Search

Samuel J Klempner,1,2 Pareen Mehta,3 Alexa B Schrock,4 Siraj M Ali,4 Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou5 1The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Los Angeles, CA, USA; 2Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA; 3Department of Radiology, The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Los Angeles, CA, USA; 4Clinical Development, Foundation Medicine, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA; 5Department of Medicine-Hematology/Oncology, Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Orange, CA, USA Abstract: Acquired resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) is a universal event and limits clinical efficacy. The third-generation EGFR inhibitor osimertinib is active in EGFR-mutant/T790M positive non-small-cell lung cancer. Mechanisms of acquired resistance are emerging, and here we describe a cis-oriented solvent-front EGFR G796S mutation as the resistance mechanism observed in a progression biopsy and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) from a patient with initial response followed by progression on osimertinib. This is one of the earliest reports of a sole solvent-front tertiary EGFR mutation as a resistance mechanism to osimertinib. Our case suggests a monoclonal resistance mechanism. We review the importance of the solvent-front residues across TKIs and describe known osimertinib resistance mechanisms. We observe that nearly all clinical osimertinib-resistant tertiary EGFR mutations are oriented in cis with EGFR T790M. This case highlights the importance of mutations affecting EGFR kinase domains and supports the feasibility of broad panel ctDNA assays for detection of novel acquired resistance and tumor heterogeneity in routine clinical care. Keywords: EGFR G796, lung cancer, ctDNA, resistance, osimertinib, T790M

Phu N Tran,1 Samuel J Klempner2,3 1Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, 2Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, 3Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA Abstract: Patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring activating mutations in EGFR benefit from treatment with EGFR small-molecule tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. However, the development of acquired resistance to EGFR inhibitors is universal and limits treatment efficacy. Over half of patients receiving first-generation EGFR inhibitors (erlotinib and gefitinib) develop resistance via the gatekeeper EGFR T790M (EGFRT790M) mutation, and therapies able to overcome T790M-mediated resistance have been an unmet need in NSCLC. Rociletinib (CO-1686) is a third-generation small-molecule EGFR inhibitor with potent activity against EGFRT790M currently in advanced clinical development in NSCLC. Early clinical data suggested significant activity in EGFR-mutant NSCLC harboring T790M alterations. However, important questions regarding side-effect profile, comparability to competitor compounds, acquired resistance, EGFR-therapy sequencing, and combination therapies remain. Here, we review the available preclinical and clinical data for rociletinib, highlight the comparison to other third-generation EGFR inhibitors, and discuss resistance implications and future directions in NSCLC. Keywords: lung cancer, rociletinib, EGFR, T790M, CO-1686, resistance, tyrosine-kinase inhibitor

Background & Aims: Peritoneal metastasis (PM) in gastric cancer (GC) is associated with poor prognosis and significant morbidity. We sought to understand the genomic, transcriptomic, and tumor microenvironment (TME) features that contribute to peritoneal organotropism in GC., Methods: We conducted a comprehensive multi-omic analysis of 548 samples from 326 patients, including primary tumors, matched normal tissues; peritoneal metastases, and adjacent-normal peritoneal tissues. We used whole exome sequencing, whole transcriptome sequencing, and digital spatial profiling to investigate molecular alterations, gene expression patterns, and TME characteristics associated with PM., Results: Our analysis identified specific genomic alterations in primary tumors, including mutations in ELF3, CDH1, and PIGR, and TME signatures, such as stromal infiltration and M2 macrophage enrichment, associated with increased risk of PM. We observed distinct transcriptional programs and immune compositions in GCPM compared with liver metastases, highlighting the importance of the TME in transcoelomic metastasis. We found differential expression of therapeutic targets between primary tumors and PM, with lower CLDN18.2 and FGFR2b expression in PM. We unravel the roles of the TME in niche reprogramming within the peritoneum, and provide evidence of pre-metastatic niche conditioning even in early GC without clinical PM. These findings were further validated using a humanized mouse model, which demonstrated niche remodeling in the peritoneum during transcoelomic metastasis., Conclusion: Our study provides a comprehensive molecular characterization of GCPM and unveils key biological principles underlying transcoelomic metastasis. The identified predictive markers, therapeutic targets, and TME alterations offer potential avenues for targeted interventions and improved patient outcomes., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The outcomes of anti-PD-1 agents plus fluoropyrimidine/platinum in frontline advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas (aGEAs) remain poor. We investigated the safety, tolerability, and activity of fluoropyrimidine/oxaliplatin and tislelizumab with the DKK1-neutralizing antibody DKN-01 in aGEAs in a phase IIa open-label study., Patients and Methods: Patients had untreated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative aGEAs, RECIST v1.1 measurable disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-1, and adequate organ function. Patients received intravenous DKN-01 300 mg once every 2 weeks, tislelizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks, oxaliplatin 130 mg/m 2 once every 3 weeks, and capecitabine 1,000 mg/m 2 twice daily on days 1-15 of each 21-day cycle. The primary end point was safety and tolerability. Key secondary end points included objective response rate (ORR) by RECISTv1.1, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS)., Results: Between September 18, 2020, and April 8, 2021, 25 patients were enrolled. All patients who received at least one dose of DKN-01 were included in the safety analysis. Most patients had gastroesophageal junction tumors, median age was 61 years, 76% were male, and 55% were ECOG of 0. All patients reported at least one treatment-emergent adverse event. The ORR was 73% (95% CI, 49.8 to 89.3), with a disease control rate of 95%. The ORR was 90% (95% CI, 55.5 to 99.7) in the DKK1-high tumor patients and 67% (95% CI, 29.9 to 92.5) in the DKK1-low tumor patients. The median PFS was 11.3 months (95% CI, 5.8 to 12.0) and the 12-month PFS rate was 33%. The median OS was 19.5 months (95% CI, 15.2 to 24.4) with a 12-month OS rate of 76% and an 18-month OS rate of 55%., Conclusion: DKN-01 can be safely combined with frontline fluoropyrimidine/oxaliplatin and tislelizumab and demonstrates encouraging activity independent of PD-L1 expression levels. A randomized phase II trial is ongoing (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04363801).

Li et al. present data from a randomized frontline phase II trial in HER2+ gastroesophageal cancers exploring dual targeting of HER2 with HLX22 (a novel HER2-specific antibody) with HLX02 (a trastuzumab biosimilar) and capecitabine/oxaliplatin chemotherapy. While the objective response and progression-free survival are encouraging, the future development of the combination in a crowded HER2 space remains unclear., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests S.J.K. has served a consultant/advisory role for Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Eisai, Astellas, Daiichi-Sankyo, Pieris, Natera, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Mersana, Sanofi-Aventis, Servier, Coherus, Taiho, and I-Mab. S.J.K. reports research funding to their institution from Leap Therapeutics, Arcus, I-Mab, Astellas, The DeGregorio Foundation, Gastric Cancer Foundation, and the National Cancer Institute. S.J.K. reports stock/equity in Turning Point Therapeutics and Nuvalent Therapeutics., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The aim of this study was to provide a review of the clinical evidence for use of ramucirumab (RAM) plus folinic acid (leucovorin), fluorouracil (5-FU), and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) or irinotecan as second-line treatment in gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA)., Methods: A systematic and comprehensive search of PubMed was performed to identify phase 2 clinical trials or retrospective studies using RAM plus FOLFIRI or irinotecan in GEA, including abstracts from major congresses, in addition to published manuscripts. An aggregated review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the effectiveness (overall response rate [ORR] as primary outcome) and safety data of RAM plus FOLFIRI or irinotecan. ORR for each study was calculated with 95% confidence interval estimated from normal approximation. To generate the combined ORR with 95% confidence interval, random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to synthesize response data from available studies., Results: Six studies were identified with non-overlapping populations, 3 phase 2 clinical trials and 3 retrospective studies. Across these studies the ORR ranged from 22% to 38%, and pooled ORR was 25.4%. Two of the 3 studies reported better ORR in patients pretreated with taxanes followed by RAM plus FOLFIRI. Treatment with RAM plus FOLFIRI or irinotecan was well tolerated. Neutropenia and diarrhea were the most common adverse events reported across studies., Conclusion: The studies examined in this review suggest that RAM plus FOLFIRI or irinotecan have activity in previously treated GEA irrespective of prior-taxane use. Overall, RAM plus FOLFIRI or irinotecan was well tolerated with no new safety concerns identified beyond established profiles for these regimens., Competing Interests: HP received support for present manuscript writing support, provision of study materials, article processing charges from Eli Lilly and company; grants or contracts from Ambrx, Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Array BioPharma, Genentech, Xencor, PsiOxus Therapeutics, Oncologie, Turning Point Therapeutics, Gossamer Bio, MacroGenics, TopAlliance Biosciences, BJ Bioscience, Vedanta Biosciences, Daiichi Pharmaceutical, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Synermore Biologics, Mirati Therapeutics, ImmuneOncia Therapeutics, Aprea Therapeutics AB, Seattle Genetics, Mabspace Biosciences, Elicio Therapeutics, Adlai Nortye USA, RePare Therapeutics, Exelixis, AstraZeneca, ImmunoGen, Fate Therapeutics, Tizona, Mersana, Bolt Biotherapeutics, StrataPATH, Chugai, Huaota, D3Bio and Amgen. SK received payment for advisory board from Eli Lilly and company; consulting fees from Amgen, Astellas, Merck, BMS, AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Taiho, Mersana, Pieris, Natera, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, Pfizer, Coherus, Exact Sciences; payment for lecture from Merck; advisory board unpaid member at Debbies Dream Foundation, Hope for Stomach Cancer; and panel unpaid member for NCCN Guidelines. JC medical writing support for current manuscript from Eli Lilly and company; received consulting fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb; payment for speakers’ bureau honoraria from Merck and Bristol-Myers Squibb; received DSMB member fees from Yiviva and Daiichi-Sankyo; employment and holds stocks from Amgen. ZW received consulting fees from Amgen, Astellas, Lilly, Novartis, Arcus, Pfizer, Seagen, Astra Zeneca, Daiichi, Merck, EMD Serono, and Alligator; support for attending meetings and/or travel from Amgen, and Merck; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board from Pfizer, Daiichi, and Astra Zeneca. ML was an employee of Eli Lilly and Company during analysis and drafting of this manuscript. SC is an employee of Eli Lilly and Company and holds Eli Lilly stocks. SB is an employee of Eli Lilly and Company and holds restricted stock units from the company. AC is an employee of Eli Lilly and Company and holds Eli Lilly stocks. The remaining author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The authors declare that this study received funding from Eli Lilly and Company. The funder had the following involvement in the study: analysis, interpretation of data, and the writing of this article (Syneos)., (Copyright © 2024 Park, Klempner, Chao, Wainberg, Lukanowski, Chenji, Bourke, Chatterjee and Lorenzen.)

