Citations

4122 Background: BTCs are rare and aggressive malignancies. The first-line standard of care regimen for advanced BTC (aBTC) is gemcitabine (GEM), cisplatin, and an immune checkpoint inhibitor. Although FOLFOX is a preferred second-line treatment, it is limited by neuropathy. Nal-IRI contains IRI free base in liposome nanoparticles, which shelter IRI from conversion to its active metabolite (SN-38) and increase intratumoral SN-38 compared with IRI alone. The NAPOLI-1 trial of FU/LV/nal-IRI vs. FU/LV in second-line advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma showed an overall survival (OS) benefit. The NIFTY trial (South Korea) demonstrated median OS (mOS) benefit of FU/LV/nal-IRI over FU/LV in a second-line aBTC population (8.6 vs. 5.3 months [mo], HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.48-0.95); however, the NALIRICC trial (Germany) did not (6.9 vs. 8.2 mo, HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.68-1.72). We sought to characterize second-line FU/LV/nal-IRI efficacy in US patients (pts) with second-line aBTC. Methods: This was a single-arm, open-label, multicenter phase II study of pts with aBTC previously treated with GEM/platinum chemotherapy. Pts received nal-IRI 70 mg/m 2 IV over 90 minutes, LV 400 mg/m 2 IV over 30 minutes every 14 days, and FU 2400 mg/m 2 IV over 46 hours every 14 days. The primary objective was to determine progression-free survival rate at 4 mo (PFS 4mo ) using RECIST v. 1.1 criteria. Median PFS reported for pts receiving second-line 5-FU doublet chemotherapy was 3 mo with a PFS of 30%. FU/LV/nal-IRI was of interest if it could increase the PFS 4mo to 50% or higher. Using a one-sided α of 0.05 and 80% power, 17 of 39 evaluable pts had to be progression-free at 4 mo to detect a difference in PFS 4mo between 30% and 50%. Results: Forty-eight pts were enrolled: median age 64.5 years; 69% women; 27% gallbladder primary; 54% intra- and 19% extrahepatic. Ten pts came off study due to toxicity without disease progression before 4 mo on study and were replaced to evaluate the PFS 4mo endpoint. Of 38 evaluable pts, 18 pts (PFS 4mo 47%) were alive and progression-free at 4 mo, meeting the primary endpoint. With a median follow-up of 7.1 mo, median time to disease progression or study discontinuation due to toxicity for all pts was 2.3 mo (95% CI 1.8-4.6, PFS 4mo 38%), and for pts evaluable for the primary endpoint, median PFS was 3.5 mo (95% CI 1.8-5.5). Five pts (10%) had PFS beyond 12 mo. mOS for all pts was 7.9 mo (95% CI 5.7-11.7). Of 41 evaluable pts, the response rate was 2% (1 PR), and the disease control rate was 54%. Adverse events (AEs) were consistent with known toxicities from the FU/LV/nal-IRI regimen. Conclusions: FU/LV/nal-IRI is an effective second-line regimen for aBTC in US pts. There was significant early toxicity as 21% of pts came off study due to AEs before 4 mo. Correlative studies, including longitudinal analyses of circulating tumor DNA using banked blood specimens, are planned (NCT04005339). Clinical trial information: NCT04005339 .

