Search

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy can provide downstaging and improve margin negativity for borderline resectable and resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma [(B)RPC]. Little is known about the relative efficacy of capecitabine (CAPE)-based vs. gemcitabine (GEM)-based 3-week chemoradiation (3WCRT) with 36 Gy in 15 fractions. This study aimed to compare the odds of achieving surgical resection, time to progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS) of patients treated with 3WCRT with concurrent CAPE versus GEM. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted, examining medical records from a single center for patients with (B)RPC treated with 3WCRT between 1/2009–12/2020. Odd ratios (OR) of achieving surgical resection were estimated using logistic regression for univariable and multivariable analyses. Median TTP (mTTP) and median OS (mOS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards analysis was conducted to estimate hazard ratios (HR) of progression and survival in univariable and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were included in the analysis. Twenty-two (71%) patients were treated with CAPE, while 9 (29%) were treated with GEM. All patients in the GEM group were borderline resectable, vs. 18 (82%) patients in the CAPE group, P=0.30. Nineteen (86%) patients in the CAPE group were treated with neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX, vs. 4 (44%) patients in the GEM group, P=0.03. The CAPE group had higher odds of achieving surgical resection [OR =9.33; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.50–58.20]. Adjusting for covariates, the odds of achieving surgical resection were still statistically higher in the CAPE group vs. the GEM group (OR =25.34; 95% CI: 1.14–563.72). The CAPE group had superior mTTP compared to the GEM group (15.4 months, 95% CI: 4.9–71.1 vs. 4.0 months, 95% CI: 0.4–14.5; P=0.01), corresponding to a hazard ratio of 0.33 (95% CI: 0.14–0.81). Adjusting for covariates this effect persisted; the adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) for progression was 0.24 (95% CI: 0.08–0.77). Cox proportional hazards analysis also demonstrated that the CAPE group had superior OS compared to the GEM group in unadjusted (HR =0.13; 95% CI: 0.04–0.40) and adjusted models (HR =0.13, 95% CI: 0.03–0.52). CONCLUSIONS: For neoadjuvant 3WCRT, this hypothesis-generating study suggests concurrent CAPE may be a more effective radiosensitizer than GEM for patients with (B)RPC.

Background Hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) is the most common regorafenib-induced adverse event and is in need of effective prevention and palliation. Materials and Methods The Regorafenib Dose Optimization Study (ReDOS), a four-arm, previously published trial with a 1:1:1:1 randomization scheme, was analyzed in a manner in keeping with the original protocol to assess whether clobetasol 0.05% cream (a corticosteroid) applied to the palms and soles twice per day for 8 weeks was more effective when prescribed preemptively (before the development of HFSR) versus reactively (after the development of HFSR). Patients were assessed during the first two cycles of regorafenib. Results Sixty-one patients received preemptive clobetasol, and 55 received reactive clobetasol. Groups were balanced on demographics. Over the first two cycles, no evidence of HFSR occurred in 30% with preemptive clobetasol versus 13% with reactive clobetasol (p = .03). During the first cycle, 54% and 45% of patients had no HFSR with preemptive and reactive clobetasol, respectively (p = .35). During the second cycle, 33% and 15% had no HFSR with preemptive and reactive clobetasol, respectively (p = .02). During the second cycle, rates of grade 1, 2, and 3 HFSR were 30%, 8%, and 3%, respectively, with preemptive clobetasol and 43%, 18%, and 7%, respectively, with reactive clobetasol (p = .12). Patient-reported outcomes showed HFSR compromised nearly all activities of daily living with worse quality of life in patients who received reactive versus preemptive clobetasol. No clobetasol-induced adverse events were reported. Conclusion Preemptive clobetasol might lessen regorafenib-induced hand-foot reactions compared with reactive therapy. Further confirmatory studies are needed in a larger patient cohort. Implications for Practice Regorafenib causes hand-foot skin reactions. Preemptive clobetasol, a high-potency topical corticosteroid, appears to lessen the severity of this adverse event. Although further study is needed, the favorable adverse event profile of this intervention might prompt clinicians to discuss this option with their patients.

Squamous cell carcinoma of the anorectal canal (SCCA) is a rare HPV-related malignancy that is steadily increasing in incidence. A high unmet need exists for patients with persistent loco-regional and metastatic disease. Axalimogene filolisbac (ADXS11-001) is an investigational immunotherapy that stimulates tumor-specific responses against HPV-associated cancers, and has demonstrated benefit in metastatic cervical cancer. We conducted this single-arm, multicenter, phase 2 trial in patients with persistent/recurrent, loco-regional or metastatic SCCA. Patients received ADXS11-001, 1 × 109 colony-forming units intravenously every 3 weeks. A Simon 2-stage design was used to test primary co-endpoints of overall response rate (ORR) and 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate. Study would proceed to full enrollment if ORR ≥ 10% or 6-month PFS rate ≥ 20%. Thirty-six patients were treated; 29 patients were evaluable for response. One patient had a prolonged partial response (3.4% ORR). The 6-month PFS rate was 15.5%. Grade 3 adverse event were noted in 10 patients, with the majority being cytokine-release symptoms; one grade 4 adverse event was noted. No grade 5 adverse events occurred. ADXS11-001 was safe and well-tolerated in patients with SCCA. However, this study did not meet either primary endpoint. ADXS11-001 may be more beneficial when administered in combination with other cytotoxic or targeted agents.

PURPOSE KEYNOTE-164 (NCT02460198) evaluated the antitumor activity of pembrolizumab in previously treated, metastatic, microsatellite instability–high/mismatch repair–deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS This phase II open-label study involved 128 centers worldwide. Eligible patients were age ≥ 18 years and had metastatic MSI-H/dMMR CRC treated with ≥ 2 prior lines of standard therapy, including fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan with or without anti–vascular endothelial growth factor/epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody (cohort A) or ≥ 1 prior line of therapy (cohort B). MSI-H/dMMR status was assessed locally. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for up to 2 years until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal. The primary end point was objective response rate by RECIST version 1.1 by independent central review. Secondary end points were duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, safety, and tolerability. RESULTS A total of 124 patients with MSI-H/dMMR CRC (61 in cohort A, 63 in cohort B) enrolled. At data cutoff, median follow-up was 31.3 months (range, 0.2-35.6 months) for cohort A and 24.2 months (range, 0.1-27.1 months) for cohort B. Objective response rate was 33% (95% CI, 21% to 46%) and 33% (95% CI, 22% to 46%), respectively, with median duration of response not reached in either cohort. Median PFS was 2.3 months (95% CI, 2.1 to 8.1 months) and 4.1 months (95% CI, 2.1 to 18.9 months). Median overall survival was 31.4 months (95% CI, 21.4 months to not reached) and not reached (95% CI, 19.2 months to not reached). Treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 10 patients (16%) in cohort A and 8 (13%) in cohort B, with the most common occurring in ≥ 2 patients being pancreatitis, fatigue, increased alanine aminotransferase, and increased lipase (2 patients each; 3%) in cohort A. CONCLUSION Pembrolizumab is effective with a manageable safety profile in patients with MSI-H/dMMR CRC.

Pharmacokinetics; Liposomal irinotecan; Safety Farmacocinética; Irinotecán liposomal; Seguridad Farmacocinètica; Irinotecan liposomal; Seguretat Liposomal irinotecan is a liposomal formulation of irinotecan, which prolongs circulation of irinotecan and its active metabolite SN-38. A population pharmacokinetic (PK) model was developed based on data from seven studies (N = 440). Adequacy of the model was assessed using multiple methods, including visual predictive check. Associations between PK exposure and the incidence of diarrhea (grade ≥3) and neutropenia adverse events (AEs) (grade ≥3) at first event in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) were investigated using logistic regression based on data from two studies (the phase III NAPOLI-1 [N = 260] and phase I/II NCT02551991 [N = 56] trials). The PKs of total irinotecan was described by a two-compartment model with first-order elimination, with SN-38 formed directly by a first-order constant from the central compartment of irinotecan or after using a transit compartment. Clearance was 17.9 L/week (0.107 L/h) and 19,800 L/week (118 L/h) for total irinotecan and SN-38, respectively. The UGT1A1*28 7/7 homozygous genotype had no significant impact on SN-38 clearance. Model evaluation was satisfactory for both irinotecan and SN-38. The incidence of diarrhea (grade ≥3) at first event was significantly higher with increasing average concentrations of total irinotecan and SN-38; there was no significant association between an increased risk of neutropenia AEs (grade ≥3) at first event and average SN-38 concentrations. In summary, the PKs of total irinotecan and SN-38 after administration of liposomal irinotecan were well-described by the model. The UGT1A1*28 status had no significant impact on the PKs of liposomal irinotecan.