Preclinical studies suggest that simultaneous HER2/VEGF blockade may have cooperative effects in gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas. In a single-arm investigator initiated clinical trial for patients with untreated advanced HER2+ gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma, bevacizumab was added to standard of care capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and trastuzumab in 36 patients (NCT01191697). Primary endpoint was objective response rate and secondary endpoints included safety, duration of response, progression free survival, and overall survival. The study met its primary endpoint with an objective response rate of 81% (95% CI 65-92%). Median progression free and overall survival were 14.0 (95% CI, 11.3-36.4) and 23.2 months (95% CI, 16.6-36.4), respectively. The median duration of response was 14.9 months. The regimen was well tolerated without unexpected or severe toxicities. In post-hoc ctDNA analysis, baseline ctDNA features were prognostic: Higher tumor fraction and alternative MAPK drivers portended worse outcomes. ctDNA at resistance identified oncogenic mutations and these were detectable 2-8 cycles prior to radiographic progression. Capecitabine, oxaliplatin, trastuzumab and bevacizumab shows robust clinical activity in HER2+ gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Combination of VEGF inhibitors with chemoimmunotherapy and anti-PD1 regimens is warranted., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of radiotherapy (RT)-related lymphopenia, its predictors, and association with survival in unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) treated with hypofractionated-RT (HF-RT)., Methods: Retrospective analysis of 96 patients with unresectable ICC who underwent HF-RT (median 58.05 Gy in 15 fractions) between 2009 and 2022 was performed. Absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) nadir within 12 weeks of RT was analyzed. Primary variable of interest was severe lymphopenia, defined as Grade 3+ (ALC <0.5 k/μL) per CTCAE v5.0. Primary outcome of interest was overall survival (OS) from RT., Results: Median follow-up was 16 months. Fifty-two percent of patients had chemotherapy pre-RT, 23% during RT, and 40% post-RT. Pre-RT, median ALC was 1.1 k/μL and 5% had severe lymphopenia. Post-RT, 68% developed RT-related severe lymphopenia. Patients who developed severe lymphopenia had a significantly lower pre-RT ALC (median 1.1 vs. 1.5 k/μL, P =0.01) and larger target tumor volume (median 125 vs. 62 cm 3 , P =0.02). In our multivariable Cox model, severe lymphopenia was associated with a 1.7-fold increased risk of death ( P =0.04); 1-year OS rates were 63% vs 77% ( P =0.03). Receipt of photon versus proton-based RT (OR=3.50, P =0.02), higher mean liver dose (OR=1.19, P <0.01), and longer RT duration (OR=1.49, P =0.02) predicted severe lymphopenia., Conclusions: HF-RT-related lymphopenia is an independent prognostic factor for survival in patients with unresectable ICC. Patients with lower baseline ALC and larger tumor volume may be at increased risk, and use of proton therapy, minimizing mean liver dose, and avoiding treatment breaks may reduce RT-related lymphopenia., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

There is a high unmet need for early detection approaches for diffuse gastric cancer (DGC). We examined whether the stool proteome of mouse models of gastric cancer (GC) and individuals with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC) have utility as biomarkers for early detection. Proteomic mass spectrometry of the stool of a genetically engineered mouse model driven by oncogenic KrasG12D and loss of p53 and Cdh1 in gastric parietal cells [known as Triple Conditional (TCON) mice] identified differentially abundant proteins compared with littermate controls. Immunoblot assays validated a panel of proteins, including actinin alpha 4 (ACTN4), N-acylsphingosine amidohydrolase 2 (ASAH2), dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4), and valosin-containing protein (VCP), as enriched in TCON stool compared with littermate control stool. Immunofluorescence analysis of these proteins in TCON stomach sections revealed increased protein expression compared with littermate controls. Proteomic mass spectrometry of stool obtained from patients with HDGC with CDH1 mutations identified increased expression of ASAH2, DPP4, VCP, lactotransferrin (LTF), and tropomyosin-2 relative to stool from healthy sex- and age-matched donors. Chemical inhibition of ASAH2 using C6 urea ceramide was toxic to GC cell lines and GC patient-derived organoids. This toxicity was reversed by adding downstream products of the S1P synthesis pathway, which suggested a dependency on ASAH2 activity in GC. An exploratory analysis of the HDGC stool microbiome identified features that correlated with patient tumors. Herein, we provide evidence supporting the potential of analyzing stool biomarkers for the early detection of DGC. Prevention Relevance: This study highlights a novel panel of stool protein biomarkers that correlate with the presence of DGC and has potential use as early detection to improve clinical outcomes., (©2024 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Adagrasib, an irreversible, selective KRASG12C inhibitor, may be an effective treatment in KRASG12C-mutated colorectal cancer, particularly when combined with an anti-EGFR antibody. In this analysis of the KRYSTAL-1 trial, patients with previously treated KRASG12C-mutated unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer received adagrasib (600 mg twice daily) plus cetuximab. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) by blinded independent central review. Ninety-four patients received adagrasib plus cetuximab. With a median follow-up of 11.9 months, ORR was 34.0%, disease control rate was 85.1%, and median duration of response was 5.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2-7.6). Median progression-free survival was 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.7-7.4) and median overall survival was 15.9 months (95% CI, 11.8-18.8). Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in all patients; grade 3-4 in 27.7% and no grade 5. No TRAEs led to adagrasib discontinuation. Exploratory analyses suggest circulating tumor DNA may identify features of response and acquired resistance., Significance: Adagrasib plus cetuximab demonstrates promising clinical activity and tolerable safety in heavily pretreated patients with unresectable or metastatic KRASG12C-mutated colorectal cancer. These data support a potential new standard of care and highlight the significance of testing and identification of KRASG12C mutations in patients with colorectal cancer. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 897., (©2024 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: The clinical application of PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) testing is complicated by the availability of multiple IHC assays, scoring algorithms, and cutoffs. This study assessed the analytical comparability of three commercially available PD-L1 assays and two scoring algorithms used to assess PD-L1 status in gastric cancer (GC) samples., Methods: Serial sections of 100 resected GC samples, with PD-L1 expression levels across the dynamic range, were stained with three in vitro diagnostic-grade PD-L1 assays (28-8, 22C3, and SP263). Three trained pathologists blindly and independently scored slides using combined positive score (CPS) and tumor area positivity (TAP) algorithms. Comprehensive statistical analyses were performed to evaluate analytical concordance. Digital image analysis (DIA) was used to objectively compare the technical performance of each assay by simulating CPS and TAP., Results: Comparable staining patterns were observed with these three PD-L1 assays. Despite discernible variation in staining intensity, reproducible evaluations of PD-L1 positivity were observed. Inter- and intra-assay assessments of all three assays, using either CPS or TAP and the same PD-L1 cutoffs, demonstrated moderate to almost-perfect (interassay Cohen's kappa [κ] range, 0.47-0.83) and substantial to almost-perfect (intra-assay κ range, 0.77-1.00) agreement. Interpathologist assessment exhibited a significant level of concordance (intraclass correlation coefficient ≥0.92). No difference in technical performance was observed using DIA., Conclusion: This study highlights analytical concordance in PD-L1 testing between three major PD-L1 assays when TAP and CPS are applied. Comparability of the technical assay performance was further supported by independent DIA. These observations support cross-application flexibility of the different PD-L1 assays and scoring algorithms to characterize PD-L1 expression in GC.

Adding anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (anti-PD-1) to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/platinum improves survival in some advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas (GEA). To understand the effects of chemotherapy and immunotherapy, we conducted a phase II first-line trial (n = 47) sequentially adding pembrolizumab to 5-FU/platinum in advanced GEA. Using serial biopsy of the primary tumor at baseline, after one cycle of 5-FU/platinum, and after the addition of pembrolizumab, we transcriptionally profiled 358,067 single cells to identify evolving multicellular tumor microenvironment (TME) networks. Chemotherapy induced early on-treatment multicellular hubs with tumor-reactive T-cell and M1-like macrophage interactions in slow progressors. Faster progression featured increased MUC5A and MSLN containing treatment resistance programs in tumor cells and M2-like macrophages with immunosuppressive stromal interactions. After pembrolizumab, we observed increased CD8 T-cell infiltration and development of an immunity hub involving tumor-reactive CXCL13 T-cell program and epithelial interferon-stimulated gene programs. Strategies to drive increases in antitumor immune hub formation could expand the portion of patients benefiting from anti-PD-1 approaches., Significance: The benefit of 5-FU/platinum with anti-PD-1 in first-line advanced gastric cancer is limited to patient subgroups. Using a trial with sequential anti-PD-1, we show coordinated induction of multicellular TME hubs informs the ability of anti-PD-1 to potentiate T cell-driven responses. Differential TME hub development highlights features that underlie clinical outcomes. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 695., (©2024 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Esophageal, gastroesophageal junction, and gastric adenocarcinomas, referred to collectively as gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas (GEAs), are a major cause of global cancer-related mortality. Our increasing molecular understanding has led to the addition of biomarker-directed approaches to defined subgroups and has improved survival in selected patients, such as those with HER2 and Claudin18.2 overexpression. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment of cancer, including GEA, but biomarkers beyond PD-L1 expression are lacking. Mismatch repair deficiency and/or high microsatellite instability (dMMR/MSI-H) is observed in 8% to 22% of nonmetastatic GEA, and 3% to 5% of patients with metastatic disease. dMMR/MSI-H tumors are associated with more favorable prognosis and significant benefit from ICIs, although some heterogeneity exists. The activity of ICIs in advanced dMMR/MSI-H cancer is seen across lines of therapy and should be recommended in the frontline setting. In patients with nonmetastatic dMMR/MSI-H cancer, increasing evidence suggests that perioperative and adjuvant chemotherapy may not provide benefit to the dMMR/MSI-H subgroup. The activity of perioperative chemotherapy-free immune checkpoint regimens in patients with nonmetastatic dMMR/MSI-H cancer is highly promising and underscores the need to identify this unique subgroup. We recommend MMR/MSI testing for all patients with GEA at diagnosis, and review the key rationale and clinical management implications for patient with dMMR/MSI-H tumors across disease stages.

