Search

Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer constitutes a complex clinical entity, presenting the clinician with a locally aggressive disease that has a proclivity for distant spread. The benefits of radiation therapy, such as improved local control and improved survival, have been questioned. In this review we seek to summarize the existing evidence on radiation therapy in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer and highlight future areas of research.A comprehensive review of PubMed for clinical studies reporting outcomes in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer was performed in June 2021, with an emphasis placed on prospective studies.Radiologic "downstaging" in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is a rare event, although some evidence shows increased clinical response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy over radiation therapy. Margin status seems to be equivalent between regimens that use neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone and regimens that include neoadjuvant radiation therapy. Local control in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is likely improved with radiation therapy; however, the benefit of improved local control in a disease marked by systemic failure has been questioned. Although some studies have shown improved survival with radiation therapy, differences in the delivery and tolerance of chemotherapy between the neoadjuvant and adjuvant setting confound these results. When the evidence is evaluated as a whole, there is no clear survival benefit of radiation therapy in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.Once considered a staple of therapy, the role of radiation therapy in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is evolving as systemic therapy regimens continues to improve. Increased clinical understanding of disease phenotype and response are needed to accurately tailor therapy for individual patients and to improve outcomes in this complex patient population.

PURPOSE This randomized, open-label trial compared the efficacy and safety of adjuvant nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine with those of gemcitabine for resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01964430 ). METHODS We assigned 866 treatment-naive patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2) + gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2) or gemcitabine alone to one 30-40 infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 of six 28-day cycles. The primary end point was independently assessed disease-free survival (DFS). Additional end points included investigator-assessed DFS, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS Two hundred eighty-seven of 432 patients and 310 of 434 patients completed nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine and gemcitabine treatment, respectively. At primary data cutoff (December 31, 2018; median follow-up, 38.5 [interquartile range [IQR], 33.8-43 months), the median independently assessed DFS was 19.4 ( nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 18.8 months (gemcitabine; hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.729 to 1.063; P = .18). The median investigator-assessed DFS was 16.6 (IQR, 8.4-47.0) and 13.7 (IQR, 8.3-44.1) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.694 to 0.965; P = .02). The median OS (427 events; 68% mature) was 40.5 (IQR, 20.7 to not reached) and 36.2 (IQR, 17.7-53.3) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.680 to 0.996; P = .045). At a 16-month follow-up (cutoff, April 3, 2020; median follow-up, 51.4 months [IQR, 47.0-57.0]), the median OS (511 events; 81% mature) was 41.8 ( nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 37.7 months (gemcitabine; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.687 to 0.973; P = .0232). At the 5-year follow-up (cutoff, April 9, 2021; median follow-up, 63.2 months [IQR, 60.1-68.7]), the median OS (555 events; 88% mature) was 41.8 versus 37.7 months, respectively (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.678 to 0.947; P = .0091). Eighty-six percent ( nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) and 68% (gemcitabine) of patients experienced grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events. Two patients per study arm died of treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSION The primary end point (independently assessed DFS) was not met despite favorable OS seen with nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine.

The frequency of DDR pathways alteration by sidedness

Tables detailing testing

Supp Table 1: MDS Patient Disease Characteristics Supp Table 2: Pathways affected by hypermethylation in MDS stroma Supp Table 3: Genes that are methylated and underexpressed in MDS stroma Supp Table 4. MDS patient characteristics for primary MSC sample isolation Supp table 5: WNT Targets

Details of NGS, WTS, CMS, and MSI/MMR status

Supplementary Methods

The bone marrow microenvironment influences malignant hematopoiesis, but how it promotes leukemogenesis has not been elucidated. In addition, the role of the bone marrow stroma in regulating clinical responses to DNA methyltransferase inhibitors (DNMTi) is also poorly understood. In this study, we conducted a DNA methylome analysis of bone marrow–derived stromal cells from myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients and observed widespread aberrant cytosine hypermethylation occurring preferentially outside CpG islands. Stroma derived from 5-azacytidine–treated patients lacked aberrant methylation and DNMTi treatment of primary MDS stroma enhanced its ability to support erythroid differentiation. An integrative expression analysis revealed that the WNT pathway antagonist FRZB was aberrantly hypermethylated and underexpressed in MDS stroma. This result was confirmed in an independent set of sorted, primary MDS-derived mesenchymal cells. We documented a WNT/β-catenin activation signature in CD34+ cells from advanced cases of MDS, where it associated with adverse prognosis. Constitutive activation of β-catenin in hematopoietic cells yielded lethal myeloid disease in a NUP98–HOXD13 mouse model of MDS, confirming its role in disease progression. Our results define novel epigenetic changes in the bone marrow microenvironment, which lead to β-catenin activation and disease progression of MDS. Cancer Res; 77(18); 4846–57. ©2017 AACR.

