Citations

TPS371 Background: Tucatinib (TUC), a highly selective HER2-directed tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) approved in multiple regions for HER2+ metastatic breast cancer, is being developed as a novel therapy for patients (pts) with GI tumors including gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GEC). While trastuzumab (Tras) with chemotherapy is standard in the 1st-line setting for metastatic HER2+ GEC, no anti-HER2 therapy has demonstrated an OS benefit over chemotherapy as 2nd-line therapy, possibly due to loss of HER2 expression following Tras-based therapy. In GEC xenograft models, dual targeting of HER2 with TUC and Tras showed superior activity to either agent alone.(Kulukian 2020) Interim results from the MOUNTAINEER study have shown promising activity for TUC and Tras for HER2+ mCRC.(Strickler 2019) The MOUNTAINEER-02 study is evaluating the efficacy and safety of TUC with Tras, ramucirumab (Ram), and paclitaxel (Pac) in pts with HER2+ GEC in the 2nd-line setting. Methods: MOUNTAINEER-02 (NCT04499924) is a phase 2/3 study evaluating TUC + Tras with Ram and Pac. Pts receive TUC 300 mg or placebo PO BID, Tras (6 then 4 mg/kg) or placebo (IV on Days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle), Pac (IV on Days 1, 8, 15), and Ram (IV on Days 1 and 15). Eligible pts have locally-advanced unresectable or metastatic HER2+ GEC and have received a HER2-directed antibody and 1 prior line of therapy for advanced disease. Pts must be ≥18 years of age, with an ECOG ≤1, and have had no prior exposure to Ram, anti-HER2 or anti-EGFR TKI, HER2-directed antibody-drug conjugates, or taxanes ≤12 months before enrollment. Due to the potential impact of TUC on Pac metabolism, the study will include an initial Pac dose optimization stage. The open-label phase 2 part will determine the recommended dose of Pac (60 or 80 mg/m²) combined with TUC, Tras, and Ram in 6-18 pts, and evaluate safety and activity of the regimen in Cohorts 2A and 2B (30 pts each). The randomized, double-blind, phase 3 part will compare the efficacy and safety of TUC and Tras (Arm 3A; ̃235 pts) vs. placebo (Arm 3B; ̃235 pts), both in combination with Ram and Pac, and also evaluate activity of TUC with Ram and Pac (Arm 3C; ̃30 pts). The dual primary phase 3 endpoints are OS and PFS per investigator, with confirmed ORR as a key secondary endpoint. HER2 status is determined at baseline using a blood-based NGS assay, and IHC/ISH of fresh or archival tumor biopsies, if available. Pts must be HER2+ by blood-based NGS in Cohort 2A and phase 3; in Cohort 2B, pts must be HER2+ in a biopsy taken post-progression during/after 1st-line therapy, but HER2-negative by blood-based NGS. Disease assessments per RECISTv1.1 will occur q6 weeks for 36 weeks, then q9 weeks. The pharmacokinetics of TUC, Pac, and their metabolites will be evaluated in a subset of pts, including a cohort with gastrectomies. Enrollment in phase 2 is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT04499924.

Abstract Purpose: Mutations in KRAS/NRAS (RAS) predict lack of anti-EGFR efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, it is unclear if all RAS mutations have similar impact, and atypical mutations beyond those in standard guidelines exist. Experimental Design: We reviewed 7 tissue and 1 cell-free DNA cohorts of 9,485 patients to characterize atypical RAS variants. Using an in vitro cell-based assay (functional annotation for cancer treatment), Ba/F3 transformation, and in vivo xenograft models of transduced isogenic clones, we assessed signaling changes across mutations. Results: KRAS exon 2, extended RAS, and atypical RAS mutations were noted in 37.8%, 9.5%, and 1.2% of patients, respectively. Among atypical variants, KRAS L19F, Q22K, and D33E occurred at prevalence ≥0.1%, whereas no NRAS codon 117/146 and only one NRAS codon 59 mutation was noted. Atypical RAS mutations had worse overall survival than RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC (HR, 2.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.24–6.80; P = 0.014). We functionally characterized 114 variants with the FACT assay. All KRAS exon 2 and extended RAS mutations appeared activating. Of 57 atypical RAS variants characterized, 18 (31.6%) had signaling below wild-type, 23 (40.4%) had signaling between wild-type and activating control, and 16 (28.1%) were hyperactive beyond the activating control. Ba/F3 transformation (17/18 variants) and xenograft model (7/8 variants) validation was highly concordant with FACT results, and activating atypical variants were those that occurred at highest prevalence in clinical cohorts. Conclusions: We provide best available evidence to guide treatment when atypical RAS variants are identified. KRAS L19F, Q22K, D33E, and T50I are more prevalent than many guideline-included RAS variants and functionally relevant.

