Search

293 Background: NET-02 was a multi-centre, randomised (1:1), non-comparative phase II trial of nal-IRI/5-FU/folinic acid (ARM A) or docetaxel (ARM B) in pts with progressive PD-EP-NEC, aimed at selecting a treatment for evaluation in a phase III trial. Primary analysis (N = 58) showed ARM A, but not ARM B, achieved the target 6-month progression-free survival rate primary endpoint (McNamara et al. ASCO 2022). HRQoL was a secondary endpoint in NET-02. Methods: HRQoL was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and GINET21 (at baseline (BL), 6-weekly intervals and at disease progression). The mean change from BL was estimated for each scale by timepoint and treatment arm. Results are presented where there were ≥4 responses per time point. Scores were considered stable if they did not change by > 10 points from BL. The mean BL C30 scores for all pts were compared to United Kingdom (UK) population normative C30 data using a 2-sample t-test. Results: Fifty-four of 58 pts (93%) completed a BL questionnaire; of these, 39 (72%) completed ≥1 post-BL questionnaire, with 21 (51%) completing questionnaires at progression. Global health status (GHS) and all functional scales in ARM A remained stable from BL to intervals pre-progression, with a sustained improvement in role functioning observed post-BL. In ARM B, GHS and all C30 functional scales decreased by > 10 points between BL and week 18 (worsening of QoL). Both arms had a > 10-point increase from BL in constipation and diarrhoea in ≥1 post-BL time point. In ARM A, pain, insomnia and financial problems decreased from BL. No C30 symptom scales in ARM B were consistently lower post-BL. Patterns of change in GINET21 mean score were similar in both arms: body image, disease-related worries, information/communication, sexual function and social function all had a > 10-point reduction in score from BL (indicating improvement in symptoms/problems); endocrine and gastrointestinal symptoms remained stable; muscle/bone pain varied across time points, initially showing a reduction in pain followed by an increase, compared to BL. In comparison to the UK C30 norms (BL all pts), 11 of 15 C30 scales did not significantly differ (P > 0.05). Mean scores for fatigue and appetite loss were significantly higher than UK C30 norms (worse symptoms in pts from NET-02) (P = 0.03, P = 0.0003 respectively). However, emotional functioning and GHS were significantly better in pts from NET-02 (P = 0.001, P = 0.03 respectively). Role and social functioning were lower in pts from NET-02 (both P = 0.06) (poorer level of functioning). Conclusions: HRQoL was maintained and potentially improved with nal-IRI/5-FU/folinic acid, but not docetaxel. Compared to the UK general population, BL QoL did not substantially differ in pts from NET-02. Clinical trial information: NCT03837977.

4039 Background: Despite potentially curative surgery, long-term survival from OGC remains poor due to high relapse rate. Neoadjuvant (naFLOT) and adjuvant (aFLOT) FLOT is currently standard treatment for resectable OGC based on data from the FLOT-4 trial. We explored whether TRG was associated with FLOT-outcome using RWD. Methods: Pts with OGC treated with naFLOT +/- aFLOT at a tertiary UK centre were identified following institutional board approval. Clinical and laboratory data were extracted from the patient record. TRG was evaluated by a histopathologist. Median overall survival (OS) and median progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Log-rank tests; time taken from start of naFLOT, and associations between factors with Fisher’s exact (FE) test. Results: 171 pts were identified, median FU 30 mths. 144 (84%) male; median age 66 (32-84); oesophagus 66 (38%), junctional (GOJ) 73 (43%), gastric 32 (19%); stage IB 3 (2%), stage IIB 26 (15%), stage III 91 (53%), stage IVA 47 (28%) and unknown 4 (2%). Pts had median of 2 comorbidities (range 0-6); performance status (PS) 0: 95 (56%), PS 1: 71 (41%), PS 2: 3 (2%) and PS unknown 2 (1%). 132/171 pts completed 4 cycles of naFLOT and this was significantly associated with undergoing surgery (p = 0.02). Those who had surgery (140/171) had significantly improved PFS (not reached (NR) vs. 6 mths; 95% CI 2-10; p < 0.001) and OS (NR vs. 12 mths; 95% CI 6-18; p < 0.001). TRG was reported for 126/140 patients who underwent surgery. TRG 1/2 (42/126) vs. TRG ≥3 was significantly associated with improved PFS (NR vs. 35 mths; 95% CI NR; p < 0.001) and OS (median NR either group; p < 0.001). Pts with TRG 1/2 who commenced aFLOT (≥1 cycle; n = 31/42) or completed 4 cycles of aFLOT (17/31) did not have improved PFS or OS vs. those who did not. Those with TRG ≥3 who commenced aFLOT (≥1 cycle; n = 62/85) had improved PFS (median NR vs. 22 mths; 95% CI 13-31 p = 0.006) and OS (median NR vs. 25 mths; 95% CI 18-32 p = 0.019). Those with TRG ≥3 who completed 4 cycles of aFLOT (n = 38/62) had significantly improved PFS (median NR vs. 25 mths; 95% CI 14-36 p = 0.016) and OS (median NR vs. 36 mths; 95% CI 16-55 p = 0.012). There was no difference in PFS or OS in pts with TRG ≥3 who had a dose reduction at any time during aFLOT. Conclusions: TRG is a predictor of outcome following naFLOT + surgery with superior outcomes in those with TRG 1/2. Our analyses suggest that only pts with TRG >3 following naFLOT + surgery benefit from adjuvant FLOT. Prospective randomised studies are required to confirm whether pts with TRG 1/2 require treatment with aFLOT.

425 Background: Molecular profiling of tumour samples and circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) may inform treatment of advanced cancer; the role of ctDNA to predict progression-free-survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in advanced PDAC is not fully understood. Methods: Eligible patients: those diagnosed with advanced PDAC undergoing molecular profiling [tumour (Foundation Medicine CDx/Caris) or ctDNA (FoundationMedicine Liquid (72 cancer-related genes))]. Baseline patient characteristics and molecular profiling outcomes, including mutant allele frequency (MAF) for pathological alterations were extracted. The primary aim was to assess the impact of presence of ctDNA at time of systemic chemotherapy initiation on PFS and OS. Results: Total of 26 samples (ctDNA 18 samples and 8 tumour samples) from 25 patients diagnosed with advanced PDAC underwent molecular profiling. When the whole population was analysed, the rate of sample analysis failure seemed to be higher when tumour tissue was tested (37.5%) compared to ctDNA (5.56%); p-value 0.072. The overall rate of identification of pathological findings was 72.73%, with 18.18% of patients having targetable findings [EGFRmut (1 patient), KRAS G12C mut (1 patient), FGFR2 fusion (1 patient), RNF43 mut (1 patient)]; these findings impacted treatment management in one patient only (RNF43 mutation; Wnt inhibitor). Variants of unknown significance were identified in 63.64% of samples. Patients with ctDNA analysis at time of palliative chemotherapy initiation (16 samples; 15 patients) were analysed [6 female (40.00%), median age 69.57 years (range 51.61-81.49), metastatic disease (66.67%), 80% first-line (80%), 20% second-line]. Pathological mutations were identified in 9/15 (60.00%) of these patients (KRAS mutation identified in 6/9). After median follow-up of 8.33 months from sample acquisition, 80% and 53.33% of patients had progressed and died, respectively. Median estimated PFS and OS were 5.65 months (95% CI 1.59-8.17) and 7.80 months (95% CI 4.13-not reached). Presence (vs absence) of pathological alterations in ctDNA showed a trend towards shorter PFS (2.91 vs 6.51 months; HR 1.38 (95% CI 0.40-4.77)) and OS (6.12 vs 9.72 months; HR 2.03 (95% CI 0.60-6.82)). Conclusions: This pilot study demonstrates the feasibility of ctDNA analysis in patients with advanced PDAC prior to initiation of palliative therapy. The presence of pathological alterations in ctDNA may prognosticate for worse PFS and OS. Larger studies are required to confirm these findings.

