Philip, Philip A.

Abstract Background: Adhering to 2018 World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF)/American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR) Cancer Prevention Recommendations is reportedly associated with better survival among long-term colon cancer survivors (likely affected by immortal time bias). Thus, it is important to validate survival benefits by assessing adherence shortly after diagnosis, and further investigation is needed to examine its association with chemotherapy outcomes. Methods: Using an NCI-sponsored adjuvant chemotherapy trial conducted in patients with stage III colon cancer (CALGB/SWOG 80702; NCT01150045), we included 1,666 patients who returned valid Willett food frequency questionnaires (FFQ) at chemotherapy initiation and derived WCRF/AICR scores accordingly (higher score suggesting higher adherence). The primary outcome was disease-free survival (time from FFQ completion to recurrence or death), and secondary outcomes were reduced relative dose intensity (RDI; <85% suggesting worse completion) and severe toxicities (grade ≥3 for any chemotherapy-related toxicity). To estimate the associations of WCRF/AICR scores (quartiles) with survival and chemotherapy outcomes, we conducted multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression for disease-free survival and multivariable logistic regression for reduced RDI and severe toxicities. Results: Compared to those in the lowest quartile of the WCRF/AICR score, patients in the highest quartile had significantly better disease-free survival (hazard ratio: 0.75 [0.58, 0.98], Ptrend = 0.02) and lower risk of reduced RDI (odds ratio [OR]: 0.74 [0.54, 1.00], Ptrend = 0.03), but not for severe toxicities (OR: 1.24 [0.93, 1.67], Ptrend = 0.11). Conclusions: In patients with stage III colon cancer, higher adherence to WCRF/AICR recommendations was associated with better survival and chemotherapy completion, but not for severe toxicities. Funding: https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org Citation Format: En Cheng, Chao Ma, Qian Shi, Anthony F. Shields, Peter T. Campbell, Ardaman P. Shergill, Katherine A. Guthrie, Felix Couture, Philip Kuebler, Pankaj Kumar, Benjamin Tan, Smitha S. Krishnamurthi, Kimmie Ng, Eileen M. O'Reilly, Justin C. Brown, Philip A. Philip, Jeffrey A. Meyerhardt. Associations of WCRF/AICR recommendations with survival and chemotherapy outcomes in colon cancer: CALGB/SWOG 80702 (Alliance) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2026; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2026 Apr 17-22; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2026;86(7 Suppl):Abstract nr 5038.

LBA4005 Background: To date, no phase 3 clinical trial has demonstrated an overall survival (OS) benefit in patients with locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (LA-PAC). TTFields are electric fields that disrupt cancer cell division. TTFields therapy is approved for glioblastoma, pleural mesothelioma, and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. A phase 2 trial in PAC demonstrated the safety and preliminary efficacy of TTFields therapy with gemcitabine with or without nab-paclitaxel. We report final data from PANOVA-3 (NCT03377491), the largest global, phase 3, randomized, open-label trial in LA-PAC to date. Methods: Adult patients with newly diagnosed unresectable LA-PAC were randomized 1:1 to receive TTFields therapy (150 kHz) with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GnP) or GnP. The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), local PFS, objective response rate (ORR), and pain-free survival. Distant PFS (metastases beyond the pancreas and regional lymph nodes) was assessed post hoc. Survival data were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and a log-rank test. Results: 571 patients were randomized. Baseline characteristics were generally well balanced between the study arms. OS was