Citations

554 Background: Atezo/Bev is the 1 st -line standard for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC). Optimal 2 nd -line therapy post-Atezo/Bev remains undefined. This study evaluates continuation of atezolizumab with a MKI versus MKI alone in the 2 nd -line setting. Methods: This multicenter, randomized phase II trial enrolled patients with unresectable aHCC who progressed on Atezo/Bev. Patients were randomized 2:1 to atezolizumab plus MKI (cabozantinib or lenvatinib; Arm A) or MKI alone (Arm B). Stratification factors included MKI choice, viral etiology, and alpha-fetoprotein levels. Dual primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), and safety. With 84 death and 89 PFS events, from 122 patients, this trial had 80% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.556 in OS and HR of 0.571 in PFS with a one-sided type I error (alpha) of 0.05 for each endpoint. Results: Twenty patients were accrued across 5 U.S. centers, between 01/2022 and 03/2025, before early closure due to slow accrual. Eighteen received treatment (Arm A: n=13; Arm B: n=5). Baseline characteristics: median age 68 yr, extrahepatic 56%, Hep B+ 0%, Hep C+ 33%, NASH 33% and CP A (5 to 6) 100%. MKIs used were cabozantinib (Arm A: 6/13; Arm B: 4/5) and lenvatinib (Arm A: 7/13; Arm B: 1/5). Median follow-up was 28.0 months (mo), with 14 deaths reported. Median (95% CI) OS were 13.9 (7.1-Not Estimable [NE]) and 6.2 (5.1-NE) mo (Arm A and B respectively); and that of PFS 4.3 (2.3-NE) and 4.1 (3.7-NE) mo. ORR was 7.7% (1/13) in Arm A (responder received lenvatinib) and 0% (0/5) in Arm B. Grade ≥3 adverse events (at least possibly related) occurred in 46.2% of Arm A and 60.0% of Arm B patients. G3+ events occurring in >10% of patients included hypertension, fatigue, anorexia, and ALT elevation in Arm A; and hypertension, hallucination, nausea, hypomagnesemia, hypokalemia, mucositis, AST increased and colitis in Arm B. Conclusions: In this limited cohort, continuation of atezolizumab with MKI showed relative activity and manageable safety in aHCC post-Atezo/Bev. The AE profile for atezo/MKI is consistent with the known profile of respective agents. These findings support further investigation of immunotherapy-based combinations in the 2nd-line setting. Clinical trial information: NCT05168163 .

517 Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major cause of cancer related morbidity and mortality worldwide, with increased incidence in patients with chronic liver disease, obesity and metabolic syndrome. Of note, increasing burden of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) and non-alcoholic fatty livery disease (NAFLD) has contributed to increased incidence of cirrhosis and progression to HCC. Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists are widely used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and obesity. Their pleotropic benefits including improved insulin sensitivity, potential anti-proliferative and anti-inflammatory benefits may significantly benefit these patients by potentially reduced hepatic inflammation and steatosis. Our study aims to evaluate the impact of GLP-1 receptor agonists on outcomes among patients with hepatocellular carcinoma with comorbid obesity, exploring potential interactions between metabolic modulation and disease behaviour. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the US Collaborative Network TriNetX, covering January 2000 to December 2023, encompassing data from 105 global healthcare organizations. Adult patients aged 18 and above with HCC and comorbid obesity were identified and then stratified into two groups based on treatment with GLP-1 agonists or not. The two groups were then propensity-matched based on age, sex, race, and common comorbidities. We followed these patients for 5 years to assess outcomes, including overall mortality, myocardial infarction, acute pancreatitis, sepsis, need for mechanical ventilation and hemodialysis. Results: We identified 401 patients with HCC and obesity who received GLP-1 receptor agonists, and 3974 patients with HCC and obesity who did not receive GLP-1 therapy. The average age was 63.7 years in the first cohort and 61.4 years in the second cohort. After propensity matching, each cohort consisted of 399 patients with similar baseline characteristics and ethnicity distribution. Our analysis found that over 5 years, patients with HCC and obesity who received GLP-1 receptor agonists had a significantly lower risk of overall mortality (Hazard Ratio (HR): 0.48, 95% CI: 0.371 to 0.623, p-value = 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in the risk for myocardial infarction, acute pancreatitis, sepsis, need for mechanical ventilation and hemodialysis between the two subgroups. Conclusions: Our study revealed that patients with HCC and obesity who received GLP-1 receptor agonists had a significantly lower risk of mortality. Further longitudinal cohort studies are imperative to better understand these associations and guide evidence-based clinical practice in this population.

