Jones, Jeremy

Background/Objectives: Multi-gene, multi-cancer, hereditary cancer risk screenings may be useful in cancer prevention and treatment, not only for cancer patients but also for patients’ family members. If genetic cancer screening is to have the widest possible benefit, it must be extended into diverse cancer care settings that serve diverse patient communities, providing cancer patients and their relatives with individualized cancer risk evaluations. Little research, to date, has examined the impact of extending multigenic cancer screening into diverse settings. Without empirical data characterizing the support needs of cancer patients and their family members, we may not adequately satisfy the needs of all patients and risk exacerbating existing disparities in cancer care and outcomes. Methods: We examined patient perspectives on the sharing of genetic results with at-risk family members by surveying a racially diverse sample of cancer patients receiving a multi-gene, multi-cancer risk screen in a community hospital setting. Results: In a survey of 230 cancer patients, we found that intent to share results with family members was high but varied across family member types. More respondents planned to disclose results to at least one sister (82.5%) compared to at least one brother (73.1%). Over one-fourth of participants (27.4%) were either uncertain about sharing or intended to withhold their genomic screening results from at least one at-risk family member eligible for cascade testing. Participants were more likely to withhold their results from a sibling than from a child. Furthermore, intent to share across all family member types was lower if probands failed to identify at least one benefit to sharing. Conclusions: Understanding factors associated with decisions to share results with at-risk relatives in diverse patient populations can help clinicians support cascade genetic cancer screenings in diverse communities and settings.

TPS228 Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most frequently diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. PD-1/PD-L1 inhibition, in combination with other modalities, has demonstrated significant benefit in patients (pts) with microsatellite instability-high or mismatch repair–deficient CRC. However, these agents have limited, if any, clinical benefit in pts with microsatellite stable (MSS) or mismatch repair–proficient (pMMR) CRC. RP2 is an enhanced potency oncolytic herpes simplex virus type 1 which expresses the fusogenic gibbon ape leukemia virus glycoprotein with the R sequence deleted (GALV-GP-R–), granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), and an anti–CTLA-4 antibody-like molecule; RP3 additionally expresses 4-1BB and CD40 activating ligands but does not express GM-CSF. Both agents have demonstrated preliminary safety and antitumor activity in pts with solid tumors. This study will evaluate the safety and activity of RP2 and RP3 in combination with atezolizumab (Atezo) plus bevacizumab (Bev) in pts with advanced MSS/pMMR CRC (NCT05733611). Methods: Pts with a histologic diagnosis of unresectable and/or metastatic CRC, with documented MSS or pMMR status, and previously treated with up to 3 standard-of-care systemic regimens will be enrolled in the RP2 + Atezo + Bev or RP3 + Atezo + Bev treatment groups (30 pts per group). Further key inclusion criteria include Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 1 and adequate hepatic, renal, and hematologic function. RP2/RP3 will be injected into tumors by direct or image-guided injection. Pts will receive 8 total doses of up to 10 mL of RP2 or RP3, with a first dose concentration of 1 × 106 plaque-forming units (PFU)/mL, followed by 3 doses of 1 × 107 PFU/mL every 2 weeks, and then 4 doses of 1 × 107 PFU/mL every 3 weeks. Pts may receive a second course of up to 8 injections of RP2/RP3 if study criteria are met. Bev will be administered starting on week 1; Atezo will be administered starting week 7. The primary endpoint is objective response rate; secondary endpoints are safety, overall survival, progression-free survival, duration of response, and complete response rate. Antitumor activity will be evaluated using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 as modified for this study. Safety will be assessed by physical examination, clinical laboratory evaluations, vital signs, and monitoring for adverse events (AEs; including serious AEs). Clinical trial information: NCT05733611 .

