Ramanathan, Ramesh K.

358 Background: Effective therapy for the treatment of PDAC remains one of the greatest unmet oncology clinical needs. The addition of C to G and AP has shown promising clinical data in a previously reported study [J Clin Oncol 35, 2017 (suppl 4S; abstract 341)]. In preclinical work, vitamin D (Vit D) analog therapy decreases myeloid derived suppressor cells and regulatory T cells, turning PDAC into a more immune-friendly microenvironment. This trial combines AP/C/G with Vit D analog P and the anti-PD-1 antibody N as a combination therapy for patients with previously untreated metastatic PDAC. This trial evaluates the efficacy and safety of NAPPCG in that patient population (NCT02754726). Methods: Eligibility criteria include Stage IV PDAC, no prior chemotherapy for systemic disease, KPS ≥ 70, and measurable disease. Doses are AP 125 mg/m2 undiluted, G 1000 mg/m2 in 250 ml of normal saline (NS), each infused over 30 minutes with C 25 mg/ m2 in 500 ml of NS infused over 60 minutes on days 1, 8, 22, and 29 of a 42-day cycle. N is given at a fixed dose of 240 mg as a 60 minute infusion on days 1, 15, and 29. P is given at a fixed dose of 25 µg IV twice weekly. Primary objective is to determine the efficacy of the combination for patients with previously untreated metastatic PDAC through determining CR, ORR, PFS, and OS. The secondary objective is to evaluate safety in patients with previously untreated metastatic PDAC. Results: Trial was initiated May 2016 and10 patients have been enrolled in the initial phase of the study and are evaluable (baseline and ≥1 follow up CT scan). Most common drug-related grade (Gr) 3-4 adverse events (AE’s), n = 10, are thrombocytopenia 100% (gr 3 = 50%, gr 4 = 50%) with no serious bleeding events, anemia 50% (gr 3 = 50%, gr 4 = 0%), and colitis 20% (gr 3 = 20%, gr 4 = 0%). By RECIST 1.1 criteria, the best response is 8 PR and 2 SD, yielding an 80% ORR. Median PFS is 8.2 months. Median OS has not been reached. Conclusions: Although a small study, the high response rate is encouraging. This regimen is being expanded to 25 patients with plans to include exploratory inflammatory biomarkers. Clinical trial information: NCT02754726.

355 Background: In this study, we sought to determine the prognostic factors impacting survival of patients with NELM who underwent LT at Mayo Clinic. Methods: We performed a three-site retrospective analysis of patients with unresectable NELM treated with LT from 1990 -2017. Cases were identified from clinical databases at Mayo Clinic. Data on demographics, timing of diagnosis and transplant, extent of liver involvement, and tumor grade, were extracted. Extent of liver involvement was calculated using previously validated standardized volumetry with high defined as > 25% increase in the weight of the extracted liver at the time of the transplant as compared to the standard liver volume. Survival was calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results: We identified 37 patients. Median age at LT was 47 (range 17.0-64.0), male: female (73% vs. 27%, respectively). Primary tumor site was in the pancreas in 51.3% and in the small bowels in 43.2%; 78.4% had NELM at presentation. While primary tumor resection was done at the time of LT in 5 (13.9%) cases, most patients (80.6%) had ˃6-months interval between primary tumor resection and LT surgery. Prior to LT, 25 (74.3%) patients received somatostatin analogues and 18 (61.3%) had liver-directed therapy. Median time from diagnosis to transplant was 33.6 months (0-246). High extent of liver involvement was identified in 12 patients (33.3%). Disease-Free Survival (DFS) at 3, 5, and 10 years was 56.8%, 43.1%, and 22.4% respectively. Overall-survival (OS) at 3, 5, and 10 years was 86.9%, 79.6%, and 52.6% respectively. High extent of liver involvement at the time of transplantation was associated with inferior DFS and OS and patients˃45 years-old at the time of transplantation had worse DFS. Patients whose disease met the OPTN (Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network) criteria for NELM transplantation had significantly better DFS and OS with median 10-year OS of 80.7 % vs. 17%. Conclusions: LT is a reasonable therapeutic option for selected patients with unresectable NELM with 10-year OS of 52.6%. High extent of liver involvement was associated with worse long-term outcomes while meeting OPTN criteria resulted in best outcomes.

