e-Poster Display Session (ID 87) Poster Display

Genitourinary tumours, non-prostate (ID 1147)

Lecture Time
09:00 - 09:00
Location
On-Demand e-Poster Display, Virtual Meeting, Virtual Meeting, Singapore
Date
20.11.2020
Time
09:00 - 20:00
e-Poster Display Session (ID 87) Poster Display

344P - Single-centre analysis of anti-resorptive agent-related osteonecrosis of the jaw in lung cancer patients (ID 135)

Presentation Number
344P
Lecture Time
09:00 - 09:00
Speakers
  • Kohei Fujita (Kyoto, Japan)
Location
On-Demand e-Poster Display, Virtual Meeting, Virtual Meeting, Singapore
Date
20.11.2020
Time
09:00 - 20:00

Abstract

Background

Over the past two decades, anti-resorptive agent-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (ARONJ) has become a growing concern. We examined the incidence of ARONJ and identified its risk factors in lung cancer patients in the real-world clinical setting. To our knowledge, we are the first to do so.

Methods

We retrospectively analysed lung cancer patients with bone metastases who had received anti-resorptive agents (zoledronate or denosumab) at the National Hospital Organization Kyoto Medical Center from October 2012 to September 2018. All ARONJ cases were diagnosed by the dentists according to the established diagnostic criteria.

Results

A total of 171 patients were reviewed, 13 (7.6%) of whom experienced ARONJ. Among the 13 patients, six (46.2%), four (30.8%), and three (23.1%) had adenocarcinoma, squamous carcinoma, and not otherwise specified, respectively. ARONJ was stage 2 in three (23.1%) patients and stage 3 in 10 (76.9%). More cycles of anti-resorptive agents (OR, 11.54; 95% CI, 2.47–53.99; P <0.01), and longer survival duration (≥2 years) (OR, 12.16; 95% CI, 3.17–46.65; P <0.01) were independently associated with ARONJ in a multivariate analysis.

Conclusions

The incidence of ARONJ was relatively high in lung cancer patients with bone metastases. When using anti-resorptive agents, oncologists should closely monitor patients for ARONJ during the course of treatment and regularly consult with dentists.

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Collapse
e-Poster Display Session (ID 87) Poster Display

312P - Identification of neoantigen-specific T cell response and anti-tumour immunity in pancreatic cancer (ID 171)

Presentation Number
312P
Lecture Time
09:00 - 09:00
Speakers
  • Xiaoxiao Du (Hangzhou, China)
Location
On-Demand e-Poster Display, Virtual Meeting, Virtual Meeting, Singapore
Date
20.11.2020
Time
09:00 - 20:00

Abstract

Background

Pancreatic cancer is a highly aggressive malignancy with relatively low morbidity, which is marked by insidious clinical symptoms but rapid development. The therapeutic options of PC are limited for the insensitivity of traditional chemoradiotherapies. The neoantigen-based vaccine is an emerging tumor immune therapeutic option, but limited evidence proved the efficient therapeutic response in pancreatic cancer.

Methods

Whole exome sequencing and bioinformatic analysis as well as quantitative real-time PCR of our previously established human pancreatic cancer cell line were performed to identify neoantigen candidates. The Immunogenicity of prioritized neoantigens was evaluated by analyzing the INF-γ secretion of neoantigen-induced T cell. The antitumor immunity of neoantigen-specific Cytotoxic T cells was examined by the cytotoxicity assay.

Results

The commutative analysis and quantitative real-time PCR identified 13 candidate neoantigens of our previously established human pancreatic cancer cell line PDXPC1 which was confirm as a multi-drug resistant cancer cell line. 4 of 13 candidate neoantigens can be recognized by the immune system and induced strong neoantigen-specific T cell response. The cytotoxic activities mediated by neoantigen-specific T cells significantly inhibited the growth of PDXPC1 tumor cells. Noteworthily, T cells recognized 3 of 4 neoepitopes via the presentation of dendritic cells.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the neoantigens selected by the next generation sequencing and computational algorithm can target the tumor inhibition of pancreatic cancer, which represent a new powerful approach for multidrug resistance and suggest a general strategy for personalized cancer immunotherapy in pancreatic cancer.