Background: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation and chemotherapy are recommended for the treatment of nonmetastatic esophageal cancer. The benefit of neoadjuvant treatment is mostly limited to patients who exhibit pathologic complete response (pCR). Existing estimates of pCR rates among patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy have not been synthesized and lack precision., Methods: We conducted an independently funded systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO CRD42023397402) of pCR rates among patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemo(radiation). Studies were identified from Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL database searches. Eligible studies included trials published from 1992 to 2022 that focused on nonmetastatic esophageal cancer, including the gastroesophageal junction. Histology-specific pooled pCR prevalence was determined using the Freeman-Tukey transformation and a random effects model., Results: After eligibility assessment, 84 studies with 6451 patients were included. The pooled prevalence of pCR after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in squamous cell carcinomas was 9% (95% CI: 6%-14%), ranging from 0% to 32%. The pooled prevalence of pCR after neoadjuvant chemoradiation in squamous cell carcinomas was 32% (95% CI: 26%-39%), ranging from 8% to 66%. For adenocarcinoma, the pooled prevalence of pCR was 6% (95% CI: 1%-12%) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and 22% (18%-26%) after neoadjuvant chemoradiation., Conclusions: Under one-third of patients with esophageal cancer who receive neoadjuvant chemo(radiation) experience pCR. Patients diagnosed with squamous cell carcinomas had higher rates of pCR than those with adenocarcinomas. As pCR represents an increasingly utilized endpoint in neoadjuvant trials, these estimates of pooled pCR rates may serve as an important benchmark for future trial design., (© 2024 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

What Is This Summary About?: This is a summary of two articles. The first article is about a clinical trial called SPOTLIGHT and it was published in the medical journal The Lancet in in April of 2023. The second article is about a clinical trial called GLOW and it was published in the medical journal Nature Medicine in July of 2023., What Are the Key Takeaways?: Until recently, chemotherapy was the first treatment given to people with stomach cancer or gastroesophageal junction (or GEJ ) cancer that is locally advanced unresectable or metastatic . When cancer cells have high amounts of the protein CLDN18.2 but do not have high amounts of the protein HER2 , the cancer is known as CLDN18.2-positive (or CLDN18.2+) and HER2-negative (or HER2-). New medicines to treat cancer are being developed. These medicines attach to proteins on cancer cells to help the body recognize and kill cancer cells.The clinical trials SPOTLIGHT and GLOW included participants with CLDN18.2+ and HER2- stomach or GEJ cancer that was locally advanced unresectable or metastatic. These trials looked at whether adding a medicine called zolbetuximab to chemotherapy as the first treatment for cancer helped people live longer before their tumors grew bigger or new tumors grew, after starting the trial. These studies also looked at whether adding zolbetuximab to chemotherapy helped people live longer after starting the trial., What Were the Main Conclusions Reported by the Researchers?: In SPOTLIGHT and GLOW, on average, participants assigned to zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy lived 1.4 to 1.9 months longer before their tumors grew bigger or new tumors grew, after starting the trial, than participants assigned to a placebo plus chemotherapy. On average, participants assigned to zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy also lived 2.2 to 2.7 months longer, after starting the trial, than participants assigned to a placebo plus chemotherapy. These results suggest that zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy could be a new first treatment for people with CLDN18.2+ and HER2- stomach or GEJ cancer that is locally advanced unresectable or metastatic. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03504397 (SPOTLIGHT); NCT03653507 (GLOW).

DNA is an organic molecule that is highly vulnerable to chemical alterations and breaks caused by both internal and external factors. Cells possess complex and advanced mechanisms, including DNA repair, damage tolerance, cell cycle checkpoints, and cell death pathways, which together minimize the potentially harmful effects of DNA damage. However, in cancer cells, the normal DNA damage tolerance and response processes are disrupted or deregulated. This results in increased mutagenesis and genomic instability within the cancer cells, a known driver of cancer progression and therapeutic resistance. On the other hand, the inherent instability of the genome in rapidly dividing cancer cells can be exploited as a tool to kill by imposing DNA damage with radiopharmaceuticals. As the field of targeted radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) is rapidly growing in oncology, it is crucial to have a deep understanding of the impact of systemic radiation delivery by radiopharmaceuticals on the DNA of tumors and healthy tissues. The distribution and activation of DNA damage and repair pathways caused by RPT can be different based on the characteristics of the radioisotope and molecular target. Here we provide a comprehensive discussion of the biological effects of RPTs, with the main focus on the role of varying radioisotopes in inducing direct and indirect DNA damage and activating DNA repair pathways.

Improved biomarkers are needed for early cancer detection, risk stratification, treatment selection, and monitoring treatment response. Although proteins can be useful blood-based biomarkers, many have limited sensitivity or specificity for these applications. Long INterspersed Element-1 (LINE-1) open reading frame 1 protein (ORF1p) is a transposable element protein overexpressed in carcinomas and high-risk precursors during carcinogenesis with negligible expression in normal tissues, suggesting ORF1p could be a highly specific cancer biomarker. To explore ORF1p as a blood-based biomarker, we engineered ultrasensitive digital immunoassays that detect mid-attomolar (10-17 mol/L) ORF1p concentrations in plasma across multiple cancers with high specificity. Plasma ORF1p shows promise for early detection of ovarian cancer, improves diagnostic performance in a multianalyte panel, provides early therapeutic response monitoring in gastroesophageal cancers, and is prognostic for overall survival in gastroesophageal and colorectal cancers. Together, these observations nominate ORF1p as a multicancer biomarker with potential utility for disease detection and monitoring., Significance: The LINE-1 ORF1p transposon protein is pervasively expressed in many cancers and is a highly specific biomarker of multiple common, lethal carcinomas and their high-risk precursors in tissue and blood. Ultrasensitive ORF1p assays from as little as 25 μL plasma are novel, rapid, cost-effective tools in cancer detection and monitoring. See related commentary by Doucet and Cristofari, p. 2502. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 2489., (©2023 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Gastric cancer (GC) with peritoneal metastases and malignant ascites continues to have poor prognosis. Exosomes mediate intercellular communication during cancer progression and promote therapeutic resistance. Here, we report the significance of exosomes derived from malignant ascites (EXO Ascites ) in cancer progression and use modified exosomes as resources for cancer therapy. EXO Ascites from patients with GC stimulated invasiveness and angiogenesis in an ex vivo three-dimensional autologous tumor spheroid microfluidic system. EXO Ascites concentration increased invasiveness, and blockade of their secretion suppressed tumor progression. In MET -amplified GC, EXO Ascites contain abundant MET; their selective delivery to tumor cells enhanced angiogenesis and invasiveness. Exosomal MET depletion substantially reduced invasiveness; an additive therapeutic effect was induced when combined with MET and/or VEGFR2 inhibition in a patient-derived MET -amplified GC model. Allogeneic MET-harboring exosome delivery induced invasion and angiogenesis in a MET non-amplified GC model. MET -amplified patient tissues showed higher exosome concentration than their adjacent normal tissues. Manipulating exosome content and production may be a promising complementary strategy against GC.

Importance: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as quality of life (QOL) and symptoms, are often associated with clinical outcomes in patients with cancer. In practice, oncologists use serum tumor markers (TMs) (ie, carcinoembryonic antigen [CEA] and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 [CA 19-9]) and imaging to monitor clinical outcomes in patients with gastrointestinal cancer., Objective: To examine associations of 1-month changes in PROs and TMs with treatment response and survival among patients with gastrointestinal cancer., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study enrolled patients at Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center with at least 1 month follow-up from May 2019 to December 2020. Included patients were beginning first-line systemic therapy, aged 18 years or older, and had been diagnosed with metastatic pancreaticobiliary, colorectal, or gastroesophageal cancer. Data analyses took place from January 2021 to January 2022., Intervention: PROs were collected, including QOL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General [FACT-G]), physical symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS]), and psychological symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-4 [PHQ4] total, PHQ4-depression, and PHQ4-anxiety), as well as TMs (CEA and CA 19-9), at the time of chemotherapy initiation and 1 month later., Main Outcomes and Measures: Associations of 1-month changes in PROs and TMs with treatment response (clinical benefit vs disease progression) at first scan, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS), adjusted for baseline values using regression models., Results: This study included 159 patients, with 134 patients (84.3%) evaluable for analysis. Patients had a median (range) age of 64.0 (28.0-84.0) years and 86 (64.2%) were male. One-month PRO changes (FACT-G: OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03-1.11; P = .001; ESAS-total: OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.94-1.00; P = .02; ESAS-physical: OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.92-1.00; P = .03; PHQ4-depression: OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.49-0.92; P = .01) were significantly associated with treatment response, but PHQ4-total or TMs were not. Changes in FACT-G (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.99; P = .003), ESAS-total (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.05; P = .004), ESAS-physical (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.00-1.05; P = .02), PHQ4-depression (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.01-1.48; P = .04), and CEA (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 1.001-1.004; P = .001) were associated with PFS, but changes in PHQ4-total or TMs were not. Changes in ESAS-total (HR, 1.03, 95% CI, 1.01-1.06; P = .006) and ESAS-physical (HR, 1.04, 95% CI, 1.01-1.06; P = .015) were associated with OS, but changes in TMs were not associated with OS., Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that 1-month changes in PROs can be associated with treatment response and survival in patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer. Notably, 1-month changes in TMs were not consistently associated with these outcomes. These findings highlight the potential for monitoring early changes in PROs to associate with clinical outcomes while underscoring the need to address the QOL and symptom concerns of patients with advanced cancer.