Summary Background Regorafenib confers an overall survival benefit in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer; however, the adverse event profile of regorafenib has limited its use. Despite no supportive evidence, various dosing schedules are used clinically to alleviate toxicities. This study evaluated the safety and activity of two regorafenib dosing schedules. Methods In this randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study done in 39 outpatient cancer centres in the USA, adults aged 18 years or older with histologically or cytologically confirmed advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum that was refractory to previous standard therapy, including EGFR inhibitors if KRAS wild-type, were enrolled. Eligible patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–1 and had no previous treatment with regorafenib. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) into four groups with two distinct regorafenib dosing strategies and two clobetasol usage plans, stratified by hospital. Regorafenib dosing strategies were a dose-escalation strategy (starting dose 80 mg/day orally with weekly escalation, per 40 mg increment, to 160 mg/day regorafenib) if no significant drug-related adverse events occurred and a standard-dose strategy (160 mg/day orally) for 21 days of a 28-day cycle. Clobetasol usage plans (0·05% clobetasol cream twice daily applied to palms and soles) were either pre-emptive or reactive. After randomisation to the four preplanned groups, using the Pocock and Simon dynamic allocation procedures stratified by the treating hospitals, we formally tested the interaction between the two interventions, dosing strategy and clobetasol usage. Given the absence of a significant interaction (p=0·74), we decided to pool the data for the pre-emptive and reactive treatment with clobetasol and compared the two dosing strategies (dose escalation vs standard dose). The primary endpoint was the proportion of evaluable patients (defined as those who were eligible, consented, and received any protocol treatment) initiating cycle 3 and was analysed per protocol. Superiority for dose escalation was declared if the one-sided p value with Fisher's exact test was less than 0·2. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT02368886 . This study is fully accrued but remains active. Findings Between June 2, 2015, and June 22, 2017, 123 patients were randomly assigned to treatment, of whom 116 (94%) were evaluable. The per-protocol population consisted of 54 patients in the dose-escalation group and 62 in the standard-dose group. At data cutoff on July 24, 2018, median follow-up was 1·18 years (IQR 0·98–1·57). The primary endpoint was met: 23 (43%, 95% CI 29–56) of 54 patients in the dose-escalation group initiated cycle 3 versus 16 (26%, 15–37) of 62 patients in the standard-dose group (one-sided p=0·043). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were fatigue (seven [13%] patients in the dose-escalation group vs 11 [18%] in the standard-dose group), hand-foot skin reaction (eight [15%] patients vs ten [16%] patients), abdominal pain (nine [17%] patients vs four [6%] patients), and hypertension (four [7%] patients vs nine [15%] patients). 14 patients had at least one drug-related serious adverse event: six patients in the dose-escalation group and eight patients in the standard-dose group. There was one probable treatment-related death in the standard-dose group (myocardial infarction). Interpretation The dose-escalation dosing strategy represents an alternative approach for optimising regorafenib dosing with comparable activity and lower incidence of adverse events and could be implemented in clinical practice on the basis of these data. Funding Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.

We describe the extent to which comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) results were used by oncologists to guide targeted therapy selection in a cohort of solid tumor patients tested as part of standard care at Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center June 2016–June 2017, with adequate follow up through September 2018 (n = 620). Overall, 28.4% of CGP tests advised physicians about targeted therapy use supported by companion diagnostic or practice guideline evidence. Post-test targeted therapy uptake was highest for patients in active treatment at the time of order (86% versus 76% of treatment naïve patients), but also took longer to initiate (median 50 days versus 7 days for treatment naïve patients), with few patients (2.6%) receiving targeted agents prior to testing. 100% of patients with resistance variants did not receive targeted agents. Treatment naïve patients received immunotherapy as the most common alternative. When targeted therapy given off-label or in a trial was the best CGP option, (7%) of patients received it. Our data illustrate the appropriate and heterogeneous use of CGP by oncologists as a longitudinal treatment decision tool based on patient history and treatment needs, and that some patients may benefit from testing prior to initiation of other standard treatments.

OBJECTIVES: Preclinical studies demonstrated antitumor activity of dovitinib in pancreatic cancer models. This phase Ib study aimed to determine the maximum tolerated dose of dovitinib in combination with gemcitabine and capecitabine and to characterize the safety and pharmacokinetic profile in patients with advanced pancreatic and biliary tract cancers (aPB) and solid malignancies. METHODS: Patients received gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 1 and 8, capecitabine 1300 mg/m(2) oral daily from day 1 to 14, and dovitinib oral daily five days on and two days off, every 21-day cycle. The standard 3+3 dose escalation design was utilized and the study expanded to treat an additional 20 aPB patients at maximum tolerated dose. RESULTS: A total of 29 patients were enrolled. One patient experienced dose limiting grade 3 colitis. Two patients developed clinically significant neuropathy after the first cycle requiring dose reduction. The maximum tolerated dose was not reached and dovitinib 300 mg was declared the recommended dose for expansion. The most frequent grade 2 or worse adverse events were fatigue (45%), neutropenia (41%), thrombocytopenia (34%), anemia (24%), nausea (24%), and palmer-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (21%). Partial responses were observed in 5 patients. Pharmacokinetic studies showed no drug-drug interaction between dovitinib, capecitabine and gemcitabine. Fibroblast growth factor 23 plasma level increased in 4 of 5 patients during the first cycle of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Dovitinib 300 mg daily is the recommended dose when combined with gemcitabine and capecitabine, achieving clinically relevant plasma concentrations. The study combination demonstrated encouraging efficacy signals in advanced pancreatic cancer.

Purpose: Small-bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) is rare, and no standard of care exists for metastatic disease beyond first-line FOLFOX/CAPOX. SBA has higher rates of microsatellite instability (MSI-H) and T-lymphocyte infiltration than other gastrointestinal cancers. We hypothesize that pembrolizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, will induce antitumor response. Patients and Methods: Patients with previously treated advanced SBA received pembrolizumab 200 mg i.v. every 3 weeks until disease progression (PD), toxicity, or 35 doses maximum. Primary endpoint was confirmed overall response rate (ORR) with secondary progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity assessment endpoints. Outcomes were stratified by tumor location, microsatellite stability (MSS) or instability (MSI-H), and PD-L1 level. Results: Forty patients were treated for a median duration of four cycles (range, 1–35). All patients are off study treatment due to PD (75%), death (10%), 35 cycles completed (8%), refusal (3%), and adverse effects (AEs, 5%). Three confirmed partial responses [PRs; 8%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2–20] did not meet predefined success criteria of ORR 30%. Median OS (7.1 months; 95% CI, 5.1–17.1) and median PFS (2.8 months; 95% CI, 2.7–4.2) were similar across primary tumor sites. One confirmed PR (3%) was seen in patients with low MSS/MSI tumors and correlated with high tumor mutation burden (TMB). Fifty percent of patients with MSI-H tumors achieved PR and remain alive without progression. Twenty-five patients (63%) had grade ≥3 AEs and 11 patients (28%) had grade 4/5 AEs. Conclusions: In the largest study of SBA to date, pembrolizumab did not induce the hypothesized response rate; however, we did identify responses in key biomarker-selected cohorts.

An increasing number of studies are describing potential uses of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) in the care of patients with colorectal cancer. Owing to this rapidly developing area of research, the Colon and Rectal–Anal Task Forces of the United States National Cancer Institute convened a panel of multidisciplinary experts to summarize current data on the utility of ctDNA in the management of colorectal cancer and to provide guidance in promoting the efficient development and integration of this technology into clinical care. The panel focused on four key areas in which ctDNA has the potential to change clinical practice, including the detection of minimal residual disease, the management of patients with rectal cancer, monitoring responses to therapy, and tracking clonal dynamics in response to targeted therapies and other systemic treatments. The panel also provides general guidelines with relevance for ctDNA-related research efforts, irrespective of indication., The analysis of ctDNA obtained from low-volume blood samples has the potential to transform the management of patients with colorectal cancer. Nevertheless, research priorities and minimum standards for sample collection and analysis in this area are currently missing. In this Position Paper, the NCI Colon and Rectal–Anal Task Forces provide a set of recommendations designed to address these challenges and accelerate the implementation of ctDNA in the management of patients with colorectal cancer.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can result in immune-related adverse events which require rapid identification and treatment. Gastrointestinal immune-related adverse events are among the most frequent and severe of these events. ICI colitis can be refractory to current therapies such as corticosteroids and biologic therapy. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is currently used in cases of recurrent Clostridioides difficile colitis. Many investigations are underway to test the utility of FMT for additional indications, including inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We present a 71-year-old man with ICI colitis that was nonresponsive to currently defined management options and treated with benefit from FMT.

