Citations

4565 Background: EVP is the preferred 1 st -line regimen for patients (pts) with aUC. EV-related toxicities are often managed with dose adjustments, such as reductions and holds. Analysis of EV monotherapy trials showed consistent survival outcomes despite dose adjustments. We hypothesized that on-treatment EV dose adjustments would not impact survival in these pts. Methods: Pts with aUC treated with EVP in the multisite UNITE study were analyzed. Early dose reductions (DR) and holds were defined as occurring < 9 weeks from EVP start, with the remainder classified as late. Pts with DR at treatment start were excluded. Survival endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from EVP start, assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox models. Multivariable Cox analysis (MVA) included age (≥ 75 vs < 75), ECOG performance status (0-1 vs 2-3), Hgb level (< 10 vs ≥ 10) and liver metastases (present vs not). A time-dependent covariate was used to reduce immortal time bias. Complementary MVA landmark analyses were performed, aligned to the total number of treatment cycles received, with six analyses from cycles 2 to 7. Results: 360 pts from 17 sites were included (median age 70; 78% Caucasian; 76% male; 27% upper tract primary; 35% histology subtype component; 17% with liver metastasis; 78% frontline); median follow-up was 11.7 months (95% CI [10.79, 13.08]). Median number of cycles was 6 in pts with DR and 3 with no DR. Early DRs (100 pts [28%]) and holds (18 pts [5%]) were most commonly due to rash (28% of all early DRs and holds). Late DR (75 pts [21%]) and holds (50 pts [14%]) were most commonly due to neuropathy (52% of all late DRs and holds). Pts with early or late DR had longer PFS and OS vs those who did not (Table); however, there was no significant PFS or OS difference with dose hold vs no hold (PFS HR 0.65, 95%CI (0.40, 1.05), p = 0.08; OS HR 0.70, 95%CI (0.39, 1.27), p=0.24). In landmark analyses, about 50% of pts had DR; no significant difference in PFS or OS was observed at most landmarks, except for longer OS in the DR cohort at cycle 4 (HR 0.53, 95% CI (0.29, 0.98), p = 0.042) and cycle 5 (HR 0.43, 95% CI (0.19, 0.99), p = 0.048). Conclusions: In this real-world retrospective analysis, EVP efficacy was maintained despite DR and dose holds. Survival difference noted in the time-dependent analyses were not consistently reproduced in landmark analyses, suggesting exposure-related selection bias rather than causal effect. Prospective studies are warranted to validate these hypothesis-generating findings. Association of EV DR with PFS/OS (time-dependent analyses). Early DR Late DR DR vs no DR outcomes UVAHR (95% CI), p MVAHR (95% CI), p UVAHR (95% CI), p MVAHR (95% CI), p PFS 0.50 (0.35, 0.72), <.001 0.56 (0.38, 0.84), 0.005 0.32 (0.21, 0.49), <.001 0.36 (0.23, 0.57), <.001 OS 0.51 (0.32, 0.79), 0.003 0.57 (0.35, 0.92), 0.022 0.26 (0.15, 0.45), <.001 0.31 (0.17, 0.55), <.001

4183 Background: High grade neuroendocrine neoplasms (HG-NENs) are treated with platinum doublets mirroring guidelines for small cell lung cancer (SCLC) but recurrences are common and salvage options are limited in efficacy. Cabozantinib (CABO), an inhibitor of VEGFR, MET, and TAM kinases (TYRO3, AXL, and MER) was approved by the FDA for treatment of well differentiated (WD) NENs of both pancreatic and extrapancreatic origins based on the CABINET study (Chan, NEJM 2025). However, its efficacy in the whole spectrum of HG-NEN patients including poorly differentiated disease (PDD) has not been prospectively explored. Methods: This was a single institution, Phase II study of CABO in patients with HG-NENs who had progressed on at least one prior treatment. Key inclusion/exclusion criteria were NENs of any origin except SCLC, high grade by Ki-67 of > 20% or histology consensus, ECOG of < = 1, appropriate hematological parameters and no history of bleeding or active cardiac disease. CABO was given orally starting at 60 mg po daily in 3-week cycles. The primary endpoint of this study was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). A Simon optimal 2-stage design tested the null hypothesis that the true ORR is < = 1% at the type I error rate of 5%, resulting in projected enrollment of up to 32 total patients. Toxicities were graded according to CTCAE v5.0 and response was evaluated according to RECIST v1. Results: All patients have been accrued, with 