One approach to achieve a cure for HIV infection or allow for people with HIV to safely stop antiretroviral therapy is to enhance HIV-specific immune function by reversing immune exhaustion. Immune checkpoint blockade with anti-PD1 can enhance virus-specific T-cell function ex vivo and in animal models but the effects of anti-PD1 on HIV-specific T-cells in vivo has not been explored. We examine samples from men with HIV and cancer on antiretroviral therapy who receive nivolumab (anti-PD1) every two weeks as part of a prospective clinical trial. We show that a single dose of anti-PD-1 increases HIV-specific CD8 + T cells in some but not all participants. Using single cell RNAseq of HIV-specific CD8 + T-cells, we show that anti-PD-1 significantly reshapes the T-cell landscape. Following anti-PD1, we see the emergence of a distinct 'progenitor' like central memory cluster characterized by an interferon-stimulated gene signature as well as an increase in expression of Granzyme-H in memory cells with expanded T-cell receptors, highlighting potential pathways to reinvigoration of cytotoxic function. We also demonstrate an inverse relationship between an increase in cell associated viral RNA following anti-PD-1 and the percentage of specific T-cell clusters prior to administration of anti-PD-1. These findings demonstrate the multiple effects of anti-PD-1 on both HIV-specific CD8 + T cells and HIV latency in PWH on ART. In people living with HIV, long term viral infection, even in the face of successful therapeutic control of viral load, can result in increased numbers of exhausted CD8+ T cells. Here the authors assess the in vivo effect of anti-PD-1 antibody therapy on the HIV specific CD8+ T cell response in men with HIV.

[Box: see text]Living guidelines are developed for selected topic areas with rapidly evolving evidence that drives frequent change in recommended clinical practice. Living guidelines are updated on a regular schedule by a standing expert panel that systematically reviews the health literature on a continuous basis, as described in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual. ASCO Living Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy Implementation for Clinical Practice Guidelines. Living Guidelines and updates are not intended to substitute for independent professional judgment of the treating clinician and do not account for individual variation among patients. See appendix for disclaimers and other important information (Appendix I and Appendix II). Updates are published regularly and can be found on the ASCO Publications website.

ASCO Guidelines provide recommendations with comprehensive review and analyses of the relevant literature for each recommendation, following the guideline development process as outlined in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual. ASCO Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy for Clinical Practice Guidelines.Clinical Practice Guidelines and other guidance ("Guidance") provided by ASCO is not a comprehensive or definitive guide to treatment options. It is intended for voluntary use by clinicians and should be used in conjunction with independent professional judgment. Guidance may not be applicable to all patients, interventions, diseases, or stages of diseases. Guidance is based on review and analysis of relevant literature and is not intended as a statement of the standard of care. ASCO does not endorse third-party drugs, devices, services, or therapies and assumes no responsibility for any harm arising from or related to the use of this information. See complete disclaimer in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 (online only) for more. PURPOSE:To provide updated recommendations for immunotherapy and targeted therapy for patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer. METHODS:ASCO convened an Expert Panel to conduct a systematic review of relevant studies and develop recommendations for clinical practice. RESULTS:Twelve newly published or updated phase III randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. RECOMMENDATIONS:The target population for these recommendations is patients with unresectable locally advanced, advanced, or metastatic gastroesophageal cancer. Results from testing for actionable biomarkers should be available as soon as possible to inform treatment decision making. Immunotherapy with doublet chemotherapy is recommended for patients with proficient mismatch repair (pMMR)/microsatellite stable (MSS) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma and PD-L1 expression ≥1; patients with higher PD-L1 expression are more likely to benefit from immunotherapy. Zolbetuximab is recommended for patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma, PD-L1 <1, and positive CLDN18.2 expression. Patients with dual PD-L1 and CLDN18.2 positivity should engage in shared decision making, considering the factors outlined in the guideline. Doublet chemotherapy alone is recommended for patients who are not positive for actionable biomarkers or are not considered candidates for targeted therapy or immunotherapy. For patients with pMMR/MSS HER2-positive gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma, trastuzumab and doublet chemotherapy is recommended; for patients with PD-L1 expression ≥1, the addition of pembrolizumab is recommended. Immunotherapy alone or with doublet chemotherapy is recommended for patients with mismatch repair deficient/microsatellite instability-high gastroesophageal cancer. Second-line therapy options include ramucirumab with paclitaxel, trastuzumab deruxtecan for HER2-positive gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma, and immunotherapy for PD-L1 ≥1 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after first-line combination chemotherapy without immunotherapy.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines.

