Citations

TPS213 Background: Regorafenib (R) is an oral multikinase inhibitor that blocks several protein kinases involved in angiogenesis and oncogenesis; it has a survival benefit in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The current standard (std) treatment in patients (pts) with RAS wildtype (WT) mCRC is sequential treatment with an anti-EGFR antibody (AEA) followed by R. However, R, which is orally administered once daily, may be more convenient and thus preferable for pts than AEA. REVERCE, a Japanese trial, demonstrated a significant 5.8 month (mo.) survival benefit with regorafenib administered prior to AEA compared to the std sequence. Based off these findings, the proposed phase II trial is to confirm the observed survival benefit from regorafenib sequencing prior to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody therapy in REVERCE in a US patient population. Methods: REVERCEII is an Academic and Community Cancer Research United (ACCRU) network-led randomized phase II study of R (dose escalation from 80mg to 160mg based on tolerance) prior to AEA (R+AEA) compared to standard sequencing (AEA+R) in pts with refractory RAS WT mCRC. Patients are randomized 1:1 to receive R (Arm A) vs. AEA (with or without irinotecan per investigator choice) (Arm B). At the time of disease progression or intolerance, patients will receive sequential treatment until disease progression. Eligibility criteria include histologically confirmed mCRC, ECOG ≤ 2, acceptable organ function, and patients must have had prior fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin and irinotecan, and no prior AEA nor R. The primary objective is to compare the overall survival (OS), the primary endpoint, between evaluable patients (eligible, consented, started protocol treatment) who were randomized to R+AEA (arm A) and AEA+R (arm B). With 83 OS events, we have 87% power to detect an improvement in median OS from 9 months to 14.5 mo., assuming 1-sided significance level of 0.15, and exponential distribution. The total sample size is 124 patients. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, objective response, and adverse events. The total study duration is expected to be 3 years. Clinical trial information: NCT04117945. Clinical trial information: 04117945.

Abstract Background Combination irinotecan and cetuximab is approved for irinotecan-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). It is unknown if adding bevacizumab improves outcomes. Patients and Methods In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II trial, patients with irinotecan-refractory RAS-wildtype mCRC and no prior anti-EGFR therapy were randomized to cetuximab 500 mg/m2, bevacizumab 5 mg/kg, and irinotecan 180 mg/m2 (or previously tolerated dose) (CBI) versus cetuximab, irinotecan, and placebo (CI) every 2 weeks until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). Results The study closed early after the accrual of 36 out of a planned 120 patients due to changes in funding. Nineteen patients were randomized to CBI and 17 to CI. Baseline characteristics were similar between arms. Median PFS was 9.7 versus 5.5 months for CBI and CI, respectively (1-sided log-rank P = .38; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25-1.66). Median OS was 19.7 versus 10.2 months for CBI and CI (1-sided log-rank P = .02; adjusted HR = 0.41; 95% CI, 0.15-1.09). ORR was 36.8% for CBI versus 11.8% for CI (P = .13). Grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 47% of patients receiving CBI versus 35% for CI (P = .46). Conclusion In this prematurely discontinued trial, there was no significant difference in the primary endpoint of PFS between CBI and CI. There was a statistically significant improvement in OS in favor of CBI compared with CI. Further investigation of CBI for the treatment of irinotecan-refractory mCRC is warranted. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02292758

Objective To develop a core outcome set (COS) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of interventions for the treatment of pregnant women with pregestational diabetes mellitus (PGDM). Design A consensus developmental study. Setting International. Population Two hundred and five stakeholders completed the first round. Methods The study consisted of three components. (1) A systematic review of the literature to produce a list of outcomes reported in RCTs assessing the effectiveness of interventions for the treatment of pregnant women with PGDM. (2) A three‐round, online eDelphi survey to prioritise these outcomes by international stakeholders (including healthcare professionals, researchers and women with PGDM). (3) A consensus meeting where stakeholders from each group decided on the final COS. Main outcome measures All outcomes were extracted from the literature. Results We extracted 131 unique outcomes from 67 records meeting the full inclusion criteria. Of the 205 stakeholders who completed the first round, 174/205 (85%) and 165/174 (95%) completed rounds 2 and 3, respectively. Participants at the subsequent consensus meeting chose 19 outcomes for inclusion into the COS: trimester‐specific haemoglobin A1c, maternal weight gain during pregnancy, severe maternal hypoglycaemia, diabetic ketoacidosis, miscarriage, pregnancy‐induced hypertension, pre‐eclampsia, maternal death, birthweight, large for gestational age, small for gestational age, gestational age at birth, preterm birth, mode of birth, shoulder dystocia, neonatal hypoglycaemia, congenital malformations, stillbirth and neonatal death. Conclusions This COS will enable better comparison between RCTs to produce robust evidence synthesis, improve trial reporting and optimise research efficiency in studies assessing treatment of pregnant women with PGDM. Tweetable abstract 165 key stakeholders have developed #Treatment #CoreOutcomes in pregnant women with #diabetes existing before pregnancy.

