Citations

LBA22 Background: Tumor-informed circulating tumor (ct) DNA testing is recognized as a powerful predictor of CRC recurrence. However, the benefit of systemic therapy to prevent or delay clinical recurrence in patients (pts) with molecular recurrence after curative surgery remains uncertain. Methods: Pts with CRC who had undergone curative resection of primary and/or metastatic sites + standard of care (SoC) adjuvant treatment if applicable, were enrolled in ALTAIR study if they (1) prospectively tested positive for ctDNA using a clinically validated, personalized assay (Signatera™, Natera, Inc.) within 3 months before enrollment and (2) had no recurrence on radiological (CT) imaging. Pts were randomized to receive FTD/TPI or placebo for 6 months. CT and ctDNA analyses were conducted every 2 months in the first year, every 3 months in the second year, and every 6 months in the third year. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS), with secondary endpoints including ctDNA clearance, overall survival (OS), and adverse events. The study assumed a median DFS of 8 months in the placebo group, an HR of 0.667 for the FTD/TPI group, 0.05 significance level, 0.80 power, 2-year enrollment, and 1-year follow-up, requiring 240 pts and 190 DFS events. Baseline ctDNA levels were evaluated by mean tumor molecules (MTM)/ml. Results: Between July 2020 and June 2023, 243 pts were enrolled and randomized to FTD/TPI (n=122) or placebo (n=121). Baseline characteristics were balanced, and 96.3% of pts received SoC treatment postoperatively. FTD/TPI group had a median DFS of 9.30 months vs. 5.55 months in the placebo group, but this difference did not reach statistical significance in the primary population (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.60-1.05; P = 0.107). The FTD/TPI benefit was highly significant in resected oligometastatic stage IV pts as shown in Table. The baseline MTM/ml levels were significantly higher in resected oligometastatic Stage IV pts vs non-Stage IV (0.68 vs 0.32, P = 0.024). Overall, FTD/TPI benefit was significantly pronounced with higher MTM/mL, with linear benefit observed with increasing MTM/mL values at the enrollment time point. OS data remain immature, with 24 events reported across both arms. Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 73.0% of the FTD/TPI arm versus 3.3% in the placebo arm, with no new safety signals. Conclusions: Although statistical significance was not reached in the primary population, FTD/TPI showed clinically meaningful DFS benefit in pts with resected oligometastatic disease and a trend towards increasing DFS benefits with increasing MTM/mL values. Clinical trial information: NCT04457297 . Number Baseline MTM/ml Median DFS FTD/TPI(months) Placebo (months) Primary population 243 0.40 9.30 5.55 HR, 0.79 P = 0.107 Stage IV 66 0.68 9.76 3.96 HR, 0.53 P = 0.012 Non-Stage IV 177 0.32 9.26 6.05 HR, 0.86 P = 0.378

LBA14 Background: CALGB/SWOG 80702 previously showed that the addition of celecoxib to standard adjuvant chemotherapy with FOLFOX did not significantly improve disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with stage III colon cancer. Here, we evaluated the prognostic and predictive value of ctDNA in identifying a subpopulation of patients who may benefit from celecoxib. Methods: In the subset of patients with adequate biospecimens who participated in CALGB/SWOG 80702, a randomized phase III trial of 3 versus 6 months of adjuvant 5-FU, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) +/- celecoxib, ctDNA assessment was performed using a clinically validated, tumor-informed 16-plex mPCR-NGS assay (Signatera(TM), Natera, Inc.) after surgery and before the start of adjuvant therapy (baseline). