Bekaii‐Saab, Tanios

Background: Regorafenib (R) and Trifluridine/Tipiracil ± bevacizumab (T) are approved for treating refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) but their optimal sequence is unclear. This study describes the characteristics/clinical outcomes of patients with mCRC in U.S. clinical practice treated sequentially with R-T or T-R. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of 818 patients treated with R-T or T-R between January 2015 and November 2022 was conducted using an electronic health record-derived database. The primary objective was to describe the demographic/clinical characteristics and biomarker status of patients treated with R-T or T-R, stratified by treatment line/age. Secondary objectives were to evaluate/estimate the frequency of neutropenia and myelosuppression-related treatments, the number/type of subsequent therapies, time to treatment discontinuation (TTD), and overall survival (OS). Results: Baseline characteristics were similar among patients who received R-T (n = 393) or T-R (n = 425). Lower rates of moderate/severe neutropenia (26%/12% vs. 32%/16%) and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor/erythropoietin use (22% vs. 24%) were observed with R-T versus T-R. The median TTD was 8.7 months and 8.5 months with R-T versus 8.1 months and 7.9 months with T-R as third- and fourth-line treatment, respectively. The median OS was 13.1 months and 11.6 months with R-T versus 11.5 months and 10.3 months with T-R as third- and fourth-line treatment, respectively. Conclusions: This study did not show a statistically significant difference in OS with R-T versus T-R. Although limited by its retrospective nature, the study suggested R-T may be preferable to T-R given the observed reduction in neutropenia/myelosuppression-related treatments.

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.

206 Background: XTX101 is an investigational tumor-activated, Fc-enhanced, high affinity binding aCTLA-4 designed to block CTLA-4 and deplete regulatory T cells upon activation in the tumor by proteases. XTX101 also contains mutations designed to enhance Fcγ receptor binding. Fc enhancement augments FcγR co-engagement on antigen presenting cells and has been linked with efficacy of aCTLA-4 combinations in patients (pts) with “cold tumors”, including microsatellite stable (MSS) colorectal cancer (CRC). Parts 1A/1B of the study evaluated XTX101 monotherapy in pts with advanced solid tumors. XTX101 was generally well tolerated with limited peripheral XTX101 activation (~13%) compared to evidence of XTX101 activation in the tumor microenvironment (73-96%, in n=2 on-treatment tumor biopsies). A durable partial response (PR) and resolution of hepatic metastases was observed in a pt with PD-L1 negative NSCLC at the monotherapy recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of 150 mg once every six weeks (Q6W) [1]. Methods: Part 1C evaluated the safety and feasibility of XTX101 in combination with atezolizumab in pts with advanced solid tumors using 3+3 dose escalation to establish the RP2D. Phase 2 is enrolling pts with MSS CRC with at least 1 prior regimen for metastatic CRC. Initial safety and anti-tumor activity data from Phase 2 in ~20 pts will be presented. Results: As of July 15, 2024, 15 pts were enrolled in Part 1C: MSS CRC (n=12), esophageal cancer, NSCLC, and ampullary carcinoma (n=1 each). Median age 69 and 3 prior lines of therapy (1-12). Across all XTX101 dose levels (75 mg to 150 mg), treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade with >10% incidence included infusion reactions (n=4), fatigue and diarrhea (n=2 each), no G4 or G5 TRAEs were reported. In Part 1C, 2 pts experienced a dose limiting toxicity: 1 pt had G3 colitis, and 1 pt had G3 liver enzyme elevation (both were at the XTX101 150 mg dose level and resolved with immunosuppression). Two unconfirmed PRs were reported: in a pt with MSS CRC, including resolution of a liver target lesion, and in a pt with ampullary carcinoma (accompanied by a Ca 19-9 decrease from 700 to 41). In addition, a decrease in intra-tumoral Tregs was observed in paired tumor biopsies from a pt. The combination RP2D was established as XTX101 100 mg Q6W and atezolizumab 1200 mg once every three weeks (Q3W), and enrollment in the Phase 2 part of the study for pts with MSS CRC is ongoing at the RP2D. Conclusions: In Part 1C dose escalation, the combination of XTX101, a tumor-activated, Fc-enhanced aCTLA-4, and atezolizumab was generally well tolerated in pts with advanced solid tumors and demonstrated initial evidence of anti-tumor activity in cold tumors. These data support the initiation of an ongoing Phase 2 study evaluating the combination in pts with MSS CRC with and without liver metastases. 1. Davar ESMO IO 2023. Clinical trial information: NCT04896697 .

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.

225 Background: Novel targeted therapies entered the treatment landscape in patients with HER2-positive metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). To ensure that these therapies are used effectively, clinicians must assess tumor HER2 status and recognize how HER2-directed treatment modalities fit into the current paradigm. To further enable clinicians to integrate HER2-targeted therapies, an educational program was designed in 2023. Methods: A one-hour online, video-based program was designed for clinicians and their teams and hosted on MedLive from February 2023 for one year. Knowledge and competence questions were administered pre-, and immediate post-activity. Additional questions assessed attitudes, barriers, and intended practice changes related to HER-positive mCRC. Results: Over 4,000 participants engaged in the educational activity, 67% of whom were physicians, and 63% noting their specialty as oncology. Approximately 68% identified as treaters seeing 14 patients with CRC per week with 78% of those patients have HER2-positive CRC. All pre-post questions showed significant improvements in knowledge and competence related to HER2 amplification testing methodologies, trial eligibility criteria, identification of patients who would benefit from anti-HER2 targeted regimens, and adverse events associated with anti-HER2 agents. Following the activity, 51% were more likely to incorporate testing for HER2 expression level or amplification prior to the selection of targeted therapy for their patients. The greatest challenges faced when managing patients with HER2-positive mCRC were affordability of therapy for patients (50%), adherence to treatment schedules (25%) and patient anxiety about treatment efficacy (24%). The most common barriers to patient enrollment in clinical trials identified by clinicians were lack of trials at their institutions (35%), lack of trials in their geographic region (21%), and patient lack of interest (20%). Qualitative insights on intended practice changes were shared by learners post-activity. Conclusions: The outcomes of this educational activity demonstrate the effectiveness of education in improving knowledge and confidence from testing to adverse event management to better integrate new regimens into practice. Encouraging practice changes were also seen from the write-in responses from learners. Additional needs were also identified to further solidify HER2 testing as a prerequisite for anti-HER2 targeted therapies, selecting eligible patients, and timely management of adverse events.