Supplementary Figure from Molecular Characterization of KRAS Wild-type Tumors in Patients with Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Purpose: To broaden access to and implementation of precision medicine in the care of patients with pancreatic cancer, the Know Your Tumor (KYT) program was initiated using a turn-key precision medicine system. Patients undergo commercially available multiomic profiling to determine molecularly rationalized clinical trials and off-label therapies.Experimental Design: Tumor samples were obtained for 640 patients from 287 academic and community practices covering 44 states. College of American Pathologists/Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments–accredited laboratories were used for genomic, proteomic, and phosphoprotein-based molecular profiling.Results: Tumor samples were adequate for next-generation sequencing in 96% and IHC in 91% of patients. A tumor board reviewed the results for every patient and found actionable genomic alterations in 50% of patients (with 27% highly actionable) and actionable proteomic alterations (excluding chemopredictive markers) in 5%. Actionable alterations commonly found were in DNA repair genes (BRCA1/2 or ATM mutations, 8.4%) and cell-cycle genes (CCND1/2/3 or CDK4/6 alterations, 8.1%). A subset of samples was assessed for actionable phosphoprotein markers. Among patients with highly actionable biomarkers, those who received matched therapy (n = 17) had a significantly longer median progression-free survival (PFS) than those who received unmatched therapy [n = 18; PFS = 4.1 vs. 1.9 months; HR, 0.47; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.24–0.94; Padj = 0.03].Conclusions: A comprehensive precision medicine system can be implemented in community and academic settings, with highly actionable findings observed in over 25% of pancreatic cancers. Patients whose tumors have highly actionable alterations and receive matched therapy demonstrated significantly increased PFS. Our findings support further prospective evaluation of precision oncology in pancreatic cancer. Clin Cancer Res; 24(20); 5018–27. ©2018 AACR.

Purpose:Defective DNA damage response (DDR) is a hallmark of cancer leading to genomic instability and is associated with chemosensitivity. Although the mismatch repair system has been extensively studied, the clinical implications of other mechanisms associated with DDR alterations in patients with colorectal cancer remain unclear. This study aimed to understand DDR pathways alterations and their association with common clinical features in patients with colorectal cancer.Experimental Design:Next-generation sequencing and whole-transcriptome sequencing were conducted using formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded samples submitted to a commercial Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments–certified laboratory. Samples with pathogenic or presumed pathogenic mutations in 29 specific DDR-related genes were considered as DDR-mutant (DDR-MT) and the remaining samples as DDR-wild type (DDR-WT).Results:Of 9,321 patients with colorectal cancer, 1,290 (13.8%) were DDR-MT. The frequency of DDR-MT was significantly higher in microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) cases than in microsatellite stable cases (76.4% vs. 9.5%). The DDR-MT genotype was higher in the right-sided, RAS-wild, BRAF-mutant, and CMS1 subgroups. However, these associations were primarily confounded by the distribution of MSI status. Compared with the DDR-WT tumors, the DDR-MT tumors had a higher mutational burden and gene expression levels in the immune-related pathway, which were independent of MSI status.Conclusions:We characterized a distinct subgroup of patients with colorectal cancer with tumors harboring mutations in the DDR-related genes. These patients more commonly had MSI-H tumors and exhibited an activated immune signature regardless of their tumor's MSI status. These findings warrant further investigations to develop personalized treatment strategies in this significant subgroup of patients with colorectal cancer.

Table S1-S12

Supplementary Methods, Figures, Tables, and Legends

Supp Fig 1 : SFRP1 methylation with coculture Supp Fig 2 : Validation of methylation changes with stroma and leukemic cell coculture Supp Fig 3: FRZB upregulation in MDS stroma after 5-Azacytidine treatment SuppFig 4: FRZB knockdown leads to partial inhibition of erythroid differentiation induced by treatment of MDS stromawith 5-Aza SuppFig 5: The expression of WNT signature genes in MDS and control marrow derived CD34+ cells