4/32 patients still on treatment. Median age at diagnosis was 62 years and male to female ratio was 1.46. Origin of tumor was GI in 68.8% of the cases, the rest being thoracic (6.3%), prostate (6.3%) cervical (6.3%) head/neck (3.1%) and unknown (9.4%). Median Ki-67 was 55%, 11 patients had Ki-67 > 70%. Histology was WD-HG in 40% of patients and PDD in 60%. Two patients had mixed PDD/other components (MiNEN). Median PFS in evaluable patients was 4.01 months [95% CI 1.61 to 9.30] and mOS was 9.89 mo [95% CI 6.73 to 18.96]. Three patients so far (9.3%) have had partial response as best response (PDD-colon, WD-pancreas and PDD-cervical) while 19/32 (59.4%) patients have had stable disease as best response so far (disease control rate 68.8%). Five (15.6%) patients have received more than 10 treatment cycles. The three longest treated patients had WD-pancreas (23 and 17 cycles) and PDD-unknown (12 cycles). One patient had eventual resection of a metastatic site and is currently without evidence of disease. Three patients withdrew from the trial because of toxicities (shortness of breath, GI bleeding, thromboembolism). Twenty-six patients have expired. Conclusions: CABO monotherapy showed efficacy in some HG-NEN patients with not just WD but also the very aggressive PDD histology. No new side effects to the ones previously described for this agent were noted. Supported by Exelixis and a Siteman investment program grant. Clinical trial information: NCT04412629 .

4178 Background: In the CABINET trial, CABO significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) compared to placebo (PB) in patients (pts) with advanced, previously treated extrapancreatic NET (epNET) or pancreatic NET (pNET) (Chan et al., NEJM, 2025). Here we report outcomes according to functional status based on NET hormone secretion. Methods: Pts with locally advanced or metastatic epNET or pNET were randomized 2:1 in separate cohorts to receive CABO 60 mg daily vs PB. Eligibility included progression by RECIST within 12 months (mo) before registration, ≥ 1 prior systemic therapy not including somatostatin analogs (SSA). Pts with functional NET due to hormone secretion and non-functional NET were included. In this post hoc subgroup analysis, we analyzed PFS by blinded independent central review and adverse events for pts receiving CABO vs PB based on functional status. Cox regression models were used with stratification on primary tumor site (epNET vs pNET). Subset analyses to evaluate treatment arm differences were conducted in pts with functional and non-functional tumors. Due to small numbers, separate results for those with unknown functional status are not included. Results: Of the total 298 pts enrolled in both cohorts, 74 had a functional NET (CABO, n = 47; PB, n = 27); 179 had a non-functional NET (CABO, n = 123; PB, n = 56); 45 had unknown functional status (CABO, n = 28; PB, n = 17). For functional NET, primary tumor sites were GI tract (n = 50; 68%), pancreas (n = 15; 20%), unknown (n = 4; 5%), lung (n = 3; 4%), and thymus (n = 2; 3%). Secreted hormones that were reported included serotonin (55%), somatostatin (18%), gastrin (16%), glucagon (4%), insulin (4%), ACTH (1%), and vasoactive intestinal peptide (1%). For non-functional NET, primary tumor sites were pancreas (n = 75; 42%), GI tract (n = 42; 23%), lung (n = 30; 17%), unknown (n = 17; 9%), thymus (n = 8; 4%), and other (n = 7; 4%). Concurrent SSA was received by 91% and 53% of pts with functional and non-functional NET, respectively. In both subgroups, CABO was associated with improved PFS compared to PB (for functional NET: stratified hazard ratio [sHR], 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.20-0.82, P = 0.012; for non-functional NET: sHR, 0.26; 95% CI: 0.17-0.41, P < 0.001). The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) attributed to CABO vs PB in pts with functional NET included hypertension (21% vs 11%), diarrhea (9% vs 11%), and fatigue (2% vs 15%); in pts with non-functional NET, grade 3/4 AEs included hypertension (21% vs 4%) and fatigue (18% vs 4%). Conclusions: Subset analyses of the CABINET trial suggest that CABO is an effective treatment option for pts with functional and non-functional epNET or pNET. Efficacy and safety results for pts with functional or non-functional NET treated with CABO are consistent with results for the entire trial. Clinical trial information: NCT03375320 .