PURPOSE:Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is an emerging tool in the evaluation of GI cancers. Challenges remain in defining its utility and role as a primary end point in therapeutic trials. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) ctDNA GI working group was created to evaluate current data and provide guidance on the inclusion of ctDNA in GI cancer trials. METHODS:The NCI GI steering committee assigned four task force members to serve as co-chairs for the working group. Co-chairs identified experts within each GI disease group to form a panel that convened to review data and provide recommendations. The group focused on ctDNA's role as a potential surrogate for assessing prognosis and guiding treatment decisions that may enhance GI cancer trials. A manuscript was drafted, circulated, revised, and voted on by the panel. The final draft was reviewed by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program. RESULTS:Further data are required to support ctDNA as a primary end point for late-phase therapeutic trials, particularly in studies that could change the standard-of-care. However, the group supports ctDNA as a primary efficacy end point for phase II studies and as a noninvasive evaluation strategy for new drug development. Incorporation of ctDNA as a biomarker in trial design must consider the specific context of disease biology of the GI cancer subtypes. ctDNA should be incorporated as an exploratory end point across a variety of disease settings and indications. Several practical considerations were identified to optimize the incorporation of ctDNA in future trial design. CONCLUSION:Prospective trials are required to clarify the role of ctDNA as a valid surrogate end point for progression-free or overall survival in GI cancers.

BACKGROUND:Although immunotherapy has emerged as a therapeutic strategy for many cancers, there are limited studies establishing the safety and efficacy in people living with HIV (PLWH) and cancer.METHODS:PLWH and solid tumors or Kaposi sarcoma (KS) receiving antiretroviral therapy and a suppressed HIV viral load received nivolumab at 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks, in two dose deescalation cohorts stratified by CD4 count (stratum 1: CD4 count > 200/µL and stratum 2: CD4 count 100-199/µL). An expansion cohort of 24 participants with a CD4 count > 200/µL was then enrolled.RESULTS:A total of 36 PLWH received nivolumab, including 15 with KS and 21 with a variety of other solid tumors. None of the first 12 participants had dose-limiting toxicity in both CD4 strata, and five patients (14%) overall had grade 3 or higher immune related adverse events. Objective partial response occurred in nine PLWH and cancer (25%), including in six of 15 with KS (40%; 95% CI, 16.3-64.7). The median duration of response was 9.0 months overall and 12.5 months in KS. Responses were observed regardless of PDL1 expression. There were no significant changes in CD4 count or HIV viral load.CONCLUSIONS:Nivolumab has a safety profile in PLWH similar to HIV-negative subjects with cancer, and also efficacy in KS. Plasma HIV remained suppressed and CD4 counts remained stable during treatment and antiretroviral therapy, indicating no adverse impact on immune function.TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02408861.

Abstract IntroductionAnal cancer is rare, but its incidence is increasing. Chemoradiotherapy is the primary treatment modality. Outcomes used in anal cancer trials vary which hinders evidence synthesis. Using a systematic review, patient interviews and a 2-stage Delphi consensus survey, the first CORMAC project brought together patients and healthcare professionals from across the world to agree shared priorities and make sure that studies of chemoradiotherapy treatments for anal cancer report outcomes that are meaningful to patients and health care professionals. CORMAC-1 established an internationally ratified core outcome set (COS) of 19 outcomes across 4 domains. These 19 outcomes are an agreed minimum that all clinical trials in chemoradiotherapy anal cancer trials should report. CORMAC-2 is the next phase which seeks to reach international agreement on the definitions for the 11 core outcomes in the domains of disease activity and survival. Agreeing definitions for these core outcomes will facilitate utilisation of the core outcome set, increasing outcome standardisation across trials thereby increasing the quality of data available for clinical decision-making and ultimately enhancing patient care.MethodsThe original CORMAC systematic review will be updated, focusing on 2 of the 4 COS domains, disease activity and survival domains. An international steering committee composed of international anal cancer trial experts will be formed. The committee will review the updated search results to develop a 2-stage Delphi consensus survey. The survey will be publicised through conferences, email lists, domestic and international bodies and will target healthcare and allied healthcare professional involved in the design, running, recruitment and publication of anal cancer trials. Following the 2-stage survey, a stakeholder meeting composed of the steering committee and selection of survey participants will ratify the results and agree a final set of core outcome definitions.Ethics and disseminationCORMAC-2 results will be disseminated through journal and conference publications to inform clinical teams and patient support groups to raise awareness and implementation of the core outcome set. Results will feed into the DECREASE study and it is registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative (1,2). As per the University of Manchester ethic decision tool, no ethical approval is required. Further information is available at https://cormacstudy.wordpress.com.