Purpose:KRAS mutation (MT) is a major oncogenic driver in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). A small subset of PDACs harbor KRAS wild-type (WT). We aim to characterize the molecular profiles of KRAS WT PDAC to uncover new pathogenic drivers and offer targeted treatments.Experimental Design:Tumor tissue obtained from surgical or biopsy material was subjected to next-generation DNA/RNA sequencing, microsatellite instability (MSI) and mismatch repair status determination.Results:Of the 2,483 patients (male 53.7%, median age 66 years) studied, 266 tumors (10.7%) were KRAS WT. The most frequently mutated gene in KRAS WT PDAC was TP53 (44.5%), followed by BRAF (13.0%). Multiple mutations within the DNA-damage repair (BRCA2, ATM, BAP1, RAD50, FANCE, PALB2), chromatin remodeling (ARID1A, PBRM1, ARID2, KMT2D, KMT2C, SMARCA4, SETD2), and cell-cycle control pathways (CDKN2A, CCND1, CCNE1) were detected frequently. There was no statistically significant difference in PD-L1 expression between KRAS WT (15.8%) and MT (17%) tumors. However, KRAS WT PDAC were more likely to be MSI-high (4.7% vs. 0.7%; P < 0.05), tumor mutational burden–high (4.5% vs. 1%; P < 0.05), and exhibit increased infiltration of CD8+ T cells, natural killer cells, and myeloid dendritic cells. KRAS WT PDACs exhibited gene fusions of BRAF (6.6%), FGFR2 (5.2%), ALK (2.6%), RET (1.3%), and NRG1 (1.3%), as well as amplification of FGF3 (3%), ERBB2 (2.2%), FGFR3 (1.8%), NTRK (1.8%), and MET (1.3%). Real-world evidence reveals a survival advantage of KRAS WT patients in overall cohorts as well as in patients treated with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel or 5-FU/oxaliplatin.Conclusions:KRAS WT PDAC represents 10.7% of PDAC and is enriched with targetable alterations, including immuno-oncologic markers. Identification of KRAS WT patients in clinical practice may expand therapeutic options in a clinically meaningful manner.

Supplementary Table from Molecular Characterization of KRAS Wild-type Tumors in Patients with Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

PDF file - 646K, Supp Fig 1: Pathways involved by hypermethylated genes in PV / ET. Supp Fig 2: Validation of HELP assay findings by MassArray bisulfite analysis Supp Fig 3: Pathways involved by genes that are overexpressed and hypomethylated at promoters by the Jak2V617F mutant. Supp Fig 4: Jak2V617F mutation does not have significant effects on global DNA methylation profiles

PDF file - 846K, Supplementary Table 1: Genes hypermethylated in PV / ET Supplementary Table 2: Genes hypermethylated in PMF Supplementary Table 3: Genes hypomethylated in PMF Supplementary Table 4: Genes hypermethylated in PMF cases with ASXL1 mutations / deletions Supp Table 5: Biological pathways affected by hypermethylated genes in ASXL1 mutated/deleted cases of PMF Supplementary Table 6: Genes hypermethylated in MPN cases with TET2 mutations Supp Table 7: Biological pathways affected by hypermethylated genes in TET2 mutated cases of MPNs

PURPOSE The College of American Pathologists (CAP) has developed a guideline on testing for mismatch repair (MMR) and microsatellite instability (MSI) for patients considered for immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. ASCO has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations. METHODS The CAP guideline was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. An ASCO Endorsement Panel subsequently reviewed the content and the recommendations. RESULTS The ASCO Endorsement Panel determined that the recommendations from the CAP guideline, published on August 3, 2022, are clear, thorough, and based on the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO endorses Mismatch Repair and Microsatellite Instability Testing for Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy: Guideline From the College of American Pathologists in Collaboration With the Association for Molecular Pathology and Fight Colorectal Cancer. RECOMMENDATIONS Within the guideline, MMR immunohistochemistry (IHC), MSI polymerase chain reaction, and MSI next-generation sequencing are all recommended testing options for colorectal cancer, MMR-IHC and MSI-polymerase chain reaction for gastroesophageal and small bowel cancer, and only MMR-IHC for endometrial cancer. No recommendation in favor of any testing method over another could be made for any other cancer. Tumor mutational burden was not recommended as a surrogate for DNA MMR deficiency. If MMR deficiency consistent with Lynch syndrome is detected, it should be communicated to the treating physician. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/molecular-testing-and-biomarkers-guidelines .

