Citations

PURPOSE Gastroesophageal carcinoma (GEC) is increasingly managed using biomarker-guided therapies. Although both tissue DNA (tDNA) and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) testing are used clinically, the concordance of genomic alterations between primary tumors, metastatic sites, and liquid biopsy remains incompletely understood. METHODS We retrospectively analyzed 345 patients with GEC who underwent ctDNA testing at Mayo Clinic. tDNA next-generation sequencing and immunohistochemistry (IHC) for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)/erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 ( ERBB2 ) and mismatch repair (MMR) were collected. Concordance was evaluated between ctDNA and tDNA, ctDNA and IHC, and across all three modalities, using 60-day and 30-day intervals. RESULTS Among 345 patients with ctDNA testing, 186 had tDNA testing, and 310 underwent IHC. ctDNA testing showed a shorter turnaround time than tDNA (median 6 v 13 days). The most frequent alteration in ctDNA, primary tDNA, and metastatic tDNA was TP53. Concordance between ctDNA and primary tDNA was ≥78.8% for key genes; between ctDNA and metastatic tDNA, it was ≥84.8%. IHC-ctDNA concordance was higher in metastatic tumors, with 91.1% for HER2/ ERBB2 and 97.7% for mismatch repair (MMR)/microsatellite instability (MSI) compared with 81.1% and 95.8%, respectively, in primary tumors. Triplet concordance for MSI/MMR was 97.6% in primary tumors and 100% in metastatic tumors, while ERBB2 /HER2 showed 84.4% and 93.9% concordance, respectively. ctDNA temporal heterogeneity analysis revealed 14 patients with fluctuating ERBB2 status and 3 with fluctuating MSI-H status. CONCLUSION ctDNA testing demonstrates high concordance with tDNA and IHC and offers faster turnaround. Given its minimally invasive nature and strong concordance with tissue-based testing, ctDNA is a reliable tool for genomic profiling and longitudinal monitoring in GEC.

PURPOSE For patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC), cancer-related time spent in health care systems, time toxicity, represents a critical but understudied burden affecting quality of life. This study aimed to quantify time toxicity in patients receiving first-line systemic therapy and evaluate whether the addition of durvalumab to gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) increases health care contact time. METHODS This international, multicenter, retrospective cohort study included patients with advanced BTC seen between January 2019 and April 2024 at Mayo Clinic Enterprise (US), and between January 2021 and April 2024 at Kyorin University Hospital (Japan), and Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein (Brazil). Patients received GC plus durvalumab (GCD) or GC. Time toxicity was recorded from treatment initiation until discontinuation or last follow-up during first-line systemic therapy. Multiple regression analysis identified factors associated with high time toxicity. RESULTS Among 193 patients (102 GCD, 91 GC; median age 65 years; 50% male; 49% Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status [PS] 0), median time on treatment (TOT) was 156 days (95% CI, 122 to 190). The median proportion of total time toxicity was 14.4% (IQR, 10.9-20.6). Planned visits accounted for 11.9%, while unplanned visits were infrequent (1.8%). Time toxicity strongly correlated with TOT ( r = 0.824) and progression-free survival ( r = 0.827). Despite longer treatment in the GCD group than the GC group (212 v 134 days; P = .027), total time toxicity was similar (27 v 18 days; P = .19). Younger age and poor PS were independent factors of higher time toxicity. CONCLUSION Time toxicity represents a meaningful metric that allows for more comprehensive integration of the net benefit in patients with advanced BTC with a limited lifespan.

Liver transplantation has emerged as a curative treatment option for selected patients with unresectable hepatic malignancies beyond hepatocellular carcinoma, marking a paradigm shift in transplant oncology. For colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM), prospective trials have demonstrated that highly selected patients achieve 5-year OS rates of 60–83%, with the Oslo score identifying optimal candidates for transplantation. Perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) has been successfully treated using strict patient selection criteria combined with neoadjuvant therapy, achieving 5-year OS rates of 50–68%, though emerging data suggests chemotherapy-based approaches may be preferable to radiation in selected cases. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA), previously considered a contraindication to transplantation, can now achieve excellent long-term outcomes (79.5% 5-year OS) in patients demonstrating sustained response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radioembolization, with metabolic tumor volume < 70 cm3 serving as an objective prognostic marker. Across these three emerging indications, successful outcomes depend on strict patient selection based on tumor biology, intensive multimodal neoadjuvant therapy, multidisciplinary evaluation in high-volume centers, and careful observation during treatment to exclude patients with aggressive disease. This evolution in transplant practice offers curative intent therapy to patients that previously only had palliative therapeutic options, fundamentally transforming hepatobiliary and oncologic surgery.

