Citations

The recent approval of encorafenib, cetuximab, and FOLFOX based on the phase III BREAKWATER trial has introduced a new standard of care for the first-line treatment of BRAF V600E–mutated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, its safety and efficacy in patients with significant liver dysfunction remains unclear and, as such, patients are often excluded from pivotal clinical trials. This report presents a case of BRAF V600E–mutated mCRC presenting with extensive hepatic involvement and liver dysfunction. Despite the absence of guidelines, the patient was initiated on full-dose encorafenib, cetuximab, and FOLFOX. He experienced a rapid clinical and biochemical response, with near-normalization of liver enzymes after cycle 1, and complete functional recovery by cycle 3. Treatment was well tolerated, with no significant adverse events throughout 9 cycles. He subsequently transitioned to maintenance 5-FU, cetuximab, and encorafenib. Posttreatment blood-based next-generation sequencing revealed no residual actionable mutations. The patient then successfully underwent complete surgical resection of his primary tumor and metastatic disease with negative margins. This case highlights the importance of considering encorafenib-based therapy in select patients with BRAF V600E–mutated mCRC in the setting of compromised liver function.

Importance Stool metabolites influencing gut motility and sensation may contribute to fecal incontinence (FI). Objective The objective of this study was to test whether FI is associated with higher levels of butyrate and Clostridiales taxa in stool. Study Design Stool metabolites and microbiota were compared between 96 women with FI and 42 controls. FI frequency and subtype (urgency vs insensible) were measured using a 14-day bowel diary, St. Mark’s score, and the Accidental Bowel Leakage questionnaire. Metabolite analysis included targeted analysis (8 short-chain fatty acids including butyrate, 17 bile acids, and 8 tryptophan derivatives) and untargeted analysis. Stool microbiota were characterized using 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Multivariable and exploratory multiomics factor analysis were performed with statistical significance defined as false discovery rate (FDR) ≤0.10. Results The FI group had a higher proportion of Bristol stool types 2 and 6 than controls ( P = 0.005). The mean number of leaks for the FI group was 1.7 ± 1.7 per day, 38% had urgency FI, and 39% had insensible FI. There was no significant difference between groups in butyrate levels and Clostridiales taxa. Multiomics analysis identified glycerolipids (monoacylglycerols and diacylglycerols) associated with FI (FDR = 0.08). In addition, insensible FI was associated with glycerolipids, long-chain saturated and monounsaturated fatty acids, phospholipids, and dipeptides (FDR = 0.08–0.09). The top weighted microbiota associated with these metabolites were Lachnospiraceae and Ruminococcaceae; however, these taxa were not directly associated with FI. Conclusion Butyrate and Clostridiales were not associated with FI. Novel stool metabolite signatures were identified, suggesting new biological pathways and potential therapeutic targets for FI.

Prostate cancer is a growing public health concern in Kenya, where it is frequently diagnosed at advanced stages and managed within resource-constrained health systems. This study examined the lived experiences of men diagnosed with prostate cancer, focusing on how the illness shaped their identities, relationships, and daily lives. We conducted a qualitative study using in-depth interviews with 130 men recruited from oncology clinics across five counties (Nairobi, Garissa, Meru, Machakos, and Kisii). Audio recordings were transcribed and translated verbatim into English, where necessary, by trained research assistants. Thematic analysis was conducted following the Braun and Clarke’s six-phase framework, with NVivo 12 Plus supporting data management. Five core themes emerged: 1) emotional and existential disruption at diagnosis; (2) treatment as both a source of hope and hardship; (3) geographic and financial barriers to care; (4) challenges to masculine identity and dignity; and (5) the dual role of family and community as sources of both support and stigma. Prostate cancer precipitated profound identity shifts for Kenyan men, transforming lived experiences from those of strong providers to vulnerable patients and disrupting deeply rooted social and personal roles. These findings underscore the need for holistic, culturally responsive cancer care that integrates psychosocial support from the point of diagnosis and addresses structural barriers to access. Such approaches are essential for advancing patient-centered prostate cancer care in Kenya and similar settings.