348 Background: The proportion of females in medicine is increasing (approx. 50% in medical school/workforce), but disparities in female authorship in oncology research publications exist; female corresponding authorship reportedly ranges from 7.2-39.1% in oncology clinical trials (Ludmir et al 2019). This study aimed to describe and assess factors associated with female first and senior authorship in later phase systemic clinical trials in BTC and to identify any changes over time. Methods: Embase/Medline were used to identify final primary trial publications in BTC (2000-2020) (excluding phase I (PI) (expected to move to later phase), mixed tumour site trials, reviews, editorials and trial-in-progress publications). Gender was determined by inspection of names, google search and author communication. Chi-square tests and log regression were used to assess factors associated with female first and senior authorship, including changes over time (STATA16). Results: Of 501 publications, 163 met inclusion criteria; 80% single-arm PII and 15% and 5% randomised PII and PIII respectively; 73% enrolled ≤50 patients. Tumour primary sites were all BTC: 86%, cholangiocarcinoma: 8%, gallbladder cancer: 6%; 80% involved chemotherapy, 13% targeted therapy and 5% localised/systemic combinations; 65% were in first-line (1L) advanced setting, 17% post 1L, 13% advanced non-specified and 5% neo-adjuvant/adjuvant. Forty-eight percent received industry funding and 65% met primary end-point. Sixty-four percent were published post ABC-02 (Valle et al 2010). Publication impact factor (IF) was ≤5 in 50% and >20 in 12%. Median number of authors in all publications was 11. Geographic location of all first and senior authors were Asia (42%/42%), Europe (29%/29%), USA (24%/22%) and other (4%/6%), respectively. Median individual trial female author representation was 25%; there were no female authors in 12% of trials. Overall, female first and senior author representation was 21% and 11%, respectively. Median position of first female author was second. In publications with IF ≤20 and >20, there were 22% and 16% female first and 13% and 0% female senior authors, respectively. The phase of trial, journal IF, industry funding, or whether met primary end-point did not impact female first or senior author representation (all P>.05). There were more female senior authors associated with “other” geographic locations (40% in 10 trials) (P=.016) vs Asia (7%), Europe (8%) and USA (14%). There were no significant changes in female first or senior author representation over time (‘00-05: 21%/18%, ‘06-10: 27%/5%, ‘11-15: 15%/15%, ‘16-20: 22%/9%, P=.738, and P=.508 respectively). Conclusions: Female first and senior author representation in later phase systemic clinical trial publications in BTC is low and has not changed significantly over time. The underlying reasons for this imbalance need to be better understood and addressed.

336 Background: The potential role of ctDNA to identify residual disease after potentially curative resection has been suggested in some malignancies; its role in resected pancreatico(P)-biliary(B) malignancies is unknown. Methods: Patients diagnosed with PB malignancies underwent molecular profiling (ctDNA) using FoundationMedicine Liquid (72 cancer-related genes) following potentially curative resection. Baseline patient characteristics and molecular profiling outcomes, including mutant allele frequency (MAF) for pathological alterations were extracted. Primary objective: prevalence of ctDNA identification and its correlation with recurrence (relapse-free survival (RFS) and relapse rate). Results: Total of 11 individuals had ctDNA analysed following potentially curative resection for PB malignancies: 8 B (4 extra-hepatic cholangiocarcinoma (eCCA), 2 ampulla, 1 intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA), 1 gallbladder cancer (GBC)) and 3 P. Baseline characteristics: 6 female (54.55%), median age 71.59 years (range 39.98-81.19). Most were pT2 (45.45%), pN0 (54.55%) and R0 (63.64%). Following surgery, 6 patients were started on adjuvant chemotherapy; at the end of follow-up (data cut-off 25/6/2020; median follow-up 11.15 months (range 5.45-13.52); 5 relapsed (45.45%) and 2 died (18.18%). Estimated median RFS was 11.43 months (95% CI 2.28-not reached); median overall survival was not reached. No sample failed ctDNA analysis; presence of ctDNA was identified in 3/11 (27.27%) of the samples; 2 and 1 samples had 2 and 1 pathological alterations identified, respectively: ALK fusion (1 sample; GBC), TP53 mutation (2 samples; eCCA and GBC), CHEK2 mutation (1 sample; pancreas), IDH2 mutation (1 sample; eCCA). Mean maximum MAF was 1.47 (2 in biliary; 0.43 in pancreas). Variants of unknown significance were identified in 72.73% of the samples (87.5% in B; 33.33% in P; p-value 0.152). None of the baseline characteristics explored correlated with presence of ctDNA. There was a trend towards increased relapse risk in the patients with ctDNA present following potentially curative surgery; Cox regression for RFS [HR 2.64 (95% CI 0.36-19.31); median RFS 11.44 months (95% CI 2.28-not reached) vs 10.87 (95% CI 2.21-not reached)]; relapse rate 37.5% (ctDNA absent) vs 66.67% (ctDNA present); statistical significance was not reached (p-value 0.340 and p-value 0.545, respectively). Conclusions: This pilot study demonstrates the feasibility of testing for ctDNA following potentially curative resection in PB malignancies. Presence of ctDNA may be associated with increased relapse risk; further studies are required to increase sample size and assess clinical implications.