Background ABTL0812 is an autophagy inducer that promotes cancer cell death by activation of cytotoxic autophagy selectively in tumour cells. ABTL0812 induces endoplasmic reticulum stress and blocks the Akt-mTOR axis; both actions converge to activate a robust and sustained autophagy leading to cancer cell death. Preclinical data supported the initiation of clinical trials in patients with cancer. Patients and methods This first-in-human trial consisted of an escalation phase (3 + 3 design), followed by an expansion phase, to assess safety and tolerability of ABTL0812. Secondary objectives were determining the recommended phase II dose (RP2D), clinical antitumour activity, pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD). Results A total of 29 patients were enrolled and treated; fifteen patients were treated in four escalation dosing cohorts (ranging from 500 mg once a day to 2000 mg twice a day) and fourteen in the expansion phase (dosed with 1300 mg three times a day). No maximum tolerated dose was attained, and RP2D was determined by PK/PD modelling. Most drug-related adverse events were gastrointestinal grade I–II. Correlation between drug levels and pAkt/Akt ratio was found. Two cases of long-term (>1 year) stable disease were observed. Conclusions ABTL0812 is safe and has an acceptable tolerability profile, allowing a long-term oral dosing. RP2D of 1300 mg three times a day was determined according to PK/PD modelling, and preliminary antitumour efficacy was observed. Clinical trial registration number NCT02201823.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has been left behind in the evolution of personalized medicine. Predictive markers of response to therapy are lacking in PDAC despite various histological and transcriptional classification schemes. We report an artificial intelligence (AI) approach to histologic feature examination that extracts a signature predictive of disease-specific survival (DSS) in patients with PDAC receiving adjuvant gemcitabine. We demonstrate that this AI-generated histologic signature is associated with outcomes following adjuvant gemcitabine, while three previously developed transcriptomic classification systems are not (n= 47). We externally validate this signature in an independent cohort of patients treated with adjuvant gemcitabine (n= 46). Finally, we demonstrate that the signature does not stratify survival outcomes in a third cohort of untreated patients (n= 161), suggesting that the signature is specifically predictive of treatment-related outcomes but is not generally prognostic. This imaging analysis pipeline has promise in the development of actionable markers in other clinical settings where few biomarkers currently exist.

Objective The optimal neoadjuvant therapy for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) and the impact on surgical outcomes remains unclear. Methods S1505 (NCT02562716) was a randomized phase II study of perioperative chemotherapy with mFOLFIRINOX (Arm 1) or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (Arm 2). Measured parameters included resection rate, margin positivity, pathologic response, and toxicity. Results Between 2015 and 2018, 147 patients were randomized. Of these, 44 (30%) were deemed ineligible (43 by central review). Of the 103 eligible patients, 77 (76%) completed preoperative therapy and underwent surgery; reasons patients did not undergo surgery included toxicity related to preoperative therapy (n = 9), progression (n = 9), or other (n = 7). Of the 77, 73 (95%) underwent successful resection; 21 (29%) required vascular reconstruction, 62 (85%) had negative (R0) margins, and 24 (33%) had a complete or major pathologic response to therapy. The grade 3-5 postoperative complication rate was 16%. Of the 73 patients completing surgery, 57 (78%) started and 46 (63%) completed postoperative therapy. This study represents the first prospective trial evaluating modern systemic therapy delivered in a neoadjuvant/perioperative format for resectable PDA. Conclusions We have demonstrated: (1) Based on the high percentage of enrolled, but ineligible patients, it is clear that adherence to strict definitions of resectable PDA is challenging; (2) Patients can tolerate modern systemic therapy and undergo successful surgical resection without prohibitive perioperative complications; (3) Completion of adjuvant therapy in the perioperative format is difficult; (4) Major pathologic response rate of 33% is encouraging.

PURPOSE As part of the Novartis Signature Program, this study evaluated the efficacy of ribociclib (selective cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 [CDK4/6] inhibitor) in patients with cyclin D–CDK4/6 pathway–aberrant tumors. METHODS This was a phase II, single-arm, signal-seeking study in patients with advanced malignancies that had progressed on or after standard treatment. Prior identification of tumor CDK4/6 mutation or amplification, CCND1/3 amplification, or CDKN2A mutation or loss was required. Clinical benefit (defined as the proportion of patients with response or stable disease at ≥ 16 weeks) was the primary end point. RESULTS From 61 centers in the United States, 106 patients (median age, 62.5 years) were enrolled across multiple malignancies. The patient population was heavily pretreated (median number of prior therapies, three; range, 0 to 19). Median progression-free survival was 1.8 months (95% CI, 1.8 to 1.9). In patients with solid tumors, the clinical benefit rate was 18.1% (n = 19 of 105) and the overall response rate was 2.9% (n = 3 of 105); three partial responses occurred in patients with adenocarcinoma (unknown primary), soft tissue sarcoma, and urothelial carcinoma. No tumor cohort met the prespecified criteria for success. The most common adverse events suspected to be related to treatment were neutropenia (30.2%; decreased neutrophils, 15.1%), fatigue (31.1%), and nausea (29.2%). Fatigue and nausea were typically mild. Only one incident of febrile neutropenia was experienced (grade 3). CONCLUSION No new or unexpected safety signals were observed in this heavily pretreated patient population. Although responses were seen in tumors with CCND1– CDK4/6 amplifications, the primary end point was not met, suggesting additional evaluation of ribociclib, possibly as combination therapy, is needed.