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to describe the distribution of survival time based on ctDNA positivity and log-rank testing was performed. Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine unadjusted associations between ctDNA positivity and disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Two-sided P values equal to or less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant, except for interaction P values (tested with a likelihood ratio). Results: In total, 1,011 of the 2,526 patients who participated in 80702 had ctDNA testing results from baseline; 189 were ctDNA positive (18.7%). ctDNA positivity associated with male sex, higher T stage, and N2 (versus N1) stage. ctDNA positivity was significantly associated with worse DFS (hazard ratio [HR] 6.52 [95% confident interval (CI) 5.09-8.34; p<0.0001] and OS (HR 6.28 [95% CI 4.63-8.51; p<0.0001]). Three-year DFS was 86.6% in ctDNA-negative cases and 36.8% in ctDNA-positive cases. Among patients who were ctDNA negative, celecoxib use was not significantly associated with worse DFS as compared to placebo (HR 0.75 [95% CI 0.54-1.05; p=0.095]) with a three-year DFS of 87.7% versus 85.5%, respectively. Among ctDNA-positive patients, celecoxib significantly improved DFS compared to placebo (HR 0.59 [95% CI 0.42-0.85; p=0.004]) with a three-year DFS of 44.1% versus 26.6% (P interaction = 0.25). Similar results were seen for overall survival with a hazard ratio of 0.86 (95% CI 0.56-1.33; p=0.49) for ctDNA negative cases and 0.63 (95% CI 0.41-0.96; p=0.028) for ctDNA-positive cases for celecoxib versus placebo (P interaction = 0.28). Conclusion: In a randomized phase III adjuvant therapy trial for stage III colon cancer, ctDNA was highly prognostic of DFS and OS. ctDNA positivity also appeared predictive of the benefit of adjuvant celecoxib for DFS and OS. These results suggest a potential role for ctDNA in determining which patients should consider celecoxib in addition to standard FOLFOX adjuvant therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT01150045 .

678 Background: Financial toxicity (FT) represents a challenge for cancer patients that impacts treatment decisions, patient satisfaction, and quality of life. Social determinants of health (SDoH) screening may predict who is at risk of FT and could potentially benefit from financial interventions. Methods: This is a retrospective study of all cancer patients presenting to Mayo Clinic sites between Sept 2023 – Jun 2024. Patients completed SDoH questionnaires and were given risk scores of Low Risk, Medium Risk, and High Risk for SDoH categories: Financial Strain Risk, Transportation Risk, and Food Insecurity Risk. Patient financial data including active debt amounts, insurance coverage, and financial aid were collected. Patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) were compared to those with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNET) and patients with other cancers (Others). Categorical variables were compared with Pearson's Chi-squared test, continuous variables with Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test. P values < 0.05 were considered significant. Results: Data was obtained from 88,039 patients, 2,607 of whom had PDAC and 449 had PNET. Compared to PDAC patients, PNET patients and Others were more likely to have Medium/High risk scores for Financial Strain Risk (6% vs 6.5% and 8.5%, respectively) and Food Insecurity (1.7% vs 3.8% and 3.2%) (Table). There was no statistically significant difference in median medical debt and need of financial assistance between the groups. Among PDAC patients, there were differences in distributions among race, primary language spoken, and patient electronic record access depending on Financial Risk categories. African American patients had the