Search

PURPOSE Liquid biopsies in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) provide a unique approach to understand the molecular basis of treatment response and resistance. This is particularly important in the context of immunotherapies, which target key immune-tumor interactions. Unlike metastatic tissue biopsies, serial real-time profiling of mRCC is feasible with our noninvasive circulating tumor cell (CTC) approach. METHODS We collected 457 longitudinal liquid biopsies from 104 patients with mRCC enrolled in one of two studies, either a prospective cohort or a phase II multicenter adaptive immunotherapy trial. Using a novel CTC capture and automated microscopy platform, we profiled CTC enumeration and expression of HLA I and programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1). Given their diametric immunological roles, we focused on the HLA I to PD-L1 ratio (HP ratio). RESULTS Patients with radiographic responses showed significantly lower CTC abundances throughout treatment. Furthermore, patients whose CTC enumeration trajectory was in the highest quartile (> 0.12 CTCs/mL annually) had shorter overall survival (median 17.0 months v 21.1 months, P < .001). Throughout treatment, the HP ratio decreased in patients receiving immunotherapy but not in patients receiving tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Patients with an HP ratio trajectory in the highest quartile (≥ 0.0012 annually) displayed significantly shorter overall survival (median 18.4 months v 21.2 months, P = .003). CONCLUSION In the first large longitudinal CTC study in mRCC to date to our knowledge, we identified the prognostic importance of CTC enumeration and the change over time of both CTC enumeration and the HP ratio. These insights into changes in both tumor burden and the molecular profile of tumor cells in response to different treatments provide potential biomarkers to predict and monitor response to immunotherapy in mRCC.

PURPOSE Structured data elements within electronic health records are health-related information that can be entered, stored, and extracted in an organized manner at later time points. Tracking outcomes for cancer survivors is also enabled by structured data. We sought to increase structured data capture within oncology practices at multiple sites sharing the same electronic health records. METHODS Applying engineering approaches and the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle, we launched dual quality improvement initiatives to ensure that a malignant diagnosis and stage were captured as structured data. Intervention: Close Visit Validation (CVV) requires providers to satisfy certain criteria before closing ambulatory encounters. CVV may be used to track open clinical encounters and chart delinquencies to encourage optimal clinical workflows. We added two cancer-specific required criteria at the time of closing encounters in oncology clinics: (1) the presence of at least one malignant diagnosis on the Problem List and (2) staging all the malignant diagnoses on the Problem List when appropriate. RESULTS Six months before the CVV implementation, the percentage of encounters with a malignant diagnosis on the Problem List at the time of the encounter was 65%, whereas the percentage of encounters with a staged diagnosis was 32%. Three months after cancer-specific CVV implementation, the percentages were 85% and 75%, respectively. Rates had increased to 90% and 88% more than 2 years after implementation. CONCLUSION Oncologist performance improved after the implementation of cancer-specific CVV criteria, with persistently high percentages of relevant malignant diagnoses and cancer stage structured data capture 2 years after the intervention.

Purpose:Glutaminase is a key enzyme, which supports elevated dependency of tumors on glutamine-dependent biosynthesis of metabolic intermediates. Dual targeting of glucose and glutamine metabolism by the mTOR inhibitor everolimus plus the oral glutaminase inhibitor telaglenastat showed preclinical synergistic anticancer effects, which translated to encouraging safety and efficacy findings in a phase I trial of 2L+ renal cell carcinoma (RCC). This study evaluated telaglenastat plus everolimus (TelaE) versus placebo plus everolimus (PboE) in patients with advanced/metastatic RCC (mRCC) in the 3L+ setting (NCT03163667).Patients and Methods:Eligible patients with mRCC, previously treated with at least two prior lines of therapy [including ≥1 VEGFR-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)] were randomized 2:1 to receive E, plus Tela or Pbo, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS; one-sided α Results:Sixty-nine patients were randomized (46 TelaE, 23 PboE). Patients had a median three prior lines of therapy, including TKIs (100%) and checkpoint inhibitors (88%). At median follow-up of 7.5 months, median PFS was 3.8 months for TelaE versus 1.9 months for PboE [HR, 0.64; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.34–1.20; one-sided P = 0.079]. One TelaE patient had a partial response and 26 had stable disease (SD). Eleven patients on PboE had SD. Treatment-emergent adverse events included fatigue, anemia, cough, dyspnea, elevated serum creatinine, and diarrhea; grade 3 to 4 events occurred in 74% TelaE patients versus 61% PboE.Conclusions:TelaE was well tolerated and improved PFS versus PboE in patients with mRCC previously treated with TKIs and checkpoint inhibitors.

Supplementary Figure from Telaglenastat plus Everolimus in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled, Phase II ENTRATA Trial

Supplementary Table from Telaglenastat plus Everolimus in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled, Phase II ENTRATA Trial

Background Nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO + IPI) has demonstrated long-term efficacy and safety in patients with previously untreated, advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Although most phase 3 clinical trials exclude patients with brain metastases, the ongoing, multicohort phase 3b/4 CheckMate 920 trial (ClincalTrials.gov identifier NCT02982954) evaluated the safety and efficacy of NIVO + IPI in a cohort that included patients with aRCC and brain metastases, as reported here. Methods Patients with previously untreated aRCC and asymptomatic brain metastases received NIVO 3 mg/kg plus IPI 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks × 4 followed by NIVO 480 mg every 4 weeks. The primary end point was the incidence of grade ≥3 immune-mediated adverse events (imAEs) within 100 days of the last dose of study drug. Key secondary end points were progression-free survival and the objective response rate according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (both determined by the investigator). Exploratory end points included overall survival, among others. Results After a minimum follow-up of 24.5 months (N = 28), no grade 5 imAEs occurred. The most common grade 3 and 4 imAEs were diarrhea/colitis (n = 2; 7%) and hypophysitis, rash, hepatitis, and diabetes mellitus (n = 1 each; 4%). The objective response rate was 32% (95% CI, 14.9%-53.5%) with a median duration of response of 24.0 months; 4 of 8 responders remained without reported progression. Seven patients (25%) had intracranial progression. The median progression-free survival was 9.0 months (95% CI, 2.9-12.0 months), and the median overall survival was not reached (95% CI, 14.1 months to not estimable). Conclusions In patients who had previously untreated aRCC and brain metastases-a population with a high unmet medical need that often is underrepresented in clinical trials-the approved regimen of NIVO + IPI followed by NIVO showed encouraging antitumor activity and no new safety signals.