Purpose: Zolbetuximab, an IgG1 monoclonal antibody, binds to claudin 18.2 (CLDN18.2) and mediates tumor cell death through antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity and complement-dependent cytotoxicity. We sought to examine zolbetuximab combinations in CLDN18.2-positive HER2-negative gastric/gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) adenocarcinoma., Patients and Methods: This phase II study assessed efficacy and safety of zolbetuximab, alone or with modified FOLFOX6 (mFOLFOX6) or pembrolizumab, in CLDN18.2-positive advanced/metastatic G/GEJ adenocarcinoma. Patients received zolbetuximab as monotherapy in third/later-line (Cohort 1A, n = 30), with mFOLFOX6 in first-line (Cohort 2, n = 21), or with pembrolizumab in third/later-line (Cohort 3A, n = 3) treatment. The primary endpoint for Cohort 1A was objective response rate (ORR). Key secondary endpoints were ORR (Cohorts 2 and 3A), overall survival (OS; Cohort 1A), and progression-free survival (PFS) and safety (all cohorts)., Results: ORR was 0% in Cohorts 1A and 3A, and 71.4% [95% confidence interval (CI), 47.82-88.72] in Cohort 2. Median PFS was 1.54 months (95% CI, 1.31-2.56) in Cohort 1A, 2.96 months (95% CI, 1.48-4.44) in Cohort 3A, and 17.8 months (95% CI, 8.05-25.69) in Cohort 2. Median OS in Cohort 1A was 5.62 months (95% CI, 2.27-11.53). Gastrointestinal adverse events occurred across cohorts [nausea, 63%-90% (grade ≥ 3, 4.8%-6.7%) and vomiting, 33%-67% (grade ≥ 3, 6.7%-9.5%)]., Conclusions: Zolbetuximab plus mFOLFOX6 demonstrated promising efficacy in previously untreated patients with CLDN18.2-positive G/GEJ adenocarcinoma. These data support the first-line development of zolbetuximab in patients whose tumors are CLDN18.2-positive. Across cohorts, zolbetuximab treatment was tolerable with no new safety signals., (©2023 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: Immune checkpoint inhibitors are approved for advanced solid tumors with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H). Although several technologies can assess MSI-H status, detection and outcomes with circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA)-detected MSI-H are lacking. As such, we examined pan-cancer MSI-H prevalence across 21 cancers and outcomes after ctDNA-detected MSI-H., Methods: Patients with advanced cancer who had ctDNA testing (Guardant360) from October 1, 2018, to June 30, 2022, were retrospectively assessed for prevalence. GuardantINFORM, which includes anonymized genomic and structured payer claims data, was queried to assess outcomes. Patients who initiated new treatment within 90 days of MSI-H detection were sorted into immunotherapy included in treatment (IO) or no immunotherapy included (non-IO) groups. Real-world time to treatment discontinuation (rwTTD) and real-world time to next treatment (rwTTNT) were assessed in months as proxies of progression-free survival (PFS); real-world overall survival (rwOS) was assessed in months. Cox regression tests analyzed differences. Colorectal cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), prostate cancer, gastroesophageal cancer, and uterine cancer (UC) were assessed independently; all other cancers were grouped., Results: In total, 1.4% of 171,881 patients had MSI-H detected. Of 770 patients with outcomes available, rwTTD and rwTTNT were significantly longer for patients who received IO compared with non-IO for all cancers ( P ≤ .05; hazard ratio [HR] range, 0.31-0.52 and 0.25-0.54, respectively) except NSCLC. rwOS had limited follow-up for all cohorts except UC (IO 39 v non-IO 23 months; HR, 0.18; P = .004); however, there was a consistent trend toward prolonged OS in IO-treated patients., Conclusion: These data support use of a well-validated ctDNA assay to detect MSI-H across solid tumors and suggest prolonged PFS in patients treated with IO-containing regimens after detection. Tumor-agnostic, ctDNA-based MSI testing may be reliable for rapid decision making.

Background: Subgroup analyses of randomized trials suggest the superiority of immune checkpoint inhibitor-based therapy over chemotherapy in patients with mismatch-repair deficient (dMMR) and/or microsatellite instability-high (MSI-high) advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. However, these subgroups are small and studies examining prognostic features within dMMR/MSI-high patients are lacking., Methods: We conducted an international cohort study at tertiary cancer centers and collected baseline clinicopathologic features of patients with dMMR/MSI-high metastatic or unresectable gastric cancer treated with anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1)-based therapies. The adjusted HRs of variables significantly associated with overall survival (OS) were used to develop a prognostic score., Results: One hundred and thirty patients were included. At a median follow-up of 25.1 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 30.3 months (95% CI: 20.4 to NA) and 2-year PFS rate was 56% (95% CI: 48% to 66%). Median OS was of 62.5 months (95% CI: 28.4 to NA) and 2-year OS rate was 63% (95% CI: 55% to 73%). Among the 103 Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors-evaluable patients, objective response rate was 66% and disease control rate 87% across lines of therapy. In the multivariable models, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status of 1 or 2, non-resected primary tumor, presence of bone metastases and malignant ascites were independently associated with poorer PFS and OS. These four clinical variables were used to build a three-category (ie, good, intermediate, and poor risk) prognostic score. Compared with patients with good risk, patients with intermediate risk score had numerically inferior PFS and OS (2-year PFS rate: 54.3% versus 74.5%, HR 1.90, 95% CI: 0.99 to 3.66; 2-year OS rate: 66.8% versus 81.2%, HR 1.86, 95% CI: 0.87 to 3.98), whereas patients with poor risk score had significantly inferior PFS and OS (2-year PFS rate: 10.6%, HR 9.65, 95% CI: 4.67 to 19.92; 2-year OS rate: 13.3%, HR 11.93, 95% CI: 5.42 to 26.23)., Conclusions: Overall outcomes with anti-PD-1-based therapies are favorable in MSI-high gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas. However, within this overall favorable subgroup a more accurate prognostication using baseline clinical characteristics might identify patients at higher risk of rapid disease progression who may deserve intensified immunotherapy combination strategies., Competing Interests: Competing interests: RC has received personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Exeliom Biosciences, Enterome Bioscience, MSD Oncology, Mylan Medical, Pierre Fabre, Servier and non-financial support from Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Mylan Medical and Servier outside the submitted work. SJK reports consulting/advisory role with Astellas, Merck, BMS, Servier, Sanofi-Aventis, Novartis, Mersana, Exact Sciences, Natera, Coherus Biosciences, Daiichi-Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and Eli Lilly. SJK reports equity in Turning Point Therapeutics, and Nuvalent Therapeutics. SBM received consulting fees from Natera, Bicara, Novartis, Basilea, Elevation Oncology, and Daiichi Sankyo. LF reported receiving personal honoraria as invited speaker from Incyte, BMS, Lilly; research funding (to Institution) from MSD, BMS, AstraZeneca, Incyte, BeiGene, Astellas, Daiichi Sankyo, Roche; participation in advisory board for MSD, AstraZeneca, Incyte, Taiho, Servier, Daiichi Sankyo, Lilly. AK reports receiving honoraria (lecture fee) from Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Ono Pharmaceutical, Merck Pharmaceutical, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo; receiving personal fees for advisory roles from Merck Pharmaceutical, Zymeworks; and receiving research funding from AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work. SL reports roles as consultant or advisor for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Incyte, Lilly, Merck Serono, MSD, Servier, and reports research funding from Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS Daichii Sankyo, Hutchinson, Incyte, Merck Serono, Mirati, MSD, Pfizer, Roche. She is part of speakers’ bureau of Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Merck Serono, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Servier. KS reports receiving personal fees for advisory roles from Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Pfizer, Ono Pharmaceutical, Merck Pharmaceutical, Taiho Pharmaceutical,Astellas, Novartis, AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline, Daiichi Sankyo, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Guardant Health Japan,and Janssen; receiving honoraria (lecture fee) from Takeda, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Janssen; and receiving research funding from Astellas, Ono Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Chugai, Merck Pharmaceutical, Medi Science, Eisai and Amgen, outside the submitted work. TA reports attending advisory board meetings and receiving consulting fees from Aptitude Health, AstraZeneca, Astellas, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gritstone Oncology, GamaMabs Pharma Sa, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck & Co. Inc., Nordic Oncology, Pierre Fabre, Seagen, Servier and Transgène; honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck & Co. Inc., Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi Seagen and Servier; and support for meetings from Merck & Co. Inc. and Servier. FP reported receiving grants from BMS, Incyte, and AstraZeneca and personal fees from BMS, MSD, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Merck Serono, Eli Lilly & Company, Pierre Fabre, Servier, Bayer, and Organon outside the submitted work. JC received grants or contracts from Merck and Brooklyn Immunotherapeutics; consulting fees from Lilly, Merck, AstraZeneca, Foundation Medicine, Daiichi Sankyo, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Astellas, Turning Point Therapeutics, Silverback Therapeutics, Novartis, Coherus Biosciences, Geneos, Roche, Guardant Health; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb and disclose Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board of Yiviva and Daiichi-Sankyo; disclose other financial or non-financial interests (employment) from Amgen. No other competing interests to disclose., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: GI cancers commonly spread to the peritoneal cavity, particularly from primary adenocarcinomas of the stomach and appendix. Peritoneal metastases are difficult to visualize on cross-sectional imaging and cause substantial morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study was to determine whether serial highly sensitive tumor-informed circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) measurements could longitudinally track changes in disease burden and inform clinical care., Methods: This was a retrospective case series of patients with gastric or appendiceal adenocarcinoma and isolated peritoneal disease that was radiographically occult. Patients underwent quantitative tumor-informed ctDNA testing (Signatera) as part of routine clinical care. No interventions were prespecified based on ctDNA results., Results: Of 13 patients studied, the median age was 65 (range, 45-75) years, with 7 (54%) women, 5 (38%) patients with gastric, and 8 (62%) patients with appendiceal adenocarcinoma. Eight (62%) patients had detectable ctDNA at baseline measurement, with median value 0.13 MTM/mL (range, 0.06-11.68), and assay was technically unsuccessful in two cases with appendiceal cancer because of limited tumor tissue. Five (100%) patients with gastric cancer and 3 (50%) patients with appendiceal cancer had detectable ctDNA at baseline. Although baseline levels of ctDNA were low, longitudinal assessment tracked with changes in disease burden among patients undergoing chemotherapy for metastatic disease. In two patients undergoing surveillance after definitive surgical management of gastric adenocarcinoma, detection of ctDNA prompted diagnosis of isolated peritoneal disease., Conclusion: Quantitative tumor-informed serial ctDNA testing aids clinical management of patients with isolated peritoneal disease. Low levels of baseline ctDNA suggest a role for highly sensitive ctDNA approaches over panel-based testing. Further exploration of this approach should be considered in patients with isolated peritoneal malignant disease.

