Phase II study of tinengotinib in advanced cholangiocarcinoma: Analysis of molecular response and resistance mechanisms.

A Angela Lamarca (Hospital Universitario Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain) M Milind M. Javle (Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX) C Christos Fountzilas (Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY) C Chih-Yi Liao (University of Chicago Department of Medicine, Chicago, IL) M Meredith Pelster (Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville) D Daneng Li (City of Hope National Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA) D Dustin A. Deming V Vaibhav Sahai L Lionel Aurelien Kankeu Fonkoua (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN) A Allen Lee Cohn (Rocky Mountain Cancer Center, Denver, CO) P Parvez Mantry (The Liver Institute at Methodist Dallas Medical Center, Dallas, TX) D Donald A. Richards (Texas Oncology, Tyler, TX) E Ed Kingsley (Comprehensive Cancer Centers of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV) A Amit Mahipal (Department of Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH) K Katie Hennessy (TransThera Sciences (US), Inc., Gaithersburg, MD) H Hui Wang C Caixia Sun J Jean Fan

Abstract

566 Background: FGFR inhibitors (FGFRi) have an established role in treating FGFR2-altered (alt) cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). Tinengotinib, a novel FGFRi, has shown promising activity overcoming acquired resistance to prior FGFRi. We present biomarker analyses evaluating tinengotinib’s ability to overcome prior FGFRi resistance and to elucidate mechanism of resistance to tinengotinib. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) with advanced/metastatic CCA who had received ≥ 1 prior systemic chemotherapy were treated with tinengotinib 10 mg daily across 4 Cohorts: A1: FGFR2 fusion (fus) with primary progressive disease (PD) on prior FGFRi; A2: FGFR2 fus with PD after prior response to FGFRi; B: FGFR alt without FGFR2 fus; C: FGFR wild-type. Efficacy was assessed by RECIST v1.1. All pts underwent liquid biopsy for circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) at baseline; additional timepoints include cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), time of PD, and end of treatment (EOT). Samples were analyzed using FoundationOne Liquid panel. Results: 27 out of 55 enrolled pts had biomarker samples collected at baseline and C3D1. Among them, pts in A1 (n=10, 107 mutations (mut)), B (n=8, 90 mut) and C (n=5, 74 mut) showed a significant decrease in short variant allele frequencies (VAF) from baseline to C3D1 by a median relative VAF reduction of 100% (p<0.0001) for each of the three cohorts. Although a median relative VAF reduction of 33.3% was seen in A2 (n=4, 15 mut), this was not significant (p=0.6093) likely due to low baseline mutation burden. A ≥50% reduction in ctDNA was associated with improved progression free survival (p<0.0014). Additionally, 100% of median relative reductions in FGFR2 kinase domain (KD) mut were seen in A1 and B (p<0.0001, 95% CI 100-100% and p=0.0156, 95% CI 83.6-100%, respectively), with 92% and 57% clearance of initial FGFR2 KD mut by C3D1. In a subgroup of 10 pts with biomarker sampling at baseline and EOT, 3 pts in A1 with acquired resistance showed emergence of novel FGFR2 mut, loss of FGFR-sensitive mut and new mut in alternate pathways (e.g., AKT, EGFR, RAS/MAPK) while retaining the original FGFR2 fus. 1 pt from B developed resistance due to new FGFR2 rearrangements and FGFR2 mut. 4 FGFR wild-type pts from C developed resistance involving mut in TP53, KRAS, and other oncogenic drivers. Conclusions: These findings provide genomic evidence that tinengotinib may overcome resistance to prior FGFRi treatment in FGFR2 fus-positive CCA, as reflected by significantly reductions in ctDNA VAFs and frequent clearance of FGFR2 KD mutations. The emergence of resistance alterations including de novo FGFR2 mutations and bypass pathways activations indicates acquired resistance that may limit long-term benefit. These results support further investigation with expanded biomarker sampling to better characterize resistance evolution and guide therapy optimization in an ongoing Phase 3 trial. Clinical trial information: NCT04919642 .

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 44, Issue 2_suppl
Published January 10, 2026
Pages 566-566
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (18)

A

Angela Lamarca

Hospital Universitario Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain

M

Milind M. Javle

Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX

C

Christos Fountzilas

Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY

C

Chih-Yi Liao

University of Chicago Department of Medicine, Chicago, IL

M

Meredith Pelster

Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville

D

Daneng Li

City of Hope National Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA

D

Dustin A. Deming

V

Vaibhav Sahai

L

Lionel Aurelien Kankeu Fonkoua

Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN

A

Allen Lee Cohn

Rocky Mountain Cancer Center, Denver, CO

P

Parvez Mantry

The Liver Institute at Methodist Dallas Medical Center, Dallas, TX

D

Donald A. Richards

Texas Oncology, Tyler, TX

E

Ed Kingsley

Comprehensive Cancer Centers of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV

A

Amit Mahipal

Department of Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH

K

Katie Hennessy

TransThera Sciences (US), Inc., Gaithersburg, MD

H

Hui Wang

C

Caixia Sun

J

Jean Fan