4025 Background: Cumulative sNT is the dose-limiting toxicity of oxaliplatin which commonly leads to early discontinuation of oxaliplatin-based therapy in the palliative and adjuvant setting. We recently demonstrated the protective effect of CaMg against oxaliplatin-induced sNT as assessed by NCI-CTC (Nikcevich ASCO 2008). It is unclear, though, if CaMg reduced acute and/or chronic, cumulative sNT. Methods: 104 pts with colon cancer undergoing adjuvant therapy with FOLFOX were randomized to IV CaMg (1g calcium gluconate plus 1g magnesium sulfate pre- and post-oxaliplatin) or placebo (PL) in a double-blinded manner. NCI-CTC, an oxaliplatin-specific sNT scale and patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires were used to differentially assess the effect of CaMg on acute (effect on sNT on days 1–4 after oxaliplatin) and chronic sNT (area between curves over whole course of therapy). Results: A total of 102 pts (50 CaMg, 52 PL; 96 mFOLFOX6, 6 FOLFOX4) were available for analysis. Apart from a strong reduction in muscle cramps with CaMg (p=0.002), no difference was found between CaMg and PL in PRO with regard to items reflecting acute sNT (e.g. sensitivity to cold, swallowing of cold liquids, throat discomfort) on days 1–4 after oxaliplatin of any treatment cycle. In contrast, CaMg was able to significantly reduce cumulative sNT in form of numbness in fingers (p=0.02), impaired ability to button shirts (p=0.05), tingling in fingers (p=0.06), and muscle cramps over the course of therapy (p=0.01). Conclusions: In our phase III, placebo-controlled trial, CaMg was able to significantly reduce chronic, cumulative sNT related to oxaliplatin as evaluated by specific PRO questionnaires. No effect was noted on phenomena associated with acute sNT. CaMg can be recommended as neuroprotectant against oxaliplatin-related chronic sNT, oxaliplatin's dose-limiting toxicity. [Table: see text]

PURPOSE Germline testing (GT) is a central feature of prostate cancer (PCA) treatment, management, and hereditary cancer assessment. Critical needs include optimized multigene testing strategies that incorporate evolving genetic data, consistency in GT indications and management, and alternate genetic evaluation models that address the rising demand for genetic services. METHODS A multidisciplinary consensus conference that included experts, stakeholders, and national organization leaders was convened in response to current practice challenges and to develop a genetic implementation framework. Evidence review informed questions using the modified Delphi model. The final framework included criteria with strong (> 75%) agreement (Recommend) or moderate (50% to 74%) agreement (Consider). RESULTS Large germline panels and somatic testing were recommended for metastatic PCA. Reflex testing—initial testing of priority genes followed by expanded testing—was suggested for multiple scenarios. Metastatic disease or family history suggestive of hereditary PCA was recommended for GT. Additional family history and pathologic criteria garnered moderate consensus. Priority genes to test for metastatic disease treatment included BRCA2, BRCA1, and mismatch repair genes, with broader testing, such as ATM, for clinical trial eligibility. BRCA2 was recommended for active surveillance discussions. Screening starting at age 40 years or 10 years before the youngest PCA diagnosis in a family was recommended for BRCA2 carriers, with consideration in HOXB13, BRCA1, ATM, and mismatch repair carriers. Collaborative (point-of-care) evaluation models between health care and genetic providers was endorsed to address the genetic counseling shortage. The genetic evaluation framework included optimal pretest informed consent, post-test discussion, cascade testing, and technology-based approaches. CONCLUSION This multidisciplinary, consensus-driven PCA genetic implementation framework provides novel guidance to clinicians and patients tailored to the precision era. Multiple research, education, and policy needs remain of importance.