Background: Small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) is rare, and no standard of care exists for metastatic SBA beyond first-line FOLFOX/CAPOX. Later-line therapy has been extrapolated from colorectal cancer (CRC) studies, though SBA is biologically distinct with higher rates microsatellite instability (MSI-H) and intratumoral T-lymphocyte infiltration. We hypothesize that pembrolizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, will induce antitumor response. Methods: Previously treated advanced SBA patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg IV q3 weeks until disease progression (PD), toxicity, or to 35 dose maximum. Primary endpoint was confirmed overall response rate (ORR) with secondary survival and safety endpoints. Outcomes were stratified by tumor location, microsatellite stability (MSS) or instability (MSI-H), and PD-L1 level. Findings: 40 patients were treated for median duration of 4 cycles (range 1-35). MSI status was available for 36 patients (90%). All 40 patients are off study treatment due to: PD (75%), death (10%), 35 cycles completed (8%), refusal (3%), and adverse effects (AE, 5%). Three confirmed partial responses (PR) (8%; 95% CI: 2-20) did not meet pre-defined success criteria. Median overall survival (OS) 7 . 1 mo (95% CI: 5 . 1-17 . 1) and median progression free survival (PFS) 2 . 8 mo (95% CI: 2 . 7-4 . 2) were similar across primary tumor sites. One confirmed PR was seen in 32 MSS/MSI-low patients (3%). MSS response correlated with high tumor mutation burden (TMB). Two of four MSI-H patients had a confirmed PR (50%) and remain alive without progression. 25 patients (63%) had grade ≥ 3 AEs, 11 pts (28%) had grade 4/5 AEs. Interpretation: In the largest study of SBA to date, and the first using immunotherapy, pembrolizumab did not achieve the hypothesized response rate; however, we did identify responses in certain biomarker-selected cohorts. Trial Registration: RU021502I (ACCRU), MISP #52192 (Merck), NCT02949219 (clinicaltrials.gov). Funding Statement: Primary study funding and investigational product was provided by the Merck Investigator Studies Program (MISP), and additional site-specific funding provided by the Kavanagh Family Foundation (MDACC) and Kevin T. Doner Memorial Fund (MDACC). Declaration of Interests: None to declare Ethics Approval Statement: Ethics board review and human research protections monitoring were performed at each institution. The trial was conducted according to ICH GCP.

The current understanding of familial colorectal cancer was limited to descriptions of affected pedigrees until the early 1990s. A series of landscape-altering discoveries revealed that there were distinct forms of familial cancer, and most were related to genes previously not known to be involved in human disease. This review largely focuses on advances in our understanding of Lynch syndrome because of the unique relationship of this disease to defective DNA mismatch repair and the clinical implications this has for diagnostics, prevention, and therapy. Recent advances have occurred in our understanding of the epidemiology of this disease, and the advent of broad genetic panels has altered the approach to germline and somatic diagnoses for all of the familial colorectal cancer syndromes. Important advances have been made toward a more complete mechanistic understanding of the pathogenesis of neoplasia in the setting of Lynch syndrome, and these advances have important implications for prevention. Finally, paradigm-shifting approaches to treatment of Lynch-syndrome and related tumors have occurred through the development of immune checkpoint therapies for hypermutated cancers. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:217-231. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Cytoreduction and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CS/HIPEC) is increasingly utilized as a treatment strategy for patients with peritoneal metastases from various primary tumor sites. For this heterogenous procedure, related to patient characteristics, patient selection, and the extent of surgical completeness of cytoreduction, high level evidence (ex: multiple randomized controlled trials) is not available to support efficacy. This review of the available literature supporting application of the procedure, focusing on colorectal cancer, provides a summary of current evidence for patient selection and treatment algorithms based on patient presentation.

The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) among Americans under the age of 50 years is increasing. The purpose of this study was to identify racial and socioeconomic disparities associated with this trend. The National Cancer Data Base was used to identify patients with CRC from 1998 to 2011. Patients were stratified by age (60 years), with ages 50 to 60 years omitted from the analysis to minimize overlapping trends between the two age groups. Relative frequencies (RFs) by year were plotted against demographic variables. Changes in RF over time and intervals from diagnosis to treatment (including surgery and chemotherapy) were compared. A total of 1,213,192 patients were studied; 885,510 patients with colon cancer and 327,682 with rectal or rectosigmoid cancer. Patients 60 years, with the highest rate of increase in stage III colon cancer (0.198% per year). Patients

The purpose of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of a combination of pralatrexate plus oxaliplatin in advanced esophagogastric cancer (EGC), analyze the impact of polymorphisms in folate metabolism pathway genes on toxicity and efficacy of pralatrexate, and to evaluate microRNA profile of tumor epithelium as a predictive biomarker. This was a two-stage trial with a safety lead in cohort and a primary endpoint of overall response rate (ORR). Patients received biweekly intravenous oxaliplatin (85 mg/m2) and pralatrexate (Dose level 1 [D1], 120 mg/m2; dose level-1 [D-1] 100 mg/m2). Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) in genes encoding proteins involved in pralatrexate metabolism were evaluated in germline DNA. microRNA profiling of the tumor epithelium was performed. ORR was 26%. Dose-limiting toxicities were observed in 2 of 4 patients at D1 and none at D-1. The T>C polymorphism in DHFR rs11951910 was significantly associated with lower progression-free survival (PFS; P ≤ 0.01), whereas the presence of the SLC19A1 rs2838957 G>A polymorphism was associated with improved PFS (P = 0.02). Presence of the GGH rs3780130 A>T and SLC19A1 rs1051266 G>A polymorphisms were significantly associated with better overall survival (OS; P = 0.01), whereas GGH rs7010484 T>C polymorphism was associated significantly with reduced OS (P = 0.04). There was no correlation between epithelial microRNA expression profile with disease progression or response. We conclude that the combination of oxaliplatin and pralatrexate is safe, is well tolerated, and has modest efficacy in advanced EGC. Pharmacogenomic analysis may be relevant to the use of pralatrexate in combination with platinum agents.

Background Regulatory approval of next generation sequencing (NGS) by the FDA is advancing the use of genomic-based precision medicine for the therapeutic management of cancer as standard care. Recent FDA guidance for the classification of genomic variants based on clinical evidence to aid clinicians in understanding the actionability of identified variants provided by comprehensive NGS panels has also been set forth. In this retrospective analysis, we interpreted and applied the FDA variant classification guidance to comprehensive NGS testing performed for advanced cancer patients and assessed oncologist agreement with NGS test treatment recommendations. Methods NGS comprehensive genomic profiling was performed in a CLIA certified lab (657 completed tests for 646 patients treated at Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center) between June 2016 and June 2017. Physician treatment recommendations made within 120 days post-test were gathered from tested patients’ medical records and classified as targeted therapy, precision medicine clinical trial, immunotherapy, hormonal therapy, chemotherapy/radiation, surgery, transplant, or non-therapeutic (hospice, surveillance, or palliative care). Agreement between NGS test report targeted therapy recommendations based on the FDA variant classification and physician targeted therapy treatment recommendations were evaluated. Results Excluding variants contraindicating targeted therapy (i.e., KRAS or NRAS mutations), at least one variant with FDA level 1 companion diagnostic supporting evidence as the most actionable was identified in 14% of tests, with physicians most frequently recommending targeted therapy (48%) for patients with these results. This stands in contrast to physicians recommending targeted therapy based on test results with FDA level 2 (practice guideline) or FDA level 3 (clinical trial or off label) evidence as the most actionable result (11 and 4%, respectively). Conclusions We found an appropriate “dose-response” relationship between the strength of clinical evidence supporting biomarker-directed targeted therapy based on application of FDA guidance for NGS test variant classification, and subsequent treatment recommendations made by treating physicians. In view of recent changes at FDA, it is paramount to define regulatory grounds and medical policy coverage for NGS testing based on this guidance.

Background: Regorafenib confers an overall survival benefit in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. The adverse event (AE) profile of regorafenib has limited its use. Despite no supportive evidence, various dosing schedules are used clinically to alleviate toxicities. Methods: In this randomized phase 2 study (NCT02368886), adults with refractory mCRC received a dose-escalation strategy (starting dose 80 mg/day with weekly escalation to standard-dose regorafenib; arm A) if no significant drug-related AEs occurred, or standard-dose regorafenib (160 mg/day; arm B) for 21 days of a 28-day cycle. Patients were randomized (1:1) to arms A and B. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients initiating cycle 3 in arm A vs B. Superiority for arm A was declared if the one-sided p-value with Fisher's exact test was

Adjuvant therapy has afforded improved outcomes following resection of locoregional colorectal cancer. In stage III colon cancer, the addition of oxaliplatin to fluoropyrimidines represents the standard in the adjuvant setting. The role of adjuvant therapy in stage II colon cancer remains controversial, though adjuvant therapy (oxaliplatin-based combination therapy or fluoropyrimidine monotherapy) could be considered and justified in stage II disease with high-risk features for recurrence. The development of various gene expression signatures may provide additional information in determining candidates for adjuvant therapy in stage II colon cancer, particularly those at low risk of recurrence. In locally advanced rectal cancer, neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by total mesorectal excision and adjuvant fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin-based therapy represents a currently favored treatment approach. There are growing data to support the use of perioperative or adjuvant therapy in resectable colorectal liver and pulmonary metastases. In this chapter, we highlight the historical development and recent advances in the adjuvant therapy of locally advanced colorectal cancer and resectable colorectal metastases.