476 Background: Outcomes remain poor for patients with advanced/metastatic CCA treated with first-line gemcitabine-cisplatin +/- anti-PD(L)1. Lirafugratinib is the first highly selective, irreversible FGFR2 inhibitor designed to target oncogenic FGFR2 driver alterations and resistance mutations. ReFocus (NCT04526106) is an open-label, multicenter phase 1/2 study in patients with advanced/metastatic CCA and other solid tumors with FGFRok2 alterations. Methods: Pivotal cohort of patients (n=116) with advanced/metastatic CCA harboring FGFR2 f/r previously treated with ≥1 systemic therapy and FGFR i-naive were treated with oral lirafugratinib 70 mg once daily until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was confirmed ORR per RECIST v1.1 by independent review committee (IRC). Key secondary endpoint was duration of response (DOR); other secondary endpoints: disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and quality of life per EORTC QLC-C30. Results: As of 27SEP2024, the primary efficacy analysis of IRC-assessed data (n=114) and the secondary analysis of investigator-assessed data (n=116) set was done. The primary efficacy analysis excluded 2 patients as not available. Median age 57 years with 61.4% female. IRC-assessed ORR was 47%, and median DOR was 11.8 months (mos) (95% CI, 7.5-13.0), where 76.2% of responses lasted >6 mos. Median PFS was 11.3 mos (95% CI, 9.2, 14.8), with 12-month rate of 49.2%. Median OS was 22.8 mos (95% CI, 17.3-27.2), with 12-month rate of 74.6%. DCR was 96.5%. Common grade ≥3 on-target, off-tumor treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) included palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (32.8%) and stomatitis (12.1%). TRAEs led to dose reductions of 75.9%, dose interruption of 82.8%, and treatment discontinuation of 4.3%. QoL was maintained. Conclusions: Lirafugratinib demonstrated clinically meaningful anti-tumor activity (ORR, DOR, and PFS), manageable and tolerable safety in CCA FGFR2 f/r patients. Clinical trial information: NCT04526106 . Best Overall Response, n (%) IRC c Investigator d Complete Response Partial Response Stable Disease Progression Disease Not Evaluable 3 (2.6)50 (43.9)57 (50.0)3 (2.6)1 (0.9) 061 (52.6)51 (44.0)3 (2.6)1 (0.9) ORR a , n (%)95% CI 53 (46.5)37.1, 56.1 61 (52.6)43.1, 61.9 DCR b , n (%)95% CI 110 (96.5)91.3, 99.0 112 (96.6)91.4, 99.1 a ORR defined as proportion achieving confirmed response of complete response or partial response per RECIST v1.1. b DCR defined as proportion with confirmed response of complete response, partial response, or stable disease per RECIST v1.1. c Primary Efficacy Analysis Set. d Secondary Efficacy Analysis Set. Percentages based on number of patients in the analysis set for each treatment arm. Exact Clopper-Pearson used for 95% CI. IRC and investigator assessments are based on different populations and cannot compare directly.