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

The Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Collapse
e-Poster Display Session (ID 87) Poster Display

164P - The impact of sarcopenia on chemotherapy toxicity and survival rate among hepatocellular carcinoma patients who underwent chemotherapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis (ID 231)

Presentation Number
164P
Lecture Time
09:00 - 09:00
Speakers
  • Elizabeth Marcella (Tangerang, Indonesia)
Location
On-Demand e-Poster Display, Virtual Meeting, Virtual Meeting, Singapore
Date
20.11.2020
Time
09:00 - 20:00

Abstract

Background

Sarcopenia is the loss of skeletal muscle mass and function that occurs with advancing age and certain diseases. It is a complication and independent risk factor for chemotherapy toxicity and mortality in patients with liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. The aim of this study was to study the impact of sarcopenia on chemotherapy toxicity and survival among hepatocellular carcinoma patients who underwent chemotherapy.

Methods

A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. A literature search was conducted by two independent reviewers on all studies that included sarcopenia in hepatocellular carcinoma patients who underwent chemotherapy using PubMed, PubMed central, and Google Scholar databases. Study included elderly population was excluded. Outcome of interest included chemotherapy toxicity and overall survival. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using Review Manager software.

Results

A total of 10 studies were eligible for meta-analysis including a total of 1203 hepatocellular carcinoma patients. All included studies were retrospective cohort. Meta-analysis revealed a significant association between sarcopenia and overall survival (HR 1.76; 95% CI 1.37 – 2.25; P < 0.001). Sarcopenia was also associated with incidence of chemotherapy toxicity (OR 2.84; 95% CI 1.35 – 5.96; P = 0.006), including hand-foot syndrome, diarrhea, hepatic encephalopathy and hypertension. The quality of study assessed with Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) showed “poor” in only 2 included studies while the remaining 8 studies were graded as “good”.

Conclusions

Sarcopenia can give negative impact on chemotherapy toxicities and survival outcomes for hepatocellular carcinoma patients who underwent chemotherapy. Prospective studies with a uniform definition of sarcopenia and same chemotherapy regimen are still needed.

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Collapse
e-Poster Display Session (ID 87) Poster Display

158P - A phase II study of trastuzumab with S-1 plus oxaliplatin for HER2-positive advanced gastric cancer (HIGHSOX study): Final report (ID 275)

Presentation Number
158P
Lecture Time
09:00 - 09:00
Speakers
  • Atsuo Takashima (Tokyo, Japan)
Location
On-Demand e-Poster Display, Virtual Meeting, Virtual Meeting, Singapore
Date
20.11.2020
Time
09:00 - 20:00

Abstract

Background

We previously reported that trastuzumab (Tmab) combined with S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) exhibited promising activity with well-tolerated toxicities in patients (pts) with human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2)-positive advanced gastric cancer (AGC) (Gastric Cancer 2019). Here, we report the results of a follow-up extension, including exploratory analyses performed to investigate predictive factors for treatment effects.

Methods

We conducted an open-label, phase II trial in pts with chemo-naïve, HER2-positive AGC. Pts received S-1 (40 mg/m2) BID orally on days 1–14, oxaliplatin (130 mg/m2) intravenously on day 1, and Tmab (course 1, 8 mg/kg; course 2, 6 mg/kg) intravenously on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR); secondary end points included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events. A sample of 75 provided the study with 90% power to test a hypothesis of threshold RR of 50% and an expected RR of 65% at a one-sided significance level of 0.05 using the binomial test.

Results

Seventy-five patients were enrolled from June 2015 to January 2018. Pts characteristics were previously reported. In the full analysis set of 75 pts with a median follow up of 20.6 months, ORR was 70.7% (95% confidence interval (CI): 59.0–80.6) and the disease control rate was 93.3% (95% CI: 85.1–97.8). OS and PFS (median) were 20.6 (95% CI: 15.9–29.2) and 8.8 (95% CI: 7.3–11.8) months, respectively. In the exploratory analyses, both OS and PFS were longer in pts with HER2 3+ (n=55) than in pts with 2+ (n=20) [OS, 25.9 vs.16.3 months; hazard ratio (HR), 0.59; 95% CI: 0.329–1.053; P=0.07; PFS, 9.8 vs. 7.0 months; HR, 0.72; 95% CI: 0.421–1.229; P=0.23]. Pts who underwent conversion surgery (n=8) exhibited dramatically prolonged survival [OS, not reached; 3-year survival rate, 85.7% (95% CI: 33.4–97.9), PFS, 34.5 months (95% CI: 6.9–not reached)].

Conclusions

Tmab in combination with SOX exhibited promising therapeutic effects in pts with HER2-positive AGC. Efficacy was enhanced in pts with HER2 3+ and in those who underwent conversion surgery.

