Safety Profile and Adverse Event Management for Futibatinib, An Irreversible FGFR1-4 Inhibitor: Pooled Safety Analysis of 469 Patients

PURPOSE

Futibatinib, a covalently-binding inhibitor of fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR)1-4 gained approval for the treatment of refractory, advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) harboring an FGFR2 fusion/other rearrangement. An integrated analysis was performed to evaluate safety and provide guidance on the management of futibatinib-associated adverse events (AEs) in patients with unresectable/metastatic tumors, including iCCA.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data from three global phase I or II studies of futibatinib (NCT02052778; JapicCTI-142552) were pooled. AEs were graded per NCI CTCAE v4.03, where applicable. Safety was analyzed for patients receiving any futibatinib starting dose (overall population) and in those receiving the approved starting dose of 20 mg once every day.

RESULTS

In total, 469 patients with one of 33 known tumor types were analyzed, including 318 patients who received futibatinib 20 mg every day. AEs of clinical interest (AECI; any grade/grade ≥3) in the overall population included hyperphosphatemia (82%/19%), nail disorders (27%/1%), hepatic AEs (27%/11%), stomatitis (19%/3%), palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (PPES; 13%/3%), rash (9%/0%), retinal disorders (8%/0%), and cataract (4%/1%). Median time to onset of grade ≥3 AECIs ranged from 9 days (hyperphosphatemia) to 125 days (cataract). Grade ≥3 hyperphosphatemia, hepatic AEs, PPES, and nail disorders resolved to grade ≤2 within a median of 7, 7, 8, and 28 days, respectively. Discontinuations due to treatment-related AEs were rare (2%), and no treatment-related deaths occurred. AE management included phosphate-lowering medication and dose adjustments.

CONCLUSIONS

Futibatinib showed a consistent and manageable safety profile across patients with various tumor types. AECIs were mostly reversible with appropriate clinical management.

Treatment sequences and prognostic/predictive factors in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: univariate and multivariate analyses of a real-world study in Europe

BACKGROUND

Real-world data on treatment patterns/outcomes for metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPAC) are limited. This study aims to assess real-world treatment patterns, survival outcomes, and prognostic/predictive factors in patients with mPAC.

METHODS

Retrospective, observational, chart-review involving medical oncologists and gastroenterologists from five European countries. Physicians reported information on disease and patient characteristics, diagnosis, and treatment for patients diagnosed with mPAC from January-October 2016. Outcomes included median progression-free survival (mPFS), median overall survival (mOS), and the impact of baseline performance status on survival. Univariate/multivariate regression analyses were undertaken to identify prognostic/predictive factors.

RESULTS

Three hundred four physicians and 3432 patients were included. First-line therapies included modified (m)FOLFIRINOX (28.4%), gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel (28.0%), and gemcitabine monotherapy (23.0%). Frequent second-line therapies were gemcitabine monotherapy (25.0%), fluorouracil (5-FU) + oxaliplatin (21.8%), and gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel (16.7%). Most frequent first- to second-line treatment sequences were gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel followed by fluoropyrimidine combinations. Longest unadjusted estimated mOS was observed with (m)FOLFIRINOX followed by gemcitabine-based combinations (19.1 months). Multivariate analysis identified significant prognostic/predictive factors for OS and PFS including performance status and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9) levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment and treatment sequences were generally in accordance with guidelines at the time of the study. Identification of prognostic/predictive factors for survival may help inform the individualised management of mPAC patients in the future.

Integrated Clinical-Molecular Classification of Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Biomarker Analysis of the Phase 3 New EPOC Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Personalized treatment approaches for patients with oligometastatic colorectal liver metastases are critically needed. We previously defined 3 biologically distinct molecular subtypes of colorectal liver metastases: (1) canonical, (2) immune, and (3) stromal.

Objective

To independently validate these molecular subtypes in the phase 3 New EPOC randomized clinical trial.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective secondary analysis of the phase 3 New EPOC randomized clinical trial included a bi-institutional discovery cohort and multi-institutional validation cohort. The discovery cohort comprised patients who underwent hepatic resection for limited colorectal liver metastases (98% received perioperative chemotherapy) from May 31, 1994, to August 14, 2012. The validation cohort comprised patients who underwent hepatic resection for liver metastases with perioperative chemotherapy (fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan based) with or without cetuximab from February 26, 2007, to November 1, 2012. Data were analyzed from January 18 to December 10, 2021.

Interventions

Resected metastases underwent RNA sequencing and microRNA (miRNA) profiling in the discovery cohort and messenger RNA and miRNA profiling with microarray in the validation cohort.

Main Outcomes and Measures

A 31-feature (24 messenger RNAs and 7 miRNAs) neural network classifier was trained to predict molecular subtypes in the discovery cohort and applied to the validation cohort. Integrated clinical-molecular risk groups were designated based on molecular subtypes and the clinical risk score. The unique biological phenotype of each molecular subtype was validated using gene set enrichment analyses and immune deconvolution. The primary clinical end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results

A total of 240 patients were included (mean [range] age, 63.0 [56.3-68.0] years; 151 [63%] male), with 93 in the discovery cohort and 147 in the validation cohort. In the validation cohort, 73 (50%), 28 (19%), and 46 (31%) patients were classified as having canonical, immune, and stromal metastases, respectively. The biological phenotype of each subtype was concordant with the discovery cohort. The immune subtype (best prognosis) demonstrated 5-year PFS of 43% (95% CI, 25%-60%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.37; 95% CI, 0.20-0.68) and OS of 63% (95% CI, 40%-79%; HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.17-0.86), which was statistically significantly higher than the canonical subtype (worst prognosis) at 14% (95% CI, 7%-23%) and 43% (95% CI, 32%-55%), respectively. Adding molecular subtypes to the clinical risk score improved prediction (the Gönen and Heller K for discrimination) from 0.55 (95% CI, 0.49-0.61) to 0.62 (95% CI, 0.57-0.67) for PFS and 0.59 (95% CI, 0.52-0.66) to 0.63 (95% CI, 0.56-0.70) for OS. The low-risk integrated group demonstrated 5-year PFS of 44% (95% CI, 20%-66%; HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.19-0.76) and OS of 78% (95% CI, 44%-93%; HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.08-0.84), superior to the high-risk group at 16% (95% CI, 10%-24%) and 43% (95% CI, 32%-52%), respectively.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this prognostic study, biologically derived colorectal liver metastasis molecular subtypes and integrated clinical-molecular risk groups were highly prognostic. This novel molecular classification warrants further study as a possible predictive biomarker for personalized systemic treatment for colorectal liver metastases.

Trial Registration

isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN22944367.

Management (mgmt) of futibatinib-associated adverse events (AEs) in patients (pts) with advanced cancers: Results of a pooled analysis

586

Background: Futibatinib, a covalently binding FGFR1–4 inhibitor, showed a 42% objective response rate with a 9.7 mo median duration of response in pts with advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) and FGFR2 fusions/rearrangements in the phase 2 FOENIX-CCA2 trial. Futibatinib treatment (tx) was safe and tolerable with a predictable and manageable side effect profile. This pooled retrospective analysis examined mgmt of futibatinib-associated AEs in pts with advanced tumors, including iCCA. Methods: Pts from a global phase 1/2 study (NCT02052778) and a Japanese phase 1 study (JapicCTI-142552) who received futibatinib 20 mg QD (recommended dose) were included. Futibatinib dose modifications and supportive medications (meds) for AE mgmt were analyzed for futibatinib-associated AEs of clinical interest (group terms: hyperphosphatemia, hepatic AEs, retinal disorders, nail disorders, rash, palmar plantar erythrodysesthesia [PPE], cataract). The Kaplan-Meier method was used for time-to-resolution (TTR) analysis. Results: As of October 1, 2020, 318 pts with advanced solid tumors (60% CCA; 98% with ≥1 prior tx) had received ≥1 futibatinib 20 mg QD dose (median tx duration, 3.6 mo). Table includes incidence and mgmt of key AEs of clinical interest. Hyperphosphatemia was the most frequent cause of futibatinib dose modifications; 85% and 30% of pts with hyperphosphatemia received phosphate binders and/or phosphaturic agents, respectively, with no obvious TTR differences. Other common supportive meds included analgesics (in 55% of pts with nail disorders; 71% with PPE) and corticosteroids (37% of pts with rash). Retinal disorders occurred in 8% of pts (all grade [gr] 1-2 and resolved). Cataract, a late-onset AE on continued tx, occurred in 12 (4%; 4 [1%] gr ≥3) pts, leading to dose modifications in 3 pts. One pt underwent cataract surgery and resumed futibatinib tx the next day. Discontinuations due to tx-related AEs were rare (2.5%) and included 1 pt each with retinal detachment, onycholysis, and cataract. Conclusions: This analysis of AE mgmt showed a consistent and manageable safety profile for futibatinib in pts with pretreated advanced tumors. Commonly observed AEs with futibatinib were well managed with dose adjustments and supportive meds and rarely led to tx discontinuation. Clinical trial information: NCT02052778 /JapicCTI-142552. [Table: see text]

Significance of alterations in DNA damage repair (DDR) genes in advanced biliary cancers (ABCs) treated with second-line active-symptom-control (ASC) alone or ASC with oxaliplatin/5-FU chemotherapy (ASC+FOLFOX) in the randomised phase III, multicentre, open-label ABC-06 trial

593

Background: The ABC-06 clinical trial established ASC+mFOLFOX as the standard of care treatment after Cisplatin and Gemcitabine (CisGem) for ABC. Translational research explored the role of alterations in DDR-related genes in the context of the ABC-06 clinical trial. Methods: Translational research using samples collected from the ABC-06 trial included all recruited patients with tissue sample containing >20% tumour cellularity with sufficient DNA extracted for analysis. Primary objective: assess the prevalence of somatic mutations within DDR genes in ABC. Secondary objectives: explore the impact of somatic mutations in DDR genes on: A) Patient’s response to platinum-based chemotherapy (predictive biomarker): 1) Retrospectively, using progression-free survival (PFS) data from 1st-line chemotherapy and 2) Prospectively, by assessing the impact on PFS/radiological response to 2nd-line FOLFOX (vs. control) and B) Overall survival (prognostic biomarker). Survival analysis was performed with Kaplan-Meier and Cox Regression. Results: Of 162 pts randomised, 83 had a sample available for analysis; of these, analysis failed in 24 despite >20% tumour content. Thus, a total of 59 patients (30 ASC arm, 29 ASC+FOLFOX arm) were eligible for this translational analysis: male 50.85%, metastatic 77.97%, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma 47.46%, adenocarcinoma 91.53%, median age 65.84 years (95% CI 63.36-68.91). Pathogenic mutations in DDR genes were identified in 22 patients (37.29%). PFS did not vary depending on the DDR-gene alterations either in the first-line setting with CisGem (n=59; 8.73 months vs 8.18 months; p-value 0.155) or with second-line FOLFOX (n=29; 3.19 months vs 3.45 months; p-value 0.098). Median OS for DDR-altered patients was 4.59 months (95% CI 2.17-5.88) (vs 7.23 months (95% CI 5.45-8.28) for DDR-wild-type); HR 2.63 (95% CI 1.48-4.67); p-value 0.001. This prognostic impact was confirmed when the prognostic model was adjusted for treatment arm and stratification factors (HR 3.75 (95% CI 1.99-7.09); p-value <0.001). Conclusions: For ABC patients, the presence of DDR-related gene pathogenic mutations are present in around one third of patients. Despite presence of DDR-mutations having a negative prognostic impact, their predictive role is not confirmed either for first-line CisGem or second-line FOLFOX. Clinical trial information: NCT01926236 .