Accurately modeling tumor biology and testing novel therapies on patient-derived cells is critically important to developing therapeutic regimens personalized to a patient's specific disease. The vascularized microtumor (VMT), or "tumor-on-a-chip," is a physiologic preclinical cancer model that incorporates key features of the native human tumor microenvironment within a transparent microfluidic platform, allowing rapid drug screening in vitro. Herein we optimize methods for generating patient-derived VMT (pVMT) using fresh colorectal cancer (CRC) biopsies and surgical resections to test drug sensitivities at the individual patient level. In response to standard chemotherapy and TGF-βR1 inhibition, we observe heterogeneous responses between pVMT derived from 6 patient biopsies, with the pVMT recapitulating tumor growth, histological features, metabolic heterogeneity, and drug responses of actual CRC tumors. Our results suggest that a translational infrastructure providing rapid information from patient-derived tumor cells in the pVMT, as established in this study, will support efforts to improve patient outcomes., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Despite the success of PD-1 blockade in melanoma and other cancers, effective treatment strategies to overcome resistance to cancer immunotherapy are lacking 1,2 . Here we identify the innate immune kinase TANK-binding kinase 1 (TBK1) 3 as a candidate immune-evasion gene in a pooled genetic screen 4 . Using a suite of genetic and pharmacological tools across multiple experimental model systems, we confirm a role for TBK1 as an immune-evasion gene. Targeting TBK1 enhances responses to PD-1 blockade by decreasing the cytotoxicity threshold to effector cytokines (TNF and IFNγ). TBK1 inhibition in combination with PD-1 blockade also demonstrated efficacy using patient-derived tumour models, with concordant findings in matched patient-derived organotypic tumour spheroids and matched patient-derived organoids. Tumour cells lacking TBK1 are primed to undergo RIPK- and caspase-dependent cell death in response to TNF and IFNγ in a JAK-STAT-dependent manner. Taken together, our results demonstrate that targeting TBK1 is an effective strategy to overcome resistance to cancer immunotherapy., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

While BRAF inhibitor combinations with EGFR and/or MEK inhibitors have improved clinical efficacy in BRAF V600E colorectal cancer (CRC), response rates remain low and lack durability. Preclinical data suggest that BRAF/MAPK pathway inhibition may augment the tumor immune response. We performed a proof-of-concept single-arm phase 2 clinical trial of combined PD-1, BRAF and MEK inhibition with sparatlizumab (PDR001), dabrafenib and trametinib in 37 patients with BRAF V600E CRC. The primary end point was overall response rate, and the secondary end points were progression-free survival, disease control rate, duration of response and overall survival. The study met its primary end point with a confirmed response rate (24.3% in all patients; 25% in microsatellite stable patients) and durability that were favorable relative to historical controls of BRAF-targeted combinations alone. Single-cell RNA sequencing of 23 paired pretreatment and day 15 on-treatment tumor biopsies revealed greater induction of tumor cell-intrinsic immune programs and more complete MAPK inhibition in patients with better clinical outcome. Immune program induction in matched patient-derived organoids correlated with the degree of MAPK inhibition. These data suggest a potential tumor cell-intrinsic mechanism of cooperativity between MAPK inhibition and immune response, warranting further clinical evaluation of optimized targeted and immune combinations in CRC. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03668431., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Adagrasib, an oral small-molecule inhibitor of mutant KRAS G12C protein, has shown clinical activity in pretreated patients with several tumor types, including colorectal cancer. Preclinical studies suggest that combining a KRAS G12C inhibitor with an epidermal growth factor receptor antibody could be an effective clinical strategy., Methods: In this phase 1-2, open-label, nonrandomized clinical trial, we assigned heavily pretreated patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with mutant KRAS G12C to receive adagrasib monotherapy (600 mg orally twice daily) or adagrasib (at the same dose) in combination with intravenous cetuximab once a week (with an initial loading dose of 400 mg per square meter of body-surface area, followed by a dose of 250 mg per square meter) or every 2 weeks (with a dose of 500 mg per square meter). The primary end points were objective response (complete or partial response) and safety., Results: As of June 16, 2022, a total of 44 patients had received adagrasib, and 32 had received combination therapy with adagrasib and cetuximab, with a median follow-up of 20.1 months and 17.5 months, respectively. In the monotherapy group (43 evaluable patients), a response was reported in 19% of the patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 8 to 33). The median response duration was 4.3 months (95% CI, 2.3 to 8.3), and the median progression-free survival was 5.6 months (95% CI, 4.1 to 8.3). In the combination-therapy group (28 evaluable patients), the response was 46% (95% CI, 28 to 66). The median response duration was 7.6 months (95% CI, 5.7 to not estimable), and the median progression-free survival was 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.4 to 8.1). The percentage of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events was 34% in the monotherapy group and 16% in the combination-therapy group. No grade 5 adverse events were observed., Conclusions: Adagrasib had antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with mutant KRAS G12C, both as oral monotherapy and in combination with cetuximab. The median response duration was more than 6 months in the combination-therapy group. Reversible adverse events were common in the two groups. (Funded by Mirati Therapeutics; KRYSTAL-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03785249.)., (Copyright © 2022 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Importance: The KEYNOTE-177 trial demonstrated that patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC) with high microsatellite instability (MSI-H) and/or mismatch repair deficiency (DMMR) have better outcomes when receiving first-line immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) compared with chemotherapy. Data on performance of ICIs in patients with MCRC in standard practice settings remain limited, and direct MMR vs MSI outcome association comparisons are lacking., Objective: To validate MSI (determined by next-generation sequencing [NGS]) as a biomarker of ICI effectiveness among patients with MCRC in standard practice settings and examine the association of MSI assessed by NGS, DMMR by immunohistochemistry, and tumor mutational burden (cutoff, 10 mutations/megabase) with ICI outcomes., Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative effectiveness research study of outcomes in prospectively defined biomarker subgroups used data from a deidentified clinicogenomic database and included patients who received Foundation Medicine testing (FoundationOne or FoundationOne CDx) during routine clinical care at approximately 280 US academic or community-based cancer clinics between March 2014 and December 2021. The population included 1 cohort of patients with MSI-H MCRC who received first-line ICIs or chemotherapy and a second cohort who received ICIs in any line of therapy (LOT) for biomarker examination., Exposures: ICI therapy or chemotherapy assigned at physician discretion without randomization., Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were time to next treatment (TTNT), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Hazard ratios were adjusted for known prognostic imbalances. Comparisons of explanatory power used the likelihood ratio test., Results: A total of 138 patients (median age, 67.0 years [IQR, 56.2-74.0 years]; 73 [52.9%] female) with MSI-H MCRC received first-line ICIs or chemotherapy. A total of 182 patients (median age, 64.5 years [IQR, 55.2-72.0]; 98 [53.8%] female) received ICIs in any LOT. Patients receiving first-line ICIs vs chemotherapy had longer TTNT (median, not reached [NR] vs 7.23 months [IQR, 6.21-9.72 months]; adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.17; 95% CI, 0.08-0.35; P < .001), PFS (median, 24.87 months [IQR, 19.10 months to NR] vs 5.65 months [IQR, 4.70-8.34 months]; AHR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.18-0.52; P < .001), and OS (median, NR vs 24.1 months [IQR, 13.90 months to NR]; HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.23-0.88; P = .02). MSI added to DMMR better anticipated TTNT and PFS in patients receiving ICIs than DMMR alone. The same was not observed when DMMR evaluation was added to MSI., Conclusions and Relevance: In this comparative effectiveness research study, MSI assessed by NGS robustly identified patients with favorable outcomes on first-line ICIs vs chemotherapy and appeared to better anticipate ICI outcomes compared with DMMR.