PURPOSE It has been estimated that 5% to 10% of cancers are due to hereditary causes. Recent data sets indicate that the incidence of hereditary cancer may be as high as 17.5% in patients with cancer, and a notable subset is missed if screening is solely by family history and current syndrome-based testing guidelines. Identification of germline variants has implications for both patients and their families. There is currently no comprehensive overview of cancer susceptibility genes or inclusion of these genes in commercially available somatic testing. We aimed to summarize genes linked to hereditary cancer and the somatic and germline panels that include such genes. METHODS Germline predisposition genes were chosen if commercially available for testing. Penetrance was defined as low, moderate, or high according to whether the gene conferred a 0% to 20%, 20% to 50%, or 50% to 100% lifetime risk of developing the cancer or, when percentages were not available, was estimated on the basis of existing literature descriptions. RESULTS We identified a total of 89 genes linked to hereditary cancer predisposition, and we summarized these genes alphabetically and by organ system. We considered four germline and six somatic commercially available panel tests and quantified the coverage of germline genes across them. Comparison between the number of genes that had germline importance and the number of genes included in somatic testing showed that many but not all germline genes are tested by frequently used somatic panels. CONCLUSION The inclusion of cancer-predisposing genes in somatic variant testing panels makes incidental germline findings likely. Although somatic testing can be used to screen for germline variants, this strategy is inadequate for comprehensive screening. Access to genetic counseling is essential for interpretation of germline implications of somatic testing and implementation of appropriate screening and follow-up.

PURPOSE Up to 25% of pancreatic adenocarcinomas (PDACs) harbor mutations in the homologous recombination DNA damage response (HR-DDR) pathway. Although known to affect responsiveness to DNA-damaging chemotherapy, the prognostic relevance of these mutations is unclear and outcomes in patients with PDAC who harbor HR-DDR mutations beyond BRCA1/2 remain unexplored. METHODS We evaluated 820 patients with PDAC enrolled in the Know Your Tumor program for whom we had collected comprehensive genomic testing results and longitudinal clinical outcomes. Patients were categorized as having resected versus advanced disease, and as having received platinum-based therapy versus being platinum naïve. Tumor genomic profiles were categorized as HR-DDR mutated (HR-DDRmut) or proficient (pHR-DDR) on the basis of the presence of pathogenic mutations of somatic or germline origin in BRCA1/2 or PALB2 (group 1); ATM/ATR/ATRX (group 2); or BAP1, BARD1, BRIP1, CHEK1/2, RAD50/51/51B, or FANCA/C/D2/E/F/G/L (group 3). Overall survival was measured from the date of diagnosis until death. RESULTS Median overall survival (mOS) was similar in all resected patients irrespective of exposure to platinum-based therapy, whereas for platinum-treated patients with advanced disease, mOS was significantly longer for HR-DDRmut versus pHR-DDR (2.37 years v 1.45 years, respectively). Of importance, no difference was identified in platinum-naïve patients. mOS in patients with mutations in all three HR-DDRmut groups was greater than that for pHR-DDR patients, but this difference was lost in platinum-naïve patients. CONCLUSION Patients with advanced HR-DDRmut have improved mOS when treated with platinum-based therapy compared with pHR-DDR patients. In platinum-naïve patients, there is no mOS difference, which suggests that HR-DDR status has no pure prognostic value. These findings support the need to test all patients with advanced PDAC to ensure that HR-DDRmut patients receive the benefit of treatment with platinum-based therapy.

681 Background: Treatment of PC remains a challenge, with surgery being the mainstay of potentially curative therapy. Even after surgical resection, however, many patients experience recurrence. There has been a shift toward treating PC as a systemic disease from diagnosis with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) or chemoradiation (nCRT). This study examines characteristics of real-world patients who were deemed to have resectable (R) or borderline resectable (BR) disease, and how they relate to overall survival (OS). Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of patients in an academic health system who presented for initiation of treatment for PC staged as R or BR. Descriptive data on patient characteristics, performance status (PS), laboratory values, neoadjuvant therapies, recurrence, and mortality were obtained. OS was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank tests. Two-sided p-values were calculated. Results: From electronic records at the University of Cincinnati, 129 patients were identified. Median age was 66 with baseline ECOG PS of mostly 0 (86, 67%) or 1 (40, 31%). Primary tumor site was most commonly head of pancreas (104, 81%). Of 129, 55 (43%) patients received surgery upfront; the rest received neoadjuvant therapy (39 nCRT, 35 nCT) with gemcitabine (68%) or 5-fluorouracil (32%) containing regimens. Of those receiving nCRT/nCT, 36 (49%) went on to resection; the rest experienced progression (27, 36%) or toxicities (11, 15%) including death. Of 129, 92 (71%) have died, with median OS of 20.1 months (95% CI 16.4 - 25.0) for the full cohort. On adjusted multivariable analysis, the following were associated with worse OS: failure to undergo resection (HR 5.65, 95% CI 3.17 - 10.09, p100 (HR 2.73, 95% CI 1.52 - 4.90, p=0.001); BR disease (HR 2.20, 95% CI 1.27 – 3.81, p=0.005); not receiving RT (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.04 - 3.53, p=0.038). Regimen choice was not associated with OS. Conclusions: In this real-world PC dataset, surgical resection remains the mainstay of curative therapy. Inadequate nCRT/nCT lead to suboptimal outcomes, likely reflecting patient physiology and disease biology effects. Future trials should focus on maximizing neoadjuvant therapy with the goal of resection.[Table: see text]