PURPOSE We sought to evaluate the patterns of portal usage among patients with cancer who regularly log in to the portal. These data will inform approaches to facilitate portal use among patients with cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a retrospective analysis of patient portal usage by patients with cancer at the University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center. Our analysis focuses on patterns of portal use by regular users (≥ 2 portal logins/year, > 3 months) receiving ongoing oncology care between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2019. Demographics, cancer characteristics, number of oncology visits per month, and portal usage data were extracted. Regular portal users were grouped and compared on the basis of their frequency of use. A linear mixed-effects model was used to determine if the frequency of oncology visits influenced the number of logins. RESULTS We identified 2076 regular portal users. The median number of portal logins/year was 72 for the entire cohort. Age and race were associated with frequency of portal logins. There was no difference in frequency of portal login on the basis of cancer type or stage. Each additional oncology office visit in a month increased the frequency of portal logins by 3.05 ± 0.11 (SE) within the same month. Messages and test result functionalities were used by 98.7% and 98.9% of the regular users, respectively. Regular users who logged in to portal more frequently used all five studied portal functionalities. CONCLUSION Patients with cancer who use portals regularly use it more in proximity to an oncology office visit and use multiple available portal functionalities. These findings can direct strategic planning to facilitate portal utilization among those not engaged with this tool.

PURPOSE Nearly all men with prostate cancer treated with androgen receptor (AR) signaling inhibitors (ARSIs) develop resistance via diverse mechanisms including constitutive activation of the AR pathway, driven by AR genomic structural alterations, expression of AR splice variants (AR-Vs), or loss of AR dependence and lineage plasticity termed neuroendocrine prostate cancer. Understanding these de novo acquired ARSI resistance mechanisms is critical for optimizing therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS A novel liquid biopsy technology was used to collect mRNA from circulating tumor cells (CTCs) to measure expression of AR-Vs, AR targets, and neuroendocrine prostate cancer markers. An institutional review board–approved prospective cohort (N = 99) was used to identify patterns of gene expression. Two prospective multicenter phase II clinical trials of ARSIs for men with castration-resistant prostate cancer (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01942837 [enzalutamide, N = 21] and NCT02025010 [abiraterone, N = 27]) were used to further validate these findings. RESULTS Hierarchical clustering of CTC transcripts identified two distinct clusters. Cluster 2 (C2) exhibited increased expression of AR-regulated genes and was associated with worse overall survival (median 8.6 v 22.4 months; P < .01; hazard ratio [HR] = 3.45 [1.9 to 6.14]). In multivariable analysis, C2 was prognostic independent of other clinicopathologic variables. AR-V status was not significant when accounting for C2. Upon further validation in pooled multicenter phase II trials, C2 was associated with worse overall survival (15.2 months v not reached; P < .01; HR = 8.43 [2.74 to 25.92]), prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival (3.6 v 12 months; P < .01; HR = 4.64 [1.53 to 14.11]), and radiographic progression-free survival (2.7 v 40.6 months; P < .01; HR = 4.64 [1.82 to 17.41]). CONCLUSION We demonstrate that a transcriptional profile detectable in CTCs obtained from liquid biopsies can serve as an independent prognostic marker beyond AR-V7 in patients with metastatic prostate cancer and can be used to identify the emergence of multiple ARSI resistance mechanisms. This is currently being investigated in additional prospective trials.

Although therapeutic options for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) have increased in the past decade, no biomarkers are yet available for patient stratification or evaluation of therapy resistance. Given the dynamic and heterogeneous nature of clear cell RCC (ccRCC), tumor biopsies provide limited clinical utility, but liquid biopsies could overcome these limitations. Prior liquid biopsy approaches have lacked clinically relevant detection rates for patients with ccRCC. This study employed ccRCC‐specific markers, CAIX and CAXII, to identify circulating tumor cells (CTC) from patients with metastatic ccRCC. Distinct subtypes of ccRCC CTCs were evaluated for PD‐L1 and HLA‐I expression and correlated with patient response to therapy. CTC enumeration and expression of PD‐L1 and HLA‐I correlated with disease progression and treatment response, respectively. Longitudinal evaluation of a subset of patients demonstrated potential for CTC enumeration to serve as a pharmacodynamic biomarker. Further evaluation of phenotypic heterogeneity among CTCs is needed to better understand the clinical utility of this new biomarker., Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) were evaluated for their expression of programmed death ligand‐1 (PD‐L1) and human leukocyte antigen class I (HLA‐I), so that biomarkers of therapeutic resistance of clear cell renal cell carcinoma can be developed. CTCs were captured with antibody‐conjugated magnetic beads against EpCAM and CAIX then probed for CAXII and CK expression using microfluidic technology.

Background Portals can assist patients in managing their healthcare. Understanding how patients with cancer use portals can facilitate improvements in patient engagement in cancer care. This study sought to determine if patients with cancer used portals differently for cancer versus noncancer purposes. The effects of geographic residence (rural vs. urban residence) and cancer stage on portal usage were also investigated. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of portal usage by patients seen at an NCI‐designated cancer center between 2015 and 2019. Demographics, cancer characteristics, and portal usage (number of successful logins, messages sent, and results viewed) were extracted. Messages sent and results viewed in the portal were deemed oncologist‐specific and cancer specific if sent to or ordered in medical oncology departments, respectively. Results The analysis included a total of 5950 patients with cancer. Patients were less likely to send and view oncologist‐specific messages compared to non‐oncologist‐specific messages. They were also less likely to view cancer results compared to noncancer results. Compared to urban counterparts, patients residing in rural areas had lower odds of having any logins and logged in less frequently during the year of diagnosis. Compared to patients with non‐metastatic disease, individuals with metastatic disease were more likely to become frequent portal users. Conclusions Patients may use portals differently for cancer versus noncancer purposes; urban residence and metastatic cancer were associated with more frequent usage. Further investigation can inform interventions to increase accessibility for groups at a disadvantage related to the use of this technology and to help patients better leverage portals to manage their cancer., Healthcare systems have come to increasingly rely on patient health portals to engage patients; however, patients with cancer may use portals for cancer purposes differently than for noncancer purposes. Our analysis of nearly 6000 patients with cancer suggests that there is a difference in cancer versus noncancer use and that factors such as age, rural residence, and non‐metastatic stage make patients less likely to access portals.