Supplementary Figure 1. CONSORT diagram of those with evaluable sample for the HCV-based analyses for this manuscript

Cox proportional hazards model results for PFS and OS. Each row reflects a model with that variable; models across all patients are stratified on treatment arm. Baseline HCV only includes those with pretreatment HCV titer data available (n = 43), and first sample HCV includes baseline HCV titer data for those with it available and cycle 2 data for those missing baseline (n = 53)

Variation in outcomes definitions and reporting limit the utility of clinical trial results. The Core Outcome Research Measures in Anal Cancer (CORMAC) project developed a core outcome set (COS) for chemoradiotherapy trials for anal squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC) through an international healthcare professional and patient consensus process. The CORMAC-COS comprises 19 outcomes across 4 domains (disease activity, survival, toxicity, life impact). In CORMAC-2 we have established standardised definitions for the 11 disease activity and survival outcomes in the CORMAC COS. Definitions were agreed through a 3 step process, initially identifying existing definitions through systematic review (registered with PROSPERO, CRD42016036540), using these to populate a two-round Delphi questionnaire completed by 51 experts from 13 countries, and finally ratification through an online consensus meeting. Standardising the definitions for these core outcomes facilitates real world utilisation of the CORMAC-COS, thereby increasing the quality of data available for clinical decision-making and ultimately enhancing patient care.

Abstract Sorafenib blocks nonstructural protein 5A (NS5A)-recruited c-Raf–mediated hepatitis C virus (HCV) replication and gene expression. Release of Raf-1-Ask-1 dimer and inhibition of Raf-1 via sorafenib putatively differ in the presence or absence of doxorubicin. Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 80802 (Alliance) randomized phase III trial of doxorubicin plus sorafenib versus sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), showed no improvement in median overall survival (OS). Whether HCV viral load impacts therapy and whether any correlation between HCV titers and outcome based on HCV was studied. In patients with HCV, HCV titer levels were evaluated at baseline and at multiple postbaseline timepoints until disease progression or treatment discontinuation. HCV titer levels were evaluated in relation to OS and progression-free survival (PFS). Among 53 patients with baseline HCV data, 12 patients had undetectable HCV (HCV-UN). Postbaseline HCV titer levels did not significantly differ between treatment arms. One patient in each arm went from detectable to HCV-UN with greater than 2 log-fold titer levels reduction. Aside from these 2 HCV-UN patients, HCV titers remained stable on treatment. Patients who had HCV-UN at baseline were 3.5 times more likely to progress and/or die from HCC compared with HCV detectable (HR = 3.51; 95% confidence interval: 1.58–7.78; P = 0.002). HCV titer levels remained unchanged, negating any sorafenib impact onto HCV titer levels. Although an overall negative phase III study, patients treated with doxorubicin plus sorafenib and sorafenib only, on CALGB 80802 had worse PFS if HCV-UN. Higher levels of HCV titers at baseline were associated with significantly improved PFS. Significance: Sorafenib therapy for HCC may impact HCV replication and viral gene expression. In HCV-positive patients accrued to CLAGB 80802 phase III study evaluating the addition of doxorubicin to sorafenib, HCV titer levels were evaluated at baseline and different timepoints. Sorafenib did not impact HCV titer levels. Despite an improved PFS in patients with detectable higher level HCV titers at baseline, no difference in OS was noted.

PURPOSE:To provide evidence-based guidance for clinicians who treat patients with stage I-III anal cancer. METHODS:A systematic review of the literature conducted by the Minnesota Evidence-based Practice Center provided the evidence base for this guideline. An ASCO Expert Panel reviewed this evidence and came to consensus on a set of evidence-based recommendations. RESULTS:The systematic review contained three randomized controlled trials and three nonrandomized studies of interventions that were relevant to the guideline topic and informed the recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS:Mitomycin-C (MMC) with a fluoropyrimidine (fluorouracil [FU] or capecitabine) is recommended as the radiosensitizing component of chemoradiation (CRT) for anal cancer; the Expert Panel recognizes that capecitabine is often used as an orally administered alternative to FU and is currently being used in ongoing clinical trials. Cisplatin with FU is an additional chemotherapy combination that may be recommended as radiosensitizing chemotherapy. Because of the myelosuppression associated with MMC, the preferable regimen for patients with immunosuppression is cisplatin and FU. Cisplatin is not recommended for patients with renal dysfunction, significant neuropathy, or hearing loss, and there is no evidence to recommend substituting carboplatin for cisplatin. Dose and schedule options for recommended chemotherapy agents are included within the full text of the guideline. Routine induction chemotherapy before CRT and additional chemotherapy after CRT are not recommended for patients with localized anal cancer.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines.