significantly longer with TTFields/GnP than with GnP (median 16.2 [95% CI: 15.0, 18.0] vs 14.2 months [95% CI: 12.8, 15.4]; HR 0.82 [95% CI: 0.68, 0.99], p=0.039). One-year survival rate was also significantly improved with TTFields/GnP vs GnP (68.1% [95% CI: 62.0-73.5] vs 60.2% [95% CI: 54.2-65.7], p=0.029). There was no significant difference in PFS or local PFS between arms. Pain-free survival was significantly longer with TTFields/GnP vs GnP (median 15.2 [95% CI: 10.3, 22.8] vs 9.1 months [95% CI: 7.4, 12.7]; HR 0.74 [95% CI: 0.56, 0.97], p=0.027). Post-hoc analysis showed significant distant PFS benefit (median 13.9 [95% CI: 12.2, 16.8] vs 11.5 months [95% CI: 10.4, 12.9], HR 0.74 [95% CI: 0.57, 0.96], p=0.022) with TTFields/GnP vs GnP. ORR was similar between arms (36.1% [95% CI: 30.0, 42.4] vs 30.0% [95% CI: 24.3, 36.2], p=0.094). 97.8% and 98.9% of patients who received TTFields/GnP and GnP, respectively, had adverse events (AEs) and 88.6% and 84.3% had grade ≥3 AEs. The most frequent grade ≥3 AEs were neutropenia (47.8% and 47.6%) and anemia (21.9% and 22.3). 81% of patients receiving TTFields/GnP had device-related AEs, mostly grade 1/2 skin AEs, e.g., dermatitis (27.7%), rash (17.5%), and pruritus (15.0%); grade 3 and grade 4 device-related AEs occurred in 9.1% and 0.4% of patients, respectively. Conclusions: PANOVA-3 is the largest phase 3 trial exclusively performed in patients with LA-PAC and the first to show a statistically significant OS benefit. With no additive systemic toxicity and a statistically significant pain-free survival benefit, TTFields therapy is a potential new standard treatment for LA-PAC. Clinical trial information: NCT03377491 .

PURPOSE Tumor treating fields (TTFields) use alternating electric fields to disrupt cancer cell proliferation. Feasibility of TTFields therapy with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel was previously demonstrated in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. PANOVA-3 was designed to confirm safety and efficacy of TTFields in patients with unresectable locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (LA-PAC). METHODS In this global phase III trial, 571 patients with newly diagnosed LA-PAC were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m 2 and nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m 2 by intravenous infusion once a day on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle with or without TTFields. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), local PFS, pain-free survival, and overall response rate (ORR). Distant PFS was analyzed post hoc. RESULTS OS was significantly prolonged using TTFields with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel versus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (median, 16.2 months [95% CI, 15.0 to 18.0] v 14.2 months [95% CI, 12.8 to 15.4]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.82 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.99]; P = .039). PFS, local PFS, and ORR were not improved. Pain-free survival was significantly prolonged with TTFields with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (median, 15.2 months [95% CI, 10.3 to 22.8] v 9.1 months [95% CI, 7.4 to 12.7]; HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.56 to 0.97]; P = .027), as was distant PFS (median, 13.9 months [95% CI, 12.2 to 16.8] v 11.5 months [95% CI, 10.4 to 12.9]; HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.96]; P = .022). Device-related skin adverse events (AEs) were experienced by 76.3% of patients. Most device-related skin AEs were mild to moderate, with 7.7% of patients reporting a grade 3 AE. CONCLUSION This study demonstrated significant OS, pain-free survival, and distant PFS benefits for TTFields with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel versus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in patients with unresectable LA-PAC, with no additive systemic toxicity.