PURPOSE To provide recommendations for the management of patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). METHODS An Expert Panel conducted a systematic literature review to obtain evidence to guide treatment recommendations. RESULTS The panel considered peer-reviewed reports published in English. RECOMMENDATIONS The diagnosis of metastatic ccRCC should be made using tissue biopsy of the primary tumor or a metastatic site with the inclusion of markers and/or stains to support the diagnosis. The International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium risk criteria should be used to inform treatment. Cytoreductive nephrectomy may be offered to select patients with kidney-in-place and favorable- or intermediate-risk disease. For those who have already had a nephrectomy, an initial period of active surveillance may be offered if they are asymptomatic with a low burden of disease. Patients with favorable-risk disease who need systemic therapy may be offered an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) in combination with a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI); patients with intermediate or poor risk should be offered a doublet regimen (no recommendation was provided between ICIs or an ICI in combination with a VEGFR TKI). For select patients, monotherapy with either an ICI or a VEGFR TKI may be offered on the basis of comorbidities. Interleukin-2 remains an option, although selection criteria could not be identified. Recommendations are also provided for second- and subsequent-line therapy as well as the treatment of bone metastases, brain metastases, or the presence of sarcomatoid features. Participation in clinical trials is highly encouraged for patients with metastatic ccRCC. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/genitourinary-cancer-guidelines

467 Background: Neuroendocrine, small cell, or large cell carcinoma originating from the urothelium (uro-NE/SCC/LCC) is rare. Outcomes for metastatic disease are dismal. Treatment is extrapolated from small cell lung cancer, for which immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have modest activity. Preliminary activity has been reported with ICI for uro-NE. We aimed to compare real-world progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) between ICI-containing and non-ICI-containing regimens in the first line (1L) metastatic setting for uro-NE/SCC/LCC. Methods: We performed a retrospective study at 11 cancer centers. Patients (pts) who received systemic therapy (2011-2021) for biopsy confirmed metastatic uro-NE/SCC/LCC were included. Pts with metastasis within 6 months of (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) (n=16) were excluded from 1L analyses. Results: 102 pts with metastatic uro-NE/SCC/LCC were evaluable. 17 (16.7%) had NE histology, 81 (79.4%) SCC, and 4 (3.9%) LCC. NE/SCC/LCC was mixed with urothelial histology in 19 (18.6%). Primary tumors were most often in the bladder (84.3%, n=86), less frequently upper tract (11.8%, n=12) or urethra (3.9%, n=4). 42 pts (41.2%) were previously treated for localized disease, the rest were de novo metastatic (n=60, 58.8%). Pts who received an ICI in any line (n=61) had significantly longer OS (p=0.038) than pts that never received an ICI (n=41). As shown in the table, in the 1L, ICI-containing regimens (n=33) resulted in significantly longer PFS, but not OS or ORR compared to non-ICI regimens (n=53). Subdividing 1L regimens into ICI without CT (n=14), CT without ICI (n=53), or ICI + CT (n=19), both PFS and OS were significantly different with similar ORR. ICI w/o CT had the longest median PFS and OS with an ORR 57.1% comparable to CT regimens. Of 61 pts that received ICI in any line, 14 (23.0%) had an immune-related adverse event of any grade; 11 (18.0%) received steroids. Conclusions: This is the largest ever report of ICI for metastatic uro-NE/SCC/LCC. ICIs were associated with improved outcomes with expected added toxicity. Further prospective investigation of ICI regimens is warranted. [Table: see text]

547 Background: Despite recent therapeutic advancements for patients with mUC, including checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs), anti-FGFR and antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), biomarker data to predict therapeutic response and identify mechanisms of resistance remain limited. Ongoing randomized clinical trials evaluating the combination of CPIs and ADCs in these pts underscore the need to develop biomarkers to better understand who might best respond to these therapies. Here, we employ a liquid biopsy approach to molecularly characterize circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), including those isolated with Trop-2, the target of the novel drug Sacituzumab Govitecan and Datopotamab Deruxtecan. Methods: 104 blood samples serially collected from pts being treated for mUC were used for CTC collection using anti-EpCAM and Trop-2 antibodies in parallel. CTCs were isolated and stained for immune markers PD-L1 and HLA I using the VERSA (Versatile Exclusion-based Rare Sample Analysis) platform. Plasma was isolated for paired analysis of CTC and ctDNA content. CTCs were analyzed for enumeration and single-cell protein analysis. Overall survival (OS) was defined from time of sample collection, and survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: We observed significantly shorter OS in pts with higher CTC burden (≥ 20 CTCs/7.5 mL blood) in samples captured with either EpCAM (median 34.1 vs 3.1 mo, P < 0.01) or Trop-2 (median 34.1 vs 6.2 months, P < 0.01). Furthermore, EpCAM and Trop-2 CTC burdens were higher at progression timepoints relative to responding or stable timepoints, when stratified according to treatment modality (table). Inter and intra-patient heterogeneous PD-L1 and HLA I expression and co-expression was observed on CTCs although no significant differences were seen globally between EpCAM and Trop-2 CTCs. In a cohort of pts treated with CPIs, we observed dynamic phenotypic changes in the ratio of HLA:PD-L1 that differed between EpCAM and Trop-2 CTCs. ctDNA analysis identified concordant increases in tumor fraction and acquired genomic mutations. When examined longitudinally across individual pts, these findings in tandem with changes in enumeration, suggest the emergence of different CTC subpopulations that may serve as biomarkers of resistance. Conclusions: We identify the prognostic significance of CTC enumeration with parallel EpCAM and Trop-2 CTC isolation and demonstrate the utility of a liquid biopsy assay that can detect pharmacodynamic changes in CTC burden and immune marker expression throughout the course of treatment. [Table: see text]

247 Background: The mainstay of therapy in metastatic prostate cancer is androgen receptor (AR) signaling inhibition. However, the emergence of early castration resistance or neuroendocrine transformation is associated with poor prognosis. Reliable biomarkers are needed to identify these patients and guide selection of clinical therapy. Methods: mRNA was isolated from EpCAM-positive circulating tumor cells (CTCs) isolated from patients with CSPC, CRPC, or NEPC to measure expression of KLK2, KLK3 (PSA), TMPRSS2, FOLH1 (PSMA), synaptophysin ( SYP), and chromogranin ( CHGA). Post-hoc retrospective analysis of an institutional review board–approved prospective cohort (N = 98) was performed to identify patterns of gene expression. Samples were considered AR+ if 3 of 4 AR pathway genes ( TMPRSS2, KLK2, KLK3, and FOLH1) were positive, and were considered NE+ if either or both SYP or CHGA were positive. Blood samples from two prospective clinical trials of men with mCRPC treated with abiraterone and enzalutamide, respectively, were analyzed to confirm results. Longitudinal samples were collected from 17 patients (6 NEPC and 11 Adenocarcinoma) and cell free DNA was isolated and sequenced using a novel targeted exon panel. Results: AR and/or NE positive patients were found to have a median overall survival (OS) of 8.58 months as compared to a median OS of 29.6 months in the AR and NE negative population (p