1016 Background: The ph III EMBRACE trial of E vs physician’s choice of tx led to FDA approval of E as ≥3rd-line tx for MBC pts with prior exposure to anthracyclines/taxanes. The ph III BOLD 301 trial of E vs capecitabine in advanced BC treated with anthracyclines/taxanes showed a nonsignificant trend to improved median OS for all pts; pre-planned analysis by HER2 status revealed a nominally significant benefit for HER2- pts. Methods: RU011201I is an investigator initiated ph III trial with 1:1 randomization to E (1.4 mg/m2 D1,8 q21days) vs P (90 mg/m2 D1,8,15 q28days) within strata defined by (neo)adjuvant taxanes (yes/no), HR status (+/-), and line of tx (1st/2nd). Pts had measurable or non-measurable disease by RECIST v1.1; new or progressive mets; peripheral neuropathy (PN) gr<2; ≤1 prior chemotx regimens for advanced or MBC. Asymptomatic brain mets with stable MRIs for >3 mos were allowed. (Neo)adjuvant taxanes were allowed if >12 mos between tx completion and disease recurrence. Radiographic studies occur q12wks. Survival data are collected q12wks after the Off-Tx Visit. Pts reported side effects weekly; post-baseline symptomatic AE rates worse than baseline were compared between arms using Fisher’s exact tests. We report clinical outcomes and the primary objective related to PRO-CTCAE use. Results: 201 pts enrolled 3/2014 - 5/2018 with 33.8 mos median f/u; 3 are on tx as of 2/20/20 (1E, 2P). Pt characteristics were the same between E vs P: median age 62 yrs (range 27-85); 42% prior taxane; 78% ER+; 70% starting 1st line tx. Baseline lesion distribution was similar except for lung mets (37E, 53P). No difference was seen between E vs P in PFS (5.7 vs 5.9 mos; P=0.72), OS (18.1 vs 16.4 mos; P=0.75), TTF (5.3 vs 4.9 mos; P=0.82), DOR (10.8 vs 12.3 mos; P=0.84), or number of metastatic events (55 vs 54). 37E and 36P pts required ≥1 dose reduction. Hematologic toxicities ≥ gr 3 were higher with E (40 vs 22%). PN events were similar: 56 vs 58 total, 4 vs 7 motor, 52 vs 51 sensory. Median duration of PN and median time to 1st PN event were 74 vs 140 and 56 vs 41 days. Worsened numbness/tingling severity and other pt-reported AE rates were similar, but worsened numbness/tingling interference (63% vs 78%, P=0.04) and vomiting frequency (35% vs 57%, P=0.005) were lower with E. Conclusions: Clinical outcomes were equivalent with E vs P as 1st/2nd line tx for HER2- advanced BC. The nature and severity of PN were similar between arms, but time of onset, duration, and interference with daily living favor E. E may be a suitable treatment option in this setting. Clinical trial information: NCT02037529 .

8507 Background: Problems with sexual functioning are an issue negatively affecting the quality of life of female cancer survivors. Testosterone has been implicated as an important hormone in sexual functioning such as libido. Studies of transdermal testosterone have shown benefit in enhancing libido in women who have been diagnosed with hypoactive sexual desire disorder after bilateral oophorectomy. This phase III placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluated whether transdermal testosterone would increase libido in female cancer survivors. Methods: Women with a history of cancer, currently without evidence of disease, were eligible if they reported a decrease in sexual desire and had a sexual partner. Women must have been postmenopausal. Eligible women were randomized to receive 2% testosterone in Vanicream (10 mg daily) versus placebo Vanicream for four weeks, then crossed over to the opposite treatment. The primary endpoint, libido, was measured via the desire subscales of the Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire (CSFQ), which were completed at baseline and at the end of 4 and 8 weeks of treatment. The primary endpoint was the average intra-patient change from baseline to four weeks in the CSFQ subscales between the two arms. A total of 64 patients per group were needed to provide 80% power to detect a difference of 8 units between the treatment means. Two-sided alternative hypothesis testing and a 5% Type I error rate were used. Results: One hundred fifty women were enrolled onto this study. Complete data were available for 132 women. For those on active testosterone cream, serum bioavailable testosterone levels increased significantly over placebo, with a mean change from baseline of 12 and 10 ng/dl for the first and second period, respectively (p<.0001). The average intra-patient change from baseline to week 4 in libido was 5.5 on testosterone and 4.4 on placebo (p=0.58). No carryover effect was detected. The difference in average intra-patient changes from baseline for the entire crossover design between the two arms was only 1.1 points (95% confidence interval of -1.2 to 3.4, p=0.35). Conclusion: Testosterone is not a panacea for libido troubles in women with a history of cancer. Further studies are needed to determine whether there is a role for transdermal testosterone in this population. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

8506 Background: A randomized study (Int J Rad Oncol Biol Phys 54:195–202, 2002) demonstrated a beneficial effect for octreotide in the treatment of diarrhea in patients receiving pelvic radiation therapy. This North Central Cancer Treatment Group study was undertaken to determine the effectiveness of depot octreotide in the prevention of diarrhea during pelvic radiation therapy. Methods: Patients receiving pelvic radiation therapy, with a planned minimum dose of 45 Gy at 1.70–2.1 Gy per day, were eligible for this study. The study was designed for a Wilcoxon test, with 112 evaluable patients, to have 85% power to detect a further one grade decrease in diarrhea over and above that experienced by patients treated with placebo. Between June 13, 2002 and October 28, 2005, 120 evaluable patients were randomly allocated, in double blind fashion, to receive octreotide (62 patients) or placebo (58 patients), prior to the fourth radiation therapy fraction. Octreotide dosing: Octreotide, 100 micrograms subcutaneously on day 1 followed by depot octreotide, 20 milligrams intramuscularly on days 2 and 29. Results: Grade 0, 1, 2 and 3 diarrhea was observed in 17%, 32%, 26% and 26% of patients treated with octreotide and 18%, 34%, 22%, and 26% of patients treated with placebo (P=0.86). Grade 0, 1, 2 and 3 tenesmus was observed in 55%, 30%, 11% and 4% of patients treated with octreotide and 76%, 16%, 4%, and 4% of patients treated with placebo (P=0.04). No other statistically significant differences in toxicity were observed. Conclusions: Octreotide, as administered in this study, did not decrease diarrhea during pelvic radiation therapy. [Table: see text]