TPS4661 Background: Liposomal irinotecan administered with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) is approved in the USA for metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) following progression with gemcitabine-based therapy. A phase 1/2 study in previously untreated locally advanced/metastatic PDAC showed promising anti-tumor activity with liposomal irinotecan 50 mg/m2 free base + 5-FU 2400 mg/m2 + LV 400 mg/m2 + oxaliplatin (OX) 60 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle (Wainberg et al. Ann Oncol 2019;30 Suppl 4: SO-005). Herein, we present the design of the phase 3 NAPOLI-3 study investigating the efficacy and safety of this regimen as first-line therapy in patients with mPDAC. Methods: NAPOLI-3 (NCT04083235) is a phase 3, open-label, randomized, global study in adults with histologically/cytologically confirmed pancreatic adenocarcinoma not previously treated in the metastatic setting. Patients are required to have one or more metastatic tumors measurable with computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0–1. Site activation began in Dec 2019 and enrollment is ongoing. Random allocation (1:1) of 750 patients is planned to liposomal irinotecan + 5-FU/LV + OX (regimen as per phase 1/2 study) or nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 + gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8 and 15 in a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint is overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints (progression-free survival [PFS] and overall response rate assessed with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1 criteria) will be compared only if the primary endpoint shows superiority for liposomal irinotecan + 5-FU/ LV + OX over nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine. Safety assessments include adverse-event monitoring. Patients will continue treatment until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or study withdrawal, and will then be followed for survival every 2 months until death or study end (when all patients have died, withdrawn consent or are lost to follow-up). Clinical trial information: NCT04083235 .

e16545 Background: Purpose: The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the efficacy and toxicity of irinotecan +/- capecitabine for patients with metastatic esophago-gastric (EG) adenocarcinomas previously treated with at least two chemotherapy regimens including platinum-based, fluoropyramidines and taxanes. Introduction: Treatment for metastatic EG cancer beyond 2nd line remains controversial. Recently, the TAGS phase III trial (Shitara et al., 2018) showed overall survival benefit with Trifluridine/tipiracil of 2.1 months compared to placebo as a third line. Apatinib is also approved for use as third line in China (Li et al., 2013). Based on minimal evidence (Kang et al., 2013), irinotecan in combination with capecitabine is used in the UK. We performed a retrospective study to assess the efficacy and toxicity of irinotecan as a beyond 2nd line regime in metastatic EG adenocarcinomas in one of Europe’s largest cancer centres, The Christie. Methods: Data was collected retrospectively from all metastatic EG adenocarcinoma patients who were treated with irinotecan +/- capecitabine as a beyond 2nd line palliative treatment at the Christie Hospital from January 2014 to December 2019. Irinotecan was either given 2 or 3 weekly at dose of 180 mg/m² with or without capecitabine 800 mg/m². Response rate (RR) was calculated according to RECIST version 1.1, overall survival measured and toxicity data collected. Results: Fifty-six patients received irinotecan as beyond 2nd line palliative chemotherapy. Out of the thirty-seven patients with measurable disease on their scans, the overall response rate was 8.1% and the disease control rate was 51.4% as per RECIST 1.1. Median overall survival was 5 months (95% CI 4.2-5.8). The presence of grade 3-4 toxicities was 16% (9 patients) and included neutropenia, fatigue, nausea and diarrhea. On average, 3.7 cycles were administered, 32% (18 patients) required dose reductions, mainly secondary to grade 2 diarrhea and fatigue. Conclusions: Irinotecan in combination with capecitabine is efficacious as a beyond 2nd line regime in metastatic EG with an acceptable toxicity profile with a limited role in patients with resistant disease to first line platinum-based chemotherapies with fluoropyramidines.

TPS462 Background: Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is the predominant histological subtype of esophageal cancer, particularly in Asian countries. Inhibition of the PD-1/PD-L1 axis has demonstrated antitumor activity in patients with advanced unresectable or metastatic ESCC. Tislelizumab, an investigational humanized IgG4 monoclonal antibody with high affinity and binding specificity for PD-1, was engineered to minimize binding to FcγR on macrophages in order to abrogate antibody-dependent phagocytosis, a mechanism of T-cell clearance and potential resistance to anti-PD-1 therapy. Results from early phase clinical studies suggest tislelizumab, as a single agent or in combination with chemotherapy, was generally well tolerated and had antitumor activity in patients with solid tumors, including ESCC. Methods: This global, phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study (NCT03783442) is designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment of unresectable, locally advanced recurrent or metastatic ESCC. Adult patients with histologically confirmed unresectable ESCC, or locally advanced recurrent/metastatic disease with a ≥6 month treatment-free interval, are eligible; palliative radiation administered > 4 weeks from study initiation is allowed. Patients who received prior anti-PD-(L)1, anti-PD-L2, or first-line therapy are ineligible. Patients (n≈480) will be randomized 1:1 to receive tislelizumab 200 mg IV every 3 weeks (Q3W) plus investigator-chosen chemotherapy (ICC) or placebo plus ICC. ICC options include: platinum (plat; cisplatin 60-80 mg/m2 or oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 IV Q3W) + 5-FU 750-800 mg/m2 by continuous IV infusion over 24 hours for 5d Q3W; or plat + capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 orally BID for 14d Q3W; or plat + paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 IV Q3W. Progression-free and overall survival are primary endpoints; secondary endpoints include objective response rate, duration of response, and health-related quality of life. Safety will be assessed by monitoring adverse events, physical examinations, vital signs, and electrocardiograms. This study is actively enrolling. Clinical trial information: NCT03783442.

499 Background: Regorafenib was the first treatment to demonstrate a survival benefit in patients with HCC after progression on sorafenib. The RESORCE trial found that regorafenib improved overall survival with acceptable toxicity, in patients with disease progression on sorafenib who tolerated ≥400mg sorafenib daily and had Child-Pugh A liver function. Methods: We performed a multicentre, retrospective, observational study of patients with HCC receiving regorafenib in the UK, following its availability in April 2018. Results: Data on a total of 104 patients were included from April 2018–August 2019, and 80.8% were male. Age was collected in 85 patients, with a median of 68 years (range 22–86). 23.5% had NAFLD, 21.2% had ALD, 12.9% had HBV, and 3.5% had HCV. Prior management included sorafenib (100%), TACE (30.8%), resection (12.9%). Duration of sorafenib treatment was evaluable in 99/104 patients, and reported a median of 8.7 months (range 1.8–76.6). Duration of regorafenib treatment was evaluable in 92/104 patients, and reported a median of 3.9 months (range 0.0–15.7). Following treatment with regorafenib, 6 patients (5.8%) achieved partial response, 37 (35.6%) achieved stable disease and 45 (43.3%) had progressive disease as the best response. 15 (14.4%) were not assessed and 1 (1.1%) had mixed response. Survival data is immature with 62/101 (61.4%) patients alive at the time of census with median survival currently 6.5 months. Fatigue was the most frequent AE, with 69/88 patients (85.2%) for all grades. 12/88 patients (14.8%) had Grade 3 fatigue. Other significant AEs include hand-foot syndrome (6/85 patients [7.3%] had Grade 3) and diarrhoea (4/83 patients [4.9%] had Grade 3). Conclusions: The population in our real-world experience of regorafenib for HCC had a similar duration of prior sorafenib to those in the RESORCE trial. However, there was different balance of aetiologies with a lower proportion of patients with HBV and HCV. The rate of partial response is similar to the RESORCE trial with fewer patients achieving stable disease. The incidence of fatigue was higher, but the incidence of hand-foot syndrome and diarrhoea were lower. Further expansion and follow-up of this population is warranted.