greatest proportion of Medium/High risk (12.9%) compared to Asian (4.4%) and White (5.8%) patients (P<0.001). Among patients with English as their primary language, 64.9% had Low Risk scores compared to 27.7% with other primary languages (P<0.001). Patients with electronic record access were more likely to report High Risk scores (6.9%) compared to those without access (1.6%). Conclusions: Per patient responses collected, PDAC patients presenting to our center have lower risk of financial strain and similar medical debt levels compared to the remainder of cancer patients. Among PDAC patients, higher financial strain was experienced by non-whites (7.9% vs 5.8%). Diagnosis PDAC (N=2607) PNET (N=449) Other (N=84983) p value Current Financial Risk (Grouped) < 0.001 - Low Risk 1662 (63.8%) 304 (67.7%) 59298 (69.8%) - Medium/High Risk 157 (6.0%) 29 (6.5%) 7209 (8.5%) - Unknown/Missing 788 (30.2%) 116 (25.8%) 18476 (21.7%) Food Insecurity Risk < 0.001 - Low Risk 1764 (67.7%) 308 (68.6%) 63235 (74.4%) - Medium Risk 45 (1.7%) 17 (3.8%) 2703 (3.2%) - Unknown/Missing 798 (30.6%) 124 (27.6%) 19045 (22.4%) Median Active Debt in USD 1102.230 1020.010 1141.135 0.593

668 Background: After the approval of 177Lu DOTATATE, a new generation of radiopharmaceutical therapies (RPT) utilizing alpha-emitting radiometals is being developed as front-line therapies for advanced NETs with the hope of higher clinical efficacy. In this Phase I study, [ 212 Pb]VMT-α-NET, a novel targeted alpha radionuclide therapy (TAT) to SSTR2, is being evaluated in SSTR2-expressing NETs tumors in patients with no prior PRRT treatment. Here we present interim safety and the first efficacy results from dose escalation cohorts 1 and 2. Methods: In this first-in-human dose-escalation study, safety, PK, and efficacy of [ 212 Pb]VMT-α-NET were investigated in a population of well-differentiated adult NETs of any grade which progressed after prior standard of care therapy as assessed by RECIST v1.1 (NCT05636618). No patient may have received prior 177 Lu-DOTATATE or PRRT. The dose escalation design includes four cohorts, 3 mCi, 5 mCi, 7.5 mCi and 10 mCi based on a Bayesian modified toxicity probability interval (mTPI-2) design. Subjects in cohorts 1 and 2 underwent dosimetry evaluations using the therapeutic surrogate [ 203 Pb]VMT-a-NET. Therapeutic [ 212 Pb]VMT-a-NET was administered for 4 cycles Q8W in combination with reno-protective amino acids. The DLT assessment period is defined as the first 6 weeks of cycle 1. The primary objectives include the evaluation of safety and tolerability, the PK and RP2D of [ 212 Pb]VMT-a-NET as well as ORR as assessed by RECIST 1.1 criteria. Results: The current data cut occurred on September 19 th , 2024. A total of 9 patients were enrolled (2 in cohort 1 and 7 in cohort 2). Median exposure for cohort 1 was 2.5 mCi (2.5 mCi, 2.5 mCi) and for cohort 2 was 5.1 mCi (4.7 mCi, 5.2 mCi). No DLTs were observed. Two grade 3 AEs occurred in Cohort 2 (diarrhea, syncope). The most frequent related TEAE were alopecia, fatigue, anemia, lymphopenia and nausea (all grade 1 or 2). One subject in Cohort 2 was discontinued due to progressive disease. Landmark PFS at 9 months is 89%. ORR is not yet mature and will be shown at the time of the meeting. Safety Monitoring Committee (SMC) meeting was held on July 17 th , 2024, recommended dose escalation to cohort 3 at 7.5 mCi. No nephrotoxicity was reported in either cohort. Conclusions: [ 212 Pb]VMT-α-NET is safe up to 185 MBq (5 mCi) dose level, and the SMC supported dose escalate to cohort 3 at 277.5 MBq (7.5 mCi) following a mandated FDA review in fall. Cohort 2 remains open for dose level expansion. Early efficacy results demonstrate encouraging progression-free survival. Clinical trial information: NCT05636618 .