Futibatinib for FGFR2-Rearranged Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Alterations in fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) have emerged as promising drug targets for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, a rare cancer with a poor prognosis. Futibatinib, a next-generation, covalently binding FGFR1-4 inhibitor, has been shown to have both antitumor activity in patients with FGFR-altered tumors and strong preclinical activity against acquired resistance mutations associated with ATP-competitive FGFR inhibitors.

METHODS

In this multinational, open-label, single-group, phase 2 study, we enrolled patients with unresectable or metastatic FGFR2 fusion-positive or FGFR2 rearrangement-positive intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and disease progression after one or more previous lines of systemic therapy (excluding FGFR inhibitors). The patients received oral futibatinib at a dose of 20 mg once daily in a continuous regimen. The primary end point was objective response (partial or complete response), as assessed by independent central review. Secondary end points included the response duration, progression-free and overall survival, safety, and patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

Between April 16, 2018, and November 29, 2019, a total of 103 patients were enrolled and received futibatinib. A total of 43 of 103 patients (42%; 95% confidence interval, 32 to 52) had a response, and the median duration of response was 9.7 months. Responses were consistent across patient subgroups, including patients with heavily pretreated disease, older adults, and patients who had co-occurring TP53 mutations. At a median follow-up of 17.1 months, the median progression-free survival was 9.0 months and overall survival was 21.7 months. Common treatment-related grade 3 adverse events were hyperphosphatemia (in 30% of the patients), an increased aspartate aminotransferase level (in 7%), stomatitis (in 6%), and fatigue (in 6%). Treatment-related adverse events led to permanent discontinuation of futibatinib in 2% of the patients. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Quality of life was maintained throughout treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

In previously treated patients with FGFR2 fusion or rearrangement-positive intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, the use of futibatinib, a covalent FGFR inhibitor, led to measurable clinical benefit. (Funded by Taiho Oncology and Taiho Pharmaceutical; FOENIX-CCA2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02052778.).

A multi-arm, phase 2, open-label study to assess the efficacy of RXC004 as monotherapy and in combination with nivolumab in patients with ring finger protein 43 (RNF43) or R-spondin (RSPO) aberrated, metastatic, microsatellite stable colorectal cancer following standard treatments

TPS3637

Background: The Wnt pathway is a critical driver of cancer. RXC004 is a potent, selective, orally active inhibitor of the key Wnt pathway regulator, Porcupine. Inhibition of Porcupine blocks the release of all Wnt ligands from cells, preventing both tumour growth and tumour immune evasion. Wnt pathway alterations, including loss-of-function (LoF) RNF43 mutations and RSPO gene fusions, increase expression of the Wnt receptor Frizzled (Fzd) on the tumour cell surface, driving Wnt-ligand signalling. These alterations are present in ̃8% (Gao, 2013; Cerami, 2012; Shesagiri, 2012; Shinmura, 2014; Kleeman, 2019) of colorectal cancers (CRC). LoF RNF43 mutations are associated with poor prognosis in MSS CRC (Yaeger, 2018 ). Preclinical genetically selected CRC models showed disease stabilisation, differentiation towards a normal colonic phenotype with increased mucin secretion, and reduced metabolic activity on FDG-PET. In a Phase 1 study in patients with advanced solid tumours (NCT03447470), RXC004 was safe and tolerated at doses up to 2mg QD, the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), and showed a differentiated efficacy signal in Wnt-ligand dependent tumours (Cook, 2021 ). Methods: The PORCUPINE (NCT04907539) trial is a 2-arm Phase 2 trial of RXC004 monotherapy (Arm A) and RXC004 in combination with nivolumab (Arm B). 20 evaluable patients will be enrolled into each Arm. The study initially opened with Arm A; Arm B will be opened once the RP2D for RXC004 in combination with nivolumab is established in a separate phase 1 study. Once Arm B is opened, patients in Arm A may be treated with RXC004 + nivolumab if they have progressive disease on the first RECIST assessment scan. To be eligible for this study, patients must have metastatic microsatellite stable (MSS) CRC that has progressed following standard therapies. Tumours must have a LoF RNF43 mutation, or an RSPO2/3 fusion. As Wnt inhibition can affect bone metabolism, patients undergo a screening DEXA scan and receive prophylactic denosumab throughout the treatment period. The primary endpoint for Arm A is the disease control rate (DCR= CR+PR+SD at 16 wks), and for Arm B is objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints are Safety and PK. Exploratory endpoints include FDG-PET changes and on-treatment changes in protein and gene expression in tumour biopsies. For Arm A, a target value (TV) of 60% DCR is considered a clinically significant improvement over standard of care against a lower reference value (LRV) of 40% DCR (Grothey, 2013; Mayer, 2015 ). For Arm B, a TV of 30% ORR is considered clinically significant against a LRV of 10% ORR (Eng, 201 9). RXC004 is also being investigated in a second Phase 2 trial, PORCUPINE 2 (NCT04907851), in Biliary Tract Cancers and RNF-43 mutated Pancreatic Cancers. Clinical trial information: NCT04907539.

Updated results of the FOENIX-CCA2 trial: Efficacy and safety of futibatinib in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) harboring FGFR2 fusions/rearrangements

4009

Background: Survival outcomes are historically poor in patients (pts) with advanced/metastatic iCCA, with median overall survival (mOS) times of approximately 1 year with first-line gemcitabine plus cisplatin and approximately 6 months with second-line chemotherapy. Futibatinib, a highly selective, irreversible FGFR1–4 inhibitor, demonstrated efficacy with durable responses in pts with iCCA harboring FGFR2 fusion/rearrangements in the pivotal FOENIX-CCA2 phase 2 study (NCT02052778). At the primary analysis of this trial (data cutoff: October 1, 2020), an objective response rate (ORR) of 41.7% was observed, with a median duration of response (mDOR) of 9.7 mo. Here, we report updated efficacy (including mature OS data) and safety data from the final analysis with an additional 8 mo of follow-up. Methods: FOENIX-CCA2 was a single-arm phase 2 study that enrolled pts with advanced/metastatic iCCA with FGFR2 fusion/rearrangement and progressive disease (PD) after ≥1 prior treatment (tx; including gemcitabine plus platinum-based chemotherapy). Pts received futibatinib 20 mg once daily until PD/intolerability. The primary endpoint was ORR per RECIST v1.1 by independent central review. Secondary endpoints were DOR, disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), OS, safety, and patient-reported outcomes. Results: At the time of the final data cutoff (May 29, 2021), median follow-up was 25.0 mo, and 96/103 pts (93%) had discontinued tx. The median number of tx cycles was 13.0 for a median tx duration of 9.1 mo. The confirmed ORR was 41.7% (43/103) and thereby the same as of the primary analysis, as was the DCR (at 82.5%). The ORR was consistent across pt subgroups. The mDOR was 9.5 mo, and 74% of responses lasted ≥6 mo. mPFS was 8.9 mo, with a 12-mo PFS rate of 35.4%. Mature mOS was 20.0 mo, with a 12-mo OS rate of 73.1% . No new safety signals were identified. Common tx-related adverse events (TRAEs) included hyperphosphatemia (85%), alopecia (33%), dry mouth (30%), diarrhea (28%), dry skin (27%), and fatigue (25%). TRAEs resulted in tx discontinuation in 4 pts (4%). No tx-related deaths occurred. Quality of life was maintained from baseline to tx cycle 13. Conclusions: Findings from the final analysis of FOENIX-CCA2 confirm the results of the primary analysis and reinforce the durable efficacy and continued tolerability of futibatinib in previously treated pts with advanced/metastatic iCCA harboring FGFR2 fusion/rearrangements. Mature OS data were consistent with data from the primary analysis and far exceed historical data in this patient population. Clinical trial information: NCT02052778.

A biomarker enrichment trial of anti-EGFR agents in right primary tumor location (rPTL), RAS wild-type (RAS-wt) advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC): ARIEL (ISRCTN11061442)

TPS3633

Background: Meta-analysis of 6 RCTs indicates that anti-EGFR agents are ineffective in rPTL RAS-wt aCRC (Arnold D, et al. Ann Oncol. 2017;28:1713-1729). However, data from the phase III PICCOLO and COIN trials suggest high tumor expression of the EGFR ligands, EREG and AREG, confers sensitivity to anti-EGFR agents in a subset of this population (Adams RA, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(30_suppl):32-32; Seligmann JF, et al. Ann Oncol. 2020;31:1021-1029). More data is needed before ligand assessment can be integrated into routine care: to date, EREG/AREG mRNA has only been assessed retrospectively, and feasibility of timely delivery of results must be demonstrated. The ARIEL trial aims to determine whether first-line chemotherapy plus cetuximab or panitumumab is more effective than chemotherapy alone in achieving early tumor shrinkage (ETS) after 8 weeks of treatment in patients (pts) with EREG/AREG-high rPTL RAS-wt aCRC. Methods: ARIEL is a multicentre, phase IV, open label, biomarker enrichment RCT. Pts with previously untreated rPTL RAS-wt (or RAS-unknown) aCRC are eligible for registration and EREG/AREG assessment using archival FFPE tumor tissue. Those confirmed as RAS-wt EREG/AREG-high (expression above 30th centile based on PICCOLO)3 are eligible for randomization to chemotherapy alone (fluoropyrimidine backbone plus irinotecan or oxaliplatin) vs chemotherapy (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI) plus anti-EGFR therapy (panitumumab or cetuximab) (options at physician’s discretion). Pts with EREG/AREG-low tumors are not eligible for randomization but may consent to translational research and follow-up. The primary endpoint is ETS at 8 weeks (≥30%, yes vs no). Secondary endpoints are depth of response at 16 weeks, overall survival, overall treatment utility, pt-reported quality of life, cost per QALY, pt acceptability of trial procedures, and safety. Pre-trial work-up included cross-validation of the EREG/AREG RT-qPCR assay at trial laboratories in Leeds and Birmingham, UK demonstrating reproducibility of biomarker results. Recruitment to an internal pilot phase is currently ongoing to demonstrate feasibility of timely delivery of biomarker results to sites (lower limit of 90% CI of mean result delivery time for first 20 pts must include 3 weeks). Mean monthly recruitment rate will be assessed at 18 months to determine likelihood of completion of the trial within the 3 year recruitment period. ARIEL is funded by the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and opened the first of 40 sites in February 2022. 440 pts will be registered for biomarker assessment in order to randomize 162 pts. All pts will be followed-up to 1 year post-randomisation, with a final assessment in all pts when the last pt has completed a year of follow-up (median 3.5 years). ARIEL is participating in the NIHR Associate PI scheme. Clinical trial information: 11061442.