Background Nonoperative or “watch and wait” strategies have emerged as a potential option for patients with rectal cancer that obtain a complete clinic response (cCR) after neoadjuvant therapy. We sought to evaluate our patients that experienced a cCR and their outcomes after non-operative management. Methods We performed a retrospective review of patients at our center with rectal cancer from 2012 to 2016. We then identified patients that had a documented “complete clinical response” of their tumors after different neoadjuvant treatments and underwent non-operative management. Patients were followed on a surveillance schedule that included physical exam, endoscopy and imaging. Results A total of 29 patients elected to undergo nonoperative management with a mean patient age of 67 years old. All patients were treated with neoadjuvant long course chemoradiotherapy. Seven patients were treated with initial induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and 11 received consolidation chemotherapy. During a median follow-up of 27.6 months, there were 6 (21%) recurrences (1 = local, 1 = local and distant, 4 distant). Of the 6 total recurrences, 5 patients were candidates for salvage surgical resection. Conclusion Neoadjuvant treatment strategies may facilitate durable rates of cCR. Continued responses after these treatments could possibly enable more patients to undergo nonoperative management. We believe nonoperative management can be offered to patients seeking rectal preservation, but more research is required to select the appropriate patients. For those patients experiencing recurrence, the majority of patients can be salvaged surgically.

Background: The rarity of neuroendocrine malignancies limits the ability to develop new therapies and thus a better understanding of the underlying biology is critical. Methods: Through a prospective, IRB-approved protocol, patients with neuroendocrine malignancies underwent next-generation sequencing of their tumours to detect somatic mutations (SMs) in 50 cancer-related genes. Clinicopathologic correlation was made among poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs/poorly differentiated histology and Ki-67 >20%) and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (PanNETs/Ki67 ⩽20%) and non-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (NP-NETs/Ki67 ⩽20%). Results: A total of 77 patients were enrolled, with next-generation sequencing results available on 63 patients. Incidence of SMs was 83% (19 out of 23) in poorly differentiated NECs, 45% (5 out of 11) in PanNETs and 14% (4 out of 29) in NP-NETs. TP53 was the most prevalent mutation in poorly differentiated NECs (57%), and KRAS (30%), PIK3CA/PTEN (22%) and BRAF (13%) mutations were also found. Small intestinal neuroendocrine tumours (Ki67

Prediction calculators estimate postoperative survival and assist the decision-making process for adjuvant treatment. The objective of this study was to create a postoperative overall survival (OS) calculator for patients with stage II/III colon cancer. Factors that influence OS, including comorbidity and postoperative variables, were included.The National Cancer Data Base was queried for patients with stage II/III colon cancer, diagnosed between 2004 and 2006, who had surgical resection. Patients were randomly divided to a testing (nt) cohort comprising 80% of the dataset and a validation (nv) cohort comprising 20%. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression of nt was performed to identify factors associated with 5-year OS. These were used to build a prediction model. The performance was assessed using the nv cohort and translated into mobile software.A total of 129,040 patients had surgery. After exclusion of patients with carcinoma in situ, nonadenocarcinoma histology, more than 1 malignancy, stage I or IV disease, or missing data, 34,176 patients were used in the development of the calculator. Independent predictors of OS included patient-specific characteristics, pathologic factors, and treatment options, including type of surgery and adjuvant therapy. Length of postoperative stay and unplanned readmission rates were also incorporated as surrogates for postoperative complications (1-day increase in postoperative stay, hazard ratio [HR] 1.019, 95% CI 1.018 to 1.021, p0.001; unplanned readmission vs no readmission HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.45, p0.001). Predicted and actual 5-year OS rates were compared in the nv cohort with 5-year area under the curve of 0.77.An individualized, postoperative OS calculator application was developed for patients with stage II/III colon cancer. This prediction model uses nationwide data, culminating in a highly comprehensive, clinically useful tool.

// Brandon G. Smaglo 1 , Anteneh Tesfaye 2 , Thorvardur R. Halfdanarson 3 , Joshua E. Meyer 4 , Jue Wang 5 , Zoran Gatalica 6 , Sandeep Reddy 6 , David Arguello 6 and Patrick M. Boland 7 1 The Ruesch Center for the Cure of GI Cancers, Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC, USA 2 Departments of Hematology/Oncology, Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC, USA 3 Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA 4 Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA 5 Division of Oncology, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Phoenix, AZ, USA 6 Department of Pathology, Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ, USA 7 Department of Medicine, GI Center, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA Correspondence to: Brandon G. Smaglo, email: // Keywords : anal squamous cell carcinoma, biomarker analysis, tumor profile Received : May 15, 2015 Accepted : October 09, 2015 Published : October 20, 2015 Abstract Anal squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC) is a rare, HPV-associated malignancy typically diagnosed in early stages and definitively treated with chemoradiation. In situations where patients exhibit metastatic or recurrent disease, treatment options are severely limited. In this study, molecular alterations were identified that could be used to aid in therapeutic decisions for patients with metastatic or recurrent anal squamous cell carcinoma. Specimens from patients with this cancer were tested via a multiplatform profiling service (Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ) consisting of gene sequencing, protein expression by immunohistochemistry, and gene amplification with in situ hybridization. Utilizing these techniques, novel treatment strategies that could be explored were identified, including potential benefit with anti-EGFR therapies, immune checkpoint inhibitors, topoisomerase inhibitors, and taxanes. The frequency of overexpression of proteins that mark resistance to chemotherapeutic drugs, such as MRP1 (chemotherapy efflux pump), ERCC1 (resistance to platinum-based chemotherapy), and thymidylate synthase (resistance to fluoropyrimidines) were also identified, suggesting a lack of benefit. This multiplatform strategy could be explored for its potential to generate a personalized treatment selection for patients with advanced ASCC, provide a guide for future therapeutic development for this cancer, and be extended to other rare cancer types as well.

The recent success of anti-PD1 drugs in metastatic colorectal cancer patients with mismatch repair deficiency generated overwhelming enthusiasm for immunotherapy in the disease. However, patients with mismatch repair deficient colorectal cancer represent only a small subset of the metastatic population. Current research focuses on advancing immunotherapy to earlier stages of the disease including adjuvant and first-line metastatic settings, and on inducing sensitivity to immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy through a combinatorial approach. Here, we review the contemporary understanding of the immune and molecular landscape in colorectal cancer and discuss ongoing clinical trials evaluating novel combination regimens based on immune checkpoint inhibitors.

TPS275 Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in US. The majority of US patients (pts) receive first-line therapy (Rx) with FOLFOX [Folinic acid (FA), 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and oxaliplatin (Ox)] + a biologic, making FOLFIRI [FA+ 5-FU+ irinotecan (Iri)] + bevacizumab (Bev) a common second-line Rx. This regimen has a median progression-free survival (PFS) of approximately 6 months (mo) and overall survival (OS) of 12 mo. Further gains are desperately needed. Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) is an oral combination Rx of a thymidine-based nucleoside analogue, FTD, and a phosphorylase inhibitor, TPI. FTD/TPI has a distinct mechanism of action from 5-FU and in preclinical models can overcome 5-FU resistance via DNA incorporation, base excision repair pathway and glycosylation responses to DNA damage. Further, there is an additive effect in combination with Iri. FTD/TPI was FDA approved for use in refractory metastatic CRC (mCRC) based on phase III RECOURSE trial. Phase I data showed combination of FTD/TPI, Iri and Bev to be safe, and an efficacy signal was seen in dose-expansion cohort (NCT01916447). A 12.5% response rate, 83.4 % disease control rate and PFS of 7.9 mo was achieved. As this study largely assessed refractory pts, one might expect a greater efficacy in Iri naïve pts. To test this hypothesis, we are conducting a multi-center phase II study of FTD/TPI, Iri and Bev as second-line Rx in mCRC pts. Methods: Eligible pts have mCRC and received first-line Ox based Rx. Rx to be given in 28-day cycles: Iri (180 mg/m2) and Bev (5 mg/kg) on D1 & 15, and FTD/TPI (25 mg/m2) twice daily on D2-6 & 16-20. Response assessment via CT/MRI to be done q8 wks (RECIST 1.1). Rx to continue until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective is to estimate PFS. Secondary objectives include ORR, OS, and safety. Final analysis to be done either 12 mo after enrollment of the final pt or once all pts have progression, whichever occurs earlier. A total of 40 pts to be accrued, and enrollment to start in January 2020. This study was approved and funded by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Oncology Research Program from general research support provided by Taiho Oncology, Inc.