451 Background: In first-line E/GEJ/G adenocarcinoma, anti-PD-1 + chemotherapy improves outcomes, yet many patients do not respond. Beyond PD-L1 CPS, tumor-intrinsic biomarkers of primary resistance remain limited. We applied a validated IFN-γ–linked T cell-inflamed (Tinfl) framework to define exclusionary programs and nominate targets. Methods: Bulk RNAseq was analyzed from TCGA ESCA/STAD adenocarcinoma (n=79, discovery) and a de novo Mayo cohort of pretreatment samples (n=74, validation) with harmonized survival and response data. Tinfl scores (160-gene signature) defined quartiles (Q1 cold, Q4 hot). Cold versus hot tumors were compared by edgeR + limma-voom to identify differentially expressed genes (DEGs) (Bioconductor v3.20). Pathway and upstream-regulator/causal-network analyses used Ingenuity Pathway Analysis seeded by top DEGs (|log2FC|>1.5, p<0.05). Survival was assessed by Cox proportional hazards models (two-sided α=0.05) and KM log-rank testing (α=0.05). A 14-gene Tinfl-weighted cold signature produced a per-sample composite score. Results: In the Mayo cohort, median age was 62 years; 72% were stage IV at diagnosis; 24% were HER2-positive and 3% MSI-H; primary sites were GEJ/esophagus/gastric 50%/34%/16%; PD-L1 CPS <1/1–5/6–49/≥50 occurred in 18%/46%/27%/4%; patients received a mean of 2.4 lines of therapy. Across discovery and validation cohorts, Tinfl-cold tumors showed significantly higher expression of developmental and lineage transcription factors (HOXC12, HOXC13, ZIC1, DLX3, EVX1), an oncofetal post-transcriptional hub (IGF2BP1), cancer-testis and piRNA components (MAGEA4, TDRD12, THEG), and neuronal or transport genes (GABRQ, KCNF1, LDLRAD1, SLC6A10P) (logFC >2, p<0.05). Pathway analysis highlighted chromatin and lineage regulators (KAT6A, SIRT1, LEF1), TGF-β signaling (TGFBR2), and repressors of innate DNA/IFN sensing (TREX1, IRF2BP2) (Z-score >2, p<0.05). The 14-gene Tinfl-weighted cold signature was higher in cold versus hot tumors (p<0.05) and showed a directional association with inferior overall survival in the Mayo validation cohort. Among patients who received first-line anti-PD-1–containing regimens, several signature members and the composite score were higher in non-responders (p<0.05). Conclusions: Using a discovery–validation design, we define tumor-intrinsic expression pathways that characterize Tinfl-cold E/GEJ/G adenocarcinoma. We also derive a concise 14-gene Tinfl-weighted cold signature that is enriched in non-responders and associated with inferior overall survival. Targetable nodes such as IGF2BP1 and MAGEA4, together with chromatin and Wnt/TGF-β regulators, support rational combinations with PD-1 blockade. Planned validation in a third cohort, single-cell confirmation of tumor-cell expression, and in vivo cytokine profiling in knockdown models will refine mechanisms and nominate clinical candidates.

402 Background: Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) is a HER2-targeted antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) with a cytotoxic payload. TDXd was approved in 2021 to be used in advanced gastric or GEJ cancers. Although given the recent approval, real-world evidence on efficacy and safety is limited. We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of T-DXd through a combined meta-analysis of clinical trials and real-world studies. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases. The original studies evaluating T-DXd in patients with metastatic/recurrent gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers were included in the analysis. The pooled objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and the incidence of adverse events (AEs) were analyzed. A random-effects model was used for meta-analysis, and the heterogeneity of the data was evaluated by Chi-sq Q test and the I 2 statistic using OpenMeta [Analyst] (Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA). Results: This meta-analysis incorporated 8 studies (3 phase II clinical trials, 5 retrospective studies) comprising 915 patients with advanced HER2-positive gastric/GEJ cancer. The median patient age was 66.5 years (range: 27–89), with 75.4% males, 70.4% Asian, and 29.0% Caucasians. 77.9% had an ECOG performance status of 0–1, while 21.8% had ECOG ≥2. Histologically, 53.6% had intestinal and 22.9% diffuse-type adenocarcinoma. HER2 overexpression (IHC3+) was observed in 75.8% of evaluable cases, and 22.4% were IHC2+/FISH positive. 77.6% had primary gastric and 22.4% GEJ tumors. The median line of therapy was 3 (range: 2–11), with prior immune checkpoint inhibitor use in 31.8% and prior surgery in 44.5% .The pooled ORR was 47.7% (95% CI 43.0-52.4%) and DCR was 82.50% (79.40%–85.72%); PFS and OS were 4.92 and 9.86 months, respectively. Safety analysis revealed grade ≥3 AEs in 48.2% of patients, neutropenia (24.5%) being the most common. Treatment discontinuation due to adverse events occurred in 12.2%, and dose reductions were required in 21.5%. Patient-reported outcomes were not assessed in any of the studies. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis, encompassing both clinical trials and real-world data, confirms the encouraging efficacy of T-DXd in gastric/GEJ cancers, with a pooled ORR of 47.7% and a median PFS of 4.92 months, and supports its use as an early-line treatment in this challenging disease landscape. This analysis also highlights the significant incidence of grade ≥3 AEs, particularly neutropenia, which necessitates vigilant monitoring and proactive management. Future research should focus on optimizing patient selection, exploring combination therapies, and refining dosing strategies to maximize clinical benefit while mitigating toxicity.