4173 Background: [ 212 Pb]VMT-α-NET is an alpha-particle radiation-delivering agent targeted to somatostatin receptor type 2 (SSTR2)-expressing tumors. Here, we present safety and efficacy results from the dose-finding phase 1/2a clinical trial (NCT05636618). Methods: This phase 1/2a dose-escalation study uses a Bayesian algorithm to identify an optimal dose of [ 212 Pb]VMT-α-NET for participants with advanced, well-differentiated NETs expressing SSTR2. Eligible participants must have unresectable or metastatic disease, documented radiologic progression following at least one prior systemic treatment, and evidence of SSTR2 expression (Krenning Score ³2) in ≥1 lesion confirmed on an FDA-approved somatostatin receptor PET scan. Patients previously treated with systemic peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) are excluded from enrollment. During the dose-finding phase, participants may receive up to four administrations of [ 212 Pb]VMT-α-NET at their assigned dose level, and they are monitored for dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) for 42 days and safety throughout the study. Efficacy is evaluated by investigators according to RECIST criteria v1.1. Dosimetry is included as a supportive analysis. Results: As of the 10-Dec-2025 data cut-off (DCO), 56 participants had been enrolled across Cohorts 1, 2, and 3 and received at least one dose of [ 212 Pb]VMT-α-NET: 2 participants in Cohort 1 (2.5 mCi), 46 in Cohort 2 (5 mCi), and 8 in Cohort 3 (6 mCi). No dose-limiting toxicities, grade 5 adverse events, treatment-related discontinuations, serious renal events, dysphagia, or clinically meaningful treatment-related myelosuppression were observed. The median follow-up for all treated participants was 40 weeks (range 6–97). Efficacy has been summarized in this abstract for 25 participants (2 in Cohort 1 and 23 in Cohort 2). Nineteen of these 25 participants remained progression-free at the time of the DCO, with a median efficacy follow-up of 49 weeks (range 6–97). In Cohort 2, investigators observed RECIST v1.1 objective responses in 9 of 23 participants (39%), including 8 confirmed responses. Both participants in Cohort 1 continued to exhibit stable disease after two years of follow-up. Updated safety for all participants and updated efficacy for participants with sufficient maturity beyond the 25 summarized here will be presented at the congress. Conclusions: Treatment with [ 212 Pb]VMT-α-NET continues to demonstrate a favorable safety profile across all treated participants (n = 56) and shows signs of sustained efficacy at the 2.5 mCi and 5 mCi dose levels. The therapy has been well-tolerated with no observed dose-limiting toxicities or serious treatment-related adverse outcomes. Based on these encouraging safety and efficacy findings, the study is ongoing, and enrollment into Cohort 3 (6 mCi) remains active. Clinical trial information: NCT05636618 .