Clinical trial identification

UMIN000017602.

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Japanese Foundation for Multidisciplinary Treatment of Cancer.

Disclosure

A. Takashima: Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (self): Taiho; Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (self): Takeda; Honoraria (self): Eli Lilly; Honoraria (self): Ono; Honoraria (self): Yakult; Honoraria (self): Chugai; Research grant/Funding (self): Sumitomo Dainippon; Research grant/Funding (institution): LSK BioPartners. K. Minashi: Research grant/Funding (institution): MSD; Research grant/Funding (institution): Ono. S. Kadowaki: Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (institution): Taiho; Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (institution): Eli Lilly; Research grant/Funding (institution): Ono; Research grant/Funding (institution): BMS; Honoraria (self): Yakult; Honoraria (self): Chugai; Honoraria (self): Bayer; Honoraria (self): Merck. T. Nishina: Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (institution): Taiho; Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (institution): Eli Lilly; Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (institution): Ono; Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (institution): BMS; Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (institution): Chugai; Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (institution): Yakult; Honoraria (self): Daiichi Sankyo; Honoraria (self): Dainippon Sumitomo; Honoraria (self): Boehringer Ingelheim; Honoraria (self): MSD. K. Amagai: Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (institution): Taiho; Research grant/Funding (institution): MSD; Honoraria (self): Eli Lilly; Honoraria (self): BMS; Honoraria (self): Yakult; Honoraria (self): Chugai; Honoraria (self): Daiichi Sankyo; Honoraria (self): Hisamitsu. N. Machida: Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (self): Taiho; Honoraria (self): Eli Lilly ; Honoraria (self): Ono; Honoraria (self): BMS; Honoraria (self): Yakult; Honoraria (self): Chugai; Honoraria (self): Nippon Kayaku; Honoraria (self): Daiichi Sankyo; Honoraria (self): MSD. M. Goto: Honoraria (self): Taiho; Honoraria (self): Yakult; Honoraria (self): Chugai; Honoraria (self): Ono; Honoraria (self): Takeda; Honoraria (self): Kyowa Hakko Kirin; Honoraria (self): Novartis; Honoraria (self): Bayer; Honoraria (self): Mochida. N. Ishizuka: Honoraria (self): BMS; Honoraria (self): Novartis; Honoraria (self): MSD. D. Takahari: Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (institution): Taiho; Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (institution): Ono; Honoraria (self): Eli Lilly; Honoraria (self): BMS. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Collapse
e-Poster Display Session (ID 87) Poster Display

399P - Real-world insights into patients (pts) with advanced NSCLC and MET alterations (ID 330)

Presentation Number
399P
Lecture Time
09:00 - 09:00
Speakers
  • Marisa Bittoni (Columbus, AL, United States of America)
Location
On-Demand e-Poster Display, Virtual Meeting, Virtual Meeting, Singapore
Date
20.11.2020
Time
09:00 - 20:00

Abstract

Background

Pts with NSCLC and MET exon 14 skipping (METex14; 3–4%) or MET amplification (METamp; 1–2%) have not been well characterized; this study aimed to address this gap.

Methods

This non-interventional descriptive cohort study used real-world data extracted from electronic medical records from academic oncology centers in Israel, The Netherlands, Taiwan, and the USA. Pts had confirmed diagnosis of advanced (stage IIIB–IV) NSCLC (date of diagnosis=index date) between 1 Jan 2010 and 30 Sept 2018 and MET alterations. Medical history was assessed prior to and at the index date (baseline period) and outcomes from first date of treatment to death, loss to follow-up, or end of the study period.

Results

70 pts had METex14 tumors and 47 pts had METamp tumors; testing methods were heterogenous. Concomitant oncogenic mutations were more common in METamp than METex14 pts; 9% of METex14 pts had concomitant METamp. Records of systemic therapy for advanced disease were available for 58 (83%) pts in the METex14 cohort and 36 (77%) pts in the METamp cohort. Common treatments (METex14 vs METamp) were platinum-based therapy (1st line [1L], 44 vs 41%; 2nd line [2L], 35 vs 30%) and MET inhibitor monotherapy (1L, 33 vs 29%; 2L, 30 vs 39%). Immune checkpoint inhibitors (±chemotherapy) were used across 1L (13 vs 16%) and 2L (35 vs 13%). Median (95% CI) time to next treatment or death was 6.3 months (4.8, 10.9) for 1L (n=52) and 7.8 months (3.9, 11.3) for 2L (n=23) in the METex14 cohort and 9.0 months (6.1, 11.7) for 1L (n=34) and 5.1 months (3.3, 12.8) for 2L (n=23) in the METamp cohort. Median (95% CI) overall survival from start of 1L therapy (any) was 12.0 months (6.8, 19.2) in METex14 and 22.0 months (9.8, 31.2) in the METamp cohort