399 Background: The standard of care for resectable GEA adenocarcinomas is perioperative chemotherapy with the FLOT (fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, docetaxel) regimen. Recent studies investigating the addition of checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) to perioperative chemotherapy have shown mixed results. An NMA can leverage both direct and indirect comparisons to evaluate the relative efficacies of available regimens in this setting. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science and CENTRAL were searched until August 27th, 2025. Eligible studies included phase 3 randomized trials evaluating perioperative or neoadjuvant chemotherapy +/- CPIs ± radiation in resectable GEA. The primary outcomes were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using a frequentist NMA framework. Results: Fifteen trials including 8072 patients were analyzed. For DFS, perioperative durvalumab + FLOT (dFLOT) ranked highest (P-score = 0.99), followed by FLOT (P-score = 0.84) (HR for dFLOT vs. FLOT was 0.71, 95% CI 0.58-0.86). dFLOT also ranked higher than perioperative pembrolizumab + cisplatin and fluorouracil/capecitabine (KN-585), though this comparison was not statistically significant (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.40-1.04). Compared with CROSS, dFLOT showed superior DFS (HR of 0.48, 95% CI 0.36-0.63). For OS, dFLOT ranked the highest (P-score=0.95) and was superior to CROSS (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.42-0.77). While dFLOT appeared favorable versus FLOT (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.62-0.98), this finding was primarily driven by MATTERHORN, which did not meet its prespecified OS significance boundary (P = 0.03 vs threshold P < 0.0001), and the proportional hazards assumption was violated. Similarly, no significant OS difference was observed between dFLOT and the KN-585 arms (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.45-1.23). Conclusions: In this NMA, perioperative FLOT remained the benchmark regimen for resectable GEA. dFLOT has shown promising early results, ranking the highest for DFS and showing favorable, but not statistically definitive OS trends in comparison to FLOT. Importantly, the network enabled indirect comparisons not tested in head-to-head trials, demonstrating that dFLOT ranked above pembrolizumab+CF/CX (KN-585) without reaching statistical significance, and also outperformed CROSS. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution, as they are primarily driven MATTERHORN data in which OS did not cross the prespecified threshold and proportional hazards assumptions were violated. Perioperative immunotherapy combinations appear promising, but final MATTERHORN results and further confirmatory studies are needed before dFLOT can be considered as a new standard of care.

