Citations

Abstract Although Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKis) are generally well tolerated and less toxic than chemotherapy alternatives used to treat lymphoid malignancies, BTKis like ibrutinib have the potential to cause new or worsening hypertension (HTN). Little is known about the optimal treatment of BTKi-associated HTN. Randomly selected patients with lymphoid malignancies on a BTKi and antihypertensive drug(s) and with at least 3 months of follow-up data were sorted into 2 groups: those diagnosed with HTN before BTKi initiation (prior-HTN), and those diagnosed with HTN after BTKi initiation (de novo HTN). Generalized estimating equations assessed associations between time varying mean arterial pressures (MAPs) and individual anti-HTN drug categories. Of 196 patients included in the study, 118 had prior-HTN, and 78 developed de novo HTN. Statistically significant mean MAP reductions were observed in patients with prior-HTN who took β blockers (BBs) with hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ), (−5.05 mmHg; 95% confidence interval [CI], 10.0 to −0.0596; P = .047), and patients diagnosed with de novo HTN who took either an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) with HCTZ (−5.47 mmHg; 95% CI, 10.9 to −0.001; P = .05). These regimens also correlated with the greatest percentages of normotensive MAPs. Treatment of HTN in patients taking a BTKi is challenging and may require multiple antihypertensives. Patients with prior-HTN appear to benefit from combination regimens with BBs and HCTZ, whereas patients with de novo HTN appear to benefit from ACEi/ARBs with HCTZ. These results should be confirmed in prospective studies.

164 Background: Lurbinectedin (L) is a novel inhibitor of oncogenic transcription that was granted accelerated approval by the Food and Drug Administration in June 2020 for the treatment of metastatic small cell lung cancer (SCLC) following disease progression on or after platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC). Prostatic small cell or neuroendocrine carcinoma (SC/NEPC) is a high-grade, invasive malignancy that accounts for < 1% of all prostate cancers. SC/NEPC is distinct from prostatic adenocarcinoma and behaves similar to SCLC. NCCN guidelines for SC/NEPC recommend following the SCLC treatment guidelines. Using these guidelines, L may be used as a second-line treatment in patients (pts) with SC/NEPC who progress on or after PBC. We aimed to characterize the baseline characteristics, clinical course and therapeutic outcomes of pts treated with L for SC/NEPC. Methods: After IRB approval, 18 cases were gathered from 4 academic oncology centers. Baseline patient data, prior treatments and L treatment outcomes, including best radiographic and serologic responses, overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and treatment toxicity were assessed. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate OS and PFS from the L start date. Clinical benefit rate (CBR) included pts with complete response (CR), partial response (PR) and stable disease (SD) on imaging. Results: At the time of first L dose, all had metastatic disease with 2-6 distinct sites of metastases, most commonly bone (14/18, 77.8%), lymph nodes (14/18, 77.8%) and liver (13/18, 72.2%); median age was 63.5 (Range: 53-84); 11 pts (61.1%) had an ECOG 0-1; 4 pts (22.2%) had an ECOG of 2-3. The median total number of systemic therapies administered prior to L was 4 (Range: 2-7). All pts received PBC prior to L. The most common dose of L prescribed was 3.2 mg/m2 every 21 days (15/18, 83.3%). Androgen deprivation therapy was administered in conjunction with L in 9 pts (50%). The median number of cycles of L was 5 (Range: 1-10). L was discontinued due to toxicity in 1 patient (5.6%), disease progression in 10 pts (55.6%), transition to hospice in 2 pts (11.1%), 3 pts (16.7%) died while receiving treatment (not due to L toxicity), and 2 pts (11.1%) remained on L at the time of data reporting. The median OS and PFS from date of first L dose was 6.01 months (0.23 – 16.69) and 3.35 months (0.16 – 7.79), respectively. CBR was 9/16 (56.3%) with partial response in 5 pts (31.3%), stable disease in 4 pts (25%), and progressive disease in 7 pts (43.8%). Two pts did not have post-treatment imaging available to assess response. There were no hospitalizations for L treatment related adverse events (tRAE). The most common tRAE were grade I and II fatigue and anemia; 9 pts (50%) experienced no tRAE. The only grade IV toxicity was neutropenia in 3 pts (16.7%). Conclusions: L is a well-tolerated and active treatment option for patients with SC/NEPC. Prospective studies are needed to determine the role of L in the treatment of SC/NEPC.