55 Background: Nearly one-half of deficient mismatch repair (d-MMR) metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRC) demonstrate durable responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Given preclinical data indicating that liver metastases sequester activated CD8+ T cells from systemic circulation, we examined clinical outcome by metastatic site. Methods: In a retrospective cohort of patients with d-MMR mCRCs treated at multiple centers in France (n=66), we sought to validate data from a U.S. cohort, and then performed pooled analysis (n=104). All patients received first-line ICI monotherapy. Metastatic site was analyzed in relationship to tumor response (RECIST version 1.1), and progression-free survival (PFS) by multivariable stratified Cox regression after adjustment for covariates. Results: Objective responses were achieved in 38/66 (58%) patients in the validation cohort. Best tumor response included 13 (20%) complete responses (CR), 25 (38%) partial responses (PR), 16 (25%) stable disease, and 11 (17%) progressive disease (PD). One-year and 5-year PFS rates were 73% and 67%, respectively; 18 (27%) patients progressed during immunotherapy. Best tumor response was attenuated in patients with liver metastasis ( P=0.03). Presence of liver metastasis, but not other sites, was associated with significantly poorer PFS after adjustment for covariates (HRadj 2.82; 95%CI, 1.08-7.39; Padj=0.03). In a pooled analysis, liver metastasis remained significantly and independently associated with poorer PFS (HRadj 3.18; 95%CI, 1.52-6.67; Padj=0.002) and with attenuated tumor best response (P=0.01). Conclusions: Metastasis to the liver, but not other sites, was validated as an independent factor associated with poorer response and survival after ICI treatment in d-MMR mCRCs. These data underscore the need for novel therapeutic strategies in these patients. [Table: see text]

Importance Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with deficient DNA mismatch repair (dMMR) shows frequent and durable responses to programmed cell death 1 blockade. While most of these tumors are sporadic and observed in older patients, first-line pembrolizumab data are limited to findings from the KEYNOTE-177 trial (A Phase III Study of Pembrolizumab [MK-3475] vs Chemotherapy in Microsatellite Instability-High [MSI-H] or Mismatch Repair Deficient [dMMR] Stage IV Colorectal Carcinoma). Objective To investigate outcome with first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy in mostly older patients with dMMR mCRC at a multisite clinical practice. Design, Setting, and Participants This cohort study included consecutive patients with dMMR mCRC who received pembrolizumab monotherapy between April 1, 2015, and January 1, 2022, at Mayo Clinic sites and the Mayo Clinic Health System. Patients were identified from review of electronic health records at the sites, which included the evaluation of digitized radiologic imaging studies. Intervention Patients with dMMR mCRC received first-line pembrolizumab, 200 mg, every 3 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary study end point was progression-free survival (PFS), which was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and a multivariable stepwise Cox proportional hazards regression model. Clinicopathological features, including metastatic site and molecular data ( BRAF V600E and KRAS ), were also analyzed along with tumor response rate, which was determined using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Results The study cohort included 41 patients (median [IQR] age at treatment initiation, 81 [76-86] years; 29 females [71%]) with dMMR mCRC. Of these patients, 30 (79%) had the BRAF V600E variant and 32 (80%) were classified as having sporadic tumors. Median (range) follow-up was 23 (3-89) months. Median (IQR) number of treatment cycles was 9 (4-20). Overall response rate was 49% (20 of 41 patients), including 13 patients (32%) with complete responses and 7 (17%) with partial responses. Median (IQR) PFS was 21 (95% CI, 6-39) months. Liver as a site of metastasis was associated with significantly poorer PFS vs nonliver metastasis (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.40; 95% CI, 1.27-9.13; adjusted P = .01). Complete and partial responses were observed in 3 patients (21%) with liver metastasis vs 17 patients (63%) with nonliver metastases. Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were observed in 8 patients (20%), 2 of whom discontinued therapy; there was 1 treatment-related death. Conclusions and Relevance This cohort study found a clinically significant prolongation of survival in older patients with dMMR mCRC who were treated with first-line pembrolizumab in routine clinical practice. Furthermore, liver vs nonliver metastasis was associated with poorer survival in this patient population, which suggests that the metastatic site has implications for survival outcome.