514 Background: EV is FDA-approved in pts with aUC and ≥1 prior therapy line. Data from EV-103 trial indicate robust response to first-line EV/pembrolizumab, suggesting potentially at least additive treatment effect with EV/ICI combination. Given the long half-life of ICIs, pts who start EV treatment immediately after ICI may potentially derive benefit from that therapy sequence. We hypothesized that the last systemic therapy prior to EV would impact outcomes, as pts treated with ICI immediately prior to EV would have superior outcomes relative to pts treated with chemotherapy (chemo). Methods: UNITE is a retrospective study of pts treated with EV at 16 US sites. Pt characteristics and outcomes were abstracted from EMR review at each site. Observed response was determined by investigators for evaluable pts with scans following ≥1 EV dose. Pts treated with EV monotherapy were divided into two groups based on whether they received chemo or ICI as the line of therapy immediately prior to EV, regardless of other therapy received. Chi-squared test was used to assess differences in pt characteristics and ORR while log-rank tests were used for OS and PFS measured from EV start. Results: Among 325 pts treated with EV monotherapy, 247 had chemo or ICI as immediate prior treatment, with 186 pts receiving ICI (Group A) and 61 pts receiving platinum-based chemo (Group B). In 247-pt cohort, ORR to EV was 52% and mPFS and mOS were 6 and 13 mos. Group B pts were younger, had more bone mets and higher Bellmunt risk factors, but were otherwise similar to Group A (Table). Most pts had both prior chemo and ICI in both group A (58%) and group B (84%). Group A pts had shorter time from last treatment (median 1.2 vs 3.2 mo, p

450 Background: EV, an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) targeting Nectin-4, is used widely in treatment-refractory aUC, but limited data are available on biomarkers predictive of EV outcomes. We investigated potential biomarkers of response to EV in a pt cohort in the UNITE dataset. Methods: We included the retrospective UNITE study pts from 16 sites, with available next generation sequencing using institutional or commercial platforms, treated with EV alone outside clinical trials. Observed response (ORR) was determined by investigators for evaluable pts with scans after ≥1 dose of EV. Assessed molecular biomarkers included tumor mutation burden (TMB), PD-L1 status, somatic alterations (alts) in ≥ 10% of pts ( TERTp, TP53, ARID1A, CDKN2A, CDKN2B, FGFR3, ERBB2, CCND1, KDM6A, MTAP, PIK3CA, RB1, TSC1) and presence of ≥1 DNA damage response mutations ( ATM, BARD1, BRCA1, BRCA2, CDK12, CHEK2, PALB2, PPP2R2A, or RAD51B). ORRs were compared using Chi-squared test, while median progression-free and overall survival (mPFS, mOS) from EV start were compared with log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards in pts with and without biomarker presence. Results: A total of 170 pts had outcomes and NGS data available. Median age was 70, 133 (78%) were men, 144 (85%) Caucasian, 110 (65%) with pure urothelial histology, 118 (69%) with primary bladder tumor, and 116 (68%) had ≥ 2 lines of therapy before EV. For all pts, ORR 47%, mPFS 6 mos, mOS 12 mos. ORRs were higher in pts with ERBB2 (67% vs 44%; p = 0.05) and TSC1 (68% vs 25%; p=0.04) alts vs wild-type. Shorter mPFS was noted in pts with CDKN2A, CDKN2B, and MTAP alts, and longer mOS in pts with high TMB (table). Conclusions: This large, multi-site, retrospective cohort of pts with aUC identified several potential biomarkers associated with differential outcomes to EV. These findings, upon external validation, may help inform clinical decision making and potential therapy sequencing with available ADCs. Limitations include retrospective nature, pt selection, and confounding biases. [Table: see text]

BackgroundPatients with bladder cancer (BC) who are cisplatin ineligible or have unresectable disease have limited treatment options. Previously, we showed targeting programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) with durvalumab (durva) and radiation therapy (RT) combination was safe in BC. We now report results from a phase II study evaluating the toxicity and efficacy of durva and RT in localized BC.MethodsThis is a single-arm, multi-institutional phase II study; N=26. Enrolled patients had pure or mixed urothelial BC (T2-4 N0-2 M0) with unresectable tumors and were unfit for surgery or cisplatin ineligible. Patients received durva concurrently with RT ×7 weeks, followed by adjuvant durva × 1 year.Primary endpoints: (A) progression-free survival (PFS) at 1 year and (B) disease control rate (DCR) post adjuvant durva. Key secondary endpoints: (A) complete response (CR) post durvaRT (8 weeks), (B) overall survival (OS), (C) PFS and (D) toxicity. Correlative studies included evaluation of baseline tumor and blood (baseline, post durvaRT) for biomarkers.ResultsMedian follow-up was 27 months. Evaluable patients: 24/26 post durvaRT, 22/26 for DCR post adjuvant durva, all patients for PFS and OS. Post adjuvant durva, DCR was seen in 72.7%, CR of 54.5%. 1-year PFS was 71.5%, median PFS was 21.8 months. 1-year OS was 83.8%, median OS was 30.8 months. CR at 8 weeks post durvaRT was 62.5%. Node positive (N+) patients had similar median PFS and OS. DurvaRT was well tolerated. Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events: anemia, high lipase/amylase, immune-nephritis, transaminitis, dyspnea (grade 4-COPD/immune), fatigue, rash, diarrhea and scleritis. No difference in outcome was observed with PD-L1 status of baseline tumor. Patients with CR/PR or SD had an increase in naïve CD4 T cells, a decrease in PD-1+CD4 T cells at baseline and an increase in cytokine-producing CD8 T cells, including interferon gamma (IFNγ) producing cells, in the peripheral blood.ConclusionDurva with RT followed by adjuvant durva was safe with promising efficacy in localized BC patients with comorbidities, including N+ patients. Larger randomized studies, like S1806 and EA8185, are needed to evaluate the efficacy of combining immunotherapy and RT in BC.Trial registration numberNCT02891161.