Purpose: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analyses allow for postoperative risk stratification in patients with curatively treated colon and breast cancers. Use of ctDNA in esophagogastric cancers (EGC) is less characterized and could identify high-risk patients who have been treated with curative intent., Methods: In this retrospective analysis of real-world data, ctDNA levels were analyzed in the preoperative, postoperative, and surveillance settings in patients with EGC using a personalized multiplex polymerase chain reaction-based next-generation sequencing assay. Plasma samples (n = 943) from 295 patients at > 70 institutions were collected before surgery, postoperatively, and/or serially during routine clinical follow-up from September 19, 2019, to February 21, 2022. ctDNA detection was annotated to clinicopathologic features and recurrence-free survival., Results: A total of 295 patients with EGC were analyzed, and 212 patients with stages I-III disease were further explored. Pretreatment ctDNA was detected in 96% (23/24) of patients with preoperative time points. Postoperative ctDNA was detected in 23.5% (16/68) of patients with stage I-III EGC within 16 weeks (molecular residual disease window) after surgery without receiving systemic therapy. ctDNA detection at any time point after surgery (hazard ratio [HR], 23.6; 95% CI, 10.2 to 66.0; P < .0001), within the molecular residual disease window (HR, 10.7; 95% CI, 4.3 to 29.3; P < .0001), and during the surveillance period (HR, 17.7; 95% CI, 7.3 to 50.7; P < .0001) was associated with shorter recurrence-free survival. In multivariable analysis, ctDNA status and clinical stage of disease were independently associated with outcomes., Conclusion: Using real-world data, we demonstrate that postoperative tumor-informed ctDNA detection in EGC is feasible and allows for enhanced patient risk stratification and prognostication during curative-intent therapy., Competing Interests: Brandon M. HuffmanStock and Other Ownership Interests: Doximity Vasily N. AushevEmployment: NateraStock and Other Ownership Interests: NateraTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Natera Griffin L. BuddeEmployment: NateraStock and Other Ownership Interests: NateraTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Natera Joseph ChaoConsulting or Advisory Role: Lilly, Merck, AstraZeneca, Foundation Medicine, Daiichi Sankyo, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Astellas Pharma, Turning Point Therapeutics, Roche, Silverback Therapeutics, Novartis, Coherus Biosciences, Geneos, Guardant HealthSpeakers' Bureau: Merck, Bristol Myers SquibbResearch Funding: Merck (Inst), Novonco Therapeutics (Inst), Brooklyn Immunotherapeutics (Inst)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Merck, Macrogenics, Foundation Medicine, AmgenOther Relationship: Yiviva Farshid DayyaniEmployment: RocheConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech/Roche, Array BioPharma, Exelixis, Eisai, QED Therapeutics, SignateraSpeakers' Bureau: Genentech/Roche, Amgen, Eisai, ipsen, Exelixis, Sirtex Medical, Deciphera, Natera, ServierResearch Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Merck (Inst), Genentech (Inst), Taiho Pharmaceutical (Inst), Exelixis (Inst), Ipsen (Inst) Diana HannaConsulting or Advisory Role: Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca Gregory P. BottaHonoraria: NateraConsulting or Advisory Role: NateraSpeakers' Bureau: Natera Daniel V.T. CatenacciHonoraria: Genentech/Roche, Lilly, Amgen, Foundation Medicine, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Guardant Health, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Gritstone Bio, Five Prime Therapeutics, Astellas Pharma, Seattle Genetics, Tempus, Pieris Pharmaceuticals, Daiichi Sankyo/UCB Japan, Zymeworks, QED Therapeutics, Natera, Archer, NovartisConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech/Roche, Amgen, Merck, Lilly, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Bristol Myers Squibb, Astellas Pharma, Seattle Genetics, Daiichi Sankyo/UCB Japan, Zymeworks, Guardant HealthSpeakers' Bureau: Guardant Health, Genentech, Lilly, Merck, Tempus, Daiichi Sankyo/Astra Zeneca Steven B. MaronStock and Other Ownership Interests: Calithera BiosciencesHonoraria: Vindico Medical Education, Clarion Healthcare, Physicans' Education ResourceConsulting or Advisory Role: Natera, Basilea, Daichi Sankyo, Bicara Therapeutics, Novartis, AmgenResearch Funding: Guardant Health (Inst), Epic Sciences Shifra KrinshpunEmployment: NateraStock and Other Ownership Interests: NateraTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Natera Shruti SharmaEmployment: NateraStock and Other Ownership Interests: Natera Giby V. GeorgeEmployment: NateraStock and Other Ownership Interests: Natera Meenakshi MalhotraEmployment: NateraStock and Other Ownership Interests: Natera Adham JurdiEmployment: NateraStock and Other Ownership Interests: Natera, Cardiff OncologySpeakers' Bureau: NateraTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Natera Solomon MoshkevichEmployment: Natera, Mahana TherapeuticsStock and Other Ownership Interests: NateraPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Named as inventor on a patent filed by Natera, incTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Natera Alexey AleshinEmployment: Natera, NateraLeadership: NateraStock and Other Ownership Interests: NateraConsulting or Advisory Role: Mission BioTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Natera Pashtoon M. KasiConsulting or Advisory Role: Taiho Pharmaceutical (Inst), Ipsen (Inst), Natera, Foundation Medicine, MSD Oncology, Tempus, Bayer, Lilly, Delcath Systems, Inflecton Point Biomedical Advisors, QED Therapeutics, Boston Healthcare Associates, SERVIER, Taiho Oncology, Exact Sciences, Daiichi Sankyo/Astra Zeneca, Eisai, Seattle GeneticsResearch Funding: Advanced Accelerator Applications (Inst), Tersera (Inst), Boston Scientific (Inst)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZeneca Samuel J. KlempnerThis author is a member of the JCO Precision Oncology Editorial Board. Journal policy recused the author from having any role in the peer review of this manuscript.Stock and Other Ownership Interests: TP Therapeutics, Nuvalent, IncHonoraria: NateraConsulting or Advisory Role: Lilly, Astellas Pharma, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pieris Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Daiichi Sankyo/UCB Japan, Sanofi/Aventis, Mersana, Exact Sciences, NovartisResearch Funding: Leap Therapeutics (Inst), BeiGene (Inst), Silverback Therapeutics (Inst)Other Relationship: NCCNNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Background: Epacadostat, an oral, selective inhibitor of IDO1, has shown activity when administered with pembrolizumab. We evaluated the addition of chemotherapy to epacadostat and pembrolizumab in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors. One proposed mechanism of resistance to PD-1 checkpoint inhibition is through immunosuppression mediated by L-kynurenine. IDO1, indoleamine-2,3-dioxygenase 1 is the rate-limiting enzyme catalyzing the conversion of L-tryptophan to L-kynurenine. If IDO1 is a mechanism of tumor escape from checkpoint inhibition, then addition of an IDO1 inhibitor with a PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor could enable tumor response to immunotherapy., Methods: Patients received one of 7 tumor-appropriate chemotherapy regimens. Pembrolizumab 200 mg was infused intravenously every 3 weeks. Epacadostat 100 mg was administered orally twice daily. The primary objectives of phase I were determining safety/tolerability and defining the maximum tolerated or pharmacologically active dose of epacadostat. Phase II of the study was designed to enroll efficacy-expansion cohorts and to assess changes in the tumor and tumor microenvironment via mandatory-biopsy cohorts., Results: A total of 70 patients were enrolled. Twelve patients were enrolled in the phase II mandatory-biopsy cohorts. Due to early study closure, efficacy expansion did not enroll. Grades 3 and 4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 78.6% of patients. Neutropenia and disease progression were the only grades 3 and 4 TEAEs reported in ≥10.0% of patients. One treatment-related death was reported. The ORR was 31.4% across all treatment groups., Conclusion: The combination of epacadostat 100 mg bid with pembrolizumab and chemotherapy had an acceptable safety profile. This regimen showed antitumor activity across multiple types of advanced or metastatic solid tumors (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03085914)., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic gastric and gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA) is globally treated with chemotherapy plus trastuzumab. Novel therapeutic strategies strive to not only optimize efficacy, but also limit toxicities. In MAHOGANY cohort A, margetuximab, an Fc-engineered, anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody (mAb) was combined with retifanlimab, an anti-programmed cell death protein 1 mAb, in the first-line HER2-positive/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive GEA., Patients and Methods: MAHOGANY cohort A part 1 is a single-arm trial to evaluate margetuximab plus retifanlimab in patients with HER2 immunohistochemistry 3+, PD-L1-positive (combined positive score ≥1%), and non-microsatellite instability-high tumors. Primary objectives for cohort A were safety/tolerability and the confirmed objective response rate (ORR)., Results: As of 3 August 2021, 43 patients were enrolled and received margetuximab/retifanlimab. Nine grade 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in eight (18.6%) patients and eight serious TRAEs in seven (16.3%) patients. There were no grade 4/5 TRAEs. Three patients discontinued margetuximab/retifanlimab because of immune-related adverse events. The ORR by independent assessment was 53% [21/40 (95% confidence interval (CI) 36.1-68.5)], with a median duration of response of 10.3 months (95% CI 4.6-not evaluable); disease control rate was 73% [29/40 (95% CI 56.1-85.4)]. The study sponsor discontinued the study in advance of the planned enrollment when it became apparent that the study design would no longer meet the requirements for drug approval because of recent advances in the treatment of GEA., Conclusions: The chemotherapy-free regimen of combined margetuximab/retifanlimab as first-line treatment in double biomarker-selected patients demonstrated a favorable toxicity profile compared with historical outcomes using chemotherapy plus trastuzumab. The ORR observed in this study compares favorably versus ORR observed with other chemotherapy-free approaches., Competing Interests: Disclosure DVTC has received personal fees from Archer, Astellas Pharma, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Five Prime Therapeutics, Foundation Medicine, Guardant Health, Tempus Labs, Genentech/Roche, Gritstone Oncology, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Natera, Pieris Pharmaceuticals, QED Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and Zymeworks. YKK has received consulting fees from ALX Oncology, Amgen, Blueprint Medicines, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daehwa Pharmaceutical, MacroGenics, Merck & Co., Inc., Novartis, Roche, Surface Oncology, and Zymeworks. HHY has received payments to the institution for grants from Bristol Myers Squibb and Merck & Co., Inc.; consulting fees from ALX Oncology, Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Bristol Myers Squibb, MacroGenics, Merck & Co, Inc., Novartis, OncXerna Therapeutics, and Zymeworks; honoraria from BeiGene; and advisory board or data safety monitoring board payments from ALX Oncology, Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Bristol Myers Squibb, MacroGenics, Merck & Co., Inc., Novartis, OncXerna Therapeutics, and Zymeworks. DYO has received grants from Array BioPharma, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Lilly, HANDOK, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Novartis, and Servier Pharmaceuticals; and participated in advisory boards for ASLAN Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Basilea Pharmaceutica, Bayer, BeiGene, Celgene, a Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Genentech/Roche, Halozyme, Merck Serono, Novartis, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Turning Point Therapeutics, and Zymeworks. AIS has received stock payments from Lilly; payments for leadership role from NEXT Oncology; honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, CytomX Therapeutics, Janssen Oncology, Merck, Novartis, and Takeda; and personal and institutional payments for advisory boards from Amgen, Array BioPharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Gritstone Oncology, Incyte, Janssen Research and Development, Merck & Co., Inc., Mirati Therapeutics, Novartis, and Takeda; consulting fees from Amgen, Array BioPharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Gritstone Oncology, Janssen Research and Development, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Incyte, Merck & Co., Inc., Mirati Therapeutics, Novartis, and Takeda; and grants and other support from AbbVie, ADC Therapeutics, Amgen, Arch Therapeutics, Astellas Pharma, Astex Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CytomX Therapeutics, Daiichi Sankyo, Gritstone Oncology, Ignyta, Incyte, Janssen Oncology, LAM Therapeutics, Loxo Oncology, MacroGenics, MedImmune, Mirati Therapeutics, NewLink Genetics, Novartis, Plexxikon, Roche, Rubius Therapeutics, Takeda, and TrovaGene. SVU has participated in advisory boards for Array BioPharma, Bayer, Eisai, Exelixis, Incyte, and Syros Pharmaceuticals; and grants to institution from AbbVie, ArQule, AstraZeneca, Atreca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, a Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, CicloMed, Evelo Biosciences, Exelixis, G1 Therapeutics, GlaxoSmithKline, IGM Biosciences, Incyte, Isofol Medical, KLUS Pharma, MacroGenics, Merck & Co., Inc., Mersana Therapeutics, OncoMed Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Revolution Medicines, Synermore Biologics, Takeda, Tarveda Therapeutics, Tesaro, Tempest Therapeutics, and Vigeo Therapeutics. EJA has received research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Seagen, AbbVie, and Lilly; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Janssen Biotech, and McKesson. PMB has received consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb and Merck; grants/research support to institution from Ipsen, Processa Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie, MacroGenics, Merck, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and Athenex. JC has received consulting fees from Amgen, Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Foundation Medicine, Lilly, MacroGenics, Merck & Co., Inc., Novartis, Ono Pharmaceutical, Silverback Therapeutics, and Turning Point Therapeutics; speaker’s bureau honorarium from Bristol Myers Squibb and Merck and Co., Inc.; data safety monitoring board member fees from Yiviva; and research payments to the institution from Brooklyn ImmunoTherapeutics, MacroGenics, and Merck & Co., Inc. HCC received grants/research support from Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Merck Serono, Bristol Myers Squibb/Ono Pharmaceutical, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Amgen, BeiGene, Incyte, and Zymeworks; received honoraria from Lilly and Merck Serono; and did consultation for Amgen, BeiGene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celltrion, Gloria Therapeutics, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Merck Serono, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and Zymeworks. FG has received consulting fees for participating on advisory boards from Janssen, Epizyme, and Regeneron/Sanofi; speaker’s bureau honorarium from Epizyme, Regeneron/Sanofi, and Pfizer. SJK has received consulting fees for participating on advisory boards from Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Lilly, Merck & Co., Inc., Natera, and Pieris Pharmaceuticals; and stock options from Turning Point Therapeutics. KWL has received consulting fees from Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, and ISU ABXIS; honorarium from Boryung Pharmaceutical and Ono Pharmaceutical; and research grants to the institution from ABL Bio, ALX Oncology, Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Bolt Biotherapeutics, Daiichi Sankyo, Five Prime Therapeutics, Genexine, Green Cross Corp, InventisBio, Leap Therapeutics, LSK BioPharma, MacroGenics, MedPacto, Merck KGaA, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Oncologie, Pharmacyclics, Ono Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, Seagen, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Trishula Therapeutics, Y-Biologics, and Zymeworks for conducting clinical trials. JP has received honoraria from Agendia, Guardant Health, and Tempus; consulting fees from TerSera Therapeutics; research funding for clinical trials from AbbVie, BerGenBio, Calithera Biosciences, Inc, eFFECTOR Therapeutics, EMD Serono, Epizyme, Genentech/Roche, Immunity Bio, Immutep S.A.S., Incyte, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Jounce Therapeutics, Lilly, KeChow Pharma, Loxo Oncology, MacroGenics, Inc., Merck, Mirati, Natera, Novocure Ltd, Sermonix Pharmaceuticals, TerSera Therapeutics, Turning Point Therapeutics, Salarius Pharmaceuticals, Immunomedics, Pfizer, and Kyowa Kirin; and owns stocks of Oncology Consultants, Zogen, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Roche, TerSera Therapeutics. LS has received consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Haichuang Pharmaceutical, Harbour BioMed, Merck & Co., Inc., Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., and Mingji Biopharmaceutical; speaker’s bureau fees from CStone Pharmaceuticals, Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals, Hutchison Whampoa, and Zai Lab; participated on advisory boards for Bristol Myers Squibb, CStone Pharmaceuticals, Rongchang Pharmaceuticals, and Zai Lab; and grants to the institution from Beihai Kangcheng (Beijing) Medical Technology, Beijing Xiantong Biomedical Technology, Jacobio Pharmaceuticals, Qilu Pharmaceutical, and Zai Lab. MM has received grants and nonfinancial support from the AIO, BMBF, EORTC, and German Cancer Aid; personal fees from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Falk Foundation, Lilly, MGI Group, Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Pfizer, Roche, and Taiho Pharmaceutical; grants to the institution from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., and Pfizer; and nonfinancial support from Amgen and Bristol Myers Squibb paid to the institution. JS, DL, and MKR are/were employees of MacroGenics and hold stock in the company. HP has received grants to institution from Adlai Nortye USA, Alpine Immune Sciences, Ambrx, Amgen, Aprea Therapeutics AB, Array BioPharma, Bayer, BeiGene, BJ Bioscience Inc., Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Lilly, Elicio Therapeutics, EMD Serono, Exelixis, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Gossamer Bio, Hoffman-La Roche, Hutchison MediPharma, ImmuneOncia Therapeutics, Incyte, Jounce Therapeutics, MabSpace Biosciences, MacroGenics, MedImmune, Medivation, Merck & Co., Inc., Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Mirati Therapeutics, Novartis, Oncologie, Pfizer, PsiOxus Therapeutics, Puma Biotechnology, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Repare Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Synermore Biologics, Taiho Pharmaceutical, TopAlliance Biosciences, Turning Point Therapeutics, Vedanta Biosciences, and Xencor; writing support from MacroGenics; and participated in advisory boards for Jacobio Pharmaceuticals. BYS, STK, SCO, and MBS have declared no conflicts of interest. Data sharing The data collected for the study will not be made available to others., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer (mEG) and tumor mutational burden ≥10 mut/Mb (TMB ≥ 10) have more favorable outcomes on immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICPI) monotherapy compared with chemotherapy in subgroup analyses of randomized controlled trials. We sought to evaluate the robustness of these associations in real-world settings where patients and practices are more diverse. A total of 362 2 L and 692 1 L patients, respectively received ICPI ( n = 99, 33) or chemotherapy ( n = 263, 659) across approximately 280 U.S. academic or community-based cancer clinics March 2014-July 2021. Deidentified data were captured into a real-world clinico-genomic database. All patients underwent Foundation Medicine testing. Time to next treatment (TTNT) and overall survival (OS) comparing ICPI versus chemotherapy were adjusted for treatment assignment imbalances using propensity scores. 2L: TMB ≥ 10 had more favorable TTNT [median 24 vs. 4.1 months; HR: 0.19; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.09-0.44; P = 0.0001] and OS (median 43.1 vs. 6.2 months; HR: 0.24; 95% CI: 0.011-0.54; P = 0.0005), TMB < 10 did not ( P > 0.05). 1L: TMB ≥ 10 had more favorable TTNT (not reached vs. median 4.1 months; HR: 0.13; 95% CI: 0.03-0.48; P = 0.0024) and OS (not reached vs. median 17.1 months; HR: 0.30; 95% CI: 0.08-1.14; P = 0.078), TMB < 10 had less favorable TTNT (median 2.8 vs. 6.5 months; HR: 2.36; 95% CI: 1.25-4.45; P = 0.008) and OS (median 4.5 vs. 13.1 months; HR: 1.82, 95% CI: 0.87-3.81; P = 0.11). TMB ≥ 10 robustly identifies patients with mEG with more favorable outcomes on 2 L ICPI monotherapy versus chemotherapy. 1 L data are more limited, but effects are consistent with 2L., Significance: Using real-world data, we sought to evaluate robustness of these clinical associations using the same assay platform and biomarker cut-off point used in both clinical trials and pan-tumor CDx approvals for later treatment lines. TMB ≥ 10 robustly identified patients with mEG with more favorable outcomes on ICPI monotherapy versus chemotherapy and suggests this subset of patients could be targeted for further trial development., Competing Interests: R.P. Graf reports personal fees from Foundation Medicine, Inc during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Epic Sciences outside the submitted work; in addition, R.P. Graf has a patent to Planned pending. V. Fisher reports grants from Roche outside the submitted work. J. Creeden reports other from Foundation Medicine, Inc outside the submitted work. A.B. Schrock reports personal fees from Foundation Medicine and Roche during the conduct of the study. J.S. Ross reports personal fees from Foundation Medicine outside the submitted work. H. Nimeiri reports other from Foundation Medicine outside the submitted work. G.R. Oxnard reports personal fees from Foundation Medicine and Roche during the conduct of the study. S.J. Klempner reports personal fees from Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Astellas, Daiichi-Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Sanofi-Aventis, Exact Sciences, Eli Lilly; other from Nuvalent and Turning Point Therapeutics outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported., (© 2022 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: Subset analyses from phase III evaluation of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibition (EGFRi) suggest improved outcomes in patients with EGFR- amplified gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA), but large-scale analyses are lacking. This multi-institutional analysis sought to determine the role of EGFRi in the largest cohort of patients with EGFR- amplified GEA to date., Patients and Methods: A total of 60 patients from 15 tertiary cancer centers in six countries met the inclusion criteria. These criteria required histologically confirmed GEA in the metastatic or unresectable setting with EGFR amplification identified by using a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-approved assay, and who received on- or off-protocol EGFRi. Testing could be by tissue next-generation sequencing, plasma circulating tumor DNA next-generation sequencing, and/or fluorescence in situ hybridization performed by a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments approved laboratory. Treatment patterns and outcomes analysis was also performed using a deidentified clinicogenomic database (CGDB)., Results: Sixty patients with EGFR -amplified GEA received EGFRi, including 31 of 60 patients (52%) with concurrent chemotherapy. Across treatment lines, patients achieved a 43% objective response rate with a median progression-free survival of 4.6 months (95% CI, 3.5 to 6.4). Patients receiving EGFRi in first-, second-, and third-line therapy achieved a median overall survival of 20.6 months (95% CI, 13.5 to not reached [NR]), 9 months (95% CI, 7.9 to NR), and 8.4 months (7.6 to NR), respectively. This survival far exceeded the 11.2-month (95% CI, 8.7 to 14.2) median overall survival from first-line initiation of non-EGFRi therapy in patients with EGFR -amplified GEA in the CGDB. Despite this benefit, analysis of the CGDB (January 2011-December 2020) suggests that only 5% of patients with EGFR -amplified GEA received EGFRi., Conclusion: Patients with EGFR- amplified GEA derive significant benefit from EGFRi. Further prospective investigation of EGFRi in a well-selected patient population is ongoing in an upcoming trial of amivantamab in EGFR and/or MET amplified GEA.