17505 Background: A previous trial of 2-CDA as a single agent for therapy of mantle cell lymphoma demonstrated this agent to be efficacious with an overall response rate of 81% (31% complete responses) (Blood 1999 Nov 15; 94:660a). A phase II study of the addition of rituximab to 2-CDA was conducted by the North Central Cancer Treatment Group based on improved outcomes achieved by the addition of rituximab to other regimens active in MCL. Methods: This one-stage phase II study was designed to determine the complete response (CR) or complete response/unconfirmed (CRu) rate. Central pathology confirmation of cyclin D1 positive mantle cell lymphoma was required. No previous therapy for lymphoma was allowed, with the exception of splenectomy. The shedule was rituximab 375 mg/m2 IV day 1; 2-CDA 5 mg/m2/d IV days 1–5 of a 4-week cycle. After 2 of the first 6 patients developed grade 4 neutropenia, subsequent patients received either pegfilgrastim or filgrastim support. Patients received 2–6 cycles of therapy, depending on response. Patients were required to achieve at least a PR after 2 cycles of therapy to continue on protocol therapy. Results: Patient characteristics of all 29 eligible pts: median age: 70 (range: 41–86); 21 male, 8 female; PS 0 (55.2%), PS 1 (41.4%), PS 2 (3.5%); stage II (6.9%), stage III (3.5%), stage IV (89.7%); prior splenectomy (20.7%). The only grade 4 adverse event occurring more than once was neutropenia (20.7%). One patient died of cerebral ischemia in the setting of pneumonia without neutropenia. Response has been determined in 26 pts with 50.0% (95% CI: 30.0–70.0%) achieving a CR, none of whom have relapsed to date. Three patients progressed early at 17, 45, and 46 days, two of whom have died, and a fourth relapsed day 222. 10 pts (34.0%) went on to receive further therapy off study, 5 in less than a PR after 2 cycles, 2 in PR after study therapy, and 1 who went off study for a rash. At last contact, 26 (89.7%) were alive (median follow-up 10.7 months; range: 1–28). Conclusions: Rituximab and cladribine were well tolerated for the treatment of MCL in a group including elderly patients. The response rate may have been underestimated due to the study design, which required at least a PR after 2 cycles to continue therapy. Despite this, 50% achieved a complete remission. [Table: see text]

102 Background: Combination irinotecan and cetuximab is approved for irinotecan-refractory mCRC; it is unknown if the addition of bevacizumab would improve outcomes. We studied the efficacy and safety of CBI compared with CI in patients (pts) with RAS wildtype, irinotecan-refractory mCRC. Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II trial, pts with RAS wildtype mCRC and no prior anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy who failed at least 1 irinotecan-based chemotherapy regimen and received bevacizumab in at least 1 prior line of therapy were randomized 1:1 to irinotecan 180 mg/m2 (or previously tolerated dose), cetuximab 500 mg/m2, and bevacizumab 5 mg/kg vs CI every 2 wks until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models stratified by number of prior lines of therapy and bevacizumab receipt in immediate prior line were performed. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). The study was closed early in January 2018 for reasons related to accrual and funding after enrollment of 36 out of a planned 60 pts. Results: Between July 2015 and December 2017, 36 pts were randomized (19 to CBI, 17 to CI). 34 pts (94%) were treated with 2 or more prior chemotherapy regimens. Baseline characteristics were similar between arms. Median PFS was 9.7 vs 5.5 mo for CBI and CI arms, respectively (log-rank P =0.76; multivariable HR = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.25-1.66). Median OS was 19.7 vs 10.2 mo for CBI and CI (log-rank P= 0.04; multivariable HR = 0.41; 95% CI, 0.15-1.09). ORR was 37% for CBI vs 12% for CI ( P =0.13). Grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 47% of pts receiving CBI vs 35% for CI ( P =0.46). Conclusions: In this prematurely discontinued trial, there were non-significant increases in PFS and ORR and a statistically significant 9.5 mo increase in median OS in favor of CBI compared to CI. Further investigation of CBI for treatment of irinotecan-refractory mCRC is warranted. Clinical trial information: NCT02292758.