4122 Background: BTCs are rare and aggressive malignancies. The first-line standard of care regimen for advanced BTC (aBTC) is gemcitabine (GEM), cisplatin, and an immune checkpoint inhibitor. Although FOLFOX is a preferred second-line treatment, it is limited by neuropathy. Nal-IRI contains IRI free base in liposome nanoparticles, which shelter IRI from conversion to its active metabolite (SN-38) and increase intratumoral SN-38 compared with IRI alone. The NAPOLI-1 trial of FU/LV/nal-IRI vs. FU/LV in second-line advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma showed an overall survival (OS) benefit. The NIFTY trial (South Korea) demonstrated median OS (mOS) benefit of FU/LV/nal-IRI over FU/LV in a second-line aBTC population (8.6 vs. 5.3 months [mo], HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.48-0.95); however, the NALIRICC trial (Germany) did not (6.9 vs. 8.2 mo, HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.68-1.72). We sought to characterize second-line FU/LV/nal-IRI efficacy in US patients (pts) with second-line aBTC. Methods: This was a single-arm, open-label, multicenter phase II study of pts with aBTC previously treated with GEM/platinum chemotherapy. Pts received nal-IRI 70 mg/m 2 IV over 90 minutes, LV 400 mg/m 2 IV over 30 minutes every 14 days, and FU 2400 mg/m 2 IV over 46 hours every 14 days. The primary objective was to determine progression-free survival rate at 4 mo (PFS 4mo ) using RECIST v. 1.1 criteria. Median PFS reported for pts receiving second-line 5-FU doublet chemotherapy was 3 mo with a PFS of 30%. FU/LV/nal-IRI was of interest if it could increase the PFS 4mo to 50% or higher. Using a one-sided α of 0.05 and 80% power, 17 of 39 evaluable pts had to be progression-free at 4 mo to detect a difference in PFS 4mo between 30% and 50%. Results: Forty-eight pts were enrolled: median age 64.5 years; 69% women; 27% gallbladder primary; 54% intra- and 19% extrahepatic. Ten pts came off study due to toxicity without disease progression before 4 mo on study and were replaced to evaluate the PFS 4mo endpoint. Of 38 evaluable pts, 18 pts (PFS 4mo 47%) were alive and progression-free at 4 mo, meeting the primary endpoint. With a median follow-up of 7.1 mo, median time to disease progression or study discontinuation due to toxicity for all pts was 2.3 mo (95% CI 1.8-4.6, PFS 4mo 38%), and for pts evaluable for the primary endpoint, median PFS was 3.5 mo (95% CI 1.8-5.5). Five pts (10%) had PFS beyond 12 mo. mOS for all pts was 7.9 mo (95% CI 5.7-11.7). Of 41 evaluable pts, the response rate was 2% (1 PR), and the disease control rate was 54%. Adverse events (AEs) were consistent with known toxicities from the FU/LV/nal-IRI regimen. Conclusions: FU/LV/nal-IRI is an effective second-line regimen for aBTC in US pts. There was significant early toxicity as 21% of pts came off study due to AEs before 4 mo. Correlative studies, including longitudinal analyses of circulating tumor DNA using banked blood specimens, are planned (NCT04005339). Clinical trial information: NCT04005339 .

11502 Background: To report results from the open-label alveolar soft part sarcoma (ASPS) cohort of the phase III APROMISS trial (NCT03016819) evaluating Catequentinib hydrochloride (AL3818), an oral multitargeted receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in adults with advanced or metastatic ASPS. Methods: Adult patients with pathologic and molecularly confirmed advanced ASPS, either treatment-naive or previously treated (excluding cediranib), were enrolled in the open-label, non-randomized ASPS cohort of the phase III APROMISS trial conducted across the United States, Asia, and Europe. Catequentinib hydrochloride was administered orally at 12 mg once daily in 21-day cycles (14 days on/7 days off) until disease progression, toxicity, or death. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) assessed per RECIST by Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) (predefined threshold: 31%). Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR) with a predefined target of =/>6 months, progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: From July 2017 to August 2022, a total of 56 patients entered the trial; 56 patients were evaluable for the primary endpoint. Median (m-) age was 29.5 years (range: 18 – 66), with 24 female and 32 male. Best overall response included 1/56 complete response (1.8%), 14/56 partial responses (25.0%), 36/56 stable disease (64.3%), and 3/56 (5.4%) progressive disease. RECIST ORR by BICR was 26.8% (95% CI, 15.8–40.3); m-DOR was 22.57 months (95%CI: 10.38-NE). The study data was collected close to 8 years for all patients. mPFS was 18.33 months (95% CI, 14.19–23.13), with 6- and 12-month progression-free rates of 88.77% (95% CI, 76.68–94.79) and 65.54% (95% CI, 50.42–77.06), respectively. mOS was 59.27 months (95% CI, 44.09–NE), with 6- and 12-month overall survival rates of 94.64% (95% CI, 84.30–98.24) and 90.81% (95% CI, 79.30–96.08), respectively. Overall, 27/56 (48.2%) patients experienced grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events, most commonly diarrhea (50.0%), hypertension (44.6%), fatigue (37.5%), nausea (35.7%), and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (30.4%); one patient (1.8%) had a grade 5 event (respiratory failure). Conclusions: Catequentinib hydrochloride demonstrated meaningful antitumor activity and durable responses in adults with advanced ASPS. Despite the ORR of 26.8% slightly below the predefined 31% threshold, disease control was prolonged, with a m-DOR exceeding 22 months. Favorable PFS and OS outcomes, together with a manageable safety profile, support its clinical benefit in this ultra-rare sarcoma. Clinical trial information: NCT03016819 .

