Abstract Background Intratumour heterogeneity is recognised across different tumour types and has implications for therapeutic resistance. At present, clinical practice often relies upon molecular information derived from a single biopsy of a primary or metastatic tumour. This information guides treatment choice but may not be representative of the diversity of the tumour. It is currently difficult to evaluate how effectively a single region guides treatment decisions because the formalin-fixed residual surgical sample that is not paraffin embedded for diagnostic purposes is typically thrown away. Retention and homogenisation – ‘blending’- of this residual formalin-fixed leftover tumour tissue creates a more representative sample for analysis. DNA may be extracted from this sample for sequencing. Pilot data in kidney cancer has demonstrated the potential of this methodology for robust mutational calling, accurate determination of cancer cell fraction and the ability to discern clonal from subclonal variants. Such information may be clinically relevant; for example, discerning resistant subclones prior to treatment, or identifying clonal neoantigens worth targeting with immunotherapy. Trial design In order to establish the feasibility of homogenization as a potential companion diagnostic tool, our study aims to 1) identify the proportion of primary tumour cases that have left over tissue amenable to homogenization across multiple tumour types and 2) pilot homogenization across multiple tumour types. The molecular profile of the homogenate will be compared to that obtained from the diagnostic specimen using next generation sequencing techniques. This is a prospective non-interventional study (NCT03832062). Patients undergoing surgical intervention at The Royal Marsden Hospital (NHS Foundation Trust) with leftover tumour tissue from primary breast, colorectal, gastric, pancreatic, ovarian, renal cancer and sarcoma surgeries, as well as melanoma lymph node dissections will be included in the feasibility assessment. We plan to homogenise 500 cases across different tumour types. The study opened in September 2018 and is expected to run for 2 years. Clinical trial identification NCT03832062; Release date: February 2019. Legal entity responsible for the study Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust. Funding Ventana Medical Systems (a subsidiary of Roche). Disclosure L. Gallegos: Full / Part-time employment: Roche. S. Hill: Full / Part-time employment: Roche. A. Barhoumi: Full / Part-time employment: Roche. S. Stanislaw: Full / Part-time employment: Roche. M. Mendoza: Full / Part-time employment: Roche. J.M.G. Larkin: Research grant / Funding (institution): Roche; Advisory / Consultancy: Roche. N. Alexander: Full / Part-time employment: Roche; Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options: Roche. S. Turajlic: Research grant / Funding (institution): Ventana Medical Systems (subsidiary of Roche). All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Abstract Background ADATPeR is the first prospective study evaluating the role of anti-PD1 agents in the neoadjuvant setting prior to cytoreductive nephrectomy in treatment-naive patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC). We performed multi-omic analyses to resolve spatial heterogeneity and temporal dynamics in putative biomarkers of response to anti-PD1 blockade. Methods In a single center study, patients received nivolumab (3mg/kg every 2 weeks) pre- and post-operatively until progressive disease (PD). Primary endpoint was safety, secondary endpoints were response evaluation and exploratory biomarker analysis. Multiregion tumour biopsies were obtained at baseline, on-treatment (week 9) and at PD. Whole-exome sequencing was performed to infer somatic mutations and predict candidate neoantigens (NAs). Tumour immune microenvironment was evaluated using a RNA-seq-derived immune signature and by stromal and intraepithelial tumour infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) assessments. Results 15 patients were treated. At median follow-up of 12.5 months(m), nivolumab had an acceptable side-effect profile. Overall response rate was 37%. Preliminary transcriptome analyses of pre-treatment biopsies (33 samples from 14 patients; up to 4 regions per case) revealed enrichment for primary-resistance (defined as PD within 2m; n = 4) with immune ‘cold’ tumours, distinct from ’hot’ tumours. Histologic TILs scoring showed concordant immune phenotypic clusters. Primary-resistant cases demonstrated 0% on-treatment stromal- and IE-TILs (2 evaluable patients). In contrast, we observed