TPS638 Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an aggressive malignancy, developing most often in the setting of liver cirrhosis (Sohal et al Current Oncol Rep 2011; Gordan et al JCO 2020). For advanced disease, immunotherapy has now become standard of care – a combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab has shown the best overall survival outcome so far (Finn et al NEJM 2020). For earlier stage disease, however, there is no systemic therapy standard. The best treatment for HCC in the setting of cirrhosis is a liver transplant allowing potential cure for both the cancer and cirrhosis. Nonetheless, 25-35% of patients fail to reach liver transplant because of disease progression while waiting for a transplant (Sinha et al, Hepatology 2019) and approximately 15% experience HCC recurrence after transplant (Mehta et al, Transplantation 2020). Taken together, this constitutes a large subset of this patient population who cannot achieve a cure. Given the success of immunotherapy in the advanced setting, it is imperative to study this in the pre-transplant setting, to improve the outcomes cited above. However, there is a theoretical risk of graft rejection with immunostimulatory treatment. Methods: This is a single-arm, open-label, Phase II, multicenter study designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of durvalumab and tremelimumab for the treatment of HCC patients who have cirrhosis or portal hypertension and are eligible for listing for a liver transplant. Eligibility requirements include adult patients with HCC within UCSF criteria, a Child-Pugh score of up to 7, and ECOG PS of 0 or 1. Treatment includes an immunotherapy combination of 1 dose of tremelimumab and 5 doses of durvalumab for up to 4 months. After a minimum 28-day gap following the final durvalumab dose, patients undergo locoregional therapy per institutional standards. After a minimum 72-day gap from the end of immunotherapy, patients undergo liver transplant. Primary outcome is a binary endpoint, and it will be assessed in patients undergoing liver transplant. Historically, 10-20% of patients are expected to experience acute cellular rejection within 30 days of transplant. We propose that an observed proportion of 20% treatment failure will be a clear indicator of safety in this pilot study, whereas an observed proportion of 50% failure will be a clear indicator of failure. Using these guardrails, with at least 20 patients going to transplant, we will have 80.6% power to demonstrate a failure proportion of 20% (4 patients experiencing failure) versus a null of 50% (10 patients experiencing failure), with a one-sided alpha of 0.05. With 25 patients going to transplant, the power will increase to 86% (other parameters being the same). Correlative studies include tumor molecular profiling, peripheral blood immunophenotyping, and circulating tumor DNA for early recurrence detection. Clinical trial information: NCT05027425 .

TPS771 Background: Curative treatment for potentially resectable (resectable or borderline resectable) pancreatic adenocarcinoma, despite recent advances, leads to only suboptimal outcomes. Recent US national cooperative group trials have demonstrated the safety and feasibility of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (PMID 33475684, PMID 35834226), and also show that the two frontline regimens, FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil, irinotecan, oxaliplatin) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GnP), are comparable in this setting. Finally, ability to undergo resection remains the key driver of cure. Therefore, an approach that selects chemotherapy based on early response assessment, to maximize the probability of resection, is likely to improve curative outcomes. Methods: This is a phase II study intended to maximize the probability of surgical resection for pancreatic cancer. Key eligibility requirements include adult patients with a confirmed histopathologic diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma or adenocarcinoma, an ECOG PS ≤ 1, resectable or borderline resectable disease by central radiology review, no prior therapy for index pancreatic cancer, and adequate bone marrow, liver and kidney function. Treatment includes 4 doses (~ 2 months total treatment time) of FOLFIRINOX (“Chemo1”). After a re-evaluation, using radiologic response, CA19.9 response, and chemotherapy toxicity, patients will either continue with “Chemo1” for another 4 cycles (8 doses) or switch to GnP (“Chemo2”) which will be administered for 4 cycles (12 doses, for ~4 month total treatment time), followed by surgical resection. Primary outcome will measure the proportion of patients undergoing surgical resection using historical dated compared to 32 patients in a current study with a time frame of 16 months. Using historical data, the expected proportion of patients undergoing resection is ~60%. The goal of this study is to increase this to 80% or higher. With a one-sided of 0.05 and power of 80%, 32 patients will be needed to demonstrate this difference. Key translational correlatives will include serial circulating tumor DNA assessment and extensive tumor molecular profiling. Clinical trial information: NCT04594772 .