TPS252 Background: Tucatinib (TUC), a highly selective HER2-directed TKI recently approved for HER2+ metastatic breast cancer (MBC), is being developed as a novel therapy for patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and other GI tumors. While trastuzumab (Tras) with chemotherapy is standard in the 1st-line setting for metastatic HER2+ gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GEC), no anti-HER2 therapy has demonstrated an OS benefit over chemotherapy in 2nd-line, possibly due to loss of HER2 expression following Tras-based therapy. In GEC xenograft models, dual targeting of HER2 with TUC and Tras showed superior activity to either agent alone. Interim results from the MOUNTAINEER study have shown promising activity for TUC and Tras in HER2+ mCRC. The MOUNTAINEER-02 study is evaluating the efficacy and safety of TUC in combination with Tras, ramucirumab (Ram), and paclitaxel (Pac) in pts with HER2+ GEC. Methods: MOUNTAINEER-02 (NCT04499924) is a phase 2/3 study evaluating TUC and Tras with the 2nd-line standard of care, Ram and Pac. Pts receive TUC 300 mg or placebo PO BID, Tras (6 then 4 mg/kg) or placebo (IV on Days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle), Pac (IV on Days 1, 8, 15), and Ram (IV on Days 1 and 15). Eligible pts have locally-advanced unresectable or metastatic HER2+ GEC, have received a HER2-directed antibody, and 1 prior line of therapy for advanced disease. Pts must be ≥18 years of age, with an ECOG ≤1, and have had no prior exposure to Ram, anti-HER2 or anti-EGFR TKI, HER2-directed antibody-drug conjugates, or taxanes ≤12 months before enrollment. Due to the potential impact of TUC on Pac metabolism, the study will include an initial Pac dose finding stage. The open-label phase 2 part will determine the recommended dose of Pac (60 or 80 mg/m²) combined with TUC, Tras, and Ram in 6-12 patients, and evaluate the safety and activity of the regimen in Cohorts 2A and 2B (30 patients each). The randomized, double-blind, phase 3 part will compare the efficacy and safety of TUC and Tras (Arm 3A; ~235 patients) vs. placebo (Arm 3B; ~235 patients), both in combination with Ram and Pac, and also evaluate activity of TUC with Ram and Pac (Arm 3C; ~30 patients). The dual primary phase 3 endpoints are OS and PFS per investigator, with confirmed ORR as a key secondary endpoint. HER2 status is determined at baseline using a blood-based NGS assay, and IHC/ISH of fresh or archival tumor biopsies, if available. Pts must be HER2+ by blood-based NGS in Cohort 2A and phase 3; in Cohort 2B, pts must be HER2+ in a biopsy taken post-progression during/after 1st-line therapy, but HER2-negative by blood-based NGS. Disease assessments per RECISTv1.1 will occur q6 weeks for 36 weeks, then q9 weeks. The pharmacokinetics of TUC, Pac, and their metabolites will be evaluated in a subset of pts, including a cohort with gastrectomies. Enrollment is ongoing in the U.S. Clinical trial information: NCT04499924.