Anal squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC) is a rare malignancy of the lower gastrointestinal tract, with distant metastases typically involving the liver and lungs. Metastasis to the kidneys is uncommon, and only one prior case has been reported in the literature. Herein, we report a rare presentation of a patient with biopsy-confirmed metastatic ASCC presenting as bilateral renal lesions. We then provide a review of the literature for rare metastatic presentations of ASCC, highlighting all the cases described in the literature. Clinicians should maintain a high index of suspicion for unusual metastatic sites, perform targeted imaging and biopsy when indicated, and consider systemic therapies to optimize outcomes in rare metastatic presentations.

TPS611 Background: GPC3 is an oncofetal protein expressed in up to 75% of hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) and associated with poor prognosis. Its selective expression in tumor and not in normal tissue makes it a promising target for radiopharmaceutical imaging and therapy (theranostics). The GPC3-selective diagnostic RYZ811 ([ 68 Ga]Ga-RAYZ-8009) and therapeutic α particle-emitting RYZ801 ([ 225 Ac]Ac-RAYZ-8009) are a theranostic pair. Previous studies show high uptake of RYZ811 in intrahepatic and extrahepatic HCCs, with low normal liver background uptake. In GPC3+ HCC mouse models, single administrations of RYZ801 significantly inhibited tumor growth. Methods: RYZ801-101 is a single-arm, open-label, phase 1/1b study of RYZ811 and RYZ801 in previously treated patients with GPC3+ unresectable HCC. The study has two parts: dose escalation (part 1) and dose expansion (part 2). Each part consists of two stages: RYZ811 imaging and RYZ801 treatment. The aim of imaging is to determine if RYZ811 safely and adequately identifies patients with GPC3+ tumors. The aim of treatment is to determine the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D; part 1), and preliminary antitumor activity (part 2) of RYZ801. Key eligibility criteria are: confirmed HCC; Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C; Child-Pugh A; ≥1 RECIST v1.1-measurable lesion (treatment stage); and disease progression after ≥1 systemic therapy in part 1 and 1 prior line in part 2. In part 1, approximately 60 patients will receive RYZ811 (185 MBq) in the imaging stage; up to 30 of these will receive escalating doses of RYZ801 (2.6–5.5 MBq × 4 doses) in the treatment stage. In part 2, approximately 80 patients will receive RYZ811 (185 MBq) in the imaging stage; up to 40 of these will receive RYZ801 at the RP2D in the treatment stage. Primary RYZ811 objectives are to assess the safety/tolerability and biodistribution of RYZ811. Secondary objectives are to determine absorbed doses (ADs) to organs and tissues and any association between RYZ811 uptake and RYZ801 efficacy. Primary RYZ801 objectives are to identify the RP2D and safety/tolerability of RYZ801. Secondary objectives are to assess PK, ADs to critical organs and tumors, and preliminary antitumor activity. Enrollment for Part 1 is ongoing in the USA. Clinical trial information: NCT06726161 .