Black people have a higher incidence of colorectal cancer and worse survival rates when compared with white people. Comprehensive genomic profiling was performed in 46,140 colorectal adenocarcinoma cases. Ancestry-informative markers identified 5,301 patients of African descent (AFR) and 33,770 patients of European descent (EUR). AFR were younger, had fewer microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) tumors, and had significantly more frequent alterations in KRAS, APC, and PIK3CA. AFR had increased frequency of KRAS mutations, specifically KRASG12D and KRASG13. There were no differences in rates of actionable kinase driver alterations (HER2, MET, NTRK, ALK, ROS1, and RET). In patients with young-onset colorectal cancer (<50 years), AFR and EUR had a similar frequency of MSI-H and tumor mutational burden-high (TMB-H) tumors, and strikingly different trends in APC mutations by age, as well as differences in MAPK pathway alterations. These findings inform treatment decisions, impact prognosis, and underscore the need for model systems representative of the diverse U.S. population., Significance: KRAS (particularly KRASG12D/G13), APC, and PIK3CA were more frequently altered in AFR who had a lower frequency of MSI-H tumors. There were no differences in actionable kinase driver alterations. In young-onset colorectal cancer, both ancestries had a similar frequency of MSI-H/TMB-H tumors, but strikingly different trends in APC. See related commentary by Eng and Holowatyj, p. 1187. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1171., (©2022 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Chemotherapy is ubiquitous in first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer, yet responses are heterogeneous, and little is known about mediators of chemotherapy response. To move forward, an understanding of the effects of standard chemotherapy on the tumor-immune microenvironment (TME) is needed. Coupling whole-exome sequencing, bulk RNA and single-cell transcriptomics from paired pretreatment and on-treatment samples in treatment-naïve patients with HER2-positive and HER2-negative gastric cancer, we define features associated with response to platinum-based chemotherapy. Response was associated with on-treatment TME remodeling including natural killer (NK) cell recruitment, decreased tumor-associated macrophages, M1-macrophage repolarization, and increased effector T-cell infiltration. Among chemotherapy nonresponders, we observed low/absent PD-L1 expression or modulation, on-treatment increases in Wnt signaling, B-cell infiltration, and LAG3-expressing T cells coupled to an exodus of dendritic cells. We did not observe significant genomic changes in early on-treatment sampling. We provide a map of on-treatment TME modulation with standard chemotherapy and nominate candidate future approaches., Significance: Using paired pretreatment and on-treatment samples during standard first-line chemotherapy, we identify chemotherapy-induced NK-cell infiltration, macrophage repolarization, and increased antigen presentation among responders. Increased LAG3 expression and decreased dendritic cell abundance were seen in nonresponders, emphasizing remodeling of the TME during chemotherapy response and resistance. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 873., (©2021 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Prospective data examining the association of aspirin use, according to dose and duration, with long-term risk of gastric adenocarcinoma in non-Asian cohorts are lacking. We evaluated the association between aspirin use and risk of gastric adenocarcinoma in two large prospective U.S. cohort studies, the Nurses' Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to calculate multivariable adjusted HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Among the 159,116 participants, we documented 316 gastric adenocarcinoma cases (176 women, 140 men) over 34 years encompassing 4.5 million person-years. Among women, regular aspirin use (at least two times or more per week) was significantly associated with lower risk of gastric adenocarcinoma (multivariable HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.37-0.73) compared with nonregular use. However, regular aspirin use was not associated with gastric adenocarcinoma risk among men (multivariable HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.77-1.52; Pheterogeneity for sex = 0.003). Among women, the lower risk of gastric adenocarcinoma was more apparent with increasing duration of aspirin use (Ptrend < 0.001) and more than five tablets per week (multivariable HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.31-0.84). Regular, long-term aspirin use was associated with lower risk of gastric adenocarcinoma among women, but not men. The benefit appeared after at least 10 years of use and was maximized at higher doses among women. The heterogeneity by sex in the association of aspirin use with risk of gastric adenocarcinoma requires further investigation., Prevention Relevance: Novel prevention is urgently needed to reduce incidence and mortality of gastric cancer. We found that regular aspirin use was associated with lower risk of gastric adenocarcinoma among women, but not men. The benefit appeared after at least 10 years of use and was maximized at higher doses among women. See related Spotlight, p. 213., (©2022 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Chemotherapy has long been shown to confer a survival benefit in patients with metastatic esophageal cancer. However, not all patients with metastatic disease receive chemotherapy., Aim: To evaluate a large cancer database of metastatic esophageal cancer cases to identify predictors of receipt to chemotherapy and survival., Methods: We interrogated the National Cancer Database (NCDB) between 2004-2015 and included patients with M1 disease who had received or did not receive chemotherapy. A logistic regression model was used to examine the associations between chemotherapy and potential confounders and a Cox proportional hazards model was employed to examine the effect of chemotherapy on overall survival (OS). Propensity score analyses were further performed to balance measurable confounders between patients treated with and without chemotherapy., Results: A total of 29182 patients met criteria for inclusion in this analysis, with 21911 (75%) receiving chemotherapy and 7271 (25%) not receiving chemotherapy. The median follow-up was 69.45 mo. The median OS for patients receiving chemotherapy was 9.53 mo (9.33-9.72) vs 2.43 mo (2.27-2.60) with no chemotherapy. Year of diagnosis 2010-2014 [odds ratio (OR): 1.29, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.17-1.43, P value < 0.001], median income > $46000 (OR: 1.49, 95%CI: 1.27-1.75, P value < 0.001), and node-positivity (OR: 1.35, 95%CI: 1.20-1.52, P < 0.001) were independent predictors of receiving chemotherapy, while female gender (OR: 0.86, 95%CI: 0.76-0.98, P = 0.019), black race (OR: 0.76, 95%CI: 0.67-0.93, P = 0.005), uninsured status (OR: 0.41, 95%CI: 0.33-0.52, P < 0.001), and high Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (OR for CCI ≥ 2: 0.61, 95%CI: 0.50-0.74, P < 0.001) predicted for lower odds of receiving chemotherapy. Modeling the effect of chemotherapy on OS using a time-dependent coefficient showed that chemotherapy was associated with improved OS up to 10 mo, after which there is no significant effect on OS. Moreover, uninsured status [hazard ratio (HR): 1.20, 95%CI: 1.09-1.31, P < 0.001], being from the geographic Midwest (HR: 1.07, 95%CI: 1.01-1.14, P = 0.032), high CCI (HR for CCI ≥ 2: 1.16, 95%CI: 1.07-1.26, P < 0.001), and higher tumor grade (HR for grade 3 vs grade 1: 1.28, 95%CI: 1.14-1.44, P < 0.001) and higher T stage (HR for T1 vs T4: 0.89, 95%CI: 0.84-0.95, P < 0.001) were independent predictors of worse OS on multivariable analyses., Conclusion: In this large, retrospective NCDB analysis, we identified several socioeconomic and clinicopathologic predictors for receiving chemotherapy and OS in patients with metastatic esophageal cancer. The benefit of chemotherapy on OS is time-dependent and favors early initiation. Focused outreach in lower income and underinsured patients is critical as receipt of chemotherapy is associated with improved OS., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: No conflict of interest., (©The Author(s) 2022. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.)

