ESMO 2026 Slide Library

[Slide 1] #ESMO2026 OCT 23 – 27, 2026 MADRID, SPAIN 15 TRIALS THAT COULD CHANGE PRACTICE @DrRishabhOnco NEW FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOTHERAPY & TARGETED THERAPY 1 INTerpath-001 Personalized mRNA vaccine + Pembrolizumab in high-risk melanoma Can personalized mRNA vaccination reduce melanoma recurrence? 2 SAFFRON EGFR-mutant, MET amplified/overexpressed NSCLC after osimertinib: osimertinib + savolitinib vs platinum-pemetrexed Can MET inhibition overcome resistance to osimertinib? 3 Krascendo 1 Divarasib vs sotorasib or adagrasib in previously treated KRAS G12C advanced NSCLC Does a next-generation KRAS G12C inhibitor improve outcomes? 4 DeLLphi-305 Tarlatamab + durvalumab vs durvalumab maintenance after first-line durvalumab + platinum-etoposide in ES-SCLC Can a DLL3 bispecific improve survival in extensive-stage SCLC? 5 HARMONi-GI1 Ivonescimab + chemotherapy vs durvalumab + chemotherapy in first-line advanced biliary cancer Can adding a PD-1/VEGF bispecific improve outcomes in advanced biliary cancer? PERIOPERATIVE, EARLY-STAGE & ADJUVANT SETTINGS 6 VOLGA Perioperative durvalumab ± tremelimumab with neoadjuvant enfortumab vedotin in cisplatin-ineligible MIBC Can perioperative immunotherapy improve outcomes in cisplatin-ineligible MIBC? 7 DASL-HicaP Darolutamide + ADT + definitive or salvage RT in very high-risk localized prostate cancer Does intensifying ADT with darolutamide improve long-term survival? 8 NATALEE Six-year follow-up of adjuvant ribociclib in HR+/HER2– early breast cancer Do long-term data confirm the benefit of adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibition? 9 TRIO-US B-12 TALENT Neoadjuvant T-DXd–based therapy in HR+/HER2-low breast cancer Can T-DXd improve pathologic response in HER2-low early breast cancer? 10 ENERGIZE Perioperative chemotherapy plus immunotherapy strategies in muscle-invasive bladder cancer Can perioperative immunotherapy improve outcomes in MIBC? ADCs, NOVEL AGENTS & DISEASE-SPECIFIC ADVANCES 11 CLARITY-Gastric 01 Sonesitatug vedotin (CLDN18.2 ADC) vs investigator choice in previously treated CLDN18.2+ gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma Can a CLDN18.2-targeted ADC improve survival in gastric/GEJ cancer? 12 KEYNOTE-C93 Pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy in first-line advanced/recurrent dMMR endometrial cancer Can chemotherapy be avoided in dMMR endometrial cancer? 13 KEYNOTE-B49 Pembrolizumab + chemotherapy in HR+/HER2– advanced breast cancer Does adding immunotherapy improve outcomes in HR+ metastatic breast cancer? 14 LITESPARK-011 Belzutifan + lenvatinib vs cabozantinib in previously treated advanced clear-cell RCC Can a HIF-2α-based combination outperform cabozantinib in advanced RCC? 15 SigVie-002 Integrin β6-directed ADC sigvotatug vedotin vs docetaxel in previously treated NSCLC Can an integrin β6 ADC improve outcomes in previously treated NSCLC? [Figure: AI-style illustrated cards with organ icons (lungs, bladder, prostate, breast, stomach, uterus, kidney, liver), Madrid skyline at top right.]

ESMO 2026 Top 10 (ish) Breast Cancer Abstracts @PTarantinoMD 1. FOURLIGHT-1 (A. Giordano et al.) -> Announced to be positive, this randomized phase 2 trial evaluated the benefit of selective CDK4 inhibition with atirmociclib (+fulvestrant) in 2L HR+ MBC. Highly awaited. 2. BRIDGET (S. Sammons et al.) -> Could the addition of tucatinib to HP (or T-DM1) lead to favorable outcomes among pts with isolated PD from HER2+ MBC? Important data on an understudied setting. 3. TALENT (S. Hurvitz et al.) -> Preliminary results from TALENT were quite disappointing, with neoadjuvant T-DXd/AI showing low pCR rate in HR+/HER2- breast cancer. At ESMO, we will see updated results, including the first data with T-DXd used in sequence with chemo in this setting. 4. SWITCH (L. Fan et al.) -> Could keeping the payload (TOPO1i) but switching the target enable for continued efficacy with ADCs? SATEEN suggested limited benefit for this strategy in HER2+ disease. The SWITCH phase 2 trial tests this strategy with 4 novel TOPO1 ADCs in HR+/HER2- disease. 5. KEYNOTE-B49 (H. Rugo et al.) -> Immunotherapy has struggled to find its place in HR+ disease. This phase 3 trial tested whether using pembro early (added to 1L chemo) and in a selected population (PD-L1+) could prove beneficial for patients with HR+ MBC. 6. POP-DURVA (J. Ribeiro et al.) -> Standard treatment for stage I TNBC remains undefined. POP-DURVA tests 2 infusions of neoadjuvant durva in stage I TNBC with sTIL of >= 5%, with primary endpoint pCR 7. NSABP B42 (E. Mamounas et al.) -> The prior 10-year analysis of NSABP B42 demonstrated a significant DFS (but not OS) advantage with 10 vs 5 years of adjuvant AI in postmenopausal patients. This final analysis will clarify the long-term impact of extended AI therapy, which is increasingly utilized in practice. 8. MRD studies -> Interesting studies evaluating the prognostic role of MRD in HER2+ MBC with exceptional response (Nozawa et al.), neoadjuvant TNBC (Barcenas et al') and in the surveillance setting (Ozaki et al.) 9. Exotic TOPO 1 ADC phase 3 trials -> At ESMO, we will see primary results of multiple phase 3 trials of TOP1 ADCs vs chemo conducted in China, including HORIZON-Breast06 (SHR-A1811 for HER2-low MBC), APEX-Breast01 (TQB2102 for HER2-low MBC) and PANKU-Breast01 (Iza-Bren for HR+/HER2- MBC) 10. Updates from NATALEE (6y), FINER (OS), TROPION-Breast02 (brain mets), DESTINY-Breast09 (brain mets), GIM3 FATA (AI comparison), lidERA (PROs), DESTINY-Breast05 (PROs), OptiTROP-Breast01 (OS) Bonus: CHARISMA (P. Tarantino et al.) -> How does breast cancer escape ADC treatment? We conducted multiomic profiling of biopsies collected pre/post-ADCs, with identification of novel mechanisms of resistance.

ESMO 2026: 10 GU Clinical Trials I'm Watching Presidential + selected oral / proffered presentations Clinical trials only - translational work excluded. PRESIDENTIAL (2 PRESENTATIONS) 1. VOLGA - Perioperative durvalumab with or without tremelimumab plus neoadjuvant enfortumab vedotin in muscle-invasive bladder cancer | Bladder | Presenter: Thomas B. Powles 2. DASL-HiCaP (ANZUP1801) - Darolutamide with ADT and definitive or salvage locoregional radiation therapy for localized, very high-risk prostate cancer | Prostate | Presenter: Tamim Niazi SELECTED ORAL / PROFFERED (8 PRESENTATIONS) 3. LITESPARK-012 - First-line pembrolizumab + lenvatinib + belzutifan or MK-1308A + lenvatinib in advanced RCC | Kidney | Presenter: Toni K. Choueiri 4. LITESPARK-011 - Final analysis: belzutifan + lenvatinib versus cabozantinib after anti-PD-(L)1 therapy in advanced RCC | Kidney | Presenter: Daniel Y. Heng 5. KEYNOTE-564 - Final protocol-prespecified analysis of adjuvant pembrolizumab versus placebo in clear-cell RCC | Kidney | Presenter: Toni K. Choueiri 6. SWOG S2200 - Cabozantinib with or without atezolizumab in metastatic papillary RCC | Kidney | Presenter: Benjamin L. Maughan 7. KEYNOTE-866 - Perioperative pembrolizumab or placebo plus neoadjuvant cisplatin/gemcitabine in muscle-invasive bladder cancer | Bladder | Presenter: Jens Bedke 8. Phase 3 perioperative nivolumab study - Neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone versus chemotherapy + nivolumab followed by adjuvant nivolumab in muscle-invasive bladder cancer | Bladder | Presenter: Andrea Necchi 9. PEACE-1 - Long-term overall survival with abiraterone acetate + prednisone in de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer | Prostate | Presenter: Karim Fizazi 10. POTOMAC - Durvalumab in combination with BCG induction and maintenance for BCG-naive, high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer | Bladder | Presenter: Maria De Santis Curated from ESMO 2026 presidential, oral and proffered GU sessions. ESMO 2026, Madrid, 23-27 October 2026 @DrChoueiri

[Slide 1] Rapid Oral session 4RO - Target switching with conserved-payload novel ADCs in patients with metastatic breast cancer following prior ADC therapy (SWITCH): A prospective, open-label, phase 2 platform trial Speakers Lei Fan (Shanghai, China) Lecture Time 10:20 - 10:25 Abstract Background Resistance to antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) is an inevitable challenge in metastatic breast cancer (MBC), but the optimal post-progression sequencing strategy remains unclear. The SWITCH trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of a "target/payload switching" strategy using novel ADCs in patients with ADC-refractory MBC. Methods SWITCH is a prospective, open-label, phase 2 platform trial. Patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-negative) MBC who progressed on at least one prior ADC were enrolled. Based on prior treatment history, participants were randomly assigned to four novel ADC cohorts: SHR-A1811 (Cohort A), SHR-A1921 (Cohort B), SHR-A2009 (Cohort C), or SHR-A2102 (Cohort D), all carrying a topoisomerase I inhibitor (TOP1i) payload. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR). Results Between Oct 21, 2024, and Dec 30, 2025, 58 HER2-negative patients were screened, 54 of whom were randomly assigned (Cohort A: n=10; B: n=12; C: n=12; D: n=20). The population was heavily pretreated, with the majority (94.4%) having prior exposure to TOP1i-based ADCs. Confirmed ORRs were limited across all cohorts: 0% in Cohort A, 8.3% in Cohort B, 0% in Cohort C, and 5% in Cohort D. Responses were observed only in patients switching from the microtubule inhibitor-based ADC disitamab vedotin (RC48) to a TOP1 inhibitor-based ADC, whereas no responses occurred after switching between ADCs with the same payload class despite antigen switching. Treatment-related adverse events were consistent with known profiles of each ADC and manageable. Conclusions Rechallenging ADC-refractory MBC with novel agents targeting alternative antigens yielded limited responses, which suggested that payload cross-resistance was a primary driver of resistance. Diversified payload mechanisms in subsequent ADC sequencing were important to restore therapeutic sensitivity.

ESMO CONGRESS 2026 - MADRID - 23-27 OCTOBER BREAST CANCER My Top 10 Oral Presentations to Watch Personal picks from Erika P. Hamilton, MD - Chief Development Officer, Late Phase & Director, Breast Cancer Research Program Proffered Paper & Rapid Oral sessions - All in Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6 - Times in Madrid local time Sarah Cannon Research Institute Clocks change from CEST to CET overnight 24-25 Oct FRIDAY - 23 OCTOBER 2026 LBA23 (Abstract) - Final results of TALENT: A neoadjuvant trial of T-DXd with or without anastrozole, or in sequence with chemotherapy for HER2-low, HR+ early-stage breast cancer. Sara A. Hurvitz - Seattle, USA. Proffered Paper 1: Breast cancer, early and advanced stage. Why it matters: Can an ADC move into the curative HR+ setting? 13:30 to 13:40 CEST est. slot LBA24 (Abstract) - Final Analysis of NRG Oncology/NSABP B-42, a Randomized, Double-blinded, Placebo-controlled Trial of Extended Letrozole in Postmenopausal Women with Hormone-receptor Positive Breast Cancer Who Have Completed Previous Adjuvant Therapy with an Aromatase Inhibitor. Eleftherios P. Mamounas - Orlando, USA. Proffered Paper 1: Breast cancer, early and advanced stage. Why it matters: The final long-term answer on extended letrozole. 14:15 to 14:25 CEST est. slot LBA25 (Abstract) - Adjuvant ribociclib (RIB) + nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) in patients (pts) with HR+/HER2- early breast cancer (EBC): NATALEE 6-y overall survival (OS) and efficacy outcomes. Dennis J. Slamon - Los Angeles, USA. Proffered Paper 1: Breast cancer, early and advanced stage. Why it matters: Our first look at OS for ribociclib; an OS benefit has already been seen with abemaciclib. 14:25 to 14:35 CEST est. slot 538RO (Abstract) - Patient (pt)-reported outcomes (PROs) from the Phase III lidERA Breast Cancer (BC) trial of giredestrant (GIRE) in pts with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative early BC (ER+, HER2- eBC). Gustavo Werutsky - Porto Alegre, Brazil. Rapid Oral: Breast cancer, early stage. Why it matters: Tolerability of the first adjuvant oral SERD: key to 5+ years of adherence. 16:20 to 16:25 CEST est. slot 542RO (Abstract) - Prognostic impact of postoperative ctDNA surveillance on relapse-free survival and molecular lead time in high-risk breast cancer: JCOG1204A1. Yukinori Ozaki - Koto-ku, Japan. Rapid Oral: Breast cancer, early stage. Why it matters: How much lead time does ctDNA surveillance buy after surgery? 16:42 to 16:47 CEST est. slot SATURDAY - 24 OCTOBER 2026 LBA51 (Abstract) - Results From KEYNOTE-B49: A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind Study of Pembrolizumab (Pembro) vs Placebo (Pbo) Plus Chemotherapy (CT) in Participants (Pts) With HR+/HER2- Advanced Breast Cancer (ABC). Hope S. Rugo - Duarte, USA. Proffered Paper 2: Breast cancer, early and advanced stage. Why it matters: Does immunotherapy have a place in metastatic HR+ disease? 08:30 to 08:40 CEST est. slot 1842O (Abstract) - Efficacy and safety of atirmociclib (ATI) + fulvestrant (FUL) in patients (pts) with HR+/HER2- advanced/metastatic breast cancer (mBC) who progressed on prior CDK4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) in a randomized phase 2 study (FOURLIGHT-1). Antonio Giordano - Boston, USA. Proffered Paper 2: Breast cancer, early and advanced stage. Why it matters: Randomized data for a CDK4-selective inhibitor after CDK4/6. 08:50 to 09:00 CEST est. slot LBA96 (Abstract) - First-line (1L) datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) vs chemotherapy in patients (pts) with locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) for whom immunotherapy was not an option: Exploratory analysis of pts with brain metastases in TROPION-Breast02. Rebecca A. Dent - Singapore. Proffered Paper 2: Breast cancer, early and advanced stage. Why it matters: CNS activity of first-line Dato-DXd in TNBC. 09:25 to 09:35 CEST est. slot MONDAY - 26 OCTOBER 2026 4RO (Abstract) - Target switching with conserved-payload novel ADCs in patients with metastatic breast cancer following prior ADC therapy (SWITCH): a prospective, open-label, phase 2 platform trial. Lei Fan - Shanghai, China. Rapid Oral 2: Breast cancer, advanced stage. Why it matters: Prospective data on ADC sequencing: switch the target, keep the payload. 10:20 to 10:25 CET est. slot LBA49 (Abstract) - A DESTINY-Breast09 (DB-09) analysis of trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) + pertuzumab (P) vs taxane + trastuzumab + pertuzumab (THP) for patients (pts) with HER2+ advanced/metastatic breast cancer (a/mBC) and baseline (BL) brain metastases (BMs). Cristina Saura Manich - Barcelona, Spain. Rapid Oral 2: Breast cancer, advanced stage. Why it matters: First-line T-DXd + pertuzumab in patients with brain metastases. 11:00 to 11:05 CET est. slot Source: ESMO Congress 2026 online programme. Session times are official; individual slots are estimated from presentation order and durations. My personal selection and opinions; not an official ESMO or Sarah Cannon Research Institute list or endorsement.

[Slide 1] Proffered Paper session 4735O - Perioperative pembrolizumab (pembro) or placebo (pbo) + neoadjuvant cisplatin (cis) and gemcitabine (gem) in participants (pts) with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC): the double-blind, phase 3 KEYNOTE-866 study Speakers Jens Bedke (Stuttgart, Germany) Lecture Time 13:30 - 13:40 Proffered Paper session 4736O - Results from a phase 3 trial of neoadjuvant (neoadj) chemotherapy alone vs in combination with nivolumab followed by postsurgical adjuvant nivolumab in patients (pts) with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) Speakers Andrea Necchi (Milan, Italy) Lecture Time 13:40 - 13:50 Proffered Paper session 4742O - Sacituzumab Govitecan (SG) Combined With Enfortumab Vedotin (EV) and Zimberelimab (ZIM) in Treatment-Naive Metastatic Urothelial Cancer (mUC): Interim Results From Phase 1b TROPHY-U-01 Cohort 7 Speakers Randy Sweis (Chicago, United States of America) Lecture Time 13:50 - 14:00 Proffered Paper session Invited Discussant 4735O, 4736O and 4742O Speakers Robert Jones (Bearsden, United Kingdom) Lecture Time 14:00 - 14:12 [Slide 2] Proffered Paper session 4733O - Perioperative pembrolizumab (pembro) or enfortumab vedotin (EV) plus pembro in pts with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) who are cisplatin-ineligible: ad hoc analysis from KEYNOTE-905 Speakers Anders Ullén (Stockholm, Sweden) Lecture Time 14:22 - 14:32 Proffered Paper session 4734O - ctDNA analysis of the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-B15 trial: neoadjuvant and adjuvant (neoadj-adj) enfortumab vedotin (EV) + pembrolizumab (pembro) for participants (pts) with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) who are eligible for cisplatin Speakers Jonathan A. Chatzkel (Tampa, United States of America) Lecture Time 14:32 - 14:42 Proffered Paper session Invited Discussant 4733O and 4734O Speakers Min Yuen Teo (New York, United States of America, NY) Lecture Time 14:42 - 14:52 Proffered Paper session Q&A and discussion Lecture Time 14:52 - 15:00 [Slide 3] Rapid Oral session 4739RO - Sacituzumab Tirumotecan (Sac-TMT) + Pembrolizumab (Pembro) for Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma (la/mUC): Results From a Phase 2 Study (2870-002/SKB264-II-06) Speakers Xiaojie Bian (Shanghai, China) Lecture Time 10:45 - 10:50 Rapid Oral session 4740RO - Enfortumab Vedotin (EV) With or Without Pembrolizumab (P) as First-Line (1L) Treatment for Cisplatin (cis)-Ineligible Locally Advanced Or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma (la/mUC): Long-Term Follow-up Analysis from EV-103 Cohorts DE/A and K Speakers Jose Pablo Maroto Rey (Barcelona, Spain) Lecture Time 10:50 - 10:55 Rapid Oral session 4749RO - Neoadjuvant Tislelizumab plus Disitamab Vedotin for UTUC: Mid-term Results of the Phase II WUTSUP-02 Trial Speakers Tiancheng Liu (Chengdu, China) Lecture Time 10:55 - 11:00 Rapid Oral session Invited Discussant 4739RO, 4740RO and 4749RO Speakers Britt B. Suelmann (Utrecht, Netherlands) Lecture Time 11:00 - 11:15

[Slide 1] Rapid Oral session 4640RO - Bulumtatug fuvedotin (BFv, 9MW2821), a nectin-4-directed antibody-drug conjugate (ADC), in patients with locally advanced or metastatic triple negative breast cancer (la/mTNBC) previously treated with topoisomerase I inhibitor (TopI)-based ADCs: Results from a phase 2 study Speakers Yanchun Meng (Shanghai, China) Lecture Time 10:30 - 10:35 Abstract Background BFv is an ADC delivering monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE) to Nectin-4-expressing cells, a target highly expressed in TNBC. For patients with prior exposure to TopI-based ADCs, switching to a Nectin-4-targeted ADC with a distinct payload (MMAE) represents a rational therapeutic strategy. We report efficacy and safety data from the cohort of la/mTNBC patients previously treated with TopI-based ADCs in the phase 2 study of BFv (NCT06492005). Methods Cohort A enrolled la/mTNBC patients with prior TopI-based ADC therapy. BFv was given intravenously at 1.25 mg/kg on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results As of April 10, 2026, 62 patients were enrolled, of whom 60 were evaluable for response. Median age was 50.5 years (range 32-73). Liver metastases were present in 33% of patients, and 42% had received ≥3 prior lines of therapy. All patients (100%) had received prior TopI-based ADCs: 48% received TROP-2-targeted ADCs, and 33% received HER2-targeted ADCs. All patients had prior taxane-based chemotherapy; 35% also received immune checkpoint inhibitors. The ORR was 30.0% (95% CI 18.85%-43.21%) and DCR was 80.0% (95% CI 67.67%-89.22%). Median PFS was 3.7 months (95% CI 2.96-4.34), and median DOR was 8.7 months (95% CI 2.79-NR). OS data were not mature. Common TRAEs (≥20%) included increased AST/ALT, neutropenia, leukopenia, hypertriglyceridemia, rash, hypercholesterolemia, hyperglycemia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, asthenia, and increased GGT. Grade ≥3 TRAEs (≥5%) included neutropenia, leukopenia, and increased AST. Conclusions BFv demonstrated promising antitumor activity with a manageable safety profile in heavily pretreated patients with la/mTNBC who had all received prior TopI-based ADCs. The first pivotal trial for this indication worldwide is underway.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 TOP 15 BREAST CANCER TRIALS TO WATCH Pre-congress watchlist | Grouped by breast cancer subtype 23 - 27 OCTOBER 2026 | MADRID, SPAIN [Photo of Madrid Metropolis building] HR+ / HER2- BREAST CANCER Endocrine therapy, targeted combinations and immunotherapy 1 FOURLIGHT-1 - Atirmociclib + fulvestrant in 2L HR+/HER2- MBC [CDK4 icon] 2 PANKU-Breast01 - EGFRxHER3 bispecific ADC in HR+/HER2- MBC 3 KEYNOTE-B49 - Pembrolizumab + chemotherapy in PD-L1+ HR+/HER2- MBC 4 NATALEE - 6-year outcomes of adjuvant ribociclib in HR+/HER2- early breast cancer [KM curve icon, "6 YEARS" calendar icon] 5 FINER / MA.40 - Overall survival with ipatasertib + fulvestrant after CDK4/6i [AKT icon] 6 NSABP B-42 - Long-term outcomes of extended adjuvant aromatase inhibition 7 TALENT - Neoadjuvant T-DXd-based sequencing in HR+/HER2-low early breast cancer 8 SWITCH - ADC sequencing after prior ADC exposure in HR+/HER2- MBC HER2-POSITIVE / HER2-LOW BREAST CANCER Next-generation ADCs and targeted approaches 9 BRIDGET - Tucatinib-based treatment for isolated progression in HER2+ MBC [HER2 icon] 10 DESTINY-Breast09 - CNS outcomes update with first-line T-DXd + pertuzumab in HER2+ MBC [brain icon] 11 HORIZON-Breast06 - Trastuzumab rezetecan in HER2-low MBC 12 APEX-Breast01 - Novel TOP1 ADC in HER2-low MBC TRIPLE-NEGATIVE BREAST CANCER Immunotherapy and next-generation ADCs 13 TROPION-Breast02 - CNS outcomes update with datopotamab deruxtecan in TNBC [brain icon] 14 POP-DURVA - Neoadjuvant durvalumab in stage I TNBC 15 OptiTROP-Breast01 - Final overall survival with sacituzumab tirumotecan in TNBC OTHER IMPORTANT ABSTRACTS TO WATCH VIKTORIA-1 - After CDK4/6i | postMONARCH - After CDK4/6i | lidERA - Patient-reported outcomes | DESTINY-Breast05 - Patient-reported outcomes | GIM3 FATA - AI comparison | MRD studies - Prognostic role across settings | CHARISMA - Mechanisms of ADC resistance [ESMO logo] GOOD SCIENCE BETTER MEDICINE BEST PRACTICE @DrRishabhOnco DM - Medical Oncology (AIIMS, New Delhi) [X logo]