4166 Background: GN is a front-line therapy for aPDAC. A Phase I/II study demonstrated that GCN has a higher overall response rate and median overall survival (mOS). Our previous study found no difference in outcomes among patients with DNA damage repair gene mutations; however, stromal gene expression correlated with mOS in patients receiving GCN. Here, we further evaluate differences in the outcomes with GCN and GN by site of biopsy. Methods: PDAC samples (n = 4,463) were analyzed by NGS (NextSeq/NovaSeq) or RNA (NovaSeq) (Caris Life Sciences, Phx, AZ). Expression of stromal and related genes ( ACTA2, ADIRF, HAS2, IL-6, MMP-2, MMP-9, SPARC, STAT3, TBGB1, TGFB2, TGFBR3, IDO1, HLA-DRB4, VEGFB) from different biopsy sites [high expression (H) >50% of RNA transcripts per million] was correlated with outcomes to GCN or GN. mOS was obtained from insurance claims and calculated from first treatment to last contact. The hazard ratio (HR) was calculated by the Cox proportional hazards model, and p-values were calculated using the log-rank test. Results: 4325 patients [primary biopsy (PT), n = 1,878; non-liver metastatic biopsy (N-LM), n = 818; Liver biopsy (LM), n = 1,629] received GN while 138 patients (PT, n = 45; N-LM, n = 28; LM, n = 65) received GCN. GCN was associated with longer mOS than GN [∆: 5.2 months (m), HR: 0.76, 95% CI 0.63-0.92, p = 0.01]. GCN was associated with longer mOS compared to GN in LM (∆: 5.6 m, HR: 0.66, 95% CI 0.50-0.87, p = 0.003), but it was not significant in PT (∆: 4.6 m, p = 0.13) and N-LM (∆: 4.4 m, p = 0.35). Median MMP2 (38.5 vs. 163.1 vs. 162.2), VEGFB (14.4 vs. 16.9 vs. 16.2) and TGFBR3 (11.4 vs. 15 vs. 16.4) expression were lower in LM compared to PT and N-LM while TGFB1 (41.6 vs. 34.5 vs. 39.8) and IL6 (1.61 vs. 1.19 vs. 1.41) expression were highest in LM (p < 0.05). In LM, IL6 -H (∆: -11 m, p = 0.037) and TGFB1 -H (∆: -5.9 m, p = 0.10) were associated with worse post-GCN survival compared to GN (p = 0.82 and p = 0.57). Whereas, in N-LM, TGFBR3 -H trended towards longer post-GCN survival (∆: 12 m, p = 0.18), while ADIRF -H trended towards shorter post-GCN survival (∆: -12 m, p = 0.056) compared to GN (p = 0.42 and p = 0.10). While in PT, MMP2 -H (∆: 11.3m, HR: 0.46, p = 0.16), TGFB1 -H (∆: 11.3 m, HR: 0.33, p = 0.09), HLA-DRB4 -H (∆: 12.9 m, HR: 0.44, p = 0.11) and VEGFB -H (∆: 10.7, HR: 0.34, p = 0.09) trended towards longer post-GCN survival compared to GN ( MMP2 -H, ∆: 3.4 m, p = 0.03, TGFB1 -H, p = 0.661, HLA-DRB4 -H, p = 0.67, VEGFB-H , ∆: 1.3 m, p = 0.03). Conclusions: GCN is associated with improved mOS compared to GN, especially in LM.Stromal gene expression in the liver differs from that in N-LM and the pancreas. While high stromal gene expression trends towards worse post-GCN survival in LM, it is associated with improved survival in N-LM and PT. Further validation is needed to understand the impact of stromal gene expression in different tumor sites on survival outcomes and signature development.

Abstract Background The treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer now includes “watch-and-wait” (WW) management for patients who exhibit a clinical complete response (cCR) to total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT). We assessed patients’ knowledge and preferences regarding WW with the goal of incorporating patient input into clinical trial design. Methods Rectal cancer patients in advocacy groups (COLONTOWN/Rectalburgh and Fight CRC) were surveyed regarding perceptions about treatment strategies, tolerable risks of treatment failure, and preferences on clinical trial design. Surveys were initially distributed in 2019, with the shift toward WW prompting re-survey of select questions in 2023. Results All respondents preferred enrollment in trials that incorporated patient input. Most respondents (76%) preferred treatment that incorporated chemotherapy escalation over radiation escalation. Furthermore, when presented with a hypothetical patient who developed a cCR after chemoradiation (without the option for WW), 58% of patients chose surgical treatment (with 100% risk of permanent ostomy and 80% chance of cure) over omission of surgery (with &lt;80% chance of cure). In contrast, when the hypothetical patient developed a cCR after TNT (with an option for WW), 82% of patients opted for selective WW over surgery. Conclusions This work successfully integrated patient advocacy groups as a resource for obtaining patient input. Surveys revealed patients had a strong preference for chemotherapy escalation, for selective WW when offered, and for incorporation of input into future clinical trial design. These findings describe how well-informed patients approach complex medical decision-making and serve as a starting point for future studies seeking to incorporate patient voices.

