Hálfdánarson, Þorvarður R.

4130 Background: KRAS is mutationally activated in over 90% of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Compared to pts with KRAS mutation, KRAS wild-type (wt) PDAC seem to have better response to therapy and may harbor potentially actionable molecular alterations. Here, we analyze the molecular profile and clinical outcome of a cohort of pts with KRAS wt PDAC. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on pts with PDAC who underwent CLIA-certified Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) testing at Mayo Clinic between December 1, 2018 and December 1, 2021. Pts with KRAS wt PDAC with available reports were included. Their genomic drivers, RNA expression, demographics, disease characteristics, therapies offered, and clinical outcome data were collected. The study was approved by the institutional IRB. Results: Of the 241 eligible pts, 8% (19) has KRAS wt PDAC. Among those, 2 pts had no mutation identified by the gene/molecular panel used. Of the 17 pts (89%) with identified alterations, mutations found in ³ 2 pts were TP53 (53%), CDKN2A (16%) and CDKN2B/ERBB2/PTEN/MSH3/RNF43/FBXW7/KMT2D/GNAS (11% each). Chromosomal rearrangements were identified in 5 (26%): CADPS2-BRAF, GP2-ERBB2, PTPRK-RSPO3, EML4-NTRK3 and TFG-MET. RNA expression results were available in 12 pts: common overexpression were ERBB2 (27%) and MET/NRAS/MYC/CCDN1/CCNE1/AR (18% each); and the under-expression MGMT (18%). Among the 13 pts with available MSI status via NGS, 2 (11%) were MSI-high (both had high TMB [28.4 and 23.7 m/MB]) while all others were TMB < 10 m/MB. The median age at diagnosis was 61 years (68% males). 8/19 (42%) were Stage IV at diagnosis with 15/19 (79%) pts ultimately diagnosed with metastatic disease. Among metastatic pts, median lines of treatment received was 2.5 (range:0-4). 4 pts received FOLFIRINOX (FFX), 2 gemcitabine/ nab-paclitaxel (GP) and tumor response were comparable to previously reported results. 1 received 1st-line pembrolizumab and remained on therapy at the time of analysis. The median length of follow up from diagnosis was 29 months. A patient with TFG-MET re-arrangement previously progressed on FFX and GP was treated using a MET inhibitor, and achieved significant CA19-9 drop and pancreas tumor shrinkage at 1st restaging, with ongoing response. Conclusions: The molecular profile of KRAS wt PDAC is highly heterogeneous and difficult to generalize. Novel approaches (e.g., basket trials) are needed to develop therapy for this rare PDAC subgroup.

e15118 Background: Melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), colorectal adenocarcinoma and thyroid tumors frequently harbor BRAF mutations and are tumor types eligible for treatment with FDA-approved BRAF inhibitors. Although there are many ongoing clinical trials with BRAF inhibitors in various advanced tumor types, currently eligibility requires both tumor type identification and BRAF mutation confirmation. The 92-gene assay (CancerTYPE ID) is a gene expression-based classifier of 50 tumor types and subtypes for metastatic patients with diagnostic ambiguity. Multimodal biomarker testing, including NGS, IHC and FISH, enables identification of actionable biomarkers to guide targeted therapy selection. Here, a database of metastatic cases integrating tumor type with biomarker analysis was used to identify patients eligible for BRAF inhibitor treatment. Methods: MOSAIC (Molecular Synergy to Advance Individualized Cancer Care) is an IRB-approved, de-identified database of diagnostically ambiguous cases submitted for CancerTYPE ID testing with tumor type-guided multimodal biomarker testing (Neogenomics). In this study, metastatic cancers of various tumor types with BRAF mutations were identified. Results: CancerTYPE ID determined 27 different tumor types in 2929 (92.5%) of 3168 cases. BRAF mutations were identified in 87 cases across 18 tumor types and subtypes. Out of the 87 cases, 22 (25.3%) had BRAF mutations in a tumor type eligible for FDA-approved BRAF inhibitor treatment, including melanoma, NSCLC, colorectal adenocarcinoma and thyroid cancer. Another 26 (29.9%) BRAF-mutated cases were detected in a tumor type with ongoing BRAF inhibitor clinical trials, including lymphoma, pancreaticobiliary and ovarian cancer (Table). Conclusions: This analysis identified patients with metastatic cancer with actionable BRAF mutations eligible for FDA-approved therapy, and patients who may be eligible for investigational BRAF inhibitors based on tumor type and mutation status. Notably, cancer type identification is critical given that FDA-approved BRAF inhibitor treatment regimens vary based on the tumor-specific indication. These findings support the clinical utility of molecular tumor type classification by CancerTYPE ID combined with biomarker profiling to identify additional treatment options for patients with metastatic cancer.[Table: see text]

