The Pretreatment Controlling Nutritional Status Score in Ovarian Cancer: Influence on Prognosis, Surgical Outcome, and Postoperative Complication Rate

Introduction The Controlling Nutritional (CONUT) Status score is an established predictor of impaired prognosis in patients with solid tumors. The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic value of the CONUT score for overall survival and perioperative complication rates in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Patients In this retrospective study we assessed the data of 337 consecutive patients with ovarian cancer. The CONUT score was associated with surgical outcome, postoperative complications and clinicopathological parameters. We used univariate log-rank test and multivariable Cox regression models to evaluate the association between pretreatment CONUT scores and survival. Results A low CONUT score (0 – 2) was associated with an early FIGO stage (p = 0.004), complete tumor resection (p < 0.001), less neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.017) and other histologies than serous cystadenocarcinoma (p = 0.006). Postoperative complications were observed in 51.4% and 60.5% of patients with a CONUT score of 0 – 2 and a score > 2, respectively (p = 0.161). A shorter overall survival was observed in patients with a CONUT score > 2 compared to patients with a low CONUT score, with 5-year overall survival rates of 31.5% and 58.7%, respectively (p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, both advanced age (p < 0.001) and FIGO stage (p < 0.001), residual disease (p < 0.001) and a high CONUT score (p = 0.048) were independently associated with unfavorable overall survival. Conclusion Pretreatment CONUT score is an independent prognostic marker for overall survival and associated with successful surgery. Patients with a high CONUT score might benefit from pretreatment nutritional intervention.

Preoperative nutritional score predicts underlying liver status and surgical risk of hepatocellular carcinoma

Background: Given the scarce evidence regarding the impact of preoperative nutritional status on surgical outcomes of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, predictive powers of nutritional/inflammatory scores for short-term surgical outcomes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma were investigated. Methods: Outcomes of 1272 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma were reviewed, and predictive powers of nine nutritional/inflammatory scores for short-term surgical outcomes were compared using the receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis. Clinical relevance of the best nutritional score was then studied in detail to clarify its utility as an alternative predictive measure for surgical risk of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Results: Receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis showed the controlling nutritional status score has the best performance in prediction of morbidity after hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (area under the curve, 0.593; 95% confidence interval: 0.552–0.635; p < 0.001), and multivariate analysis confirmed its correlation with the risk of any morbidity (odds ratio per +1 point, 1.17; 95% confidence interval: 1.08–1.27; p < 0.001) and major morbidity (odds ratio per +1 point, 1.14; 95% confidence interval: 0.99–1.27; p = 0.052). The undernutrition grade based on the controlling nutritional status score showed strong correlation with the degree of fibrosis in the liver ( p < 0.001), platelet count ( p < 0.001), and indocyanine green retention rate at 15 min ( p < 0.001). In addition, the controlling nutritional status undernutrition grade well stratified the risk of postoperative morbidity especially in cirrhotic subpopulation (odds ratio, 1.17 per +1 point; 95% confidence interval: 1.05–1.29 for any morbidity and odds ratio, 1.20 per +1 point; 95% confidence interval: 1.03–1.40 for major morbidity). Conclusion: The controlling nutritional status score could be an alternative measure for underlying liver injury and the surgical risk of hepatocellular carcinoma.

418 Phase 1b/2 KEYNOTE-365 cohort I: platinum-containing chemotherapy alone or in combination with pembrolizumab for treatment-emergent neuroendocrine prostate carcinoma