METex14 (n=70) METamp (n=47)
Biopsy method; liquid/tissue 81%/20% 77%/26%
Age, median (range); years 74 (37, 92) 63 (37, 87)
Gender, male 51% 68%
Race: White Asian Other 59% 34% 7% 85% 4% 11%
Smoking history (ever smokers) 49% 79%
Advanced disease at diagnosis 83% 65%
Histology: Adenocarcinoma squamous cell carcinoma sarcomatoid 84% 1% 6% 82% 4% 2%
Brain metastases* 19% 25%
Comorbidity: Uncomplicated diabetes peripheral vascular disease chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 10% 9% 9% 6% 2% 13%

Patient records were from Israel (n=18), The Netherlands (n=13), Taiwan (n=23), and the USA (n=63). *Data on brain metastases were available for 52 pts in the METex14 cohort and 28 pts in the METamp cohort.

.

Conclusions

Heterogeneous treatments reflect the changing landscape and availability of new treatments, as well as the high unmet medical need in pts with METex14 who were older and had more advanced disease at diagnosis. Screening for these alterations in pts with advanced NSCLC is warranted.

Editorial acknowledgement

Medical writing assistance (funded by Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany) was provided by Syneos Health, London, UK.

Legal entity responsible for the study

Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.

Funding

Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.

Disclosure

J.C-H. Yang: Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: Boehringer Ingelheim; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: Eli Lilly; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: Bayer; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: Roche/Genentech; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: Chugai Pharmaceutical; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: MSD; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: Pfizer; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: Novartis; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: BMS; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: Ono Pharmaceuticals; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: AstraZeneca; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: ACT Genomics; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: Merck Serono; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: Celgene; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: Yuhan Pharmaceuticals; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: Daiichi Sankyo; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: Hansoh Pharmaceuticals; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: Takeda Pharmaceuticals; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: Blueprint Medicines; Advisory/Consultancy, personal fees: Amgen. J-Y. Shih: Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: AstraZeneca; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: Roche; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: Boehringer Ingelheim; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: Eli Lilly; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: Pfizer; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: Novartis; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: Merck Sharp & Dohme; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: Ono Pharmaceutical; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: Chugai Takeda; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: Bristol-Myers Squibb. N. Peled: Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): AstraZeneca; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Bayer; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Boehringer Ingelheim; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Bristol-Myers Squibb; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Eli Lilly; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Foundation Medicine; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Gaurdant360; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Merck; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): MSD; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Novartis; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): NovellusDx; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Pfizer; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Roche; Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Takeda. E. Smit: Advisory/Consultancy: Lilly; Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution): AstraZeneca; Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution): Boehringer Ingelheim; Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution): Roche/Genentech; Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution): Bristol-Myers Squibb; Advisory/Consultancy: Merck KGaA; Advisory/Consultancy: MSD Oncology; Advisory/Consultancy: Takeda; Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution): Bayer; Advisory/Consultancy: Regeneron; Advisory/Consultancy: Novartis; Advisory/Consultancy: Daiichi Sankyo; Advisory/Consultancy: Seattle Genetics. R. Camidge: Advisory/Consultancy: Anchiarno; Advisory/Consultancy: Amgen; Advisory/Consultancy, Leadership role, Research grant/Funding (self), Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): Takeda; Advisory/Consultancy: Roche; Advisory/Consultancy: EMD Serono; Advisory/Consultancy: Sanofi; Advisory/Consultancy, Leadership role, Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): Pfizer; Advisory/Consultancy: CBT Pharmaceuticals; Advisory/Consultancy, Interstitial Lung Disease adjudication committee: Daiichi-Sankyo; Advisory/Consultancy, data safety monitoring board: G1 Therapeutics; Advisory/Consultancy, data safety monitoring board: Bio-Thera; Advisory/Consultancy: Blueprint; Advisory/Consultancy, Leadership role, Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): Abbvie; Advisory/Consultancy: Achilles; Advisory/Consultancy: BeyondSpring; Advisory/Consultancy, standing Scientific Review Committee: Apollomics; Advisory/Consultancy, standing Scientific Review Committee: 14ner/Elevation; Advisory/Consultancy: Archer; Advisory/Consultancy: Helssin; Advisory/Consultancy, Leadership role, Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): Bristol-Myers Squibb; Advisory/Consultancy: Eli Lilly; Advisory/Consultancy: Medtronic; Advisory/Consultancy: Ribon; Advisory/Consultancy, Leadership role, Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): AstraZeneca; Advisory/Consultancy: Arrys/Kyn; Advisory/Consultancy: Regeneron; Advisory/Consultancy: Hengrui; Advisory/Consultancy, Scientific Review Committee and Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): Hansoh; Advisory/Consultancy, Leadership role, Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): Roche/Genentech; Advisory/Consultancy: Inivata; Leadership role, Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): GlaxoSmithKline; Leadership role, Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): Inhibrx; Leadership role, Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): Lycera; Leadership role, Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): MedImmune; Leadership role, Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): Merck; Leadership role, Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): Pfizer; Leadership role, Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): Phosplatin; Leadership role, Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): Psioxus; Leadership role, Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): Rain; Leadership role, Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): Seattle Genetics; Leadership role, Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): Symphogen; Leadership role, Principle investigator for company sponsored trials (institution): Tolero. D. Carbone: Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: AstraZeneca; Honoraria (self): Nexus Oncology; Advisory/Consultancy: AbbVie; Advisory/Consultancy: Bayer; Advisory/Consultancy: Biothera; Advisory/Consultancy: Boehringer Ingelheim; Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Bristol-Myers Squibb; Advisory/Consultancy: Clovis Oncology; Advisory/Consultancy: Genentech/Roche; Advisory/Consultancy: Helsinn Therapeutics; Advisory/Consultancy: Incyte; Advisory/Consultancy: Inivata; Advisory/Consultancy: Loxo Oncology; Advisory/Consultancy: Merck; Advisory/Consultancy: Novartis; Advisory/Consultancy: Peregrine Pharmaceuticals; Advisory/Consultancy: Pfizer; Advisory/Consultancy: Synta. D. Oksen, E. Boutmy, A. Johne: Full/Part-time employment: Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany. P. Paik: Advisory/Consultancy: AbbVie; Advisory/Consultancy: Bristol-Myers Squibb; Advisory/Consultancy: Calithera; Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (institution): Celgene; Advisory/Consultancy: Lilly; Advisory/Consultancy: Takeda; Research grant/Funding (self), Research grant/Funding (institution): EMD Serono. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Collapse
e-Poster Display Session (ID 87) Poster Display