Purpose: Glutaminase is a key enzyme, which supports elevated dependency of tumors on glutamine-dependent biosynthesis of metabolic intermediates. Dual targeting of glucose and glutamine metabolism by the mTOR inhibitor everolimus plus the oral glutaminase inhibitor telaglenastat showed preclinical synergistic anticancer effects, which translated to encouraging safety and efficacy findings in a phase I trial of 2L+ renal cell carcinoma (RCC). This study evaluated telaglenastat plus everolimus (TelaE) versus placebo plus everolimus (PboE) in patients with advanced/metastatic RCC (mRCC) in the 3L+ setting (NCT03163667). Patients and Methods: Eligible patients with mRCC, previously treated with at least two prior lines of therapy [including ≥1 VEGFR-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)] were randomized 2:1 to receive E, plus Tela or Pbo, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS; one-sided α Results: Sixty-nine patients were randomized (46 TelaE, 23 PboE). Patients had a median three prior lines of therapy, including TKIs (100%) and checkpoint inhibitors (88%). At median follow-up of 7.5 months, median PFS was 3.8 months for TelaE versus 1.9 months for PboE [HR, 0.64; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.34–1.20; one-sided P = 0.079]. One TelaE patient had a partial response and 26 had stable disease (SD). Eleven patients on PboE had SD. Treatment-emergent adverse events included fatigue, anemia, cough, dyspnea, elevated serum creatinine, and diarrhea; grade 3 to 4 events occurred in 74% TelaE patients versus 61% PboE. Conclusions: TelaE was well tolerated and improved PFS versus PboE in patients with mRCC previously treated with TKIs and checkpoint inhibitors.

BackgroundRP1 is an enhanced potency oncolytic HSV-1 which expresses a fusogenic glycoprotein (GALV-GP R-) and granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF).1 In pre-clinical studies, RP1 demonstrated potent GALV-GP R-enhanced anti-tumor activity and immunogenic cell death. This Phase 1/2 (Ph 1/2) study was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of RP1 ± nivolumab (nivo) in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors, including pts whose disease failed prior anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy and has reported promising interim data in a number of tumor types including cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) and anti-PD1 failed melanoma to date.2MethodsThis is a multi-center, first-in-human, open label, multi-cohort, non-randomized Ph1 study of RP1 alone and combined with nivo followed by Ph2 in combination with nivo in pts with recurrent advanced solid tumors including those that progressed after prior anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy. The Ph 1 monotherapy dose escalation (n=14) and RP-1 combination expansion (n=22) cohorts are fully enrolled. Approximately 260 pts are expected to be enrolled in the ongoing Ph 2 portion across five cohorts; melanoma (n=30, enrollment complete), non-melanoma skin cancer (n=45, to include 15 pts with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 failed disease), anti-PD-1 failed MSI-H/dMMR tumors (n=30), anti-PD-1/PD-L1-failed non-small-cell lung cancer (n=30) and a registration-directed cohort in anti-PD-1 failed cutaneous melanoma (n=125). Pts in the Ph 2 portion receive up to 10 mL of RP1 intratumorally into one or more superficial or deep seated/visceral lesions at the recommended Ph 2 dose (1x10^6 PFU/mL × 1 followed by 1x10^7 PFU/mL × 7, Q2W). Following the first dose of RP1, nivo (240 mg IV Q2W for 4 months then 480 mg IV Q4W for up to 2 years) is subsequently administered in combination. Pts may receive up to 8 additional doses of RP1 if they meet protocol-specified criteria. Tumor assessments are performed Q8W. The primary objectives of the Ph 2 part of the study are to assess the safety, tolerability, and overall response rate (ORR) of RP1 in combination with nivo, by independent review for the anti-PD1 failed melanoma cohort. Secondary objectives include duration of response, complete response rate, disease control rate, PFS, 1-year and 2-year survival rates. Exploratory objectives include biodistribution and shedding analysis of RP1 and biomarker studies, including analyses of tumor biopsies and blood samples. Enrollment is currently ongoing in the UK and US, with additional sites in the EU (including France and Spain) are expected to open in 2021.Trial RegistrationNCT03767348ReferencesThomas S, Kuncheria L, Roulstone V, Kyula JN, Mansfield D, Bommareddy PK, Smith H, Kaufman HL, Harrington KJ, Coffin RS. Development of a new fusion-enhanced oncolytic immunotherapy platform based on herpes simplex virus type 1. J Immunother Cancer 2019;7(1):214.Coffin R, Astley-Sparke P, and Middleton M (2021, June 3rd). Retrieved from https://ir.replimune.com/static-files/f4fe3349-e082-4d41-94a1-106ce7e78a23Ethics ApprovalThe study was approved by institutional review board or the local ethics committee at each site. Informed consent was obtained from patients prior to enrollment.

BackgroundWe previously reported a pilot clinical trial using a DNA vaccine encoding prostatic acid phosphatase (pTVG-HP), given over 12 weeks either concurrently or in sequence with pembrolizumab, in patients with mCRPC. We report here the final analysis of this trial following two additional treatment arms in which patients with mCRPC were treated beyond 12 weeks until progression.MethodsPatients with mCRPC were treated with pTVG-HP and pembrolizumab every 3 weeks (Arm 3, n=20), or pTVG-HP every 2 weeks and pembrolizumab every 4 weeks (Arm 4, n=20). The primary objectives were safety, 6-month PFS, median time to radiographic progression, and objective response rates. Secondary objectives included immunological evaluations.ResultsTreatment was without unexpected toxicity, and only 1 grade 4 event (hyperglycemia) was observed. Immune related adverse events (irAE) > grade 1 included adrenal insufficiency, hepatitis, colitis, thyroid dysfunction, pancreatitis, pneumonitis, and rash, occurring in 42% of patients overall. 10/25 patients with measurable disease experienced any decrease in tumor volume from baseline, with 1 confirmed PR and no CR. 23/66 (35%) experienced any PSA decline from baseline. Overall median TTP was 5.4 months (95% CI; 5.3–8.1 months); median TTP for Arm 3 was 5.3 months compared to 8.0 months for Arm 4. Overall, 41.7% of patients had no radiographic progression at 6 months (29.9% Arm 3, 57.9% Arm 4). Median overall survival was 22.9 months. IFNγ and/or granzyme B immune response to PAP was detected in 2/20 patients in Arm 3 and 6/20 patients in Arm 4. Cytokines associated with immune activation and CD8+ T cell recruitment were augmented in the plasma of patients at weeks 6 and 12. Increased IFNγ in the sera at week 6 trended with prolonged TTP (p=0.010) and overall survival (p=0.025). The development of irAE was associated with a prolonged TTP (HR=0.25, p=0.003).ConclusionsPD-1 pathway inhibitors have demonstrated little clinical activity to date as monotherapies for mCRPC. Our findings demonstrate that combining PD-1 blockade with tumor-targeted T-cell activation using pTVG-HP is safe, can augment tumor-specific T cells, and result in objective changes with longer time to progression than what has been observed in previous trials. The association of progression or survival with increased IFNγ, irAE, and vaccine schedule suggests T cell activation by vaccination is critical to the mechanism of action of this combination. This study suggests this approach should be further evaluated in randomized clinical trials for patients with advanced mCRPC.AcknowledgementsFunding for this trial was from a 2014 Movember Prostate Cancer Foundation Challenge Award and Madison Vaccines, Inc.Trial RegistrationNCT02499835Ethics ApprovalThis trial was reviewed and approved by the University of Wisconsin Human Subjects’ Review Committee (IRB), protocol 2015–0453. All participants provided IRB-approved written informed consent before taking part.