[Slide 1] Top 10 Anticipated Practice Changing/Informing Abstracts for ESMO 2026 from Community Oncology's (@OncBrothers) perspective 1 #INTerpath001: Ph III, Intismeran autogene (individualized mRNA neoantigen therapy) + Pembro vs. Pembro in adjuvant resected stage IIB–IV Melanoma. 2 #VOLGA: Ph III, NeoAdj Durva + EV +/- Treme → Surgery → Durva +/- Treme in cisplatin ineligible muscle invasive Bladder Cancer. 3 #ANZUP1801: Ph III, Darolutamide + ADT + XRT vs. ADT + XRT for very high risk localized Prostate Cancer. 4 #LITESPARK011: Ph III (Update), Belzutifan + Lenvatinib (FDA approved on Sept 24, 2026) vs. Cabozantinib in 2L (after IO) in advanced/metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma. 5 #DeLLphi305: Ph III, Durvalumab + Tarlatamab vs. Durvalumab as maintenance (after chemo + IO as induction) in extensive stage Small Cell Lung Cancer. 6 #SAFFRON: Ph III, Osimertinib + Savolitinib vs. Chemo (platinum + Pemetrexed) in MET overexpressed or amplified after Osi in mEGFR Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. 7 #CLARITYGastric01: Ph III, Sonesitatug Vedotin (sone-ve, CLDN18.2 targeting ADC) vs. physician's choice chemotherapy in 2L+ CLDN18.2+ advanced/metastatic GE Junction or Gastric Adenocarcinoma. 8 Updates in Breast Cancer: • #TALENT: Ph II, NeoAdj T-DXd +/- ET for early stage HER2-low, HR+ • #NATALEE: Ph III, Adj Ribo + ET in resected HR+, 6yr update • #postMONARCH: Ph III, Abema + Fulvestrant after 1L CDK4/6i + ET in metastatic HR+, OS update • #VIKTORIA1: Ph III, Gedatolisib + Fulv +/- Palbo after 1L CDK4/6i + ET 9 #MOIO: Ph III, non-inferiority trial, Standard Immunotherapy dosing vs. Reduced frequency (once every 3 months) after 6 months of standard dosing and achieving Partial or Complete response in Metastatic Cancer (multiple primary cancers included). 10 #TroFuse005: Ph III, Sacituzumab Tirumotecan (Sac-TMT, Trop-2 targeting ADC) vs. physician's choice chemotherapy in 2L+ (after chemo + IO) in recurrent/metastatic Endometrial Cancer. www.oncbrothers.com @Oncbrothers (YouTube) @Oncbrothers (Instagram) @Oncbrothers (X)

[Slide 1] Urothelial cancer, ctDNA and renal cancer beat the 6% average for orals Oral slots flag what ESMO rates most practice-changing, and these 3 topics win them at 1.4 to 2.5x the average Share of each topic's ~4.2K abstracts presented orally Tumor and theme topics | Meeting average 6% | Deep dives in this report Urothelial cancer & enfortumab vedotin 15% ctDNA & liquid biopsy 11% Survivorship, supportive care & quality of life 9% Renal cell carcinoma 9% Neoadjuvant therapy & organ preservation 7% Melanoma & immunotherapy 7% HR+ & HER2+ breast cancer 6% Metastatic colorectal cancer 5% Drug safety, dosing & tolerability 5% Squamous cancers, mainly head & neck 5% Gastric & esophagogastric cancer 4% Non-small cell lung cancer 4% Checkpoint inhibitor response & toxicity 4% Care delivery, equity & access 4% Triple-negative breast cancer 3% Pancreatic cancer & KRAS 3% Prostate cancer & radioligands 2% Genomic testing & actionable alterations 2% Early-stage disease outcomes 1% [horizontal bar chart, x-axis 0%-25%] Groups defined by study type First-in-human phase 1 agents 21% Phase 2 TKI & immunotherapy combinations 16% Randomized trials, mostly gynecological 13% AI, prediction models & early detection 4% Preclinical & translational biology 4% Epidemiology & mortality trends 3% Systematic reviews & meta-analyses 1% Prognostic factors & host markers 1% [horizontal bar chart, x-axis 0%-25%] ESMO 2026 abstracts, 19 Oct 2026. Topics group abstracts by content: some carry a tumor name, some a drug or method. Share = orals ÷ topic abstracts. Average = 257 of 4,249 topic abstracts (4,275 excl. nursing, page 10). TKI = tyrosine kinase inhibitor. HR = hormone receptor 3 [Slide 2] Urothelial cancer | Renal cancer | ctDNA | Checkpoint inhibitors | PD-1 × VEGF | KRAS | ADCs EV + pembro moved from metastatic to muscle-invasive bladder cancer in 23 months MIBC trials now ask which ADC regimen to use and whether cisplatin or the bladder can be dropped The path to muscle-invasive bladder cancer EV regimens Dec 2023 FDA: EV + pembrolizumab, first-line metastatic Oct 2025 KEYNOTE-905 at ESMO 2025: EV + pembrolizumab, cisplatin-ineligible MIBC, EFS HR 0.40 Nov 2025 FDA: EV + pembrolizumab, cisplatin-ineligible MIBC Jul 2026 FDA: EV + pembrolizumab, MIBC regardless of cisplatin eligibility (KEYNOTE-B15) Oct 2026 VOLGA at ESMO 2026: durvalumab + EV, cisplatin-ineligible MIBC PD-1 + cisplatin Oct 2026 ESMO 2026: pembrolizumab or nivolumab + cisplatin, no EFS gain (HR 0.88, 0.94) Key ADC regimens in early urothelial cancer EV + pembrolizumab — Nectin-4 · perioperative — Approved in the U.S. [logos: astellas, Pfizer, MERCK] EV + durvalumab — Nectin-4 · perioperative — Phase 3, positive topline [logos: astellas, Pfizer, AstraZeneca] Datopotamab deruxtecan — TROP2 · after surgery — Phase 3, recruiting [logos: Daiichi-Sankyo, AstraZeneca] Sacituzumab tirumotecan — TROP2 · bladder-sparing — Phase 3, opening Oct 2026 [logos: KELUN-BIOTECH, MERCK] SHR-A2102 — Nectin-4 · perioperative — Phase 2/3 [logo: Hengrui] Disitamab vedotin — HER2 · neoadjuvant MIBC and upper-tract — Phase 2, mostly China [logo: RemeGen] Sacituzumab govitecan — TROP2 · neoadjuvant — Phase 2 [logo: GILEAD] 9MW2821 — Nectin-4 · perioperative — Phase 2 [logo: Mabwell] More than a dozen EV trials now target early MIBC or upper-tract cancer, 4 of them phase 3 Sleuth Insight: Sequencing is not static. As EV + pembro moves into early-stage disease, relapsing patients will arrive EV- and PD-1-exposed, which changes which treatments open up in later lines. Upcoming readouts show where those openings will be before the standard moves. FDA, ESMO 2023 – 2026. Company releases, registries. EV = enfortumab vedotin. Pembro = pembrolizumab. MIBC = muscle-invasive bladder cancer. EFS = event-free survival. HR = hazard ratio 4 [Slide 3] Urothelial cancer | Renal cancer | ctDNA | Checkpoint inhibitors | PD-1 × VEGF | KRAS | ADCs PD-(L)1 × VEGF bispecifics now go head-to-head against PD-(L)1 drugs 20% of their abstracts are presented orally vs 6% overall, and 22 of 27 presentations sit outside NSCLC PD-(L)1 × VEGF presentations at ESMO 2026, by agent (27) [legend: Oral / Poster or trial in progress] Ivonescimab — Akesobio → Summit · 2022 — 3 oral, total 12 Pumitamig — Biotheus → BIONTECH · 2024 → Bristol Myers Squibb · 2025 — 4 oral, total 8 SSGJ-707 — 3SBIO → Pfizer · 2025 — 3 RC148 — RemeGen → abbvie · 2026 — 2 JS207 — TopAlliance — 1 CR-001 — Crescent · U.S. — 1 [stacked bar chart, x-axis 0-12] The 5 trials randomized against a PD-(L)1 Trial | Bispecific vs PD-(L)1 control | Tumor · line · phase | Status HARMONi-GI1 (LBA8) [Akesobio] | Ivonescimab + chemo vs durvalumab + chemo | Biliary tract · 1L · Ph3 | OS met at topline 2660P [Pfizer] | SSGJ-707 + chemo vs tislelizumab + chemo | Lung · 1L · Ph2 | Response 75% vs 45%, non-squamous 2910P [RemeGen] | RC148 + RC118 vs toripalimab + RC118 | Gastric · later line · Ph2 | Response 57% vs 38%, 21 per arm Symbiotic-GYN-18 [Pfizer] | PF-08634404 + chemo vs pembrolizumab + chemo | Endometrial · 1L · Ph3 | In progress ROSETTA Gastric-204 [BIONTECH + Bristol Myers Squibb] | Pumitamig + chemo vs nivolumab + chemo | Gastric · 1L · Ph2/3 | In progress • Ivonescimab beat pembrolizumab, each administered as a monotherapy, in PD-L1+ lung cancer in China (PFS HR 0.51, interim OS HR 0.73) • The FDA decision on ivonescimab in EGFR-mutant lung cancer is due on November 14th, 2026 Sleuth Insight: Five ESMO 2026 trials test these bispecifics against a PD-(L)1, two against pembrolizumab or nivolumab. This suggests a class built to replace PD-1 drugs, who critically face the loss of patent exclusivity in the U.S. in 2028. ESMO 2026 abstracts and program, 19 Oct 2026. Company releases, SEC filings. WCLC 2026. PD-(L)1 × VEGF includes pumitamig (PD-L1 × VEGF). Oral share = abstracts, late-breakers excluded (5 of 25). Meeting average 6%, page 3. Ph = phase. 1L = first line. NSCLC = non-small cell lung cancer 8 [Slide 4] [Topic tabs: Urothelial cancer | Renal cancer | ctDNA | Checkpoint inhibitors | PD-1 × VEGF | KRAS | ADCs (selected)] China-originated ADCs supply 12 of the 14 phase 3 ADC readouts at ESMO 2026 Toplines separate winners from losers, as 12 of 14 met a primary endpoint, 1 was mixed and 1 did not Primary endpoint at topline = result the company announced before ESMO. No hazard ratios released All 22 ADC late-breakers, by agent [Legend: shaded = U.S. or European licensee; box = Marketed in the U.S.] Agent | Target | Originator → licensee · year | Late-breaker: tumor · line · phase | Primary endpoint at topline | Other ESMO 2026 abstracts China-originated ADCs · 12 agents, 15 late-breakers Sacituzumab tirumotecan | TROP2 | Kelun-Biotech → Merck · 2022 | EGFR-mutant NSCLC · 2L+ · Ph3 / PD-L1-negative NSCLC · 1L · Ph3 / Endometrial · 2L+ · Ph3 | PFS met / PFS met / OS + PFS met, subgroup | 2 orals · 6 posters Izalontamab brengitecan | EGFR×HER3 | Biokin Pharma → Bristol Myers Squibb · 2023 | HR+/HER2− breast · 2L+ · Ph3 / EGFR-mutant NSCLC · 2L+ · Ph3 | PFS met / PFS met | 1 oral · 1 poster Sonesitatug vedotin | CLDN18.2 | KYM Biosciences → AstraZeneca · 2023 | Gastroesophageal · 2L+ · Ph3 | OS met, PFS not met | 1 poster Risvutatug rezetecan | B7-H3 | Hansoh → GSK · 2023 | Osteosarcoma · 2L+ · Ph3 | PFS met | 4 posters Mocertatug rezetecan | B7-H4 | Hansoh → GSK · 2023 | Ovarian · 2L+ · Ph1 | – | 1 oral · 2 posters Disitamab vedotin | HER2 | RemeGen → Pfizer · 2021 | Extramammary Paget's · Ph2 | – | 2 orals · 16 posters MRG007 | CDH17 | Lepu Biopharma → Arrivent · 2025 | Solid tumors · 2L+ · Ph1 | – | – Tambotatug pelitecan | B7-H3 | MediLink Therapeutics → Roche · 2026 | Nasopharyngeal · 2L+ · Ph3 | ORR met, 1 of 2 | 2 posters Arcotatug tavatecan | CLDN18.2 | Innovent → Takeda · 2025 | Gastric · 2L+ · Ph3 | Primary met | – Trastuzumab rezetecan | HER2 | [Hengrui logo] → Glenmark · 2025 | HER2-low breast · Ph3 | PFS met | 2 posters Rolditamig deuderuxtecan | HER2 | CTTQ → Cipla · 2026 | HER2-low breast · Ph3 | PFS met | 1 oral Ruzaltatug rezetecan | HER3 | [Hengrui logo] · no announced licensee | EGFR-mutant NSCLC · 2L+ · Ph3 | PFS met | 2 posters Japan- and West-originated ADCs · 5 agents, 7 late-breakers Trastuzumab deruxtecan [Marketed] | HER2 | Daiichi-Sankyo + AstraZeneca | HR+ early breast · neoadjuvant · Ph2 / HER2-mutant NSCLC · 1L · Ph3 secondary / HER2+ breast · 1L · Ph3 secondary | – / – / – | 3 orals · 29 posters Datopotamab deruxtecan [Marketed] | TROP2 | Daiichi-Sankyo + AstraZeneca | Triple-negative breast · 1L · Ph3 secondary | – | 4 posters Enfortumab vedotin [Marketed] | Nectin-4 | Astellas + Pfizer | MIBC · perioperative · Ph3 (with durvalumab) | EFS + OS met | 7 orals · 31 posters Sigvotatug vedotin | Integrin β6 | Pfizer | NSCLC · 2L+ · Ph3 | OS not met | – ZW191 | FRα | Zymeworks | Ovarian · 2L+ · Ph1 | – | – Footnote: ESMO 2026 program, 19 Oct 2026. Company releases. China-originated incl. izalontamab brengitecan. Year = deal. Other = agent in title. CLARITY-Gastric 01: OS in 3L+, PFS in 2L+. 1L, 2L+ = first, later line. NSCLC = non-small cell lung cancer [page number 11]

[Slide 1] [Photo: speaker at a lectern (badge reads 'URO-ONKO FORUM 2026' — partly legible) presenting a slide; four panellists seated] Cisplatin eligible [blue, top — trial name not printed]: GC x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation ; GC + Durva x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Durva x 8 [red check mark] KN-866 NCT03924856: GC x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation ; GC + Pembro x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Pembro x 13 ENERGIZE NCT03661320: GC x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation ; GC + Nivo x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Nivo x [number clipped] [red box around KN-866 and ENERGIZE rows] [orange, bottom — trial name not printed]: EV + Pembro x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | EV x 5 + Pembro x 13 ; GC x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation [red check mark] Cisplatin ineligible KN-905/EV-303 NCT03924895 [red check mark]: EV + Pembro x 3 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | EV x 6 + Pembro x 14 ; No preop therapy | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation Volga NCT04960709 [red box]: Durva + EV x 3 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Durva x 9 ; Durva/Treme + EV x 3 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Treme x 1 + Durva x 9 ; No preop therapy | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Per physician choice Modified from Rosenberg [J.] Presented at ESMO 2025 [... c]ombination with pembro is not registered by EMA f[or the] treatment of cis[platin-eligible] MIBC patients. [bottom line partly obscured by panellists]

