Citations

588 Background: CALGB/SWOG 80405 found no difference in overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) in 1137 patients with KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with either the anti-VEGF agent bevacizumab (Bev) or the anti-EGFR agent cetuximab (Cet) in combination with chemotherapy (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI) as first-line therapy. Additional molecular biomarkers are required for the optimization of treatment choices for patients with mCRC. Methods: Levels of 24 proteins were assayed in EDTA-plasma samples using multiplex ELISA techniques. Plasma samples were collected at baseline and cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1). Analyses of baseline markers have been presented previously. Changes from baseline to C2D1 were expressed as an L-ratio (LR, log2 of C2D1 divided by baseline measure). LRs dichotomized at 0 were analyzed for potential prognostic and predictive effects on OS and PFS using Cox models while adjusting for confounders (post-hoc optimized cutpoints were used for PLGF, TIMP1, VCAM1, and VEGFR3 due to skew in the distributions of these markers). P-values are not corrected for multiple testing. Results: Baseline and matched C2D1 samples from 446 patients (212 Bev/234 Cet) were available for analysis. Thirteen markers were differentially modulated between arms (p < 0.05). Early increases in CD73 (p = 0.001), ICAM1 (p = 0.022), TIMP1 (p = 0.001), TSP2 (p = 0.024), and VEGFR3 (p = 0.006) were prognostic for shorter OS. Increases in ICAM1 (p = 0.008), TIMP1 (p = 0.042), and TGFB1 (p = 0.039) were prognostic for shorter PFS. Changes in VEGFR3 (pint = 0.097) and TGFBR3 (pint = 0.052) were predictive for OS and PFS, respectively. No other markers were predictive for OS or PFS (p < 0.1). Conclusions: Changes in circulating plasma protein biomarkers observed in patients enrolled in CALGB/SWOG 80405 were both prognostic and predictive for OS and PFS and warrant further study. Such changes could provide valuable information and help guide treatment decisions. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U10CA180888, U10CA180830; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00265850. [Table: see text]

Marine omega‐3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (MO3PUFAs) have anticancer properties and may improve colon cancer survival. However, it remains unknown whether the benefit differs by tumor molecular subtype. We examined data from a phase III randomized trial of FOLFOX or FOLFOX + cetuximab among 1,735 stage III colon cancer patients who completed a dietary questionnaire at enrollment. Multivariable hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the association between MO3PUFA and disease‐free survival (DFS) and overall survival according toKRASandBRAFV600Emutations and DNA mismatch repair (MMR) status. Higher MO3PUFA intake was associated with improved 3‐year DFS forKRASwild‐type tumors (77%vs. 73%; HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.67–1.05) but notKRAS‐mutant tumors (64%vs. 70%; HR: 1.30; 95% CI: 0.97–1.73;Pinteraction= 0.02). Similar heterogeneity was found by MMR (Pinteraction= 0.14): higher MO3PUFA was associated with better 3‐year DFS for tumors with deficient MMR (72%vs. 67%) but not proficient MMR (72%vs. 72%). No heterogeneity was found byBRAFV600Emutation. Similar findings were obtained for overall survival. In conclusion, we found a suggestive beneficial association between higher MO3PUFA intake and improved survival among stage III colon cancer patients with wild‐typeKRASand deficient MMR. Given the relatively small number of cases with tumor molecular assessments, further studies, preferably through pooled analyses of multiples cohorts, are needed to validate our findings.

Background Sexual and gender minority individuals face numerous cancer‐related inequities, many of which appear to be underreported. However, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, no one has assessed rates of acquisition of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) data within community oncology settings. Methods Community oncology practices that were part of the NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) network were asked whether they routinely collected SOGI information and coded this information in their electronic medical records. The proportion of practice groups reporting routine collection of sexual and/or gender minority information was calculated. Potential associations between the collection of SOGI information and practice group–level and state‐level characteristics (from Gallup poll data) were also provided. Results Twenty‐four percent of the responding NCORP practice groups reported routine collection of sexual orientation information, and 10% reported collection of gender identity information. Practices located in western regions of the United States, practices in states with higher proportions of sexual and gender minority–identifying individuals, and practices with lower proportions of non‐Hispanic patients were more likely to ask patients about sexual orientation and/or gender identity. Conclusions US oncology practices that participate in research do not frequently collect SOGI information from patients with cancer. Educational initiatives should inform oncology staff and providers about the importance of collecting gender identity and sexual orientation information to improve existent disparities faced by sexual and gender minority patients.