ABSTRACT Background Retrospective evaluations of multidisciplinary team (MDT) review of pancreatic cystic lesions (PCL) demonstrate improved PCL management. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) evaluates PCL for worrisome features; however, its influence on MDT is unclear and may be attenuated by anchoring/confirmation bias. We aimed to evaluate the impact of EUS and the overall performance of MDT evaluation of PCL. Methods Four mock MDT sessions at two institutions were presented imaging from 40 consecutive PCL cases (20 “high‐risk” with advanced neoplasia, 20 “low‐risk” with pathologic low‐grade dysplasia or ≥ 3 years of non‐progression on surveillance), with and without upfront EUS/FNA (cytology, CEA, Amylase), in a randomized, crossover design. Group 1 adjudicated without EUS, Group 2 adjudicated with EUS, and Group 3 adjudicated with EUS after initially adjudicating without it. Results The cohort included branch‐duct ( n = 20), mixed type ( n = 6), and main duct ( n = 4) IPMN, MCN ( n = 5), and non‐mucinous PCL ( n = 5). Group 2 (EUS) correctly identified mucinous PCL with 97% sensitivity and 70% specificity, significantly higher than Group 1 (No EUS) (Sensitivity 91%, Specificity 20%; p = 0.04). Group 3 (Unblinded to EUS) performed significantly worse in mucinous PCL identification compared with Group 2, indicating cognitive bias (Sensitivity 97%, Specificity 10% ( p = 0.0003)). Group 2 correctly identified high‐risk PCL that required surgical intervention with 85% sensitivity and 85% specificity, significantly higher than Group 1 (Sensitivity 60%, Specificity 75%; p = 0.0016) and Group 3 (Sensitivity 73%, Specificity 80%, p = 0.0485). Conclusion While susceptible to cognitive bias, EUS significantly improves MDT assessment of PCL. MDT establishes a high bar for iterative additions of biomarkers to PCL analysis.

162 Background: In preclinical studies, the tryptophan-metabolizing enzyme, Indoleamine 2, 3-dioxygenase 1 (IDO1), promotes resistance to radiation in colorectal cancer, and IDO1 inhibition with epacadostat improves tumor radiosensitivity. In a phase 1 trial, patients (pts) with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC, n=17) were treated with epacadostat in combination with short course radiotherapy (SCRT) and CAPOX which was well-tolerated, and the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of epacadostat was 400mg BID. Here we report efficacy and safety from the NCI-supported phase 2 (NCT03516708) multicenter, open-label trial (treatment cohort). Methods: Pts were treated with standard of care (SOC) SCRT, then SOC neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) followed by SOC surgical resection or non-operative management (NOM). Epacadostat (400 mg BID) started with SCRT and continued until starting NAC (a minimum of 21 days). Eight pts were enrolled prior to discontinuation of epacadostat by Incyte in February/March 2025. The primary endpoint is Neoadjuvant Rectal (NAR) score. In patients who underwent NOM, we calculated MRI-based tumor regression grade (MR-TRG). Secondary endpoints are pathologic complete response (pCR) rate, complete clinical response (cCR) rate, and progression free survival (PFS). Results: Table 1 summarizes baseline characteristics and endpoints (primary and secondary). NOM was pursued in 7/8 (87.5%) pts, surgical resection was performed on 1/8 (12.5%). At median follow-up of 12 months, local tumor regrowth occurred in 1 pt initially treated with NOM (after tumor regrowth, he underwent salvage surgery and is currently on surveillance). Treatment with epacadostat was interrupted in 2/8 (25%) patients due to grade 3 maculopapular skin rash. Most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) regardless of causality (all grades (G)/G3-4) were bloating (75%/0%), increased ALT (62.5%/0%), increased AST (50%/0%), nausea (50%/0%), and constipation (50%/0%). Grade 3 diarrhea and grade 3 non-cardiac chest pain occurred in 1 patient each (both unrelated to epacadostat). Conclusions: Epacadostat demonstrates promising efficacy and manageable safety in patients with LARC. The biomarker cohort and correlative studies are ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT03516708 . Baseline characteristics and endpoints. Patient Age Sex Ethnicity Stage Surgery/NOM NAR MR-TRG cCR/pCR Recurrence 1 52 M Caucasian T3N1 NOM NA 2 Y/NA No 2 45 M Caucasian T3N1 NOM NA 3 Y/NA Local tumor regrowth 3 48 M Caucasian T3N2 NOM NA 3 Y/NA No 4 61 M Caucasian T4N2 NOM NA 3 Y/NA No 5 57 M Caucasian T3N0 NOM NA 1 Y/NA No 6 60 F Caucasian T3N1 Surgery 15 3 N/ypT3N0 No 7 67 M Caucasian T4N0 NOM NA 3 Y/NA No 8 51 M Caucasian T4N2 NOM NA P NA No