Gastric cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Over 95% of gastric cancers are adenocarcinomas, which are typically classified based on anatomic location and histologic type. Gastric cancer generally carries a poor prognosis because it is often diagnosed at an advanced stage. Systemic therapy can provide palliation, improved survival, and enhanced quality of life in patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. The implementation of biomarker testing, especially analysis of HER2 status, microsatellite instability (MSI) status, and the expression of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), has had a significant impact on clinical practice and patient care. Targeted therapies including trastuzumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab have produced encouraging results in clinical trials for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Palliative management, which may include systemic therapy, chemoradiation, and/or best supportive care, is recommended for all patients with unresectable or metastatic cancer. Multidisciplinary team management is essential for all patients with localized gastric cancer. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Gastric Cancer focuses on the management of unresectable locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic disease.

Background: Despite unprecedented benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with mismatch repair deficient (dMMR)/microsatellite instability high (MSI-H) advanced gastrointestinal cancers, a relevant proportion of patients shows primary resistance or short-term disease control. Since malignant effusions represent an immune-suppressed niche, we investigated whether peritoneal involvement with or without ascites is a poor prognostic factor in patients with dMMR/MSI-H metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and gastric cancer (mGC) receiving ICIs., Methods: We conducted a global multicohort study at Tertiary Cancer Centers and collected clinic-pathological data from a cohort of patients with dMMR/MSI-H mCRC treated with anti-PD-(L)1 ±anti-CTLA-4 agents at 12 institutions (developing set). A cohort of patients with dMMR/MSI-high mGC treated with anti-PD-1 agents±chemotherapy at five institutions was used as validating dataset., Results: The mCRC cohort included 502 patients. After a median follow-up of 31.2 months, patients without peritoneal metastases and those with peritoneal metastases and no ascites had similar outcomes (adjusted HR (aHR) 1.15, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.56 for progression-free survival (PFS); aHR 0.96, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.42 for overall survival (OS)), whereas inferior outcomes were observed in patients with peritoneal metastases and ascites (aHR 2.90, 95% CI 1.70 to 4.94; aHR 3.33, 95% CI 1.88 to 5.91) compared with patients without peritoneal involvement. The mGC cohort included 59 patients. After a median follow-up of 17.4 months, inferior PFS and OS were reported in patients with peritoneal metastases and ascites (aHR 3.83, 95% CI 1.68 to 8.72; aHR 3.44, 95% CI 1.39 to 8.53, respectively), but not in patients with only peritoneal metastases (aHR 1.87, 95% CI 0.64 to 5.46; aHR 2.15, 95% CI 0.64 to 7.27) when compared with patients without peritoneal involvement., Conclusions: Patients with dMMR/MSI-H gastrointestinal cancers with peritoneal metastases and ascites should be considered as a peculiar subgroup with highly unfavorable outcomes to current ICI-based therapies. Novel strategies to target the immune-suppressive niche in malignant effusions should be investigated, as well as next-generation ICIs or intraperitoneal approaches., Competing Interests: Competing interests: KS paid consulting or advisory roles for Astellas, Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Pfizer, Ono, MSD, Taiho, Novartis, AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline, Daiichi Sankyo, Amgen, and Boehringer Ingelheim ; honoraria from Novartis, AbbVie, and Yakult; and research funding from Astellas, Lilly, Ono, Sumoitomo Dainippon, Daiichi Sankyo, Taiho, Chugai, MSD, Medi Science and Eisai. JC reports grants and personal fees from Merck, Amgen, Macrogenics, Ono Pharmaceuticals, Foundation Medicine, Daiichi-Sankyo and Bristol Myers Squibb. AK reports honoraria from Ono Pharmaceutical, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and Eli Lilly outside the submitted work. CC received honoraria from Amgen, Bayer, Merck, Roche, and Servier; has consulting or advisory role at Amgen, Bayer, MSD, and Roche; was a speakers bureau member at Servier; received research funding from Bayer, Merck, and Servier; and received travel and accommodation expenses from Roche and Servier. MO: consulting for Merck Sharp & Dohme, AbbVie, Agilvax, Acrotech Biopharma, and Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp; and scientific/ advisory committee member of Takeda Pharmaceuticals (Japan). AK reports honoraria from from Ono Pharmaceutical, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and Eli Lilly outside the submitted work. FP received honoraria from Amgen, Merck-Serono, Sanofi, Lilly, Bayer, Servier, Astrazeneca; research grants from Astrazeneca and BMS. All the remaining authors declared no conflict of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

The sequential use of 1 st -/2 nd -generation to 3 rd -generation epidermal growth factor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) has led to the emergence of triple EGFR mutations generally consisting of the founder mutation (del 19 or L858R), gatekeeper mutation (T790M) and mutation (C797S) that abolishes the covalent binding of osimertinib to the EGFR protein (i.e., del 19 or L858R/T790M/C797S). Besides C797S, other tertiary mutations confer structural steric hindrance to osimertinib rather than preventing its covalent binding to the EGFR kinase domain such as solvent front mutation (G796S) or others such as L792F/H mutation. "Fourth-generation" EGFR TKIs are being developed to inhibit these triple mutations, in particular, in the background of compound T790M/C797S mutations but they are still in early clinical stages of development. Amivantamab, a bi-specific EGFR/MET monoclonal antibody that can affect Fc mediated trogocytosis of the EGFR protein has been approved for the treatment of EGFR exon20 insertion mutations and has demonstrated activity against a myriad of compound EGFR mutations. Here we report amivantamab monotherapy induced symptomatic, biochemical, molecular, and radiographic responses in a NSCLC patient with triple EGFR mutations in cis in the background of EGFR amplification., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)