TPS2656 Background: ESCC remains the predominant histological subtype of, and accounts for most deaths from, esophageal cancer. PD-1 inhibition has demonstrated antitumor activity and was generally well tolerated in patients (pts) with advanced unresectable or metastatic ESCC. Tislelizumab, an investigational anti-PD-1 antibody, was engineered to minimize binding to FcγR on macrophages to abrogate antibody-dependent phagocytosis, a mechanism of T-cell clearance and potential resistance to anti-PD-1 therapy. Results from early phase clinical studies suggest single-agent tislelizumab was generally well tolerated and had antitumor activity in pts with solid tumors, including ESCC. Methods: This phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study (NCT03783442) is designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment of unresectable, locally advanced recurrent or metastatic ESCC. Adult pts with histologically confirmed ESCC that had metastatic disease either at first diagnosis or with a ≥6 month treatment-free interval will be eligible. Additional eligibility criteria include measurable/evaluable disease, ECOG performance score ≤1, and no prior anti-PD-(L)-1, PD-L2, or other first-line therapy or palliative radiation treatment ≤4 weeks before treatment. Approximately 480 pts will be randomized 1:1 to receive investigator-chosen chemotherapy (ICC) plus tislelizumab 200 mg IV Q3W or ICC plus placebo. Chemotherapy options include: platinum (cisplatin 60–80 mg/m2 or oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 IV Q3W) plus 5-FU 750–800 mg/m2 IV daily for 5 days Q3W; or platinum plus capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 orally BID for 14 days Q3W; or platinum + paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 IV Q3W. Progression-free survival and overall survival are coprimary endpoints; secondary endpoints include objective response rate, duration of response, and health-related quality-of-life. Safety will be assessed by monitoring adverse events, physical examinations, vital signs, and electrocardiograms. This study is actively enrolling. Clinical trial information: NCT03783442.

TPS4158 Background: The prognosis for pts with PD-EP-NEC is poor. First-line treatment for advanced disease is etoposide/platinum-based chemotherapy, analogous to that of high grade lung NEC, with no standard second-line treatment, and is an area of unmet need. Methods: This is a multi-centre, randomised, phase II trial of nal-IRI; 80mg/m2 intravenously (IV) over 90 mins, prior to 5-FU; 2400 mg/m2 infusion over 46 hrs and folinic acid, Q14 days, or docetaxel; 75mg/m2 IV over 60 mins, Q21 days, as second-line therapy in pts with progressive PD-EP-NEC (Ki-67 > 20%), with the overall aim of selecting a treatment for continuation to a phase III trial. The standard arm is that used in high-grade lung NEC, of which docetaxel is a second-line therapy option (NCCN guidelines) and combination regimens such as Irinotecan/5-FU are a second-line therapy option currently used without trial evidence for this subset of pts. Pts must have had prior treatment with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, have documented disease progression and have an ECOG performance status of ≤2. This study plans to recruit 102 pts from 16 UK centres (over 37 mths). Primary endpoint is 6-mth progression-free survival (PFS) rate; trial is designed to have an 80% chance of demonstrating that the one-sided 95% confidence interval of the 6 mth PFS rate excludes 15%, if the true rate is at least 30%, where 30% is the required level of efficacy, and a rate of < 15% would give grounds for rejection. If both treatment arms exceed the required level of efficacy to warrant further evaluation in a phase III trial, treatment with the higher PFS rate at 6 mths will be selected. Secondary endpoints include overall survival, objective response rate, toxicity, quality of life, serum neuron-specific enolase. Exploratory endpoints include quantification of circulating tumour cells (CTCs), circulating tumour deoxyribonucleic acid (ctDNA) and molecular profiling of CTCs, ctDNA and tumour tissue, and generation of CTC-derived xenografts. This trial is open and has enrolled 6 pts at time of submission. Clinical trial information: 10996604.

e16204Background: NAPOLI-1 (NCT01494506) was a global phase 3 study in pts with mPDAC previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapy that showed a significant improvement in overall survival (OS...

e16166Background: SSAs are the most common treatment for well-differentiated NETs. Side effects include biliary and GI disorders, injection-site pain and hyperglycemia. There is often misdiagnosis ...

459 Background: Results from NAPOLI-1 (NCT01494506), a phase 3 study in pts with mPDAC previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapy, demonstrated an improvement in OS (primary endpoint), progression-free survival, and objective response rate with nal-IRI+5-FU/LV vs 5-FU/LV. The MPACT study reported a nomogram to predict OS using baseline pt variables in previously untreated mPDAC. We conducted an exploratory post hoc analysis of NAPOLI-1 variables to develop a nomogram to predict OS in the post-gemcitabine setting. Methods: In NAPOLI-1, pts were randomized to receive nal-IRI 80 mg/m2 q2w + 5-FU/LV, nal-IRI 100 mg/m2 q3w, or 5-FU/LV. Univariate and multivariate analyses determined factors significantly predictive of OS. A multivariable Cox model was created using these factors to develop a nomogram that assigned points equal to the weighted sum of relative significance of each variable. Predictive accuracy of the nomogram as measured by the concordance index (c-index) was evaluated by internal bootstrap validation. Results: Data from the 417-pt univariate analysis and 399-pt multivariate analysis (18 pts excluded for missing baseline data) were used. Eight of 21 variables were retained in the multivariate analysis (p < 0.01 except BMI [p=0.08]). Conclusions: In NAPOLI-1, predictors of OS were nal-IRI+5-FU/LV treatment, KPS, NLR, albumin level, baseline CA19-9, stage 4 at diagnosis, BMI, and presence of liver metastasis. The nomogram, which will distinguish between risk groups and may aid in clinical decision making, will be presented in the poster. Clinical trial information: NCT01494506. [Table: see text]

388 Background: In NAPOLI-1 (NCT01494506), a randomized phase 3 study in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapy, nal-IRI+5-FU/LV improved overall survival (OS; primary endpoint) vs 5-FU/LV (6.1 mos vs 4.2 mos; HR = 0·67, 95% CI 0.49–0.92; P = 0.012). This exploratory analysis examined the impact of dose modifications or delays used to manage adverse events (AEs) on OS. The study protocol allowed ≤2 dose reductions for nal-IRI and 5-FU and for up to 3 weeks. Methods: Patient who had a dose delay or reduction within the planned first 6 weeks of the study were included. Delays were defined as any delay in dosing > 3 days from target dosing date and dose reductions were defined as any reduction in dose from initial administered dose. OS was compared within the nal-IRI+5-FU/LV arm and with the 5-FU/LV arm. Comparisons were made using the cohort of 5-FU/LV and nal-IRI+5-FU/LV patients enrolled under protocol version 2. Median OS was based on Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox regression analysis was used to calculate HRs. Results: More patients in the nal-IRI+5-FU/LV treatment group experienced AEs that required dose delay and/or reduction than in the 5-FU/LV treatment group (62% vs 33%). Within the nal-IRI+5-FU/LV arm, median OS was numerically but not significantly different between patients who did (n = 34) vs did not (n = 83) have a dose reduction (9.3 vs 5.4 mos; HR = 0.66 [95% CI 0.43, 1.01]) and for those who did (n = 49) vs did not (n = 68) have a dose delay (8.4 vs 5.6 mos; 0.82 [95% CI 0.56, 1.23]). Between treatment arms, OS was greater in the nal-IRI+5-FU/LV arm regardless of dose delay or reduction (Table). Conclusions: Dose modifications in the nal-IRI+5-FU/LV arm did not significantly impact OS compared with those who did not need a dose modification, and OS remained greater than in 5-FU/LV-treated patients. This suggests that appropriate dose modification of nal-IRI+5-FU/LV for AEs may not adversely affect outcomes. Clinical trial information: NCT01494506. [Table: see text]

