Citations

170 Background: Pembro had antitumor activity as monotherapy in pretreated advanced mCRPC (KEYNOTE-028; KEYNOTE-199). KEYNOTE-365 (NCT02861573) is a phase 1b/2 umbrella study testing combinations in mCRPC; we report early results from cohort B combining pembro + docetaxel in mCRPC. Methods: Pts who failed or became intolerant to ≥4 weeks of abi or enza in the pre-chemotherapy mCRPC state received pembro 200 mg IV with docetaxel 75 mg/m2 IV Q3W plus prednisone 5 mg orally twice daily. Pts also progressed within 6 months prior to screening as determined by either PSA progression or radiologic progression in bone or soft tissue. Response was evaluated by PSA levels Q3W and imaging Q9W for first year and Q12W thereafter. Primary end points: safety and PSA response rate (confirmed PSA decline ≥50%). Key secondary end points: investigator-determined ORR (RECIST v1.1), disease control rate (DCR: CR+PR+SD ≥6 mo), time to PSA progression, rPFS, and OS. Results: 72 pts (median age 68 years; PD-L1+ 29%; visceral disease 36%; measurable disease 50%) initiated pembro + docetaxel. Median (95% CI) follow-up was 10 (8-12) mo. Efficacy is outlined in table below. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 69 (96%) pts; most frequent (≥30%) were alopecia (43%), fatigue (40%), and diarrhea (39%). Grade 3-5 treatment-related AEs occurred in 27 (38%) pts, including 2 deaths due to treatment-related AEs (pneumonitis). Conclusions: Combination of pembro + docetaxel/prednisone has activity in pts with mCRPC previously failing anti-hormonal therapy. Observed safety profile for the combination was consistent with known safety profile of each component. Clinical trial information: NCT02861573. [Table: see text]

631 Background: For most clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) patients with early stage disease, surgical resection offers definitive cure. However, for the small percentage of tumors that metastasize, analyzing gene expression profiles from the primary site at the time of nephrectomy can serve as a model to understand the molecular aberrations behind a metastatic phenotype. Differences in gene expression profiles between patients with Stage I and II ccRCC who experience metastasis versus patients who maintain cure after surgery may help elucidate significant molecular targets and stratify patients at higher risk for metastasis. Methods: Nineteen Stage I and twenty Stage II ccRCC tumors preserved in FFPE blocks after nephrectomy were included in this study. Patients were matched for age, gender, tumor size and grade. In both stages, approximately half the patients that experienced metastasis within 5 years of surgery were part of the experimental group, whereas the control group had > 5 years of follow-up without evidence of disease. Extracted RNA for Stage I patients was sequenced using Illumina TruSeq RNA Access Library. Gene counts were assessed by ht-seq counts and differential expression using DESeq2. Significant genes found were validated in the Stage II group using RT-qPCR. Results: In the Stage I experimental group, statistically significant upregulation of several genes associated with unfavorable prognosis in RCC were found: COL1A1, NUMBL, and STEAP3. Random forest classification accurately separated Stage I control versus experimental patients based on expression of COL1A1. Affected genes were consistent with molecular changes seen in TCGA analysis. In the Stage II group, a double-blinded analysis correctly identified the clinical outcome for the majority of the patients using qPCR expression of COL1A1, NUMBL, and STEAP3. Conclusions: Differences in gene expression profiles harbored in the primary site of early stage ccRCC may be employed to predict patients at high risk for developing metastasis. Validating these findings in a larger study carries the potential to better understand mechanisms of metastasis and identify an at risk cohort of patients with early stage disease.