TPS261 Background: There are currently no validated predictive biomarkers for stage II resected colon cancer (CC) after adjuvant chemotherapy. However, circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) that is shed into the bloodstream represents a highly specific and sensitive approach for identifying microscopic or residual tumor cells. For patients (pts) with CC, the detection of ctDNA is associated with persistent disease after resection and may outperform traditional clinical and pathological features as a prognostic factor to assess risk for recurrence. We hypothesize that for pts whose stage II colon cancer has been resected and who have no traditional high-risk features, a positive ctDNA status may identify those who will benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. Methods: In this prospective phase II/III clinical trial, pts (N=1,408) with resected stage II CC without traditional high-risk features and whom the evaluating oncologist deems suitable for no adjuvant chemotherapy will be randomized 1:1 into 2 arms: standard-of-care/observation (Arm A), or prospective testing for ctDNA (Arm B). Postoperative blood will be analyzed for ctDNA with the GuardantHealth LUNAR panel, covering CC-relevant mutations and CC-specific methylation profiling. Pts in Arm B with ctDNA detected will be treated with 6 months of adjuvant (FOLFOX) chemotherapy. For all pts in Arm A, ctDNA status will be analyzed retrospectively at the time of endpoint analysis. The primary endpoints are clearance of ctDNA with adjuvant chemotherapy (phase II) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) for “ctDNA-detected” pts treated with or without adjuvant chemotherapy (phase III). Secondary endpoints will include time-to-event outcomes (OS, RFS, TTR) by ctDNA marker status and treatment, prevalence of detectable ctDNA in stage II CC, and rates of compliance with assigned intervention. Archived normal and matched tumor and blood samples will be collected for exploratory correlative research. Trial accrual is anticipated across all US and Canadian cooperative groups.NCT#: 04068103. Support: U10-CA-180868, -180822; UG1CA-189867; GuardantHealth. Clinical trial information: 04068103.

TPS464 Background: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) followed by surgery is a standard approach for localized EGAC. Despite multimodality treatment, 5-year overall survival (OS) is less than 50%, with pathologic complete response (pCR) rates of 20%. Achievement of pCR is associated with an improved OS. We propose to use a novel combination of FTD/TPI and oxaliplatin as IC. We hypothesize that IC before CRT will increase the pCR rate in localized EGAC. Methods: This is an open-label, multicenter phase II trial. Patients (pts) with potentially resectable loco-regional EGAC are eligible. Pts. should have adequate organ function, ECOG performance status of 0 –1, age < 76 years, and endoscopic ultrasound-determined node-positive disease with any T-stage, or T3-T4a with any N stage. Pts. with T4b or M1 disease will be excluded. Pts. will receive three cycles of IC with FTD/TPI and oxaliplatin. Based on the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) observed in a phase I trial, FTD/TPI will be administered 35 mg/m² BID, days 1–5 every 14 days, with a fixed dose of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m² (day 1). Pts will then undergo concurrent CRT (standard radiation dose of 5040 cGY will be utilized) with weekly Carboplatin (AUC 2) and Paclitaxel (50 mg/m2) for 6 weeks followed by surgery. Our primary objective is to evaluate the pCR rate. The secondary objectives include evaluation of 2-year disease-free survival (DFS), 2-year OS, and assessment of toxicities of the IC. As a correlative endpoint, circulating tumor DNA level will be correlated with disease recurrence and metabolic response on PET CT. Assuming a historic pCR rate of 20% with standard CRT, 41 pts (enrollment of up to 45 pts accounting for non-evaluable pts) are needed to show a 15% increase in pCR with IC with 80% power at one-sided significance level of α = 0.1. In stage 1, n1= 22 evaluable pts will be enrolled. If there is 5 or more pCRs, an additional n2= 19 pts will be enrolled in stage 2. If 12 or more pCRs are observed in the total n = 41 evaluable pts, then the proposed treatment regimen will be considered promising for further study. We anticipate accrual over a 2-year period from 3 sites. Clinical trial information: NCT04097028.

Introduction: Liposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) plus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) is approved for patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPAC) after disease progression following gemcitabine-based therapy. The combination of nal-IRI+5-FU/LV plus oxaliplatin (NAPOX) is being investigated as first-line treatment for patients with mPAC in a phase 1/2, open-label, dose exploration and dose expansion study (NCT02551991). This exploratory analysis investigated changes in carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 levels, and their association with response rates, in patients with mPAC receiving NAPOX. Methods: After establishing a recommended dose in the exploration phase of study NCT02551991 (nal-IRI 50 mg/m2 [free-base equivalent], oxaliplatin 60 mg/m2, LV 400 mg/m2, 5-FU 2400 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle), 25 patients were enrolled into the dose expansion phase, resulting in a total of 32 patients treated at the selected dose level (pooled population; PP). The data cut-off for this interim analysis was when all treated patients had completed at least 16 weeks of follow-up. CA 19-9 levels were assessed at baseline and up to week 16. Results: Overall, 30 of the 32 treated patients in the PP had available CA 19-9 data at baseline. The median CA 19-9 level at baseline was 316 U/mL, with 23 (77%) patients having baseline CA 19-9 levels above the normal level (>37 U/mL). Among patients with baseline CA 19-9 levels >37 U/mL and measurements up to week 16 (n = 17), the median best reduction from baseline in CA 19-9 was 35.9%; a best CA 19-9 reduction of ≥20%, ≥50%, and ≥70% was achieved by 59% (10/17), 41% (7/17), and 24% (4/17) of patients, respectively. A total of 72% (23/32) treated patients achieved disease control by week 16 (DCR16), and the overall response rate (ORR; complete response or partial response over entire follow-up period) was 34% (11/32). In treated patients with any reduction in CA 19-9 by week 16, the DCR16 rate was 88% (14/16) and the ORR was 63% (10/16). Among patients with above-normal baseline CA 19-9 levels and any CA 19-9 reduction by week 16, the DCR16 rate was 83% (10/12) and the ORR was 67% (8/12). Rates of DCR16 and ORR increased with greater CA 19-9 reductions, reaching 100% and 75-83%, respectively, in patients with a CA 19-9 decrease of ≥70%. Conclusion: In patients with mPAC, first-line NAPOX therapy (with a dosing schedule of nal-IRI 50 mg/m2, oxaliplatin 60 mg/m2, LV 400 mg/m2, and 5-FU 2400 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle) resulted in substantial reductions in CA 19-9 levels from baseline, indicative of antitumor activity. Response rates were higher in patients with greater CA 19-9 reductions. Further assessment of CA19-9 levels and response rates over a longer follow-up period is ongoing. Citation Format: Farshid Dayyani, Patrick M. Boland, Andrew Dean, Christopher H. Lieu, Teresa Macarulla, Bin Zhang, Bruce Belanger, Yan Moore, Fiona Maxwell, Tiffany Wang, Zev A. Wainberg. CA 19-9 levels in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma receiving first-line therapy with liposomal irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin and oxaliplatin (NAPOX) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Pancreatic Cancer: Advances in Science and Clinical Care; 2019 Sept 6-9; Boston, MA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(24 Suppl):Abstract nr B14.