TPS3624 Background: To improve survival for patients with mCRC, efforts are needed to identify and treat actionable genomic alterations. HER2 is amplified in approximately 5-8% of patients with KRAS and NRAS (RAS) wild-type mCRC. HER2 functions as an oncogenic driver and a mediator of EGFR antibody (Ab) resistance. Although prior studies have shown that anti-HER2 therapies are active in patients with HER2+ (HER2 IHC 3+ or HER2 amplified) mCRC, there are no HER2-directed therapies approved for these patients. Tucatinib is a potent and highly selective oral small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor of HER2, currently being developed to treat metastatic breast cancer. In HER2+ CRC patient derived xenograft models, tucatinib has substantial anti-tumor activity. The addition of the anti-HER2 monoclonal Ab trastuzumab augments tumor growth inhibition. Methods: This single-arm phase II study will test the combination of tucatinib and trastuzumab in patients with HER2+ mCRC. Eligible patients include those with RAS wild-type mCRC who have been previously treated with 5-FU, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and an anti-VEGF monoclonal Ab. Patients must have HER2+ disease by IHC, FISH, or NGS. Prior treatment with anti-HER2 targeting therapy is excluded. The primary objective is to assess the objective response rate for the combination. Secondary objectives are to evaluate the efficacy (PFS, OS, clinical benefit rate), safety, and tolerability of the combination. Correlation between tissue and blood-based biomarkers and clinical outcomes will be explored. Blood will be collected at baseline and each restaging to determine if the combination eliminates HER2 amplified circulating tumor DNA. Subjects will receive tucatinib at a dose of 300mg by mouth daily, and trastuzumab will be administered every 3 weeks (8 mg/kg IV day 1 of cycle 1, then 6 mg/kg IV Q3 weeks). Response will be assessed every 3 cycles (9 weeks) per RECIST version 1.1. Both agents will be provided by the study. This study was initiated in February 2017. Recruitment is ongoing at 8 sites in the Academic and Community Cancer Research United (ACCRU) network. Clinical trial information: NCT03043313.

3511 Background: CALGB 80405 was a randomized Ph3 trial showing no OS or PFS difference in mCRC pts treated with Bevacizumab (BV) or Cetuximab (Cet) in the first line. A Nanostring platform was used to determine the CMS classification of 392 KRAS wt (codon 12 and 13) primary tumors and correlated it with OS and PFS in patients enrolled in 80405. Methods: CMS for 392 of 431tumors were defined using a custom CRC Nanostring panel (39 CMS classification not possible). Stratified Cox proportional hazard model was used to evaluate the effect of CMS classification stratified by prior radiation, prior chemotherapy, adjusting for age, sex, race, primary in place, liver met only, and sidedness. Results: We found CMS1 (14%), CMS2 (47%), CMS3 (2%), CMS4 (29%), NonConsensus (8%). Results are shown in Table 1. Patients with CMS1 who received BV had significantly longer OS than those who received Cet (HR 0.47, 95% CI [0.24, 0.92]). Patients with CMS2 who received BV tended to have shorter OS than those who received Cet (HR 1.41, CI [0.95, 2.08]). Conclusions: Our data suggest that CMS is associated with OS and PFS in first line therapy in mCRC patients. Preliminary data suggest that certain CMS may be associated with efficacy of Bev and Cet based chemotherapy. CMS classification should be explored as a stratification factor in future trials. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180830, U10CA180882 Clinical trial information: NCT00265850. [Table: see text]