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 MADRID SPAIN ESMO CONGRESS SCIENCE · BETTER MEDICINE · BRIGHTER LIVES 23 – 27 October 2026 IFEMA MADRID Madrid, Spain ESMO CONGRESS 2026 MADRID Top ESMO 2026 Abstracts to Watch 1 Melanoma INTerpath-001 (Ph III) • Resected stage IIB–IV melanoma • Intismeran autogene (individualized mRNA neoantigen therapy) + pembrolizumab vs. pembrolizumab 2 Bladder Cancer VOLGA (Ph III) • Cisplatin-ineligible muscle-invasive bladder cancer • NeoAdj Durva + EV +/- Treme → Surgery → Durva +/- Treme 3 Prostate Cancer ANZUP1801 (Ph III) • Very high risk localized prostate cancer • Darolutamide + ADT + XRT vs. ADT + XRT 4 Renal Cell Carcinoma LITESPARK-011 (Ph III, Update) (FDA approved on Sept 24, 2026) • 2L (after IO) advanced/metastatic RCC • Belzutifan + Lenvatinib vs. Cabozantinib 5 Small Cell Lung Cancer DeLLphi-305 (Ph III) • Extensive stage SCLC (after chemo + IO induction) • Durvalumab + Tarlatamab vs. Durvalumab maintenance 6 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer SAFFRON (Ph III) • MET overexpressed or amplified after Osi in mEGFR NSCLC • Osimertinib + Savolitinib vs. Chemo (platinum + Pemetrexed) 7 Gastric / GE Junction Cancer CLARITYGastric01 (Ph III) • CLDN18.2+ advanced/metastatic GEJ or gastric adenocarcinoma • Sonesitatug Vedotin (CLND18.2+ targeting ADC) vs. physician's choice chemotherapy 8 Breast Cancer (Updates) • TALENT (Ph II) NeoAdj T-DXd +/- ET for early stage HER2-low, HR+ • NATALEE (Ph III) Adj Ribo + ET in resected HR+, 6yr update • postMONARCH (Ph III, OS update) Abema + Fulvestrant after 1L CDK4/6i + ET in metastatic HR+, OS update • VIKTORIA1 (Ph III) Gedatolisib + Fulv +/- Palbo after 1L CDK4/6i + ET 9 Endometrial Cancer TroFuse-005 (Ph III) • Recurrent/metastatic endometrial cancer (after chemo + IO) • Sacituzumab Tirumotecan (Sac-TMT, Trop-2 ADC) vs. physician's choice chemotherapy in 2L+ 10 Multiple Cancers (Tumour-Agnostic) MOIO (Ph III, Non-inferiority) • Metastatic cancer (multiple primary cancers) with partial/complete response after 6 months of standard IO • Standard immunotherapy dosing vs. reduced frequency (once every 3 months) after 6 months ESMO 2026 – Congress Details [photo: IFEMA MADRID building] 23 – 27 October 2026 IFEMA MADRID Madrid, Spain SCIENCE · BETTER MEDICINE · BRIGHTER LIVES Dr Rohit Malde MD DNB FRCR (UK) Consultant Clinical Oncologist [Slide 2] ESMO 2026 MADRID SPAIN ESMO CONGRESS · SCIENCE · BETTER MEDICINE · BRIGHTER LIVES · 23 – 27 October 2026 · IFEMA MADRID Madrid, Spain · ESMO CONGRESS 2026 MADRID Top ESMO 2026 Abstracts to Watch – Detailed Overview (Top 3) 1 INTerpath-001 (Phase III) — LBA1 24 Oct 2026 Intismeran autogene (individualized mRNA neoantigen therapy) + Pembrolizumab vs. Pembrolizumab in resected stage IIB–IV Melanoma CANCER SITE & DISEASE SETTING: Cutaneous Melanoma • Resected stage IIB, IIC, III or IV • Adjuvant setting after complete surgical resection WHY IMPORTANT?: High risk of recurrence despite anti-PD-1 • Personalized mRNA vaccine aims to boost tumour-specific immune response • Potential new standard in adjuvant melanoma TRIAL DESIGN: Phase III 1,137 patients | Randomized 2:1 | Primary endpoint Recurrence-free survival (RFS) | Key secondary Distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) TREATMENT ARMS: Experimental Arm: Intismeran autogene (V940/mRNA-4157) 1 mg IM every 3 weeks (up to 9 doses) + Pembrolizumab 400 mg IV every 6 weeks (up to 9 cycles) | Control Arm: Placebo (vaccine) + Pembrolizumab 400 mg IV every 6 weeks (up to 9 cycles) KNOWN RESULTS (Pre-Congress Topline): Recurrence-free survival (RFS) — Primary endpoint met, Significant improvement vs. pembrolizumab alone | Distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) — Key secondary endpoint met, Significant improvement | Overall survival (OS) — Still immature, Full numerical data awaited KEY QUESTIONS AT ESMO: Magnitude of benefit (HR, absolute rates) | Benefit across stages IIB/III/IV | Toxicity and feasibility | OS data and durability 2 VOLGA (Phase III) — LBA2 24 Oct 2026 Neoadjuvant Durvalumab + Enfortumab Vedotin ± Tremelimumab → Surgery → Adjuvant Durvalumab ± Tremelimumab in cisplatin-ineligible muscle invasive Bladder Cancer CANCER SITE & DISEASE SETTING: Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer (MIBC) • Cisplatin-ineligible or cisplatin-declining • Planned radical cystectomy • Curative-intent perioperative setting WHY IMPORTANT?: Large proportion of MIBC patients cannot receive cisplatin chemotherapy • Potential cisplatin-free perioperative strategy • May improve cure rates and expand options TRIAL DESIGN: Phase III 695 patients | Multinational 182 centres 25 countries | Primary endpoint Event-free survival (EFS) | Key secondary Overall survival (OS) TREATMENT ARMS (Three-arm study): Arm 1 – Triplet: Durvalumab + EV + Tremelimumab (2 cycles) → Radical cystectomy → Adjuvant: Durvalumab + Tremelimumab (1 cycle) → Durvalumab (9 cycles) | Arm 2 – Doublet: Durvalumab + EV (3 cycles) → Radical cystectomy → Adjuvant: Durvalumab (9 cycles) | Arm 3 – Control: Radical cystectomy with or without approved adjuvant treatment (standard of care) KNOWN RESULTS (Pre-Congress Topline): Event-free survival (EFS) — Significant improvement in both experimental arms vs. control | Overall survival (OS) — Significant improvement for doublet arm; Favourable trend for triplet arm (not statistically significant at interim analysis) | Safety — No new safety signals reported KEY QUESTIONS AT ESMO: Magnitude of EFS & OS (HR, absolute benefit) | Pathological response & downstaging | Added value of tremelimumab | Toxicity and treatment completion 3 ANZUP1801 / DASL-HiCaP (Phase III) — LBA4 25 Oct 2026 Darolutamide + ADT + Radiotherapy vs. ADT + Radiotherapy for very high risk localized Prostate Cancer CANCER SITE & DISEASE SETTING: Prostate Cancer • Very high risk localized disease • Includes selected post-prostatectomy salvage RT patients • Non-metastatic, curative-intent WHY IMPORTANT?: High risk of metastatic relapse despite ADT + RT • Tests benefit of adding darolutamide (potent AR inhibitor) in non-metastatic setting • Could change standard in very high risk prostate cancer TRIAL DESIGN: Phase III 1,106 patients | International, randomized, double-blind | Primary endpoint To be confirmed (e.g. metastasis-free survival) | Key endpoints Metastasis-free survival, Biochemical progression, Overall survival TREATMENT ARMS: Experimental Arm: Darolutamide + ADT + Radiotherapy | Control Arm: Placebo + ADT + Radiotherapy PATIENT POPULATION (Key features): Definitive RT cohort: Very high risk (Grade Group 4–5, selected GG4, node-positive) | Post-prostatectomy cohort: Persistent/rising PSA with very high risk pathological features | Excludes distant metastatic disease KNOWN RESULTS (Pre-Congress): Interim analysis results to be presented at ESMO 2026. Full numerical data (MFS, OS, toxicity) not yet available. KEY QUESTIONS AT ESMO: Magnitude of MFS/OS and absolute benefit | Subgroup analysis (definitive vs. salvage, GG, nodal) | Toxicity and treatment duration | Long-term outcomes and change in practice [Slide 3] ESMO 2026 MADRID SPAIN ESMO CONGRESS · 23 – 27 October 2026 · IFEMA MADRID Madrid, Spain · SCIENCE BETTER MEDICINE BRIGHTER LIVES · ESMO CONGRESS 2026 MADRID Top ESMO 2026 Abstracts to Watch – Detailed Overview (Abstracts 4 to 7) 4 LITESPARK-011 (Phase III) Belzutifan + Lenvatinib vs. Cabozantinib in Advanced/Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma RATIONALE: • After prior PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy, RCC remains challenging. • Combination of HIF-2α inhibition (belzutifan) and VEGF inhibition (lenvatinib) may be more effective than cabotantinib. MECHANISM OF ACTION: Belzutifan (HIF-2α inhibitor) — VHL loss → HIF-2α ↑ Tumour growth, angiogenesis, metabolism | Lenvatinib (multikinase inhibitor) — Inhibits VEGFR and other kinases → reduces angiogenesis TRIAL DESIGN: 747 patients | Phase III Randomized Open-label | Population: Advanced ccRCC after anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy ARMS: Belzutifan + Lenvatinib — Belzutifan 120 mg OD + Lenvatinib 20 mg OD (1:1 randomization) | Cabozantinib — 60 mg OD KEY RESULTS (Published): Progression-free survival (PFS) 14.8 months vs. 10.7 months, HR 0.70 (95% CI 0.59–0.84), p < 0.0001 | Overall survival (OS) 34.9 months vs. 27.6 months, HR 0.85 (95% CI 0.88–1.05), Not statistically significant (at interim analysis) SAFETY (Grade ≥3 AEs): • 84% vs. 83% (experimental vs. control) • Hypertension: 31% vs. 29% • Monitor: hypertension, anemia, hypoxia, proteinuria, renal function KEY TAKEAWAY: Significant PFS benefit; final OS results awaited at ESMO 2026. 5 DeLLphi-305 (Phase III) Tarlatamab + Durvalumab vs. Durvalumab in Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer RATIONALE: • Extensive-stage SCLC displays high relapse rates after initial chemo + I/O. • DLL3-targeted T-cell engager may enhance immune response during maintenance. MECHANISM OF ACTION: Tarlatamab (DLL3 × CD3 bispecific T-cell engager) — Brings T cells to DLL3-expressing tumour cells → T-cell mediated killing | Durvalumab (anti-PD-L1 antibody) — Blocks PD-L1 mediated immune inhibition TRIAL DESIGN: 563 patients | Phase III Randomized Global study | Population: ES-SCLC without progression after platinum + etoposide + durvalumab induction ARMS: Tarlatamab + Durvalumab — Maintenance until progression VS Durvalumab alone — Maintenance until progression KEY RESULTS (Topline): Overall survival (OS) – primary endpoint met, Statistically significant improvement | Progression-free survival (PFS) – significant improvement | Objective response rate (ORR) – improved | Full numerical data awaited at ESMO 2026 SAFETY: • Consistent with known profiles • Key risks: cytokine-release syndrome (CRS), neurological toxicity (ICANS), infusion reactions KEY TAKEAWAY: First-line maintenance with DLL3-targeted T-cell engager shows significant OS benefit (topline). 6 SAFFRON (Phase III) Osimertinib + Savolitinib vs. Chemotherapy in EGFR-Mutated NSCLC with MET Overexpression/Amplification RATIONALE: • MET overexpression or amplification is a key resistance mechanism after osimertinib. • Dual EGFR/MET inhibition may overcome resistance and delay chemotherapy. MECHANISM OF ACTION: Osimertinib (EGFR TKI) — Continues inhibition of mutant EGFR signalling | Savolitinib (selective MET inhibitor) — Inhibits MET signalling bypass pathway TRIAL DESIGN: (Number not publicly specified, large Phase III study) | Phase III Randomized Global study | Population: EGFR-mutated NSCLC with MET overexpression or amplification after osimertinib ARMS: Osimertinib + Savolitinib (oral combination) VS Platinum + Pemetrexed (chemotherapy) KEY RESULTS (Topline): Progression-free survival (PFS) – significant improvement | Overall survival (OS) – significant improvement | Consistent benefit across key subgroups (as per topline) | Full numerical data awaited at ESMO 2026 SAFETY: • Consistent with known profiles of osimertinib and savolitinib • Monitor: interstitial lung disease, hepatotoxicity, edema and other class-specific AEs KEY TAKEAWAY: Potential new standard for EGFR-mutated NSCLC with MET-driven resistance after osimertinib, if OS benefit confirmed in full data. 7 CLARITY-Gastric01 (Phase III) Sonesitatug Vedotin (CLDN18.2 ADC) vs. Physician's Choice in Advanced/Metastatic Gastric/GEJ Adenocarcinoma RATIONALE: • Poor outcomes after first-line therapy in advanced gastric/GEJ cancer. • CLDN18.2 is a validated target. • Antibody–drug conjugate delivers cytotoxic payload directly to CLDN18.2-expressing tumour cells. MECHANISM OF ACTION: 1 Target binding — Anti-CLDN18.2 antibody binds tumour cells | 2 Internalization — ADC internalized into tumour cell | 3 Cytotoxic effect — Release of MMAE payload → cell death TRIAL DESIGN: ~600 patients | Phase III Randomized Global study | Population: CLDN18.2 positive (≥25% tumour cells) 2L+ advanced gastric/GEJ or oesophageal adenocarcinoma ARMS: Sonesitatug Vedotin — 2.2 mg/kg IV Q3W VS Investigator's Choice — (Ramucirumab + paclitaxel, paclitaxel, docetaxel, irinotecan, TAS-102, or apatinib depending on line and region) KEY RESULTS (Topline): Overall survival (OS) in 3L+ population – primary endpoint met | Overall survival (OS) in 2L+ population – significant improvement | Progression-free survival (PFS) – favourable trend, not statistically significant | Full numerical data to be presented at ESMO 2026 SAFETY: • No new safety signals reported • Main AEs: peripheral neuropathy, neutropenia, gastrointestinal toxicity (MMAE-related) KEY TAKEAWAY: CLDN18.2-targeted ADC shows OS benefit in previously treated advanced gastric/GEJ cancer; full data needed to define magnitude, PFS and safety profile. [Slide 4] ESMO 2026 MADRID SPAIN ESMO CONGRESS · SCIENCE · BETTER MEDICINE · BRIGHTER LIVES · 23 – 27 October 2026 · IFEMA MADRID Madrid, Spain · ESMO CONGRESS 2026 MADRID Top ESMO 2026 Abstracts to Watch – Detailed Overview (Abstracts 8 to 10) 8 BREAST CANCER – 4 KEY TRIALS From early stage to metastatic disease 8A TALENT (Phase II) Neoadjuvant T-DXd in HER2-low, HR+ early breast cancer STUDY DESIGN: HER2-low, HR+ early breast cancer | Phase II (Neoadjuvant) | Arms: T-DXd alone, T-DXd + anastrozole, T-DXd → chemotherapy | Primary endpoint: pCR MECHANISM: T-DXd — Anti-HER2 antibody; Topoisomerase-I payload; Bystander effect on neighbouring tumour cells KEY QUESTIONS AT ESMO: Pathological complete response (pCR) rates | Residual cancer burden | Benefit of adding anastrozole | Can chemotherapy be reduced? | Safety (ILD, nausea, cytopenias) 8B NATALEE (Phase III) 6-year follow up of adjuvant ribociclib in HR+/HER2– early breast cancer STUDY DESIGN: Stage II–III (incl. selected node-negative) HR+/HER2– | ~5,100 patients | Ribociclib 400 mg daily (3 weeks on/1 week off) × 3 years + endocrine therapy | Endpoint: iDFS (primary), OS KEY RESULTS (5-year, published): Invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) 85.5% Ribociclib + ET vs 81.0% ET alone; Absolute difference: 4.5%; HR 0.716 (95% CI 0.618–0.829) | Overall survival (5-year) HR 0.800 (95% CI 0.637–1.003) Favourable trend, not statistically significant KEY QUESTIONS AT ESMO (6-year update): Does OS become statistically significant? | Persistence of iDFS benefit after stopping ribociclib | Subgroup analysis (node-negative vs positive) | Long-term safety (QT prolongation, LFT, neutropenia) 8C postMONARCH (Phase III) Abemaciclib + fulvestrant after progression on prior CDK4/6 inhibitor STUDY DESIGN: HR+/HER2– metastatic breast cancer after CDK4/6 inhibitor + endocrine therapy | 368 patients | Abemaciclib + fulvestrant vs placebo + fulvestrant | Primary endpoint: PFS; Key secondary endpoint: OS KEY RESULTS (published): Median PFS 6.0 mo vs 5.3 mo; HR 0.73 (Investigator-assessed) | [header reads 'Coxicty (durvica)' — garbled] HR 0.55 (Blinded independent central review); HR 0.55 (Blinded independen[t]) KEY QUESTIONS AT ESMO (OS update): Overall survival benefit? | Consistency across subgroups | Toxicity (diarrhoea, neutropenia, VTE) | Positioning vs other post-CDK4/6 options (oral SERDs, ADCs) 8D VIKTORIA-1 (Phase III) Gedatolisib + fulvestrant ± palbociclib in HR+/HER2– advanced breast cancer STUDY DESIGN: After endocrine therapy + CDK4/6 inhibitor | Gedatolisib + fulvestrant ± palbociclib vs fulvestrant (control) | Includes PIK3CA wild-type cohort PREVIOUS KEY RESULTS [header partly garbled]: table — Median PFS | HR (vs fulvestrant): Gedatolisib + Fulv + Palbo 9.3 mo | 0.24; Gedatolisib + Fulv – | 0.33; Fulvestrant alone 2.0 mo | – KEY QUESTIONS AT ESMO (Update): Updated PFS and OS | Incremental value of palbociclib | Toxicity (stomatitis, rash, [garbled]) | Role in PIK3CA WT disease 9 MOIO (Phase III) Reduced-frequency immunotherapy in multiple metastatic cancers CLINICAL QUESTION: In patients with metastatic cancers who have achieved a partial or complete response after 6 months of standard immunotherapy, can treatment frequency be reduced to once every 3 months without compromising efficacy? STUDY DESIGN: Phase III, randomized non-inferiority trial | Multiple solid tumours | Patients with CR or PR after 6 months of standard checkpoint inhibitor therapy | Reduced-frequency dosing (every 3 months, same dose) vs standard dosing frequency | Primary endpoint: Non-inferiority for efficacy RATIONALE: Maintain durable response with lower treatment burden — Reduce hospital visits | Less treatment burden & cost | Potential for fewer immune-related AEs | Maintain long-term disease control PATIENT POPULATION: Metastatic cancers (multiple primary sites) with partial or complete response after 6 months of standard immunotherapy KEY EXCLUSIONS: • Selected melanoma CR • Selected favourable-risk RCC on TKI + IO • Other protocol-specified exclusions KEY POINTS AT ESMO: Non-inferiority outcome (hazard ratio, confidence intervals) | Consistency across tumour types | Duration of follow-up and durability | Immune-related adverse events | Impact on real-world practice and cost POTENTIAL IMPACT: If non-inferiority is shown: • Less frequent infusions • Reduced cost and logistical burden • May maintain efficacy • Could improve patient quality of life IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS: • Non-inferiority trial (not superiority) • Predefined non-inferiority margin is critical • Results may not apply to all tumour types • Long-term outcomes and safety are key 10 TroFuse-005 (Phase III) Sacituzumab tirumotecan (Sac-TMT) in advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer CLINICAL QUESTION: Can a TROP-2 targeted antibody–drug conjugate improve overall survival and progression-free survival in advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer after platinum-based chemotherapy and immunotherapy? STUDY DESIGN: Phase III, randomized, global study | Advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer | Prior platinum-based chemotherapy and anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy (together or sequentially) | Sacituzumab tirumotecan vs physician's-choice chemotherapy (doxorubicin or paclitaxel) | Primary endpoints: OS and PFS MECHANISM OF ACTION: Sacituzumab tirumotecan (TROP-2 ADC) — Anti-TROP-2 antibody; Linker; Cytotoxic payload (TOP1 Inhibitor); TROP-2. Binds TROP-2 → internalization → release of payload → tumour cell death KEY RESULTS (Pre-Congress Topline): Overall survival (OS) – primary endpoint met (statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement) | Progression-free survival (PFS) – primary endpoint met | Full numerical data (median OS, PFS, HRs) to be presented at ESMO 2026 PATIENT POPULATION: ~600 patients Advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer after platinum chemotherapy and immunotherapy CONTROL ARM: Physician's choice: Doxorubicin or paclitaxel (as per protocol and region) KEY QUESTIONS AT ESMO: Magnitude of OS and PFS benefit (HR, medians, landmark rates) | Efficacy across histological subtypes and molecular subgroups | Safety (neutropenia, diarrhoea, nausea, neuropathy) | Positioning vs other therapies in this setting POTENTIAL IMPACT: First positive Phase III ADC in this setting | Addresses unmet need after chemo + immunotherapy | Could establish new standard of care if benefit is confirmed

[Slide 1] ESMO GOOD SCIENCE BETTER MEDICINE BEST PRACTICE ESMO 2026 · MADRID GUT ONC LAB GI ABSTRACTS I'M WATCHING Oct 23–27 · Times are Madrid local (CEST through Oct 24, CET from Oct 25) BELOW THE BELT AZUR-1 LBA87 Sun 25 11:00 Dostarlimab alone in stage II/III MSI-H rectal cancer This will be positive. Incredibly positive. This is already what I'm doing in clinical practice and is a massive step forward for the 5–10% of rectal cancer patients that are MSI-H. Yay. IROCAS LBA29 Sun 25 10:15 Adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX vs mFOLFOX6, T4/N2 colon Important study, and honestly, it is going to predict if US-CIRCULATE will be positive. If this is negative, CIRCULATE will be a nail-biter. CheckMate 8HW LBA32 Sat 24 15:42 Final OS: nivo/ipi vs nivo vs chemo, MSI-H mCRC What happens when you do a trial with an agent that essentially cures a disease against another that cures most people? It is a really long damn trial. Excited for the final OS data. Will it be positive? TBD, but I certainly think the magnitude of benefit of dual IO makes it better than single agent, and this data could reinforce that practice. UNION 3530O Sun 25 11:10 SCRT → camrelizumab + CAPOX, locally advanced rectal pCR reported at ~40% in 2024, let's see if more people were cured. Some criticism in changing radiation schedule and adding IO compared to standard, but will set the stage for future studies. EMT2 LBA30 Sun 25 10:25 EPA vs placebo after CRC liver metastasis resection It's like fish oil but better. File this in the ALASCCA category of "costs nothing, helps people" if positive. ALASCCA + CHALLENGE <3 QTX3034 790RO Sat 24 15:15 KRAS G12D inhibitor + cetuximab ± mFOLFOX6, mCRC Sick study. Moving us to molecularly driven treatments in earlier line settings for CRC. Where the field MUST move. If this isn't positive I will eat a hat (a small one, preferably organic). EC + FOLFIRI beyond PD 788RO Sat 24 14:50 Continuing encorafenib + cetuximab past progression, BRAF V600E mCRC Already doing this in clinical practice with patients who have BRAF+ disease w/o resistance mechanism on ctDNA at progression. Data for its use is HUGELY welcome. BOT/BAL in the real world 905eP ePoster · 3771P Mon 26 12:00 Botensilimab + balstilimab: refractory MSS mCRC (AGEO) and advanced sarcoma (Spanish EAP) Gives us a look at Bot Bal in real world. Important data, multiple attempts to use CPI in advanced disease have provided mixed results, what happens when we use stronger agents? RUNNER-UP Biweekly TAS-102 + bev LBA31 Sat 24 15:37 Biweekly vs standard schedule, refractory mCRC Runner up only because Cathy Eng already convincingly showed this is the dosing schedule we should be using. I already use this in clinical practice. Great to randomize but should be positive. UPPER GI CLARITY-Gastric01 + G-HOPE-001 LBA7 Sun 25 17:18 · LBA77 Fri 23 13:30 CLDN18.2 ADCs, pretreated gastric/GEJ The next generation of CLDN18.2 is here. Expect less explosive emesis and improved outcomes. KEYNOTE-975 2875O Fri 23 13:50 Pembro + definitive chemoRT, esophageal/GEJ Merck joins the D-FLOT era for patients still receiving definitive chemoRT. After the CROSS/FLOT study the impact of this is going to be less, but still important for patients receiving definitive chemoRT. HERIZON-GEA-01 LBA79 Fri 23 16:15 Zanidatamab ± tislelizumab, 1L HER2+ GEA My practice in HER2+ upper GI/GEA has moved to Zani, will be helpful to see the longer-term outcomes here. SANO LBA78 Fri 23 13:40 Active surveillance vs surgery after nCRT, long-term People deserve to keep their organs. Our ability to offer this only improves when we layer in tools like ctDNA. Interested in what we can extrapolate to other organ systems (especially for MSI-H). PANCREAS RASolute 302 LBA82 Fri 23 14:22 Daraxonrasib subgroups, 2L+ metastatic PDAC Every subgroup likely benefited. G12V more than others. Maybe there will be another standing ovation? Come for the science, stay for the clapping. AMPLIFY-7P LBA83 Fri 23 14:32 mKRAS vaccine vs observation, resected PDAC Vaccine therapies are the next frontier. Merck has pushed them forward in Melanoma where they are an amazing success, very interested in the randomized data here. Even if negative it will be critical data to learn from. HCC / BILIARY HARMONi-GI1 LBA8 Sun 25 17:42 Ivonescimab vs durvalumab + GemCis, 1L BTC PD-1/VEGF emerges in GI. Let's see the benefit. China only. ACTICCA-1 LBA21 Sat 24 10:25 Adjuvant GemCis vs capecitabine, resected BTC Might immediately change the standard of care for resected BTC. Worth tuning in for. Nicholas J. Hornstein, MD, PhD Full abstracts online Oct 19 · LBAs at presentation

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 GU Trials to Watch Presidential + selected oral / proffered presentations ESMO 2026 MADRID 23–27 OCTOBER 2026 17 trials | Prostate 5 | Bladder 6 | Kidney 6 PROSTATE | 5 trials 1 DASL-HiCaP (ANZUP1801) — Darolutamide + ADT with definitive or salvage locoregional radiotherapy in localized, very high-risk prostate cancer. 2 PROTEUS substudy (LBA 53) — Perioperative apalutamide + ADT around radical prostatectomy in high-risk localized prostate cancer. 3 PEACE-1 — Long-term overall survival with abiraterone + prednisone in de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. 4 CAPItello-281 (LBA56) — Capivasertib + abiraterone vs placebo + abiraterone in PTEN-deficient metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: updated OS. 5 2045O — Transcriptome classifier risk stratification and ARPI intensification for clinically very high-risk prostate cancer. BLADDER | 6 trials 6 VOLGA — Perioperative durvalumab ± tremelimumab + neoadjuvant enfortumab vedotin in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. 7 KEYNOTE-866 — Perioperative pembrolizumab or placebo + neoadjuvant cisplatin/gemcitabine in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. 8 Phase 3 perioperative nivolumab study — Neoadjuvant chemotherapy ± nivolumab, followed by adjuvant nivolumab, in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. 9 POTOMAC — Durvalumab + BCG induction and maintenance in BCG-naive, high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. 10 KEYNOTE-905 (4733O) — Perioperative pembrolizumab or enfortumab vedotin + pembrolizumab in cisplatin-ineligible muscle-invasive bladder cancer: ad hoc analysis. 11 KEYNOTE-B15 ctDNA (4734O) — ctDNA analysis of neoadjuvant/adjuvant enfortumab vedotin + pembrolizumab in cisplatin-eligible muscle-invasive bladder cancer. KIDNEY | 6 trials 12 LITESPARK-012 — First-line pembrolizumab + lenvatinib + belzutifan or MK-1308A + lenvatinib in advanced RCC. 13 LITESPARK-011 — Final analysis of belzutifan + lenvatinib versus cabozantinib after anti-PD-(L)1 therapy in advanced RCC. 14 KEYNOTE-564 — Final protocol-prespecified analysis of adjuvant pembrolizumab versus placebo in clear-cell RCC. 15 SWOG S2200 — Cabozantinib ± atezolizumab in metastatic papillary RCC. 16 PE-PE (LBA88) — Perioperative pembrolizumab plus metastasis-directed therapy versus MDT alone in oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma. 17 AK112 / Ivonescimab (3592O) — First-line PD-1/VEGF bispecific antibody in IMDC favorable-risk advanced RCC: phase Ib/II results. CLINICAL TRIALS SHAPING THE NEXT ERA IN GENITOURINARY CANCERS X @dryukselurun [watercolour Madrid skyline illustration]

[Slide 1] MY TOP 10 LUNG CANCER ABSTRACTS #ESMO26 01 LBA3 DeLLphi-305 Phase III primary analysis: Tarlatamab + durvalumab vs durvalumab as 1L maintenance after durvalumab + platinum/etoposide in ES-SCLC Jacob Sands 02 2614O PERSEE Phase III pembrolizumab with or without platinum-based chemotherapy as 1L treatment in advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥50% Chantal Decroisette 03 LBA66 OptiTROP-Lung06 Phase III sacituzumab tirumotecan + pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy + pembrolizumab in 1L PD-L1-negative advanced non-squamous NSCLC Caicun Zhou 04 LBA6 SAFFRON Phase III primary results: Osimertinib + savolitinib vs platinum–pemetrexed in EGFR-mutant, MET-overexpressed/amplified advanced NSCLC after osimertinib Shun Lu 05 LBA5 KRAScendo 1 Phase III divarasib vs sotorasib or adagrasib in previously treated advanced KRAS G12C-mutated NSCLC Ferdinandos Skoulidis 06 LBA67 OptiTROP-Lung04 Final OS analysis: Sacituzumab tirumotecan vs platinum-based chemotherapy in EGFR-mutated NSCLC after EGFR-TKI progression Wen Feng Fang 07 2613O SARON Primary results: Randomized trial of consolidation radiotherapy for synchronous oligometastatic NSCLC Fiona McDonald 08 LBA69 SANOVO Phase III savolitinib or placebo + osimertinib in treatment-naïve advanced NSCLC with EGFR mutation and MET overexpression Yi-Long Wu 09 LBA71 PANKU-Lung01 Phase III izalontamab brengitecan in EGFR-mutant non-squamous NSCLC after progression on a third-generation EGFR TKI Li Zhang 10 LBA73 PACE-LUNG Single-arm phase II: Adding chemotherapy for EGFR-mutant NSCLC with persistent plasma EGFR-mutant ctDNA at week 3 of 1L osimertinib Martin Sebastian @dr_yakupergun