Indirect treatment comparison of futibatinib with chemotherapy and pemigatinib in cholangiocarcinoma with FGFR2 fusions/rearrangements

440

Background: Futibatinib, an irreversible FGFR1–4 inhibitor, is being investigated for the treatment of advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCC) with FGFR2 fusions/rearrangements. We conducted an indirect treatment comparison to evaluate efficacy outcomes with futibatinib for advanced iCC patients from the FOENIX-CCA2 trial (NCT02052778) relative to published data for chemotherapy and FGFR inhibitors. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify clinical trials for FGFR inhibitors published 01/2015-02/2021, with additional targeted searches for chemotherapy data. A simulated treatment comparison was conducted using individual-level patient data from FOENIX-CCA2 and published aggregate data from comparator trials, applying regression models to adjust for between-trial differences in baseline characteristics. Population-adjusted Cox regression models were used for base case time-to-event outcomes (progression-free survival [PFS], overall survival [OS], duration of response [DOR]) and binomial-logistic regressions for binary outcomes (objective response rate [ORR]). Results: Two studies of FGFR inhibitors among previously treated patients with FGFR2 fusions/rearrangements were identified with sufficient data for analysis: FOENIX-CCA2 (n=103) and FIGHT-202 (n=107, pemigatinib). Two studies were identified for chemotherapy in this setting (an analysis of prior systemic therapy in the FIGHT-202 cohort [n=53] and a natural history study using a clinicogenomic database [n=71]). Comparisons of futibatinib with chemotherapy showed significantly lower risk of progression or death with futibatinib (table). Comparisons of futibatinib with pemigatinib showed similar outcomes between treatments (table), however, there was a numerical advantage for futibatinib in all efficacy parameters. Conclusions: Data suggest that futibatinib provides longer survival vs chemotherapy among previously treated advanced iCC patients with FGFR2 fusions/rearrangements. No statistically significant differences were observed in efficacy outcomes between futibatinib and pemigatinib, although numerical trends favored futibatinib. Molecular detail such as improved activity against co-mutated tumours and resistance mutations may explain such trends. [Table: see text]

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients (pts) with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) treated with nivolumab (N) plus chemotherapy (CT) or nivo plus ipilimumab (I) versus chemo: Results from CheckMate 648

262

Background: This analysis evaluated HRQoL as exploratory endpoints in CheckMate 648, a randomized, open-label, global Phase 3 study, evaluating treatment with N+I, N+CT and CT alone in inoperable advanced, recurrent, or metastatic ESCC. Methods: The effects of N+I vs N+CT vs CT on HRQoL were assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Esophageal (FACT-E) (including the GP5 item to assess impact of side effects) and EQ-5D-3L. A mixed model for repeated measures was used to evaluate longitudinal changes from baseline (BL) and differences between treatment groups. Comparison of the risk of being bothered by the side effects of treatment was estimated for the GP5 using generalized estimating equation (GEE). Time to confirmed deterioration (TTCD) was assessed using Kaplan-Meier plots along with Cox proportional hazard models. Analyses were conducted on both the all-randomized population and the subset of patients with PD-L1 expression ≥1%. Results: 970 pts were randomized 1:1:1 to N+I (n=325), N+CT (n=321), or CT (n=324). 90% of pts completed both a BL and at least one on-treatment assessment and were included in the PRO analysis population. FACT-E (all randomized pts). Study showed similar BL scores across all 3 treatment groups. Changes from BL showed a trend towards better HRQoL for pts treated with N+I and N+CT compared to CT alone, however these results were not statistically significant. Patients treated with N+I had significantly decreased risk of experiencing bother associated with the side effects of treatment than patients treated with either N+CT or CT. TTCD analysis demonstrated delayed deterioration for pts treated with N+CT vs CT. Findings for PD-L1 ≥1% subpopulation were similar to all randomized pts. Conclusions: In pts with inoperable advanced, recurrent, or metastatic ESCC, HRQoL is maintained throughout treatment with N+I and N+CT. Trends towards better HRQoL and decreased risk of deterioration were observed with N+I and N+CT compared to CT alone. Clinical trial information: NCT03143153. [Table: see text]

Final Overall Survival Efficacy Results of Ivosidenib for Patients With Advanced Cholangiocarcinoma With IDH1 Mutation: The Phase 3 Randomized Clinical ClarIDHy Trial

Question

Does ivosidenib treatment improve overall survival outcomes vs placebo among patients with chemotherapy-refractory cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation?

Findings

In this phase 3 randomized clinical trial including 187 previously treated patients with advanced cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation, ivosidenib treatment resulted in numerically improved overall survival benefits vs placebo, despite a high rate of crossover. Ivosidenib preserved certain quality of life subscales and was well tolerated.

Meaning

The combined efficacy data and tolerable safety profile, as well as corroborating quality of life data, support the clinical benefit of ivosidenib relative to placebo in cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation, which has an unmet need for new treatments.

Importance

Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) variations occur in up to approximately 20% of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. In the ClarIDHy trial, progression-free survival as determined by central review was significantly improved with ivosidenib vs placebo.

Objective

To report the final overall survival (OS) results from the ClarIDHy trial, which aimed to demonstrate the efficacy of ivosidenib (AG-120)—a first-in-class, oral, small-molecule inhibitor of mutant IDH1—vs placebo for patients with unresectable or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical phase 3 trial was conducted from February 20, 2017, to May 31, 2020, at 49 hospitals across 6 countries among patients aged 18 years or older with cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation whose disease progressed with prior therapy.

Interventions

Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive ivosidenib, 500 mg, once daily or matched placebo. Crossover from placebo to ivosidenib was permitted if patients had disease progression as determined by radiographic findings.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was progression-free survival as determined by blinded independent radiology center (reported previously). Overall survival was a key secondary end point. The primary analysis of OS followed the intent-to-treat principle. Other secondary end points included objective response rate, safety and tolerability, and quality of life.

Results

Overall, 187 patients (median age, 62 years [range, 33-83 years]) were randomly assigned to receive ivosidenib (n = 126; 82 women [65%]; median age, 61 years [range, 33-80 years]) or placebo (n = 61; 37 women [61%]; median age, 63 years [range, 40-83 years]); 43 patients crossed over from placebo to ivosidenib. The primary end point of progression-free survival was reported elsewhere. Median OS was 10.3 months (95% CI, 7.8-12.4 months) with ivosidenib vs 7.5 months (95% CI, 4.8-11.1 months) with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.56-1.12]; 1-sided P = .09). When adjusted for crossover, median OS with placebo was 5.1 months (95% CI, 3.8-7.6 months; hazard ratio, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.34-0.70]; 1-sided P < .001). The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse event (≥5%) reported in both groups was ascites (11 patients [9%] receiving ivosidenib and 4 patients [7%] receiving placebo). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events considered ivosidenib related were reported in 3 patients (2%). There were no treatment-related deaths. Patients receiving ivosidenib reported no apparent decline in quality of life compared with placebo.

Conclusions and Relevance

This randomized clinical trial found that ivosidenib was well tolerated and resulted in a favorable OS benefit vs placebo, despite a high rate of crossover. These data, coupled with supportive quality of life data and a tolerable safety profile, demonstrate the clinical benefit of ivosidenib for patients with advanced cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02989857

FOENIX-CCA2 quality of life data for futibatinib-treated intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) patients with FGFR2 fusions/rearrangements

4097

Background: In FOENIX-CCA2 (NCT02052778), a pivotal phase 2 study among iCCA patients (pts) with FGFR2 fusions/rearrangements, the highly selective, irreversible FGFR1–4 inhibitor futibatinib demonstrated a confirmed objective response rate of 41.7%, with a 9.7-month median duration of response. Adverse events were manageable with dosing modifications that did not adversely impact on response. We report outcomes for the preplanned analysis of Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) during futibatinib treatment as a secondary objective of FOENIX-CCA2. Methods: Pts enrolled in FOENIX-CCA2 had locally advanced/metastatic unresectable iCCA with FGFR2 fusions/rearrangements, ≥1 prior line of therapy (including gemcitabine/cisplatin) and ECOG PS 0-1. Pts received oral futibatinib 20 mg continuous QD dosing per 21-day cycle. PRO measures included EORTC-QLQ-C30 (1 global health, 5 functional, 9 symptom scales), EQ-5D-3L, and EQ visual analogue scale (VAS). PROs were collected at screening, cycles 2 and 4, every 3 cycles thereafter, and end of treatment. PRO data were evaluated up to cycle 13, the last visit before data were missing for >50% of the PRO population (PRO primary assessment time point). Results: 92/103 (89.3%) pts enrolled had PRO completion data at baseline and a minimum of 1 follow-up assessment (median age 58 y, 56.5% female), with 48 pts having PRO data at cycle 13. At baseline, mean (SD) EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status score was 70.1 (19.4) and EQ VAS score 71.7 (20.3). Mean EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status scores were maintained from baseline to cycle 13, corresponding to 9.0 months on treatment, with no clinically meaningful (≥10-point) changes in individual functional measures (Table). EORTC QLQ-C30 scores across individual symptom measures were also stable from baseline through cycle 13; only constipation showed an average of 10.0-point worsening at only cycle 4. Mean EQ VAS scores were sustained from baseline to cycle 13 (mean change ranging -1.8 to +4.8 across cycles), with values maintained within the population norm range from across 20 countries. Conclusions: Quality of life data from the phase 2 FOENIX-CCA2 trial show that physical, cognitive and emotional functioning, and overall health status were maintained among pts with advanced iCCA receiving futibatinib. Clinical trial information: NCT02052778. [Table: see text]

Final results from ClarIDHy, a global, phase 3, randomized, double-blind study of ivosidenib (IVO) versus placebo (PBO) in patients (pts) with previously treated cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) and an isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutation

4069

Background: CCA is a rare cancer for which there are limited effective therapies. IDH1 mutations occur in ̃20% of intrahepatic CCAs, resulting in production of the oncometabolite D-2-hydroxyglutarate, which promotes oncogenesis. IVO (AG-120) is a first-in-class, oral, small-molecule inhibitor of mutant IDH1 (mIDH1). ClarIDHy aimed to demonstrate the efficacy of IVO vs PBO in pts with unresectable or metastatic m IDH1 CCA. The primary endpoint was met with significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) by independent radiology center (IRC) with IVO vs PBO (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.37, p < 0.0001). Objective response rate (ORR) and stable disease for IVO were 2.4% (3 partial responses) and 50.8% (n = 63) vs 0% and 27.9% (n = 17) for PBO. IVO pts experienced significantly less decline in physical and emotional functioning domains of quality of life at cycle 2 day 1 vs PBO pts (nominal p < 0.05). Methods: Pts with m IDH1 CCA were randomized 2:1 to IVO (500 mg PO QD) or matched PBO and stratified by prior systemic therapies (1 or 2). Key eligibility: unresectable or metastatic m IDH1 CCA based on central testing; ECOG PS 0–1; measurable disease (RECIST v1.1). Crossover from PBO to IVO was permitted at radiographic progression. Primary endpoint: PFS by IRC. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS; by intent-to-treat), ORR, PFS (by investigator), safety, and quality of life. The planned crossover-adjusted OS was derived using the rank-preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) model. Results: As of 31 May 2020, ̃780 pts were prescreened for an IDH1 mutation and 187 were randomized to IVO (n = 126) or PBO (n = 61); 13 remain on IVO. Median age 62 y; M/F 68/119; 91% intrahepatic CCA; 93% metastatic disease; 47% had 2 prior therapies. 70% of PBO pts crossed over to IVO. OS data were mature, with 79% OS events in IVO arm and 82% in PBO. Median OS (mOS) was 10.3 months for IVO and 7.5 months for PBO (HR = 0.79; 95% CI 0.56–1.12; one-sided p = 0.093). The RPSFT-adjusted mOS was 5.1 months for PBO (HR = 0.49; 95% CI 0.34–0.70; p < 0.0001). Common all-grade treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs, ≥ 15%) in the IVO arm: nausea 41%, diarrhea 35%, fatigue 31%, cough 25%, abdominal pain 24%, decreased appetite 24%, ascites 23%, vomiting 23%, anemia 18%, and constipation 15%. Grade ≥ 3 TEAEs were reported in 50% of IVO pts vs 37% of PBO pts, with grade ≥ 3 treatment-related AEs in 7% of IVO pts vs 0% in PBO. 7% of IVO pts experienced an AE leading to treatment discontinuation vs 9% of PBO pts. There were no treatment-related deaths. Conclusions: IVO was well tolerated and resulted in a favorable OS trend vs PBO despite a high rate of crossover. These data – coupled with statistical improvement in PFS, supportive quality of life data, and favorable safety profile – demonstrate the clinical benefit of IVO in advanced m IDH1 CCA. Clinical trial information: NCT02989857.