350 Background: BTCs are often diagnosed at an advanced stage and have a poor prognosis. The standard therapy for aBTCs is the combination of GC. However, the median overall survival (mOS) is dismal at 11.7 months (mos) with a median progression free survival (mPFS) of 8 mos. Methods: A single arm, phase II study was conducted at MD Anderson and Mayo Clinic Arizona. Patients (pts) with aBTC were treated at initial dose level of G/C/N (in mg/m2) at 1000/25/125 (n = 30) which was reduced to lower doses due to grade 3/4 hematological (heme) toxicity (tox) - G/C/N: 800/25/100 (n = 30). Cycles were q21 days with restaging q3 cycles until progression. PFS was the primary endpoint (endpt). Using a Bayesian hypothesis test-based design, we assumed mPFS of 8 mos under the null hypothesis (H0), 10 mos under the alternative (H1). Secondary endpts included mOS, RECIST v1.1 response rate (RR), safety and CA19-9 response. Results: 60 pts were enrolled with 51 being response-evaluable having received more than 1 cycle of therapy (age: median 60 yrs [range 31-77], ECOG PS 0/1 (22/38), M/F (33/27), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma/extrahepatic/gallbladder (38/9/13). Median follow-up was 14 mos and median number of treatment (trmt) cycles = 5.24. Pts at initial dose level had significant grade 3/4 heme tox: neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia leading to trmt discontinuation in 6/30 pts. After dose reduction to G/C/N (in mg/m2) at 800/25/100, trmt was better tolerated with only 3 pts experiencing grade 4 heme tox. Non-heme tox were grade 3 in 19 pts: nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, thromboembolic event/CVA, hypokalemia, constipation, cystitis, LFT elevations. The mPFS = 11.4 mos (95% CI: 6.1, 16.1) and mOS = 19.2 (95%CI: 13.6, NA), 1-year survival rate 67.6%. 51 pts evaluable for response: disease control rate (PR+CR+SD)-84.3% and RR-39%. 12 unresectable cases were operated post trmt with 1 pathologic CR. Conclusions: The combination of GCN was well tolerated at adjusted doses and demonstrates encouraging efficacy having met its mPFS endpt and an impressive mOS higher than historical control. These results merit evaluating GC +/-N in a randomized controlled study. Clinical trial information: NCT02392637.

208 Background: PEGPH20 degrades hyaluronan (HA), a major component of the stroma, increases delivery of gemcitabine and prolongs survival in preclinical models. We evaluated the activity of PEGPH20 in combination with mFFOX in mPC , unselected for tumor HA. Methods: Pertinent eligibility: untreated mPC, PS of 0-1 and adequate organ function. Standard FFOX was modified to add prophylactic growth factor support and omit bolus 5FU. Due to increased thromboembolic (TE) events with PEGPH20, an amendment instituted LMWH prophylaxis in the PEGPH20 arm only. Following a dose finding cohort of mFFOX + PEGPH20, the Phase II study randomized patients (1:1) to the combination arm or mFFOX alone (n = 138). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), with a null median OS of 10 mo and an alternative of 15 mo (1-sided type 1 error 0.1, 80% power). Results: PEGPH20 at 3 mcg/kg, q2 weeks was more tolerable than twice weekly dosing. The randomized phase II study began May 2015. The planned interim futility analysis when 35 deaths occurred gave a HR of 0.44 favoring the standard arm, thus the study was closed to accrual (March 2017). As of August 22, 2017 (n = 111), the estimated median OS in the mFFOX arm was 15.1 mo (95% CI 10.1-15.7) vs 7.6 mo (95% CI 4.6-9.2) in the PEGPH20 arm. Conclusions: OS in the mFFOX control arm (15.1 mo) is longest yet reported. Addition of PEGPH20 to mFFOX is not recommended for further study and appears to be detrimental (HR = 0.48). The impact of PEGPH20 on OS was unexpected and in contrast to favorable results reported for the combination of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel + PEGPH20 especially in the HA high cohort (Hingorani S et al. A 4008, ASCO 2017). PEGPH20 with mFFOX caused increased toxicity (mostly GI and TE events) and decreased treatment duration compared to mFFOX alone. Tumor HA content will be analyzed. Funding: NIH/NCI grants CA180888, CA180819; and in part by Halozyme Inc. Clinical trial information: 01959139. [Table: see text]

e15779 Background: There is paucity of data regarding the best available second-line treatment following progression on gemcitabine-based regimens in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). While a Nanoliposomal formulation of irinotecan (MM398) is considered a standard of care, there is conflicting data relating to the use of oxaliplatin in this setting. We performed a meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness of adding oxaliplatin (OX) or various irinotecan (IRI) formulations to a fluoropyrimidine (FP) as a second-line in PDAC patients. Methods: We searched different databases, including PubMed, Embase and Cochrane, to identify randomized controlled trials comparing FP monotherapy to FP combination therapy that includes either oxaliplatin (FPOX) or various irinotecan formulations (FPIRI) in PDAC patients who progressed after first-line treatment. Secondary analyses were planned to assess the effectiveness of FPOX and FPIRI compared to FP. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The overall effect was pooled using the DerSimonian and Laird random effects models. Results: Five studies (2 with FPIRI and 3 with FPOX) with 895 patients were identified. Patients randomized to FPIRI/FPOX had a significantly improved PFS (HR = 0.74, CI 0.62 to 0.89) and a trend towards an improved OS compared to FP monotherapy (HR = 0.88, CI 0.65 to 1.19). When comparing FPIRI to FP, there was an improvement in both PFS (HR = 0.64, CI 0.47 to 0.87) and OS (HR = 0.70, CI 0.55 to 0.89) in patients treated with the combination. Conversely, FPOX showed only a modest improvement in PFS (HR = 0.81, CI 0.67, 0.97) with no improvement in OS (HR = 1.03, CI 0.64 to 1.67). Conclusions: Combination chemotherapy with oxaliplatin or various irinotecan formulations seem to improve PFS vs. single agent FP. FPIRI, but not FPOX seem to confer an OS advantage. Oxaliplatin with FP following gemcitabine failure may need further confirmatory studies to establish its role in refractory pancreas cancer.