392 Background: PAC+RAM is the standard second-line therapy for advanced GEA. However, PAC-related neuropathy is a major challenge, particularly since many pts have pre-existing neuropathy from prior platinum exposure. An effective “neuropathy-free” regimen remains an unmet need. We evaluated FTD-TPI+RAM as an alternative to PAC+RAM. Methods: This multi-center, randomized, phase II study enrolled GEA pts who progressed on or were intolerant to fluoropyrimidine+ platinum therapy. Pts were randomized to FTD-TPI+RAM (Arm A) or PAC+RAM (arm B) at a 1:1 ratio. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), defined as time interval between randomization date and the date of disease progression or death; Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AEs). The design hypothesized non-inferiority (NI) of Arm A to Arm B with a NI margin of hazard ratio 1.19. 90 PFS events from 116 pts provide 80% power with a one-sided alpha of 0.15. The interim futility analysis, conducted in December 2024 with 20 events, did not cross the futility boundary (Z statistic ≥ 1.172 ) and continued enrolling pts. The trial closed enrollment in March 2025 due to slow accrual. At the time of interim analysis, 20 events had occurred and the Z statistic was 0.4532. Final analysis included the 29 pts that were eligible, consented, randomized, and received any protocol treatment. Results: Among 29 pts (15 Arm A; 14 Arm B), baseline characteristics were balanced (in Arms A vs B, median age 64 vs 63; 80% vs 85.7% male; 86.7%% vs 78.6% White; 80% vs 78.6% ECOG 1). At data freeze of 8/4/2025, 26 PFS events were reported. Median PFS was 3.2 vs. 3.9 months in Arm A vs. Arm B (HR 1.37, 95% CI 0.61-3.02). NI was not demonstrated (Z =0.34, threshold for NI<-1.036). Median OS was 8.4 vs. 10.7 months, in Arms A and B, respectively. Grade ≥3 AEs occurred in 93% (Arm A) vs 71% (Arm B) with hematologic AEs occurring more frequently in Arm A than Arm B (53% vs 29%). Peripheral sensory neuropathy (any grade) occurred more frequently in Arm B (86%) vs. Arm A (47%). Conclusions: Although NI was not achieved due to early closure and small sample size, FTD-TPI+RAM was relatively safe and associated with less neuropathy compared with PAC+RAM. This regimen warrants further evaluation for pts in whom neuropathy limits taxane use. Clinical trial information: NCT04660760 .

381 Background: In RATIONALE-306 (NCT03783442), patients (pts) with LA unresectable or metastatic ESCC who received TIS (intravenously, 200 mg, every 3 weeks) + CT (platinum + fluoropyrimidine or paclitaxel) had longer median overall survival (OS) than pts who received PBO + CT at the interim analysis; improvement was maintained after a ≥3-year follow-up. Post hoc analyses in the PD-L1 TAP ≥1% subgroup showed clinically meaningful improvement with TIS + CT. These data supported the US FDA approval for unresectable or metastatic ESCC. Here we report the subgroup analysis of pts who had LA ESCC with PD-L1 TAP score ≥1%. Methods: Pts who had LA unresectable ESCC with PD-L1 TAP score ≥1% were included in this post hoc analysis. Efficacy outcomes (OS, progression-free survival [PFS], objective response rate [ORR], duration of response [DoR]) and safety were analyzed. Results: At data cutoff (Feb 28, 2022), of 649 pts randomized, 63 had LA ESCC with PD-L1 TAP score ≥1% (TIS + CT n=31; PBO + CT n=32; median age 67.0 years; 85.7% male). At median follow-up (TIS + CT 24.4 months; PBO + CT 24.5 months), efficacy with TIS + CT was improved vs PBO + CT (Table) and was consistent with the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Efficacy was maintained after a ≥3-year follow-up (data cutoff: Nov 24, 2023; Table). Conclusions: In this post-hoc analysis, the median OS for pts receiving TIS + CT exceeded two years. The regimen was well tolerated. While the findings require validation in future clinical trials, first-line TIS + CT is an encouraging option for pts who have LA unresectable ESCC with PD-L1 TAP score ≥1%. Clinical trial information: NCT03783442 . Interim Analysis 3-Year Follow-up TIS + CT (n=31) PBO + CT (n=32) TIS + CT (n=32) e PBO + CT (n=31) f Median OS, mo(95% CI) 25.6 (15.3, NE) 11.5(9.0, 21.8) 25.6 (15.3, NE) 12.3(9.0, 21.8) HR (95% CI) a 0.36 (0.17, 0.77) – 0.50 (0.26, 0.95) – Median PFS, a mo(95% CI) 13.2(6.8, NE) 6.7(4.2, 9.7) 13.2(6.8, 27.7) 6.7(4.2, 9.7) HR (95% CI) a 0.46 (0.22, 0.96) – 0.47 (0.23, 0.96) – ORR, b,c n (%) 18 (58.1) 10 (31.3) 19 (59.4) 10 (32.3) Median DoR, b,d mo(95% CI) Not reached (8.4, NE) 5.7 (1.5, 9.6) 22.1 (6.1, NE) 5.7 (1.5, 9.6) a Stratified. b Investigator assessed. c Unconfirmed. d Based on unconfirmed ORR. e One patient’s disease status at baseline was changed to LA after interim analysis. f One patient’s disease status at baseline was changed to metastatic after interim analysis. NE, not estimable.