heavy on-treatment stromal TILs (70-90%) and intraepithelial TILs (30-90%) across 7 regions at nephrectomy in an exceptional responder receiving ongoing treatment (>24 cycles). Conclusions ADATPeR is the first neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitor study pre-cytoreductive nephrectomy, and incorporated multi-omic analyses of putative biomarkers. Baseline immune gene expression signature is distinct in responders compared with non-responders. On-treatment intraepithelial TILs were prominent in those deriving durable clinical benefit. Integrative analyses are ongoing. Clinical trial identification NCT02446860. Legal entity responsible for the study The authors. Funding Bristol-Myers Squibb; The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) at The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and The Institute of Cancer Research; Cancer Research UK (CRUK). Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Abstract Background In 2017 a new PN led clinic was established for immunotherapy patients. At the 1-year mark to ensure patients were satisfied with the service provision, a patient experience survey was conducted. The survey explored if patients felt comfortable in discussing side effects with the PN and if they felt part of their treatment related decisions. Importantly patients were asked if they had confidence and trust in the PN. Methods The survey was provided to all patients whom attended the PN led clinic from May 2017 to May 2018. The survey consisted of 10 closed questions using the Likert scale, with spaces provided for personal comments. Data collection period was 1.06.18 to 29.06.18. Estimated number of patients was 10. Results Questionnaires were provided to a total of 10 patients. Three questionnaires could not be provided to 3 patients whom attended the PN led clinic as they had died. Two patients did not respond back. 6/8 patients strongly agreed (SAg) to feeling comfortable in discussing treatment related side effects and 2/8 patients agreed (Ag). This same result was found when patients were asked if they felt involved in the decisions related to their care e.g. stopping immunotherapy treatment at 2 yrs. With respect to having confidence and trust with the advice and care provided by the PN, 7 patients SAg and 1 Ag. All patients felt that they were being listened to and had the opportunity to ask questions during their consultations (7 patients SAg and 1 Ag). Reassuringly all 8 patients said that they would recommend this service to their friends and family (7 patients SAg and 1 Ag). Conclusions This survey was to ensure patients were satisfied with being reviewed by a PN and as the service was new to the melanoma unit in 2017; it was vital that the patients had the opportunity to evaluate the service provision. With this positive feedback the clinic was expanded from September 2018 and to date 36 patients have now been seen within the PN led immunotherapy clinic and another patient experience survey is due. Legal entity responsible for the study The authors. Funding Has not received any funding. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Neurological adverse events from immune checkpoint inhibition are increasingly recognised, especially with combination anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA4) and anti-programmed death receptor 1 (anti-PD-1) therapies. Their presenting symptoms and signs are often subacute and highly variable, reflecting the numerous components of the nervous system. Given the risk of substantial morbidity and mortality, it is important to inform patients of symptoms that may be of concern, and to assess any suspected toxicity promptly. As with other immune-related adverse events, the cornerstone of management is administration of corticosteroids. Specialist neurology input is vital in this group of patients to guide appropriate investigations and tailor treatment strategies.

1. Schechter AL, Stern DF, Vaidyanathan L et al. The neu oncogene: an ERB-B-related gene encoding a 185,000-Mr tumour antigen. Nature 1984; 312(5994): 513–516. 2. Finkle D, Quan ZR, Asghari V et al. HER2-targeted therapy reduces incidence and progression of midlife mammary tumors in female murine mammary tumor virus huHER2-transgenic mice. Clin Cancer Res 2004; 10(7): 2499–2511. 3. Slamon DJ, Clark GM, Wong SG et al. Human breast cancer: correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER-2/neu oncogene. Science 1987; 235(4785): 177–182. 4. Mishra R, Hanker AB, Garrett JT. Genomic alterations of ERBB receptors in cancer: clinical implications. Oncotarget 2017; 8(69): 114371–114392. 