[Slide 1] Perioperative MIBC Trials: Chemo/IO and ADC/IO Approaches Cis-Eligible Niagara (reported 2024) FDA approval March 2025 EU approval July 2025 GC x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation GC + Durva x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Durva x 8 KN-866 GC x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation GC + Pembro x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Pembro x 13 ENERGIZE GC x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation GC + Nivo x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Nivo x 9 EV-304/KN-B15 (reported: Feb 2026) EV + Pembro x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | EV x 5 + Pembro x 13 GC x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation Cis-Ineligible EV-303/KN-905 (reported 2025; FDA approval Nov 2025) EV + Pembro x 3 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | EV x 6 + Pembro x 14 No preop therapy | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation VOLGA Durva + EV x 3 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Durva x 9 Durva/Treme + EV x 3 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Treme x 1 + Durva x 9 No preop therapy | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Per physician choice

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 Top 10 GI Cancer Trials to Watch 23 - 27 October 2026 | Madrid, Spain @DrRishabhOnco 1 CLARITY-Gastric 01 — LBA7 — Presidential Symposium — Sonesitatug vedotin vs investigator's choice — Gastric/GEJ cancer (CLDN18.2+, previously treated) 2 HARMONi-GI1 — LBA8 — Presidential Symposium — Ivonescimab + chemo vs durvalumab + chemo — Biliary tract cancer (1L advanced) 3 KEYNOTE-975 — 2875O — Pembrolizumab + chemoRT vs chemoRT — Esophageal/GEJ cancer (locally advanced) 4 G-HOPE-001 — LBA77 — Arcotatug tavatecan vs physician's choice — Gastric/GEJ cancer (CLDN18.2+, previously treated) 5 HERIZON-GEA-01 — LBA79 — Zanidatamab + chemo ± tislelizumab — HER2+ gastric/GEJ cancer (1L, updated outcomes) 6 GERCOR-GONO DEWI — 2877RO — Dostarlimab (nonoperative approach) — Localized dMMR/MSI-H gastric/GEJ cancer 7 LOMAC — LBA81 — 4 months vs 6 months adjuvant CAPOX — Gastric cancer (post D2 gastrectomy) 8 KC-WISE — LBA80 — Anbenitamab + chemo after trastuzumab — HER2+ gastric/GEJ cancer (post trastuzumab) 9 RAMIRIS — 2878RO — FOLFIRI + ramucirumab vs paclitaxel + ramucirumab — Gastric/GEJ cancer (after taxane therapy) 10 FORTITUDE-101/102 — 2883RO — Bemaritzumab-based therapy in FGFR2-amplified gastric/GEJ cancer — Gastric/GEJ cancer (FGFR2 amplification) [cartoon organ and antibody illustrations; Madrid building]

#ESMO26 - SPOTLIGHT ON KEY GI ABSTRACTS (Abstracts to be released Oct 19th) @GillSharlene GI Upper Digestive Presidential Symposium (Oct 25) LBA7 - CLARITY-Gastric 01 (CG-01): a Phase 3 study of sonesitatug vedotin (Sone-Ve) in second or later-line (2L+) advanced or metastatic Claudin 18.2 (CLDN18.2) positive gastroesophageal carcinoma (GEC). Dr. Rui-Hua Xu (China) LBA8 - HARMONi-GI1 - Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy versus durvalumab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer: A randomized, controlled, double-blinded phase 3 trial. Dr. Jian Zhou (China) Proffered Paper Session 1 (Oct 23) LBA77 - G-HOPE-001 - Arcotatug tavatecan (IBI343/TAK-921) versus treatment of physician's choice in previously treated advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: First interim analysis of the randomized phase 3 G-HOPE-001 study. Dr. Kohei Shitara (Japan) LBA78 - SANO - Active surveillance versus standard surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer: Long-term results of a cluster-randomised controlled trial. Dr. Sanjiv S. Gangaram-Panday (Netherlands) 2875O - KEYNOTE-975 - Pembrolizumab or placebo plus concurrent definitive chemoradiotherapy in esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer: The phase 3 randomized KEYNOTE-975 study. Dr. Manish Shah (USA) LBA82 - Daraxonrasib, a RAS(ON) multi-selective inhibitor vs chemotherapy in previously treated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC): Additional subgroup analyses from the Ph3 RASolute 302 study. Dr. Zev Wainberg (USA) Proffered Paper Session 2 (Oct 24) LBA21 - ACTICCA-1 - Adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin compared with standard of care after curative-intent resection of cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma. Dr. Henning Wege (Germany) 459O - A randomized trial of paclitaxel +/- tovecimig in previously treated patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. Dr. Nilofer Azad (USA) LBA48 - Liver function trajectory and post-progression outcomes in the Phase 3 EMERALD-3 study of tremelimumab (T) + durvalumab (D) +/- lenvatinib (L) + transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) in participants (pts) with embolisation-eligible hepatocellular carcinoma (eeHCC). Dr. Masatoshi Kudo (Japan) 1679O - Phase 1 study of BGB-B2033 (GPC3 x 4-1BB bispecific antibody) Monotherapy: First Disclosure of Dose Optimization (DO) and Dose Escalation (DE) Update in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) [remainder of list obscured by chat-app UI overlay in the screenshot]

[Slide 1] Presentations at 2026 ESMO Congress October 23–27, 2026 *All times CEST/CET (Please note that the time zone will switch from CEST to CET between 24 and 25 October 2026, due to the end of daylight saving time.) Dana-Farber Cancer Institute PRESENTATION | SPEAKER | SESSION/TIME Friday, October 23, 2026 Personalising vaccines using peptides, DNA, mRNA and more | Patrick Ott, MD, PhD | Special Symposium Melanoma: From standard fit to bespoke care/Leon Auditorium Hall 4 | 13:30-15:00 What oncologists should know about mRNA vaccines: Perspectives from the medical oncologist | Toni Choueiri, MD | Special Session What oncologists should know about mRNA vaccines Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6 | 15:15-16:00 The best is yet to come: Immune modulating approaches in neuro-oncology | Lakshmi Nayak, MD (Chair) | Challege Your Expert Salamanca Auditorium - Hall 10 |16:15-17:00 Saturday, October 24, 2026 1842O Efficacy and safety of atirmociclib (ATI) + fulvestrant (FUL) in patients (pts) with HR+/HER2– advanced/metastatic breast cancer (mBC) who progressed on prior CDK4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) in a randomized phase 2 study (FOURLIGHT-1) | Antonio Giordano, MD, PhD Presenting Author | Proffered paper 2 Breast cancer, early and advanced stage Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6 | 8:30-10:00 LBA74 First-line (1L) trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) in patients (pts) with HER2-mutant (HER2m) NSCLC: patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from DESTINY-Lung04 (DL-04) | Pasi A. Jänne, MD, PhD Discussant (Chair) | Rapid oral 1 NSCLC, metastatic Almeria Auditorium - Hall 9 | 8:30-10:00 2631RO First-line BAT8008 (TROP2-ADC) plus BAT1308 (anti-PD-1) for advanced NSCLC: Results from a multicenter phase 2 study | Pasi A. Jänne, MD, PhD Discussant (Chair) | Rapid oral 1 NSCLC, metastatic Almeria Auditorium - Hall 9 | 8:30-10:00 LBA53 Perioperative apalutamide (APA) plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with radical prostatectomy plus pelvic lymph node dissection (RP + PLND) vs RP + PLND alone in patients (pts) with high-risk localized or locally advanced prostate cancer (HR LPC/LAPC): PROTEUS Substudy | Mary-Ellen Taplin, MD Senior Author | Proffered paper Genitourinary tumours, prostate, penile and testis Barcelona Auditorium - Hall 9 | 10:15-11:45 [Slide 2] Presentations at 2026 ESMO Congress October 23–27, 2026 *All times CEST/CET (Please note that the time zone will switch from CEST to CET between 24 and 25 October 2026, due to the end of daylight saving time.) Dana-Farber Cancer Institute PRESENTATION | SPEAKER | SESSION/TIME Saturday, October 24, 2026 (continued) 2RO Retrospective exploratory biomarker (BM) analyses from evERA Breast Cancer (BC): A Phase III trial of giredestrant (GIRE) + everolimus (E) in patients (pts) with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced BC (ER+, HER2– aBC) in the post-CDK4/6 inhibitor (i) setting | Sara Tolaney, MD, MPH Presenting Author | Rapid oral 1 Breast cancer, advanced stage Almeria Auditorium - Hall 9 | 10:15-11:45 LBA3 Tarlatamab plus durvalumab (durva) vs durva as 1L maintenance (1LM) therapy following durva, platinum, and etoposide (1L durva + EP) in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC): Primary analysis of the phase 3 DeLLphi-305 trial | Jacob Sands, MD Presenting Author | Presidential Symposium 1 Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6 | 4:30-5:15 Sunday, October 25, 2026 3586O First-line pembrolizumab + lenvatinib + belzutifan or MK-1308A + lenvatinib in advanced RCC: randomized open-label phase 3 LITESPARK-012 study | Toni Choueiri, MD Presenting Author | Proffered paper 2 Genitourinary tumours, renal and urothelial Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6 | 8:30-10:00 Personalized cancer vaccines | Patrick Ott, MD, PhD | Educational Session All about cancer vaccines Almeria Auditorium - Hall 9 | 8:30-10:00 Optimising systemic therapy and sequence for stage I HER2-positive early breast cancer | Sara Tolaney, MD, MPH | Educational Session Optimising Systemic Therapy and sequence for stage I HER2-positive early breast cancer Almeria Auditorium - Hall 9 | 10:15-11:45 The modern oncologist: Leading teams in an era of complexity | Elizabeth Mittendorf, MD, PhD | Special Session ESMO-ASCO: The evolving definition of the modern oncologist Oviedo Auditorium - Hall 5 | 10:15-11:45 [Slide 3] Presentations at 2026 ESMO Congress October 23–27, 2026 *All times CEST/CET (Please note that the time zone will switch from CEST to CET between 24 and 25 October 2026, due to the end of daylight saving time.) Dana-Farber Cancer Institute PRESENTATION | SPEAKER | SESSION/TIME Sunday, October 25, 2026 (continued) 690O Final results of the TUXEDO-3 phase II trial of patritumab deruxtecan (HER3-DXd) in active brain metastases (BMs) and leptomeningeal disease (LMD) | Nancy Lin, MD Discussant | Proffered paper CNS tumours Murcia Auditorium - Hall 3 | 10:15-11:45 691O A First in Human Phase 1 Study of Intrathecal Peptide-Pulsed Dendritic Cells for HER2+ and Triple Negative Breast Cancer Leptomeningeal Disease | Nancy Lin, MD Discussant | Proffered paper CNS tumours Murcia Auditorium - Hall 3 | 10:15-11:45 3589RO Final protocol-prespecified analysis of the phase 3 KEYNOTE-564 trial of adjuvant pembrolizumab versus placebo in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) | Toni Choueiri, MD Presenting Author | Rapid oral 2 Genitourinary tumours, renal and urothelial Burgos Auditorium - Hall 3 | 14:45-16:15 3593RO Plasma Kidney Injury Molecule-1 (KIM-1) Dynamics During First-Line Immunotherapy With or Without Cabozantinib in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma (aRCC) | Wenxin (Vincent) Xu, MD Presenting Author | Rapid oral 2 Genitourinary tumours, renal and urothelial Burgos Auditorium - Hall 3 | 14:45-16:15 Monday, October 26, 2026 4449RO Paired-biopsy multi-omic analysis reveals target-independent mechanisms of antibody–drug conjugate (ADC) resistance in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) | Paolo Tarantino, MD, PhD Presenting Author | Rapid oral 2 Breast cancer, advanced stage Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6 | 10:15-11:45 Challenges in the management of neuro-endocrine and small cell prostate cancer | Himisha Beltran, MD | Challenge Your Expert Granada Auditorium - Hall 4 | 10:15-11:00 Evolving surgical strategies after neoadjuvant immunotherapy: What should change? | Ravindra Uppaluri, MD, PhD | Special Symposium IO-based systemic therapy in head and neck cancers Granada Auditorium - Hall 4 | 16:30-18:00 [Slide 4] Presentations at 2026 ESMO Congress October 23–27, 2026 *All times CEST/CET (Please note that the time zone will switch from CEST to CET between 24 and 25 October 2026, due to the end of daylight saving time.) Dana-Farber Cancer Institute PRESENTATION | SPEAKER | SESSION/TIME Monday, October 26, 2026 (continued) LBA11 Sacituzumab Tirumotecan in Previously Treated Advanced or Recurrent Endometrial Cancer: Results from the Phase 3 TroFuse-005/ENGOT-en23/GOG-3095 Study | Joyce Liu, MD, MPH Discussant | Presidential Symposium III Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6 | 16:30-18:15

[Slide 1] ESMO CONGRESS 2026 · MADRID · 23–27 OCTOBER | #ESMO2026 GU Oncology: 11 Trials I'm Watching Presidential, late-breaking and proffered papers — sorted by tumour entity PROSTATE 3 trials 1 DASL-HiCaP (ANZUP1801) [PRESIDENTIAL] — Darolutamide + ADT with definitive or salvage locoregional RT in localised, very high-risk prostate cancer. Presenter: Tamim Niazi 2 PROTEUS substudy [LBA 53] — Perioperative apalutamide + ADT around radical prostatectomy in high-risk localised disease. Presenter: Alberto Briganti · Sat 10:15, Proffered Paper 3 PEACE-1 — Long-term overall survival with abiraterone + prednisone in de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. Presenter: Karim Fizazi "PROTEUS substudy (LBA 53) also a potential practice changer." — Prof. Boris Hadaschik, comment on the GU picks BLADDER 4 trials 4 VOLGA [PRESIDENTIAL] — Perioperative durvalumab ± tremelimumab + neoadjuvant enfortumab vedotin in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Presenter: Thomas B. Powles 5 KEYNOTE-866 — Perioperative pembrolizumab or placebo + neoadjuvant cisplatin/gemcitabine in MIBC. Presenter: Jens Bedke 6 Perioperative nivolumab (Ph 3) — Neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone vs chemo + nivolumab, followed by adjuvant nivolumab, in MIBC. Presenter: Andrea Necchi 7 POTOMAC — Durvalumab + BCG induction and maintenance in BCG-naïve, high-risk NMIBC. Presenter: Maria De Santis KIDNEY 4 trials 8 LITESPARK-012 — First-line pembrolizumab + lenvatinib + belzutifan or MK-1308A + lenvatinib in advanced RCC. Presenter: Toni K. Choueiri 9 LITESPARK-011 — Final analysis: belzutifan + lenvatinib vs cabozantinib after anti-PD-(L)1 in advanced RCC. Presenter: Daniel Y. Heng 10 KEYNOTE-564 — Final protocol-prespecified analysis of adjuvant pembrolizumab vs placebo in clear-cell RCC. Presenter: Toni K. Choueiri 11 SWOG S2200 — Cabozantinib ± atezolizumab in metastatic papillary RCC. Presenter: Benjamin L. Maughan Prof. Dr. Axel S. Merseburger Department of Urology · UKSH Campus Lübeck Selection builds on Toni Choueiri's GU picks + PROTEUS added · clinical trials only

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 — ABSTRACTS TO WATCH MV Onco PART 01/04 — PRESIDENTIAL SPOTLIGHT LBA1 — INTerpath-001 MELANOMA | PERSONALIZED mRNA VACCINE WHO? Resected stage IIB–IV melanoma. WHAT? Intismeran autogene (V940) + pembrolizumab versus pembrolizumab alone. WHY WATCH? Can personalized vaccination further reduce melanoma recurrence after surgery? LBA2 — VOLGA MUSCLE-INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER WHO? Cisplatin-ineligible or cisplatin-declining MIBC. WHAT? Neoadjuvant enfortumab vedotin + perioperative durvalumab, with or without tremelimumab, versus surgery-based control. WHY WATCH? Does adding CTLA-4 blockade provide enough extra benefit to justify toxicity? LBA3 — DeLLphi-305 EXTENSIVE-STAGE SCLC WHO? Patients without progression after first-line durvalumab + platinum–etoposide. WHAT? Tarlatamab (DLL3 × CD3 T-cell engager) + durvalumab versus durvalumab maintenance alone. WHY WATCH? Can DLL3-directed T-cell engagement improve survival in first-line maintenance? LBA4 — DASL-HiCaP VERY-HIGH-RISK PROSTATE CANCER WHO? Localized or locoregional very-high-risk prostate cancer receiving definitive or salvage RT. WHAT? Darolutamide versus placebo, added to ADT + radiotherapy. WHY WATCH? Does intensified androgen-receptor blockade improve outcomes beyond ADT + RT? FINAL TAKE-HOME FOUR PHASE III TRIALS. FOUR CLINICAL QUESTIONS. Cancer vaccines • Perioperative ADCs • T-cell engagers • AR blockade THE DATA WILL DECIDE. [Slide 2] ESMO 2026 — ABSTRACTS TO WATCH PART 02/04 — LUNG & GI BREAKTHROUGHS MV Onco LBA5 — KRAScendo 1 KRAS G12C-MUTATED NSCLC WHO? Previously treated advanced KRAS G12C-mutated NSCLC. WHAT? Divarasib versus sotorasib or adagrasib. WHY WATCH? Can a newer KRAS G12C inhibitor outperform existing drugs targeting the same mutation? LBA6 — SAFFRON EGFR-MUTATED NSCLC | MET RESISTANCE WHO? Advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC progressing after osimertinib, with MET overexpression and/or amplification. WHAT? Osimertinib + savolitinib versus platinum–pemetrexed. WHY WATCH? Can targeting both EGFR and MET overcome resistance better than chemotherapy? LBA7 — CLARITY-Gastric 01 CLDN18.2-POSITIVE GASTROESOPHAGEAL CANCER WHO? Advanced/metastatic CLDN18.2-positive gastroesophageal cancer after prior treatment (second line or later). WHAT? Phase III evaluation of sonesitatug vedotin, a CLDN18.2-directed ADC. WHY WATCH? Can an ADC targeting CLDN18.2 offer another treatment option after first-line therapy? LBA8 — HARMONi-Gi1 ADVANCED BILIARY TRACT CANCER WHO? Previously untreated advanced biliary tract cancer. WHAT? Ivonescimab + chemotherapy versus durvalumab + chemotherapy. WHY WATCH? Can dual PD-1/VEGF targeting improve outcomes beyond current immunochemotherapy? FINAL TAKE-HOME FOUR TRIALS. FOUR PRECISION-ONCOLOGY QUESTIONS. KRAS G12C • EGFR/MET • CLDN18.2 ADC • PD-1/VEGF THE DATA WILL DECIDE. [Slide 3] ESMO 2026 — ABSTRACTS TO WATCH PART 03/04 — BREAST CANCER: THE NEXT QUESTIONS MV Onco LBA14 — FINER HR+/HER2– METASTATIC BREAST CANCER WHO? ER-positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. WHAT? Fulvestrant + ipatasertib (AKT inhibitor) versus fulvestrant + placebo. WHY WATCH? Can adding AKT inhibition improve overall survival with endocrine therapy? LBA16 — VIKTORIA-1 ENDOCRINE-RESISTANT BREAST CANCER WHO? HR+/HER2– advanced breast cancer after prior endocrine-based treatment. WHAT? Gedatolisib (PI3K/mTOR inhibitor) + fulvestrant, with or without palbociclib, versus standard care. WHY WATCH? Can targeting the PI3K/mTOR pathway improve outcomes after endocrine resistance? LBA23 — TALENT EARLY HER2-LOW BREAST CANCER WHO? HR-positive/HER2-low early breast cancer before surgery. WHAT? Neoadjuvant trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd), with or without anastrozole, or sequenced with chemotherapy. WHY WATCH? Could an ADC become part of curative-intent treatment before surgery? LBA25 — NATALEE HR+/HER2– EARLY BREAST CANCER WHO? Stage II–III HR+/HER2– early breast cancer. WHAT? Six-year follow-up of adjuvant ribociclib + aromatase inhibitor versus aromatase inhibitor alone. WHY WATCH? Does the recurrence benefit translate into improved overall survival? FINAL TAKE-HOME FOUR TRIALS. FOUR QUESTIONS THAT MATTER. AKT inhibition • PI3K/mTOR targeting • HER2-low ADCs • Adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibition THE DATA WILL DECIDE. [Slide 4] ESMO 2026 — ABSTRACTS TO WATCH PART 04/04 — NEW ADCs & IMMUNOTHERAPY MV Onco LBA50 — PANKU-Breast01 HR+/HER2– METASTATIC BREAST CANCER WHO? Previously treated unresectable locally advanced or metastatic HR+/HER2– breast cancer. WHAT? Izalontamab brengitecan (iza-bren), an EGFR×HER3 bispecific ADC, evaluated against chemotherapy in a randomized Phase III study. WHY WATCH? Can a bispecific ADC improve outcomes after endocrine and targeted therapies? LBA51 — KEYNOTE-B49 HR+/HER2– ADVANCED BREAST CANCER WHO? Endocrine-resistant, advanced HR+/HER2– breast cancer. WHAT? Pembrolizumab + chemotherapy versus placebo + chemotherapy. WHY WATCH? Can immunotherapy finally establish a meaningful role in HR-positive metastatic breast cancer? LBA67 — OptiTROP-Lung04 EGFR-MUTATED ADVANCED NSCLC WHO? Advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC after progression on EGFR-TKI therapy. WHAT? Sacituzumab tirumotecan (sac-TMT), a TROP2-directed ADC, versus platinum-based chemotherapy. WHY WATCH? Does the final overall survival analysis establish an advantage for sac-TMT after EGFR-TKI failure? LBA68 — SigVie-002 PREVIOUSLY TREATED NONSQUAMOUS NSCLC WHO? Advanced nonsquamous NSCLC after prior systemic therapy. WHAT? Sigvotatug vedotin, an integrin β6-directed ADC, versus docetaxel. WHY WATCH? Can a new integrin-targeting ADC outperform conventional second-line chemotherapy? FINAL TAKE-HOME FOUR TRIALS. FOUR QUESTIONS THAT MATTER. Bispecific ADCs • Immunotherapy • TROP2 ADCs • Integrin β6 ADCs THE DATA WILL DECIDE.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 Top 10 Lung Cancer Trials to Watch 23 - 27 October 2026 | Madrid, Spain @DrRishabhOnco [illustrations: lungs, Madrid Cibeles palace] 1 TARGETED THERAPY & MOLECULARLY DEFINED NSCLC — NEXT-GENERATION TARGETED STRATEGIES 1 DeLLphi-305 LBA3 Tarlatamab + durvalumab vs durvalumab maintenance in ES-SCLC Can adding tarlatamab improve survival in ES-SCLC? 2 SAFFRON LBA6 Osimertinib + savolitinib vs platinum-pemetrexed after osimertinib in MET-altered EGFR+ NSCLC Can MET inhibition overcome resistance to osimertinib? 3 ANTIBODY-DRUG CONJUGATES (ADCs) — NEW ADCs EXPANDING TREATMENT OPTIONS 3 Krascendo 1 LBA5 Divarasib vs sotorasib or adagrasib in previously treated KRAS G12C NSCLC Can a next-generation KRAS G12C inhibitor improve outcomes? 4 OptiTROP-Lung06 LBA66 Sacituzumab tirumotecan + pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy + pembrolizumab in 1L PD-L1-negative nonsquamous NSCLC Can an ADC improve outcomes in PD-L1-negative NSCLC? 5 OptiTROP-Lung04 LBA67 Sacituzumab tirumotecan vs chemotherapy after EGFR-TKI progression in NSCLC (final OS) Does sacituzumab tirumotecan improve overall survival? 5 IMMUNOTHERAPY & OTHER STRATEGIES — NEW COMBINATIONS, NEW SETTINGS 6 SigVie-002 LBA68 Sigvotatug vedotin vs docetaxel in previously treated nonsquamous NSCLC Does an integrin αvβ6 ADC improve outcomes? 7 SARON 26130 Consolidation radiotherapy in synchronous oligometastatic NSCLC Does consolidation RT improve survival? 8 PERSEE 26140 Pembrolizumab alone vs pembrolizumab + chemotherapy in 1L NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥50% Is chemotherapy needed with pembrolizumab in high PD-L1 NSCLC? 9 DeLLphi-304 38080 Extended OS follow-up of tarlatamab in previously treated SCLC Long-term survival with tarlatamab in SCLC? 10 ASTRIDE 38090 Serplulimab vs atezolizumab + chemo in 1L ES-SCLC Does serplulimab improve survival in ES-SCLC?