LBA5012 Background: There is a critical evidence gap on the relative benefits and harms of proton therapy (PT) compared with photon-based intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in prostate cancer. Herein we report early results from COMPPARE, a non-randomized comparative study of outcomes with PT and IMRT in prostate cancer. Methods: Between 2018-2022, 2524 patients from 51 facilities (28 PT and 23 IMRT) enrolled in COMPPARE, including 1501 treated with PT and 1023 treated with IMRT, and were followed prospectively. Treatment naïve patients with localized prostate cancer except those with very high-risk disease were eligible. Treatment was pragmatic with daily standard fractionation (1.8-2.1 Gy) and moderate hypofractionation (2.4-3.1 Gy) permitted. Use of rectal spacers and androgen deprivation were at physician discretion. Patient-reported quality of life data and treatment team-reported toxicity and disease control outcomes were collected at baseline and pre-specified time intervals via VisionTreeOptimalCare; treatment planning and delivery data were collected via the Advanced Treatment Consortium. We analyzed 1404 PT patients and 939 IMRT patients. We report the early primary endpoint of the study, a comparison of patient reported bowel urgency and bowel frequency at 2-years using the EPIC tool, and the secondary endpoints of 2-year CTCAE v5 ≥ grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity outcomes and 3-year freedom from biochemical progression (FFBP) results reported by the study teams. Results: Study sample size was targeted at 1,500 PT patients and 1,000 IMRT patients, and median follow-up time was 4.0 years. The primary endpoint and secondary toxicity 2-year endpoints focused on the alternative hypothesis of PT superiority. All results include inverse probability of treatment weighting. Using generalized linear mixed effects models, we found there to be no significant difference in EPIC bowel urgency scores (p = 0.324) or bowel frequency scores (p = 0.514) between PT and IMRT cohorts over time up to the 2-year endpoint. For grade 2 gastrointestinal toxicity, the 2-year cumulative incidence was 5.2% for PT and 5.6% for IMRT. Gray’s Test for competing risks showed a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.91 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.65-1.28, p = 0.6] for PT versus IMRT. The exploratory non-inferiority endpoint of 3-year FFBP was 98.0% for PT and 97.9% for IMRT, and Gray’s Test showed a HR of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.52-1.71, p = 0.90). Conclusions: Analysis of early results of COMPPARE show no significant differences between PT and IMRT in patient reported bowel frequency and urgency, grade ≥2 gastrointestinal toxicity, or FFBP. Assessment of long-term disease control, late toxicity and secondary malignancy will require longer follow-up. Clinical trial information: NCT03561220 .

LBA5 Background: Available 2L therapies offer limited clinical benefit in mPDAC with reported mPFS of 3–4 mo and mOS of 6–7 mo. Aberrant RAS pathway activation is the key driver of PDAC, with oncogenic RAS mutations (mut) identified in >90% of cases, most commonly at codon G12. Daraxonrasib is an oral, RAS(ON) multi-selective, tri-complex inhibitor of the active, GTP-bound state of mutant and wild type RAS. Methods: RASolute 302 (NCT06625320) is a global, randomized, open-label, Ph 3 study in pts with 2L mPDAC and ECOG PS 0-1. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive daraxonrasib 300 mg PO QD or investigator’s choice of SOC cytotoxic chemo. Dual primary endpoints were OS and PFS by BICR in the RAS G12 mutant (RAS G12) population. Key secondary endpoints included OS and PFS by BICR in the overall population, ORR by BICR in RAS G12 and overall populations. Results: 248 pts were randomized to daraxonrasib and 252 to chemo. Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms. At data cutoff (Feb 10, 2026; mFU: 8.5 mo), all primary and key secondary endpoints were met. Statistically significant, clinically meaningful improvements in OS and PFS were observed with daraxonrasib vs chemo in the RAS G12 and overall populations (Table). Gr ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 43.6% of pts receiving daraxonrasib vs 57.5% receiving chemo. The most common (≥10%) Gr ≥3 TRAEs were rash (13.7%) and stomatitis (12.0%) for daraxonrasib; neutrophil decrease (18.2%) and anemia (16.4%) for chemo. TRSAEs occurred in 10.8% of pts receiving daraxonrasib vs 18.7% receiving chemo. Discontinuation due to TRAEs occurred in 1.2% of pts for daraxonrasib vs 11.2% for chemo. Median/mean daraxonrasib dose intensity was 93.1%/84.7%. Conclusions: Daraxonrasib demonstrated unprecedented improvements in OS and PFS vs chemo in pts with 2L mPDAC with or without an identified tumor RAS mut. Daraxonrasib was generally well tolerated, with a manageable safety profile and with no new safety signals. Results support daraxonrasib as the new SOC for 2L mPDAC. Clinical trial information: NCT06625320 . RAS G12 Overall b Daraxonrasibn=228 Chemo n=231 Daraxonrasib n=248 Chemo n=252 OS Median; mos(95% CI) 13.2(10.0–NE) 6.6(5.4–8.2) 13.2(10.0–NE) 6.7(5.8–8.0) HR(95% CI)P-value 0.40(0.30-0.54)<0.0001 0.40(0.30-0.53)<0.0001 PFS a Median; mos(95% CI) 7.3(6.3–8.1) 3.5(2.9–3.8) 7.2(5.7–7.5) 3.6(2.9–4.2) HR(95% CI)P-value 0.45(0.34-0.59)<0.0001 0.49(0.38-0.64)<0.0001 ORR a %(95% CI) 33.2(27.0–39.9) 11.8(7.8–16.8) 31.6(25.8–38.0) 11.2(7.5–15.9) a By BICR. b RAS G12, G13 or Q61 mut or no RAS mut identified.