369P - The surgical perspective in neoadjuvant immunotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (ID 375)

Presentation Number
369P
Lecture Time
09:00 - 09:00
Speakers
  • Long Jiang (Hangzhou, Guangdong, China)
Location
On-Demand e-Poster Display, Virtual Meeting, Virtual Meeting, Singapore
Date
20.11.2020
Time
09:00 - 20:00

Abstract

Background

More recently, the novel conception of neoadjuvant immunotherapy has generated interest among surgeons worldwide, especially the lack of experience involving surgical treatment for the neoadjuvant immunotherapy population. To address this, the current study was conducted to report the analysis of surgical perspective outcome data after neoadjuvant immunotherapy followed by surgery for resectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Methods

The current retrospective study was conducted at Shanghai Chest Hospital, an ultra-high-volume tertiary thoracic surgery center in Shanghai, China. Patients with NSCLC, who underwent neoadjuvant immunotherapy or chemo-immunotherapy were retrospectively collected between September 2018 and April 2020. Demographic data, pathologic and clinical features, therapeutic regimens, and outcome data of all individuals were collected by retrospective chart review. Operative details, information of neoadjuvant therapy, were also abstracted.

Results

Of the 14901 patients underwent lung resection in our institute during the study period, 31 patients received neoadjuvant immunotherapy or chemo-immunotherapy for at least 2 courses were included in the study. The patients’ median age was 61 years. 29 of the patients were males while 2 were females. Patients received a median of 3 doses before resection. The median duration from final treatment to surgery was 34 days. After neoadjuvant treatment, post-treatment computed tomography scan showed that 24 patients had partial response. 12 of 31 patients had a major pathologic response, 15 pathologic downstaging. Three patients had no residual viable tumor. A positive surgical margin was identified in 7 cases. One or more postoperative complications occurred in 18 of all 31 patients. 26 of these 31 patients underwent next-generation sequencing (NGS) before surgery in total. Among them, 2 patients (7.7%) were detected STK11 mutations. None of these 2 individuals had an MPR by final pathological examination.