666 Background: In the phase 3 CABINET trial (NCT03375320), cabozantinib (CABO) significantly prolonged median progression-free survival (PFS) compared to placebo (PB) in patients with advanced, previously treated, progressive extrapancreatic NET (epNET) [HR 0.38 (95% CI, 0.25-0.59, P<0.0001)] and pancreatic NET (pNET) [HR 0.23 (95% CI, 0.12-0.42, P<0.0001)] (Chan et al., NEJM, 2024). In this analysis, we focus on outcomes of patients with epNET arising in the GI tract. Methods: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic epNET or pNET were randomized 2:1 in separate cohorts to receive CABO 60 mg daily vs PB. The epNET cohort included patients with tumors arising in the GI tract (not including pancreas), lung, unknown primary, and other rare primary sites. In this subgroup analysis of the epNET cohort, patients with GI NET were included. Eligibility included progression by RECIST within 12 months (mo) prior to registration, ≥ 1 prior systemic therapy. Primary endpoint: PFS by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints: objective response rate, overall survival, safety. Results: 116 of the 203 patients in the epNET cohort had GI NET (CABO, n=70; PB, n=46). Median age was 66 yrs; females: 46%; G1/G2/G3/unknown grade: 35%/57%/6%/2%. ECOG performance status: 0/1-2: 43%/57%. White race: 86%. The most common primary tumor locations were ileum/cecum (54%), small intestine with location not specified (20%); non-cecum colon or rectum (11%), stomach (4%); duodenum (3%); jejunum and nonspecified midgut site (3% each). Prior systemic therapies included somatostatin analogs (SSA) (100%), everolimus (59%); Lu-177 dotatate (77%); temozolomide +/- capecitabine (16%). In patients with GI NET, CABO was associated with improved PFS by BICR compared to PB (stratified HR, 0.50; 95% CI: 0.28-0.88, 1-sided stratified log-rank P=0.007). Median PFS with cabozantinib was 8.5 mo (95% CI, 6.0-16.7) compared to 5.6 mo (95% CI, 3.9-11.0) with PB. CABO demonstrated potential benefit in patients with midgut GI NET and across clinical factors including grade, functional status related to hormone secretion, concurrent SSA use, and prior therapy with Lu-177 dotatate or everolimus. The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events attributed to therapy with CABO included hypertension (19%), diarrhea (13%), fatigue (10%). Conclusions: CABO is associated with improvement in PFS compared to PB in patients with advanced GI NET. Potential benefit was observed across clinical factors including grade, functional status, concurrent SSA, and prior treatment. The safety profile for CABO in patients with GI NET is consistent with that previously reported. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; U10CA180820 (ECOG-ACRIN), U10CA180868 (NRG Oncology), U10CA180888 (SWOG); Exelixis; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . Clinical trial information: NCT03375320 .

662 Background: Alkylating-based chemotherapy (ALK) is one of the main treatments used in patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs). Its use has been associated with an increased risk of grade progression and acquisition of a hypermutator phenotype, associated with frequent alterations of the mismatch repair (MMR) genes. This suggests a potential benefit of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) that are otherwise ineffective in ALK-naïve PanNETs, which are mostly hypomutated. We aimed to describe the efficacy of ICI in patients with advanced PanNET pretreated with ALK. Methods: We assembled an international retrospective cohort of patients with advanced PanNET who received at least one cycle of ICI, and who had previously received at least 3 months of ALK. Patients with poorly-differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma were excluded. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) and the secondary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR). The impact of tumor mutational burden (TMB, high being defined by >10 mut/Mb) and MMR alterations (mutations or IHC) was explored. Results: We included 39 patients (median age 58.7, male sex 62%). All PanNETs were progressive at baseline and presented a median of 3 (IQR, 2-4) metastatic sites. Tumors were predominantly classified as G2 (47%) or G3 (42%), with a median Ki-67 of 18.5% (IQR, 12-35). 23/27 patients with tumor tissue or ctDNA NGS testing had high TMB (median, 35 mut/Mb; IQR, 24-106) and 12/22 had MMR alterations. Patients had previously received an average of 14 cycles (IQR, 7-25) of ALK (temozolomide 78%, streptozotocin 18%, dacarbazine 4%), which had yielded objective response in 72% of cases. In addition, patients had received a median of 4 (IQR, 3-5) other treatments (including platinum drugs in 80% and PRRT in 51%). ICI mainly consisted in an anti-PDL1/PD1 + anti-CTLA4 combination (85%) or a monotherapy (15%), with a median of 3 (IQR, 2-8) cycles. The ORR was 18% and the disease control rate was 46%. Median PFS was 2.8 months (95% CI, 0.62-4.96) and 6-month PFS rate was 31%. 19% of patients had grade 3-4 toxicity. Patients with high TMB had higher ORR (30% vs. 0%, p=0.03) and longer median PFS (4.9 vs. 2.1 months, p=0.004) compared with patients with low/unknown TMB. Patients with altered MMR had higher ORR (42% vs. 7%, p=0.02) and longer median PFS (8.9 vs. 2.5 months, p=0.014) compared with patients with no/unknown MMR alterations. Conclusions: While ICI shows limited efficacy in unselected patients with advanced PanNETs pretreated with ALK, it may be an effective treatment option in case of high TMB and MMR alterations.