Background The benefit of immune checkpoint blockade in mCRC is currently limited to mismatch repair (MMR) deficient tumours. Increasing evidence suggests that the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway plays a role in cancer immune evasion. Co-targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 and VEGF axes may result in clinical activity in mCRC. Methods 133 patients (pts) were randomized 2:1 to receive C/B/P (Arm A) or C/B/A (Arm B), stratifying by ECOG and RAS. Pts had progressed on 5-FU, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, bevacizumab, and anti-EGFR therapy (if RAS wt). Prior anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy was not permitted. Doses were C 850 or 1000 mg/m² d1-14, B 7.5 mg/kg d1, and A 1200 mg d1 in 21 day cycles. Primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). 110 events were required to detect PFS hazard ratio (HR) of 0.65 at 1-sided α = 0.1 with 80% power. Secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and safety/tolerability. Primary and secondary efficacy analyses were performed using modified intent to treat analysis (mITT). Results Analysis includes 46 pts (Arm A) and 82 pts (Arm B) with median age 58 yo, 40% female, 47% ECOG 0. As of 4/12/19, median follow-up was 12.35 months (mo). Proficient MMR or microsatellite stable (MSS) is present in 86.7% vs 85.7%. In mITT analysis, median PFS is 3.3 mo (2.1-6.2) vs 4.4 mo (4.1-6.4) with a HR of 0.725 (0.491-1.07), 1-sided log-rank p-value 0.051. In MSS only pts, HR for PFS is 0.67 (0.44-1.03). ORR is 4.35% (0.5-14.8) vs 8.54% (3.5-16.8), p = 0.5. The 12 mo OS is 43% (29-63) vs 52% (42-65), HR 0.94 (0.56-1.56), p = 0.4. Most common grade > = 3 related adverse events are hypertension (7% vs 9%), hand-foot syndrome (4% vs 6%), and diarrhea (2% vs 7%). Conclusions The study reached its prespecified primary endpoint and the addition of A to CB results in a significantly longer PFS. No new or increased safety signals are identified. Further investigation in a larger phase III study may be warranted. This is the first positive study co-targeting PD-1/PD-L1 and VEGF axes in mCRC and correlative analyses may help identify predictors of benefit. Clinical trial identification NCT0287319. Legal entity responsible for the study ACCRU. Funding Genentech Roche. Disclosure H.J. Lenz: Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (institution): Genentech Roche; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (institution): Bayer; Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): Bristol-Myers Squibb. P.M. Boland: Research grant / Funding (institution): Merck; Research grant / Funding (institution): Genentech; Research grant / Funding (institution): Boehringer Ingelheim; Research grant / Funding (institution): Hemispherx; Research grant / Funding (institution): Boston Biomedical; Research grant / Funding (institution): Isofol Medical; Research grant / Funding (institution), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Ipsen; Research grant / Funding (institution): Athenex; Research grant / Funding (institution): Bayer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Clinical Genomics. A.B. Nixon: Research grant / Funding (self): Seattle Genetics; Research grant / Funding (self): MedPacto; Research grant / Funding (self): Genentech Roche; Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (self): Tracon Pharma; Research grant / Funding (self): Acceleron Pharma; Research grant / Funding (self): Leadiant Biosciences; Research grant / Funding (self): Sanofi-Aventis; Advisory / Consultancy: Eli Lilly. H. Hurwitz: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options, Full / Part-time employment: Genentech Roche. M.G. Fakih: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (self): Amgen; Advisory / Consultancy: Array; Advisory / Consultancy: Bayer; Research grant / Funding (self): AstraZeneca; Research grant / Funding (self): Novartis. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Background HER2 (ERBB2) amplification is present in 5-10% of patients (pts) with KRAS and NRAS (RAS) WT mCRC. Tucatinib (Seattle Genetics, Bothell, WA) is a potent, highly selective oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor of the HER2 receptor. In patient-derived xenograft models of HER2+ mCRC, the combination of tucatinib and trastuzumab showed significantly greater antitumor activity compared with tucatinib or trastuzumab alone. Here we present initial results from a trial of tucatinib and trastuzumab in pts with HER2 amplified mCRC. Methods MOUNTAINEER is a multicenter open-label single-arm phase II trial. Pts with RAS WT mCRC had HER2 amplification/overexpression by NGS, FISH, or IHC (3+ or 2+ and amplified by FISH). Prior treatment with 5FU, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and an anti-VEGF antibody was required. Prior anti-HER2 therapy was excluded. Pts received tucatinib 300mg PO bid and standard doses of trastuzumab (IV, Q3 weeks). The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. Using a 2-Stage Fleming design, this study compared ORR of 20% (null) vs 40% (alt) in 10 or 25 evaluable pts (1-sided α = 0.11; β=.16). At least 8 responses were needed to meet the primary efficacy endpoint. Results As of 26 April 2019, 26 pts enrolled, and 22 pts completed ≥1 evaluation of response. 16/26 pts (62%) were male. Median age= 52.5 (range 24-70). The primary tumor site of origin included right colon (N = 4), left colon/rectum (N = 17), transverse colon (N = 3), and overlapping (N = 2). Among 22 evaluable pts, ORR= 55% (CR/PR= 12; SD = 5; PD = 5). Clinical benefit rate (CR+PR+SD≥4 months) = 64%. At a median follow-up of 10.6 months, median PFS= 6.2 months (95% CI 3.5-NE). Median OS = 17.3 months (95% CI 12.3-NE). Median duration of response has not been reached. There were 2 (9%) grade 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and no grade 4/5 TRAEs. The most common TRAEs were AST elevation (48%; all G1), ALT elevation (30%; all G1), and diarrhea (26%; G1/G2/G3=4%/17%/4%). Conclusions The combination of tucatinib and trastuzumab is well tolerated and has met its primary efficacy endpoint. Based on these results, further expansion of the MOUNTAINEER trial in pts with HER2 amplified mCRC is justified. Updated results will be presented. Clinical trial identification NCT03043313. Legal entity responsible for the study Academic and Community Cancer Research United. Funding Seattle Genetics. Disclosure J.H. Strickler: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): Amgen; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Bayer; Honoraria (self): Chugai; Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): Genentech/Roche; Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): AstraZeneca; Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Seattle Genetics; Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution), Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options, Non-remunerated activity/ies: OncoMed; Advisory / Consultancy: Celgene; Advisory / Consultancy: Proteus Digital Health; Advisory / Consultancy: Chengdu Kanghong Biotechnology Ltd; Research grant / Funding (institution): Exelixis; Research grant / Funding (institution): Sanofi; Research grant / Funding (institution): Nektar; Research grant / Funding (institution): AbbVie; Research grant / Funding (institution): Gilead Sciences; Research grant / Funding (institution): Macrogenics; Research grant / Funding (institution): Leap Therapeutics. A. Cercek: Advisory / Consultancy: Bayer; Advisory / Consultancy: Proteus; Research grant / Funding (institution): Seattle Genetics. C. Wu: Research grant / Funding (institution): Vaccinex; Research grant / Funding (institution): Boston Biomedical; Research grant / Funding (institution): Lycera; Research grant / Funding (institution): Seattle Genetics; Research grant / Funding (institution): Symphogen; Research grant / Funding (institution): FLX Bio. J. Hubbard: Research grant / Funding (institution): Seattle Genetics; Honoraria (institution), Research grant / Funding (institution): Bayer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Merck; Research grant / Funding (institution): Boston Biomedical; Research grant / Funding (institution): Treos Bio; Research grant / Funding (institution): Taiho; Research grant / Funding (institution): Senhwa pharmaceuticals. N. Kemeny: Research grant / Funding (institution): Amgen. P.M. Boland: Research grant / Funding (institution): Merck; Research grant / Funding (institution): Genentech/Roche; Research grant / Funding (institution): Boehringer Ingelheim; Research grant / Funding (institution): Hemispherx; Research grant / Funding (institution): Boston Biomedical; Research grant / Funding (institution): Isofol Medical; Research grant / Funding (institution), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Ipsen; Research grant / Funding (institution): Athenex; Research grant / Funding (institution): Bayer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Clinical Genomics. K. Ng: Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): Genentech; Advisory / Consultancy: Eli Lilly; Advisory / Consultancy: Tarrex Biopharma; Advisory / Consultancy: Bayer; Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): Seattle Genetics; Research grant / Funding (institution): Gilead Sciences; Research grant / Funding (institution): Trovagene; Research grant / Funding (institution): Celgene; Research grant / Funding (institution): Pharmavite; Research grant / Funding (institution): Consano. T. Bekaii-Saab: Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Seattle Genetics. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Background: The purpose of this study was to identify differences in both demographic and pathologic factors associated with the age-related rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) and overall survival (OS). Methods: The National Cancer Data Base (NCDB), 2004–2013, was queried for patients with CRC. Patients were stratified by age (≤50 vs. ≥60 years). Multivariable analysis was performed to identify factors associated with OS. Results: A total of 670,030 patients were included; 488,121 with colon, and 181,909 with rectal or rectosigmoid cancer. For colon cancer, patients ≤50 years had higher proportions of pathologic stage III and IV disease than patients ≥60 (III: 33.7% vs. 28.6%, IV: 25.5% vs. 14.3%, respectively; P≤0.001). Similar differences were found for patients with rectal cancer (III: 35.8% vs. 28.6%, IV: 16.5% vs. 11.6%, respectively for age ≤50 and ≥60 years; P≤0.001). More aggressive pathologic factors were identified in the ≤50 cohort and were associated with worse OS, including higher tumor grade, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), perineural invasion (PNI), and elevated serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA). Disparities associated with OS were also identified for both colon and rectal cancer. For patients ≤50 with CRC, African-American and Hispanic race, lower income and lower education were associated with increased risk of mortality compared to the ≥60 cohort. Conclusions: There are clear differences in biological factors and in racial and socioeconomic disparities of patients with early onset CRC. Earlier screening should be seriously considered in patients under 50 years who are African-American and Hispanic, as these populations present with more aggressive and advanced disease.

