s complete HLA genotype and antigen expression rate) and then measured by ELISpot after one cycle of vaccination. Results: Eleven patients were vaccinated with PolyPEPI1018. The most common adverse events were transient skin reactions (local inflammation at the site of the injections, e.g. erythema, redness and itchiness) and flu-like syndrome. No grade 3 or higher adverse events related to the vaccine occurred. Initial analysis on 4 patients demonstrated that T-cell responses were elicited by 96% of vaccine peptides. The overall percentage agreement between PEPI test-predicted and Elispot-measured CD8+ T cell responses was 71%, consistent with our retrospective analysis on 64 vaccine clinical trials involving 1,790 patients. Two of these 4 patients had unexpected tumor size reduction. Based on these encouraging results, the trial was amended to administer 3 doses of PolyPEPI1018 given 12 weeks apart. Conclusions: PolyPEPI1018 combined with maintenance therapy was safe and well-tolerated in mCRC patients. Unprecedented immune responses were induced after single dose, with broad CRC-specific T cell responses and high accuracy prediction of CD8+ T cell responses. This promising activity in mCRC patients led to a trial amendment to administer 3 doses of PolyPEPI1018 in combination with systemic therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT03391232.