Kaplan–Meier curves for the OS distributions for patients who had detectable (HCV-d) versus undetectable (HCV-UN) HCV titer levels on their first evaluated sample. The HR based on a corresponding Cox proportional hazards model was 1.14 for those with HCV-UN (vs. HCV-d), 95% CI: 0.58–2.23 (P = 0.70).

Gastroesophageal malignancy remains an area of unmet need for novel diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. In human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive gastric and gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma, HER2-directed therapies have the potential to greatly improve outcomes, and in recent years, the success of HER2-targeted agents as well as immunotherapy agents has yielded new standards in first-line and second-line treatments of patients with advanced disease. Further study of loss of HER2 expression after first-line treatment with HER2-targeting agents is important to clarify who would best benefit from second-line HER2-targeted agents.

Patient characteristics by HCV titer status on first available sample, for patients with available sample

Cox proportional hazards model results for PFS and the influence of genotype classification. Separation reflects different models for different breakdowns of genotype group

4000 Background: E/GEJ adenocarcinoma has a high mortality rate despite curative intent therapy. Although the use of immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) in combination with chemotherapy in the metastatic setting and as adjuvant monotherapy both confer survival benefits, its role in combination with neoadjuvant chemoradiation or with other ICIs in the adjuvant setting remains unclear. Here we report the impact of nivo on pCR rate in pts with E/GEJ adenocarcinoma receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiation as part of the EA2174 clinical trial. Methods: Pts with a localized T1N1-3M0 or T2-3N0-2M0 E/GEJ adenocarcinoma with an ECOG PS of 0-1 and deemed surgical candidates for an esophagectomy were eligible. In step 1, pts were randomized to neoadjuvant therapy with carboplatin AUC 2 and paclitaxel 50 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) weekly x 5 along with 41.4-50.4 Gy radiation without (Arm A) or with (Arm B) nivo 240 mg IV during weeks 1 and 3 of treatment, followed by esophagectomy. Pts underwent a second randomization (step 2) to 6-12 months of adjuvant nivo with or without 6 months of ipi. Planned accrual for step 1 was 278 pts. The primary neoadjuvant endpoint was pCR rate with H0= 23% vs HA= 38%, 90% power, one-sided α = 0.10. The primary adjuvant endpoint comparing nivo to nivo/ipi is disease free survival and will be reported separately once data are mature. Results: Between May 2019 and Dec 2022, 275 pts were enrolled to step 1 of the study (Arm A, n = 138; Arm B, n = 137). Male = 89.5%; White = 92%, Asian = 2.2%, Black 1.5%; median age 65.5 years; E = 60.4%, GEJ = 39.3%. Only 78.5% of pts proceeded to surgery (Arm A = 76.1%, Arm B 81.0%). The pCR rate in Arm A was 21.0% (95% CI, 14.5-28.8) and in Arm B was 24.8% (95% CI, 17.8-32.9), showing no statistically significant difference (p = 0.27). Surgical complication rates between the two arms were similar (Arm A = 28.7%, Arm B = 25.4%). Grade (G) 3/4 events occurring in at least 5% of pts on Arm A—anemia (n = 7), dysphagia (n = 9), esophagitis (n = 7), decreased lymphocytes (n = 80), decreased neutrophils (n = 7); decreased white blood cells (n = 20). G3/4 events occurring in at least 5% of pts on Arm B—anemia (n = 10), dysphagia (n = 8), nausea (n = 8), decreased lymphocytes (n = 84), decreased neutrophils (n = 20), decreased white blood cells (n = 31). Three treatment related deaths occurred on Arm A and two on Arm B. There were no notable differences in chemotherapy or radiation exposure between the two arms. Conclusions: The addition of nivo to neoadjuvant carboplatin, paclitaxel and radiation does not improve the pCR rate in pts with resected E/GEJ adenocarcinoma. Given the known benefit of the addition of ICI to chemotherapy, a further understanding of the impact of radiation on ICI activity is needed. Clinical trial information: NCT03604991 .