3504 Background: CALGB 80405 was a randomized phase III trial that found no difference in OS in first-line mCRC pts treated with either bevacizumab (Bev) or cetuximab (Cet). Primary tumor DNA from 361 pts, including KRAS mutant (mut) pts, has been profiled for somatic gene mutations/ML/MSI to discover molecular markers of OS. Methods: Mutations in 11 genes were determined by PCR, MSI by microsatellite analysis, and ML by next-generation sequencing (FoundationOne). Cox proportional hazard models are used, stratified by prior XRT and +/- adjuvant chemotherapy; adjusted by age, race, gender, synchronous vs. metachronous, liver metastases, sidedness, all RAS. Results: BRAF: Mut pts had shorter OS than wild-type (wt) pts (HR 1.92, 95% CI 1.34,2.75; p<0.001); HR 1.65 (1.09,2.50) after adjusting for sidedness (p 0.022). In mut pts longer OS is observed in Bev arm vs. Cet arm (p 0.041); in wt pts no arm difference is observed (p 0.291, table). MSI: OS does not differ between MSI-H and MSI-S pts (HR 0.78 [0.40, 1.52], p 0.450). In MSI-H pts longer OS is observed in Bev arm vs. Cet arm (p 0.002); in MSI-S pts no difference is observed (p 0.305, table). ML: Hypermutated MSI-H pts are excluded. In a subset of 205 pts, pts with ML>5 (N=93) have longer OS than pts with ML≤5 (N=112) (HR 0.65 [0.42,1.00], p 0.048). In Bev arm higher ML confers longer OS than lower ML (HR 0.85 [0.80,0.96], p 0.004); in Cet arm no difference is observed (HR 0.99 [0.90,1.09], p 0.862). Conclusions: BRAF is a strong negative prognostic factor in mCRC, even when sidedness is taken into account. ML is a novel marker for further evaluation. The effect of Bev and Cet in either BRAF mut or MSI-H pts should be tested in larger datasets. Updated results from more screened samples will be presented. [Table: see text]

3503 Background: 80405 found no OS or Progression Free Survival (PFS) difference when bevacizumab (BV) or cetuximab (Cet) was added to 1st-line FOLFOX or FOLFIRI in All RAS wild type (wt) mCRC pts. There was a significant 1° side by biologic interaction (P int: OS = 0.008, PFS = 0.001) favoring pts with left-sided (L) 1°. Analyses of 1° tumors beyond All RAS includes Consensus Molecular Subtype (CMS), BRAF and MSI. (CMS results - see Lenz et al; BRAF -see Innocenti et al) We asked whether 1° tumor location - L vs right (R) - is an independent prognostic marker when these other molecular features are considered. Methods: We used a Cox proportional hazard model stratified by prior XRT and +/- adjuvant chemo; adjusted for age, gender, synchronous vs metachronous, CMS, MSI and BRAF status. Pts with transverse (T) tumors were excluded in this analysis. Results: Sidedness was determined in 782 pts (L - 472; R - 256; T -54). Molecular data from 728 pts (with L - and R-sided 1°s) was available as follows: KRAS -- 291, NRAS -393, BRAF - 393, MSI - 378, CMS - 533. L vs R mOS: 32.9 v 19.6 months (mo) (p < 0.0001). See Table for OS results in All RAS / BRAF wt and BRAF mutant (mut) pts. Sidedness (R vs L) is an independent prognostic marker even after adjusting for all these molecular features: HR = 1.392 (1.032, 1.878), p = 0.031. Conclusions: Primary tumor location is an independent prognostic factor when adjusted for age, gender, synchronous/metachronous, CMS, MSI and BRAF status. We are exploring clinical variables such as tumor burden, metastatic sites and measurability of disease in an attempt to explain the impact of sidedness. Support: U10CA188021, U10CA180882. Eli Lilly and Co, Genentech/Roche, Pfizer, Sanofi. Clinical trial information: NCT002655850. [Table: see text]

AbstractBackground: Prior studies have supported an inverse association between physical activity and colon cancer risk and suggest that higher physical activity may also improve cancer survival. Among participants in a phase III adjuvant trial for stage III colon cancer, we assessed the association of physical activity around the time of cancer diagnosis with subsequent outcomes.Methods: Before treatment arm randomization (FOLFOX or FOLFOX + cetuximab), study participants completed a questionnaire including items regarding usual daily activity level and frequency of participation in recreational physical activity (N = 1,992). Using multivariable Cox models, we calculated HRs for associations of aspects of physical activity with disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS).Results: Over follow-up, 505 participants died and 541 experienced a recurrence. Overall, 75% of participants reported recreational physical activity at least several times a month; for participants who reported physical activity at least that often (vs. once a month or less), the HRs for DFS and OS were 0.82 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.69–0.99] and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.63–0.93), respectively. There was no evidence of material effect modification in these associations by patient or tumor attributes, except that physical activity was more strongly inversely associated with OS in patients with stage T3 versus T4 tumors (Pinteraction = 0.03).Conclusions: These findings suggest that higher physical activity around the time of colon cancer diagnosis may be associated with more favorable colon cancer outcomes.Impact: Our findings support further research on whether colon cancer survival may be enhanced by physical activity. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 27(6); 696–703. ©2018 AACR.