593 Background: TP53 and CDKN2A are the most frequently mutated tumor suppressors in BTC, each linked to poor outcomes. Their co-alteration remains unexplored due to the current single-gene classification. Methods: This is an international multicenter study involving 35 institutions across 3 continents (North America, Asia, South America). Genomic profiling was performed on tissue or blood samples using NGS. Patients (pts) were categorized as wild-type (wt) TP53/ wt CDKN2A (WT/WT) (42%), mutated (mut) TP53 /wt CDKN2A (45%), wt TP53 /mut CDKN2A (5%), mut TP53 /mut CDKN2A (8%). Associations between TP53 / CDKN2A status , clinical and genomic features were evaluated using Chi-squared/Kruskal-Wallis tests adjusted for multiple comparisons. Overall survival (OS) from start of first-line systemic therapy was analyzed by Kaplan–Meier and multivariate Cox regression (covariates: age, sex, stage, primary site, first-line treatment, TP53/CDKN2A status), p or q<0.05. Results: We included 1079 pts with BTC. Median age 66 years with intrahepatic BTC (46%), gallbladder cancer (25%), extrahepatic BTC (22%), undefined (6%), ampullary cancer (< 1%). Most had de novo metastatic disease (54%), followed by recurrent (38%) and locally advanced disease (8%). Treatment regimens included chemotherapy (87%), chemo-immunotherapy (12%) and immunotherapy alone (<1%). The most frequently actionable genes were HER2 (8%), IDH1 (7%), BRAF (6%), FGFR2 fusions (4%), MSI-High (H) (3%). HER2 alterations were prevalent in mut TP53 /wt CDKN2A vs WT/WT (11 vs 4%, q = 0.002). IDH1 alterations were more frequent in WT/WT vs TP53 mut/wt CDKN2A (10 vs 4%, q < 0.001). FGFR2 fusions were more common in wt TP53 /mut CDKN2A vs WT/WT (17 vs 6%, q < 0.001), mut TP53 /mut CDKN2A (17 vs 3%, q = 0.001) and mut TP53 /wt CDKN2A (17 vs 1%, q < 0.001). MSI-H was enriched in mut TP53 /mut CDKN2A vs wt TP53 /mut CDKN2A (11 vs 2%, q = 0.035), mut TP53 /wt CDKN2A (11 vs 3%, q = 0.002) and WT/WT (11 vs 2%, q < 0.001). TMB-H was more prevalent in mut TP53 /mut CDKN2A vs mut TP53 /wt CDKN2A (16 vs 8%, q < 0.001) and WT/WT (16 vs 3%, q < 0.024). There was no significant difference in ORR, DCR and PFS among the four groups. mut TP53 /mut CDKN2A had the shortest median OS, while WT/WT had the longest (Table). Only 14% of mut TP53 /mut CDKN2A received regimens including immunotherapy. Conclusions: mut TP53 /mut CDKN2A represents a high-risk subset enriched with MSI-H and TMB-H pts, underscoring the need to prioritize the development of immunotherapy strategies. TP53 / CDKN2A status is prognostic, stratifying patients into distinct survival groups and supporting NGS use in the first-line setting. mOS (months) (95% CI) HR (95% CI) P-value WT/WT 21.4 (19.0-24.4) reference wt TP53 /mut CDKN2A 17.3 (12.4-25.9) 1.16 (0.79-1.71) 0.442 mut TP53 /wt CDKN2A 17.4 (16.0-19.2) 1.21 (1.01-1.45) 0.040 mut TP53 /mut CDKN2A 13.8 (11.5-18.1) 1.54 (1.13-2.09) <0.001