Abstract Background Darvadstrocel (DVS), a suspension of expanded allogeneic adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells, is approved for the treatment of complex Crohn’s perianal fistulas (CPF). INSPIRE (EUPAS24267) is a European observational post-approval study evaluating real-world effectiveness and safety of DVS in patients with complex CPF for up to 36 months. Here we report preliminary clinical and safety outcomes from INSPIRE. Methods Patients with complex CPF who had received DVS according to local standard practice were eligible to enrol. Clinical response (closure of ≥50% of external openings [EOs]) and clinical remission (closure of all EOs) of DVS-treated fistulas that were draining at baseline, were evaluated in the all-treated (AT; received ≥1 dose of DVS with an evaluation for fistula response after 6 months) and per-protocol (PP; received DVS as per label-approved guidelines) cohorts. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious TEAEs and AEs of special interest were reported for the safety cohort (all patients treated with DVS). Results As of April 2023, 652 patients had enrolled (Table 1). Complete data to evaluate 12-month clinical response and remission were available for 134 (AT cohort) and 124 (PP cohort) patients, of whom 79.9% (AT, n = 107) and 79.8% (PP, n = 99) had a clinical response and 76.1% (AT, n = 102) and 76.6% (PP, n = 95) had clinical remission (Figure 1). From baseline to Month 12, there was a decrease in the mean (standard deviation [SD]) Perianal Disease Activity Index score (–3.5 [3.3]; n/N = 96/302 and –3.7 [3.2]; n/N = 89/249) and a decrease in the mean (SD) Harvey–Bradshaw Index for Crohn’s disease activity (-0.3 [2.8]; n/N = 102/302 and -0.4 [2.9]; n/N = 95/249) in the AT and PP cohorts, respectively. Complete safety data were available for 619 patients (median [min–max] follow-up 480 [6–1595]) days. Overall, 26% (n = 162) had ≥1 TEAE and 10% (n = 63) ≥1 serious TEAE. The most frequent TEAEs were anal abscess (6.9%), COVID-19 (1.9%) and proctalgia (1.1%). No deaths were reported. One breast cancer lymph node metastasis and one ovarian epithelial cancer were reported; both events were confounded by immunosuppressant treatment and were not considered related to DVS treatment. Conclusion These preliminary data are consistent with the pivotal ADMIRE-CD study and demonstrate a single dose of DVS in patients with complex CPF is associated with positive clinical outcomes in up to 80% of patients, and a favourable safety profile, both of which are maintained after 12 months. The inherent limitations of registry-based studies mean these data should be interpreted with caution. However, the ongoing INSPIRE study will provide longer follow-up data to confirm these observations with respect to any study limitations.

Abstract Background Complex perianal fistulas are a serious complication in patients with Crohn’s disease (CD). Darvadstrocel (DVS), a suspension of expanded adult allogeneic adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells, is approved in Europe and Japan for treatment of complex Crohn’s perianal fistulas (CPF). The global ADMIRE-CD II phase 3 randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study evaluated the efficacy and safety of DVS for treatment of complex CPF. Methods Patients aged 18–75 years with clinically controlled, inactive or mildly active CD and complex CPF (≤2 internal openings [IO] and ≤3 external openings [EOs]) who had an inadequate, or a loss of response to immunosuppressive agents or biologics were included. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive a local injection of DVS as a single dose (120 x 106 cells/24 mL) or placebo. In all patients, fistula preconditioning included vigorous curettage and seton placement 2–3 weeks before treatment, and seton removal, a further curettage and closure of IOs immediately before treatment. The primary endpoint was combined remission (closure of all treated EOs that were draining at baseline, despite gentle finger compression, and absence of collections &gt;2 cm confirmed by MRI) at 24 weeks. Secondary endpoints included combined remission at 52 weeks, clinical remission (closure of all treated EOs without MRI confirmation) at 24 and 52 weeks, and time to clinical remission at 24 weeks. Safety was monitored up to 52 weeks. Results From 19 Oct 2017 to 26 Jul 2023, 568 patients received DVS (n = 283) or placebo (n = 285) with fistula preconditioning; 56.3% of patients enrolled in Europe and Israel, and 43.7% in North America. Mean (SD) age, sex and race were similar in the DVS and placebo arms (38.4 [11.9] vs 37.7 [10.8] years; 42.8% vs 45.6% female; 85.9% vs 89.1% White). Combined remission rates at 24 weeks did not statistically differ between treatments (48.8% DVS vs 46.3% placebo) and there were no differences in secondary endpoints (Table 1; Figure 1). Based on health authority guidelines, post hoc analyses of patients randomized before COVID-19 (11 March 2020; n = 141 DVS, n = 143 placebo) were performed: combined remission rates at 24 weeks were 46.8% (DVS) and 38.5% (placebo). The safety profile for DVS was consistent with prior studies with no new safety signals (Table 1). Conclusion The efficacy outcomes assessed did not statistically differ between DVS and placebo, and the placebo response rate (with fistula preconditioning) was higher than expected. Post hoc analyses revealed lower placebo response rates in patients randomized before COVID-19 (similar to the pivotal ADMIRE CD I study) than the overall placebo arm. DVS was well tolerated.