4020 Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) presents a substantial patient education challenge to medical oncologists (MOs). Findings from our 2005 pilot survey suggest that a significant fraction of colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors are willing to undergo AC for modest treatment benefits, but their understanding of risks and benefits may be suboptimal. This project attempted to validate these findings by surveying patients with CRC (Pts) who previously received AC. Methods: 150 Pts who received AC for CRC in the last 5 years were recruited to listen to an audio program on AC featuring interviews with clinical investigators (CIs) and Pts who received AC. Based on this input, Pts were asked whether they would undergo the same AC again for varying absolute treatment benefits. A corresponding survey asked 24 CRC CIs and 150 MOs to predict how patients would respond. The survey also queried Pts about their expectations of and experiences with AC side effects. Results: About 1/3 of Pts would be treated again with AC for a 1% absolute reduction in recurrence risk (ARRR), and about 2/3 believed a 5% ARRR would justify treatment. There were no statistically significant differences between responses of males and females or between Pts receiving oxaliplatin (OX) and those receiving other regimens. ( Table 1 ) The corresponding estimates of CIs and MOs were lower. Additionally, AC side effects were different than expected: 57% and 66% of Pts experienced less GI toxicity and alopecia, respectively, while 38% and 46% of Pts receiving OX experienced greater cold intolerance and numbness. Conclusions: Many potential obstacles exist in communicating with Pts about AC including heterogeneity in Pts’ attitudes towards risk/benefit trade-offs and preconceptions about treatment side effects. The next step in this initiative will be to examine these issues prospectively by evaluating the impact of an audio/web education supplement on the decision-making process. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Abstract Background and Aims Chronic diarrhea affects about 5% of the population overall. Altered bile acid metabolism is a common but frequently undiagnosed cause. Methods We performed a systematic search of publication databases for studies of assessment and management of bile acid diarrhea (BAD). The certainty (quality) of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Patient population, intervention, comparator and outcome questions were developed through an iterative process and were voted on by a group of specialists. Results The certainty of evidence was generally rated as very low. Therefore, 16 of 17 recommendations are conditional. In patients with chronic diarrhea, consideration of risk factors (terminal ileal resection, cholecystectomy or abdominal radiotherapy), but not additional symptoms, was recommended for identification of patients with possible BAD. The group suggested testing using 75selenium homocholic acid taurine (where available) or 7α-hydroxy-4-cholesten-3-one, including patients with irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea, functional diarrhea and Crohn’s disease without inflammation. Testing was suggested over empiric bile acid sequestrant therapy (BAST). Once remediable causes are managed, the group suggested cholestyramine as initial therapy, with alternate BAST when tolerability is an issue. The group suggested against BAST for patients with extensive ileal Crohn’s disease or resection and suggested alternative antidiarrheal agents if BAST is not tolerated. Maintenance BAST should be given at the lowest effective dose, with a trial of intermittent, on-demand administration, concurrent medication review and reinvestigation for patients whose symptoms persist despite BAST. Conclusions Based on a systematic review, BAD should be considered for patients with chronic diarrhea. For patients with positive results from tests for BAD, a trial of BAST, initially with cholestyramine, is suggested.

Abstract Background & Aims Crohn’s disease (CD) is a lifelong illness with substantial morbidity, although new therapies and treatment paradigms have been developed. We provide guidance for treatment of ambulatory patients with mild to severe active luminal CD. Methods We performed a systematic review to identify published studies of the management of CD. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Statements were developed through an iterative online platform and then finalized and voted on by a group of specialists. Results The consensus includes 41 statements focused on 6 main drug classes: antibiotics, 5-aminosalicylate, corticosteroids, immunosuppressants, biologic therapies, and other therapies. The group suggested against the use of antibiotics or 5-aminosalicylate as induction or maintenance therapies. Corticosteroid therapies (including budesonide) can be used as induction, but not maintenance therapies. Among immunosuppressants, thiopurines should not be used for induction, but can be used for maintenance therapy for selected low-risk patients. Parenteral methotrexate was proposed for induction and maintenance therapy in patients with corticosteroid-dependent CD. Biologic agents, including tumor necrosis factor antagonists, vedolizumab, and ustekinumab, were recommended for patients failed by conventional induction therapies and as maintenance therapy. The consensus group was unable to clearly define the role of concomitant immunosuppressant therapies in initiation of treatment with a biologic agent. Conclusions Optimal management of CD requires careful patient assessment, acknowledgement of patient preferences, evidence-based use of existing therapies, and thorough assessment to define treatment success.