LBA10509 Background: The MCED test (Galleri) detects a shared cancer signal from cell-free DNA in blood and predicts a cancer signal origin (CSO) to guide diagnostic (dx) workup. PF2 (NCT05155605) is a large, prospective, multicenter, interventional study of the MCED test’s performance and safety in a diverse US intended-use population. Methods: PF2 enrolled participants aged ≥50y without clinical suspicion of cancer or cancer diagnosis/treatment within 3y of enrollment. Primary objectives were MCED performance and safety in terms of dx testing triggered by a positive (cancer signal detected) MCED test result. Participants with a positive MCED test underwent targeted dx workup guided by the predicted CSO(s). Participant-reported anxiety was assessed with the State Trait Anxiety Inventory. Results: PF2 enrolled 35,878 participants; 32,007 with a 12m cancer assessment were analyzable for performance. Of 287 (0.9%) with a positive MCED test, 173 were diagnosed with cancer within 12m, for a cancer detection rate of 0.5% (95% CI 0.5-0.6%) and positive predictive value of 60.3% (54.5-65.8%). Specificity was 99.6% (99.6-99.7%). 12m episode sensitivity was 69.8% (62.8-76.0%) in a prespecified subgroup of 12 cancers responsible for ⅔ of US cancer deaths, 66.2% (55.1-75.8%) in a subgroup of 6 aggressive cancers with low 5y survival, and 39.3% (34.9-44.0%) across all cancers. Overall CSO prediction accuracy was 91.3% (86.2-94.7%) across all cancers. The MCED test detected 151 new primary and 22 recurrent cancers; additional cancers detected by screening were those with USPSTF A/B (n=31) and C (n=60) recommended screening. Of 151 MCED-detected new primaries, 80 (53.0%) were clinical stage I-II; 107 (70.9%) were stage I-III. Of 80 MCED-detected stage I-II cancers, 71.2% had no USPSTF A/B screening recommendation. Of 35,335 participants analyzable for safety, 213 (0.6%) had invasive procedure(s) to evaluate a positive MCED test result, of which 90% were nonsurgical and 1.8x more likely for participants with vs without cancer diagnosis. Most (87.6%) had a CSO-guided dx evaluation. There were 5 study-related adverse events during the time of dx workup; none were serious. Anxiety temporarily increased for participants with a positive MCED test and cancer diagnosed, and returned to baseline by 12m. Of participants with a positive MCED test, median time from test result to dx resolution was 48d (95% CI 43-56). Few participants (7/63 [11.1%]) had cancer found by dx PET/CT after a targeted dx workup that did not reveal cancer. Conclusion: The MCED test demonstrated robust performance with a favorable safety profile. When MCED testing was added to USPSTF A/B screening, 6.5x more cancers were detected by screening, most at early stages. The diverse, representative PF2 participant population supports the generalizability of these findings to the US intended-use population. Clinical trial information: NCT05155605 .

Abstract Purpose The diagnostic accuracy of imaging modalities in periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) remains uncertain. This study assessed and compared the performance of different imaging techniques for diagnosing PJI. Methods A systematic review and meta‐analysis of studies published in PubMed and Embase (1 January 2000 to 1 March 2024) was conducted. Eligible studies included adults (≥18 years), applied a valid reference standard for PJI diagnosis, and provided sufficient data to construct 2 × 2 contingency tables. Imaging modalities included white blood cell scintigraphy (WBCS), FDG‐PET/CT, antigranulocyte scintigraphy (AGS), bone scintigraphy (BS), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT) and related combinations. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS‐2 tool. A bivariate random‐effects model estimated pooled diagnostic odds ratios, sensitivities, and specificities with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results Forty studies (1263 PJI cases, 4700 controls) were included. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were as follows: WBCS‐SPECT/CT: 87.1% (95% CI, 31.7–99.0) and 94.1% (95% CI, 87.5–97.3); WBCS‐BMS: 79.7% (95% CI, 58.3–91.7) and 94.2% (95% CI, 91.0–96.3); WBCS: 88.1% (95% CI, 73.8–95.1) and 80.0% (95% CI, 62.2–90.7); FDG‐PET (±PET/CT): 88.1% (95% CI, 79.9–93.2) and 87.2% (95% CI, 76.3–93.5); BS‐WBCS: 59.5% (95% CI, 43.2–73.9) and 96.6% (95% CI, 92.2–98.6); BS: 89.3% (95% CI, 80.9–94.2) and 74.1% (95% CI, 59.0–85.0); AGS: 89.1% (95% CI, 76.8–95.3) and 73.0% (95% CI, 63.1–81.0). No eligible studies were identified for MRI or CT. Substantial heterogeneity was observed. Conclusion Diagnostic performance varied substantially, and no modality consistently demonstrated superior accuracy. WBCS showed the most stable results, particularly when combined with BS or BMS. Given the heterogeneity and variability in specificity, imaging should complement comprehensive diagnostic evaluation rather than be used in isolation. Level of Evidence 2a–3a, systematic review and meta‐analysis of retrospective cohort and case‐control studies.