4020 Background: High grade (G3) GEPNENs are a rare and heterogeneous disease entity for which there is little prospective treatment data. EP chemotherapy is the treatment standard but this may not be appropriate for all G3 GEPNEN pts. CAPTEM has demonstrated activity in G3 GEPNENs and may be a promising alternative. EA2142 aimed to determine if CAPTEM was superior to EP in pts with G3 GEPNENs. Methods: This was a multicenter, randomized (1:1) phase II trial for pts with a locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic well differentiated G3 neuroendocrine tumor (NET) or a poorly differentiated, non-small cell G3 neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) of suspected gastrointestinal origin and an ECOG PS of 0-2. Pathology must have demonstrated a Ki-67 of 20-100% or at least 10 mitoses/10 high powered field. Pts were randomized to receive capecitabine 750 mg/m2 orally every 12 hours on days 1-14 and temozolomide 200 mg/m2 orally once daily on days 10-14 of a 28-day treatment cycle (Arm A) or etoposide 100 mg/m2 daily on days 1-3 with either cisplatin 25 mg/m2 daily on days 1-3 or carboplatin AUC 5 on day 1 of a 21-day treatment cycle (Arm B). Restaging scans were performed every 8 weeks and toxicity monitored per CTCAEv4. Final statistical plan was to accrue 80 pts to detect a 67% improvement in progression free survival (PFS) (primary endpoint) with CAPTEM as compared to EP, 80% power and one-sided significance level of 0.10. A planned interim analysis for efficacy and futility was conducted. Results: A total of 67 pts were enrolled (Arm A, n=32; Arm B, n=35). Male 58%, African American 4%, Asian 3%. Mean age 61. Among 63 eligible pts, primary tumor site pancreatic 56%, non-pancreatic 43%. Poorly differentiated 57%, well differentiated 33%, unknown 10%. Mean Ki-67 48% (Arm A), 60% (Arm B). The study was closed prior to full accrual due to futility at 57.7% information time. In the interim analysis, among 62 eligible pts, PFS, overall survival and response rate with CAPTEM were 2.43 months (mos) (95% CI 2.04, 7.72), 12.6 mos, 9% respectively vs 5.36 mos (95% CI 2.14, 7.23), 13.6 mos and 10% with EP. Toxicity was evaluable in 57 pts with Grade (G) 3/4 events occurring in 29% of pts on Arm A, 66% of pts on Arm B. G3/4 events occurring in more than 5% of pts on Arm A—febrile neutropenia (n=2); abdominal pain (n=2); diarrhea (n=2); nausea (n=2); neutropenia (n=2); dehydration (n=2) and on Arm B—anemia (n=8); febrile neutropenia (n=2); fatigue (n=2); lymphopenia (n=2); neutropenia (n=12); thrombocytopenia (n=4); leukopenia (n=6). There was one G5 event on Arm A due to sepsis. Conclusions: CAPTEM does not appear to be superior to EP chemotherapy as front-line treatment for pts with G3 NENs but does demonstrate a more favorable toxicity profile. Studies assessing G3 NET independently of G3 NEC are needed. Clinical trial information: NCT02595424.

AbstractImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), as a novel class of anticancer therapy, can be more efficacious and less toxic than chemotherapy, but their clinical success is confined to certain tumor types. Elucidating their targets, mechanisms and scope of action, and potential synergism with chemotherapy and/or targeted therapies are critical to widen their clinical indications. Treatment response to an ICI targeting programmed death‐1 (anti‐PD‐1) is sought to be understood here by conducting a preplanned correlative analysis of a phase II clinical trial in patients with small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA). The cytolytic capacity of circulating immune cells in cancer patients using a novel ex vivo cytotoxicity assay is evaluated, and the utility of circulating biomarkers is investigated to predict and monitor the treatment effect of anti‐PD‐1. Baseline expression of Bim and NKG7 and upregulation of CX3CR1 in circulating T cells are associated with the clinical benefit of anti‐PD‐1 in patients with SBA. Overall, these findings suggest that the frequency and cytolytic capacity of circulating, effector immune cells may differentiate clinical response to ICIs, providing a strong rationale to support immune monitoring using patient peripheral blood.

Abstract Background Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) are rare cancers with outcomes determined by multiple factors including grade, stage, and clinical presentation. In this study, we aimed to determine the prognosis of patients with pNETs using a large population-based database. Materials and Methods In this population-based study, we identified patients with pNETs from the SEER 18 registry (2000-2016) using a combination of ICD-O-3 and histology codes. We calculated age-adjusted incidence rates using SEER*Stat 8.3.5. In addition, we analyzed overall survival (OS) using the Kaplan-Meier method, and investigated prognostic factors using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model. Results A total of 8944 pNETs patients were identified. Annual incidence rates increased from 0.27 to 1.00 per 100 000. This was largely explained by an increase in number of patients diagnosed with localized disease in more recent years (2012-2016). Median OS was 68 months (95% CI [64, 73]) and 5-year OS rates in localized, regional, and metastatic disease were 83%, 67%, and 28%, respectively. There was a significant improvement in OS for patients diagnosed between 2009 and 2016 (median OS 85 months) compared with those diagnosed between 2000 and 2008 (median OS 46 months) (HR 0.66; 95% CI [0.62, 0.70]). This improvement in OS was consistent across all stages. Conclusions and Relevance This study shows a steady increase pNETs incidence with notable stage migration to earlier stages in recent years. This increase in incidence is accompanied by a significant improvement in survival across different disease stages.

Abstract Background This North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) N064A (Alliance) phase II trial evaluated upfront chemoradiotherapy incorporating the EGFR inhibitor panitumumab, followed by gemcitabine and panitumumab for unresectable, non-metastatic pancreatic cancer. Methods The treatment consisted of fluoropyrimidine and panitumumab given concurrently with radiotherapy followed by gemcitabine and panitumumab for 3 cycles followed by maintenance panitumumab. The primary endpoint was the 12-month overall survival (OS) rate and secondary endpoints included confirmed response rate (RR), OS, progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events. Enrollment of 50 patients was planned and the study fully accrued. Results Fifty-two patients were enrolled, but only 51 were treated and included in the analysis. The median age of patients was 65 years and 54.9% were women. Twenty-two patients received at least 1 cycle of systemic therapy following radiotherapy, but 29 patients received chemoradiotherapy only without receiving subsequent chemotherapy after completion of chemoradiotherapy. The overall RR was 5.9% (95% CI: 1.2%-16.2%). The 12-month OS rate was 50% (95% CI: 38%-67%) which fell short of the per-protocol goal for success (51.1%). The median PFS was 7.4 months (95% CI: 4.5-8.6) and the median OS was 12.1 months (95% CI 7.9-15.9). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were reported by 88%. Conclusion The combination of panitumumab, chemotherapy, and external beam radiation therapy was associated with very high rates of grades 3-4 toxicities and survival results did not meet the trial’s goal for success. This regimen is not recommended for further study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00601627).