Outcomes for cancer patients on systemic anti-cancer therapies during the COVID-19 pandemic from the CAPITOL (COVID-19 Cancer PatIenT Outcomes in North London) cohort study

10567

Background: One of the major challenges with COVID-19 has been the changes to cancer services, including changes to the type of systemic anti-cancer treatment being delivered to patients. There needs to be a better understanding of which cancer patients are at the greatest amount of risk to make informed decisions on how cancer treatment can be altered to protect patients from COVID-19 infection. The CAPITOL (COVID-19 CAncer PatIenT Outcomes in North London) study investigated the outcomes of patients receiving systemic anti-cancer therapies (SACT) with regards to COVID-19 infection, as patients with cancer are hypothesised to be at higher risk. Methods: CAPITOL collected data from all patients receiving SACT at two cancer centres. The effect of clinical characteristics on the incidence and severity of COVID-19 infection in patients on SACT was the primary outcome, and we used univariable and multivariable models in our analysis, adjusting for age, gender and comorbidities. Results: 2871 patients were analysed from 2nd March to 31st May 2020, all of whom received SACT; during this time period 68 (2.4%) were diagnosed with COVID-19. Receiving SACT increased the risk of death when contracting COVID-19 (adjusted (adj.) OR 9.84; 95% CI 5.73 – 16.9). The risk of contracting COVID-19 was increased by receiving chemotherapy (adj. OR 2.99; 95% CI = 1.72 - 5.21), with the risk significantly increased by high dose chemotherapy (adj. OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.35 – 6.48). Patients with comorbidities (adjusted OR 2.29; 95% CI 1.19 - 4.38), or with a respiratory or intrathoracic neoplasm (adj. OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.04 - 4.36) were also at increased risk of contracting COVID-19. Cancer patients who received targeted treatment had a reduced risk of contracting COVID-19 (adj. OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.30 – 0.95), while there was no significant change in risk caused by treatment intent (curative versus palliative), hormonal- or immunotherapy and solid versus haematological cancers. Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the first investigations into the risk of contracting COVID-19 in a cohort of all cancer patients on SACT. We found that patients on SACT are more likely to die if they contract COVID-19. The type of SACT received by cancer patients can affect their likelihood of contacting COVID-19, with chemotherapy increasing risk, targeted therapy decreasing risk and a potential protective effect for hormonal and immunotherapy.

Second-line FOLFOX chemotherapy versus active symptom control for advanced biliary tract cancer (ABC-06): a phase 3, open-label, randomised, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Advanced biliary tract cancer has a poor prognosis. Cisplatin and gemcitabine is the standard first-line chemotherapy regimen, but no robust evidence is available for second-line chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to determine the benefit derived from second-line FOLFOX (folinic acid, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancer.

METHODS

The ABC-06 clinical trial was a phase 3, open-label, randomised trial done in 20 sites with expertise in managing biliary tract cancer across the UK. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who had histologically or cytologically verified locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer (including cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder or ampullary carcinoma) with documented radiological disease progression to first-line cisplatin and gemcitabine chemotherapy and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally to active symptom control (ASC) and FOLFOX or ASC alone. FOLFOX chemotherapy was administered intravenously every 2 weeks for a maximum of 12 cycles (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, L-folinic acid 175 mg [or folinic acid 350 mg], fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 [bolus], and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 as a 46-h continuous intravenous infusion). Randomisation was done following a minimisation algorithm using platinum sensitivity, serum albumin concentration, and stage as stratification factors. The primary endpoint was overall survival, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was also assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The study is complete and the final results are reported. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01926236, and EudraCT, 2013-001812-30.

FINDINGS

Between March 27, 2014, and Jan 4, 2018, 162 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to ASC plus FOLFOX (n=81) or ASC alone (n=81). Median follow-up was 21·7 months (IQR 17·2-30·8). Overall survival was significantly longer in the ASC plus FOLFOX group than in the ASC alone group, with a median overall survival of 6·2 months (95% CI 5·4-7·6) in the ASC plus FOLFOX group versus 5·3 months (4·1-5·8) in the ASC alone group (adjusted hazard ratio 0·69 [95% CI 0·50-0·97]; p=0·031). The overall survival rate in the ASC alone group was 35·5% (95% CI 25·2-46·0) at 6 months and 11·4% (5·6-19·5) at 12 months, compared with 50·6% (39·3-60·9) at 6 months and 25·9% (17·0-35·8) at 12 months in the ASC plus FOLFOX group. Grade 3-5 adverse events were reported in 42 (52%) of 81 patients in the ASC alone group and 56 (69%) of 81 patients in the ASC plus FOLFOX group, including three chemotherapy-related deaths (one each due to infection, acute kidney injury, and febrile neutropenia). The most frequently reported grade 3-5 FOLFOX-related adverse events were neutropenia (ten [12%] patients), fatigue or lethargy (nine [11%] patients), and infection (eight [10%] patients).

INTERPRETATION

The addition of FOLFOX to ASC improved median overall survival in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer after progression on cisplatin and gemcitabine, with a clinically meaningful increase in 6-month and 12-month overall survival rates. To our knowledge, this trial is the first prospective, randomised study providing reliable, high-quality evidence to allow an informed discussion with patients of the potential benefits and risks from second-line FOLFOX chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancer. Based on these findings, FOLFOX should become standard-of-care chemotherapy in second-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer and the reference regimen for further clinical trials.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK, StandUpToCancer, AMMF (The UK Cholangiocarcinoma Charity), and The Christie Charity, with additional funding from The Cholangiocarcinoma Foundation and the Conquer Cancer Foundation Young Investigator Award for translational research.

Real-world study of treatment patterns and outcomes among patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in Europe

391

Background: Few data are available regarding real-world treatment patterns and outcomes for metastatic PDAC (mPDAC) in Europe. Methods: This retrospective, observational, chart-review study involved medical oncologists and gastroenterologists from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK. Physicians completed online patient (pt) reports for 20 consecutive pts diagnosed with PDAC between 01 and 10/2016. Here, the analysis is focused on treated pts diagnosed with mPDAC. Reports provided information on general disease and pt characteristics, diagnosis, and treatment of metastatic disease. Outcomes included median PFS and OS according to each line of metastatic therapy. In addition, how baseline performance status (PS) and treatment sequence affected OS and PFS were assessed. Results: 304 physicians (France [n=62], Germany [n=60], Italy [n=63], Spain [n=66], UK [n=53]) participated and enrolled 6,000 pts with PAC, of whom 3827 had mPDAC. Of the 3827, 3432 were treated for their metastatic disease. The most common first-line therapies were modified FOLFIRINOX (28.4%), gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel (28.0%), and gemcitabine monotherapy (23.0%), while the most common second-line therapies were gemcitabine monotherapy (25.0%), 5-FU + oxaliplatin (21.8%), and gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel (16.7%). The longest median PFS and OS were obtained when using mFOLFIRINOX as first-line therapy, with gemcitabine-based combinations as second-line therapy. However, pt characteristics were more favorable with FOLFIRINOX compared with the other regimens used in first line. The most common treatment in first line for patients with a worse baseline PS (PS >1) was gemcitabine monotherapy (571 patients [46%]); in addition, having a worse baseline PS was predictive of shorter survival in second line. The most common reason for discontinuation of either line was disease progression. The study showed that the choice of first- and second-line treatment among European physicians is in accordance with current ESMO guidelines; in contrast, the choice of subsequent line was more heterogeneous, according to local practices. Additional data concerning first and second line OS and PFS per treatment regimen will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: This large real-life study highlights a clear picture of treatment patterns in European real-world clinical practice and outcomes for metastatic PDAC, which may help in more effectively managing such patients in the future. Further univariate and multivariate analysis will complete this first description.

Gender representation in authorship in later-phase systemic clinical trials in biliary tract cancer (BTC)

348

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

Final results from ClarIDHy, a global, phase III, randomized, double-blind study of ivosidenib (IVO) versus placebo (PBO) in patients (pts) with previously treated cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) and an isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutation

266

Background: CCA is a rare cancer for which there are limited effective therapies. IDH1 mutations occur in ~20% of intrahepatic CCAs, resulting in production of the oncometabolite D-2-hydroxyglutarate, which promotes oncogenesis. IVO (AG-120) is a first-in-class, oral, small-molecule inhibitor of mutant IDH1 (m IDH1). ClarIDHy aimed to demonstrate the efficacy of IVO vs PBO in pts with unresectable or metastatic m IDH1 CCA. The primary endpoint was met with significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) by independent radiology center (IRC) with IVO vs PBO (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.37, p < 0.0001). Objective response rate (ORR) and stable disease for IVO were 2.4% (3 partial responses) and 50.8% (n = 63) vs 0% and 27.9% (n = 17) for PBO. IVO pts experienced significantly less decline in physical and emotional functioning domains of quality of life at cycle 2 day 1 vs PBO pts (nominal p < 0.05). Methods: Pts with m IDH1 CCA were randomized 2:1 to IVO (500 mg PO QD) or matched PBO and stratified by prior systemic therapies (1 or 2). Key eligibility: unresectable or metastatic m IDH1 CCA based on central testing; ECOG PS 0–1; measurable disease (RECIST v1.1). Crossover from PBO to IVO was permitted at radiographic progression. Primary endpoint: PFS by IRC. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS; by intent-to-treat), ORR, PFS (by investigator), safety, and quality of life. The planned crossover-adjusted OS was derived using the rank-preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) model. Results: As of 31 May 2020, ~780 pts were prescreened for an IDH1 mutation and 187 were randomized to IVO (n = 126) or PBO (n = 61); 13 remain on IVO. Median age 62 y; M/F 68/119; 91% intrahepatic CCA; 93% metastatic disease; 47% had 2 prior therapies. 70% of PBO pts crossed over to IVO. OS data were mature, with 79% OS events in IVO arm and 82% in PBO. Median OS (mOS) was 10.3 months for IVO and 7.5 months for PBO (HR = 0.79; 95% CI 0.56–1.12; one-sided p = 0.093). The RPSFT-adjusted mOS was 5.1 months for PBO (HR = 0.49; 95% CI 0.34–0.70; p < 0.0001). Common all-grade treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs, ≥ 15%) in the IVO arm: nausea 41%, diarrhea 35%, fatigue 31%, cough 25%, abdominal pain 24%, decreased appetite 24%, ascites 23%, vomiting 23%, anemia 18%, and constipation 15%. Grade ≥ 3 TEAEs were reported in 50% of IVO pts vs 37% of PBO pts, with grade ≥ 3 treatment-related AEs in 7% of IVO pts vs 0% in PBO. 7% of IVO pts experienced an AE leading to treatment discontinuation vs 9% of PBO pts. There were no treatment-related deaths. Conclusions: IVO was well tolerated and resulted in a favorable OS trend vs PBO despite a high rate of crossover. These data – coupled with statistical improvement in PFS, supportive quality of life data, and favorable safety profile – demonstrate the clinical benefit of IVO in advanced m IDH1 CCA. Clinical trial information: NCT02989857.

