Sonbol, Mohamad Bassam

Abstract Background Optimal treatment for resectable gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma remains unclear due to limited head-to-head comparisons among chemotherapy and chemoradiation regimens. This network meta-analysis aimed to determine the relative efficacy of available multimodality treatment regimens in these patients. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and CENTRAL were searched till September 20, 2024. Phase 3 randomized trials evaluating perioperative/neoadjuvant systemic therapy ± radiation in resectable gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma were included. Primary outcomes were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Frequentist network meta-analysis was conducted to compare hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results Fifteen trials (8072 patients) were analyzed. pFLOT (perioperative fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel) ranked highest for DFS in the overall population (P-score 91%), achieving significant improvements compared to surgery alone (HR 0.48, 95% CI, 0.38-0.60) and nCROSS (neoadjuvant paclitaxel, carboplatin, and radiotherapy) (0.67, 0.56-0.81). For OS, nPLF + nCRT(EP) (neoadjuvant cisplatin, leucovorin, and fluorouracil for induction, followed by etoposide, cisplatin, and radiotherapy) (P-score 90%) and pFLOT (P-score 87%) were the top regimens. pFLOT significantly outperformed surgery alone (0.57, 0.45-0.72) and nCROSS (0.73, 0.60-0.89). Based on the limited data available, adding neoadjuvant chemoradiation to pFLOT provided no additional OS (1.14, 0.76-1.72) or DFS (1.22, 0.83-1.82) benefit. Similarly, adding pembrolizumab to perioperative chemotherapy (cisplatin and fluorouracil/capecitabine) was not superior to pFLOT (DFS: 1.10, 0.71-1.69; OS: 1.09, 0.69-1.72). Conclusions pFLOT demonstrated superior efficacy in resectable gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma, outperforming surgery alone, nCROSS, and alternative perioperative regimens. The additive role of immunotherapy requires further investigation to optimize patient selection and outcomes.

PURPOSE Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have significantly improved outcomes in various malignancies. However, the high cost of these therapies limits access for much of the global population. This systematic review aims to evaluate the efficacy of low-dose ICIs compared with standard doses in different malignancies, addressing financial and access barriers in global cancer care. METHODS We conducted a systematic review of studies comparing the efficacy of low-dose versus standard-dose ICI regimens in advanced solid tumors. A comprehensive search was performed across multiple electronic databases, including retrospective and prospective studies. Excluded were animal studies, editorials, conference papers, book chapters, and other immunotherapy modalities. Outcomes assessed included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival, and objective response rate. Results were summarized descriptively due to study heterogeneity. RESULTS From 1,010 screened articles, four studies with 435 Asian patients were included, covering a variety of solid tumors. All included studies were with a low quality of evidence and a high risk of bias due to retrospective design. Two studies used weight-based dosing (pembrolizumab <2 mg/kg and nivolumab <2.15 mg/kg), showing similar OS to standard dosing in non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and renal cell carcinoma, respectively. Flat dose regimens in two studies (nivolumab 20 mg or 100 mg once every 3 weeks and pembrolizumab 100 mg once every 3 weeks) also demonstrated comparable OS in NSCLC. CONCLUSION Low-dose ICIs may offer equivalent clinical benefits to standard dosing, potentially reducing costs and expanding access in developing countries. Although awaiting more representative randomized clinical trials, weight-based ICI regimens could be a viable alternative in low- and middle-income countries.

Abstract Biliary tract cancer (BTC) remains among the most challenging malignancies with a poor prognosis and limited treatment options, particularly in pretreated patients. As most patients experience disease progression after first-line treatment, effective second-line and subsequent treatments are required. Although the addition of modified FOLFOX (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) to active symptom control improved the overall survival of patients with progressing advanced BTC despite gemcitabine plus cisplatin treatment, its efficacy was modest. Moreover, most clinical trials demonstrated modest efficacy of molecular-targeted agents for molecularly unselected pretreated advanced BTC. Patients with advanced BTC carry a relatively high druggable genetic alteration rate and have shown promising responses to molecular-matched therapies targeting gene alterations such as FGFR2 fusions/rearrangements, IDH1 mutation, and HER2 overexpression/amplification. Additionally, tumor-agnostic approaches, including BRAF V600E, NTRK fusion, and RET fusion, have expanded the treatment options for some patients. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown limited efficacy as mono- or combination therapy in patients with pretreated advanced BTC. Therefore, developmental efforts have shifted to immune checkpoint inhibitor and other combinations such as vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitors or radiation. In addition to refining combination strategies to enhance the therapeutic potential of immune checkpoint inhibitor, future research should focus on elucidating the tumor microenvironment. This review delineates the evolution of systemic therapies in patients with pretreated advanced BTC. By examining past developments and recent advances through prospective trials, it highlights novel approaches that may improve outcomes in this challenging disease.