563 Background: RUB is an oral PARP1,2,3 inhibitor that demonstrated efficacy in patients (pts) with ovarian and prostate cancers harboring deleterious BRCA mutations. RUB exerts synergistic anti-tumor effect with IRI preclinically though the combination has overlapping toxicities. We previously published on the population PK of nal-IRI (Adiwijaya, Ma et al, Clin Pharm Ther 2017). We conducted a phase I study to evaluate a novel sequential dosing of RUB with nal-IRI/5FU in mGI cancer pts. Methods: Eligible pts had incurable mGI cancer previously received > 1 line of therapy (rx), ECOG PS 0-1, had RECIST measurable disease, adequate organ reserves and not received IRI for metastatic disease. Previous PARPi rx was excluded. The endpoints included dose limiting toxicity (DLT), maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and toxicity profile. The dose escalation utilized the 3+3 design. RUB was given oral bid on Day 4 to 13 and 18 to 27 with nal-IRI i.v. and 5FU i.v. 2400 mg/m2 over 46 hr on Day 1 and 15, every 28 day. Planned dose levels were RUB 400 mg/nal-IRI 50 mg/m2 (DL1), 400 mg/70 mg/m2 (DL2) and 600 mg/70 mg/m2 (DL3). Adverse events (AEs) were scored per CTCAE v4.03. Molecular profile was evaluated by CLIA-certified NGS testing. Results: Eighteen pts including 11 colorectal (CRC), 6 PANC, 1 gastroesophageal (GE) were enrolled and 12 were evaluable for DLTs. DL2 was not tolerable (DLT: G3 diarrhea, nausea and vomiting) and DL2A was added (RUB 600 mg/nal-IRI 50 mg/m2). DL2A enrolled 6 pts with no DLT and was determined as the MTD. Of DLT-evaluable pts, G3 and worse treatment-related AEs from all cycles were diarrhea (33%), fatigue (25%), leukopenia (25%), neutropenia (25%), anemia (8%) and nausea (8%). Four of 12 response evaluable pts had partial response: 2 CRC (1 had ATM mut), 1 PANC ( ATM mut), 1 GE ( BRCA2 mut) whilst 3 responders previously had platinum (PLA). Five pts had stable disease beyond 16 weeks (range 18.9 to 100.7 weeks), and all had prior PLA. Conclusions: The study successfully determined the MTD of RUB in combination with nal-IRI and 5FU. Encouraging efficacy was observed in PLA-treated mGI cancers including responses in those harboring ATM and BRCA alterations. The study is proceeding to evaluate the efficacy of the combination in metastatic pancreas cancer pts with and without BRCA1/2 or PALB2 alterations. Clinical trial information: NCT03337087.

512 Background: The role of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in the treatment of extrapulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma (EP-NEC) has yet to be established. While objective responses have been observed, it is still unknown which patients are likely to derive benefit. We investigated the genomic profiles of patients who did and did not benefit from ICIs. Methods: Previously we reported the objective responses to ICI in a retrospective series of patients with EP-NEC. RECIST 1.1 criteria were used to categorize patients as achieving disease control (DC = CR, PR, or SD) vs progressive disease (PD). The EMR was reviewed to identify patients who had genomic panels performed, and results were extracted for analysis. Results: Of 31 patients eligible for RECIST assessment, 19 had genomic panels available (9 with DC: 4 SD, 5 PR vs 10 with PD). Of those with NEC histology specified, 9 were small cell, 1 combined large and small cell, 3 were large cell. All tumors were microsatellite-stable. All but one (with TMB = 25) of 16 tumors with TMB status available were < 10 m/MB. Of those with disease control, 67% had both TP53 and RB1 alterations, compared with only 10% in those with progressive disease; this was statistically significant ( p = 0.0198, Fisher exact). Of 7 tumors with TP53 + RB1 alterations, 4 were specified as small cell carcinoma. Half of those with PD showed alterations in β-catenin pathway genes CTNNB1 or APC, compared to only one of the DC group, but this did not reach significance ( p = 0.1409, Fisher exact). In an analysis of all Mayo patients (not just those treated with ICI) with NGS data available (Tempus and FoundationOne), concurrent TP53 + RB1 alteration was significantly more common in SCLC than in EP-NEC (Table). Conclusions: In this small series of patients with EP-NEC treated with ICIs, the SCLC-like genomic signature of concurrent TP53 + RB1 alterations was significantly more common in those with disease control than in those with progressive disease. An analysis of all patients with NGS data (not just on ICI) showed that the dual alteration was more common in SCLC, and SCLC also had more TMB-high tumors. This may explain why ICIs are more effective in SCLC than in EP-NEC. Further study is warranted to determine whether TP53 + RB1 mutations predict response to ICI in NEC.[Table: see text]