that routine prophylaxis was not recommended for patients with cancer in the outpatientsetting but may be a consideration forselected high-riskpatients.ItisnotclearfromthestudybyPelzeret al 1 whether there is a higher-risk subpopulation within the advanced pancreatic cancer disease group who may derive more benefit from prophylactic anticoagulation. Neither are we significantly enlightened as to the risk threshold to apply for identification of patients for thromboprophylaxis, with various levels of risk reported as relevant (ie, greater than 10% 3 or 15% to 30%). 4 It is stated that patients were randomly assigned to treatment arms, with patient characteristics being well balanced, but the impactofpotentiallyimportantcharacteristicssuchasperformance status, disease extent, lymph node disease location, and the use of red-cell growth factors, platinum-based therapy and central venous catheters cannot be assessed. Specifically, how many patients with poor performance status, previously reported by Khorana et al as a covariable associated with development of venous thromboembolism (VTE), 3 went on to develop such an event? The inclusion criteria for the Riess study, published in 2008 5 , stated that patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed stage IV pancreatic cancer were eligible, but patients with locally advanced disease seem to have been included in the Pelzer et al report. 1 In the study, 26% and 22% of patients with locally advanced disease were enrolled in the enoxaparin and observation arms, respectively. It would be interesting to know if there were differences in occurrences of VTE between those with M0 and M1 disease, as reported by Chew et al. 6 In the enoxaparin and observation arms, 18% and 10% of patients, respectively, had lymph node metastases. What were the radiologic parameters of nodal involvement in this current study? 1

4127 Background: In the NAPOLI-1 study, nal-IRI+5-FU/LV significantly increased median OS vs. 5-FU/LV control (6.1 vs. 4.2 mo; unstratified HR = 0.67 [0.49–0.92]; p = .012). This is a subgroup analysis by prior lines of mtx. Methods: Study methodology has been published (Wang-Gillam; Lancet 2016). This exploratory subgroup analysis compares outcomes in pts with 0–1 vs. ≥2 prior mtx lines, based on primary survival analysis data (cut-off February 2014) of the ITT population. Results: OS, PFS and CA19-9 response rates in pts with 0–1 (65.8% of pts) or ≥2 (34.2%) prior mtx lines are shown (see Table). Median OS for nal-IRI+5-FU/LV improved vs. 5-FU/LV by 2.1 mo to 6.2 mo (HR = 0.66; p = .03) in pts with 0–1 prior mtx lines and by 1.1 mo to 5.4 mo (HR = 0.68; p = .18) in pts with ≥2 prior mtx lines. The safety profile was similar between subgroups with nal-IRI+5-FU/LV (≥grade 3 drug-related AEs: 43 [55%] with 0–1 and 20 [51%] with ≥2 prior mtx lines). Conclusions: This post-hoc subgroup analysis shows significant increases for nal-IRI+5-FU/LV over 5-FU/LV in OS, PFS and CA19-9 response in pts with 0–1 prior mtx lines. Median OS benefit was less prominent in later lines, but conclusions are restricted by limited pt numbers. Clinical trial information: NCT01494506. [Table: see text]

e15774 Background: Gemcitabine (GEM) based chemotherapy has been the standard of care for patients with metastatic PDAC with marginal effects on overall survival (OS). In recent years, FOLFIRINOX and Nab-paclitaxel (NAB) + GEM regimens have shown significant survival benefits compared to gemcitabine in clinical trial settings. This study aims to investigate the efficacy of FOLFIRINOX and NAB + GEM versus GEM monotherapy and GEM doublet combinations in real-life settings across different European institutions. Methods: Patients from UK, Sweden, Germany, Italy and Hungary with metastatic PDAC receiving palliative chemotherapy between 2012 and 2015 were included in a retrospective multinational study. Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis. Results: Of the 1089 included patients, 576 (52.9%) were male and 170 (15.6%) underwent primary resection before systemic recurrence. GEM monotherapy was the most commonly used regimen (40.0%; n = 436), followed by combination treatments such as GEM + oxaliplatin, GEM + cisplatin, GEM + capecitabine (24.2%; n = 263), FOLFIRINOX (17,5%; n = 191) and NAB + GEM (7.3%; n = 80). Overall, 6-months and 12-months mortality rate was 48.9% and 72.5%, respectively. The median OS in different groups was: FOLFIRINOX 9.0 months (95% CI 7.1-10.9), NAB + GEM 7.0 months (95% CI 5.8-8.2), other GEM doublet combinations 7.0 months (95% CI 6.0-8.0) and GEM monotherapy 5.0 months (95% CI 4.3-5.7). Compared to GEM monotherapy, intensified chemotherapy either with FOLFIRINOX (p = 0.0001), NAB + GEM (p = 0.02) or GEM doublets (p = 0.0001) was associated with significantly improved survival. Comparison of the different combination regimens was as follows: NAB + GEM vs. FOLFIRINOX (OS: 7.0 vs 9.0 months, p = 0.25), NAB + GEM vs. GEM doublets (OS: 7.0 vs. 7.0 months, p = 0.79) and FOLFIRINOX vs. GEM doublets (OS: 9.0 vs. 7.0 months, p = 0.29). Conclusions: The use of FOLFIRIOX and NAB in clinical routine is variable in Europe. GEM based regimens seem to be the preferred standard of care. Compared to GEM monotherapy, combination treatments improved survival. No significant differences amongst combination therapeutic regimens were identified within our cohort.