Abstract An estimated 14.1 million patients survive sepsis each year. Many survivors experience poor long-term outcomes, including new or worsened neuropsychological impairment; physical disability; and vulnerability to further health deterioration, including recurrent infection, cardiovascular events, and acute renal failure. However, clinical trials and guidelines have focused on shorter-term survival, so there are few data on promoting longer-term recovery. To address this unmet need, the International Sepsis Forum convened a colloquium in February 2018 titled “Understanding and Enhancing Sepsis Survivorship.” The goals were to identify gaps and limitations of current research and shorter- and longer-term priorities for understanding and enhancing sepsis survivorship. Twenty-six experts from eight countries participated. The top short-term priorities identified by nominal group technique culminating in formal voting were to better leverage existing databases for research, develop and disseminate educational resources on postsepsis morbidity, and partner with sepsis survivors to define and achieve research priorities. The top longer-term priorities were to study mechanisms of long-term morbidity through large cohort studies with deep phenotyping, build a harmonized global sepsis registry to facilitate enrollment in cohorts and trials, and complete detailed longitudinal follow-up to characterize the diversity of recovery experiences. This perspective reviews colloquium discussions, the identified priorities, and current initiatives to address them.

606 Background: Between 3-5% of CRC patients have BRCA1/2 pathogenic mutations. This study aims to identify associations between BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations and clinical characteristics in CRC. Methods: A total of 6396 CRC tumor samples were tested with Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) on a 592-gene panel, pathogenic or presumed pathogenic variants were counted as mutations (mt). Microsatellite instability (MSI) and tumor mutational burden (TMB) were tested by NGS. Statistical correlations were investigated using ANOVA, Chi-square and t-test. Results: Among tumors sampled, 53% derived from male patients and median age was 60 years. BRCA1 mt were detected in 1.1% (n = 72) of tumors, while BRCA2 in 2.8% (n = 179). BRCA1 mt were more frequent in women (W;65%) than men (M;35%) (p = 0.0019) while no relationship with sex was seen for BRCA2 mt (42% F vs. 58% M). No significant associations with age were noticed. Majority of pathogenic mt in BRCA1 (52%; n = 34) and BRCA2 (62%; n = 103) occurred in MSI-High (MSI-H) cases. MSI-H pts had more frameshift mt in both BRCA1/2 than MSS pts. MSS cases had lower rates of BRCA1 and 2 pathogenic mt (44% and 37%, respectively). Right-sided tumors were significantly associated with BRCA1 (p = 0.0056) and BRCA2 (p < 0.0001) mt in MSI-H cases only. BRCA1/2 mt were associated with higher TMB in all CRCs, including MSI-H and MSS cases (p < 0.001). POLE mt (n = 31) were associated with higher BRCA1/2 mt rates (9.6%, 55% respectively). Among MSS cases with POLE wild-type status, BRCA1 (p = 0.0269) and BRCA2 (p = 0.0151) mt were associated with high TMB and combining both BRCA1/2 mutations led to an even higher TMB (3.6%; p = 0.001). Conclusions: This is the first study to show that BRCA1/2 mutations are more frequent in MSI-H, and independently associated with higher TMB, pathogenic POLE mutations, and right-sided tumors in MSI-H CRCs. Given their relationship with TMB, the presence of BRCA1/2 mutations may be potential predictive biomarkers for checkpoint or PARP inhibitors in CRC, a finding that should be prospectively evaluated.