380 Background: KRAS amplifications (amp) occur in ~2% of solid tumors, representing a high unmet need for effective targeted therapies. BI3706674 binds to GDP-bound KRAS and locks KRAS protein in an inactive form. In preclinical models, BI3706674 has shown potent inhibition of KRAS-amp tumors. Methods: This is a Phase Ia/b trial (NCT06056024) to explore the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD) and efficacy of BI 3706674 in patients (pts) with unresectable or metastatic KRAS wild type amp or KRAS G12V mutated (mut) solid tumors. The trial aimed to define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Pts (ECOG 0 -1) received BI 3706674 daily per os at 50 - 1200 mg doses. Dose escalation (DE) was guided by a Bayesian logistic regression model. This report focuses on KRAS wt amp pts from Phase Ia (DE). Results: As of 31 July 2025, 46 pts had received BI 3706674. Pts (n=15/46) with KRAS wt amp tumors had upper gastrointestinal tract (uGI) cancer [n=9: gastric (GAC;n=5), oesophageal (EAC; n=2), gastroesophageal junction (GEJC; n=2) cancers], Cholangiocarcinoma (n=1), colorectal (CRC; n=4), and ovarian (OC; n=1) cancers. Pts were treated at 200 mg (n=2), 400 mg (n=1), 800 mg (n=5), 1200 mg (n=7) doses; males: n=11; ECOG 1: n=10; median age - 62 years (range 38–83); median number of prior treatment lines was 3 (range 1-6). AEs were reported in 15 pts (100%), including 12 pts (80%) with treatment-related AEs (TRAE). High-grade AEs (Grade 3-5) were reported in 10 pts (66.7%), including 4 pts (26.7%) with TRAEs. SAEs were reported in 7 pts (46.7%), including 2 pts (13.3%) with TRAEs. The most-frequent AEs were mostly low-grade (Grade 1-2) diarrhoea (10 pts, 66.7%), nausea (10 pts, 66.7%), and vomiting (9 pts, 60.0%), often reported as TRAE. Two dose limiting toxicities were observed in 1200 mg group: nausea (Grade 3) and vomiting (Grade 3). MTD was not reached. BI 3706674 PK parameters followed the predicted non-linear PK model; dose dependent systemic exposure reached plateau at 800 mg. 12/15 pts with KRAS wt amp tumors, including 10/12 pts in 800 – 1200 mg groups, were efficacy evaluable; Disease control rate (DCR) was 58.3% (7/12 pts): 3/ 12 pts with partial response (PR), 4/12 had stable disease (SD), 5/12 pts - disease progression (PD). In 800 – 1200 mg groups 1 - OC, 2 – CRC pts achieved SD. PK/PD/efficacy correlation data is pending. Conclusions: BI 3706674 showed a tolerable safety profile and clinical efficacy in pts with KRAS amp tumors. Study results provide clinical proof of concept. KRAS wt amp is a druggable target and KRAS-targeting treatment is active in KRAS wt amp uGI cancer pts. Clinical trial information: NCT06056024 . Anticancer activity of BI 3706674 in efficacy evaluable pts with KRAS wt amp tumors. All pts, 200 – 1200 mg, N=12 Pts with uGI cancers,800 – 1200mg, N=7 ORR, n (%) 3* (25%) 3* (43%) SD, n (%) 4 (33.3%) 1 (14%) DCR, n (%) 7 (58.3%) 4 (57%) PD, n (%) 5 (41.7%) 3 (43%) *Tumor shrinkage: -60.3%, -34% and 34.3%.