BackgroundTreatment-emergent neuroendocrine prostate carcinoma (t-NE) can occur de novo or after diagnosis of prostate adenocarcinoma. Treatment often includes platinum-containing chemotherapy because of t-NE’s histologic similarity to small cell lung cancer. The PD-1 inhibitor pembrolizumab has shown promising efficacy and acceptable safety when combined with olaparib, docetaxel, or enzalutamide for treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in the multicohort phase 1b/2 KEYNOTE-365 study (NCT02861573). Cohort I will be used to compare platinum-containing chemotherapy alone with chemotherapy + pembrolizumab as treatment for t-NE.MethodsPatients who have t-NE (≥1% neuroendocrine cells in a recent biopsy specimen confirmed by central histology review); experienced progression within 6 months of starting a next-generation hormonal agent (NHA) for mCRPC or hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and experienced progression within 6 cycles of docetaxel treatment for mCRPC; and have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score of 0 or 1 are eligible. Prior therapy with ≤2 NHAs and 1 other chemotherapy for mCRPC is permitted. Patients will be randomly assigned 1:1 to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg IV on day 1 of each cycle every 3 weeks + carboplatin AUC of 5 IV on day 1 + etoposide 100 mg/m2 IV on days 1, 2, and 3 of each 21-day cycle for 4 cycles (arm 1) or the same chemotherapy regimen without pembrolizumab (arm 2); in each arm 40–100 patients will be enrolled. Pembrolizumab treatment will continue up to 2 years until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. Patients will be stratified by ECOG performance status score (0 or 1). Computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging will be performed every 9 weeks through week 54 and every 12 weeks thereafter. Primary end points are safety and tolerability, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate, and objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary end points are time to PSA progression; ORR and radiographic progression-free survival (PFS) per PCWG3-modified RECIST v1.1 by BICR; duration of response and disease control rate per RECIST v1.1 by BICR and PCWG3-modified RECIST v1.1 by BICR; and overall survival. End points will be summarized for each arm without formal hypothesis testing.AcknowledgementsMedical writing and/or editorial assistance was provided by Matthew Grzywacz, PhD, of ApotheCom (Yardley, PA, USA). This assistance was funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA. Funding for this research was provided by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA.Trial RegistrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT02861573Ethics ApprovalThe study and the protocol were approved by the Institutional Review Board or ethics committee at each site.

561. Phase 3 Trial of Fostamatinib for the Treatment of COVID-19: Repurposing an Immunomodulatory Drug Previously Approved for Immune Thrombocytopenia

Background Key pathologies in severe COVID-19 include immune cell activation, inflammatory cytokine release, and neutrophil extracellular trap release (NETosis), which are mediated by spleen tyrosine kinase (SYK) (Figure 1). Fostamatinib, an oral SYK inhibitor approved for chronic immune thrombocytopenia, has shown activity in vitro using plasma from patients with severe COVID-19, by abrogating the hyperimmune response triggered by anti-spike IgG; 1 inhibiting hyperactivation in platelets; 2 and blocking NETosis in neutrophils.3 R406, active metabolite of fostamatinib, protected against LPS-induced acute lung injury and thrombosis in mice.4,5 In clinical studies, fostamatinib reduced IL-6 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.6 Therefore, a phase 2 study (NCT04579393) evaluated fostamatinib vs. placebo plus standard of care (SOC) in 59 hospitalized COVID-19 patients (manuscript pending). We initiated a phase 3 clinical study (NCT04629703) of fostamatinib for the treatment of COVID-19. Methods A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, adaptive design, multi-center, Phase 3 study (NCT04629703) is underway to evaluate the safety and efficacy of fostamatinib in 308 adult patients with COVID-19 (Figure 2). Hospitalized patients without respiratory failure (with or without supplemental oxygen) were included. Patients with ARDS or using extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) were excluded. Patients will receive fostamatinib 150 mg BID or placebo for 14 days; both arms receive SOC. The primary outcome will be progression to severe/critical disease (worsening in clinical status score on the 8-point ordinal scale) within 29 days of the first dose of study drug. Fostamatinib is investigational for COVID-19. Results Blinded update of trial in progress as of 28 April 2021. 12 patients have been randomized in North and South America. The clinical status score at Baseline was 5 (Hospitalized, requiring supplemental oxygen) in all 12 patients. Five patients had 8 adverse events (AE) (Fig 3). One AE (PE) was serious and is resolving. No deaths have been reported. At least two patients have been discharged (Day 5, Day 13) with continued dosing at home. Conclusion Fostamatinib has the potential to provide a treatment option for the hyperimmune complications of COVID-19. Disclosures Ziad Mallat, MD, PhD, Rigel Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Consultant) Sandra Tong, MD, Rigel Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Employee, Shareholder)