4109 Background: Prognostic nomograms have been developed in various cancers, including ovarian, breast, and gastrointestinal; however, there is limited information on nomograms in MPC. The large, phase 3 MPACT study of nab-P + Gem vs Gem alone for the treatment of MPC provides a robust database for the development of a nomogram to predict OS using baseline patient variables. Methods: A multivariable Cox model was created from MPACT data using factors that were significantly predictive of OS in univariable analysis or considered clinically important (stepwise selection to remain in model). From the Cox model, a nomogram was derived that assigned points equal to the weighted sum of relative significance of each variable. The nomogram was internally validated using bootstrapping, a concordance index (c-index), and calibration plots. Results: Data from all 861 pts were used. Seven of the 34 considered variables were retained in the multivariable analysis (Table; all factors significant at the P < 0.01 level, except for analgesic use [ P = 0.07]). The resulting nomogram was able to distinguish low (n = 216), medium (n = 430), and high (n = 215) risk groups (c-index: 0.69; CI: 0.67-0.71) with median OS values of 12.9, 8.2, and 3.7 months, respectively. Calibration curves showed that the nomogram’s predicted probabilities were mostly consistent with observed probabilities for 6-, 9-, and 12-month OS. Conclusions: Treatment arm, Karnofsky performance status (KPS), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), albumin level, sum of longest tumor diameters (SLD), and presence of liver metastasis were the key predictors of OS. This nomogram, which will be presented in visual format in the final presentation, may help physicians and pts make informed treatment decisions. Clinical trial information: NCT00844649. [Table: see text]

4018 Background: BTCs are often diagnosed at an advanced stage and have a poor prognosis. The standard therapy for aBTCs is the combination of GC. However, the median overall survival (mOS) is dismal at 11.7 months (mos) with a median progression free survival (mPFS) of 8 mos. Methods: A single arm, phase II study was conducted at MD Anderson and Mayo Clinic Arizona. Patients (pts) with aBTC were treated at initial dose level of G/C/N (in mg/m2) at 1000/25/125 (n = 27) which was reduced to lower doses due to grade 3/4 hematological (heme) toxicity (tox) - G/C/N: 800/25/100 (n = 33). Cycles were q21 days with restaging q3 cycles until progression. PFS was the primary endpoint (endpt). Using a Bayesian hypothesis test-based design, we assumed mPFS of 8 mos under the null hypothesis (H0), 10 mos under the alternative (H1). Secondary endpts included mOS, RECIST v1.1 response rate (RR), safety and CA19-9 response. Results: 60 pts were enrolled with data on 51 available as of the time of this abstract (age: median 60 yrs [range 31-77], ECOG PS 0/1 (17/34), M/F (30/21), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma/extrahepatic/gallbladder (32/8/11). Median follow-up was 11.5 mos and median number of treatment (trmt) cycles = 5. Pts at initial dose level had significant grade 3/4 heme tox: neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia leading to trmt discontinuation in 6/27 pts. After dose reduction to G/C/N (in mg/m2) at 800/25/100, trmt was better tolerated with only 4 pts experiencing grade 4 heme tox. Non-heme tox were grade 3 in 10 pts: nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, thromboembolic event/CVA, hypokalemia, constipation, cystitis, LFT elevations. In the initial 51 pts, mPFS = 11.4 mos (95% CI: 6.1, not reached) and mOS not reached (estimated > 20 mos, 1-year survival rate 66.7%; 95%CI: 65.9-92.2%). 34 pts evaluable for response: disease control rate (PR+CR+SD)-82.3% and RR-32.3%. 3 unresectable cases were operated post trmt with 1 pathologic CR. Conclusions: The combination of GCN was well tolerated at adjusted doses and demonstrates encouraging preliminary efficacy having met its mPFS endpt and a 1-year survival rate higher than historical control. These results merit evaluating GC +/-N in a randomized controlled study. Clinical trial information: NCT02392637.