484 Background: The histopathological growth patterns (HGPs) of liver metastasis reflect the complicated and varied interactions between tumor cells and the host microenvironment. We studied HGPs of gastric cancer liver metastasis (GCLM) and sought to predict them using radiomic and clinical variables. Methods: Hepatectomy was performed in 62 patients with GCLM at our university hospital between 2011 and 2021. HGPs were evaluated according to international consensus guidelines, and were classified as either desmoplastic HGP (dHGP) or non-dHGP. CD4, CD8, VEGF and CD31 were analyzed by immunohistochemistry. Eight hundred and fifty-one radiomics features were extracted from CT portal venous phase images and the optimal radiomics signature was determined by univariate analysis and LASSO regression. Multivariable regression analyses and ROC curves were used to assess the predictive performance of HGPs with a radiomic and clinical combined model. Results: Among 62 patients, 14 were categorized as dHGP, and 48 as non-dHGP. Non-dHGP vs. d-HGP was associated with higher tumor N stage and CEA level, and with decreased CD8 + T cells, and lower VEGF and CD31 expression. HGP status was independently associated with patient cancer-specific survival (CSS) (P＜0.05) multivariately.Analysis of percent relative contribution revealed that HGP ranked first for CSS (35.9%), ahead of T (28.9%) and N (28.9%) stage. A model with combined radiomic and clinical features demonstrated robust performance with area under the curve (AUC) values of 0.993 and 0.933 in the training and validation sets, respectively. Conclusions: Non-invasive determination of radiomic and clinical features was shown to predict HGPs types. Compared to dHGP, GCLM with non-dHGP exhibited significantly lower immune cell infiltration and decreased angiogenesis. Among features examined in GCLM, HGP was the most robust for prognostication. Univariate and multivariate analysis of prognostic factors for cancer-specific survival. Characteristics Univariate analysis Multivariate rergression analysis HR (95%CI) P HR (95%CI) P Gender ( Women vs Men ) 1.13(0.61-2.09) 0.71 Age ( >60years vs ≤60years) 1.08(0.60-1.70) 0.98 HGP ( non-desmoplastic HGP vs desmoplastic HGP ) 3.63(1.78-7.41) 0.00 3.48(1.37-8.88) 0.01 T stage ( T3-T4 vs T1-T2 ) 2.03(1.08-3.80) 0.03 2.29(1.15-4.58) 0.02 N stage ( N1-N3 vs N0 ) 3.46(1.66-7.23) 0.00 2.54(1.17-5.56) 0.02 CEA ( >5ng/ml vs ≤5ng/ml ) 2.37(1.25-4.48) 0.01 1.56(0.70-3.48) 0.27

483 Background: Heterogeneity exists in recurrence and survival among patients with intestinal-type gastric cancer (IGC). Nucleotyping is the alterations in chromatin organization. We sought to identify the prognostic utility of nucleotyping, tumor stroma ratio (TSR) and DNA ploidy in these patients. Methods: Radical resection of gastric carcinoma (> 15 LNs removed) was performed in 283 patients (stage I, n=73; stage II, n=102; stage III, n=108) at our university hospital between 2010 and 2018. Automated image cytometry tools were used to quantitatively measure nucleotyping, TSR and DNA ploidy. Cutpoints of nucleotyping and TSR were 0.044 and 50%, respectively. Associations of these features with clinicopathological characteristics, time-to-recurrence (TTR) and cancer specific survival (CSS) were analyzed by univariate and multivariate analysis. Results: Among 283 patients, chromatin heterogeneity, high TSR and non-diploid were significantly associated with larger tumor size, higher T and N stage, and poorer TTR and CSS at 5 years. In a Cox multivariable analysis, nucleotyping and TSR were independently