Conclusions

Pulmonary resection after neoadjuvant immunotherapy or chemo-immunotherapy for resectable NSCLC appears to be safe with low operative mortality and morbidity rate in the current population.

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81702251 and 81972176), the Science Foundation of Shanghai (No.18ZR1435100) and Shanghai Hospital Development Center (SHDC12016113).

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Collapse
e-Poster Display Session (ID 87) Poster Display

422P - Response rate and time to progression after first line chemotherapy with cisplatin and adriamycin in patients with metastatic osteosarcoma at presentation (ID 410)

Presentation Number
422P
Lecture Time
09:00 - 09:00
Speakers
  • Sivasubramaniam Kumaravelu (Chennai, India)
Location
On-Demand e-Poster Display, Virtual Meeting, Virtual Meeting, Singapore
Date
20.11.2020
Time
09:00 - 20:00

Abstract

Background

Metastatic osteosarcoma at presentation forms 10 to 20% of total osteosarcomas diagnosed. They have a very poor prognosis compared to non-metastatic subset. Patients with resectable metastasis have a better DFS and OS compared to unresectable metastatic disease at presentation. This study was done to find the response rate to first line cisplatin and adriamycin combination chemotherapy to upfront metastatic osteosarcoma patients and time to progression after first line chemotherapy. Secondary objective was to find the overall survival.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with osteosarcoma at madras medical college were identified from the database for a period of 5.5 years from January 2013 to June 2018. From that patients who had metastasis at presentation were further sorted out and taken for analysis.

Results

77 patients were diagnosed to have osteosarcoma during the 5.5year period. Among them 36 patients had metastatic disease at presentation. 28 patients were male (77.8%) and 8 patients were female (22.2%). Median age of the patients was 19.5 years. 23 patients had ECOG PS 2 (63.9%) and 12 had ECOG PS 1 (33.3%) and 1 had ECOG PS 3 (2.8%). Tibia and femur were the most common primary site (75%). 5 patients had resectable lung metastasis and underwent pulmonary metastasectomy and were excluded from analysis and 1 patient was on palliative care only. Among remaining 30 patients, 27 patients had multiple lung metastasis (90%) and 3 patients had bone metastasis (10%). 30 patients received 6 cycles of chemotherapy with adriamycin 25mg/m2 on d1-d3 and cisplatin 100mg/m2 on d1 repeated every 21 days except 3 who progressed during chemotherapy. 17 patients (56.7%) had grade 1-2 vomiting. No one developed any acute cardiotoxicity. No treatment related death occurred. At the end of 6 cycles, 22 patients (73.3%) had partial response and 5 patients (16.7%) had stable disease and 3 patients (10%) had progressive disease. Median time to progression was 11.5 months. 2year OS was 73.3%.

Conclusions

This platinum doublet is a reasonable option for these patients as most of them are young.

Legal entity responsible for the study

Sivasubramaniam Kumaravelu.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Collapse
e-Poster Display Session (ID 87) Poster Display

100P - Individualized treatment of advanced digestive system tumour guided by PDTX mouse model: A multicenter trial (ID 499)

Presentation Number
100P
Lecture Time
09:00 - 09:00
Speakers
  • Yuan Cheng (Nanjing, China)
Location
On-Demand e-Poster Display, Virtual Meeting, Virtual Meeting, Singapore
Date
20.11.2020
Time
09:00 - 20:00

Abstract

Background

To explore the clinical feasibility of the patient-derived tumor xenograft (PDTX or PDX) mouse model in guiding the individualized precise treatment of advanced digestive system tumors through a multicenter clinical study.

Methods

14 centers participated the trial in China. Fresh tumor tissues were obtained by surgery and biopsy, then engrafted subcutaneously into immune deficient mice. When the tumor volume grew to 60 mm3, the modeling was successful. The consistency of the original tissue (PA) and the engrafted tissue (P0) was analyzed by pathological comparison. The tumorigenesis time model was recorded. After successful modeling, medication was administered in groups according to the recommended regimen for 21 days. The tumor growth inhibition rate (TGI) was recorded and evaluated as positive if TGI > 60%. According to RECIST 1.1, DCR (SD, PR, CR) was evaluated as positive in clinical synchronous treatment. The two results were compared to evaluate the accuracy of guiding clinical medication.