A phase I/II study of safety and efficacy of the arginase inhibitor INCB001158 plus chemotherapy in patients (Pts) with advanced biliary tract cancers

311

Background: Arginase, secreted in the tumor microenvironment by myeloid suppressor cells, is a major regulator of arginine-mediated immune response. Arginase inhibition by INCB001158 increases arginine, which reverses the immunosuppressive effects of neutrophils and myeloid-derived suppressor cells on T cells. The current standard first-line (1L) treatment for advanced biliary tract cancers (BTC) is gemcitabine/cisplatin chemotherapy. The combination of INCB001158 immunotherapy and standard 1L treatment may provide additional clinical benefit in pts with advanced or metastatic BTC. Methods: This open-label phase 1/2 study evaluated the safety, tolerability, and antitumor activity of INCB001158 in pts with advanced or metastatic solid tumors. In phase I, dose escalation of INCB001158 (50, 75, and 100 mg twice daily [BID]) was used to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of INCB001158 + gemcitabine/cisplatin. Phase II used a Simon 2-stage design and evaluated objective response rate (ORR; RECIST v1.1), duration of response (DOR), disease control rate (DCR), and progression-free survival (PFS) of INCB001158 RP2D + gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2)/cisplatin (25 mg/m2 Days 1 and 8 of 21-day cycle). Here we report preliminary safety and activity from the cohort of pts with BTC. Results: The phase I dose-escalation group identified a RP2D for INCB001158 of 100 mg BID. At a data cutoff of July 1, 2020, 33 pts with BTC in phase II treated with INCB001158 100 mg BID + gemcitabine/cisplatin were evaluable. Adverse events (AEs) related to INCB001158 and/or chemotherapy occurred in 88% of pts and 73% of pts had AEs related specifically to INCB001158 (Table). Treatment was interrupted due to INCB001158-related TEAEs in 30% of pts (n=10); discontinuation related to INCB001158 occurred in 3% (n=1). Treatment did not result in immune-related or significant additive chemotherapy-associated toxicity. ORR was 24% (8/33; 95% CI, 11.1–42.3) based on confirmed response per investigator’s assessment; stable disease occurred in 42% of pts. Median DOR (95% CI) was 5.8 (4.1–not reached) mo, and the DCR was 67%. Median PFS (95% CI) was 8.5 (5.7–10.1) mo. Conclusions: Preliminary data suggest the combination of INCB001158 100 mg BID + gemcitabine/cisplatin was tolerable and did not result in significant added toxicity. Response rates and PFS suggest that some pts with BTC may benefit from this combination. Clinical trial information: NCT03314935. [Table: see text]

FOENIX-CCA2: A phase II, open-label, multicenter study of futibatinib in patients (pts) with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) harboring FGFR2 gene fusions or other rearrangements

108

Background: Patients (pts) with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) have a 5-year survival rate of 24%. There is no standard treatment for advanced disease after first-line chemotherapy. Fibroblast growth factor receptor-2 ( FGFR2) gene fusions occur in 10% to 20% of pts with iCCA, offering a promising therapeutic avenue for this disease. Futibatinib is a highly selective irreversible FGFR1-4 inhibitor given as a continuous once-daily (QD) oral regimen. This phase 2 registrational trial was initiated because of results from a phase 1 dose escalation/expansion study showing tolerability and preliminary efficacy of futibatinib in pts with iCCA with FGFR2 fusions. Methods: FOENIX-CCA2 (NCT02052778), a single-arm multicenter phase 2 study, enrolled pts with locally advanced/metastatic unresectable iCCA harboring FGFR2 gene fusions or other rearrangements, disease progression after ≥1 line of systemic therapy (including gemcitabine plus platinum-based chemotherapy), no prior FGFR inhibitor treatment, and an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. Pts received futibatinib 20 mg QD until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint is objective response rate (ORR) based on independent central radiology review. Secondary endpoints include disease control rate (DCR), duration of response (DOR), and safety. Results: A total of 103 pts were enrolled. For this interim analysis, data are reported for the 67 pts (65%) with ≥6 months of follow-up. Of these, 82.1% of pts had tumors harboring an FGFR2 fusion. One, 2, or ≥3 prior therapies were received by 44.8%, 28.4%, and 26.9% of pts, respectively. ORR was 34.3% (all partial response, n = 23), and DCR was 76.1%; assessment was pending for 8 pts. Median time to response was 1.6 months (range, 1.0-4.9), and median DOR was 6.2 months (range, 2.1-14.2). The most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs; all grade, grade ≥3) were hyperphosphatemia (79.1%, 25.4%), diarrhea (37.3%, 0%), and dry mouth (32.8%, 0%). Any-cause grade ≥3 AEs were reported in 73.1% of pts. Dose delay or dose reduction was required in 65.7% and 53.7% of pts, respectively; 6.0% of pts discontinued treatment because of AEs. Conclusions: Preliminary assessment of these phase 2 data indicate efficacy and tolerability of futibatinib for treatment of pts with iCCA harboring FGFR2 fusions or other rearrangements who have progressed after chemotherapy. Continued analysis of the study population is underway. Clinical trial information: NCT02052778.

A phase II study of selective HDAC6 inhibition with KA2507 for second-line treatment of advanced biliary tract cancer (ABC-11)

TPS4652

Background: The ABC-02 trial provided Level A evidence supporting the use of cisplatin plus gemcitabine as first-line chemotherapy for advanced biliary tract cancer (ABC) [Valle, 2010]. In second line therapy oxaliplatin and 5FU and ivosedinib for IDH1 mutated cancers are options [Lamarca, 2019; Abou-Alfa, 2019] however there remains significant unmet need for patients without actionable alterations. Histone deacetylase 6 (HDAC6) is over-expressed in cholangiocarcinoma, reducing primary cilia. This is mediated through increased resorption in normal human cholangiocytes via tubulin deacetylation in the ciliary axoneme. Inhibition of HDAC6 elicits both cell intrinsic and extrinsic anti-cancer activity. HDAC6 inhibition reversed oncogenic loss of ciliation and demonstrated preclinical efficacy in a syngeneic rat orthotopic biliary cancer model [Gradilone, 2013]. KA2507 is a potent and selective small molecule inhibitor of HDAC6. Phase I dose escalation study identified an oral dose of 800mg bid for further development, being well tolerated and showing evidence of selective target engagement. Methods: ABC-11 is a Phase II multi-centre, open-label study of KA2507 in 40 evaluable patients with advanced biliary tract cancer previously treated with standard of care chemotherapy. The study follows a single-arm single-stage design using A’Hern’s methodology. Eligible patients receive continuous 28-day cycles of fixed daily oral dose of KA2507 until death, disease progression or other pre-defined reason for study drug discontinuation. Tumour assessment is made at baseline and at 8-weekly intervals using RECIST 1.1 criteria until disease progression; primary endpoint is PFS at 4 months. Independent Data Monitoring Committee will review 4 month PFS and other data after first six patients, after a total of 17 patients (futility analysis, corresponding to cut-off of the Simon’s minimax 2-stage design; 33% was set as the target 4-month PFS rate expected with KA2507) and at least annually thereafter. Subject to availability of adequate tissue, mandatory pre-treatment and on-study tumour biopsy samples will undergo multiparameter flow cytometry of immune cell subsets, immunofluorescence analysis of immune cell subsets (activation status and topology) and T cell repertoire studies. The study received regulatory and ethical approval to proceed in January 2020 and enrolment is in progress. Clinical trial information: NCT04186156 .

Systemic chemotherapy with or without cetuximab in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastasis (New EPOC): long-term results of a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The interim analysis of the multicentre New EPOC trial in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastasis showed a significant reduction in progression-free survival in patients allocated to cetuximab plus chemotherapy compared with those given chemotherapy alone. The focus of the present analysis was to assess the effect on overall survival.

METHODS

New EPOC was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with KRAS wild-type (codons 12, 13, and 61) resectable or suboptimally resectable colorectal liver metastases and a WHO performance status of 0-2 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive chemotherapy with or without cetuximab before and after liver resection. Randomisation was done centrally with minimisation factors of surgical centre, poor prognosis cancer, and previous adjuvant treatment with oxaliplatin. Chemotherapy consisted of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 administered intravenously over 2 h, l-folinic acid (175 mg flat dose administered intravenously over 2 h) or d,l-folinic acid (350 mg flat dose administered intravenously over 2 h), and fluorouracil bolus 400 mg/m2 administered intravenously over 5 min, followed by a 46 h infusion of fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 repeated every 2 weeks (regimen one), or oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 administered intravenously over 2 h and oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-14 repeated every 3 weeks (regimen two). Patients who had received adjuvant oxaliplatin could receive irinotecan 180 mg/m2 intravenously over 30 min with fluorouracil instead of oxaliplatin (regimen three). Cetuximab was given intravenously, 500 mg/m2 every 2 weeks with regimen one and three or a loading dose of 400 mg/m2 followed by a weekly infusion of 250 mg/m2 with regimen two. The primary endpoint of progression-free survival was published previously. Secondary endpoints were overall survival, preoperative response, pathological resection status, and safety. Trial recruitment was halted prematurely on the advice of the Trial Steering Committee on Nov 1, 2012. All analyses (except safety) were done on the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses included all randomly assigned patients. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 22944367.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 26, 2007, and Oct 12, 2012, 257 eligible patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy with cetuximab (n=129) or without cetuximab (n=128). This analysis was carried out 5 years after the last patient was recruited, as defined in the protocol, at a median follow-up of 66·7 months (IQR 58·0-77·5). Median progression-free survival was 22·2 months (95% CI 18·3-26·8) in the chemotherapy alone group and 15·5 months (13·8-19·0) in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·17, 95% CI 0·87-1·56; p=0·304). Median overall survival was 81·0 months (59·6 to not reached) in the chemotherapy alone group and 55·4 months (43·5-71·5) in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group (HR 1·45, 1·02-2·05; p=0·036). There was no significant difference in the secondary outcomes of preoperative response or pathological resection status between groups. Five deaths might have been treatment-related (one in the chemotherapy alone group and four in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events reported were: neutrophil count decreased (26 [19%] of 134 in the chemotherapy alone group vs 21 [15%] of 137 in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group), diarrhoea (13 [10%] vs 14 [10%]), skin rash (one [1%] vs 22 [16%]), thromboembolic events (ten [7%] vs 11 [8%]), lethargy (ten [7%] vs nine [7%]), oral mucositis (three [2%] vs 14 [10%]), vomiting (seven [5%] vs seven [5%]), peripheral neuropathy (eight [6%] vs five [4%]), and pain (six [4%] vs six [4%]).

INTERPRETATION

Although the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy improves the overall survival in some studies in patients with advanced, inoperable metastatic disease, its use in the perioperative setting in patients with operable disease confers a significant disadvantage in terms of overall survival. Cetuximab should not be used in this setting.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK.