202 Background: Large studies have identified immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) as an effective therapy for deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability high (dMMR/MSI-H) colorectal cancer (CRC). However, a subset of dMMR/MSI-H CRC patients exist that do not benefit from ICI and show rapid cancer progression within the first 6 months of therapy. Genetic alterations of the host immune system, including loss of β2M and single copy loss of HLA molecules, can contribute to innate resistance to ICI. In this study, we sought to analyze the role of expression of HLA genes and β2M as determinants of innate resistance to ICI by analyzing an extensive clinico-genomic database. Methods: Next-generation sequencing (NGS) of DNA (592-gene or whole exome) and RNA (whole transcriptome) was performed on CRC patient samples (n = 24,394) submitted to a CLIA-certified laboratory (Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ). dMMR/MSI-H was assessed by IHC/NGS. PD-L1 expression was tested by IHC (SP142; positive (+): ≥2+, ≥%5). Real world overall survival and treatment data were obtained from insurance claims data. Time-To-Next-treatment (TTNT) was calculated from start of ICI monotherapy to the start of next therapy, or death. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used for comparison. A composite signature of MHC II gene expression was tested for molecular associations. Immune cell infiltration was estimated by RNA deconvolution using quanTIseq. Statistical significance was determined using Fisher’s Exact/Mann Whitney/X2 tests. Results: We identified 1549 patients with dMMR/MSI-H CRC; 242 patients of these had received pembrolizumab or nivolumab. Using TTNT as a proxy for progression on treatment, we divided the patients into two cohorts: >180 days TTNT and 180 days TTNT; good responders) and 34 patients (

Objective Larotrectinib is a highly selective tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitor with demonstrated efficacy across various TRK fusion-positive solid tumours. We assessed the efficacy and safety of larotrectinib in patients with TRK fusion-positive thyroid carcinoma (TC). Methods We pooled data from three phase I/II larotrectinib clinical trials (NCT02576431, NCT02122913, and NCT02637687). The primary endpoint was the investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Data cut-off: July 2020. Results Twenty-nine patients (median age: 60; range: 6–80) with TRK fusion-positive TC were treated. Tumour histology was papillary (PTC) in 20 (69%) patients, follicular (FTC) in 2 (7%), and anaplastic (ATC) in 7 (24%) patients. Among 28 evaluable patients, ORR was 71% (95% CI: 51–87); best responses were complete response in 2 (7%) patients, partial response in 18 (64%), stable disease in 4 (14%), progressive disease in 3 (11%), and undetermined in 1 (4%) due to clinical progression prior to the first post-baseline assessment. ORR was 86% (95% CI: 64–97) for PTC/FTC and 29% (95% CI 4–71) for ATC. Median time to response was 1.87 months (range 1.64–3.68). The 24-month DoR, PFS, and OS rates were 81, 69, and 76%, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events were mainly grades 1–2. Conclusion In TRK fusion-positive TC, larotrectinib demonstrates rapid and durable disease control and a favourable safety profile in patients with advanced disease requiring systemic therapy. Significance statement NTRK gene fusions are known oncogenic drivers and have been identified in various histologies of thyroid carcinoma, most commonly in papillary thyroid carcinoma. This is the first publication specifically studying a TRK inhibitor in a cohort of TRK fusion-positive thyroid carcinoma patients. In the current study, the highly selective TRK inhibitor larotrectinib showed durable antitumour efficacy and a favourable safety profile in patients with TRK fusion-positive thyroid carcinoma. Our findings show that patients with advanced non-medullary thyroid carcinoma who may require systemic therapy could be considered for testing for gene fusions by next-generation sequencing.

The role of systemic therapy for Stage IA pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is unclear. The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) on survival in patients with early stage disease.The National Cancer Database was queried from 2006 to 2017 for resected pT1N0M0 (Stage 1A) PDAC. Exclusion criteria included neoadjuvant therapy, radiation, or those who suffered a 90-day mortality.Of the 1526 patients included in the study, 42.2% received AC and 57.8% underwent surgery alone. Patients who received AC were younger, had fewer comorbidities, and were more likely to have private insurance, compared with those treated with surgery alone. Patients who received AC had longer median overall survival (OS) compared with those who underwent surgery alone (105.7 months vs 72.0 months, p0.01). Subset analyses based on individual "good" prognostic features (size ≤ 1.0 cm, lymphovascular invasion negative, well/moderately differentiated, margin negative resection) demonstrated improved OS with AC. Following propensity score matching based on key clinicopathologic features, AC remained associated with improved median OS (83.7 months vs 59.8 months, p0.01). However, in the cohort with body/tail tumors (101.2 months vs 95.0 months, p = 0.19) and those with all "good" prognostic features (95.9 months vs 90.6 months, p = 0.15), AC was not associated with improved survival.In resected, Stage IA PDAC, AC is associated with improved overall survival in the vast majority of patients; however, in select cohorts the role of AC is unclear. Further study is needed to tailor treatment to individual patients with PDAC.