4114 Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy following PC resection improves overall survival (OS). It is uncertain whether benefit is influenced by nodal and resection status or other factors. Methods: A systematic review of electronic databases identified published phase 2/3 studies investigating use of adjuvant chemotherapy in pts with resected PC. Efficacy (disease-free survival [DFS], OS, 5 yr OS) was explored using meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis explored effects based on nodal/resection status. Meta-regression also explored influence of age, gender, performance status [PS] and proportion of pts with head of pancreas (HOP) tumors on benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy. Results: Ten studies comprising 3644 pts were included. Two prospective phase 2 studies; 8 phase 3 trials. Median age was 63 yrs (range 24-84), 46% male. In 2268 pts with PS reported; 42% were PS 0, 51% PS 1. Tumor location was reported in 719 pts; 82% had HOP tumors. Of 3524 pts with available data; 33% N- and 67% R0. Overall, in studies of experimental vs control, adjuvant therapy significantly improved DFS (HR 0.67, CI 0.48-0.93, P = 0.02), OS (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.68-0.87, P < 0.001) and odds of death risk at 5 yrs (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.41-0.70, P < 0.001). In studies comparing chemotherapy to surgery only, adjuvant therapy also significantly improved DFS (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.49-0.76, P < 0.001) and OS (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.64-0.87, P < 0.001). There was a numerical but non-significant greater effect of adjuvant therapy in N- vs N+ pts (HR 0.58 vs 0.71, P for difference = 0.29). There was no difference in effect between pts with R0 or R1 disease (HR 0.70 vs 0.69, P for difference = 0.95). There was greater OS benefit from adjuvant therapy in pts with PS 0 (P = 0.04) and significantly less benefit on 5 yr OS in pts with HOP tumors (P = 0.04). Conclusions: The relative benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy seems similar in N-/N+ and in R0/R1 pts. This will translate into greater absolute benefit in the N+ and R1 pts due to their greater absolute risk of recurrence/death. Adjuvant chemotherapy is recommended for all pts with resected PC, where clinically appropriate, and greater benefit was seen in pts with PS 0 and body/tail tumors.

e15795 Background: Increased NLR and PLR have been associated with poor survival in several malignancies. Here we report the association of NLR and PLR with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in the NAPOLI-1 trial (NCT01494506), which evaluated nal-IRI+5-FU/LV for the treatment of mPDAC patients (pts) after disease progression following gemcitabine-based therapy. Methods: Pts missing baseline NLR/PLR data were excluded. Medians reflect Kaplan-Meier estimates; hazard ratios (HRs) reflect Cox regression analysis. P values in this exploratory analysis are descriptive. Results: Of 116 evaluable pts in the nal-IRI+5-FU/LV arm, 82 (71%) had NLR ≤5 and 44 (38%) had PLR ≤150 (data cutoff: Nov 16, 2015). Of 105 evaluable pts in the 5-FU/LV control arm, 73 (70%) had NLR ≤5 and 36 (34%) had PLR ≤150. In pts with baseline NLR ≤5 or PLR ≤150, median OS and PFS were significantly longer in the nal-IRI+5-FU/LV treatment arm vs the 5-FU/LV control arm (Table). In pts with baseline NLR >5 or PLR >150, median OS and PFS were numerically longer in the treatment vs control arm, but differences were less compelling (95% CIs for HRs included 1). Conclusions: Median OS and PFS were improved with nal-IRI+5-FU/LV vs 5-FU/LV in pts with baseline NLR ≤5 or PLR ≤150. This exploratory analysis extends the prognostic significance of NLR and PLR to the post-gemcitabine setting. Clinical trial information: NCT01494506. [Table: see text]

293 Background: nal-IRI, a liposomal formulation of irinotecan, plus 5-FU/LV is approved in the United States and Taiwan for patients (pts) with mPDAC previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapy. Primary analysis of the NAPOLI-1 trial (NCT01494506) showed that nal-IRI+5-FU/LV significantly improved median overall survival vs 5-FU/LV (6.1 vs 4.2 months; HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.49-0.92; P = 0.012; Wang-Gillam et al, Lancet. 2016). Herein we report baseline characteristics of pts surviving ≥1 year (data cutoff, Nov 2015). Methods: This analysis includes 117 pts assigned to treatment with nal-IRI 70 mg/m2 (free base) + 5-FU/LV 2400/400 mg/m2 q2w, and 119 pts assigned to treatment with 5-FU/LV 2000/200 mg/m2weekly for weeks 1-4 q6w. Results: A total of 29 (25%) pts in the nal-IRI+5-FU/LV arm and 17 (14%) in the 5-FU/LV arm survived ≥1 year. These pts typically had better performance status, lower CA19-9 (U/mL) levels, and were less likely to have liver metastases at baseline, compared with the overall population (Table). For long-term survivors in the nal-IRI+5-FU/LV arm, a higher proportion of pts had neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) >5, a marker of poor prognosis, suggesting that higher NLR may potentially be predictive of survival outcome with nal-IRI+5-FU/LV. Conclusions: More pts receiving nal-IRI+5-FU/LV versus 5-FU/LV were alive beyond 1 year. The most prominent prognostic markers of survival ≥1 year included lower CA19-9, KPS ≥90 and absence of liver metastases. These analyses may be limited by small sample sizes. Clinical trial information: NCT01494506. [Table: see text]

303 Background: nal-IRI+5-FU/LV is approved in the United States and Taiwan for pts with mPDAC previously treated with gem-based therapy based on the NAPOLI-1 study which showed that nal-IRI+5-FU/LV improved overall survival (OS) vs 5-FU/LV (6.1 vs 4.2 mo; HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.49-0.92; P = 0.012; Wang-Gillam et al, Lancet. 2016). This post hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of nal-IRI+5-FU/LV in subgroups of pts defined by prior gem regimen including gem monotherapy and gem combinations (combo). Methods: This analysis (data cutoff, Nov 2015) focuses on the 236 pts assigned to nal-IRI+5-FU/LV q2w (n = 117) or 5-FU/LV qw for weeks 1-4 q6w cycle (n = 119). Pts previously received gem-based therapy in a neoadjuvant, adjuvant, locally advanced, or metastatic setting. Results: Of 117 pts in the nal-IRI+5-FU/LV arm, 53 (45%) previously received gem monotherapy and 64 (55%) previously received gem combo including erlotinib (n = 9) or nab-paclitaxel (n = 20). Of the 119 pts in the 5-FU/LV arm, 55 (46%) previously received gem monotherapy and 64 (54%) previously received gem combo including erlotinib (n = 17) or nab-paclitaxel (n = 11). Nal-IRI+5-FU/LV improved median OS, median PFS, and ORR vs 5-FU/LV, regardless of prior therapy (Table). Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events were not influenced by prior treatment. Clinical trial information: NCT01494506. Conclusions: These resultsshow consistent benefit of nal-IRI+5-FU/LV treatment across subgroups of pts who previously received gem therapy and support the ASCO guidelines recommending nal-IRI+5-FU/LV for this pt population. These analyses may be limited by the small sample size of treatment arms.[Table: see text]

4089Background: Prognostic markers for risk-stratification of pts with GI-NECs are lacking. We aimed to externally validate our previously-designed prognostic score (Training Cohort [TC]) derived f...

4017Background: Arginine (Ar) depletion is a putative target in HCC, which lacks the citrulline (Ci) to Ar repleting enzyme argininosuccinate synthetase. A is an Ar degrading enzyme cloned from M. ...

e15732Background: nal-IRI is a nanoliposomal formulation of irinotecan. In the primary analysis of the pivotal NAPOLI-1 Phase-3 trial, nal-IRI+5-FU/LV significantly improved median overall survival...