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 / THORACIC ONCOLOGY Five lung cancer trials PREMEETING EVIDENCE SNAPSHOT • 21 OCTOBER 2026 Topline announcements ≠ full results. New LBA effect sizes not verified. LBA3 DeLLphi-305 ES-SCLC • Maintenance after durvalumab-platinum-etoposide Tarlatamab + durvalumab vs durvalumab SPONSOR TOPLINE: OS, PFS and ORR improved significantly. Watch: absolute OS gain, subsequent therapy, CRS and neurologic toxicity. LBA5 KRAScendo 1 Previously treated advanced KRAS G12C-mutated NSCLC Divarasib vs sotorasib or adagrasib SPONSOR TOPLINE: PFS and OS improved significantly. Watch: CNS efficacy, control-drug subgroups and hepatotoxicity. LBA6 SAFFRON EGFR-mutated NSCLC • MET overexpression/amplification post-osimertinib Osimertinib + savolitinib vs platinum doublet SPONSOR TOPLINE: PFS and OS improved significantly. Watch: MET assay thresholds, biomarker subgroups and tolerability. LBA67 OptiTROP-Lung04 EGFR-mutated NSCLC after EGFR-TKI progression • Final OS update Sacituzumab tirumotecan (sac-TMT) vs platinum chemotherapy PUBLISHED: PFS 8.3 vs 4.3 mo; HR 0.49 (95% CI 0.39-0.62). Prior interim OS HR 0.60 (95% CI 0.44-0.82). Final OS pending review. LBA66 OptiTROP-Lung06 First-line PD-L1-negative (TPS <1%) advanced nonsquamous NSCLC Sac-TMT + pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy + pembrolizumab SPONSOR TOPLINE: PFS improved; positive OS trend only. Watch: OS maturity, benefit magnitude, toxicity and quality of life. EVIDENCE KEY Sponsor topline = company-reported findings; numerical new LBA results not verified. Sources: Amgen, 08 Sep 2026; Roche, 02 Jul 2026; AstraZeneca, 17 Aug 2026; Kelun-Biotech, 14-15 Jul / 22 Sep 2026; Fang et al., NEJM, doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2512071. OS: overall survival • PFS: progression-free survival • ORR: objective response rate Gilberto Lopes | Evidence first. Clinical context matters.

[Slide 1] MADRID 2026 ESMO congress MADRID SPAIN 23-27 OCTOBER 2026 Hepatobiliopancreatic SELECTED ABSTRACTS Presidential Symposium II | 25 October 2026 | 17:42-18:15 LBA8 - Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy versus durvalumab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer: a randomized, controlled, double- blinded, phase 3 trial (HARMONi-GI1) Proffered paper 1: Gastrointestinal tumour, upper digestive | 23 October 2026 | 13:30-15:00 LBA82 - Daraxonrasib, a RAS(ON) multi-selective inhibitor vs chemotherapy in previously treated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC): Additional subgroup analyses from the Ph3 RASolute 302 study. LBA83 - Seven-Valent mKRAS-specific Lymph Node Targeted Amphiphile Immunotherapy Versus Observation in Resected Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC): the AMPLIFY-7P randomized Phase 2 study Proffered paper 2: Gastrointestinal tumours, upper digestive | 24 October 2026 | 10:15-11:45 459O - A randomized trial of paclitaxel ± tovecimig in previously treated patients with advanced biliary tract cancer LBA21 - Adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin compared to standard of care after curative intent resection of cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma (ACTICCA-1 trial) LBA48 - Liver function trajectory and post-progression outcomes in the Phase 3 EMERALD-3 study of tremelimumab (T) + durvalumab (D) ± lenvatinib (L) + transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) in participants (pts) with embolisation-eligible hepatocellular carcinoma (eeHCC) 1679O - Phase I study of BGB-B2033 (GPC3 x 4-1BB bispecific antibody) monotherapy: First disclosure of dose optimization (DO) and dose escalation (DE) update in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) Rapid oral 1: Gastrointestinal tumour, upper digestive | 23 October 2026 | 16:45-18:15 3136RO - Randomised phase II study of mFOLFIRINOX ± SBRT in patients with high risk, borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer: Results of the AGITG MASTERPLAN trial Rapid oral 2: Gastrointestinal tumour, upper digestive | 26 October 2026 | 14:45-16:15 LBA85 - HRS-4642 Plus Chemotherapy ± Adebrelimab as Perioperative Therapy in KRAS G12D-Mutant Pancreatic Cancer: Preliminary Results of a Phase 2 Study 3137RO - Safety and efficacy of INCB161734, a novel oral KRAS G12D inhibitor, in combination with chemotherapy in patients (pts) with advanced/metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) 1678RO - Phase 3 LEAP-012 study of lenvatinib + pembrolizumab vs dual placebo with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for unresectable non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma: Long-term OS results LBA22 - OPTIMUM: A randomized phase 2 study of maintenance olaparib (Ola) with or without durvalumab (Durva) in DDR gene-mutated advanced biliary tract cancer (aBTC) 473RO - Subcutaneous anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody envafolimab plus gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) versus GEMOX alone as first-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer in Chinese patients: A randomized, open-label, multicenter, registrational phase III trial Nieves Martínez Lago · @DraMartinezLago | #ESMO26

[Slide 1] KRASCENDO 1 Divarasib at ESMO 2026 Head-to-head phase III • KRAS G12C-mutated NSCLC Conference preview • Full numerical data pending [Lung / KRAS icon] A direct randomized comparison of next-generation divarasib versus first-generation KRAS G12C inhibitors in previously treated advanced NSCLC. STUDY DESIGN • Population: previously treated advanced KRAS G12C-mutated NSCLC • Experimental arm: divarasib • Comparator: sotorasib or adagrasib • Trial: randomized phase III (KRASCENDO 1) WHAT ROCHE HAS REPORTED • Progression-free survival: clinically meaningful, statistically significant improvement • Overall survival: statistical significance achieved at interim analysis • Safety: consistent with prior data; no new safety signals reported WHAT IS STILL NEEDED • Effect sizes and hazard ratios • Absolute PFS and OS outcomes • Detailed toxicity and discontinuation data • Subgroup analyses and follow-up context ESMO 2026 Madrid, Spain Late-breaking abstract: LBA5 Presentation date: October 25, 2026 WHY IT MATTERS If the full results are convincing, divarasib could reshape treatment selection after progression in KRAS G12C-positive NSCLC. Until the full presentation, this remains a promising company-reported readout rather than a fully appraised practice-changing result. Sources: Roche press release, July 2, 2026; Roche ESMO 2026 update, October 19, 2026. [Tropical/Madrid skyline illustration]

[Slide 2] The Uromigos™ Prostate Cancer. Who benefits from treatment intensification? High-risk prostate cancer isn't one uniform patient population. Identifying who needs additional systemic treatment remains a central question. DASL-HiCaP New evidence on adding darolutamide in very high-risk localized disease. PROTEUS A subgroup analysis comparing intensified treatment around surgery with prostatectomy alone. PEACE-1 Long-term survival findings that may help clarify the role of prostate-directed radiotherapy in metastatic disease. Key theme: Patient selection may be just as important as the treatment being added. [prostate anatomy illustration] [Slide 3] The Uromigos™ Kidney Cancer. Is there a future for triplet therapy? Triplet therapy continues to evolve in advanced kidney cancer. New data at ESMO 2026 may help define which patients benefit most and how to manage associated toxicity. LITESPARK-012 First-line belzutifan + pembrolizumab + lenvatinib in advanced clear cell RCC. Treatment sequences How emerging data may inform optimal sequencing and patient selection. Toxicity management Balancing efficacy with tolerability remains a key consideration. Key theme: Better patient selection and thoughtful toxicity management will be essential. [kidney anatomy illustration] [Slide 4] The Uromigos™ Bladder Cancer. How much treatment is enough? At ESMO 2026, new data will help inform how to optimize perioperative strategies in bladder cancer, including the right intensity and sequencing of treatment. VOLGA Perioperative durvalumab + chemotherapy in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. KEYNOTE-905 Perioperative pembrolizumab + chemotherapy and long-term outcomes. Treatment decisions Emerging data may help refine who benefits from perioperative therapy and how to balance efficacy with toxicity. Key theme: Finding the right patients — and the right amount of treatment — remains critical. [bladder anatomy illustration]

[Slide 1] 5 LBAs to Watch Out for on Day 1 Friday, 23 October 2026 1 [pink ribbon] Early Breast Cancer LBA23 – TALENT Final results of TALENT: A neoadjuvant trial of T-DXd with or without anastrozole, or in sequence with chemotherapy for HER2-low, HR+ early-stage breast cancer • Can ADCs move into the curative setting? • Role of endocrine therapy with T-DXd • Implications for treatment sequencing in HER2-low, HR+ disease 13:30 – 13:40 Alicante Auditorium (Hall 6) Sara A. Hurvitz (Seattle, USA) 2 [pink ribbon] Early Breast Cancer LBA25 – NATALEE Adjuvant ribociclib (RIB) + nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) in patients with HR+/HER2– early breast cancer: 6-year overall survival and efficacy outcomes • Mature 6-year overall survival data • Durability of benefit with adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibition • Impact on high-risk subgroups and long-term safety 14:25 – 14:35 Alicante Auditorium (Hall 6) Dennis J. Slamon (Los Angeles, USA) 3 [stomach icon] Oesophageal Cancer LBA78 – SANO Active surveillance versus standard surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer: Long-term results of a cluster-randomised controlled trial • Can we safely avoid surgery in complete responders? • Long-term survival and salvage outcomes • Potential to change standard of care and preserve quality of life 13:40 – 13:50 Almeria Auditorium (Hall 9) Sanjiv S. Gangaram-Panday (Rotterdam, Netherlands) 4 [pancreas icon] Pancreatic Cancer LBA82 – RASolute 302 Daraxonrasib, a RAS(ON) multi-selective inhibitor vs chemotherapy in previously treated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: Additional subgroup analyses from the phase 3 RASolute 302 study • Efficacy of a RAS(ON) inhibitor in mPDAC • Key subgroup analyses and biomarker-defined populations • Safety profile and potential new treatment avenue in a high unmet need setting 14:22 – 14:32 Almeria Auditorium (Hall 9) Zev A. Wainberg (Los Angeles, USA) 5 [stomach icon] Gastric / GEJ Cancer LBA77 – G-HOPE-001 Arcotatug tavatecan (IBI343/TAK-921) versus treatment of physician's choice in previously treated, advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: First interim analysis of the randomized, open-label, phase 3, G-HOPE-001 study • Phase 3 data for a new ADC in advanced G/GEJ cancer • Survival benefit and biomarker selection • Positioning in the treatment landscape 13:30 – 13:40 Almeria Auditorium (Hall 9) Kohei Shitara (Kashiwa, Japan)

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 TOP 10 GU CANCER TRIALS TO WATCH Pre-congress watchlist | Grouped by GU subspecialty 23-27 October 2026 | Madrid, Spain PROSTATE CANCER 1 DASL-HiCaP - Darolutamide + ADT + RT in very high-risk localized prostate cancer 2 PROTEUS - Perioperative apalutamide + ADT in high-risk localized prostate cancer 3 CAPItello-281 - Updated OS with capivasertib + abiraterone in PTEN-deficient mHSPC 4 PEACE-1 - Long-term OS benefit with abiraterone in de novo mCSPC BLADDER / UROTHELIAL CANCER 5 VOLGA - Perioperative durvalumab ± tremelimumab with neoadjuvant enfortumab vedotin in cisplatin-ineligible MIBC 6 KEYNOTE-866 - Perioperative pembrolizumab + gem/cis in cisplatin-eligible MIBC 7 ENERGIZE / CA017-078 - Perioperative nivolumab + cisplatin-based chemotherapy in MIBC KIDNEY CANCER (RCC) 8 LITESPARK-011 - Belzutifan + lenvatinib vs cabozantinib after prior PD-(L)1 in advanced RCC 9 LITESPARK-012 - Belzutifan- or quavonlimab-containing first-line regimens with pembrolizumab + lenvatinib in advanced RCC 10 KEYNOTE-564 - Final prespecified analysis of adjuvant pembrolizumab in clear-cell RCC @DrRishabhOnco OTHER GU ABSTRACTS TO WATCH: PE-PE | KEYNOTE-B15 | TALAPRO-3 | NIAGARA | SWOG S2200 [Madrid skyline line-art illustrations]

[Slide 1] MADRID 2026 ESMO congress MADRID SPAIN 23-27 OCTOBER 2026 Gastroesophageal | SELECTED ABSTRACTS Presidential Symposium II | 25 October 2026 · 17:18-17:42 LBA7 - CLARITY-Gastric 01 (CG-01): a Phase 3 study of sonesitatug vedotin (Sone-Ve) in second or later-line (2L+) advanced or metastatic Claudin 18.2 (CLDN18.2) positive gastroesophageal carcinoma (GEC) Proffered paper 1: Gastrointestinal tumour, upper digestive | 23 October 2026 · 13:30-15:00 LBA77 - Arcotatug tavatecan (IBI343/TAK-921) versus treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in previously treated, advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (G/GEJA): First interim analysis of the randomized, open-label, phase 3, G-HOPE-001 study LBA78 - Active surveillance versus standard surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer: long-term results of a cluster-randomised controlled trial (SANO) 2875O - Pembrolizumab or placebo plus concurrent definitive chemoradiotherapy in esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer: The phase 3 randomized KEYNOTE-975 study Rapid oral 1: Gastrointestinal tumour, upper digestive | 23 October 2026 · 16:45-18:15 LBA79 - Zanidatamab (zani) + chemotherapy (CT) ± tislelizumab (TIS) for first-line (1L) HER2-positive (HER2+) advanced/metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (mGEA): second interim analysis (IA) from HERIZON-GEA-01 LBA80 - Anbenitamab plus chemotherapy for previously treated HER2-positive gastric or gastroesophageal carcinomas (GC/GEJC): Updated overall survival (OS) analysis of KC-WISE 2876RO - TQB2102, a novel HER2 bispecific antibody-drug conjugate, combined with bemotrizumab with or without capecitabine as first-line therapy for HER2-positive advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer: A phase II study 2877RO - Watch-and-wait (W&W) strategy for dostarlimab in localized deficient dMMR/MSI-H gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA): Results from the first interim analysis of the GERCOR-GONO DEWI phase II study 2878RO - FOLFIRI plus ramucirumab versus paclitaxel plus ramucirumab as second-line therapy for taxane-pretreated patients with advanced or metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma-Final results of the phase III IKFs602/AIO RAMIRIS Study LBA81 - Four Months of Adjuvant XELOX versus Six Months in Stage II-IIIB Gastric Cancer - The LOMAC Randomized Trial 2879RO - Durvalumab plus definitive chemoradiotherapy versus definitive chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced esophagus carcinoma: ARION PRODIGE 67 randomized phase 2 trial 2883RO - Efficacy of bemarituzumab in patients with advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer (GC/GEJ) by FGFR2 amplification status: Exploratory biomarker analysis from FORTITUDE-101 (F101) and FORTITUDE-102 (F102) Nieves Martínez Lago · @DraMartinezLago | #ESMO26

[Slide 1] ESMO CONGRESS 2026 Anticipated Highlights Madrid · October 23-27 1 INTerpath-001 · LBA1 · Sat Presidential I Intismeran plus pembrolizumab, resected IIB-IV melanoma. First phase 3 individualized neoantigen win: recurrence risk cut 42%. 2 VOLGA · LBA2 · Sat Presidential I Perioperative durvalumab plus neoadjuvant EV in cisplatin-ineligible MIBC. EFS/OS positive at interim; FDA priority review. 3 LITESPARK-011 · 3587O · Renal proffered Final: belzutifan plus lenvatinib held PFS post-immunotherapy in ccRCC; OS non-significant. QoL 3595RO may shape sequencing. 4 LITESPARK-012 · 3586O · Renal proffered First-line belzutifan combinations vs pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib in ccRCC. Missed PFS and OS endpoints. 5 DASL-HiCaP · LBA4 · Prostate late-breaking Interim: darolutamide plus ADT with radiotherapy in very-high-risk localized prostate cancer. 6 CAPItello-281 · LBA56 · Prostate late-breaking Updated OS: capivasertib plus abiraterone in PTEN-deficient metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. 7 Perioperative bladder cancer · Fri orals KEYNOTE-866, ENERGIZE, and KEYNOTE-905 ad hoc: refining immunotherapy around cystectomy. 8 AI in oncology · Fri 10:15 AM + LBA20 Sat Educational session on digital health and AI, Barcelona Hall 9 Friday morning, plus the Agendia AI digital pathology late-breaker, Bilbao Hall 3 Saturday 2:45 PM. Cross-tumor practice changers first, then GU depth · ESMO 2026, Madrid

[Slide 1] Friday, 23 October 2026 Time | Session | Room | GU focus / key abstracts 13:30–15:00 | Proffered Paper 1: GU tumours, renal and urothelial | Barcelona Aud. – Hall 9 | Bladder/urothelial — KEYNOTE-866 perioperative pembro ; neoadj chemo ± nivolumab; TROPHY-U-01 Cohort 7 SG+EV+zimberelimab; KEYNOTE-905; KEYNOTE-B15 ctDNA 13:30–15:00 | Rapid Oral: GU tumours, prostate, penile and testis | Bilbao Aud. – Hall 3 | Penile — neoadj toripalimab+chemo; Testis/GCT — ixotatug vedotin, Claudin-6 ADC; Prostate — KEYNOTE-365 cohort I NEPC; liquid-biopsy/CH vs HRR; TALAPRO-3 ctDNA; PROMPT; CCTG PR21 QoL Lu-177-PSMA vs docetaxel; TALAPRO-3 PROs; CAPItello-281 OS 14:45–16:15 | Rare GU cancers | Granada Aud. – Hall 4 | Urachal carcinoma; small-cell NE; squamous; papillary RCC; unclassifiable RCC 16:15–17:45 | Emerging therapeutic in PCa | Bilbao Aud. – Hall 3 | Prostate — novel AR therapies; immune-based therapy; radioligand therapy; ADCs 16:30–18:15 | Presidential Symposium I | Alicante Aud. – Hall 6 | Bladder — VOLGA perioperative durvalumab ± treme + neoadj EV in MIBC (LBA2, 16:54); Prostate — DASL-HiCaP darolutamide + ADT + RT in very high-risk localized disease (LBA4, 17:42) [Slide 2] Saturday, 24 October 2026 Time | Session | Room | GU focus / key abstracts 10:15–11:45 | Proffered Paper: GU tumours, prostate, penile and testis | Barcelona Aud. – Hall 9 | Prostate — PEACE-1 long-term OS abiraterone (2215O); JNJ-6143 oral AR PROTAC (2216O); PROTEUS substudy perioperative apalutamide (LBA53); transcriptome classifier + ARPI in very high-risk disease (2045O) 10:15–11:45 | Rapid Oral 1: GU tumours, renal and urothelial | Bilbao Aud. – Hall 3 | Bladder/urothelial — POTOMAC durvalumab+BCG in NMIBC (4737RO); KEYNOTE-B15 HRQoL (4738RO); disitamab vedotin+gem in HER2+ MIBC (4748RO); Sac-TMT+pembro (4739RO); EV-103 cohorts (4740RO); WUTSUP-02 UTUC (4749RO); NIAGARA molecular subtypes (4741RO); GDFather-NEO nivolumab ± visugromab (4757RO) [Slide 3] Sunday, 25 October 2026 Time | Session | Room | GU focus / key abstracts 08:30–10:00 | Proffered Paper 2: GU tumours, renal and urothelial | Almeria Aud. – Hall 9 | Kidney/RCC — LITESPARK-012 1L pembro+lenvatinib+belzutifan (3586O); LITESPARK-011 final analysis (3587O); PE-PE perioperative pembro + MDT in oligomet RCC (LBA88); XmAb819 ENPP3×CD3 bispecific (3588O); ivonescimab PD-1/VEGF (3592O) 10:15–11:45 | Emerging new systemic therapies for RCC | Bilbao Aud. – Hall 3 | Kidney/RCC — HIF2α agents; CAR-T/bispecifics/new ICIs; ADCs; vaccines 14:45–16:15 | Rapid Oral 2: GU tumours, renal and urothelial | Barcelona Aud. – Hall 9 | Kidney/RCC — KEYNOTE-564 final prespecified analysis adjuvant pembro (3589RO); RAMPART PROs (3590RO); CAIX [68Ga]DPI-4452 PET/CT (3604RO); SWOG S2200 papillary RCC (3591RO); REPRINT EV+pembro collecting-duct/medullary (3612RO); UCL70802 anti-CD70 CAR-T (3615RO); plasma KIM-1 (3593RO); CARE1 PD-L1 (3594RO); LITESPARK-011 HRQoL (3595RO)