Enfortumab vedotin (EV) is a novel antibody-drug conjugate approved for advanced urothelial cancer (aUC) refractory to prior therapy. In the Urothelial Cancer Network to Investigate Therapeutic Experiences (UNITE) study, the authors looked at the experience with EV in patient subsets of interest for which activity had not been well defined in clinical trials.UNITE was a retrospective study of patients with aUC treated with recently approved agents. This initial analysis focused on patients treated with EV. Patient data were abstracted from chart reviews by investigators at each site. The observed response rate (ORR) was investigator-assessed for patients with at least 1 post-baseline scan or clear evidence of clinical progression. ORRs were compared across subsets of interest for patients treated with EV monotherapy.The initial UNITE analysis included 304 patients from 16 institutions; 260 of these patients were treated with EV monotherapy and included in the analyses. In the monotherapy cohort, the ORR was 52%, and it was40% in all reported subsets of interest, including patients with comorbidities previously excluded from clinical trials (baseline renal impairment, diabetes, and neuropathy) and patients with fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR3) alterations. Progression-free survival and overall survival were 6.8 and 14.4 months, respectively. Patients with a pure urothelial histology had a higher ORR than patients with a variant histology component (58% vs 42%; P = .06).In a large retrospective cohort, responses to EV monotherapy were consistent with data previously reported in clinical trials and were also observed in various patient subsets, including patients with variant histology, patients with FGFR3 alterations, and patients previously excluded from clinical trials with an estimated glomerular filtration rate30 mL/min and significant comorbidities.Enfortumab vedotin, approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2019, is an important new drug for the treatment of patients with advanced bladder cancer. This study looks at the effectiveness of enfortumab vedotin as it has been used at multiple centers since approval, and focuses on important patient populations previously excluded from clinical trials. These populations include patients with decreased kidney function, diabetes, and important mutations. Enfortumab vedotin is effective for treating these patients. Previously reported clinical trial data have been replicated in this real-world setting, and support the use of this drug in broader patient populations.

IMPORTANCE: Preclinical studies suggest that inhibition of single-stranded DNA repair by ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3 (ATR) may enhance the cytotoxicity of cisplatin, gemcitabine, and other chemotherapeutic agents. Cisplatin with gemcitabine remains the standard up-front therapy for treatment in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of the selective ATR inhibitor, berzosertib, could augment the activity of cisplatin with gemcitabine. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In a phase 2 randomized clinical trial, 87 patients across 23 centers in the National Cancer Institute Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network were randomized to receive either cisplatin with gemcitabine alone (control arm) or cisplatin with gemcitabine plus berzosertib (experimental arm). Key eligibility criteria included confirmed metastatic urothelial cancer, no prior cytotoxic therapy for metastatic disease, 12 months or more since perioperative therapy, and eligibility for cisplatin receipt based on standard criteria. The study was conducted from January 27, 2017, to December 15, 2020. INTERVENTIONS: In the control arm, cisplatin, 70 mg/m(2), was given on day 1 and gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m(2), was given on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. In the experimental arm, cisplatin, 60 mg/m(2), was given on day 1; gemcitabine, 875 mg/m(2), on days 1 and 8; and berzosertib, 90 mg/m(2), on days 2 and 9 of a 21-day cycle. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point of the study was progression-free survival. The analysis was on all patients who started therapy. RESULTS: Of the total of 87 patients randomized, 41 patients received cisplatin with gemcitabine alone and 46 received cisplatin with gemcitabine plus berzosertib. Median age was 67 (range, 32-84) years, and 68 patients (78%) were men. Median progression-free survival was 8.0 months for both arms (Bajorin risk-adjusted hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.72-2.08). Median overall survival was shorter with cisplatin with gemcitabine plus berzosertib compared with cisplatin with gemcitabine alone (14.4 vs 19.8 months; Bajorin risk-adjusted hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.76-2.68). Higher rates of grade 3 vs grade 4 thrombocytopenia (59% vs 39%) and neutropenia (37% vs 27%) were observed with cisplatin with gemcitabine and berzosertib compared with cisplatin with gemcitabine alone; consequently, more dose reductions were needed in the experimental arm. Patients in the experimental arm received a median cisplatin dose of 250 mg/m(2), which was significantly lower than the median dose of 370 mg/m(2) in the control arm (P

Testicular cancer is relatively uncommon and accounts for 50% of patients dying within 1 year of diagnosis. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Testicular Cancer focuses on recommendations for the management of adult patients with nonseminomatous GCTs.

Brief abstract: Castleman's disease (CD) is an uncommon lymphoproliferative process that can present concurrent to other solid organ malignancy, especially in selected populations. Concomitant CD and renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are challenging in terms of diagnosis and treatment. Assessment of CD involvement is a crucial step in selecting the optimal treatment strategy. Here we report a case of metastatic RCC and concurrent CD treated with surgery and immunotherapy.

TPS3174 Background: Cisplatin, a well-established backbone of combination therapy of various advanced solid tumors, inhibits DNA synthesis by forming DNA cross-links and adducts. Despite the activity of cisplatin, tumor cells can either be refractory or develop resistance to treatment. Cisplatin has been demonstrated to cause cell cycle G2/M arrest, which may allow for DNA damage response (DDR) and repair. Ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) and ataxia telangiectasia and Rad 3-related (ATR) protein kinases are key regulators of DDR, and contribute to maintaining genomic integrity in response to various exogenous and endogenous genotoxic insults like cytotoxic chemotherapy. In fact, cisplatin has been shown to transiently increase ATR expression. Inhibitors of ATR have been studied in combination with cisplatin both in vitro and in vivo, demonstrating enhanced activity. The oral small molecule ATR inhibitor elimusertib, which has been studied as a single agent in a Phase I study, has also demonstrated enhanced activity with cisplatin in vitro in lung cancer and bladder cancer cell lines. We sought to conduct a Phase I study evaluating the combination of elimusertib with cisplatin or with cisplatin and gemcitabine. Methods: In the first cohort, patients with histologically confirmed advanced solid tumors for which cisplatin-based therapy would be considered appropriate, who exhibit adequate organ function, and have received < 300 mg/m2 of cisplatin previously are treated with cisplatin on Day (D) 1 and with elimusertib on D2 & 9 of each 21-day cycle. The study follows a phase I queue (IQ) 3+3 dose escalation design, following standard practices for dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) impact on escalation, and when the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) is established with cisplatin alone, this will inform the first dose level of the next cohort, in which patients will be treated with cisplatin on D1, gemcitabine on D1 & 8, and elimusertib on D2 & 9 of each 21-day cycle. An expansion cohort will enroll urothelial carcinoma patients when the second MTD is established. The primary objective of the study is to evaluate the safety and MTD of elimusertib in combination with cisplatin, as well as in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine. Secondary study objectives include evaluation of pharmacokinetics of elimusertib in these combinations, preliminary efficacy, and evaluating the association between ATM expression and responses to therapy. Currently, 6 patients have been enrolled to the first cohort of the study. Clinical trial information: NCT04491942.