In a retrospective study of patients with Lynch syndrome vs non‐Lynch syndrome and microsatellite instability high colorectal cancer, there were no observed differences with immune checkpoint inhibitors toward progression‐free survival or overall survival. Univariate analysis of Stage IV patients showed BRAF V600E mutations were associated with decreased survival.

243 Background: HER2-amplified aCRC is associated with poor prognosis despite new anti-HER2 regimens. Insight on biomarkers that predict response to these therapies is limited. This study aims to evaluate whether baseline alterations in oncogenic drivers along the HER2 pathway predict response to anti-HER2 therapy in HER2-amplified aCRC. Methods: In this international multi-center study involving Mayo Clinic, Duke Cancer Institute and National Cancer Center Hospital East (Japan), we collected baseline genomic alterations from tissue or blood samples using next-generation sequencing (NGS) prior to anti-HER2 therapy initiation. We defined PIK3CA, RAS, RAF, MAP2K, and MET as oncogenic drivers of resistance within the HER2 pathway. Overall survival (OS) was evaluated with the Kaplan-Meier method and a log-rank test was used to compare median OS (mOS) between pts with and without alterations in the above genes. A chi-square test (significance level 0.05) was performed to compare overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR). Results: We identified 39 pts with HER2-amplified aCRC and baseline NGS. Median age was 57 (range 30-77), 54% were male. Baseline alterations in HER2 pathway oncogenic drivers were identified in 17 pts (43.5%). 18 (46%) received monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) plus tyrosine kinase inhibitors, 12 (30%) received dual mAbs and 7 (18%) received trastuzumab deruxtecan. The mOS was 41.9 months (mos) (95%CI 23.7-60.1) for other alterations vs 24.2 mos (95%CI 14.1-34.3) in pts with HER2 pathway alterations (p = 0.1). ORR was 47% vs 41% (p = 0.7) and DCR 82% vs 73% (p = 0.4), for pts with HER2 pathway alterations and without HER2 pathway alterations, respectively. 4 pts receiving trastuzumab/tucatinib had complete response, none of which had HER2 pathway alterations. Conclusions: Pts with baseline alterations in oncogenic drivers of the HER2 pathway had clinically worse outcomes compared to pts without such alterations despite receiving HER2-targeted therapy, though results lacked statistical significance. Larger studies are needed to confirm the lack of benefit from anti-HER2 therapy in this subgroup.

820 Background: The number of FDA-approved anticancer drugs have increased in recent years with a more use of surrogate endpoints. However, it is unclear whether the same trend applies to GI cancers. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the trend in FDA-approved GI cancer drugs over the past two decades and the associated clinical benefit. Methods: The FDA’s online database was searched for drugs approved for GI cancers from 2006 until 2024. Primary and secondary endpoints along with trial characteristics were extracted. ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) was assessed by two blinded investigators with a third resolving disagreements. We divided the study into period A (01/2006-12/2014) and period B (01/2015-08/2024). Results: Since 2006, FDA approved 62 regimens for GI cancer based on 70 trials, mostly (n= 45;72.6%) in period B. Most trials (n=44) were phase III with only 26 phase II: 22 single arm, and 4 randomized. All the 22 single-arm phase II trials were approved in period B with two randomized phase II trials approved in each period. Approvals based on phase III trials dropped by 33.5% (from n=15 to n=29) between the two periods. Half (n=34) of the approvals were based on overall survival (OS) benefit, while the use of objective response rate (ORR) as an endpoint has increased from 11.8% (n=2) in period A to 45.3% (n=24) in period B. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed only in 27% of the studies and found benefit only in 22.7%. The mean gain in OS was similar across both periods; 2.3 months [1.2-4.7]. Out of the 19 accelerated approvals, 17 were in period B, of which 23% (4/17) were based on secondary endpoint, 18% (3/17) were withdrawn, and 59% (10/17) received full approval. Substantial clinical benefit (ESMO score 4-5) was seen in 11.8% of the trials in period A and 19.6% in period B, with 17.4% overall from 2006-2024. Conclusions: Despite rising FDA approvals for GI cancer drugs since 2006, only 17.4% demonstrated substantial clinical benefit based on ESMO-MCBS. Recent approvals rely more on single-arm phase II studies and ORR, often without OS or QoL benefit. These trends underscore the need for more rigorous clinical trials that prioritize meaningful endpoint to ensure that new therapies provide real clinical value to the patient.