Background In patients with resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), the decision for neoadjuvant treatment depends on clinical staging with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and positron-emission tomography (PET) scan. Patients with locally advanced EAC pathology misclassified as early EAC by clinical staging are missing the opportunity to receive neoadjuvant therapy. We aim to identify predictors of locally advanced pathology in EAC to determine more accurately those who benefit from neoadjuvant therapy. Methods Retrospective study of patients who underwent upfront endoscopic or surgical resection for EAC without neoadjuvant therapy from January 2011 to December 2017 was performed. Clinical characteristics, EUS, PET scan and histologic findings were analyzed. Multivariable analysis of predictors of locally advanced stage was performed and a risk prediction score was developed. Results A total of 97 patients were included; 68 patients were staged as early EAC (pT1 or pT2 and pN0) and 29 patients were staged as locally advanced EAC (pT1 or pT2 with pN1 and pT3 or pT4 irrespective of N status). In a predictive model of EAC, patients presenting with dysphagia, tumor size >2 cm, exophytic mass appearance on endoscopy and absence of hiatal hernia were more likely to be have locally advanced pathology with a probability of 70% (C-statistic 0.766). Conclusions A risk prediction model based on the presence of dysphagia, tumor size >2 cm, exophytic mass appearance and absence of hiatal hernia can be used to identify locally advanced pathology in EAC patients.

Systemic therapy is an essential part of treatment for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, not all patients receive every cycle of chemotherapy and even if they do, the impact of reduced dose density (DD) on survival is not known.A single institutional prospective database was queried for patients with PDAC who underwent curative resection between 2009 and 2018. The primary outcome was DD, defined as the percentage of total planned chemotherapy actually received and associated survival.Of the 126 patients included, 38.9% underwent a neoadjuvant approach, which was associated with a greater median number of completed chemotherapy cycles (5 cycles versus 4 cycles, p0.01) and a higher median total DD (93.0% versus 65.0%, p0.01), compared with an adjuvant treatment approach. In both groups, adjuvant chemotherapy completion rates were low, with only 55 patients completing all adjuvant cycles. After sequential survival analysis, patients who received a DD ≥ 80% had improved median overall survival (OS) (27.1 months versus 18.6 months, p = 0.01), compared with patients who achieved a DD80%. On multivariate Cox proportional-hazards modeling, only the presence of lymphovascular invasion (HR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.04-2.99, p = 0.04) and DD80% (HR: 1.91, 95% CI: 1.23-3.00, p = 0.01) were associated with decreased OS.In this cohort study, patients who received ≥ 80% DD had significantly better OS. DD should be considered an important prognostic metric in pancreatic cancer, and strategies are needed to improve chemotherapy tolerance to improve patient outcomes.

PURPOSE Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have emerged as promising therapy in cancers with homologous recombination repair deficiency. However, efficacy is limited by both intrinsic and acquired resistance. The Olaparib Combinations basket trial explored olaparib alone and in combination with other homologous recombination–directed targeted therapies. Here, we report the results of the arm in which olaparib was combined with the orally bioavailable ataxia telangiectasia and RAD3-related inhibitor ceralasertib in patients with relapsed or refractory cancers harboring DNA damage response and repair alterations, including patients with BRCA-mutated PARP inhibitor–resistant high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Germline and somatic mutations had to be deleterious by COSMIC or ClinVar for eligibility. Olaparib was administered at 300 mg twice daily and ceralasertib at 160 mg daily on days 1-7 in 28-day cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicities. Primary end points were confirmed complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) rates and clinical benefit rate (CBR; CR + PR + stable disease [SD] at 16 weeks). RESULTS Twenty-five patients were enrolled, with median four prior therapies. Five patients required dose reductions for myelosuppression. Overall response rate was 8.3% and CBR was 62.5% among the entire cohort. Two of five patients with tumor harboring ATM mutation achieved CR or SD ongoing at 24+ months, respectively (CBR 40%). Of seven patients with PARP inhibitor–resistant HGSOC, one achieved PR (–90%) and five had SD ranging 16-72 weeks (CBR 86%). CONCLUSION Olaparib with ceralasertib demonstrated preliminary activity in ATM-mutated tumors and in PARP inhibitor–resistant BRCA1/2–mutated HGSOC. These data warrant additional studies to further confirm activity in these settings.