4545 Background: Despite recent advances in the treatment of clear cell RCC, there is a paucity of data to guide management of nccRCC due to the heterogeneity and rarity of these tumors. The clinical activity of combination therapies (including IO-IO, IO-VEGF, VEGF-mTOR) in subtypes of advanced nccRCC is unknown. Methods: In this multicenter retrospective analysis, we evaluated the efficacy of combination systemic therapies in patients with nccRCC. Eligible patients included those with nccRCC as determined by local genitourinary pathology review and receipt of one of three combination regimens during any line treatment (IO-IO, IO-VEGF, mTOR-VEGF). The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) assessed by investigator review. Secondary endpoints were progression- free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR), and overall survival (OS). Results: Among 128 included patients, median age was 57 years; 66% were male and 65% white. Histologies included papillary (37%), unclassified (33%), chromophobe (16%), translocation (9%), and other (5 %). Among all patients, 69% had prior nephrectomy; 80% were IMDC intermediate/poor risk; 20% had sarcomatoid and/or rhabdoid differentiation, 27% and 29% had liver and bone metastasis respectively and 63% received combination treatment as first line. Comparison of outcomes based on treatment regimen, line of treatment and subtype is shown in the table. Median PFS and OS were longer with IO/IO and IO/VEGF compared to VEGF/ mTOR at 8.5, 9.5 and 3.7 months and 24.4, 18.2 and 15.4 months respectively. Conclusions: Antitumor activity was observed with novel combinations in nccRCC in both frontline and later line setting. Optimal management of nccRCC remains an unmet need and prospective data is warranted to guide treatment selection for this population. [Table: see text]

Introduction: The treatment landscape of metastatic renal cell carcinoma has advanced significantly with the approval of combination regimens containing an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) for patients with treatment-naive disease. Little information is available regarding the activity of single-agent ICIs for patients with previously untreated mRCC not enrolled in clinical trials. Methods: This retrospective, multicenter cohort included consecutive treatment-naive mRCC patients from six institutions in the United States who received ≥1 dose of an ICI outside a clinical trial, between June 2017 and October 2019. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze outcomes including objective best response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and tolerability. Results: The final analysis included 27 patients, 70% men, median age 64 years (range 42-92), 67% Caucasian, and 33% with ECOG 2 or 3 at baseline. Most patients had intermediate risk (85%, IMDC) with clear cell (56%), papillary (26%), unclassified (11%), chromophobe (4%), and translocation (4%) RCC. All patients had evidence of metastatic disease involving the lungs (59%), lymph node (41%), CNS (19%), liver (11%), adrenal gland (11%), and bone (11%). The median time on ICI was 3.1 (0.1-26.8) months, and the median PFS was 6.3 (95% CI, 0-18.6) months. Among the 21 patients with an evaluable response, the best ORR was 33%, including two complete responses and five partial responses. The ORR was 29% (n = 1 complete response, n = 5 partial response) in clear cell and 5% (n = 1 complete response) in non-clear cell RCC. Adverse events (AEs) of any cause were reported in 37% and included fatigue (11%), dermatitis (11%), diarrhea (7%), and shortness of breath (7%). Significant AEs (30%) included shortness of breath (7%), acute kidney injury (4%), dermatitis (4%), Clostridium difficile infection (4%), cerebrovascular accident (4%), and fatigue (7%). Three patients discontinued therapy due to grade 4 AEs. Conclusions: In this multi-institutional case series, single-agent ICI demonstrated objective responses and was well tolerated in a heterogeneous treatment-naive mRCC cohort. ICI monotherapy is not the standard of care for patients with mRCC, and further investigation is necessary to explore predictive biomarkers for optimal treatment selection in this setting.

Background DNA damage response (DDR) genomic alterations may play an important role in clinical outcomes of patients with urothelial cancer (UC). However, data on the prognostic role of DDR gene alterations in patients with advanced UC remain unclear. Materials and Methods We retrospectively collected data of three independent patient cohorts with relapsed or advanced UC including 81 and 91 patients from four institutions who underwent FoundationOne genomic sequencing as well as 129 patients selected from The Cancer Genome Atlas bladder cohort. Fisher's exact test was used to determine differences of mutation frequency among the three cohorts. Logistic regression analysis was performed to calculate odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Overall survival (OS) was measured from time of initial diagnosis and Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was performed to calculate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI. Results DDR genomic alterations were present in 76.5% (62/81), 40.7% (37/91), and 51.2% (66/129) of the three cohorts. ATM alterations consistently correlated with significantly shorter OS, whereas other DDR alterations (excluding ATM) were associated with better prognosis. In 152 patients treated with platinum pooled from the three cohorts, the prognostic value of alterations in ATM as compared with other predefined DDR genes was substantially different (ATM: adjusted HR [HR], 2.03; 95% CI, 1.03–4; p = .04; other DDR: adjusted HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.31–0.8; p = .003). Conclusions Genomic alterations in ATM and other DDR genes may have opposite prognostic value in relapsed and/or advanced UC. ATM may have a complex role in UC progression. Implications for Practice Somatic mutations of DNA damage response (DDR) genes are frequently found in urothelial cancer and appear to play an important role in tumorigenesis, progression, treatment response, and outcomes. In a set of DDR genes, ATM alterations were associated with worse survival, while other alterations were associated with better survival in advanced urothelial cancer. The results of this study suggest a complex role of ATM in tumor progression and call for further studies to determine the underlying mechanisms and biomarker clinical utility.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE:The addition of docetaxel to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) significantly improves progression-free survival and overall survival compared to ADT alone in men with me...