[Slide 1] Proffered Paper session LBA7 - CLARITY-Gastric 01 (CG-01): a Phase 3 study of sonesitatug vedotin (Sone-Ve) in second or later-line (2L+) advanced or metastatic Claudin 18.2 (CLDN18.2) positive gastroesophageal carcinoma (GEC) Speakers Rui-Hua Xu (Guangzhou, China) Lecture Time 17:18 - 17:30 [Slide 2] Proffered Paper session LBA8 - Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy versus durvalumab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer: a randomized, controlled, double- blinded, phase 3 trial (HARMONi-GI1) Speakers Jian Zhou (Shanghai, China) Lecture Time 17:42 - 17:54 [Slide 3] Proffered Paper session LBA10 - MOIO: Interim analyses of a Phase III Randomized Non Inferiority Trial Assessing Reduced Frequency Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Responding Patients with Advanced/Metastatic Cancer. Speakers Gwenaëlle Gravis (Marseille, France) Lecture Time 16:54 - 17:06 [Slide 4] Proffered Paper session LBA1 - INTerpath-001: Phase 3 study of the mRNA-based individualized neoantigen therapy (INT) intismeran autogene (intismeran) plus pembrolizumab (pembro) vs pembro alone for adjuvant treatment of resected stage IIB-IV melanoma (MEL) Speakers Georgina V. Long (Sydney, Australia, NSW) Lecture Time 16:30 - 16:42

[Slide 1] MedShr ESMO 2026 Top 10 Trial Predictions The studies most likely to shape practice in Madrid 23–27 October 2026 Madrid, Spain The full late-breaking abstract (LBA) list isn't public yet. ESMO keeps LBAs under embargo until presentation, so this ranking is based on company announcemen[ts] and preview coverage. [ESMO 2026 MADRID logo; Madrid skyline photo] # | Trial (abstract) | Setting | Why it matters 1 | INTerpath-001 (Presidential, 24 Oct) | Adjuvant stage IIB–IV melanoma — intismeran (mRNA neoantigen therapy) + pembrolizumab | First phase III of a personalised mRNA neoantigen therapy. If positive, this is the headline of the congress and opens a new kind of treatment. 2 | MOIO (LBA10, Presidential III, 26 Oct) | Immunotherapy given every 3 months vs standard schedule in responders — any solid tumour | Treatment de-escalation that applies to every tumour type. Large implications for cost, chair capacity and toxicity; directly relevant to the NHS. 3 | DeLLphi-305 (LBA3) | Extensive-stage SCLC maintenance — tarlatamab + durvalumab vs durvalumab | Moves a BiTE into first-line SCLC. An area where survival has barely moved. 4 | HARMONi-GI1 (LBA8, Presidential II, 25 Oct) | First-line biliary — ivonescimab + chemotherapy vs durvalumab + chemotherapy | Reported OS-positive. A PD-1 × VEGF bispecific beating the TOPAZ-1 standard; first proof against an active immunotherapy comparator outside lung. 5 | KRASCENDO 1 (LBA5) | Pretreated KRAS G12C NSCLC — divarasib vs sotorasib/adagrasib | Head-to-head between G12C inhibitors; could settle which one to use. 6 | CLARITY-Gastric 01 (LBA7) | CLDN18.2+ gastric, 3L+ — sonesitatug vedotin | OS-positive. Establishes a CLDN18.2 ADC as a new drug class. 7 | HERIZON-GEA-01 (LBA79) | First-line HER2+ GEA — zanidatamab ± tislelizumab + chemotherapy | Median OS 26.4 vs 19.2 months. Likely to displace trastuzumab. 8 | NATALEE 6-yr OS (LBA25) | Adjuvant HR+ early breast — ribociclib | An OS signal would settle debate over adjuvant CDK4/6 use; large audience. 9 | SAFFRON (LBA6) / SANOVO (LBA69) | MET-overexpressed EGFR+ NSCLC, after osimertinib / treatment-naïve | Chemo-free option for MET-driven resistance. 10 | KEYNOTE-B49 (LBA51) | HR+/HER2− advanced breast — pembrolizumab + chemotherapy | Would be the first immunotherapy win in luminal disease. Please note: This is a provisional ranking based on company announcements and preview coverage. The full LBA list and several Presidential slots are unconfirmed, and coverage of GU, gynae and colorectal is thin.

[Slide 1] [search icon] Proffered Paper session LBA50 - PANKU-Breast01: Randomized phase III study of izalontamab brengitecan (iza-bren) in previously treated unresectable locally advanced or metastatic (LA/M) hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-) breast cancer (BC) Speakers Bo Lan (Beijing, China) Lecture Time 14:35 - 14:45 Abstract Background Although first-line endocrine therapy plus CDK4/6 inhibitors has improved clinical outcome of HR+/HER2- BC, patients (pts) inevitably develop resistance and survival outcomes remain poor with subsequent therapy. Iza-bren is a first-in-class bispecific antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) against EGFR and HER3, containing a potent topoisomerase I inhibitor payload (Ed-04). Methods Eligible pts had unresectable LA/M HR+/HER2- BC (HR+, ER≥1% and/or PR≥1%; HER2-, IHC 0, 1+, or 2+/ISH-), progressed after at least 1L of endocrine therapy and 1 or 2L prior chemotherapy, and had previously received CDK4/6 inhibitors and taxanes. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive iza-bren (2.5 mg/kg D1D8 Q3W) or TPC (eribulin, capecitabine, gemcitabine, or vinorelbine). The primary endpoint was PFS by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoint included OS. The pre-planned final analysis for PFS serves as the interim analysis for OS. Results As of Jul 21, 2026, a total of 383 pts were randomized and treated (iza-bren/TPC, 190/193). Median follow-up for PFS was 15.24 vs 13.63 mo (iza-bren/TPC). Iza-bren significantly improved PFS by BICR vs TPC; mPFS was 8.18 mo (95% CI, 6.93-8.58) vs 4.01 mo (95% CI, 2.92-4.30) (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.33-0.53; P<0.0001). OS was immature at the interim analysis, and no detrimental effect was observed. The cORR by BICR was 40.5% with iza-bren vs 20.2% with TPC, and mDOR was 6.93 vs 4.21 mo, respectively. Grade ≥3 TRAEs were predominantly hematologic in nature. TRAEs were manageable with standard supportive care, and only 1.6% of pts discontinued iza-bren treatment due to TRAEs. Adjudicated ILD occurred in 2 (1.1%) pts with iza-bren (grade 1 or 2). No new safety signals were identified. Conclusions The study met its primary endpoint at the prespecified analysis. Iza-bren demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS vs TPC in previously treated HR+/HER2- BC. The safety profile was manageable and consistent with previous studies. The results support iza-bren as a new standard of care option in this population in China.

[Slide 2] ESMO CONGRESS 2026 - MADRID - 23-27 OCTOBER Ten trials to watch A personal shortlist of the studies most likely to change practice in Madrid. [Headshot] Dr Mario Balsa Skin Cancer Unit Clínic Comprehensive Cancer Center Barcelona [Table columns: NO. | TRIAL | SETTING | WHY IT MATTERS] 01 | INTerpath-001 - LBA1 - Presidential I - 24 Oct | Resected melanoma, stage IIB-IV (adjuvant) - Intismeran autogene (mRNA) + pembrolizumab vs pembrolizumab | First phase III readout for an individualised neoantigen therapy. A positive result opens an entirely new class of treatment. 02 | MOIO - LBA10 - Presidential III - 26 Oct | Responders to immunotherapy, any solid tumour - Same dose every 3 months vs standard schedule | Tumour-agnostic de-escalation, with direct consequences for toxicity, cost and day-unit capacity. 03 | DeLLphi-305 - LBA3 - Presidential | Extensive-stage SCLC, maintenance - Tarlatamab + durvalumab vs durvalumab | OS benefit at interim analysis. Brings a DLL3-directed BiTE into first line, where survival has barely moved. 04 | HARMONi-GI1 - LBA8 - Presidential II - 25 Oct | First-line biliary tract cancer - Ivonescimab + chemo vs durvalumab + chemo | OS benefit over the TOPAZ-1 standard in a Chinese phase III: a PD-1 × VEGF bispecific beating active immunotherapy outside lung. 05 | KRASCENDO-1 - LBA5 - Presidential | Pretreated KRAS G12C NSCLC - Divarasib vs sotorasib or adagrasib | A true head-to-head within the G12C class: divarasib reported superior PFS over the first-generation inhibitors. 06 | CLARITY-Gastric 01 - LBA7 | CLDN18.2-positive gastric/GEJ, second line and beyond - Sonesitatug vedotin vs investigator's choice | OS benefit in third line and beyond, and across the wider pretreated population. Establishes CLDN18.2-directed ADCs as a class. 07 | HERIZON-GEA-01 - LBA79 - Second interim analysis | First-line HER2-positive GEA - Zanidatamab + chemo ± tislelizumab vs trastuzumab + chemo | Updated data for a regimen already approved by the FDA. Longer follow-up should firm up its place over trastuzumab. 08 | NATALEE - LBA25 - 6-year OS | Adjuvant HR-positive early breast cancer - Ribociclib | A survival signal would close the long-running debate on adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibition. 09 | SAFFRON / SANOVO - LBA6 - Presidential II / LBA69 | MET-overexpressed EGFR-mutant NSCLC - Savolitinib + osimertinib, after osimertinib / first line | A chemotherapy-free strategy for MET-driven disease, both at resistance and upfront. 10 | KEYNOTE-B49 - LBA51 | HR+/HER2- advanced breast, PD-L1 CPS ≥1 - Pembrolizumab vs placebo + chemotherapy | Would be the first immunotherapy win in luminal disease. [OncoAlert360 logo]

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 / MADRID EVIDENCE NOTES [ESMO Congress Madrid 2026 logo] PRESIDENTIAL SYMPOSIA / 1 WHICH DATA WILL ACTUALLY CHANGE CARE? Five positive Phase 3 toplines • Effect sizes still await Madrid 01 INTerpath-001 | LBA1 · OCT 24 Resected stage IIB–IV melanoma · adjuvant · n=1,137 ARMS Intismeran + pembrolizumab ↔ pembrolizumab KNOWN RFS + DMFS met READOUT Phase 2b RFS HR 0.51; Phase 3 HR and absolute gain? 02 VOLGA | LBA2 · OCT 24 Cisplatin-ineligible MIBC · cystectomy · n=695 ARMS Durvalumab + enfortumab vedotin ↔ surgery ± adjuvant care KNOWN EFS + OS met READOUT Absolute OS, surgery completion and toxicity 03 DeLLphi-305 | LBA3 · OCT 24 Extensive-stage SCLC · first-line maintenance · n=563 ARMS Tarlatamab + durvalumab ↔ durvalumab KNOWN OS + PFS met READOUT Survival gain, CRS and monitoring burden 04 KRAScendo 1 | LBA5 · OCT 25 KRAS G12C NSCLC · head-to-head · n=338 ARMS Divarasib ↔ sotorasib / adagrasib KNOWN PFS + OS met READOUT Absolute gain over sotorasib/adagrasib 05 SAFFRON | LBA6 · OCT 25 EGFR-mutant NSCLC · MET resistance after osimertinib ARMS Savolitinib + osimertinib ↔ platinum + pemetrexed KNOWN PFS + OS met READOUT MET threshold, OS magnitude and toxicity Positive company toplines. Full HRs, confidence intervals and event counts are still needed. 19 OCT 2026 • ESMO programme + sponsor toplines drozdogan.com

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 / MADRID EVIDENCE NOTES [ESMO Congress Madrid 2026 logo] PRESIDENTIAL SYMPOSIA / 2 FIVE QUESTIONS BEHIND THE HEADLINES Active comparators • Discordant endpoints • Less treatment 01 HARMONi-GI1 | LBA8 · OCT 25 Biliary tract cancer · first line ARMS Ivonescimab + chemo ↔ durvalumab + chemo KNOWN OS met READOUT Absolute OS, bleeding and transfer beyond China 02 CLARITY-Gastric01 | LBA7 · OCT 25 CLDN18.2+ gastric cancer · antibody–drug conjugate ARMS Sonesitatug vedotin ↔ investigator's choice KNOWN OS positive · PFS not significant READOUT Third-line OS vs PFS in the broader population 03 TroFuse-005 | LBA11 · OCT 26 Endometrial cancer after platinum + immunotherapy ARMS Sacituzumab tirumotecan ↔ doxorubicin / paclitaxel KNOWN OS + PFS met READOUT Magnitude of TROP2 ADC benefit and toxicity 04 KEYNOTE-C93 | LBA12 · OCT 26 Advanced / recurrent dMMR endometrial cancer ARMS Pembrolizumab ↔ carboplatin + paclitaxel KNOWN PFS met · OS immature READOUT Place alongside current chemo + IO practice 05 MOIO | LBA10 · OCT 26 ICI responders after 6 months ARMS Standard schedule ↔ same ICI every 3 months KNOWN RESULTS PENDING READOUT Noninferiority margin, quality of life and cost A positive press release is not a clinical verdict. Read the comparator, absolute benefit and harms. 19 OCT 2026 • ESMO programme + sponsor toplines drozdogan.com

[Slide 1] Dr. Aakash Desai Associate Director, Phase 1 and Precision Oncology @ADesaiMD My Top Picks for ESMO 2026! CLINICAL REVIEW ESMO Congress 2026 · Madrid · Oct 23–27 · Thoracic phase 3 readouts and early-phase ADCs, ranked 7 | 2658RO | c-Met ADC Temab-A Telisotuzumab adizutecan: c-Met-directed ADC with a Top1i payload Phase 1 first-in-human study, overall survival analysis in nonsquamous NSCLC Rapid Oral 1: NSCLC, metastatic Sat Oct 24 · 09:27 CEST AbbVie reports: EGFR wild-type (n=48): ORR 50%, median OS 13.8 mo EGFR-mutant (n=41): ORR 63%, median OS 16.2 mo EGFR wild-type, c-Met 3+ ≥25%: median OS ~19.2 mo Watching: Does c-Met expression level select who benefits? Phase 3 AndroMETa-Lung-167 vs standard of care is underway. 1 | LBA6 | EGFR + MET SAFFRON Osimertinib + savolitinib vs platinum–pemetrexed EGFRm, MET-overexpressed and/or amplified NSCLC after osimertinib Presidential Symposium II Sun Oct 25 · 16:54 CET Sponsor topline: PFS and OS met (AstraZeneca / HUTCHMED) Watching: How large is the benefit, and which MET IHC/FISH cutoff selects patients? 2 | LBA3 | DLL3×CD3 DeLLphi-305 Tarlatamab + durvalumab vs durvalumab 1L maintenance in ES-SCLC after durvalumab + platinum–etoposide Presidential Symposium I Sat Oct 24 · 17:18 CEST Sponsor topline: OS met at interim; PFS and ORR also met (Amgen) Watching: How big is the OS gain, and can clinics deliver T-cell engager monitoring in maintenance? 3 | LBA5 | KRAS G12C Krascendo 1 Divarasib vs sotorasib or adagrasib Previously treated KRAS G12C-mutated advanced NSCLC Presidential Symposium II Sun Oct 25 · 16:30 CET Sponsor topline: PFS met; OS significant at interim (Roche) Watching: How wide is the gap within the G12C class, and at what tolerability? 4 | LBA66 | TROP2 ADC OptiTROP-Lung06 Sac-TMT + pembrolizumab vs chemo + pembrolizumab 1L PD-L1-negative (TPS <1%) nonsquamous NSCLC Proffered Paper 1: NSCLC, metastatic Sun Oct 25 · 10:53 CET Sponsor topline: PFS met at interim; positive OS trend (Kelun-Biotech) Watching: Can a TROP2 ADC replace the platinum doublet alongside IO? 5 | LBA71 | EGFR×HER3 PANKU-Lung01 Iza-bren (bispecific ADC) vs platinum–pemetrexed EGFR-mutant nonsquamous NSCLC after a 3rd-gen EGFR TKI Proffered Paper 2: NSCLC, metastatic Mon Oct 26 · 09:14 CET Sponsor topline: PFS met at interim (Sichuan Biokin) Watching: First effect sizes: how big is the PFS gain, and at what toxicity? 6 | 3837RO | SEZ6 ADC ABBV-706 SEZ6-directed Top1i ADC, phase 1 Relapsed/refractory SCLC Rapid Oral: Non-metastatic NSCLC and other thoracic Mon Oct 26 · 10:15 CET AbbVie reports: ORR 56%, median OS 12.4 mo at 1.8 mg/kg (2L+, n=41) Watching: Where does SEZ6 fit next to DLL3 and B7-H3 in SCLC? Key Clinical Impacts & Future Directions • After osimertinib: MET (SAFFRON), TROP2 (OptiTROP-Lung04 final OS, LBA67) or EGFR×HER3 (PANKU-Lung01): which patients get which next step? • ES-SCLC: Does tarlatamab move into 1L maintenance, and how does that reshape later lines (DLL3, SEZ6, B7-H3)? • KRAS G12C: Does a next-generation inhibitor reset the second-line standard? • 1L PD-L1-negative: Can an ADC replace platinum chemotherapy alongside pembrolizumab? • Biomarkers: MET IHC/FISH, c-Met level, SEZ6: which assays will we need at diagnosis and at progression? • Phase 1 to phase 3: Will early ADC signals hold up against standard of care? Times are Madrid local (CEST on Oct 24; CET from Oct 25). Toplines are as stated in sponsor releases; full data pending. Not medical advice. Source: ESMO 2026 Congress program | Design: Dr. Aakash Desai

[Slide 1] SWITCH | ESMO 2026 New Target. Same Payload. Same Resistance? MV Onco [illustration: ADC-resistant cancer cell with HER2 and TROP2 receptors] HER2-targeted ADC TOP1i Different targets. Same payload class. TROP2-targeted ADC TOP1i ADC-resistant cancer cell Different payload class may overcome resistance Microtubule inhibitor (MMAE) Microtubule inhibitor → TOP1i TOP1i Response observed (2/54) 54 patients | Phase II | 94.4% previously exposed to TOP1i ADCs ONLY 2/54 RESPONDED A: 0% | B: 8.3% | C: 0% | D: 5% TAKE-HOME • Changing the target alone produced limited responses. • Payload cross-resistance may matter more than antigen switching. • Change the weapon - not just the address? • Small phase II trial. Hypothesis-generating. [Slide 2] SWITCH | ESMO 2026 PART 1/2 New Target. Same Payload. Does It Work? MV Onco 01 WHY SWITCH? • HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer • Resistance to antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) is an emerging challenge. • After progression on an ADC, what should we change? ○ The antigen target? ○ The cytotoxic payload? • Can changing the target alone overcome resistance? [illustration: Before ADC response / After ADC progression (resistance)] 02 TRIAL DESIGN • Phase II | Prospective | Open-label • 54 patients | HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer • Progression after ≥1 prior ADC • Four investigational ADC cohorts assigned according to prior treatment history. • Primary endpoint: Investigator-assessed ORR [four bottles:] SHR-A1811 Cohort A (n=10) SHR-A1921 Cohort B (n=12) SHR-A2009 Cohort C (n=12) SHR-A2102 Cohort D (n=20) All FOUR ADCs carried a TOP1 inhibitor payload 03 WHICH ADCs WERE TESTED? • Four investigational ADCs with different targets and constructs. • All used the SAME TOP1 inhibitor payload. • Cohort A - SHR-A1811 (n=10) • Cohort B - SHR-A1921 (n=12) • Cohort C - SHR-A2009 (n=12) • Cohort D - SHR-A2102 (n=20) [ADC illustration] Different antigen targets and ADC constructs / Same cytotoxic payload (TOP1 inhibitor) 04 HOW HEAVILY PRETREATED? • 94.4% had prior TOP1i-based ADC exposure. • Most patients had already received an ADC with the same payload class. • Could another TOP1i-based ADC restore sensitivity? [pictogram] 94.4% had prior TOP1i-based ADC exposure 05 WHAT WERE THE RESULTS? CONFIRMED OBJECTIVE RESPONSE RATE • Cohort A - 0% • Cohort B - 8.3% • Cohort C - 0% • Cohort D - 5% Only 2 of 54 patients responded (3.7%). TAKE-HOME • Changing the ADC construct while retaining a TOP1i payload produced very limited responses. • NEXT: Is payload cross-resistance the missing explanation? [Slide 3] SWITCH | ESMO 2026 Change the Target - Or Change the Payload? PART 2/2 MV Onco 01 WHERE DID RESPONSES OCCUR? ONLY AFTER SWITCHING PAYLOAD CLASS Both responders had previously received: Disitamab vedotin (RC48) • Microtubule inhibitor payload (MMAE) [ADC illustration] RC48 (Disitamab vedotin) Target: HER2 Payload: MMAE (microtubule inhibitor) Then switched to: TOP1i-based ADC - Different target, Payload: TOP1 inhibitor 2 responses among 54 patients → No responses were observed after switching between ADCs with the same TOP1i payload class. 02 WHY DID TARGET SWITCHING FAIL? POSSIBLE PAYLOAD CROSS-RESISTANCE ADC resistance may involve: • Antigen loss or downregulation • Impaired internalization • Drug efflux mechanisms • Altered TOP1 activity • Enhanced DNA damage repair [cell illustration labelled: Antigen loss downregulation, Impaired internalization, Drug efflux, Altered TOP1 activity, Enhanced DNA damage repair] Changing the antigen may not overcome resistance to the cytotoxic payload. Different target ≠ Different killing mechanism 03 WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR ADC SEQUENCING? Consider progression after T-DXd. T-DXd (HER2) Payload: DXd (TOP1 inhibitor) → Sacituzumab govitecan (TROP2) Payload: SN-38 (TOP1 inhibitor) • HER2 → TROP2: Different targets • DXd → SN-38: Different molecules • Both: TOP1 inhibitor payload class • Potential for cross-resistance despite antigen switching. Important: SWITCH does NOT establish that sacituzumab govitecan is ineffective after T-DXd. 04 WHAT ARE THE LIMITATIONS? Small, hypothesis-generating phase II trial • Only 54 patients • Only 2 confirmed responses • Small, treatment-history-selected cohorts • No direct randomized comparison of payload-switching strategies • No definitive mechanistic proof of cross-resistance • Safety was described as manageable, without detailed toxicity rates in the abstract. Association ≠ Proof of mechanism 05 WHAT SHOULD FUTURE TRIALS TEST? Three sequencing strategies: A Different target + Same payload class B Same target + Different payload class C Different target + Different payload class • Integrate antigen expression and molecular resistance biomarkers. • Which strategy can truly restore ADC sensitivity? TAKE-HOME New Target. Same Payload. Limited Responses. • SWITCH suggests that payload-class cross-resistance may contribute substantially to ADC failure. • Changing the antigen alone may be insufficient. • The next frontier in ADC sequencing may be changing the weapon - not merely its address. • Hypothesis-generating, not practice-changing. [dartboard with arrows illustration]

[Slide 2] TOPICS TO WATCH · 1 OF 2 [cartoon of skin/melanoma lesion] INTerpath-001 Personalized mRNA vaccine + pembrolizumab, adjuvant melanoma Why it matters: First Phase 3 test of a personalized cancer vaccine [cartoon of uterus] TroFuse-005 Sacituzumab tirumotecan (TROP2 ADC), endometrial cancer Why it matters: First TROP2 ADC to improve overall survival here [cartoon of uterus] KEYNOTE-C93 Pembrolizumab alone, first-line dMMR endometrial Why it matters: Could make chemo-free first-line the new standard @hemoncsimplified [Slide 3] TOPICS TO WATCH · 2 OF 2 [cartoon of lungs] Krascendo 1 Divarasib vs sotorasib / adagrasib, KRAS G12C lung cancer Why it matters: First head-to-head of KRAS G12C inhibitors [cartoon of a bladder] VOLGA Enfortumab vedotin + perioperative durvalumab, bladder cancer Why it matters: Perioperative EV moves into muscle-invasive disease [cartoon of lungs] DeLLphi-305 Tarlatamab (DLL3) + durva, small-cell lung cancer Why it matters: DLL3 targeting moves earlier [cartoon of lungs] SAFFRON Osimertinib + savolitinib, EGFR/MET lung cancer Why it matters: MET resistance gets an answer @hemoncsimplified