11078 Background: Unmet essential needs, such as food, transportation, and housing insecurity, can create barriers to timely cancer treatment. Delayed or prolonged courses of definitive radiotherapy (RT) can compromise cancer outcomes like recurrence and survival. There are limited prospective data testing interventions to improve timely cancer treatment completion by meeting essential needs. Methods: We conducted a pragmatic single-arm pilot study testing an enhanced financial assistance intervention for unmet needs during RT. Eligibility criteria included adults with a cancer diagnosis and unmet social needs (via social risk screening and/or social worker evaluation) who were prescribed or undergoing a course of RT with > 10 fractions remaining. Participants received standard institutional assistance (e.g., limited support for travel/lodging with strict eligibility criteria) plus the enhanced assistance intervention, including needs assessments prior to and during RT and up to $2000/patient of tailored unconditional monetary transfer via gift cards for all essential needs identified. The primary outcome was delay-free completion of RT (DFC: completing all prescribed RT fractions and delaying < 5 fractions). The study was powered (power = 80%, 1-sided alpha = 0.2 for this pilot study) to detect a 10-percentage point increase in % DFC relative to a historic benchmark of 83% (based on similar patients from our institution), with required sample size of N = 33. Due to delays in gift card administration (on average ~2 weeks after consent), we also present per protocol analysis, limited to patients who had > 10 fractions remaining after first receiving financial assistance. Post-hoc analyses using generalized linear mixed models evaluated percentages of delayed fractions prior to and after an individual’s receipt of financial assistance. Results: 35 met inclusion criteria and were approached, 33/35 enrolled. Participants received median assistance of $1800 ($700-2000) and had a median of 27 RT fractions after consent (range: 12-35) and 17 (3-34) after receiving assistance. In the overall cohort, 1 patient did not complete RT and 2 patients had ≥5 delayed fractions, leading to 30/33 achieving DFC (90.9%, 80% CI = 83.9 – 100), significantly higher than the 83% benchmark. In the per protocol analysis, 27/28 achieved DFC (96.4%, 80% CI = 89.7–100, P = .037). Among the 27 patients who started RT prior to receiving assistance, mixed model analysis showed more delayed fractions prior to (7.1%) vs. after (3.0%) receiving assistance (OR 2.84, 95% CI = 1.43-5.80, P = .003). Conclusions: In this prospective pilot study, a tailored enhanced financial assistance intervention for unmet essential needs led to improved delay-free completion of RT over a historic benchmark. Further analysis on patient-reported quality of life and financial toxicity will be reported in the future. Clinical trial information: NCT06582849 .