TPS3648 Background: Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 (IDO1) metabolizes tryptophan along the kynurenine pathway and is recognized as a potent suppressor of tumor reactive immunity. Epacadostat is an orally active, potent and selective inhibitor of IDO1. In preclinical studies, IDO1 was found to promote resistance to radiation in rectal cancer, irrespective of microsatellite instability (MSI) status. IDO1 inhibition with epacadostat improved tumor radiosensitivity by relieving immune suppression and augmenting radiation-induced apoptosis while protecting the normal intestine from radiation damage. In a phase 1 trial, 17 patients were enrolled from 4/2019 to 8/2023. Epacadostat in combination with short-course radiation therapy (SCRT) and CAPOX was well-tolerated and the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of epacadostat was determined to be 400 mg BID. An NCI supported Phase 2 trial is ongoing to further evaluate the promising disease responses reported in the dose escalation phase. Methods: This phase 2 multicenter, open-label trial includes treatment and biomarker cohorts. In the treatment cohort, epacadostat at 400 mg BID will be administered concurrently with SCRT followed by epacadostat monotherapy until 1 day prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, followed by standard-of-care (SOC) neoadjuvant chemotherapy and, ultimately, surgical resection or non-operative management (NOM). Biomarker cohort enrollment will commence at completion of treatment cohort accrual. Enrolled patients will be treated with SOC SCRT followed by SOC neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgical resection or NOM. Eligible patients must be a treatment-naïve, newly diagnosed, pathologically confirmed, locally advanced rectal cancer (defined by 8 th edition AJCC stage 2 or 3, or stage 1 not eligible for sphincter-sparing surgery) with plans to proceed with neoadjuvant SCRT and chemotherapy. The primary endpoint is the neoadjuvant rectal (NAR) score. Secondary endpoints are pathologic complete response (pCR) rate, complete clinical response (cCR) rate and progression-free survival (PFS). Exploratory endpoints are pharmacodynamics, PDX and organoid generation, identification of molecular predictors of response and resistance, correlation of radiographic and pathologic response and effect of treatment on patient quality of life. We aim to enroll 27 patients in the treatment cohort and 10 in the biomarker cohort. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03516708 .

How the KRAS oncogene drives cancer growth remains poorly understood. Therefore, we established a systemwide portrait of KRAS- and extracellular signal–regulated kinase (ERK)–dependent gene transcription in KRAS-mutant cancer to delineate the molecular mechanisms of growth and of inhibitor resistance. Unexpectedly, our KRAS-dependent gene signature diverges substantially from the frequently cited Hallmark KRAS signaling gene signature, is driven predominantly through the ERK mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) cascade, and accurately reflects KRAS- and ERK-regulated gene transcription in KRAS-mutant cancer patients. Integration with our ERK-regulated phospho- and total proteome highlights ERK deregulation of the anaphase promoting complex/cyclosome (APC/C) and other components of the cell cycle machinery as key processes that drive pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) growth. Our findings elucidate mechanistically the critical role of ERK in driving KRAS-mutant tumor growth and in resistance to KRAS-ERK MAPK targeted therapies.