FIGHT-302: Phase III study of first-line (1L) pemigatinib (PEM) versus gemcitabine (GEM) plus cisplatin (CIS) for cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) with FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements

TPS592

Background: For advanced CCA, standard of care 1L systemic treatment is GEM + CIS. Genetic alterations in intrahepatic CCA provide potential therapeutic targets. Fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) 2 gene rearrangements driving CCA tumorigenesis were identified almost exclusively in intrahepatic CCA patients (pts) (incidence, 10–16%). In phase 2, PEM (INCB054828), a selective, potent, oral FGFR1–3 inhibitor elicited an objective response rate (ORR) of 35.5% and median progression-free survival (PFS) of 6.9 months (mo) in previously treated, locally advanced or metastatic CCA with FGFR2 rearrangements (NCT02924376). FIGHT-302, a randomized, open-label, phase 3 study will evaluate efficacy and safety of 1L PEM vs GEM + CIS in unresectable/metastatic CCA with FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements (NCT03656536). Methods: Eligible pts are adults with confirmed unresectable/metastatic CCA; no prior systemic therapy for advanced disease < 6 mo before enrollment; radiographically measurable/evaluable disease (per RECIST v1.1); ECOG PS ≤1; documented FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements. Exclusions include clinically significant corneal or retinal disorder; history of calcium and phosphate homeostasis disorder or systemic mineral imbalance with ectopic soft tissue calcification; untreated CNS metastases or history of uncontrolled seizures. Pts will be randomized (1:1; stratified by region and tumor burden) to PEM 13.5 mg QD on a 21-day (d) cycle or GEM (1000 mg/m2) + CIS (25 mg/m2) on D1 and D8 of 21-d cycles (max 8). Crossover to PEM allowed after confirmed progression. PEM titration to 18 mg from cycle 2 allowed for pts without hyperphosphatemia (serum phosphate > 5.5 mg/dL) and Grade ≥2 treatment-related adverse events during cycle 1. Hyperphosphatemia will be managed with diet modifications, phosphate binders, diuretics, or dose adjustments. Treatment will continue until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint is PFS (by independent review). Secondary endpoints are ORR, overall survival, duration of response, disease control rate, safety, and quality of life. Four pts (target N = 432) are enrolled as of Sep 25, 2019. Clinical trial information: NCT03656536.

Sex difference in patients with biliary tract cancer receiving chemotherapy: Post hoc analysis of ABC-01, -02, -03, -04, BILCAP

517

Background: The relationship between toxicity from chemotherapy and clinical outcome in biliary tract cancer (BTC) is uncertain. Aim: This post hoc analysis evaluated differences by sex in the frequency of adverse events (AEs) and overall survival (OS) and its impact on progression-free survival (PFS)/recurrence-free survival (RFS) for BTC patients. Methods: Individual patient data were retrieved from ABC -01, -02, -03, -04, and BILCAP study. AEs were graded according to National Cancer Institute's Common Toxicity Criteria v 4.02 and odds ratios along with 95%CI and p-values derived from logistic regression were used to assess the effect of sex on the risk of AEs. Time to event outcomes were evaluated using Cox regression and plotted using Kaplan-Meier plots. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Overall 994 patients-data were examined: 86 in ABC-01, 324 in-02, 124 in -03, 13 in -04 and 447 in BILCAP. A total of 484 (49%) were males (M) and 510 (51%) were females (F). 770 patients were evaluable for AEs because a total of 224 patients in BILCAP study belonged to the observation group. Urinary tract infection (M, 1.6%; F, 5.5%), nausea (M, 50.7%; F, 69.9%), vomiting (M, 29.1%; F, 46.1%), alopecia (M, 11.3%; F, 27.3%), are dominant in F, hyperbilirubinaemia (M, 36.7%; F, 29.1%) and thrombocytopenia (M, 43.1%; F, 34.3%) and hiccups (M, 2.4%; F, 0.5%) are dominant in M at any grade. Vomiting (M, 3.5%; F, 7.0%) and fatigue (M, 4.0%; F, 8.5%) are higher in F than in M for grade 3-5. The median OS (M, 16.2 months (Mo); F, 17.5 Mo), PFS (M, 6.4 Mo; F, 6.5 Mo) and RFS (M, 20.8 Mo; F 19.4 Mo) were similar. Amongst the subgroup of patients with gallbladder, F achieved longer OS (M, 11.5 Mo; F 13.3 Mo, 0.73 (95%CI:0.54,0.99), p = 0.041) and RFS than M (M, 20.8 Mo; median PFS for F not reached, HR:0.52 (95%CI:0.27,1.02), p = 0.057). Conclusions: Females with BTC have tended to have more AEs, especially grade 3+. Although no difference was observed in OS, PFS, and RFS between males and females for the overall cohort of patients, females with gallbladder cancer had an improved OS and RFS compared with males. These findings suggest, in BTC, sex may play a role when designing clinical trials as well as in making treatment decisions.

A phase III study of futibatinib (TAS-120) versus gemcitabine-cisplatin (gem-cis) chemotherapy as first-line (1L) treatment for patients (pts) with advanced (adv) cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) harboring fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) gene rearrangements (FOENIX-CCA3)

TPS600

Background: Pts with adv CCA have poor survival outcomes, and chemotherapy offers limited survival benefit (5-year survival rates, 5–10%; median overall survival [OS], 8–12 months). FGFR2 gene rearrangements are known to be early drivers of oncogenesis in ~15% of pts with intrahepatic (i) CCA. Futibatinib, an oral, highly selective, irreversible FGFR1-4 inhibitor has shown antitumor activity against a broad spectrum of FGFR-deregulated tumors in preclinical studies. In a previous study, futibatinib demonstrated clinical activity and tolerability in heavily pretreated pts with adv CCA harboring FGFR2 gene rearrangements. This phase 3 trial (FOENIX-CCA3) is designed to evaluate futibatinib vs gem-cis as 1L therapy for pts with adv iCCA harboring FGFR2 rearrangements. Methods: FOENIX-CCA3 is a multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 3 study that will be conducted in pts with metastatic or unresectable iCCA harboring FGFR2 rearrangements (assessed at screening by a central laboratory). Pts must have an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1 and should not have received previous systemic anticancer therapy for adv disease (adjuvant/neoadjuvant therapy ≥6 mo prior to randomization is permissible). Pts with clinically-significant alterations in calcium-phosphorus homeostasis or ectopic mineralization/calcification will be excluded. Approximately 216 pts will be randomized (1:1 ratio) to receive 20 mg futibatinib once daily until disease progression or other discontinuation criteria are met or gem-cis (on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle) for 8 cycles or until disease progression, whichever occurs first. Pts will be stratified by prior surgical excision (yes vs no), geographic region, and locally adv vs metastatic disease. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by independent central review (ICR). Secondary endpoints include objective response rate and disease control rate based on ICR, OS, PFS per investigator assessment, and safety. The anticipated start date is in April, 2020.

NUC-1031 in combination with cisplatin for first-line treatment of advanced biliary tract cancer

TPS4156

Background: Cisplatin and gemcitabine (CisGem) is the global standard of care for 1st-line treatment of patients (pts) with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC). No agents have regulatory approval for this disease. CisGem achieves an objective response rate (ORR) of 26% and median overall survival (OS) of 11.7 months (ABC-02). Key cancer resistance mechanisms limit gemcitabine efficacy. NUC-1031, a phosphoramidate transformation of gemcitabine, is designed to overcome resistance mechanisms associated with poor gemcitabine response. Promising signs of efficacy have been observed with single agent in a phase I study in solid tumors (Blagden et al 2018) and in the phase Ib ABC-08 study of NUC-1031 + cisplatin 25 mg /m2 d1, d8 q 21 days for the 1st-line treatment of advanced BTC. 14 pts have been enrolled across 2 cohorts (NUC-1031: 625 mg/m2 and 725 mg/m2). In 11 pts evaluable for response ORR was 64% (1 CR, 6 PRs) and DCR was 73%. PFS/OS data is maturing. The combination was very well-tolerated with no unexpected adverse events or dose-limiting toxicities. The RP2D in combination with cisplatin is 725 mg/ m2. Safety, coupled with encouraging efficacy signal has led to initiation of a global Phase III development program. Methods: A Phase III, open-label, randomized head-to-head study of NUC-1031 + cisplatin versus CisGem for the 1st-line treatment of advanced BTC will include pts ≥18 years with histologically- or cytologically-proven BTC (including cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder, or ampullary cancer), that is not resectable and who have had no prior systemic chemotherapy for locally advanced/metastatic disease. A total of 828 pts will be randomized (1:1) to either 725 mg/m2 NUC-1031 + 25 mg/m2 cisplatin or 1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine + 25 mg/m2 cisplatin, administered on Days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle, respectively. Primary objectives are OS and ORR. Secondary objectives include further measurements of efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics, and patient-reported quality of life. The study will be conducted at approximately 120 sites across North America, Europe and Asia Pacific countries. Clinical trial information: NCT02351765.

ABC-06 | A randomised phase III, multi-centre, open-label study of active symptom control (ASC) alone or ASC with oxaliplatin / 5-FU chemotherapy (ASC+mFOLFOX) for patients (pts) with locally advanced / metastatic biliary tract cancers (ABC) previously-treated with cisplatin/gemcitabine (CisGem) chemotherapy

4003

Background: Level A evidence supports use of CisGem as first-line chemotherapy for ABC; no robust evidence is available for second-line chemotherapy. Methods: Pts diagnosed with ABC with disease progression after prior CisGem were randomised (1:1) to either ASC+mFOLFOX or ASC. Randomisation was stratified by serum albumin levels ( < 35 vs ≥35 g/L), platinum sensitivity (determined from first-line CisGem) and disease extent (locally advanced vs metastatic). Pts with ECOG PS0-1, adequate haematological, renal and liver function, and adequate biliary drainage were eligible. Primary end-point was overall survival (OS) (multivariable Cox regression adjusted for stratification factors); sample size: 162 pts delivering 148 events were required (80% power; 5% two-sided alpha) for a hypothesised hazard ratio (HR) of 0.63. Assumed median survival for ASC was 4 months. Results: 162 pts (81 in each arm) were randomised (27 March ‘14 - 04 Jan ‘18); median age 65 yrs (range 26-84); sex: 80 (49%) male, 82 (51%) female; primary site: intrahepatic 72 (44%), extrahepatic 45 (28%), gallbladder 34 (21%) and ampullary 11 (7%). Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms except platinum sensitivity (ASC+mFOLFOX 27 pts (33%); ASC 34 pts (42%)). After 150 OS events, the adjusted HR was 0.69 (95% CI 0.50-0.97; p = 0.031; ASC+mFOLFOX vs ASC). Median OS (months (m)), 6m and 12m OS-rate (%) were 6.2m, 50.6% and 25.9% for the ASC+mFOLFOX and 5.3m, 35.5%, 11.4% for the ASC arm, respectively. Grade 3/4 toxicities were reported in 48 (59%) and 32 (39%) pts in the ASC+mFOLFOX and ASC arm, respectively; these were balanced between arms except for fatigue and neutropenia (more frequent in ASC+mFOLFOX arm); data cleaning is ongoing. No chemotherapy-related deaths were reported. Conclusion: Survival with ASC was greater than assumed; ASC+mFOLFOX improved OS after progression to CisGem with a clinically meaningful increase in 6m and 12m OS rate. ASC+mFOLFOX should become standard of care in second-line for ABC. Clinical trial information: NCT01926236.