759 Background: BRAF V600E mutations are present in 5-10% of patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) and associated with poor prognosis. Recently, there was tumor agnostic FDA approval of dabrafenib + trametinib for BRAF V600E mutated solid tumors. However, the frequency of BRAF alterations ( BRAF alt), especially non-V600E, in other gastrointestinal (GI) cancers are not well described. This study characterizes BRAF alt in CRC vs other GI cancers (non-CRC). Methods: De-identified records from 51,560 patients diagnosed with GI cancers were retrospectively analyzed from the Tempus database. The molecular landscape including presence of pathogenic/likely pathogenic BRAF alt was evaluated by panel-based tissue DNA, RNA or ctDNA NGS sequencing (Tempus Labs, Inc.). The frequency of BRAF alt, co-mutations, MSI, TMB and MMR were compared between CRC and (non-CRC) by Chi-squared/Fisher’s Exact or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. False-discovery rate correction was used for multiple testing. Results: BRAF alt were identified in 8.9% of CRC and 2.2% of non-CRC cohort. BRAF alt frequency varied by tumor type with the highest observed in colon (11%), jejunum (9.6%), intrahepatic bile duct (5.3%), rectal (4.5%), and ampulla of vater (4.5%) and lower in esophageal (0.9%) and gastric (1.6%). BRAF alt CRC had higher frequency of females (57% vs 45%, p <0.001) and older age at diagnosis (67 vs 66 yrs, p=0.029) compared to non-CRC group. Race was also significantly different, with white patients being more predominant in both groups (85% CRC,77% non-CRC). Among the BRAF alt, fusions (12% vs 2.2%, p <0.001) and amplifications (3.1% vs 0.3%, p <0.001) were higher in non-CRC vs CRC (Table). BRAF V600E was most common in all GI tumors, but higher in CRC vs non-CRC (75% vs 27%, q<0.001). Mutations higher in non-CRC vs CRC (q<0.009) included class II (G469A, K601E, BRAF-SND1, and BRAF amplification) and class III (D594N & N581S) BRAF alt. BRAF co-occurring mutations in CRC were TP53 (70%), APC (42%), RNF43 (30%), SMAD4 (22%), and PIK3CA (21%), and in non-CRC: TP53 (52%), CDKN2A (32%), CDKN2B (20%) SMAD4 (17%) and MTAP (16%). Among tissue samples, MSI-H (30% vs 4.%, p <0.001) and TMB-H ≥10 mut/MB (32% vs 6.7%, p <0.001) were more frequent in BRAF alt CRC vs non-CRC. Conclusions: Meaningful differences were found between the groups in terms of demographics, frequency, and type of BRAF alt and co-occurring mutations. In particular, certain BRAF fusions were present in a higher proportion of other GI cancers and could be an important therapeutic target for this patient population.[Table: see text]

55 Background: Nearly one-half of deficient mismatch repair (d-MMR) metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRC) demonstrate durable responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Given preclinical data indicating that liver metastases sequester activated CD8+ T cells from systemic circulation, we examined clinical outcome by metastatic site. Methods: In a retrospective cohort of patients with d-MMR mCRCs treated at multiple centers in France (n=66), we sought to validate data from a U.S. cohort, and then performed pooled analysis (n=104). All patients received first-line ICI monotherapy. Metastatic site was analyzed in relationship to tumor response (RECIST version 1.1), and progression-free survival (PFS) by multivariable stratified Cox regression after adjustment for covariates. Results: Objective responses were achieved in 38/66 (58%) patients in the validation cohort. Best tumor response included 13 (20%) complete responses (CR), 25 (38%) partial responses (PR), 16 (25%) stable disease, and 11 (17%) progressive disease (PD). One-year and 5-year PFS rates were 73% and 67%, respectively; 18 (27%) patients progressed during immunotherapy. Best tumor response was attenuated in patients with liver metastasis ( P=0.03). Presence of liver metastasis, but not other sites, was associated with significantly poorer PFS after adjustment for covariates (HRadj 2.82; 95%CI, 1.08-7.39; Padj=0.03). In a pooled analysis, liver metastasis remained significantly and independently associated with poorer PFS (HRadj 3.18; 95%CI, 1.52-6.67; Padj=0.002) and with attenuated tumor best response (P=0.01). Conclusions: Metastasis to the liver, but not other sites, was validated as an independent factor associated with poorer response and survival after ICI treatment in d-MMR mCRCs. These data underscore the need for novel therapeutic strategies in these patients. [Table: see text]