5. Pillai RN, Behera M, Berry LD et al. HER2 mutations in lung adenocarcinomas: a report from the Lung Cancer Mutation Consortium. Cancer 2017; 123(21): 4099–4105. 6. Li BT, Ross DS, Aisner DL et al. HER2 amplification and HER2 mutation are distinct molecular targets in lung cancers. J Thorac Oncol 2016; 11(3): 414–419. 7. Liu L, Shao X, Gao W et al. The role of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 as a prognostic factor in lung cancer: a meta-analysis of published data. J Thorac Oncol 2010; 5(12): 1922–1932. 8. Nakamura H, Saji H, Ogata A et al. Correlation between encoded protein overexpression and copy number of the HER2 gene with survival in nonsmall cell lung cancer. Int J Cancer 2003; 103(1): 61–66. 9. Yoshizawa A, Sumiyoshi S, Sonobe M et al. HER2 status in lung adenocarcinoma: a comparison of immunohistochemistry, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), dual-ISH, and gene mutations. Lung Cancer 2014; 85(3): 373–378. 10. Peters S, Stahel R, Bubendorf L et al. Trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in patients with previously treated HER2-overexpressing metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer: efficacy, safety, and biomarkers. Clin Cancer Res 2019; 25(1): 64–72. 11. Dong ZY, Zhang JT, Liu SY et al. EGFR mutation correlates with uninflamed phenotype and weak immunogenicity, causing impaired response to PD-1 blockade in non-small cell lung cancer. Oncoimmunology 2017; 6(11): e1356145. 12. Li BT, Shen R, Buonocore D et al. Ado-trastuzumab emtansine for patients with HER2-mutant lung cancers: results from a Phase II Basket Trial. J Clin Oncol 2018; 36(24): 2532–2537. 13. Hotta K, Aoe K, Kozuki T et al. A phase II study of trastuzumab emtansine in HER2-positive non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2018; 13(2): 273–279. 14. Mazières J, Barlesi F, Filleron T et al. Lung cancer patients with HER2 mutations treated with chemotherapy and HER2-targeted drugs: results from the European EUHER2 cohort. Ann Oncol 2016; 27(2): 281–286. 15. Langer CJ, Stephenson P, Thor A et al. Trastuzumab in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: is there a role? Focus on Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study 2598. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22(7): 1180–1187. 16. Gatzemeier U, Groth G, Butts C et al. Randomized phase II trial of gemcitabine–cisplatin with or without trastuzumab in HER2-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. Ann Oncol 2004; 15(1): 19–27. 17. Mazières J, Peters S, Lepage B et al. Lung cancer that harbors an HER2 mutation: epidemiologic characteristics and therapeutic perspectives. J Clin Oncol 2013; 31(16): 1997–2003. 18. Hainsworth JD, Meric-Bernstam F, Swanton C et al. Targeted therapy for advanced solid tumors on the basis of molecular profiles: results from mypathway, an open-label, phase IIa multiple basket study. J Clin Oncol 2018; 36(6): 536–542. 19. Kris MG, Camidge DR, Giaccone G et al. Targeting HER2 aberrations as actionable drivers in lung cancers: phase II trial of the pan-HER tyrosine kinase inhibitor dacomitinib in patients with HER2-mutant or amplified tumors. Ann Oncol 2015; 26(7): 1421–1427. 20. Hyman DM, Piha-Paul SA, Won H et al. HER kinase inhibition in patients with HER2and HER3-mutant cancers. Nature 2018; 554(7691): 189–194. 21. Gandhi L, Besse B, Mazieres J et al. MA04.02 neratinib 6 temsirolimus in HER2-mutant lung cancers: an international, randomized phase II study. J Thoracic Oncol 2017; 12(1): S358–S359. 22. De Grève J, Moran T, Graas MP et al. Phase II study of afatinib, an irreversible ErbB family blocker, in demographically and genotypically defined lung adenocarcinoma. Lung Cancer 2015; 88(1): 63–69. 23. Smit EF, Peters S, Dziadziuszko R et al. A single-arm phase II trial of afatinib in pretreated patients with advanced NSCLC harboring a HER2 mutation: the ETOP NICHE trial. J Clin Oncol 2017; 35(Suppl 15): 9070. 24. Lai W-CV, Lebas L, Milia J et al. Afatinib in patients with metastatic HER2-mutant lung cancers: an international multicenter study. J Clin Oncol 2017; 35(Suppl 15): 9071. 25. Wang Y, Jiang T, Qin Z et al. HER2 exon 20 insertions in non-small-cell lung cancer are sensitive to the irreversible pan-HER receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor pyrotinib. Ann Oncol 2019; 30(3): 447–455. 26. de Melo Gagliato D, Jardim DL, Marchesi MS, Hortobagyi GN. Mechanisms of resistance and sensitivity to anti-HER2 therapies in HER2þ breast cancer. Oncotarget 2016; 7(39): 64431–64446. 27. Pauli C, Hopkins BD, Prandi D et al. Personalized. Cancer Discov 2017; 7(5): 462–477.