Abstract Purpose: Targeting focal adhesion kinase (FAK) renders checkpoint immunotherapy effective in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) mouse model. Defactinib is a highly potent oral FAK inhibitor that has a tolerable safety profile. Patients and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, open-label, phase I study with dose escalation and expansion phases. In dose escalation, patients with refractory solid tumors were treated at five escalating dose levels of defactinib and gemcitabine to identify a recommended phase II dose (RP2D). In expansion phase, patients with metastatic PDAC who progressed on frontline treatment (refractory cohort) or had stable disease (SD) after at least 4 months of standard gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (maintenance cohort) were treated at RP2D. Pre- and posttreatment tumor biopsies were performed to evaluate tumor immunity. Results: The triple drug combination was well-tolerated, with no dose-limiting toxicities. Among 20 treated patients with refractory PDAC, the disease control rate (DCR) was 80%, with one partial response (PR) and 15 SDs, and the median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.6 and 7.8 months, respectively. Among 10 evaluable patients in the maintenance cohort, DCR was 70% with one PR and six SDs. Three patients with SD came off study due to treatment- or disease-related complications. The median PFS and OS on study treatment were 5.0 and 8.3 months, respectively. Conclusions: The combination of defactinib, pembrolizumab, and gemcitabine was well-tolerated and safe, had promising preliminary efficacy, and showed biomarker activity in infiltrative T lymphocytes. Efficacy of this strategy may require incorporation of more potent chemotherapy in future studies.

4146 Background: Targeting focal adhesion kinase (FAK) renders checkpoint immunotherapy effective in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) mouse models. Defactinib is a highly potent oral FAK inhibitor shown to have a tolerable safety profile. We evaluated the safety and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of defactinib in combination with pembrolizumab and gemcitabine for PDAC patients. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, open-label, phase I study with dose escalation and expansion phases. In 3x3 dose escalation, patients with refractory solid tumors were treated at five escalating dose levels of defactinib and gemcitabine to identify a RP2D. In expansion phase, patients with metastatic PDAC who progressed on frontline treatment (refractory cohort) or had treatment response or stable disease (SD) on standard gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (maintenance cohort) were treated at RP2D. Pre- and post-treatment tumor biopsies were performed to evaluate changes in tumor immunity. Results: The triple drug combination was well-tolerated with no dose-limiting toxicities. Among 17 treated patients with refractory PDAC, the disease control rate (DCR) was 58.8% with one partial response (PR) and nine SDs and the median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 4.2 months and 9.1 months, respectively. Among the evaluable patients in the maintenance cohort, DCR was 63.6% with one PR and six SD. Three patients with SD came off study due to treatment- or disease-related complications. The median PFS and OS were 5.0 months and 8.3 months, respectively. Conclusions: The combination of defactinib, pembrolizumab, and gemcitabine was well-tolerated, had promising preliminary efficacy, and showed increased infiltrative T lymphocytes in post-treatment tumor biopsies. Incorporation of a more potent chemotherapy backbone should be considered to achieve better clinical response in future trial design. Clinical trial information: NCT02546531.

TPS3172 Background: Ulixertinib (BVD-523) is a small molecule inhibitor of extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1/2 (ERK1/2) in development as a novel anti-cancer drug. Early clinical data demonstrated anti-tumor activity, especially for patients with tumors harboring atypical BRAF or MEK1/2 alterations (Sullivan et al., Cancer Discov. 2018;8(2):184-195). Atypical BRAF (non-V600) alterations can be categorized according to characteristics of molecular signaling (Class II or III), are seen in approximately 3% of all human cancers, and there are currently no approved therapies for this indication. Similar to atypical BRAF alterations, the incidence of MEK1/2 alterations are rare in human tumors (< 1 %). Preclinical data have demonstrated activity of ulixertinib in MEK mutant models. Ulixertinib has FDA fast-track designation for patients with solid tumors, other than CRC, with specific BRAF mutations (G469A, L485W, or L597Q). Designed with intent to register, the BVD-523-ABC clinical trial will continue evaluation of ulixertinib in patients with tumors harboring any atypical BRAF or MEK1/2 alteration (NCT04488003). Methods: This multi-center, phase II study, will be conducted in two parts and assess the clinical benefit, safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of ulixertinib in patients with advanced malignancies. Ulixertinib will be administered at the RP2D of 600 mg BID for 28-day treatment cycles. Eligible patients will have locally advanced or metastatic cancer which progressed following standard systemic therapies, or for which the patient is not a candidate or refused systemic therapy. Planned correlative analyses include reverse phase protein array and transcriptomics of tumor tissue. Part A is open-label and tumor agnostic, except for group 4 and 6 (CRC patients only). Patients will enroll into one of six groups based on BRAF (groups 1-4) or MEK1/2 (groups 5-6) tumor alteration (38 patients per group). Overall response rate (ORR) is the primary endpoint for Part A, with secondary endpoints including duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Part B is tumor histology specific. Patients will be randomized to receive either ulixertinib or physician's choice of treatment in a 2:1 ratio. Up to three specified tumor histologies will be defined, guided by available Part A data (n = 80-100 per histology). The primary endpoint of Part B is PFS, and secondary endpoints include OS, ORR, and DOR. This study has enrolled 43 patients of the planned 228 in Part A at the time of abstract submission. Clinical trial information: NCT04488003.