304 Background: Identification of HCC pts with higher probability of benefit from sorafenib warrants investigation. Hypertension (HTN) and hand foot syndrome (HFS) are sorafenib-specific toxicities; the development of these toxicities is prognostic in pts with renal cell cancer receiving sorafenib, their significance in HCC remains uncertain. Methods: HCC pts treated with sorafenib at the Christie NHS Foundation Trust (Nov-09-Feb-15) were identified. The primary end-point was overall survival (OS). Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models were employed for identification of prognostic factors. Results: Eighty-five eligible pts were identified [median follow-up 6.2 months (range: 0.4-31.4)].Median age 68 yrs (range 29-89); 87% male; 80% background liver cirrhosis ;88% ECOG performance score 0/1; Child-Pugh (CP) A5 (64%), A6 (29%) and B (7%); 41% baseline AFP > 400 IU/L; 45% previous liver-directed therapy. Sorafenib (400mg BD),was started in 68% (median dose intensity 49.9% (range 0.7-100)), remaining patients started at reduced dose. Fifty-one percent had pre-existing HTN (91% treated).The most common grade ≥ 3 treatment-related toxicities were HTN (42% no prior history of HTN), fatigue (8%), and HFS (8%);59% of pts developed any grade HFS and/or worsening HTN (HFS/HTN). Toxicity-related dose reduction/cessation was required in 46 (54%) pts (15% due to HFS, 7% due to HTN). Estimated median progression-free (PFS) and OS were 5.5 (95% CI 4.1-7.0) and 6.5 (95% CI 4.9-8.0) months, respectively. Age at diagnosis, previous liver-directed therapy, CP score, baseline AFP and development of HFS/HTN were included in multivariable analysis: CP-A (vs. B; p-value < 0.001) and development of HFS/HTN (vs. no; HR 0.4 [95% CI 0.2-0.7] p-value 0.001) were independent prognostic factors. The prognostic influence of HFS/HTN was preserved when limiting analysis to pts developing worst grade HFS/HTN in the first 3 months of treatment (53 pts; HR 0.5 [95% CI 0.3-0.9] p-value 0.030) making time-on-treatment bias unlikely. Conclusions: The development of sorafenib-specific toxicities, HFS and HTN, are prognostic factors associated with prolonged OS.

425 Background: CA19-9 has been shown to correlate with response to therapy and OS in patients with mPAC. NAPOLI-1, a randomized phase 3 study evaluated nal-IRI, a nanoliposomal formulation of irinotecan, with or without 5-FU/LV vs 5-FU/LV in patients with mPAC previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapy. Nal-IRI+5-FU/LV significantly improved OS (primary endpoint) vs 5-FU/LV (6.1 mo vs 4.2 mo; unstratified hazard ratio [HR] = 0.67; P = 0.012). CA19-9 response (≥50% decline from baseline) was superior with nal-IRI+5FU/LV compared with 5-FU/LV (29% vs 9%; P=0.0006). Nal-IRI alone did not show a statistical improvement in survival. Methods: Patients with a recorded baseline CA19-9 measurement were divided into quartiles to evaluate the treatment effect pattern of CA19-9 from nal-IRI+5-FU/LV and 5-FU/LV arms. Quartile ranges were based on 404 available CA19-9 values from randomized patients (N=417). Unstratified Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate HRs and corresponding 95% CIs. Effect of baseline CA19-9 on time to response, progression-free survival, and response will be presented. Results: Of patients randomized to receive nal-IRI+5-FU/LV (n = 117) or 5-FU/LV enrolled contemporaneously (n = 119), 218 received study drug and had a baseline CA19-9 measurement. Results show a greater treatment effect on OS with higher CA19-9 level relative to 5-FU/LV. Conclusions: In patients with mPAC previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapy, nal-IRI+5-FU/LV significantly improved OS supported by progression free survival and objective response rate. The CA19-9 serum level can provide important information with regards to overall survival. Clinical trial information: NCT01494506. [Table: see text]

417 Background: NAPOLI-1 is a global, randomized Phase 3 study evaluating nal-IRI—a nanoliposomal irinotecan—with or without 5-FU/LV in 417 patients with mPAC previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapy. Primary survival analysis was based on 313 events. Nal-IRI+5FU/LV significantly improved overall survival (OS, primary endpoint), 6.1 months (mo) vs 4.2 mo; with 5-FU/LV (unstratified hazard ratio [HR] = 0.67; P = 0.012). Primary endpoint was supported by improved progression-free survival, time to treatment failure, objective response and CA19-9 tumor marker response rates, and manageable toxicities. An updated analysis of OS, 6- and 12-month-survival estimates, and safety is presented. Methods: The updated descriptive analysis of OS, based on 378 events (25 May 2015), includes data from all randomized patients across the 3 arms. Results: After 378 OS events, nal-IRI+5-FU/LV (n = 117) retained an OS advantage relative to 5-FU/LV (n = 119): 6.2 mo (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.8–8.4) vs 4.2 mo (95% CI, 3.3–5.3) with an unstratified HR of 0.75 (P = 0.0417). In contrast, there was no OS advantage with nal-IRI monotherapy (n = 151) vs 5-FU/LV (n = 149): 4.9 mo [95% CI, 4.2–5.6] vs 4.2 mo [95% CI, 3.6–4.9], HR = 1.08; P = 0.5. Six-month survival estimates were 53% (95% CI, 44–62%) for nal-IRI+5-FU/LV vs 38% (95% CI, 29–47%) for 5-FU/LV; 12-month survival estimates were 26% (95% CI, 18-35%) for nal-IRI+5-FU/LV vs 16% (95% CI, 10–24%) for 5-FU/LV. With events in nearly all patients, the OS curves converge at ~20 mo with 19 patients (16.2%) surviving beyond 20 mo. This is a reason for attenuation of the HR estimate and unstratified log rank p-value. The most common grade 3+ adverse events occurring at a ≥ 2% incidence in the nal-IRI-containing arms were neutropenia, diarrhea, vomiting, and fatigue. Conclusions: In an updated analysis, the median OS benefit for nal-IRI+5FU/LV over 5-FU/LV was maintained, with a similar safety profile. Nal-IRI+5-FU/LV may be a new standard of care for patients with mPAC previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT01494506.