PURPOSE SWOG S1815 was a randomized, open label phase III trial, evaluating gemcitabine, nab-paclitaxel, and cisplatin (GAP) versus gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) in patients with newly diagnosed advanced biliary tract cancers (BTCs). METHODS Patients with newly diagnosed locally advanced unresectable or metastatic BTC, including intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC) and gallbladder carcinoma (GBC), were randomly assigned 2:1 to either GAP (gemcitabine 800 mg/m 2 , cisplatin 25 mg/m 2 , and nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m 2 intravenously once per day on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle) or GC (gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m 2 and cisplatin 25 mg/m 2 intravenously once per day on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle). RESULTS Among 452 randomly assigned participants, 441 were eligible and analyzable, 67% with ICC, 16% with GBC, and 17% with ECC. There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between GAP versus GC. Median OS with GAP was 14.0 months (95% CI, 12.4 to 16.1) and 13.6 months with GC (95% CI, 9.7 to 16.6); hazard ratio (HR), 0.91 (95% CI, 0.72 to 1.14); P = .41. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was similar between groups with median PFS for GAP being 7.5 months (95% CI, 6.4 to 8.5) versus 6.3 months for GC (95% CI, 4.4 to 8.2); HR, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.71 to 1.12); P = .32. In exploratory subset analyses, the OS and PFS benefits of GAP versus GC treatment were greater in locally advanced disease compared with metastatic disease, although not statistically significant (interaction P = .14 for OS and P = .17 for PFS). Moreover, GAP versus GC showed greater improvement in PFS among participants with GBC than those with ICC or ECC (interaction P = .01), but not OS (interaction P = .28). CONCLUSION The addition of a taxane in the GAP regimen to the standard gemcitabine-cisplatin regimen did not improve OS in newly diagnosed BTC. More toxicity was encountered with GAP versus GC.

4107 Background: Aberrant Wnt/β-catenin activation has been implicated in tumor formation and progression in BTC. CTNNB1 is a key transcriptional co-activator in Wnt signaling. The impact of CTNNB1 alterations on outcomes in intrahepatic (IHCC) vs extrahepatic (EHCC) vs gallbladder (GB) tumors and patterns of gene co-expression is unclear. We examined the molecular correlates and predictive and prognostic significance of CTNNB1 expression in a real-world cohort of pts with BTC. Methods: 7450 BTC tumors were analyzed using Next Generation Sequencing (NextSeq), Whole Exome and Whole Transcriptome Sequencing (NovaSeq) at Caris Life Sciences (Phoenix, AZ). Top quartile transcripts per million (TPM) expression was considered high expressors (Q4), bottom quartile was considered low expressors (Q1) within each subtype. Real-world overall survival (OS) data was obtained from insurance claims. Hazard ratio (HR) was calculated using Cox proportional hazards model, P values were calculated using log-rank test. Significance was determined to be p <0.05. Chi-square and Mann-Whitney tests determined molecular differences between subgroups and adjusted for multiple comparisons (q<0.05). Results: The cohort was comprised of 61% IHCC, 14% EHCC, 23% GB, 2% NOS. CTNNB1 mutations are rare in BTC (1.3%). Pts with CTNNB1-wt tumors had significantly better OS vs CTNNB1-mt (13.6 vs 10.2 mo, HR 0.74, p=0.008). This