378 Background: RATIONALE-305 (NCT03777657) enrolled the highest number of pts with PM among similar trials and stratified pts with advanced GC/GEJC by presence of PM. We used statistical modeling to evaluate the impact of varying PM levels on outcomes with TIS+CT. Methods: We randomized adults with GC/GEJC (1:1) to TIS or placebo (PBO) + CT. Primary endpoints: OS in intent-to-treat (ITT) population and pts with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) Tumor Area Positivity (TAP) score ≥5%. We weighted pts using the method of moments to match a hypothetical population to ITT, with the same distribution of sex, primary tumor location, PD-L1 (TAP score <5% vs ≥5%), number of metastatic sites (0-2 vs 3+), and liver metastasis. PM representation was set from 20% to 45%. Weighted OS, PFS, and objective response rate (ORR) were estimated. Results: Of 997 pts enrolled, 434 (43.5%) had PM. Among pts with PD-L1 TAP scores ≥5% (54.8%), 39.7% had PM, and among pts with scores ≥1% (88.9%), 43.6% had PM (data cutoff Feb 28, 2024). Fewer pts with (+) PM had PD-L1 high tumors (TAP score ≥5%: 50.0%) and more had primary stomach tumors (86.6%) compared to those without (-) PM (58.4% and 75.5%). TIS+CT improved OS, PFS, and ORR in ITT and in pts +/- PM vs PBO+CT (Table). Across 20%–45% PM, TIS+CT showed consistent benefit, with stable HRs for OS and PFS (20% and 45% shown). TIS+CT showed survival benefits in pts with PM and PD-L1 TAP score ≥5% (OS: HR=0.71; PFS: HR=0.65) and ≥1% (OS: HR=0.79; PFS: HR=0.79) vs PBO+CT. ORR was higher with TIS+CT vs PBO+CT in pts + PM and PD-L1 TAP scores ≥5% (47.3% vs 30.8%) and ≥1% (44.2% vs 33.2%). Conclusions: Our analysis showed that lowering PM representation marginally improved OS and ORR, underscoring the poor prognosis of peritoneal disease. In RATIONALE-305, TIS+CT provides clinically meaningful response and survival benefits irrespective of PM, with higher responses in PD-L1+ GC/GEJC. Clinical trial information: NCT03777657 . Arm(95% CI) ITT + PM - PM 20%+ PM 45%+ PM OS, months TIS+CT 15.0 (13.6, 16.5) 12.3 (10.6, 14.3) 17.3 (15.0, 20.3) 15.4 (13.9, 18.0) 15.0 (13.5, 16.5) PBO+CT 12.9 (12.1, 14.1) 11.8 (10.5, 13.0) 14.0 (12.6, 16.0) 13.1 (12.3, 14.5) 12.8 (12.1, 14.1) HR 0.79 (0.69, 0.91) 0.78 (0.64, 0.96) 0.79 (0.65, 0.95) 0.81 (0.69, 0.95) 0.79 (0.69, 0.90) PFS, months TIS+CT 6.9 (5.7, 7.2) 5.8 (5.6, 7.3) 7.0 (5.7, 8.4) 6.9 (5.7, 7.3) 6.9 (5.7, 7.2) PBO+CT 6.2 (5.6, 6.9) 5.7 (5.3, 6.9) 6.9 (5.7, 7.1) 6.5 (5.6, 7.0) 6.2 (5.6, 6.9) HR 0.79 (0.68, 0.91) 0.80 (0.64, 0.98) 0.77 (0.64, 0.94) 0.79 (0.67, 0.94) 0.79 (0.69, 0.91) ORR, % TIS+CT 47.3 (42.9, 51.8) 43.6 (37.0, 50.5) 50.2 (44.2, 56.2) 48.0(42.9, 53.1) 47.3 (42.8, 51.8) PBO+CT 40.5 (36.2, 45.0) 32.2 (26.0, 39.0) 46.8 (40.9, 52.8) 43.1(38.1, 48.3) 40.3(36.0, 44.8) ORR difference, % 6.8 (0.6, 12.9) 11.4 (2.3, 20.3) 3.4 (-4.9, 11.6) 4.9 (-2.2, 11.9) 6.9 (0.8, 13.0)