Real-world experience of trifluridine/tipiracil in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: A multicenter United Kingdom study

668

Background: TAS-102 is an orally administered combination of the thymidine-based nucleic acid analogue, trifluridine and the thymidine phosphorylase inhibitor, tipiracil hydrochloride. Following the phase III RECOURSE study, it received approval as third line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer showing significant improvement in overall and progression free survival and an acceptable toxicity profile. Methods: We performed a multicenter retrospective observational study of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving TAS-102 as third line treatment between 2016 and 2018 in Cancer centers across the UK. Results: A total of 143 patients were included (94 men, 49 women). Median age was 68 years (35-82). All patients had received at least 2 lines of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy doublet with oxaliplatin or irinotecan. About 90% of patients had ECOG ≥ 1. Median duration of treatment was 2.9 months (0.5-22.9), with a response rate of 1.6% and stable disease achieved in 24%. Median OS was 7 months (95% CI 5.84-8.15) and median PFS 2.6 months (95% CI 2.2-3.36). A dose reduction was required in 28% of patients, while 8% discontinued treatment due to toxicity. AEs reported included fatigue 81.3% (G3 16.8%), nausea 34.5% (G3 4.5%) and diarrhoea 25.5% (G3 1.8%). Neutropenia was common 50.4%, (≥ G3: 25.4%) with 4.2% cases of neutropenic fever while thrombocytopenia was less frequent 8.7% (≥ G3 1.8%). Conclusions: The OS, PFS and ORR observed in our real-world experience were consistent with the RECOURSE trial, though we noted a lower disease control rate. Overall, TAS-102 was well tolerated and the most prevalent adverse events seen in our patients were in keeping with those reported in the trial. Although severe toxicities were less frequent than the trial, we experienced higher rates of toxicity induced dose reductions and treatment cessations, which could reflect the differences between trial and real world populations. Further validation is warranted.

FOENIX-101: A phase II trial of TAS-120 in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma harboring FGFR2 gene rearrangements

TPS468

Background: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) is a cancer arising from the intrahepatic bile duct. Standard treatment of unresectable, recurrent, or metastatic iCCA is with cytotoxic chemotherapy. FGFR2 gene fusions have been identified as oncogenic drivers in 10–20% of iCCA tumors, but no targeted agents have been established to date. TAS-120 is an investigational irreversible FGFR1–4 inhibitor in development as a once-daily oral treatment for iCCA. Based on initial studies in multiple tumor types expressing FGFR abnormalities, iCCA was identified as a tumor type with potential susceptibility to FGFR inhibition and high unmet need. A phase I portion of the trial with an iCCA expansion cohort demonstrated tolerability and preliminary evidence of clinical efficacy with TAS-120 as a continuous, once-daily oral treatment in patients with iCCA. The most common AEs in the phase I portion of the trial were hyperphosphatemia, a mechanism-based on-target side effect, cutaneous AEs, and gastrointestinal AEs. The phase I portion of the study is continuing to enroll, and final results are anticipated in early 2019. Based on preliminary findings, a phase II portion of the study (FOENIX-101; clinicaltrials.gov registration NCT02052778) has been initiated. Methods: The phase II portion of the trial is a global, single-arm study of TAS-120 in patients with iCCA harboring FGFR2 gene rearrangements. The study will enroll approximately 100 adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic iCCA that progressed after ≥ 1 systemic therapies and with an ECOG PS of 0 or 1. Prior systemic therapy must include gemcitabine plus platinum-based chemotherapy. Screening for FGFR2 gene rearrangements will be performed at a central laboratory. The primary endpoint is objective response rate based on RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints include duration of response, disease control rate, overall survival, progression-free survival, safety, and health-related quality of life. Clinical trial information: NCT02052778.

The value of tumour debulking for patients with extensive multi-organ metastatic colorectal cancer

Local treatment of metastases by surgical resection or other ablative therapies is technically feasible in an increasing number of patients with multi-organ metastatic cancer. This results in a growing debate on whether patients with extensive disease, that is traditionally deemed unresectable, may benefit from local treatment of metastases when added to standard palliative systemic therapy. For selected patients with oligometastatic colorectal cancer, local treatment of metastases has become the standard of care based on retrospective reports showing long-term survival rates. In addition to systemic therapy, preliminary evidence suggests that patients with extensive metastatic colorectal cancer may also benefit from local treatment. Here, we present the future perspectives based on the available literature on local treatment approaches in colorectal cancer.

Circulating biomarkers during treatment in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer receiving cediranib in the UK ABC-03 trial

BACKGROUND

Advanced biliary tract cancer (ABC) has a poor prognosis. Cediranib, in addition to cisplatin/gemcitabine [CisGem], improved the response rate, but did not improve the progression-free survival (PFS) in the ABC-03 study. Minimally invasive biomarkers predictive of cediranib benefit may improve patient outcomes.

METHODS

Changes in 15 circulating plasma angiogenesis or inflammatory-related proteins and cytokeratin-18 (CK18), measured at baseline and during therapy until disease progression, were correlated with overall survival (OS) using time-varying covariate Cox models (TVC).

RESULTS

Samples were available from n = 117/124 (94%) patients. Circulating Ang1&2, FGFb, PDGFbb, VEGFC, VEGFR1 and CK18 decreased as a result of the therapy, independent of treatment with cediranib. Circulating VEGFR2 and Tie2 were preferentially reduced by cediranib. Patients with increasing levels of VEGFA at any time had a worse PFS and OS; this detrimental effect was attenuated in patients receiving cediranib. TVC analysis revealed CK18 and VEGFR2 increases correlated with poorer OS in all patients (P < 0.001 and P = 0.02, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Rising circulating VEGFA levels in patients with ABC, treated with CisGem, are associated with worse PFS and OS, not seen in patients receiving cediranib. Rising levels of markers of tumour burden (CK18) and potential resistance (VEGFR2) are associated with worse outcomes and warrant validation.

ABC-08: A phase Ib, multi-centre, open-label study of a first-in-class nucleotide analogue NUC-1031 in combination with cisplatin in patients with locally advanced/metastatic biliary tract cancers

TPS544

Background: The UK ABC-02 study established cisplatin and gemcitabine as the reference regimen for first-line treatment of patients (pts) with advanced biliary tract cancers (BTCs) (median overall survival (OS): 11.7 months). No clinical studies since ABC-02 have reported an extension in OS, and therefore effective new agents/combinations are required. NUC-1031 was designed to improve on gemcitabine’s relatively poor efficacy by overcoming its associated key cancer resistance mechanisms, through cellular uptake independent of nucleoside transporters, activation independent of deoxycytidine kinase and protection from cytidine deaminase inactivation, resulting in over 200x the intracellular levels of the anti-cancer metabolite, dFdCTP, greater stability and reduction in the generation of toxic metabolites. NUC-1031 showed activity as monotherapy in a phase I/II study in 7 pts with BTC, refractory to all standard treatments (Blagden et al ASCO 2015; abstract 2514). Methods: ABC-08 is a multi-centre phase Ib study of NUC-1031 combined with cisplatin in pts with non-resectable or recurrent/metastatic cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder or ampullary carcinoma, aged ≥18 years with an ECOG performance status of 0-1, who have received no prior systemic therapy. The starting dose for NUC-1031 is 625 mg/m2 administered IV on days 1 and 8 in combination with cisplatin (standard dose of 25 mg/m2) (21 day schedule). The dose will be escalated sequentially in cohorts of 3-6 pts using an accelerated titration procedure (725mg/m2, 825mg/m2, 925mg/m2). Treatment will continue until intolerable toxicity/progressive disease. The primary endpoints are safety and RP2D. Secondary endpoints are progression-free survival, OS, response rate and pharmacokinetic endpoints, including assessments of multiple plasma and intracellular analytes: NUC-1031, cisplatin, dFdC, dFdCMP, dFdCDP, dFdCTP and dFdU, and will be correlated with safety profile and clinical activity. Planned accrual is 15-24 pts over 2 years. Cohort 1 has been completed without dose-limiting toxicities. Enrolment to cohort 2 is on-going. Clinical trial information: NCT02351765.

Guidelines for management of urgent symptoms in cholangiocarcinoma (CC) patients (pts) with biliary stents or catheters using the modified RAND/UCLA Delphi process

e15641

Background: CC pts with biliary stents or catheters are prone to have obstruction/infection and studies show 20-40% present with fever/or jaundice requiring urgent treatment for which there is no uniform guideline. We aimed to develop an expert panel consensus on this topic using the modified RAND/UCLA Delphi process to rate treatment appropriateness. Methods: We recruited 13 physician experts from relevant specialty, geography, and practice settings. Patient scenarios were developed and panelists rated the therapies before and after a face-to-face discussion. The appropriateness of various therapies was rated on a 1-9 scale and classified as appropriate, inappropriate, or uncertain. Scenarios with > 2 ratings of 1-3 (inappropriate) and > 2 ratings of 7-9 (appropriate) were considered to have disagreement and were not assigned an appropriateness rating. Results: Panelists were from all US regions (92%) and the UK (8%); had practiced for a mean 16.5 years (4-33 years). Panelists rated 480 scenarios before the meeting, but re-rated only 288 clinical scenarios as they felt that ongoing treatment with chemotherapy did not influence decision-making. Disagreement decreased from 37.5% before the meeting to 10.4% after. Consensus statements are summarized in the table below. Conclusions: The Delphi process produced consensus guidelines to fill an unmet need in urgent management of ascending cholangitis in pts with CC. (Support: The Cholangiocarcinoma Foundation). [Table: see text]

Adjuvant capecitabine for biliary tract cancer: The BILCAP randomized study

4006

Background: Despite improvements in multidisciplinary management, BTC has a poor outcome. Approximately 20% of cases are suitable for surgical resection with a 5 year survival of < 10%. BILCAP aimed to determine whether capecitabine (Cape) improves overall survival (OS) compared to observation (Obs) following radical surgery. Methods: Patients with completely-resected cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) or gallbladder cancer (including liver and pancreatic resection, as appropriate), with adequate biliary drainage, no ongoing infection, adequate renal, haematological and liver function, and ECOG PS ≤2, were randomized 1:1 to Cape (1250 mg/m2 D1-14 every 21 days, for 8 cycles) or Obs. Randomization was minimized on tumor site, resection status, ECOG PS and surgical center. The primary outcome was OS in the intention to treat (ITT) population. 410 patients were needed to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.69 (2-sided α = 0.05 and 80% power). HR was estimated by Cox survival model with adjustment for the minimization factors. Primary analysis performed with at least 24 months (m) follow-up. Results: 447 participants were randomized to Cape (n = 223) or Obs (n = 224) from 44 UK sites between 2006-2014. Median age was 63y (IQR 55, 69) and 201 (45%), 232 (52%), and 14 (3%) patients were ECOG PS 0, 1 and 2 respectively. Primary site: 84 (19%) intrahepatic, 128 (28%) hilar, 156 (35%) extrahepatic CCA and 79 (18%) muscle-invasive gallbladder cancers. Resection margins: R0 in 279 (62%) and R1 in 168 (38%); 207 (46%) were node-negative. Follow up was at least 36m in > 80% of surviving patients. By ITT analysis (n = 447), median OS was 51m (95%CI 35, 59) for Cape and 36m (95%CI 30, 45) for Obs, HR 0.80 (95%CI 0.63, 1.04; p = 0.097). Sensitivity analyses with adjustment for nodal status, grade of disease and gender indicated HR 0.71 (95%CI 0.55, 0.92 p < 0.01). In the per-protocol analysis (Cape n = 210, Obs n = 220) median OS was 53m (95%CI 40, NR) for Cape and 36m (95%CI 30, 44) for Obs, HR 0.75 (95%CI 0.58, 0.97; p = 0.028). Median RFS (ITT) was 25m (95%CI 19, 37) for Cape and 18m (95%CI 13, 28) for Obs. Grade 3-4 toxicity was less than anticipated. Conclusions: Cape improves OS in BTC when used as adjuvant and should become standard of care. Clinical trial information: ISRCTN72785446.