association remained significant in IHCC (13.2 vs 4.5 mo, HR 0.64, p=0.031) but not EHCC (18.0 vs 11.8 mo, HR 0.87, p=0.64) or GB (12.9 vs 11.0 mo, HR 0.75, p=0.071). CTNNB1-mt tumors were more frequently TP53-mt (63% vs 41%), ERBB2-mt (9% vs 2%) and ATM-mt (9% vs 3%). CTNNB1-wt tumors were more likely BAP-mt (9% vs 0%) and IDH1-mt (10% vs 0%) (all q<0.05). CTNNB1-mt tumors had higher median CTNNB1 expression vs wt (154.9 vs 113.4, q<0.009). Pts with CTNNB1 Q1 expression had significantly better OS vs Q4 (14.5 vs 12.4 mo, HR 0.88, p=0.007). This association held in IHCC (15.0 vs 10.6 mo, HR 0.77, p<0.00001) but not EHCC (17.5 vs 19.9 mo, HR 1.05, p=0.70) or GB (12.4 vs 12.8 mo, HR 1.05, p=0.63). CTNNB1 Q4 expressing tumors were more likely to be TP53-mt (55% vs 34%), PIK3CA-mt (9% vs 5%), KRAS-mt (23% vs 12%) and less likely IDH1-mt (4% vs 14%) compared to Q1 (all q<0.05). CTNNB1 Q4 pts had higher ARID1A, CTLA4, LAG3, HIF1A, TGFB1/2/3, EPHB4, EPHA2, VEGFA expression (FC: 2.1-4.2, all q<0.05) and higher T-cell inflamed score vs Q1. There was a trend towards improved OS in pts with IHCC CTNNB1 Q1 tumors receiving gemcitabine or fluorouracil (17.5 vs 15.0 mo, HR 0.86, p=0.064); no difference in outcomes by CTNNB1 expression in pts receiving immunotherapy. Conclusions: CTNNB1 mutations and mRNA expression levels impact survival in BTC, especially IHCC, and may be associated with benefit from chemotherapy. CTNBB1 alterations are associated with immunogenic, DNA repair and angiogenic pathways and may help identify novel therapeutic strategies for BTC.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. Observational studies have associated aspirin or cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) inhibitor usage either before or after colorectal cancer diagnosis with lower risk of recurrence and suggest that PIK3CA mutational status is predictive of better response to COX-2 inhibition. To prospectively test whether adding the COX-2 inhibitor celecoxib to standard adjuvant chemotherapy reduces the risk of recurrence and improves survival, the National Cancer Institute sponsored the CALGB/SWOG 80702 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01150045 ) for patients with stage III resected colon cancer. Although the primary hypothesis for all patients did not show a statistically significant improvement in disease-free survival (DFS) with celecoxib, subgroup analysis by PIK3CA mutational status was a preplanned study. PIK3CA gain-of-function mutations were detected in 259 of 1,197 tumors with available whole-exome sequencing data. When stratified by PIK3CA status, patients with PIK3CA gain-of-function mutations treated with celecoxib exhibited improved DFS (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.56 [95% CI, 0.33 to 0.96]) compared with PIK3CA wildtype patients (adjusted HR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.70 to 1.14]), although the interaction test was nonsignificant ( Pinteraction = .13). Overall survival was similarly improved for patients with PIK3CA gain-of-function mutations (adjusted HR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.22 to 0.85]) compared with PIK3CA wildtype patients (adjusted HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.30]; Pinteraction = .04). Although the test for heterogeneity in DFS did not reach statistical significance, the results suggest potential utility of PIK3CA to consider selective usage of COX-2 inhibitors in addition to standard treatment for stage III colon cancer.