[Slide 1] SWITCH vs SATEEN | ESMO 2026 ADC Sequencing: Is the Payload the Problem? MV Onco PARAMETER | SWITCH | SATEEN Population | HER2-negative MBC | HER2-positive MBC Design | Phase II platform | Phase II single-arm Patients | 54 | 27 Prior ADC | ≥1 ADC | T-DXd Strategy | Change ADC target/construct | Sacituzumab govitecan + trastuzumab Payload | TOP1i → TOP1i in previously TOP1i-exposed patients | DXd → SN-38 (both TOP1i) ORR | 3.7% (2/54) | 3.7% (1/27) Key finding | No responses after same-class TOP1i switching. | Primary endpoint not met. Additional result | Both responses after MMAE → TOP1i. | Median PFS: 2.3 months. Conclusion | Possible payload cross-resistance. | Limited activity after T-DXd. BOTH STUDIES → ORR 3.7% Different populations. Similar concern about sequential TOP1i-based ADCs. TAKE-HOME 1 TARGET SWITCHING MAY NOT BE ENOUGH. Changing the antigen does not necessarily overcome resistance. 2 SAME PAYLOAD CLASS MAY MEAN CROSS-RESISTANCE. Different TOP1 inhibitors may share resistance mechanisms. 3 PAYLOAD DIVERSIFICATION DESERVES STUDY. Changing the cytotoxic mechanism may be more useful than changing the target alone. 4 NOT YET PRACTICE-CHANGING. Small phase II studies; mechanistic cross-resistance remains unproven. Different Targets. Same Payload Class. Limited Responses.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 –GU topics– My TOP3: ① VOLGA, ② LITESPARK-011&012, ③ ANZUP1801 [Column headers] NMIBC | MIUC (Perioperative) | Metastatic UC VOLGA (phase 3) Neoadjuvant EV + Perioperative Durva ± Treme KEYNOTE-866 (phase 3) Neoadjuvant GC ± Perioperative Pembro GC + Nivolumab (phase 3) Neoadjuvant GC ± Perioperative Nivo Exploratory/ad hoc analysis of major Phase 3 KEYNOTE-B15 (phase 3) CDDP-eligible Perioperative EVP, ctDNA analysis KEYNOTE-905 (phase 3) CDDP-ineligible Perioperative EVP NIAGARA (phase 3) Neoadjuvant GC+Durva TROPHY-U-01 C7 (phase 1b) SG + EV + Zimberelimab for treatment naïve mUC interim analysis SKB264-II-06 (phase 2) sacTMT + Pembrolizumab EV103 cohorts DE/A&K (phase 1) 1st line EV ± Pembro, long term outcomes PE-PE (phase 2) MDT ± Perioperative Pembro Oligometa RCC KEYNOTE-564 (phase 3) Final analysis of adjuvant Pembro LITESPARK-012 (phase 3) 1st line Lenva/Pembro/Belzutifan or MK-1308A/Lenva vs Lenva/Pembro LITESPARK-011 (phase 3) Post-PD-(L)1 Lenva/Belzutifan vs Cabo, final analysis XmAb819 (phase 1) XmAb819 (novel ENPP3/CD3 BsAb) AK112 (phase 1b/2) Ivonescimab (PD-1/VEGF BsAb) 1st line for IMDC favor cohort SWOG S2200 (phase 2) Cabo ± Atezo for papirally RCC KIM-1 dynamics study KIM-1 analysis during 1st line ICI ± Cabo [Column headers] RCC (Perioperative) | Metastatic RCC DASL-HiCaP/ANZUP1801 (phase 3) Darolutamide with ADT and definitive/salvage RT for localized, very high-risk PC PROTEUS substudy (phase 3) Perioperative Apalutamide + ADT with RP/PLND vs RP/PLND alone [Column headers] Local PC / BCR | mHSPC m0CRPC | mCRPC JNJ-6143 (phase 1) First-in-class oral AR-targeted RIPTAC CAPitello-281 (phase 3) Capiva + Abi for PTEN-loss mHSPC Updated OS analysis PEACE-1 (phase 3) Long-term OS analysis @KohjiToncol

[Slide 1] ESMO GOOD SCIENCE BETTER MEDICINE BEST PRACTICE ESMO 2026 · MADRID GUT ONC LAB GI ABSTRACTS I'M WATCHING Oct 23–27 · Times are Madrid local (CEST through Oct 24, CET from Oct 25) BELOW THE BELT AZUR-1 LBA87 Sun 25 11:00 Dostarlimab alone in stage II/III MSI-H rectal cancer This will be positive. Incredibly positive. This is already what I'm doing in clinical practice and is a massive step forward for the 5–10% of rectal cancer patients that are MSI-H. Yay. IROCAS LBA29 Sun 25 10:15 Adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX vs mFOLFOX6, T4/N2 colon Important study, and honestly, it is going to predict if US-CIRCULATE will be positive. If this is negative, CIRCULATE will be a nail-biter. CheckMate 8HW LBA32 Sat 24 15:42 Final OS: nivo/ipi vs nivo vs chemo, MSI-H mCRC What happens when you do a trial with an agent that essentially cures a disease against another that cures most people? It is a really long damn trial. Excited for the final OS data. Will it be positive? TBD, but I certainly think the magnitude of benefit of dual IO makes it better than single agent, and this data could reinforce that practice. UNION 3530O Sun 25 11:10 SCRT → camrelizumab + CAPOX, locally advanced rectal pCR reported at ~40% in 2024, let's see if more people were cured. Some criticism in changing radiation schedule and adding IO compared to standard, but will set the stage for future studies. EMT2 LBA30 Sun 25 10:25 EPA vs placebo after CRC liver metastasis resection It's like fish oil but better. File this in the ALASCCA category of "costs nothing, helps people" if positive. ALASCCA + CHALLENGE <3 QTX3034 790RO Sat 24 15:15 KRAS G12D inhibitor + cetuximab ± mFOLFOX6, mCRC Sick study. Moving us to molecularly driven treatments in earlier line settings for CRC. Where the field MUST move. If this isn't positive I will eat a hat (a small one, preferably organic). EC + FOLFIRI beyond PD 788RO Sat 24 14:50 Continuing encorafenib + cetuximab past progression, BRAF V600E mCRC Already doing this in clinical practice with patients who have BRAF+ disease w/o resistance mechanism on ctDNA at progression. Data for its use is HUGELY welcome. BOT/BAL in the real world 905eP ePoster · 3771P Mon 26 12:00 Botensilimab + balstilimab: refractory MSS mCRC (AGEO) and advanced sarcoma (Spanish EAP) Gives us a look at Bot Bal in real world. Important data, multiple attempts to use CPI in advanced disease have provided mixed results, what happens when we use stronger agents? RUNNER-UP Biweekly TAS-102 + bev LBA31 Sat 24 15:37 Biweekly vs standard schedule, refractory mCRC Runner up only because Cathy Eng already convincingly showed this is the dosing schedule we should be using. I already use this in clinical practice. Great to randomize but should be positive. UPPER GI CLARITY-Gastric01 + G-HOPE-001 LBA7 Sun 25 17:18 · LBA77 Fri 23 13:30 CLDN18.2 ADCs, pretreated gastric/GEJ The next generation of CLDN18.2 is here. Expect less explosive emesis and improved outcomes. KEYNOTE-975 2875O Fri 23 13:50 Pembro + definitive chemoRT, esophageal/GEJ Merck joins the D-FLOT era for patients still receiving definitive chemoRT. After the CROSS/FLOT study the impact of this is going to be less, but still important for patients receiving definitive chemoRT. HERIZON-GEA-01 LBA79 Fri 23 16:15 Zanidatamab ± tislelizumab, 1L HER2+ GEA My practice in HER2+ upper GI/GEA has moved to Zani, will be helpful to see the longer-term outcomes here. SANO LBA78 Fri 23 13:40 Active surveillance vs surgery after nCRT, long-term People deserve to keep their organs. Our ability to offer this only improves when we layer in tools like ctDNA. Interested in what we can extrapolate to other organ systems (especially for MSI-H). PANCREAS RASolute 302 LBA82 Fri 23 14:22 Daraxonrasib subgroups, 2L+ metastatic PDAC Every subgroup likely benefited. G12V more than others. Maybe there will be another standing ovation? Come for the science, stay for the clapping. AMPLIFY-7P LBA83 Fri 23 14:32 mKRAS vaccine vs observation, resected PDAC Vaccine therapies are the next frontier. Merck has pushed them forward in Melanoma where they are an amazing success, very interested in the randomized data here. Even if negative it will be critical data to learn from. HCC / BILIARY HARMONi-GI1 LBA8 Sun 25 17:42 Ivonescimab vs durvalumab + GemCis, 1L BTC PD-1/VEGF emerges in GI. Let's see the benefit. China only. ACTICCA-1 LBA21 Sat 24 10:25 Adjuvant GemCis vs capecitabine, resected BTC Might immediately change the standard of care for resected BTC. Worth tuning in for. Nicholas J. Hornstein, MD, PhD Full abstracts online Oct 19 · LBAs at presentation

[Slide 1] 2658RO - Overall survival (OS) analysis of telisotuzumab adizutecan in patients (pts) with nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSQ NSCLC): Phase 1 first-in-human study Speakers David Sommerhalder (San Antonio, United States of America) Lecture Time 09:27 - 09:32 Abstract Background c-Met (or MET) protein is highly expressed in NSCLC and has a poor prognosis. Telisotuzumab adizutecan (ABBV-400; Temab-A) is an antibody drug conjugate (ADC) consisting of an anti c-Met antibody conjugated to a Top1i payload. In an ongoing phase 1 study (NCT05029882), Temab-A showed promising efficacy and manageable safety in pts with NSQ NSCLC. Herein, we present OS for pts with NSQ NSCLC. Methods Enrolled pts with advanced EGFR wildtype (WT) or mutant (MUT) NSQ NSCLC that progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy and immune checkpoint or targeted therapy received Temab-A once every 21 days. Primary endpoint was confirmed investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS) and OS. Tumor tissue c-Met protein expression was retrospectively assessed by IHC via central laboratory. Results The EGFR WT cohort enrolled 48 pts (median follow-up: 27 months [mo]; median prior lines of therapy [LoT] 2 [range, 1–9]) and the EGFR MUT cohort enrolled 41 pts (median follow-up: 26 mo; median prior LoT: 3 [1–8]). Most pts received 2.4 mg/kg dose (EGFR WT: 81%, 39/48; EGFR MUT: 88%, 36/41); the remaining received 3.0 mg/kg. Median duration of treatment was 5.6 and 10 mo in the EGFR WT and EGFR MUT cohorts, respectively. Median OS for EGFR WT and EGFR MUT was 13.8 mo and 16.2 mo (Table). Among EGFR WT patients, the prevalence of c-MET expression ≥3+ staining intensity in ≥10% and ≥25% tumor cells was 43% (20/46) and 33% (15/46), respectively. Among EGFR MUT patients, it was 56% (19/34) and 41% (14/34), respectively. Median OS was longer in EGFR WT pts with c-MET above these thresholds (≥3+, ≥10%: 25.2 mo; ≥3+, ≥25%: 19.2 mo). No new safety signals were observed. Table: 2658RO [columns: EGFR WT — Total N=48^a | ≥3+, ≥10% n=20^b | ≥3+, ≥25% n=15^b ; EGFR MUT — Total N=41^c | ≥3+, ≥10% n=24^b | ≥3+, ≥25% n=19^b] ORR, n (%) | 24 (50) | 12 (60) | 9 (60) | 26 (63) | 17 (71) | 13 (68) Median DOR, mo (95% CI) | 5.6 (4.2–12.3) | 5.6 (3.8–12.4) | 6.3 (2.8–21.8) | 9.7 (8.3–12.4) | 9.9 (6.9–13.5) | 10.9 (8.3–14.3) Median PFS, mo (95% CI) | 6.8 (5.4–7.3) | 7.2 (5.5–9.0) | 8.0 (5.3–9.8) | 10.9 (8.3–12.3) | 11.0 (9.4–12.6) | 12.2 (9.6–14.7) Median OS, mo (95% CI) | 13.8 (9.0–25.2) | 25.2 (7.5–NE) | 19.2 (7.1–NE) | 16.2 (11.6–19.9) | 15.6 (10.6–19.6) | 16.2 (10.6–21.0) ^a3.0 mg/kg (n=9). ^bAvailable IHC. ^c3.0 mg/kg (n=5). DOR, duration of response; IHC, immunohistochemistry; mo, months; NE, not estimable; ORR, objective response rate. Conclusions Temab-A exhibited promising OS in a heavily pretreated NSCLC population. OS rates compared favorably to those reported in the same indications with chemotherapy or other ADCs.

[Slide 1] 3837RO - ABBV-706: A first-in-class SEZ6-targeted topoisomerase 1 inhibitor (Top1i)-antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) with robust antitumour activity in relapsed/refractory small cell lung cancer (R/R SCLC) Speakers Anne C. Chiang (New Heaven, United States of America) Lecture Time 10:15 - 10:20 Abstract Background SEZ6 exhibits higher expression on SCLC cells than other SCLC therapeutic targets. ABBV-706 is a SEZ6-targeted ADC that selectively delivers a potent, cytotoxic Top1i payload (adizutecan) to SEZ6-expressing tumour cells. Phase (Ph) 1 results of ABBV-706 monotherapy in R/R SCLC (NCT05599984), including biomarker-response associations and ABBV-706 preclinical activity, are presented. Methods Archival tumour tissue was collected at baseline for immunohistochemistry (IHC) and RNA-Seq. Serum neuroendocrine proGRP and circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) were assessed longitudinally. Binding and trafficking of SEZ6 on normal lung alveolar and SCLC cell lines were determined by flow cytometry and high content imaging. Adizutecan potency and activity was assessed in vitro; RNA-Seq was performed on SCLC cells. Results As of Sept 27, 2025, 124 patients (pts) with R/R SCLC received ABBV-706. Among pts with second-line plus (2L+) R/R SCLC who received the recommended Ph 3 dose of 1.8 mg/kg Q3W in Part 2a dose optimization (n=41), an objective response rate (ORR) of 56% and median overall survival (mOS) of 12.4 months (mo) was observed. In a subset with 2L R/R SCLC (n=17), ORR was 82% and mOS was 14.3 mo. Among 2L+ R/R SCLC, safety was comparable with prior data. ABBV-706 drove rapid declines in ctDNA and proGRP as early as cycle (C) 2 day (D) 1. At C3D1, 100% ctDNA clearance was associated with improved progression-free survival and OS. SEZ6 IHC expression was highly prevalent (93% above a 1% [1+ cutoff]), stable across therapy lines, and similar in responders and non-responders. SEZ6 was absent on human normal alveolar lung cells. Preclinically, SEZ6 antibody showed minimal binding and lysosomal trafficking in normal human pulmonary alveolar epithelial cells; significant trafficking in SEZ6-expressing SCLC cells was observed. Adizutecan potently reduced viability and increased expression of MHC-I, PD-L1, and key immune pathways in SCLC cell lines. Conclusions ABBV-706 monotherapy shows promising clinical benefit in heavily pretreated R/R SCLC with biomarker and preclinical data reinforcing its selective, differentiated, and potent antitumour profile.

[Slide 1] ESMO CONGRESS 2026 · MADRID · 23-27 OCTOBER 10 breast cancer abstracts I will not miss Late-breaking phase III data, mature survival analyses and the next ADC questions 1 NATALEE LBA25 6-year OS with adjuvant ribociclib in HR+/HER2- early BC Fri 23 Oct · 13:30 · Hall 6 2 TALENT LBA23 Neoadjuvant T-DXd ± anastrozole in HR+/HER2-low early BC: final results Fri 23 Oct · 13:30 · Hall 6 3 PANKU-Breast01 LBA50 Iza-bren, an EGFR x HER3 bispecific ADC, phase III in pretreated HR+/HER2- MBC Fri 23 Oct · 13:30 · Hall 6 4 KEYNOTE-B49 LBA51 Pembrolizumab + chemotherapy, phase III in HR+/HER2- advanced BC Sat 24 Oct · 08:30 · Hall 6 5 FINER / MA.40 LBA14 Overall survival with ipatasertib + fulvestrant after CDK4/6i Sat 24 Oct · 08:30 · Hall 6 6 FOURLIGHT-1 1842O Selective CDK4 inhibition: atirmociclib + fulvestrant post CDK4/6i Sat 24 Oct · 08:30 · Hall 6 7 postMONARCH 1RO Overall survival with abemaciclib + fulvestrant after a prior CDK4/6i Sat 24 Oct · 10:15 · Hall 9 8 VIKTORIA-1 LBA16 Gedatolisib + fulvestrant ± palbociclib: updated phase III results Sat 24 Oct · 10:15 · Hall 9 9 DESTINY-Breast09 LBA49 T-DXd + pertuzumab vs THP in patients with baseline brain metastases Mon 26 Oct · 10:15 · Hall 6 10 OptiTROP-Breast01 4639RO Final OS: sacituzumab tirumotecan vs chemotherapy in pretreated mTNBC Mon 26 Oct · 10:15 · Hall 6 Also on my list: HORIZON-Breast06 (LBA13) · TROPION-Breast02 brain mets (LBA96) · SWITCH (4RO) · lidERA PROs (538RO) · TOP-1 (545RO) Madrid local time. No breast trial in the Presidential Symposia this year. Halls: check the ESMO app on the day. @nicolobattisti

[Slide 1] PANKU-Breast01 | ESMO 2026 | LBA50 TWO TARGETS. DOUBLE THE PFS. BUT WILL PATIENTS LIVE LONGER? MV Onco [illustration: breast cancer tumour; bispecific ADC binding EGFR and HER3; chemotherapy] Breast cancer tumour IZA-BREN EGFR HER3 Chemotherapy IZA-BREN MEDIAN PFS IZA-BREN 8.18 MONTHS versus CHEMOTHERAPY 4.01 MONTHS HR 0.41 | 59% LOWER HAZARD ORR: 40.5% vs 20.2% OVERALL SURVIVAL? STILL IMMATURE. [Slide 2] PANKU-Breast01 | ESMO 2026 | LBA50 Part 1 – Can a Bispecific ADC Double PFS? MV Onco 01 THE CLINICAL QUESTION • HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer. • Progression after endocrine therapy. • Previously received CDK4/6 inhibitors and taxanes. • 1-2 prior chemotherapy lines. • Can a bispecific ADC outperform chemotherapy? 02 TRIAL DESIGN & TREATMENTS Phase III | N = 383 | Randomized 1:1 ▶ IZA-BREN (n = 190) – EGFR + HER3 bispecific ADC. – TOP1 inhibitor payload (Ed-04). – 2.5 mg/kg IV, Days 1 & 8, every 3 weeks. ▶ PHYSICIAN'S CHOICE (n = 193) – Eribulin / Capecitabine – Gemcitabine / Vinorelbine Primary endpoint → BICR-assessed PFS 03 DID IT DOUBLE PFS? Median PFS Iza-bren → 8.18 months Chemotherapy → 4.01 months HR 0.41 (95% CI 0.33–0.53) P < 0.0001 59% LOWER HAZARD OF PROGRESSION OR DEATH ~2× MEDIAN PFS 04 DID MORE TUMOURS RESPOND? Objective response rate Iza-bren → 40.5% vs Chemotherapy → 20.2% Median duration of response Iza-bren → 6.93 months vs Chemotherapy → 4.21 months TAKE-HOME • Iza-bren nearly doubled median PFS and ORR versus chemotherapy. • Overall survival remains immature. [Slide 3] PANKU-Breast01 | ESMO 2026 | LBA50 Part 2 – Is Iza-bren the Next ADC Standard? MV Onco 01 HOW SAFE IS IZA-BREN? • Grade ≥3 toxicities: Predominantly hematologic. • ILD → 1.1% (2 patients) Both grade 1-2. • Discontinuation due to TRAEs → 1.6% ✓ Manageable early safety profile. • Long-term safety needs confirmation. 02 WHAT ABOUT OVERALL SURVIVAL? OS DATA IMMATURE • No detrimental OS effect observed at interim analysis. • PFS HR → 0.41 • But PFS benefit ≠ proven OS benefit. • Survival advantage NOT YET established. 03 HOW DOES IT FIT AMONG ADCs? • T-DXd → HER2 • Sacituzumab govitecan → TROP2 • Iza-bren → EGFR + HER3 All deliver TOP1 inhibitor payloads. • No head-to-head ADC comparison. • Efficacy after prior ADCs remains unknown. • Optimal ADC sequencing unresolved. 04 WHAT QUESTIONS REMAIN? • Does PFS translate into OS? • Does efficacy differ in HER2-zero vs HER2-low? • Can it overcome resistance to prior ADCs? • Will EGFR/HER3 expression predict benefit? TAKE-HOME • Iza-bren offers impressive PFS benefit with manageable reported toxicity. • But OS, ADC sequencing and long-term safety remain unanswered.

[Slide 1] G-HOPE-001 | ESMO 2026 | LBA77 SAME TARGET. NEW WEAPON. CLDN18.2 ADC vs Chemotherapy MV Onco CHEMOTHERAPY PFS: 2.9 months ORR: 5.3% IBI343 | CLDN18.2 ADC PFS: 5.5 months ORR: 23.6% [illustration: tumour mass, chemo IV bag on left; ADC antibodies binding on right] CLDN18.2 Arcotatug tavatecan (IBI343) TOP1 inhibitor payload Most tumour cells remain viable Fewer viable tumour cells PFS HR 0.47 53% LOWER PROGRESSION/DEATH HAZARD CLDN18.2-positive tumour cells survive OS: 9.9 vs 7.4 months BUT OS IS IMMATURE Will the benefit survive longer follow-up? [Slide 2] G-HOPE-001 | ESMO 2026 | LBA77 Part 1 – Can a CLDN18.2 ADC Beat Chemotherapy? MV Onco 01 THE CLINICAL QUESTION • Advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma • Progression after 2–4 prior regimens. • CLDN18.2 IHC ≥2+ in ≥75% of tumour cells. • Can a CLDN18.2 ADC outperform chemotherapy? 02 THE TRIAL G-HOPE-001 | Phase III | N = 408 Arcotatug tavatecan (IBI343) 6 mg/kg IV Q3W n = 203 VS Physician's choice chemotherapy n = 205 Irinotecan / paclitaxel / trifluridine-tipiracil Primary endpoints: PFS and OS. 03 THE PFS & RESPONSE RESULTS Median PFS 5.5 vs 2.9 months HR 0.47 (95% CI 0.34–0.65) 53% lower progression/death hazard. Objective response rate 23.6% vs 5.3% Absolute ORR gain: +18.3 percentage points. 04 THE OS QUESTION Median OS 9.9 vs 7.4 months HR 0.63 (95% CI 0.45–0.89) But only 34.8% of OS events occurred. OS IMMATURE – NOT YET DEFINITIVE. TAKE-HOME • PFS hazard reduced by 53%. • ORR approximately 4.5-fold higher. • Mature OS results awaited. [Slide 3] G-HOPE-001 | ESMO 2026 | LBA77 Part 2 – What Makes This CLDN18.2 ADC Different? MV Onco 01 WHY IS IBI343 DIFFERENT? Arcotatug tavatecan = CLDN18.2-targeted ADC • Fc-silenced antibody + • Exatecan-derived TOP1 inhibitor payload. Zolbetuximab • Anti-CLDN18.2 antibody • Relies primarily on immune-mediated cytotoxicity. IBI343 (Arcotatug tavatecan) • Anti-CLDN18.2 ADC • Delivers cytotoxic payload • Exatecan-derived TOP1 inhibitor inside tumour cells. 02 THE SAFETY SURPRISE Grade ≥3 TEAEs 45.8% vs 57.9% IBI343 Chemotherapy Diarrhoea 12.8% vs 34.5% IBI343 Chemotherapy ILD: 0 cases observed. No treatment-related deaths. No observed ILD ≠ No ILD risk. 03 THE SEQUENCING DILEMMA Can IBI343 work after zolbetuximab? • Same target: CLDN18.2. • Different mechanisms: • Zolbetuximab → Immune-mediated cytotoxicity. • IBI343 → TOP1 payload delivery. Post-zolbetuximab efficacy remains uncertain. 04 WHAT REMAINS UNANSWERED? • Mature OS? → Only 34.8% of OS events occurred. • After zolbetuximab? → Benefit not established. • Lower CLDN18.2 expression? → Not studied in this trial. • Beyond East Asia? → Further generalisability data needed. TAKE-HOME • One target. Two different therapeutic strategies. • CLDN18.2 ADC shows promising efficacy with manageable toxicity. • Optimal sequencing and mature OS remain the key questions.