associated with TTR and CSS (P＜0.05) (Table). The top three contributors to TTR were N stage (33.9%), nucleotying (29.7%) and TSR (25.5%). The top three contributors to CSS were N stage (35.6%), nucleotying (29.7%) and TSR (18.0%). As a combined variable, the percent relative contribution of nucleotyping and TSR ranked first for TTR and CSS (56.0%, 50.0%), ahead of N stage (33.4%, 34.6%) and TILs (8.4%, 10.6%). Conclusions: Nucleotyping and TSR were each significantly and independently associated with TTR and CSS, and their combined variable was more strongly prognostic than either alone. Cox multivariable analysis of TTR and CSS. Features TTR HR (95%CI) TTR P value CSS HR (95%CI) CSS P value Tumor size (>3cm vs ≤3cm) 1.10 (0.48-2.54) 0.83 0.77 (0.35-1.70) 0.56 T stage (T3-T4 vs T1-T2) 1.07 (0.46-2.49) 0.87 1.41 (0.53-3.76) 0.49 N stage (N2N3 vs N0N1) 2.84 (1.39-5.78) <0.01 7.69 (3.37-17.55) <0.01 Adjuvant Therapy (with vs without) 1.32 (0.72-2.40) 0.37 0.85 (0.48-1.52) 0.59 TB (high vs low) 1.29 (0.62-2.69) 0.50 1.61 (0.85-3.07) 0.15 TILs（low vs high） 1.73 (0.96-3.13) 0.07 1.90 (1.06-3.40) 0.03 Nucleotyping (Chromatin heterogeneous vs Chromatin homogeneous) 2.19 (1.21-3.99) 0.01 3.44 (1.96-6.03) <0.01 TSR (high vs low) 2.12 (1.16-3.82) 0.01 2.51 (1.43-4.41) <0.01 DNA ploidy (Non-diploid vs Diploid) 1.20 (0.55-2.63) 0.65 0.98 (0.44-2.15) 0.95 1 TTR, time-to-recurrence; 2 CSS, cancer specific survival.

243 Background: HER2-amplified aCRC is associated with poor prognosis despite new anti-HER2 regimens. Insight on biomarkers that predict response to these therapies is limited. This study aims to evaluate whether baseline alterations in oncogenic drivers along the HER2 pathway predict response to anti-HER2 therapy in HER2-amplified aCRC. Methods: In this international multi-center study involving Mayo Clinic, Duke Cancer Institute and National Cancer Center Hospital East (Japan), we collected baseline genomic alterations from tissue or blood samples using next-generation sequencing (NGS) prior to anti-HER2 therapy initiation. We defined PIK3CA, RAS, RAF, MAP2K, and MET as oncogenic drivers of resistance within the HER2 pathway. Overall survival (OS) was evaluated with the Kaplan-Meier method and a log-rank test was used to compare median OS (mOS) between pts with and without alterations in the above genes. A chi-square test (significance level 0.05) was performed to compare overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR). Results: We identified 39 pts with HER2-amplified aCRC and baseline NGS. Median age was 57 (range 30-77), 54% were male. Baseline alterations in HER2 pathway oncogenic drivers were identified in 17 pts (43.5%). 18 (46%) received monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) plus tyrosine kinase inhibitors, 12 (30%) received dual mAbs and 7 (18%) received trastuzumab deruxtecan. The mOS was 41.9 months (mos) (95%CI 23.7-60.1) for other alterations vs 24.2 mos (95%CI 14.1-34.3) in pts with HER2 pathway alterations (p = 0.1). ORR was 47% vs 41% (p = 0.7) and DCR 82% vs 73% (p = 0.4), for pts with HER2 pathway alterations and without HER2 pathway alterations, respectively. 4 pts receiving trastuzumab/tucatinib had complete response, none of which had HER2 pathway alterations. Conclusions: Pts with baseline alterations in oncogenic drivers of the HER2 pathway had clinically worse outcomes compared to pts without such alterations despite receiving HER2-targeted therapy, though results lacked statistical significance. Larger studies are needed to confirm the lack of benefit from anti-HER2 therapy in this subgroup.