Genomic tests are increasingly complex, less expensive, and more widely available with the advent of next-generation sequencing (NGS). We assessed knowledge and perceptions among genetic counselors pertaining to NGS genomic testing via an online survey. Associations between selected characteristics and perceptions were examined. Recent education on NGS testing was common, but practical experience limited. Perceived understanding of clinical NGS was modest, specifically concerning tumor testing. Greater perceived understanding of clinical NGS testing correlated with more time spent in cancer-related counseling, exposure to NGS testing, and NGS-focused education. Substantial disagreement about the role of counseling for tumor-based testing was seen. Finally, a majority of counselors agreed with the need for more education about clinical NGS testing, supporting this approach to optimizing implementation.

The recent success of anti-PD1 drugs in metastatic colorectal cancer patients with mismatch repair deficiency generated overwhelming enthusiasm for immunotherapy in the disease. However, patients with mismatch repair deficient colorectal cancer represent only a small subset of the metastatic population. Current research focuses on advancing immunotherapy to earlier stages of the disease including adjuvant and first-line metastatic settings, and on inducing sensitivity to immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy through a combinatorial approach. Here, we review the contemporary understanding of the immune and molecular landscape in colorectal cancer and discuss ongoing clinical trials evaluating novel combination regimens based on immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma carries a grim prognosis. In 2007, gemcitabine with erlotinib emerged as an appropriate treatment option for patients with advanced inoperable or metastatic disease (APC). In this phase II trial we sought to evaluate the efficacy of erlotinib monotherapy in patients with APC who had disease refractory to or ineligibility for gemcitabine-based therapy. Eligible patients who had received 0 or 1 non-EGFR inhibitor containing gemcitabine-based chemotherapy for APC were recruited prospectively and treated with erlotinib 150 mg orally daily until unacceptable toxicity or disease progression. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Correlations of clinical response with smoking, rash, steady-state concentration of erlotinib and its metabolite (OSI-420) as well as the nicotine metabolite cotinine were performed. The trial was terminated early for futility. Eighteen of the 34 planned subjects were recruited. Median PFS and OS were 42 and 95 days, respectively. Best response was stable disease (21%). There was a trend for improved PFS and OS in never smokers compared to current and past smokers (128.5, 39, 42 days and 173, 100, 88 days, respectively). Past/current smokers had lower steady-state concentrations of erlotinib and OSI-420 compared to never smokers. There was evidence of recent smoking exposure in 30% of patients self-identified as past smokers. Rash was infrequent, with no cases of grade III/IV rash and it was not related to treatment outcomes. Overall, erlotinib monotherapy failed to improve outcomes compared to historical controls in patients with APC after 0–1 prior systemic therapies. There was a trend for improved PFS and OS in never smokers.

In locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma, 15% to 20% of patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) achieve a pathologic complete response (pCR). The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy is controversial in rectal cancer. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of clinical risk factors and adjuvant chemotherapy usage on the outcomes of the pCR patient population.We performed a retrospective study using the National Cancer Data Base from 2006 to 2013. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). The association between OS and patient characteristics (demographics, tumor variables, and treatment) was examined using multivariable Cox regression modelling.A total of 2891 patients were identified who had achieved a pCR. Of these 2891 patients, 2102 received nCRT and 789 received nCRT followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. The median follow-up duration was 43.2 months. The factors significantly associated with OS included age (P .001), gender (P = .011), Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score (P .001), grade (P = .029), clinical T stage (P = .030), carcinoembryonic antigen negativity (P = .002), and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy (P .001). Nodal status was not significantly associated with survival. The 5-year OS rate was 94% in the nCRT plus adjuvant group compared with 84% in the nCRT-alone group. Adjuvant chemotherapy was more likely to be given to younger patients (aged 60 years), higher grade, lower Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score, elevated carcinoembryonic antigen level, higher clinical T stage, and higher clinical N stage.Our findings showed a significant improvement in OS for patients who received nCRT plus adjuvant chemotherapy compared with those who received nCRT alone. The nCRT plus adjuvant patients were more likely to be younger, have a lower comorbidity score, have clinical ≥ T3 disease, and have clinical node-positive disease. Thus, a selection bias could have been present. Nonetheless, even in the setting of already excellent outcomes, for patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma who achieve a pCR, the additional benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy should be weighed against the potential for toxicity.

Neuroendocrine tumors (NET) and gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) are believed to originate from the cells of Cajal that are randomly dispersed along the aerodigestive tract. Despite their distinct morphologic appearance, NET and GIST may share oncogenic mechanisms. Often presenting in the metastatic setting, treatment options for patients with NET are limited. This case report presents a patient with refractory metastatic NET that did not respond conventional chemotherapy. The patient was treated with a KIF11 inhibitor in a phase I clinical trial and experienced a prolonged and clinically meaningful partial response. On progression at 20 months, the patient's tumor was sequenced to reveal a KIT exon 11 mutation. Institution of imatinib therapy achieved a rapid and sustained antitumor effect with profound clinical benefit. Despite previously reported KIT expression in NET, this is the first documented case of an activating KIT mutation in NET and of successful treatment with both a KIF11 inhibitor and imatinib, each of which was elucidated through molecular profiling of the patient's tumor. Imatinib may be a valuable therapy in NET harboring activating KIT mutations.

11586 Background: Hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) is the most common regorafenib adverse event. However, no intervention has demonstrated efficacy in preventing or palliating this adverse event, short of modulating the regorafenib dose. Methods: The Regorafenib Dose Optimization Study (ReDOS) was a randomized trial ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02368886 ); here we describe an a priori secondary analysis of ReDOS with the goal of assessing whether clobetasol 0.05% cream (a potent corticosteroid) applied to the palms and soles twice per day is more effective when prescribed pre-emptively (before the development of HFSR) versus reactively (after the development of HFSR). Patients were assessed during the 1st 2 cycles of regorafenib. Results: Among 116 evaluable patients, 61 received pre-emptive clobetasol, and 55 reactive clobetasol. Baseline demographics were comparable between groups. During the 1st regorafenib cycle, 46% and 52% of patients developed HFSR with pre-emptive and reactive clobetasol, respectively (p = 0.52). However, during the 2nd cycle, 56% (of 47 total patients) and 80% (of 41 total patients), developed this toxicity with pre-emptive and reactive clobetasol, respectively (p = 0.02). Of note, during the 2nd cycle, rates of grade 1,2, and 3 HFSR were 40%, 11%, and 4% (pre-emptive) and 45%, 25%, and 10% (reactive) (p = 0.07). A sensitivity analysis to examine rates of no HFSR over all 2 regorafenib cycles showed that no HFSR occurred in 33% (of 61 total patients) with pre-emptive clobetasol versus 15% (of 55 total patients) with reactive clobetasol (p = 0.02). Patient-reported outcomes showed HFSR compromised activities of daily living, including getting dressed, preparing meals, walking, and even driving, with seemingly worse descriptive outcomes in patients who received reactive therapy. No adverse events from clobetasol were reported. Conclusions: Compared to reactive therapy, pre-emptive topical clobetasol might lessen regorafenib-induced HFSR. Clinical trial information: NCT02368886.

e15569 Background: Sunitinib (S) is a multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor with activity against VEGFR, PDGRF, KIT, FLT-3, and RET. S is synergistic with chemotherapy in preclinical models. We hypothesized that S+FOLFIRI combination will have increased efficacy in advanced EGC. Methods: This was a phase I study for patients with advanced chemo naïve EGC. Dose escalation used a standard 3+3 design. The primary objective was to determine the tolerability and safety of S+FOLFIRI. Secondary objectives were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). Results: Twenty-three patients participated in the study (Male 78%, Female 22%). Median age was 60 (Range: 37-77) years. Median follow up time was 67.5 (95% CI: 58.9, 76) months. The most frequently reported adverse events were neutropenia (78%; G3/4: 43%), nausea (74%; G3/4:13%), diarrhea (65%; G3/4: 4%), vomiting (61%, G3/4: 9%) lymphopenia (52%; G3/4: 13%) and fatigue (52%; G3/4:17%).Two dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were noted each at dose level (DL) 1 and 1A, one at DL 1B and 3 at DL 2 (Table 1). Maximum tolerated dose was determined at DL 1B. At the time of data reporting 21 patients had died. Two patients came off the study per investigator request. All patients were evaluated for efficacy. The median OS and PFS were 12.4 (95% CI: 8.9, 16.5) months and 6.2 (95% CI: 3.4, 13.5) months, respectively. Conclusions: S+FOLFIRI was reasonably tolerated, with a manageable safety profile and signs of clinical activity in patients with advanced EGC. This study was supported by a research grant from Pfizer, Inc. Clinical trial information: NCT00524186. [Table: see text]