507 Background: Navitoclax (ABT-263) is an oral Bcl-2 homology-3 mimetic that binds with high affinity to pro-survival Bcl-2 proteins, resulting in apoptosis. Sorafenib, an oral multi kinase inhibitor inhibits tumor angiogenesis and also promotes apoptosis. The efficacy of either agent alone is limited; however, preclinical studies demonstrate synergy with the combination of navitoclax and sorafenib. Methods: In this phase 1 pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study (NCT01364051), we evaluated the combination of navitoclax and sorafenib in a dose escalation cohort of patients with refractory solid tumors, with an expansion cohort in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The study agents were provided by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program at National Cancer Institute under CRADA. Navitoclax and sorafenib were administered continuously on days 1 through 21 of 21-day cycles. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was determined using the continual reassessment method. Results: Ten patients were enrolled in the dose escalation cohort and 15 patients with HCC were enrolled in the expansion cohort. Two dose levels were tested, dose level 1 (navitoclax 150 mg daily plus sorafenib 400 mg twice daily) and dose level 2 (navitoclax 200 mg daily plus sorafenib 400 mg twice daily). At dose level 1, one dose limiting toxicity (DLT) [grade 3 aspartate aminotransferase elevation] was observed among 6 patients treated at this dose level. In a cohort of 3 patients treated at dose level 2, two DLTs were observed (grade 3 hypertension, and grade 3 rash), hence dose level 1 was identified as the MTD. Among all patients, the most common grade 3 toxicity was thrombocytopenia (5 patients, 20%): there were no grade 4 or 5 toxicities (Table). Patients received a median of 2 cycles (range 1-36 cycles) and all patients were off study treatment at data cut off. Six patients in the expansion cohort had stable disease, 5 had progressive disease and 4 with unavailable data. There were no partial or complete responses. Drug-drug interaction between navitoclax and sorafenib was not observed. The combination of navitoclax and sorafenib did not increase induction of apoptosis compared with navitoclax alone. Conclusions: Navitoclax plus sorafenib resulted in manageable, but not ideal toxicities for continuous oral administration which precluded dose escalation. The lack of clinical benefit in the HCC expansion cohort does not support further development of this combination for the treatment of advanced HCC. Clinical trial information: NCT01364051 . [Table: see text]

Abstract Radioresistance of melanoma brain metastases limits the clinical utility of conventionally fractionated brain radiation in this disease, and strategies to improve radiation response could have significant clinical impact. The catalytic subunit of DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PKcs) is critical for repair of radiation-induced DNA damage, and inhibitors of this kinase can have potent effects on radiation sensitivity. In this study, the radiosensitizing effects of the DNA-PKcs inhibitor peposertib were evaluated in patient-derived xenografts of melanoma brain metastases (M12, M15, M27). In clonogenic survival assays, peposertib augmented radiation-induced killing of M12 cells at concentrations ≥100 nmol/L, and a minimum of 16 hours exposure allowed maximal sensitization. This information was integrated with pharmacokinetic modeling to define an optimal dosing regimen for peposertib of 125 mpk dosed just prior to and 7 hours after irradiation. Using this drug dosing regimen in combination with 2.5 Gy × 5 fractions of radiation, significant prolongation in median survival was observed in M12-eGFP (104%; P = 0.0015) and M15 (50%; P = 0.03), while more limited effects were seen in M27 (16%, P = 0.04). These data support the concept of developing peposertib as a radiosensitizer for brain metastases and provide a paradigm for integrating in vitro and pharmacokinetic data to define an optimal radiosensitizing regimen for potent DNA repair inhibitors.