PURPOSE To develop recommendations involving targeted therapies for patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer. METHODS The American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel to conduct a systematic review of relevant studies and develop recommendations for clinical practice. RESULTS Eighteen randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. RECOMMENDATIONS For human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–negative patients with gastric adenocarcinoma (AC) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 5, first-line therapy with nivolumab and chemotherapy (CT) is recommended. For HER2-negative patients with esophageal or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) AC and PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5, first-line therapy with nivolumab and CT is recommended. First-line therapy with pembrolizumab and CT is recommended for HER2-negative patients with esophageal or GEJ AC and PD-L1 CPS ≥ 10. For patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≥ 1%, nivolumab plus CT, or nivolumab plus ipilimumab is recommended; for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and PD-L1 CPS ≥ 10, pembrolizumab plus CT is recommended. For patients with HER2-positive gastric or GEJ previously untreated, unresectable or metastatic AC, trastuzumab plus pembrolizumab is recommended, in combination with CT. For patients with advanced gastroesophageal or GEJ AC whose disease has progressed after first-line therapy, ramucirumab plus paclitaxel is recommended. For HER2-positive patients with gastric or GEJ AC who have progressed after first-line therapy, trastuzumab deruxtecan is recommended. In all cases, participation in a clinical trial is recommended as it is the panel's expectation that targeted treatment options for gastroesophageal cancer will continue to evolve. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines.

The social stigma surrounding an anal cancer diagnosis has traditionally prevented open discussions about this disease. However, as recent treatment options and an increasing rate of diagnoses are made worldwide, awareness is growing. In the United States alone, 9,090 individuals were expected to be diagnosed with anal cancer in 2021. The US annual incidence of squamous cell carcinoma of the anus continues to increase by 2.7% yearly, whereas the mortality rate increases by 3.1%. The main risk factor for anal cancer is a human papillomavirus infection; those with chronic immunosuppression are also at risk. Patients with HIV are 19 times more likely to develop anal cancer compared with the general population. In this review, we have provided an overview of the carcinoma of the anal canal, the role of screening, advancements in radiation therapy, and current trials investigating acute and chronic treatment-related toxicities. This article is a comprehensive approach to presenting the existing data in an effort to encourage continuous international interest in anal cancer.

TPS4162 Background: Advanced esophageal and gastric adenocarcinomas (EGA) have poor prognosis. Doublet chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidine and platinum agents in combination with nivolumab for PD-L1 positive tumors is now the standard first-line approach, but overall survival (OS) remains < 1.5 years. A subset of EGA patients have limited burden of metastatic disease. There is accumulating evidence that patients with oligometastatic states across disease types may benefit from locoregional ablative therapies during the course of their treatment. EA2183 is the first prospective study to evaluate the potential benefits of consolidative radiotherapy (XRT) in oligometastatic EGA. Methods: This is a prospective, randomized phase 3 study evaluating the role of consolidative XRT in oligometastatic EGA. Patients with ≤3 metastases at the time of diagnosis of advanced disease are eligible for enrollment. After completion of 4 months of systemic therapy, patients whose disease has not progressed are randomized to consolidation with XRT to all sites of disease followed by continuation of systemic therapy or continuation of systemic therapy alone. Patients are able to enroll in the study at the time of diagnosis of advanced disease or after completion of induction therapy. Systemic therapy is left to the discretion of the treating physician and can include FOLFOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) or CAPOX (capecitabine, oxaliplatin) in combination with nivolumab. Unless there are contraindications to immunotherapy or a history of prior treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors, nivolumab use is mandatory if tumor has PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) ≥5. The goal of radiation is to consolidate gains made by chemotherapy by delivering the highest dose that maintains the greatest tumor control probability that is also safe to deliver given the anatomic and normal tissue constraints. Specific radiation dose and fractionation are recommended in the protocol but is left to the discretion of the treating radiation oncologist to choose the course that is most suitable. Radiation must be administered over a maximum of 15 treatment days to minimize systemic therapy treatment breaks. Primary endpoint is OS from the time of randomization. Secondary endpoints include progression free survival from the time of randomization and safety and tolerability of consolidative XRT. We hypothesize that consolidative XRT will prolong OS from 10 to 15.6 months (an increase in median OS of 55.6%). The study is planning to enroll 314 patients with the goal of randomizing 204 patients in a 2:1 fashion. Stratification factors include number of metastatic sites, choice of immunotherapy with relation to PD-L1 CPS, as well as time of registration to the protocol (before or after systemic therapy initiation). Enrollment to the study is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT04248452.