Association of prognostic value of primary tumor location in stage III colon cancer with RAS and BRAF mutational status

3515

Background: Recent data suggest that the anatomic site of colon primary tumor may be an important factor in the interpretation of molecular markers with clinical outcome in metastatic colon cancer (CC) patients (pts). We assessed here the prognostic value of primary location in fully resected stage III CC pts and its relationship to MSI, RAS and BRAF mutational status. Methods: Pts enrolled in the PETACC-8 trial were analyzed. We categorized tumor site as located proximal (left-sided) or distal (right-sided) to the splenic flexure. The association between tumor location and disease free survival (DFS), survival after relapse (SAR) and overall survival (OS) were assessed by Cox models and adjusted for clinical and pathological features, MSI, BRAF and RASmutation status. The outcome of pts receiving FOLFOX or FOLFOX and cetuximab in the adjuvant setting were also determined according to tumor site. Results: Among the 1869 pts with full molecular data available, 755 (40%) had a right-sided tumor, 164 (10%) were MSI, 942 (50%) were mutated for RAS and 212 (11%) were mutated for BRAF. Right-sided tumor was not prognostic for DFS in the whole population but was associated to a shorter SAR (HR: 1.54 [1.23 - 1.93], p = 0.001) and OS (HR: 1.25 [1.02 - 1.54], p = 0.03). Same results were observed for MSS and for MSI pts. However, when looking at pts mutated for RAS or BRAF(MUT) and those double wild type (DWT) for those mutations, we found that right-sided tumors, when compared to left-sided tumors, was associated with a worst DFS in DWT patients (HR:1.39[1.01-1.92], p = 0.04) and a better DFS in MUT patients (HR:0.77[0.63-0.95], p = 0.01). These results were found independently of the treatment received and no beneficial effect of cetuximab on DFS or OS was observed in left-sided tumors. Conclusions: In the whole study population of stage III CC pts, though right-sided tumor location influences OS as previously reported, it does not seem to influence DFS but only SAR, when disease becomes metastatic. Interestingly, sidedness seems to influence DFS when splitting the population in MUT or DWT for RAS and BRAF, with a worst DFS for right-sided tumors in DWT and a worst DFS for left-sided tumors in RAS or BRAF mutants. Clinical trial information: 2005-003463-23.

A randomized phase II trial comparing different schedules of nab-paclitaxel (nabP) combined with gemcitabine (GEM) as first line treatment for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC)

4100

Background: NabP+GEM chemotherapy improves survival compared with GEM monotherapy as treatment for mPDAC. A PDAC mouse model suggested that nabP potentiates GEM activity by reducing cytidine deaminase levels and scheduling may be critical to optimise clinical benefit. Methods: Patients (pts) were randomised to receive standard concomitant (CON) nabP+GEM or sequential (SEQ) administration, with nabP given 24 hours before GEM. After 6 cycles, pts benefiting from treatment could continue the same regimen until disease progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by RECIST v1.1; secondary endpoints included safety, objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS) and quality of life (QoL). Serial blood and baseline tumour samples were collected for exploratory biomarkers. Results: Between March 2014 and 2016, 146 pts (71 SEQ, 75 CON) were recruited. Median age (range) was 66 (45-82) years; Karnofsky performance status was 70 (in 12% pts), 80 (27%), 90 (38%) or 100 (24%); 47% had pancreatic head primaries; 84% had liver metastases. Median no. cycles received was 4 SEQ, 3 CON; 51 pts (35%) received ≥6 cycles of treatment (42% SEQ, 28% CON). A 24+2hr interval was achieved in > 90% SEQ admin. Grade ≥3 adverse events experienced by ≥10% pts (SEQ, CON) were neutropaenia (54%, 30%; p = 0.003), febrile neutropaenia (12%, 12%), fatigue (22%, 15%), vomiting (7%, 11%) and anaemia (10%, 5%). G-CSF was administered at local investigator's discretion to 35 pts (23 SEQ, 12 CON; p = 0.015). To date, 112 pts have died. 6 month (m) PFS by SEQ and CON arms were 47% and 33%; median PFS were 5.8 and 4.0m; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.46-0.95; 12m OS by SEQ and CON arms were 29% and 26%; median OS were 10.1 and 7.9m; HR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.61-1.29. ORR was 50% SEQ and 33% CON (p = 0.065). Mean baseline QoL Global health status score was 60.6 SEQ and 63.4 CON. The mean change in QoL score from baseline at 24 weeks was -2.1 SEQ and -12.1 CON. Conclusions: Sequential delivery of nabP combined with GEM trended towards improving all clinically relevant efficacy end points: PFS, OS, and ORR. Translational correlates will be reported in due course. Clinical trial information: ISRCTN71070888.

Velour trial biomarkers update: Impact of RAS, BRAF, and sidedness on aflibercept activity

3538

Background: Addition of (ziv)-aflibercept (A) to FOLFIRI in second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) has been shown to be beneficial in phase III VELOUR trial (NCT00561470). A follow-up study (NCT01754272) was undertaken to acquire tumor samples for biomarker analyses and identify subgroups of patients with differential treatment effects. The primary results assessing efficacy according to well-established CRC subgroups defined by RAS, BRAF status and sidedness are reported here. Methods: Tissue specimens were collected for 666 patients from 1226 ITT pts. Suitable specimens were assayed for somatic mutation using NGS targeting extended RAS and BRAF genes. NGS assays with no missing values were obtained for 482 pts. Affymetrix gene chip technology was used for whole-transcriptome profiling; sidedness was extracted from available pathological reports. Differences between subgroups were assessed by interaction analysis. Results: The treatment effects on overall survival (OS) for the 482 pts is still significant HR=0.80 (CI 0.65-0.99), and similar to the ITT (n=1226) results (HR=0.82, CI 0.71-0.93). Two established ways of defining mutations (traditional KRAS exon 2 and extended RAS using NGS) show a trend for a differential effect across mutation groups.(see table for OS). Interestingly, BRAF mutants (which are all RAS wild type) show a trend for better outcome Same is seen for PFS and RR. Sidedness did not affect efficacy (HR: 0.83 (0.63- 1.1) for left and HR: 0.83 (0.54-1.3) for right. Conclusions: None of the mutations subgroup results shows significant interaction, although the ratios of treatment HR favor RAS wild types. Similar trends were observed in published trials with bevacizumab or ramucirumab. Sanofi supported this ISS. Clinical trial information: NCT01754272. [Table: see text]

Long-term results and recurrence patterns from SCOPE-1: a phase II/III randomised trial of definitive chemoradiotherapy +/- cetuximab in oesophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

The SCOPE-1 study tested the role of adding cetuximab to conventional definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT), and demonstrated greater toxicity and worse survival outcomes. We present the long-term outcomes and patterns of recurrence.

METHODS

SCOPE-1 was a phase II/III trial in which patients were randomised to cisplatin 60 mg m-2 (day 1) and capecitabine 625 mg m-2 bd (days 1-21) for four cycles +/- cetuximab 400 mg m-2 day 1 then by 250 mg m-2 weekly. Radiotherapy consisted of 50 Gy/25# given concurrently with cycles 3 and 4. Recruitment was between February 2008 and February 2012, when the IDMC recommended closure on the basis of futility.

RESULTS

About 258 patients (dCRT=129; dCRT+cetuximab (dCRT+C)=129) were recruited from 36 centres. About 72.9% (n=188) had squamous cell histology. The median follow-up (IQR) was 46.2 (35.9-48.3) months for surviving patients. The median overall survival (OS; months; 95% CI) was 34.5 (24.7-42.3) in dCRT and 24.7 (18.6-31.3) in dCRT+C (hazard ratio (HR)=1.25, 95% CIs: 0.93-1.69, P=0.137). Median progression-free survival (PFS; months; 95% CI) was 24.1 (15.3-29.9) and 15.9 (10.7-20.8) months, respectively (HR=1.28, 95% CIs: 0.94-1.75; P=0.114). On multivariable analysis only earlier stage, full-dose RT, and higher cisplatin dose intensity were associated with improved OS.

CONCLUSIONS

The mature analysis demonstrates that the dCRT regimen used in the study provided useful survival outcomes despite its use in patients who were largely unfit for surgery or who had inoperable disease. Given the competing risk of systemic and local failure, future studies should continue to focus on enhancing local control as well as optimising systemic therapy.

Consensus treatment guidelines for urgent symptoms in cholangiocarcinoma (CC) patients (pts) with biliary stents or catheters using the modified RAND/UCLA Delphi process

452

Background: CC pts with biliary stents or catheters often present with fever and/or jaundice requiring urgent treatment for which there is no uniform guideline. We aimed to develop an expert panel consensus on this topic using the modified RAND/UCLA Delphi process to rate treatment appropriateness. Methods: We recruited 13 physician experts from relevant specialty, geography, and practice settings. Patient scenarios were developed based on a literature review, and therapies were rated by the experts before and after a face-to-face discussion. The appropriateness of various therapies was rated on a 1-9 scale and classified as appropriate, inappropriate, or uncertain. Scenarios with > 2 ratings of 1-3 (inappropriate) and > 2 ratings of 7-9 (appropriate) were considered to have disagreement and were not assigned an appropriateness rating. Results: Panelists were from all US regions (92%) and the UK (8%); had practiced for a mean 16.5 years (4-33 years) and reported seeing an average of 120 unique CC patients a year (0-900 pts). Panelists rated 288 clinical scenarios. Experts decided that ongoing treatment with chemotherapy did not influence decision-making. Disagreement decreased from 37.5% before the meeting to 10.4% after. Consensus statements are summarized in table 1. Conclusions: The Delphi process produced consensus guidelines to fill an unmet need in urgent management of ascending cholangitis in pts with CC. Studies of the impact of these guidelines on cost of care and pt outcomes are warranted. (Support: The Cholangiocarcinoma Foundation)[Table: see text]

Biliary Tract Cancer: Epidemiology, Radiotherapy, and Molecular Profiling

Biliary tract cancer, or cholangiocarcinoma, arises from the biliary epithelium of the small ducts in the periphery of the liver (intrahepatic) and the main ducts of the hilum (extrahepatic), extending into the gallbladder. The incidence and epidemiology of biliary tract cancer are fluid and complex. It is shown that intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma is on the rise in the Western world, and gallbladder cancer is on the decline. Radiation therapy has emerged as an important component of adjuvant therapy for resected disease and definitive therapy for locally advanced disease. The emerging sophisticated techniques of imaging tumors and conformal dose delivery are expanding the indications for radiotherapy in the management of bile duct tumors. As we understand more about the molecular pathways driving biliary tract cancers, targeted therapies are at the forefront of new therapeutic combinations. Understanding the gene expression profile and mutational burden in biliary tract cancer allows us to better discern the pathogenesis and identify promising new developmental therapeutic targets.