Abstract Background Despite multiple randomized trials, the role of perioperative chemotherapy in colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM) is still under debate. In this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA), we aim to evaluate the efficacy of perioperative systemic therapies for patients with CRLM. Methods We searched various databases for abstracts and full-text articles published from database inception through May 2021.We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the addition of perioperative (post, pre, or both) systemic therapies to surgery alone in patients with CRLM. The outcomes were compared according to the chemotherapy regimen using a random effects model. Outcomes of interest included disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Results Seven RCTs with a total of 1504 patients with CRLM were included. Six studies included post-operative treatment and one evaluated perioperative (pre- and postoperative) therapy. Fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy was the most used systemic therapy. NMA showed benefit of adding perioperative therapy to surgery in terms of DFS (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.84). However, these findings did not translate into a statistically significant OS benefit (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.05). NMA did not show any advantage of one regimen over another including oxaliplatin or irinotecan. Conclusions This systematic review and NMA of 7 RCTs found that the addition of perioperative systemic treatment for resectable CRLM could improve disease-free survival but not overall survival. Based on the findings, addition of perioperative treatment in resectable CRLM should be individualized weighing the risks and benefits.

Abstract Objectives Peritoneal metastasis (PM) from appendiceal cancer or colorectal cancer (CRC) has significant morbidity and limited survival. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a minimally invasive approach to treat PM. We aim to conduct a dose-escalation trial of mitomycin C (MMC)-PIPAC combined with systemic chemotherapy (FOLFIRI) in patients with PM from appendiceal cancer or CRC. Methods This is a multicenter Phase I study of MMC-PIPAC (NCT04329494). Inclusion criteria include treatment with at least 4 months of first- or second-line systemic chemotherapy with ineligibility for cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC). Exclusion criteria are: progression on chemotherapy; extraperitoneal metastases; systemic chemotherapy intolerance; bowel obstruction; or poor performance status (ECOG>2). Escalating MMC-PIPAC doses (7–25 mg/m 2 ) will be administered in combination with standard dose systemic FOLFIRI. Safety evaluation will be performed on 15 patients (dose escalation) and six expansion patients: 21 evaluable patients total. Results The primary endpoints are recommended MMC dose and safety of MMC-PIPAC with FOLFIRI. Secondary endpoints are assessment of response (by peritoneal regression grade score; Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [RECIST 1.1], and peritoneal carcinomatosis index), progression free survival, overall survival, technical failure rate, surgical complications, conversion to curative-intent CRS-HIPEC, patient-reported outcomes, and functional status. Longitudinal blood and tissue specimens will be collected for translational correlatives including pharmacokinetics, circulating biomarkers, immune profiling, and single-cell transcriptomics. Conclusions This Phase I trial will establish the recommended dose of MMC-PIPAC in combination with FOLFIRI. Additionally, we expect to detect an early efficacy signal for further development of this therapeutic combination.

PURPOSE This investigation sought to evaluate the prognostic value of pretreatment of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in metastatic biliary tract cancers (BTCs) treated with platinum-based first-line chemotherapy treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS We performed a retrospective analysis of 67 patients who underwent ctDNA testing before platinum-based chemotherapy for first-line treatment for metastatic BTC. For analysis, we considered the detected gene with highest variant allele frequency as the dominant clone allele frequency (DCAF). Results of ctDNA analysis were correlated with patients' demographics, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS The median age of patients was 67 (27-90) years. Fifty-four (80.6%) of 67 patients evaluated had intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma; seven had extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and six gallbladder cancers. Forty-six (68.6%) of the patients were treated with cisplatin plus gemcitabine, and 16.4% of patients received gemcitabine and other platinum (carboplatin or oxaliplatin) combinations, whereas 15% of patients were treated on a clinical trial with gemcitabine and cisplatin plus additional agents (CX4945, PEGPH20, or nab-paclitaxel). TP53, KRAS, FGFR2, ARID1A, STK11, and IDH1 were the genes with highest frequency as DCAF. The median DCAF was 3% (0%-97%). DCAF > 3% was associated with worse OS (median OS: 10.8 v 18.8 months, P = .032). Stratifying DCAF in quartiles, DCAF > 10% was significantly related to worse PFS (median PFS: 3 months, P = .014) and worse OS (median OS: 7.0 months, P = .001). Each 1% increase in ctDNA was associated with a hazard ratio of 13.1 in OS when adjusting for subtypes, metastatic sites, size of largest tumor, age, sex, and CA19-9. CONCLUSION DCAF at diagnosis of advanced BTC can stratify patients who have worse outcomes when treated with upfront platinum-based chemotherapy. Each increase in %ctDNA decreases survival probabilities.