TPS3641 Background: Currently, there are no biomarkers validated prospectively in randomized studies for resected colon cancer (CC) to determine need for adjuvant chemotherapy (AC). However, circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) represents a highly specific and sensitive approach (especially with serial monitoring) for identifying minimal/molecular residual disease (MRD) post-surgery in CC patients (pts), and may outperform traditional clinical and pathological features in prognosticating risk for recurrence. CC pts who do not have detectable ctDNA (ctDNA-) are at a much lower risk of recurrence and may be spared the toxicities associated with AC. Furthermore, for CC pts with detectable ctDNA (ctDNA+) who are at a very high risk of recurrence, the optimal AC regimen has not been established. We hypothesize that for pts whose CC has been resected, ctDNA status may be used to risk-stratify for making decisions about AC. Methods: In this prospective phase II/III trial, up to 1,912 pts with resected stage IIB, IIC, and III CC will be enrolled. Based on the post-operative ctDNA status using personalized and tumor-informed assay (Signatera, bespoke assay), those who are ctDNA- (Cohort A) will be randomized to immediate AC with fluoropyrimidine (FP)+oxaliplatin (Ox) for 3-6 mos per established guidelines vserial ctDNA monitoring. Patients who are ctDNA+ post-operatively, or with serial monitoring (Cohort B), will be randomized to FP+Ox v more intensive AC with addition of irinotecan (I) for 6 mos. One cycle of chemotherapy is allowed while awaiting ctDNA testing results for cohort assignment. The primary endpoints for Cohort A are time to ctDNA+ status (phase II) and disease-free survival (DFS) (phase III) in the immediate v delayed AC arms. The primary endpoint for Cohort B is DFS in the FP+Ox v FP+Ox+I arms for both phase II and phase III portions of the trial. Secondary endpoints include prevalence of detectable ctDNA post-operatively, time-to-event outcomes (overall survival and time to recurrence) by ctDNA status, and the assessment of compliance to adjuvant therapy. Biospecimens including archival tumor tissue, as well as post-operative plus serial matched/normal blood samples, will be collected for exploratory correlative research. Active enrollment across the NCTN started in June 2022 with CCTG sites joining in August 2023. Current accrual (as of 02-02-2024) is 240/1,912. NCT05174169. Support: U10-CA-180868, -180822; UG1CA-189867; Natera, Inc. Clinical trial information: NCT05174169 .

Background The C-C motif chemokine receptor 5 (CCR5)/C-C motif chemokine ligand 5 (CCL5) axis plays a major role in colorectal cancer (CRC). We aimed to characterize the molecular features associated with CCR5 / CCL5 expression in CRC and to determine whether CCR5 / CCL5 levels could impact treatment outcomes. Methods 7604 CRCs tested with NextGen Sequencing on DNA and RNA were analyzed. Molecular features were evaluated according to CCR5 and CCL5 tumor gene expression quartiles. The impact on treatment outcomes was assessed in two cohorts, including 6341 real-world patients and 429 patients from the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB)/SWOG 80405 trial. Results CCR5 / CCL5 expression was higher in right-sided versus left-sided tumors, and positively associated with consensus molecular subtypes 1 and 4. Higher CCR5 / CCL5 expression was associated with higher tumor mutational burden, deficiency in mismatch repair and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) levels. Additionally, high CCR5 / CCL5 were associated with higher immune cell infiltration in the tumor microenvironment (TME) of MMR proficient tumors. Ingenuity pathway analysis revealed upregulation of the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/PD-L1 cancer immunotherapy pathway, phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPAR) signaling, and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) signaling in cytotoxic T lymphocytes, whereas several inflammation-related pathways were downregulated. Low CCR5 / CCL5 expression was associated with increased benefit from cetuximab-FOLFOX treatment in the CALGB/SWOG 80405 trial, where significant treatment interaction was observed with biologic agents and chemotherapy backbone. Conclusions Our data show a strong association between CCR5/CCL5 gene expression and distinct molecular features, gene expression profiles, TME cell infiltration, and treatment benefit in CRC. Targeting the CCR5/CCL5 axis may have clinical applications in selected CRC subgroups and may play a key role in developing and deploying strategies to modulate the immune TME for CRC treatment.