381 Background: Single agent or combination regimens using different IO and TKI agents have dramatically improved survival of patients (pt) with advanced ccRCC. Nevertheless, selecting optimal combination and sequencing of treatments remains challenging given the current absence of predictive biomarkers. Considering substantial disease heterogeneity and tumor clonal evolution, CTCs could provide a more comprehensive and longitudinal assessment of disease and response to treatment when compared to single site biopsy. In this study we explore changes in CTC characteristics in correlation with pt’s response (Resp) to treatment and progression (PD). Methods: 152 blood sample time points from 44 ccRCC pts (mean=3.5 sample/pt, range= 1-9) were included. An automated microfluidic platform using exclusion-based sample technology was employed for high sensitivity enrichment of RCC CTCs using EpCAM and CAIX antibodies. High-specificity CTC identification was achieved with positive staining for pCK or CAXII, and negative staining for CD45, CD34 and CD66b. Single cell phenotyping of PDL1 and HLA1 expression on each CTC was quantified with automated image analysis algorithms followed by manual visual QA of the putative CTCs. Cellular-level expression of PDL1 and HLA1 were compared within treatment-response groupings, using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests (Table). Results: Pts were 70% male, 93% Caucasian, 51% de novo metastatic, 98% received systemic treatment. CTC samples were collected at baseline (12) or while on treatment with IO (71), TKI (55), or IO/TKI (14). Across treatments, the number of CTCs increased from Resp to PD but this trend was not statistically significant. PDL1 expression was higher at PD compared to Resp on IO and IO/TKI but not significantly different on TKI. HLA1 expression was higher at PD compared to Resp on IO and TKI but not significantly different on IO/TKI. Average CTC PD-L1 expression was higher at Resp to IO compared to baseline. Conclusions: Single cell phenotyping of PDL1 and HLA1 were done at Resp compared to PD time points on IO and/or TKI to identify potential mechanisms of resistance. Further evaluation of these preliminary results in prospective trials is ongoing to advance new predictive biomarkers for ccRCC.[Table: see text]

390 Background:The concept of primary systemic therapy has gained increasing traction in the management of metastatic and locally advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC). Most series have evaluated the use of tyrosine-kinase inhibitors, however, with the emergence of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy as first line agents in advanced RCC, further assessment of efficacy is warranted. We examined the effects of immunotherapy (IO) combinations on the primary tumor and consequent surgical quality and short-term oncological outcomes. Methods: We conducted a multi-center, retrospective analysis of patients with advanced/metastatic RCC having received IO followed by Radical (RN) or partial nephrectomy (PN). Primary outcome was achievement of Bifecta (composite outcome of complete resection and no 30-day post-operative complications). Predictors for achievement of Bifecta were assessed with logistic regression multivariable analysis. Secondary outcomes were change in maximal tumor dimension, RENAL nephrometry score and disease progression. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to assess progression-free survival (PFS) for Bifecta and non-Bifecta patients. Results: We identified 52 patients with advanced RCC across 9 institutions who were eligible. The median age was 63 years and 60.4% were males. Median tumor size at diagnosis was 9.3 cm. 19.6% had T4 disease and 75% had AJCC Stage IV disease. IO treatment resulted in significant reductions in median tumor size (-25.4%; 9.7 cm vs. 7.3cm p = 0.0129) and RENAL nephrometry score (9 to 8, p = 0.032). 43 (83%) of patients underwent RN and (9) 17% had PN. Median tumor size was smaller for PN (8 vs. 4.1 cm, p < 0.001), and 30 day complication rates were higher (p = 0.024). Bifecta was achieved in 39 patients [33/42 (78.6%) RN and 6/9 (67%) PN, p = 0.264). Predictors for achievement of Bifecta were younger age (OR 1.06, p = 0.01), increasing reduction in tumor size (OR 1.187, p < 0.001), and shorter time between therapy and surgery (OR 1.07, p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated longer median time to progression in the Bifecta-positive group compared to patients who failed to achieve Bifecta (75 vs. 30 months, p = 0.04). Conclusions: Pre-surgical therapy resulted in tumor size and complexity reduction. Tumor size reduction was predictive for achievement of Bifecta, which was associated with improved short term oncological outcomes. To our knowledge, this is the first series evaluating the effect of neoadjuvant systemic therapy on the primary tumor prior to surgical intervention.

// Ming Yin 1, 6 , Petros Grivas 2, 7 , Hamid Emamekhoo 3 , Prateek Mendiratta 2 , Siraj Ali 4 , JoAnn Hsu 5 , Monali Vasekar 1 , Joseph J. Drabick 1 , Sumanta Pal 5 and Monika Joshi 1 1 Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Penn State Cancer Institute, Hershey, PA, USA 2 Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA 3 Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, WI, USA 4 Foundation Medicine, Cambridge, MA, USA 5 Department of Medical Oncology, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, USA 6 Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA 7 Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA Correspondence to: Monika Joshi, email: mjoshi@pennstatehealth.psu.edu Keywords: biomarkers; prognosis; bladder cancer; genomic alterations; next generation sequencing Received: November 30, 2017 Accepted: March 02, 2018 Published: March 30, 2018 ABSTRACT Background: Mutations of DNA repair genes, e.g. ATM/RB1 , are frequently found in urothelial cancer (UC) and have been associated with better response to cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Further external validation of the prognostic value of ATM/RB1 mutations in UC can inform clinical decision making and trial designs. Results: In the discovery dataset, ATM/RB1 mutations were present in 24% of patients and were associated with shorter OS (adjusted HR 2.67, 95% CI, 1.45–4.92, p = 0.002). There was a higher mutation load in patients carrying ATM/RB1 mutations (median mutation load: 6.7 versus 5.5 per Mb, p = 0.072). In the validation dataset, ATM/RB1 mutations were present in 22.2% of patients and were non-significantly associated with shorter OS (adjusted HR 1.87, 95% CI, 0.97–3.59, p = 0.06) and higher mutation load (median mutation load: 8.1 versus 7.2 per Mb, p = 0.126). Materials and Methods: Exome sequencing data of 130 bladder UC patients from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) dataset were analyzed as a discovery cohort to determine the prognostic value of ATM/RB1 mutations. Results were validated in an independent cohort of 81 advanced UC patients. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was performed to calculate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) to compare overall survival (OS). Conclusions: ATM/RB1 mutations may be a biomarker of poor prognosis in unselected UC patients and may correlate with higher mutational load. Further studies are required to determine factors that can further stratify prognosis and evaluate predictive role of ATM/RB1 mutation status to immunotherapy and platinum-based chemotherapy.