Background: Outcomes of patients with high-grade GI-NETs are poor; prognostic markers for risk-stratification are needed.Methods: Consecutive patients, diagnosed with high-grade GI-NETs between 1997-2014, were included. Prognostic factors were identified by the Log-rank test, Cox regression and logistic regression and ROC curve comparisons performed for prediction accuracy. Internal validation of the score by Bootstrap-corrected Harrell Concordance Index (C-index) and Resampling Model Calibration were performed.Results: One-hundred and nine patients were eligible for analysis. Median follow-up time was 9.7 months (1.3-102.9). Median age: 67.7 years (16.3-84.1); 62% male, 84% metastatic; 19% foregut, 5% midgut, 19% pancreas, 28% hindgut and 29% unknown primary. Median ki67: 70% (20-100); ECOG PS 0: 26%, 1: 52%; 70% received chemotherapy. Baseline median alkaline phosphatase (ALK) and LDH were 109 IU/l (45-2035) and 70 IU/l (258-11069), respectively. The maximum model included stage, PS, LDH, Na, ALK, ki67, number of metastatic sites, presence of liver and presence of lung metastases. The score, selected by the lowest Akaike Index Criterion, included liver metastases, PS, ki67, LDH and ALK with 0-6 points assigned to each, resulting in 4 risk groups (A-D) with predicted risk of death, detailed in Table. There was no difference in the survival prediction accuracy between the maximum model and the score. On multivariable analysis, the score was prognostic for overall survival (HR 1.95, 95%CI 1.55-2.47; p < 0.001) and had good discrimination (C-index, 0.76) and calibration (mean error, 0.021; percentile 90, 0.037).Conclusions: This simple score identified high-grade GI-NET patients with meaningful differences in survival and may inform clinical decision-making and trial design.

4102 Background: The PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling pathway is upregulated in pNET. Everolimus (EVE) is an mTOR inhibitor (mTORi) approved to treat advanced pNET, but resistance occurs. PI3K pathway activ...

234 Background: MM-398 is a nanoliposomal encapsulation of irinotecan. OS in the ITT population was significantly longer with MM-398+5FU/LV over 5FU/LV alone, and the most frequent grade 3+ AEs included neutropenia, fatigue, and GI effects (diarrhea and vomiting). Expanded, pre-specified analyses of the Phase 3 study are presented. Methods: Patients (n=417) with mPAC previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapy, were randomized 1:1:1 in an open-label study to receive: (A) MM-398 (120 mg/m2 IV over 90 min) q3w; (B) 5FU (2,000 mg/m2 over 24 h) plus racemic leucovorin (LV) (200 mg/m2 over 30 min) x 4w followed by 2w rest; or (C) combination of MM-398 (80 mg/m2 IV over 90 min) prior to 5FU (2,400 mg/m2 over 46 h) and racemic LV (400 mg/m2 over 30 min) q2w. The primary endpoint was OS. The Intent To Treat (ITT) population included all randomized patients; the Per Protocol (PP) population included patients who received at least 80% of the target dose in the first 6 weeks and did not violate any inclusion/exclusion criteria. Results: Analysis of the PP populations confirmed the favorable OS, which was also reflected by the PFS, ORR and CA19-9 levels, of the combination MM-398+5FU/LV arm over the control 5FU/LV arm. The MM-398 monotherapy arm did not show a statistically significant improvement in OS compared with the control arm. Analysis of subgroups, based on pretreatment characteristics including stage at diagnosis, time since initial histological diagnosis, prior lines of therapy, time since last prior therapy, and CA19-9 levels, consistently favored OS for the MM-398+5FU/LV arm over the 5FU/LV arm. Conclusions: Expanded analysis of the PP population and sensitivity analyses support the favorability of MM-398+5FU/LV over 5FU/LV, with a manageable safety profile. Clinical trial information: NCT01494506. [Table: see text]

TPS1617 Background: Pre-clinical data demonstrate that aspirin inhibits tumour growth and prevents metastases. Meta-analyses of individual patient data from randomized trials evaluating cardiovascu...

TPS4160 Background: While sorafenib is established as the standard first-line treatment for patients with advanced HCC, its use can be complicated by the occurrence of drug-related adverse events (AEs). Nintedanib, a potent, oral triple angiokinase inhibitor that targets VEGF, PDGF and FGF signaling (as well as Flt3 and RET), has demonstrated clinical activity in various advanced solid tumors with a relatively low incidence of AEs typically associated with angiogenesis inhibitors (e.g. skin toxicity, hypertension, hemorrhage, and hematologic toxicity) and is currently in phase III for non-small cell lung cancer and ovarian cancer. In the Phase I, dose-finding stage of this ongoing, multicenter, open-label Phase I/II trial (NCT01004003), 200mg twice daily (bid) was established as the maximum tolerated dose of nintedanib in previously untreated patients with advanced HCC (Palmer D, et al. Ann Oncol 2012;23(Suppl 9):ix245[Abs 740P]). Nintedanib had an acceptable liver AE profile; the most common AEs were mild/moderate gastrointestinal toxicities. Methods: The randomized Phase II stage of the trial aims to assess the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of nintedanib in comparison with sorafenib. Eligible patients have pathologically confirmed, measurable HCC that is not amenable to local therapy, ECOG Performance Status of ≤2, Child-Pugh score of 5–6 (Class A), AST/ALT levels ≤2× upper limit of normal, and no prior systemic therapy. Patients are being stratified by macrovascular invasion and/or extrahepatic spread and then randomized 2:1 to receive nintedanib 200mg bid or sorafenib 400mg bid in continuous 28-day cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Overall, 93 patients were randomized between Sept 2011 and Nov 2012. The primary endpoint is time to progression (TTP) by independent review, according to RECIST 1.0. TTP will be estimated in the treated set by Kaplan–Meier methodology with treatment effects compared using a Cox proportional hazards model. Secondary endpoints include overall survival, tumor response, progression-free survival, safety and pharmacokinetics. Results are due late 2013. Clinical trial information: NCT01004003.

6 Background: There are no randomised trials of 2nd line chemotherapy for esophageal cancer. The phase III COG trial of gefitinib versus placebo in patients with esophageal cancer progressing after chemotherapy did not show significant overall survival (OS) benefit, however the trial incorporated patient reported outcomes (PRO) using validated tools. The PRO data are therefore critical to inform practice and the initial results are presented here. Methods: Adults with measurable/evaluable metastatic esophageal or types I/II junctional adeno or squamous cell carcinoma progressing after prior chemotherapy, with performance status 0-2 were randomised 1:1 to 500mg gefitinib (G) or placebo (P), treated until progression. Primary outcome: OS. Secondary outcomes include safety, PFS, PRO (assessed by EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-OG25 at baseline 4, 8 and 12 weeks until progression) and predictive biomarkers. Pre-specified PRO domains were global quality of life, dysphagia, eating and odynophagia. Analysis by ANCOVA of change in PRO at 4 weeks adjusted for baseline. Results: 450 patients were recruited from 51 UK centres and no difference in OS was detected. There was evidence that PFS was better in the intervention arm (P 35 days, G 49 days; HR=0.795, 95%CI 0.66, 0.96, p=0.017). Questionnaire compliance rates were excellent at baseline (94%) and at 4 weeks (77%). Patients in the gefitinib arm reported significantly better social function (9.26; 95%CI 1.94 to 16.58; p=0.013) and significantly fewer problems with odynophagia (-8.61; 95%CI -14.49 to -2.73; p=0.004), constipation (-15.24; 95%CI -22.83 to -7.65; p=0.0001) and speech (-10.40; 95%CI -16.13 to -4.67; p=0.0004) than patients receiving placebo but more problems with diarrhoea (19.23; 95%CI 11.79 to 26.27; p