826 Background: After initial response to first line therapy with imatinib, GISTs commonly progress due to secondary resistance mutations in KIT. As the KIT mutation targeting profiles of bezuclastinib (type I TKI) and sunitinib are distinct, when combined they inhibit a broad spectrum of secondary KIT mutations. Herein we report extended experience of patients treated with 2 nd line combination bezuclastinib and sunitinib, including response assessment and safety. Methods: Peak (NCT05208047), a global randomized Phase 3, open-label study, aims to evaluate efficacy and safety of bezuclastinib + sunitinib vs sunitinib in GIST pts with imatinib intolerance or resistance. In Part 1a of the 3-part study, the dose of an optimized formulation of bezuclastinib was escalated in serial cohorts to achieve a target exposure comparable to that achieved at the RP2D established in the prior Phase 1b/2a study. Part 1b evaluated the interaction between bezuclastinib + sunitinib. Key inclusion: adult with locally advanced, metastatic and/or unresectable GIST, ≥1 measurable lesion according to modified RECIST v1.1, and ECOG PS 0 to 2. Part 1 completed enrollment in Apr 2023. Based upon PK and safety, a dose of bezuclastinib 600 mg QD + sunitinib 37.5 mg QD was selected for Part 2. All Part 1 data reported herein are as of Aug 2023; updated safety and efficacy will be presented. Results: Part 1 has completed enrollment with 19 pts in Part 1a and 23 in 1b. In Part 1a, Cohort 1 included 5 pts starting at bezuclastinib 300 mg QD + sunitinib 37.5 mg QD; Cohort 2 included 14 pts at bezuclastinib 600 mg QD + sunitinib 37.5 mg QD. Pt characteristics in Part 1a+1b: median age - 60 yrs (range: 33-77); 81% men; 98% ECOG PS 0-1; 98% metastatic and 2% locally advanced. The majority of TEAEs were low grade and reversible with low rate (38%) of Grade 3+ events. There were limited (24%) dose reductions and infrequent (n=2) discontinuations due to TEAEs. Three pts experienced serious AEs possibly associated with study medications. In pts evaluable for response (received ≥1 cycle of study treatment and had assessments at baseline and post-baseline [n=40]), the objective response rate (ORR) was 20% (6 confirmed PRs, 2 unconfirmed PRs). Data remain immature to estimate median PFS for Part 1 pts. In a subset of pts with prior imatinib only (n=6), the closest approximation for pts enrolling in Part 2, the ORR was 33% (2 confirmed PRs). The majority of 2nd-line pts remain on treatment past 12 months. Conclusions: Data from Peak Part 1 show an encouraging safety and tolerability profile generally consistent with published sunitinib monotherapy experience. ORR in evaluable pts from Part 1 was 20%; ORR in 2 nd line pts was 33%. Part 2 of the Peak study is actively enrolling pts globally at the selected dose of bezuclastinib 600 mg QD + sunitinib 37.5 mg QD versus sunitinib 37.5 mg QD. Clinical trial information: NCT05208047 .