561 Background: For patients with aHCC, second-line treatment options are not well established. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of Futi, an FGFR 1-4 inhibitor, in combination with Pem as a second line therapy in patients with FGF19-expressing aHCC. Methods: Patients aged ≥ 18 years, with histological/cytological diagnosis or radiological diagnosis of HCC, Child-Pugh (CP) class A-B7, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) A, B or C, ECOG performance status of 0-2, and FGF19+, by in-situ hybridization or immunohistochemistry, received Futi 20 mg once daily plus i.v. Pem 200mg every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 6 months (PFS6). Secondary endpoints include overall survival (OS). The study was designed to enroll 22 evaluable patients to detect PFS6 from 25% (historical control) to 47%, assuming a 1-sided alpha of 0.1 with 80% power. All patients provided written consent. Eligible patients with consent who started treatment are considered evaluable. Results: The study was closed to enrollment early at the request of funding agency due to poor accrual. Between 8/2021 and 3/2024, 14 patients enrolled with 1 patient withdrawing consent before beginning protocol treatment. Among 13 evaluable patients, median age was 72 (range: 60-87) years, 7 (53.8%) were male, 12 CP A (92.3%), 7 BCLC C (53.8%), with 7 (53.8%) having received prior liver directed therapy. Median PFS was 15 weeks (95% confidence interval [CI]: 9.0-Not Estimable) and PFS6 was 23.1% (95% CI: 8.6%, 62.3%). Objective response rate was 0% (95% CI: 0%, 24.71%) and stable disease occurred in 7 (53.9%) of patients. Median OS was 55.7 weeks (95% CI: 47.3-NE). Nine (69.2%) patients experienced at least 1 grade 3+ adverse event (AE), and 2 (15.4%) patients experienced at least a grade 4+ AE. One patient had a grade 5 AE unrelated to study treatment (acute kidney injury). Most commonly reported AEs (occurring in more than 31% of patients) were hyperphosphatemia (76.9%), fatigue (69.3%), diarrhea (61.6%), AST (53.9%) and ALT (46.2%), dry eye (38.5%), nail changes (38.5%), rash-maculo-papular (38.5%), and mucositis oral (38.5%). Conclusions: This prospective study evaluated the use of a targeted treatment in combination with immunotherapy following first line immune-based therapy. This combination had modest activity as a second line therapy for patients with aHCC but did not meet the primary endpoint. The safety profile was acceptable and consistent with prior reports. An optimal second-line regimen remains a critical need. Clinical trial information: NCT04828486 .

Background: Peritoneal metastasis represents an aggressive disease pattern in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), traditionally associated with poor survival and limited therapeutic options. Emerging intraperitoneal chemotherapy strategies—including hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), normothermic intraperitoneal paclitaxel (NIPEC/IP-PTX), and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC)—have been investigated to improve local tumor control and survival outcomes. Methods: We systematically reviewed published studies evaluating HIPEC, NIPEC/IP-PTX, and PIPAC in PDAC, including adjuvant, cytoreductive, and palliative settings. Study characteristics, feasibility, perioperative outcomes, oncologic outcomes, and risk of bias were analyzed. Results: Across modalities, intraperitoneal treatment strategies demonstrated acceptable feasibility and safety profiles in appropriately selected patients. Adjuvant HIPEC following pancreatectomy showed reduced local–regional recurrence signals in limited cohorts. CRS + HIPEC among patients with isolated peritoneal metastases yielded encouraging multi-year survival in highly selected candidates achieving complete cytoreduction. NIPEC/IP-PTX demonstrated favorable ascites control, symptom relief, and potential conversion to resection in select patients. PIPAC was primarily used in unresectable, heavily pretreated, palliative peritoneal metastasis settings, with goals centered on disease stabilization, histologic regression, and symptom control rather than curative intent. Conclusions: Intraperitoneal chemotherapy strategies in PDAC appear feasible with signals of meaningful clinical benefit in select settings. While CRS + HIPEC may benefit carefully selected metastatic patients, NIPEC/IP-PTX and PIPAC hold value primarily in symptom control and disease stabilization. Larger prospective trials are needed to define patient selection, optimize treatment protocols, and clarify survival benefit.

Despite European colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) transplant trials having been performed entirely using deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT), there has been speculation about whether similar results can be achieved in the United States, given the lack of MELD score prioritization. A formal transplant protocol for unresectable CRLM was implemented in our center at the start of 2022 with the plan to utilize DDLT. Between 2022 and 2025, 86 patients with CRLM were referred to our program, and 19 patients underwent a formal transplant evaluation. Median time from listing until transplant was 31 days (range 3–115 d). Median allocation MELD was 8 (range 6–15). The donor livers were from DCDs, older donors, or National Share livers, which had been declined by all other centers. All but 2 of the cases underwent advanced perfusion. There were no cases of primary nonfunction, postreperfusion syndrome, acute kidney injury, hepatic artery thrombosis, or ischemic cholangiopathy. The length of stay for the median posttransplant was 5 days. Graft and patient survival were 100% at the time of maximal follow-up. Recurrence developed in 3 recipients (25.0%), 1 of whom was treated and has no evidence of disease. These findings support the viability of DDLT for CRLM using advanced perfusion, contingent on strict protocol adherence. Center-specific waitlist dynamics must inform the choice between DDLT and living donor liver transplant (LDLT).