Results

A total of 33 patients with different advanced digestive system tumors were included, including 2 cases of esophageal cancer, 10 cases of colorectal cancer, 10 cases of pancreatic cancer, 5 cases of gastric cancer, 3 cases of liver cancer, 2 cases of duodenal adenocarcinoma and 1 case of gallbladder cancer. The successful rate of tumor xenograft modeling was 75.8% (25/33), including 78.3% (18/23) in small samples and 70% (7/10) in surgical samples. Pathological results showed that the consistency of P0 and PA was 100% in 25 cases. The average tumorigenesis time of PDTX model was 42 days. Pharmacodynamic tests were completed in 17 cases, including 28 kinds of drugs and 49 regimens. The clinical efficacy of 10 regimens in 9 patients were evaluated as PR in 2 cases, SD in 6 cases and PD in 2 cases. The results of pharmacodynamic test were consistent with clinical synchronous efficacy.

Conclusions

PDTX mouse model has high successful modeling rate with the biological and pathological characteristics of primary tumor, and the results of pharmacodynamic test are highly consistent with the clinical efficacy. It can be used as a individualized diagnosis and treatment technique of advanced gastrointestinal tumors.

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Nanjing Personal Oncology Biotechnology Co. Ltd.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Collapse
e-Poster Display Session (ID 87) Poster Display

78P - Novel allogeneic cell immunotherapy for advanced cancers (ID 518)

Presentation Number
78P
Lecture Time
09:00 - 09:00
Speakers
  • Ratnavelu Kananathan (Nilai, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia)
Location
On-Demand e-Poster Display, Virtual Meeting, Virtual Meeting, Singapore
Date
20.11.2020
Time
09:00 - 20:00

Abstract

Background

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) and CAR-T cell immunotherapies have provided new treatment options for many patients with metastatic disease and hematological malignancy, respectively, inducing durable responses in some cases. CAR-T is not indicated for solid tumors and ICI responsiveness requires high tumor mutational load, CD8+ T cell infiltration and positive IFN-γ status, defining an inflamed phenotype (“hot tumors”). However, the majority of metastatic tumors present as non-inflamed (“cold tumors”), thus limiting the applicability of ICI to a minority subset of patients with highly immunogenic tumors. Immunological treatment of cold tumors is a great challenge as no pre-existing adaptive immune response has been established or maintained.

Methods

AlloStim®, was used on compassionate grounds AlloStim® is currently being evaluated in a phase IIB clinical trial in USA in MSI-S, chemotherapy-refractory, metastatic colorectal cancer patients, an indication known to present with “cold” lesions and to be non-responsive to ICI. AlloStim® is a living, non-genetically manipulated, allogeneic Th1-like cell therapy derived from precursor cells purified, expanded and differentiated from blood of normal donors. The AlloStim® mechanism of action is purported to convert “cold” tumors to “hot” tumors and naturally down-regulate checkpoint molecules in the tumor microenvironment. Single dose vials of formulated AlloStim® cells were delivered to our center in liquid nitrogen dry shippers. Administered either intradermally (ID) or intravenously (IV). The protocol included 3 weekly intradermal (ID) injections followed a week later by an intravenous (IV) infusion. This 4-week cycle was repeated 3 times. Upon approval of our institutional review board and obtaining informed consent.

Results

7 patients were acured 3 advanced/metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma, 2 breast cancer, 1 gall bladder and 1 Nasopharyngeal cancer. Due to the advanced status and poor ECOG status, only 3 completed the treatment schedule. 2 were still stable and alive at 1-year follow-up without receiving any other systemic therapy.

Conclusions

Simple to administer, minimal side-effects and appears to have activity in refractory metastatic disease. Further controlled clinical trials is warranted.

Legal entity responsible for the study

Kananathan.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

M. Har Noy: Leadership role, Shareholder/Stockholder/Stock options, Officer/Board of Directors: Mirror Biologics Inc. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Collapse
e-Poster Display Session (ID 87) Poster Display

51P - Real world outcomes in elderly women with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer (ID 547)

Presentation Number
51P
Lecture Time
09:00 - 09:00
Speakers
  • Nicole Evans (Box Hill, Australia)
Location
On-Demand e-Poster Display, Virtual Meeting, Virtual Meeting, Singapore
Date
20.11.2020
Time
09:00 - 20:00

Abstract

Background

The development of anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) therapies has significantly improved disease outcomes in patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer (ABC). However, elderly patients are largely under-represented in clinical trials. We examined treatment patterns and outcomes in an elderly (defined as ≥70) ‘real world’ Australian population.