451 Background: Perioperative chemotherapy with surgery is the standard of care for patients (pts) with resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GEA). However, recent studies have shown more favorable responses after neoadjuvant immunotherapy (NIO) in patients with mismatch repair deficient (dMMR) cancers. Herein, we present the outcomes of 10 cases with dMMR GEA. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients with GEA at Mayo Clinic Arizona who met the following criteria: have dMMR disease by IHC, nonmetastatic operable disease, and received NIO +/- chemotherapy. Patient demographics, disease characteristics, and clinical outcomes were extracted. The primary endpoint was clinical complete response (cCR) in patients treated with non-operative management (NOM) defined as complete radiological response and no residual disease on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and biopsy. Results: 10 pts with dMMR GEA with a median age of 70 (43-85) were identified. 6 pts had T2N0, 1 had T4N0, 3 had N+ disease. 8 pts received NIO monotherapy upfront, 1 received NIO after progressing on chemotherapy, and 1 concurrently with chemotherapy. No grade 3/4 toxicities were reported, however, 2 pts discontinued therapy due to arthralgia and colitis. After NIO, 9/10 pts had significant or complete resolution of FGD avidity on PET/CT, while 1/10 had stable disease. 3/10 pts underwent surgical resection, with 2 achieving pathological complete response (pCR) and the third showing T1N0 disease with no recurrence 1 year after surgery. Notably, one of the pts with pCR passed away due to surgical complications. 7/10 patients had NOM, of whom, 4 had cCR and 3 had radiological response only, as no EUS data was available. 4/7 NOM pts had follow up data at 6 months with no evidence of progression, of whom one pt remained progression-free at 33 months. ctDNA testing was performed in 6/10 pts: 2 had undetectable ctDNA at baseline, while 3 became MRD-negative after NIO, consistent with radiological and/or pathological response, and 1 had persistent ctDNA both before and after NIO, despite cCR. Conclusions: This study demonstrates exceptional and prolonged response, along with good tolerability to NIO in pts with dMMR GEA, supporting the feasibility of non-operative management in such patients.

628 Background: Biliary tract cancers (BTC) are aggressive malignancies with poor survival outcomes and limited treatment options. This study compared the epidemiological and molecular differences of advanced BTC patients through a global collaboration involving the Mayo Clinic and National Cancer Center Hospital East. Methods: We included patients with advanced BTC who underwent comprehensive tumor molecular profiling who received at least 30 days of systemic therapy. Patients were grouped based on specific alterations. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the start of first-line therapy until death and compared among subgroups using Cox regression models. Results: 332 (36%) out of 932 patients had at least one actionable mutation : somatic BRCA1/2 mutations N=106, FGFR2 fusions N=61, HER2 amplifications N=65, KRAS G12C/D mutations N=46, IDH1 mutations N=38, and TMB >10 mut/Mb N=16. BRCA1/2 -mutated BTC were more commonly found in older Asian males with intrahepatic tumors and often presented with peritoneal and liver metastases upon initial diagnosis. FGFR2 fusions were more prevalent in younger White females with intrahepatic tumors, while HER2 amplifications were mainly seen in Asian females with gallbladder tumors. KRAS mutations were primarily observed in Asian males, and IDH1 mutations were common in White males with intrahepatic tumors, frequently presenting with liver metastasis. Survival outcomes varied significantly based on the alteration type: patients with FGFR2 fusions had the longest median OS (mOS) at 23.3 months (mo) (95%CI 18.4-34.9), followed by those with IDH1 mutations (19.3 mo; 95% CI 17.4-NE) and TMB >10 mut/Mb (17.8 mo; 95% CI 13.6-NE). BRCA mutations had a mOS of 16 mo (95% CI 14.6-19.8), while HER2 amplifications and KRAS mutations had mOS of 15.5 (95% CI 11.9-20.2) and 11.6 mo (95% CI 10.0-20.9), respectively. Conclusions: These findings underscore the heterogeneity in clinical and genomic characteristics among BTC patients, highlighting the importance of tailored therapeutic approaches. Baseline patient characteristics stratified by mutation status. KRAS G12C/D (N=46) BRCA 1/2 (N=106) IDH1 (N=38) HER2 amplification(N=65) FGFR2 fusion(N=61) TMB>10 mut/Mb(N=16) P-value Median Age, year 67 68 64 66 52 73 <0.001 Female, n (%) 19 (41) 34 (32) 18(47) 34 (52) 45(74) 6 (38) <0.001 Race, n (%) <0.001 Asian 31 (67) 97 (92) 13 (34) 51 (79) 10 (16) 6 (38) White 14 (30) 8 (8) 24 (63) 13 (20) 48 (79) 10 (63) Primary tumor location, n (%) <0.001 Intrahepatic 28 (68) 45 (45) 33 (100) 19 (31) 54(95) 10 (67) Extrahepatic 9 (22) 27(27) 0 (0) 10 (16) 2 (4) 4 (27) Gallbladder 4 (10) 28 (28) 0 (0) 32 (53) 1 (2) 1 (7) Sites of Metastasis at diagnosis, n (%) Abdominal Wall / Peritoneal 9 (24) 15 (19) 4(13) 7 (12) 6 (10) 4 (27) 0.309 Bone 33 (92) 70 (90) 26 (87) 2 (3) 9(15) 0 (0) 0.212 Liver 20 (49) 52 (61) 28 (82) 45 (73) 45 (76) 6 (38) 0.001 Lung 26 (70) 65 (82) 22 (69) 36 (58) 27(45) 11 (69) 0.006