3032 Background: Irinotecan is a prodrug of the potent topoisomerase inhibitor SN-38. In animals, oral administration of irinotecan with the selective minimally absorbed P-gp inhibitor HM30181A increased the bioavailability of irinotecan. Oral administration of irinotecan may also increase the conversion to SN-38. Objectives: To determine the MTD and DLT of orally administered irinotecan in combination with HM30181A 15 mg on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Additional objectives include determining the recommended phase 2 dose and the PK of irinotecan and SN-38. Methods: This was a phase 1 dose escalation study enrolling cohorts of 3-6 patients with advanced malignancies. Patients had Hb ≥9 gm/dL, ANC ≥ 1.5x109/L, platelets ≥ 100x109/L, adequate hepatic and renal function, ECOG 0-1 and were not homozygous for UGT1A1*28. Patients were administered HM30181A 15 mg and oral irinotecan 20, 40, 80, 120, 160, 200, 240, 280 and 320mg/m2. Results: Thirty male and female patients, mean age 60.9 (range 33-78) were enrolled into this ongoing study. The most common cancers were ovarian (6), colorectal (4), breast (4), endometrial (3), and pancreatic (3). The median number of cycles administered was 3 (range 1-9). Treatment-related Grade 3-4 AEs were experienced by 12 (40%) subjects. The most common were nausea 7 (23%), vomiting 6 (20%) and abdominal pain 3 (10%). Treatment-related SAEs were experienced by 6 (20%) patients (nausea or vomiting in 4 subjects). DLTs occurred in 2 patients at the 320 mg/m2 dose level (neutropenia and C. Difficile diarrhea) and additional patients are being enrolled at the 280mg/m2 dose level to define the MTD. Acute cholinergic diarrhea has not been observed. The best response was stable disease in 9/21 evaluable patients. PK at the three highest dose levels is summarized below. Conclusions: Oral administration of HM30181A in combination with irinotecan tablets results in pharmacologically active concentrations of SN-38. Confirmation of the MTD when dosed on a 21-day cycle is ongoing. Phase 2 studies are being planned. Clinical trial information: NTC02250157. [Table: see text]

4111Background: nal-IRI+5-FU/LV is effective for patients with mPAC after disease progression following gemcitabine-based therapy. The current study (NCT02551991) is a phase 1/2, open-label trial t...

3514Background: Pembrolizumab is approved for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients (pts) with previously treated MSI-H cancer regardless of tumor type or site. This approval was based in p...

611 Background: Regorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor with survival benefit in refractory mCRC patients (pts). Toxicities such as Palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (PPES), fatigue and hypertension (HTN) have limited its use. Despite absence of supportive data, various dosing or interval scheduling have been implemented into clinical practice. Methods: A randomized phase II study of regorafenib dose-escalation (Arm A: 80 mg/day, weekly dose escalation if no significant drug-related toxicities, up to 160 mg/day) vs. standard dose (Arm B: 160 mg/day) in pts with mCRC for 21 days of a 28-day cycle. Pts were randomized 1:1:1:1 to arms A1 and B1 (Pre-emptive Clobetasol for PPES); A2 and B2 (Reactive Clobetasol). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who completed 2 cycles of treatment and initiated the 3rd in Arm A (Pooled A1 + A2) vs. Arm B (Pooled B1 + B2). Superiority for Arm A was to be declared if the one-sided p-value calculated using Fisher’s exact method was less than 0.2. Results: From June 2015 to June 2017, 123 pts were randomized with 116 (A = 54, B = 62) evaluable for the primary endpoint. Demographic data were well balanced with overall median age of 61yrs (range: 29-81), M/F (61/39%) and ECOG PS 0/1 (37/63%) and KRAS MT/WT/UNK (47/44/9%).The study met its primary endpoint with 43% of pts on Arm A initiating the 3rd vs. only 25% of pts Arm B [one-sided p-value 0.028]. Median Overall Survival (OS) was improved in Arm A vs. Arm B (9.0 mos vs. 5.9 mos; p = 0.094). Median Progression Free Survival (PFS) was 2.5 mos for Arm A vs. 2.0 mos for Arm B (p=0.553). Overall rates of grade 3/4 toxicity were more favorable for Arm A vs. Arm B (% PPES 15 vs. 16, HTN 7 vs. 15 and fatigue 13 vs. 18, respectively). Multiple QOL parameters were improved in A vs. B primarily at week 2 of the first cycle. Conclusion: A strategy with weekly dose escalation of regorafenib from 80 mg to 160 mg/day was found to be superior to a starting dose of 160 mg/day. These results establish a new standard for optimizing regorafenib dosing. Further data on outcomes of preemptive vs. reactive clobetasol strategies are undergoing analysis and will be presented later. Clinical trial information: NCT02368886.

TPS873 Background: Initial treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) involves a 5-fluorouracil based chemotherapy regimen, often in combination with anti-VEGF therapy. Upon disease progression, multiple studies have suggested a benefit for continued anti-VEGF therapy. There is increasing evidence that VEGF plays a role in cancer immune evasion. Targeting of inflammatory and immune checkpoints are attractive approaches to enhance the benefits of anti-VEGF therapy. The safety and activity of the anti-PD-L1 antibody atezolizumab with bevacizumab and with 5-FU, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab have been recently reported; the combinations were well-tolerated and suggested clinical activity. Therefore, bevacizumab may increase the immunogenicity of colorectal cancers, and the combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab may be associated with clinically meaningful response rates and disease control. Furthermore, there may be candidate biomarkers that may identify those patients most likely to benefit from this combination. Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled phase II study, 135 patients with mCRC will be randomized 2:1 to receive capecitabine/bevacizumab/atezolizumab or capecitabine/bevacizumab/placebo. Patients with prior PD-L1/PD-1 therapy are ineligible. Primary and secondary efficacy will be conducted using ITT analysis. Safety analyses will include all randomized patients who receive at least one dose of study treatment. The primary objective is PFS. The secondary objectives are ORR, OS, safety, and tolerability. The primary comparison will be superiority of the active treatment for the PFS endpoint, atezolizumab versus placebo testing at 1-sided α = 0.1 (log rank test). A PFS hazard ratio of 0.618 (active treatment versus placebo) is detectable with 86% power (1 sided α = 0.1). No interim analyses for futility or efficacy will be conducted. A subset analysis will be performed in the microsatellite-high patients looking at potential differences in PFS and OS. Trial is active and currently recruiting patients. Clinical trial information: NCT02873195.

834 Background: Cetuximab is a chimeric IgG1 anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody approved in RAS-wt metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Pre-clinical data have suggested that cetuximab triggers immunogenic cell death and support an immunologic basis of activity. Small clinical data sets demonstrate that EGFR-based therapy preferentially increases TILs in colorectal hepatic metastases. This Phase Ib/II study was designed to assess the safety and clinical activity of cetuximab and pembrolizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer. Methods: Eligible pts were those with RAS-wt mCRC, ECOG performance status (PS) 0-2, with at least 1 prior line of therapy for advanced stage disease, and no prior treatment with an anti-EGFR antibody. The phase Ib study was designed as a safety lead-in with a de-escalation design. Pembrolizumab was administered at a fixed dose of 200 mg q3week with standard cetuximab dosing (400 mg/m2 loading dose, followed by 250 mg/m2 weekly). DLTs were defined as any ≥ grade 3 clinically significant toxicity which is possibly related and occurs within the first 6 weeks of therapy. For rash and hypomagnesemia only ≥ grade 4 toxicities were considered DLTs. Correlative serial biopsies were performed at baseline and at 9 weeks. Results: 9 patients, ages 33-73, were enrolled onto the Phase Ib study between 8/10/16 and 11/2/16. No DLTs were observed. The most common AEs of any cause observed were xerosis, dermatitis acneiform rash, hypomagnesemia, vomiting, and fatigue. ≥ Grade 3 toxicities were uncommon, but included hypomagnesemia (3), rash (1), urticaria (1), hypocalcemia (1), alk phos elevation (1), and ascites (1). 6/9 patients achieved stable disease lasting ≥ 16 weeks. Conclusions: The combination of cetuximab and pembrolizumab is well-tolerated in this study and can be administered at full dosages. Though hypomagnesemia appears prominent, no additional emergent AEs have been observed during or following the DLT period. The associated ongoing phase II study will enroll an additional 33 patients to assess the true efficacy of this regimen with dual primary endpoints of ORR and 6 month PFS. Clinical trial information: NCT02713373.