Estimates of fibromyalgia prevalence vary widely worldwide due to differences in diagnostic criteria, study methodology, and population characteristics. Accurate estimates are essential to inform population-level surveillance, guide resource allocation, and highlight disparities in disease recognition and access to care. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the global prevalence of fibromyalgia in the general population, and secondarily to identify factors moderating prevalence variation and to assess prevalence in defined at-risk subpopulations. Pooled prevalence estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the inverse variance heterogeneity model with Freeman–Tukey transformation. Subgroup analyses were performed by sex, diagnostic criteria, country, and other study characteristics, and meta-regression assessed moderators including publication year and Human Development Index (HDI). Of 21,645 records identified, 1,728 underwent full-text review and 882 studies were included in the final analysis. Across 38 countries and 30,070,032 individuals (188 studies), the pooled fibromyalgia prevalence in the general population was 1.40% (95% CI, 0.49–2.47), with substantial heterogeneity (I 2 = 100%) and very low certainty of evidence. Among at-risk subpopulations (9,771,123 participants; 768 studies), prevalence was markedly higher in autoimmune and inflammatory conditions, such as chronic urticaria (37.1%), interstitial cystitis (30.8%), systemic sclerosis (20.6%), celiac disease (20.5%), and inflammatory bowel disease (19.9%), and elevated in chronic pain, rheumatologic, and post-infection cohorts. Meta-regression identified publication year (β = 0.008, P < .001) and HDI (β = 0.725, P = .002) as significant moderators of prevalence. In conclusion, fibromyalgia affects 1% to 2% of the global population, with substantially higher rates in at-risk subpopulations. Temporal and socioeconomic trends emphasize diagnostic inconsistency and global disparities in care.

Importance Ischemia-reperfusion injury contributes to graft dysfunction after liver transplant. Hypothermic oxygenated perfusion (HOPE) has been shown to improve liver function, but its benefit in extended criteria donors in a US population remains unclear. Objective To assess whether back-to-base portal-venous HOPE impacts outcomes after liver transplant in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants The Bridge to HOPE Trial is a multicenter, randomized, open-label trial with 1-year follow-up. The study took place at 15 US liver transplant centers and patients were enrolled between January 2021 and May 2023. Central assessment of complications and cholangiograms for nonanastomotic biliary strictures (NAS) was blinded to treatment arm. Participants included 219 recipients of extended-criteria donor livers after brain death (DBD) and after circulatory death (DCD) who were randomized 1:1 to HOPE after static cold storage (SCS) (n = 109) or SCS only (n = 110). Randomization was performed after liver inspection and acceptance for transplant. Data were analyzed from December 2024 to July 2025. Intervention After SCS and transport, livers underwent portal-venous HOPE until implant, using the VitaSmart HOPE System. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary efficacy end point was early allograft dysfunction (EAD). Other main outcomes included model for early allograft function (MEAF) score, hospital length of stay (LOS), patient and graft survival, and biliary complications. Additional post hoc analyses were performed. Results Overall, 219 patients (82 female [37.4%] and 137 male[62.6%]) were included (DCD, 57 of 219 [26%]) with 97% (212 of 219) completing 12-month follow-up. EAD incidence was 20.2% (22 of 109) with HOPE vs 37.3% (41 of 110) with SCS (rate difference, −17.1%; 95% CI, −27.2 to −7.0; noninferiority P &amp;lt; .001; superiority P = .005). HOPE treatment led to significantly lower MEAF mean (SD) scores (HOPE group, 4.28 [1.75]; control group, 4.82 [1.85]; mean difference, −0.54; 95% CI, −1.02 to −0.06; P = .03) and shorter median LOS (hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.01-1.73; P = .04). NAS on imaging and 1-year survivals were comparable between groups (patients: HOPE group, 106 of 109 [97.2%] vs SCS, 106 of 110 [96.4%]; graft: HOPE group, 104 of 109 [95.4%] vs SCS, 102 of 110 [92.7%]). Post hoc analyses showed numerically less graft loss due to NAS after HOPE (4 vs 1) and less major complications (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥IIIa) per patient, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance Back-to-base portal-venous HOPE was compared with SCS alone for extended risk DBD and DCD livers. The HOPE approach was safe and associated with reduced EAD, MEAF score, and LOS. These findings support the use of HOPE as a pragmatic strategy to improve early posttransplant outcomes. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05045794 .