Abstract Background: Focal adhesion kinase (FAK) is consistently hyperactivated in multiple tumor types including PDAC. Our preclinical work showed that FAK and PD-1 inhibitors elicit significant tumor regression, and that combining FAK and PD-1 inhibitors with gemcitabine achieves a maximal response. This suggests the need for a cytotoxic agent to bolster antigen presentation. Defactinib is an orally available, well-tolerated, potent FAK inhibitor. Methods: This study included a dose escalation phase (all solid tumors) and dose expansion phase (metastatic PDAC). A 3+3 design with five dose levels was used in the dose escalation phase. For the expansion phase, 10 PDAC patients with stable disease on front-line gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel were enrolled in the Maintenance cohort (A), while 10 patients who progressed on at least one line of therapy were enrolled in the Refractory cohort (B). Pre and on-treatment biopsied were collected from all PDAC patients. The primary endpoint was to determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). Secondary endpoints included safety, toxicity, objective response rate, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The exploratory endpoints included developing a molecular and immune profile for treatment response. Results: In dose escalation, the common low grade (G1/2) treatment-emergent adverse events included fatigue, anorexia, nausea and vomiting. No DLTs were seen. The RP2D was defactinib 400mg twice daily, gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 days 1, 8 and pembrolizumab 200mg day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Safety and toxicity results in the escalation cohort were reported at the 2018 ASCO Annual Meeting. Among 8 evaluable PDAC patients enrolled on the dose escalation phase, we observed 1 (13%) partial response (PR), 3 (38%) stable disease (SD), 4 (50%) progressive disease (PD). In the Maintenance cohort, 1 (10%) PR, 6 (60%) SD, and 3 (30%) PD were observed. Two patients in the Maintenance cohort remain on study, and the median time on treatment was 4.6 months. In the Refractory cohort, 5 (50%) had SD, 4 (40%) PD, 1 not evaluable; median PFS was 2.9 months and median OS was 7.6 months. Interestingly, two confirmed PR patients both have MSS disease. Paired biopsies in PDAC patients show increased proliferating CD8+ T cells, while Tregs, macrophages, and stromal density decrease with treatment. Conclusions: The combination regimen was well tolerated. Encouraging efficacy signals were observed in both Maintenance and Refractory cohorts. Updated outcomes and correlative analyses are forthcoming. Citation Format: Andrea Wang-Gillam, Robert McWilliams, A. Craig Lockhart, Benjamin R Tan, Rama Suresh, Kian-Huat Lim, Katrina S. Pedersen, Nikolaos Trikalinos, Olivia Aranha, Haeseong Park, Lee Ratner, Nicholas Boice, David G. Denardo. Phase I study of defactinib combined with pembrolizumab and gemcitabine in patients with advanced cancer: Experiences of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020; 2020 Apr 27-28 and Jun 22-24. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(16 Suppl):Abstract nr CT118.