Methods

Data was extracted from the Treatment of Advanced Breast Cancer in the HER2-positive Australian Patient (TABITHA) multi-site clinical registry, and patients stratified according to age (<70 and ≥70 years). Descriptive statistics were used to report baseline characteristics and compared using T-tests and Chi square analyses. Treatment duration and overall survival were calculated via the Kaplan-Meier method.

Results

We identified 319 patients, including 67 patients (21%) aged ≥70 years. Older patients were more likely to have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of ≥2 (16% vs 3%; p<0.001) and a Charlson Comorbidity Index of ≥2 (13% vs 7%; p<0.001). There were no significant differences in hormone receptor status, de novo metastatic presentation, or presence of visceral disease. A similar proportion of patients in each group received first line HER2-directed therapy, and the duration of therapy was not significantly different. Despite no difference in the proportion of patients who received first-line chemotherapy, older patients demonstrated shorter chemotherapy durations (2.7 months vs 3.5 months; p<0.02). Median overall survival was significantly longer in younger patients (82.4 months vs 42.3 months; hazard ratio, 0.50; 95%CI, 0.29-0.87; p<0.001). In the first-line setting, adverse events rates were higher in the older group (34% vs 20%; p=0.04), including cardiotoxicity (7% vs 0.9%; p=0.02), and on-treatment deaths (5% vs 0%; p=0.01).

Conclusions

Elderly patients with HER2-positive ABC demonstrated shorter chemotherapy durations, poorer overall survival, and increased rates of adverse events despite having similar disease characteristics and treatment patterns. Prospective studies are required to improve outcomes in the elderly population.

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Collapse
e-Poster Display Session (ID 87) Poster Display

192P - A multicenter crossover analysis of first and second-line FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel administered to pancreatic cancer patients: Results from the NAPOLEON study (ID 581)

Presentation Number
192P
Lecture Time
09:00 - 09:00
Speakers
  • Kenta Nio (Fukuoka, Fukuoka, Japan)
Location
On-Demand e-Poster Display, Virtual Meeting, Virtual Meeting, Singapore
Date
20.11.2020
Time
09:00 - 20:00

Abstract

Background

FOLFIRINOX (FFX) and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) are considered standard 1st-line chemotherapy (CTx) for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer, and reports about the effects of FFX and GnP as 2nd-line CTx have been accumulating. However, compared data of two crossover sequences and those of the comparison of the crossover sequences with others are unknown.

Methods

We investigated the efficacies of the two crossover sequences using the data of the multicenter observational study conducted in patients with CTx-naive advanced or unresectable pancreatic cancer (AUPC) treated with FFX or GnP from 14 hospitals in Japan during the period from December 2013 to June 2018. Patient characteristics and clinical outcomes including overall survival (OS), time-to-first and -second progression (TTFP/TTSP) and overall response rate (ORR) were analyzed between the two crossover groups [CG] firstly. Then, the efficacies of them were compared with non-crossover groups [NCG].

Results

Of 318 AUPC patients, 118 and 200 patients received FFX and GnP as 1st-line CTx, respectively. Of these, 91 and 100 patients received 2nd-line CTx, of which 72 (79%) and 17 (17%) patients were shifted to GnP (F-to-G) and FFX (G-to-F), respectively (p<0.01). The F-to-G group comprised more patients with higher body mass index, biliary drainage, peritoneal metastasis, and maximal tumor size of 20 mm or larger at baseline. In the two crossover sequences, there was no significant difference in the median OS (11.5 vs. 16.4 months; hazard ratio [HR] 1.25; p=0.45) between the F-to-G and G-to-F groups, respectively. No significant differences in the ORR of 1st-line (p=0.12) and 2nd-line (p=0.74) were seen. The median TTFP and TTSP were also comparable between the two groups (5.7 vs. 5.0 months; HR 0.99; p=0.97, 8.8 vs. 12.2 months; HR 1.12; 95% CI 0.67-2.02; p=0.58), respectively. Then, the median OS in the CG (n=89) was not significantly longer than that in the NCG (n=99) (11.6 vs. 12.8 months; HR 1.24; p=0.19).

Conclusions

There were no significant efficacy differences between the two CGs. The OS of CG was not statistically superior to NCG in our study.

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Collapse