[Slide 1] My picks - CRC and PDAC - #ESMO26 Dr Jose Tapia · Barts Cancer Centre- X: @TapiajC1 MADRID 2026 ESMO congress · MADRID SPAIN 23-27 OCTOBER 2026 COLORECTAL CANCER LBA32 | CheckMate 8HW | Mature OS data Mature OS results from Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab vs Nivolumab vs Chemotherapy in MSI-H/dMMR mCRC. Relevant to inform patients. Keen to see updated data on subsequent therapies. LBA87 | AZUR-1 | Organ preservation Clinical CR with Dostarlimab monotherapy in dMMR/MSI-H locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). First results from the global registrational trial. Potential to establish an organ-preserving treatment approach for selected patients. LBA29 | IROCAS | Adjuvant intensification RCT Ph3 of adjuvant intensification with mFOLFIRINOX vs mFOLFOX6 in high-risk stage III (T4 and/or N2) colon cancer. Does benefit justify additional toxicity? 788RO | ECLYPse | Beyond progression Ph2 Encorafenib + Cetuximab (EC) + FOLFIRI beyond PD to EC in BRAF V600E mCRC. Particularly interested in pts who previously had IO. 787RO and 789RO are other interesting strategies in this setting. 790RO | QTX3034 | KRAS G12D in CRC Preliminary clinical results. An oral G12D-preferring KRAS inhibitor + Cetuximab ± mFOLFOX6 in patients with KRAS G12D-mutated CRC. Data could inform development of targeted strategies. PANCREATIC CANCER LBA82 | RASolute 302 | RAS(ON) inhibition Additional subgroup analyses from the Ph3 RASolute 302 study. Keen to see data on G12 variant subpopulation (G12D, G12V, and G12R), non-colon 12 mut (G14 and Q61) and RAS wild-type. 3137RO | INCB161734 | G12D plus chemo Ph1 = Safety and efficacy. A novel oral KRAS G12D inhibitor + chemo advanced/metastatic PDAC. Will be interesting to see data on AE grades, interruptions and discontinuations. Are all the KRAS inh the same? LBA85 | HRS-4642 | Perioperative G12D Ph2. Perioperative strategy in KRAS-G12Dm PDAC. Non-covalent KRAS G12D inh + chemo ± adebrelimab (anti-PD-L1). Keen on seeing data on downstaging, % surgery/SBAR, and eradication of micrometastatic disease. LBA83 | AMPLIFY-7P | Adjuvant vaccine Ph2 RCT. Seven-valent mKRAS-specific lymph node targeted amphiphile immunotherapy vs AS in resected PDAC. Innovative immunotherapy. Does treatment intensification in selected population translate into clinical benefit? Abstract titles as listed in the ESMO 2026 programme. Selection reflects titles only; data not yet reviewed.

[Slide 1] ESMO CONGRESS 2026 · MADRID · 23-27 OCTOBER Older adults with cancer at #ESMO26 10 presentations I will not miss 1 MOIO LBA10 Phase III non-inferiority trial of immune checkpoint inhibitors every 3 months in responding patients. Gwenaëlle Gravis. Mon 26 Oct · 16:30-18:15 · Presidential Symposium III · Alicante Auditorium, Hall 6 2 TOP-1 (BOOG 2016-01) 545RO 5-year results of omitting radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery in systemically untreated older women with ER+ early breast cancer. Lotte Bouwman. Fri 23 Oct · 16:15-17:45 · Rapid oral, early breast cancer · Alicante Auditorium, Hall 6 3 NRG Oncology/NSABP B-42 LBA24 Final analysis of extended letrozole after 5 years of aromatase inhibitor-based therapy in postmenopausal women. Eleftherios P. Mamounas. Fri 23 Oct · 13:30-15:00 · Proffered paper 1, breast cancer · Alicante Auditorium, Hall 6 4 GIM3 FATA 544RO Final analysis: upfront versus switch schedule and three aromatase inhibitors head to head in postmenopausal HR+ early breast cancer. Pietro De Placido. Fri 23 Oct · 16:15-17:45 · Rapid oral, early breast cancer · Alicante Auditorium, Hall 6 5 GERCOR-GONO DEWI 2877RO Dostarlimab with watch-and-wait in localised dMMR/MSI-H gastro-oesophageal cancer, including a cohort of patients over 70 unfit for surgery. Thierry André. Fri 23 Oct · 16:15-17:45 · Rapid oral, upper GI · hall to be confirmed 6 EV-302 in older patients 4761P Updated exploratory analysis of enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab in older patients and those with comorbidities. S. S. Sridhar. Fri 23 Oct · poster on view 09:00-17:00, presenter 15:15-16:00 · Poster Area, Hall 5 7 KEYNOTE-C93 / GOG-3064 / ENGOT-en15 LBA12 Phase III first-line pembrolizumab versus carboplatin-paclitaxel in dMMR advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer. Brian M. Slomovitz. Mon 26 Oct · 16:30-18:15 · Presidential Symposium III · Alicante Auditorium, Hall 6 8 AZUR-1 LBA87 First results of dostarlimab monotherapy for clinical complete response in dMMR/MSI-H locally advanced rectal cancer. Andrea Cercek. Sun 25 Oct · 10:15-11:45 · Proffered paper, lower GI · hall to be confirmed 9 AIUR LBA28 Randomised trial of compression with standard surgical gloves to prevent paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathy. Young-Joon Kang. Fri 23 Oct · 16:15-17:45 · Rapid oral, early breast cancer · Alicante Auditorium, Hall 6 10 HOPE LBA92 Phase III trial of a personalised digital supportive-care pathway for endocrine therapy symptoms in early breast cancer. Mon 26 Oct · 08:30-10:00 · Proffered paper, supportive and palliative care · hall to be confirmed Also on my list Beyond guidelines: grey zones of oncology practice, with decision making in elderly and frail patients, Sat 24 Oct 10:15-11:45, Murcia Auditorium, Hall 3 · Overcoming barriers of access to clinical trials, Sat 24 Oct 08:30-10:00, Seville Auditorium · LOMAC (LBA81), 4 versus 6 months of adjuvant XELOX in gastric cancer · HER2CLIMB-05 HRQoL (1766RO), Sat 24 Oct 10:15-11:45, Almeria Auditorium, Hall 9 · lidERA (538RO) and DESTINY-Breast05 (539RO) patient-reported outcomes, Fri 23 Oct 16:15-17:45 · KEYNOTE-905 (4733O) and EV-103 (4740RO) in cisplatin-ineligible urothelial cancer · Dostarlimab real-world data by age (1286P), Mon 26 Oct poster · EONS19: quality of life for older adults with head and neck cancer (Cherith J. Semple), Sun 25 Oct 08:30 · TALENT (LBA23) and NATALEE 6-year OS (LBA25), Fri 23 Oct 13:30-15:00 Madrid local time. Clocks go back overnight on 24-25 October (CEST to CET). Late-breaking abstracts are embargoed until presentation; halls from secondary sources, check the programme app on the day. @nicolobattisti

[Slide 1] Dr. Aakash Desai Associate Director, Phase 1 and Precision Oncology @ADesaiMD My Top Picks for ESMO 2026! CLINICAL REVIEW ESMO Congress 2026 · Madrid · Oct 23–27 · Thoracic phase 3 readouts and early-phase ADCs, ranked 7 | 2658RO | c-Met ADC Temab-A Telisotuzumab adizutecan: c-Met-directed ADC with a Top1i payload Phase 1 first-in-human study, overall survival analysis in nonsquamous NSCLC Rapid Oral 1: NSCLC, metastatic Sat Oct 24 · 09:27 CEST AbbVie reports: EGFR wild-type (n=48): ORR 50%, median OS 13.8 mo EGFR-mutant (n=41): ORR 63%, median OS 16.2 mo EGFR wild-type, c-Met 3+ ≥25%: median OS ~19.2 mo Watching: Does c-Met expression level select who benefits? Phase 3 AndroMETa-Lung-167 vs standard of care is underway. 1 | LBA6 | EGFR + MET SAFFRON Osimertinib + savolitinib vs platinum–pemetrexed EGFRm, MET-overexpressed and/or amplified NSCLC after osimertinib Presidential Symposium II Sun Oct 25 · 16:54 CET Sponsor topline: PFS and OS met (AstraZeneca / HUTCHMED) Watching: How large is the benefit, and which MET IHC/FISH cutoff selects patients? 2 | LBA3 | DLL3×CD3 DeLLphi-305 Tarlatamab + durvalumab vs durvalumab 1L maintenance in ES-SCLC after durvalumab + platinum–etoposide Presidential Symposium I Sat Oct 24 · 17:18 CEST Sponsor topline: OS met at interim; PFS and ORR also met (Amgen) Watching: How big is the OS gain, and can clinics deliver T-cell engager monitoring in maintenance? 3 | LBA5 | KRAS G12C Krascendo 1 Divarasib vs sotorasib or adagrasib Previously treated KRAS G12C-mutated advanced NSCLC Presidential Symposium II Sun Oct 25 · 16:30 CET Sponsor topline: PFS met; OS significant at interim (Roche) Watching: How wide is the gap within the G12C class, and at what tolerability? 4 | LBA66 | TROP2 ADC OptiTROP-Lung06 Sac-TMT + pembrolizumab vs chemo + pembrolizumab 1L PD-L1-negative (TPS <1%) nonsquamous NSCLC Proffered Paper 1: NSCLC, metastatic Sun Oct 25 · 10:53 CET Sponsor topline: PFS met at interim; positive OS trend (Kelun-Biotech) Watching: Can a TROP2 ADC replace the platinum doublet alongside IO? 5 | LBA71 | EGFR×HER3 PANKU-Lung01 Iza-bren (bispecific ADC) vs platinum–pemetrexed EGFR-mutant nonsquamous NSCLC after a 3rd-gen EGFR TKI Proffered Paper 2: NSCLC, metastatic Mon Oct 26 · 09:14 CET Sponsor topline: PFS met at interim (Sichuan Biokin) Watching: First effect sizes: how big is the PFS gain, and at what toxicity? 6 | 3837RO | SEZ6 ADC ABBV-706 SEZ6-directed Top1i ADC, phase 1 Relapsed/refractory SCLC Rapid Oral: Non-metastatic NSCLC and other thoracic Mon Oct 26 · 10:15 CET AbbVie reports: ORR 56%, median OS 12.4 mo at 1.8 mg/kg (2L+, n=41) Watching: Where does SEZ6 fit next to DLL3 and B7-H3 in SCLC? Key Clinical Impacts & Future Directions • After osimertinib: MET (SAFFRON), TROP2 (OptiTROP-Lung04 final OS, LBA67) or EGFR×HER3 (PANKU-Lung01): which patients get which next step? • ES-SCLC: Does tarlatamab move into 1L maintenance, and how does that reshape later lines (DLL3, SEZ6, B7-H3)? • KRAS G12C: Does a next-generation inhibitor reset the second-line standard? • 1L PD-L1-negative: Can an ADC replace platinum chemotherapy alongside pembrolizumab? • Biomarkers: MET IHC/FISH, c-Met level, SEZ6: which assays will we need at diagnosis and at progression? • Phase 1 to phase 3: Will early ADC signals hold up against standard of care? Times are Madrid local (CEST on Oct 24; CET from Oct 25). Toplines are as stated in sponsor releases; full data pending. Not medical advice. Source: ESMO 2026 Congress program | Design: Dr. Aakash Desai

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 Presidential Abstracts [Table columns: # | Trial | Arms | Cancer Setting | Topline Announced] LBA1 | INTerpath-001 | Adjuvant pembro ± intismeran autogene | Resected stage IIB-IV melanoma | RFS and DMFS at interim LBA2 | VOLGA | Periop durva ± trem + neoadjuvant EV vs cystectomy ± adjuvant therapy | Cisplatin-ineligible/declining MIBC | Durva + EV: EFS, OS; Triplet: EFS, OS trend LBA3 | DeLLphi-305 | Durvalumab ± tarlatamab | 1L maintenance, ES-SCLC | OS at interim; PFS, ORR LBA4 | DASL-HiCaP | Darolutamide vs PBO with ADT & RT | Very high-risk localized prostate cancer | No topline announced LBA5 | Krascendo 1 | Divarasib vs sotorasib or adagrasib | Previously treated KRAS G12C+ NSCLC | PFS; OS at interim LBA6 | SAFFRON | Osimertinib + savolitinib vs platinum-pemetrexed | Post-osimertinib EGFR+ NSCLC with MET overexpression or amplification | PFS and OS LBA7 | CLARITY-Gastric 01 | Sonesitatug vedotin vs investigator's choice | 2L+, CLDN18.2+ gastric, GEJ, or esophageal adenocarcinoma | OS in 2L+ and 3L+; PFS NS LBA8 | HARMONi-GI1 | Ivonescimab + chemo vs durva + chemo | 1L, advanced BTC | OS, PFS, ORR LBA9 | ARTEMIS-011 | Risvutatug rezetecan vs gem + doce | R/R osteosarcoma (3L+) | PFS LBA10 | MOIO | ↓ frequency ICI vs standard schedule | IO responders with advanced cancer | No topline announced LBA11 | TroFuse-005 | Sacituzumab tirumotecan vs doxorubicin or paclitaxel | Endometrial cancer after platinum & PD-(L)1 | OS and PFS, ORR LBA12 | KEYNOTE-C93 | Pembro vs carboplatin-paclitaxel | 1L, dMMR advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer | PFS, OS trend Source: Sponsor news releases as of 10/15/2026. ©2026 MedPoint Solutions, LLC

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 • Thoracic oncology sessions on my list Oct 23–27 • Madrid • Times: Madrid (Beijing) Oct 23 (Fri) 13:30 (19:30) SCLC: Can we finally tackle it? 13:30 (19:30) Liquid biopsies in advanced lung cancer Oct 24 (Sat) 08:30 (14:30) LBA73 PACE-LUNG • FLAURA2 plasma EGFR 10:15 (16:15) Borderline resectable stage III NSCLC (MDT) 14:45 (20:45) Rare thoracic tumours: thymic, NETs 16:30 (22:30) Presidential I • LBA3 DeLLphi-305 Oct 25 (Sun) 10:15 (17:15) LBA66 OptiTROP-Lung06 • LBA67 OptiTROP-Lung04 • SARON 16:30 (23:30) Presidential II • LBA5 Krascendo-1 • LBA6 SAFFRON Oct 26 (Mon) 08:30 (15:30) LBA69 SANOVO • LBA71 PANKU-Lung01 • LBA72 HERON-Lung01 10:15 (17:15) THRIVE • iTHYM • LBA62 MDT-BRIDGE 14:45 (21:45) LBA64 Neotorch • KEYNOTE-671 biomarkers • DeLLphi-304 16:30 (23:30) Periop strategies in oncogene-driven resectable NSCLC Schedule per ESMO online programme; subject to change. @yanwanpu1527

[Slide 1] MADRID 2026 ESMO congress GHG GoBroad Healthcare Group 高博医疗集团 38 Abstracts Accepted for ESMO Congress 2026 Research Highlights from GHG and Associated Expert Teams [four stat tiles with icons] 3 LBA 6 Oral 24 Poster 5 E-Poster [Madrid skyline silhouette graphic] ESMO Congress 2026 | Madrid, Spain | 23–27 October 2026

[Slide 1] TOPO1i ADCs B7-H3: Elfetabart drozuntecan (Elfe-D; DB-1311/BNT324) · Ifinatamab deruxtecan (I-DXd) · MGC026 · QLC5508 (MHB088C) · Risvutatug rezetecan (Ris-Rez) · SYS6043 · Tambotatug pelitecan (Tam-Peli) HER3: DB-1310 · Patritumab deruxtecan (HER3-DXd) · Ruzaltatug rezetecan · SHR-A2009 · SYS6023 · YL202/BNT326 HER2: IBI354 · JSKN003 · TQB2102 · Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) · Trastuzumab pamirtecan (T-Pam) · Trastuzumab rezetecan (SHR-A1811) TROP2: Datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) · OBI-992 · Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) · Sacituzumab tirumotecan (Sac-TMT) FRα: Sofetabart mipitecan (Sofe-M) · Torvutatug samrotecan (Torvu-sam) · ZW191 cMET: SHR-1826 · Telisotuzumab adizutecan (Temab-A, ABBV-400) · YL211 CLDN18.2: SHR-A1904 · Arcotatug tavatecan (IBI343/TAK-921) EGFR x B7-H3: IBI3001 · TJ101 DLL3: SHR-4849 · ZL-1310 CEACAM5: BG-C477 · Precemtabart tocentecan (Precem-TcT) CDH17: CM518D1 · MRG007 (ARR-217) SEZ6: HS-20108 ROR1: HDM2005 PSMA x STEAP1: ABBV-969 PSMA: SHR-4394 PD-L1: HLX43 Nectin4: SHR-A2102 FGFR3: BHV-1530 (AMB302) FGFR2b: HDM2020 EGFR x HER3: Izalontamab brengitecan (Iza-bren) EGFR x cMET: HS-20122 CDH6: Raludotatug deruxtecan (R-DXd) B7-H4: Mocertatug rezetecan (Mo-Rez) Auristatin ADCs CLDN18.2: ATG-022 · Sonesitatug vedotin (Sone-Ve) Nectin4: Bulumtatug fuvedotin (BFv, 9MW2821) · Enfortumab vedotin (EV) ITGB6: Sigvotatug vedotin (SV) HER2: Disitamab vedotin (DV) EGFR: Becotatug vedotin (MRG003) cMET: Telisotuzumab vedotin (Teliso-V) CLDN6: Ixotatug vedotin (TORL-1-23) CD20: TRS005 5T4: JK06 BCMA: Belantamab mafodotin Maytansinoid ADCs HER2: Trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) FRα: Mirvetuximab soravtansine (Mirv) [Figure: three boxed panels; targets on the left with branching lines to colour-coded dots and agent names. No trial names or data values on the image.]

[Slide 1] ESMO26 TOP TEN BY ONCOALERT GU ONCOLOGY [OncoAlert 360 logo - Oncology / For Colleagues / By Colleagues] WWW.ONCOALERT360.COM LBA2 | VOLGA: PERIOPERATIVE DURVALUMAB WITH OR WITHOUT TREMELIMUMAB PLUS NEOADJUVANT ENFORTUMAB VEDOTIN IN MUSCLE-INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER: RESULTS FROM THE PHASE 3 VOLGA TRIAL LBA4 | DASL-HICAP: DAROLUTAMIDE WITH ADT AND DEFINITIVE OR SALVAGE LOCOREGIONAL RADIATION THERAPY FOR LOCALISED, VERY HIGH-RISK PROSTATE CANCER: INTERIM ANALYSIS OF THE PHASE 3 DASL-HICAP TRIAL (ANZUP1801) 3586O | LITESPARK-012: FIRST-LINE PEMBROLIZUMAB + LENVATINIB + BELZUTIFAN OR MK-1308A + LENVATINIB IN ADVANCED RCC: RANDOMIZED OPEN-LABEL PHASE 3 LITESPARK-012 STUDY 3587O | LITESPARK-011: FINAL ANALYSIS OF THE PHASE 3 LITESPARK-011 STUDY: BELZUTIFAN PLUS LENVATINIB VERSUS CABOZANTINIB FOR ADVANCED RCC AFTER ANTI-PD-(L)1 THERAPY LBA56 | CAPITELLO-281: CAPIVASERTIB + ABIRATERONE VS PLACEBO + ABIRATERONE IN PATIENTS WITH PTEN-DEFICIENT METASTATIC HORMONE-SENSITIVE PROSTATE CANCER: UPDATED OVERALL SURVIVAL FROM CAPITELLO-281 3592O | AK112: EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF AK112 (IVONESCIMAB), A PD-1/VEGF BISPECIFIC ANTIBODY, AS FIRST-LINE TREATMENT FOR IMDC FAVORABLE-RISK ADVANCED RCC: RESULTS FROM A PHASE IB/II STUDY LBA53 | PROTEUS: PERIOPERATIVE APALUTAMIDE PLUS ADT WITH RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY AND PELVIC LYMPH NODE DISSECTION VS RP + PLND ALONE IN HIGH-RISK LOCALIZED OR LOCALLY ADVANCED PROSTATE CANCER: PROTEUS SUBSTUDY LBA88 | PE-PE: PERIOPERATIVE PEMBROLIZUMAB PLUS METASTASIS-DIRECTED THERAPY VERSUS MDT ALONE IN OLIGOMETASTATIC RENAL CELL CARCINOMA: THE RANDOMIZED PHASE II PE-PE TRIAL 4734O | KEYNOTE-B15: CTDNA ANALYSIS OF THE PHASE 3 KEYNOTE-B15 TRIAL: NEOADJUVANT AND ADJUVANT ENFORTUMAB VEDOTIN + PEMBROLIZUMAB FOR CISPLATIN-ELIGIBLE MUSCLE-INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER 3591RO | SWOG S2200: FIRST RESULTS OF SWOG S2200, A RANDOMIZED PHASE II STUDY COMPARING CABOZANTINIB WITH OR WITHOUT ATEZOLIZUMAB IN METASTATIC PAPILLARY RENAL CELL CARCINOMA 3588O | XMAB819: PHASE 1 RESULTS OF XMAB819, A NOVEL ENPP3 X CD3 BISPECIFIC, IN ADVANCED CLEAR CELL RENAL CELL CARCINOMA 4736O | ENERGIZE: RESULTS FROM A PHASE 3 TRIAL OF NEOADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY ALONE VS IN COMBINATION WITH NIVOLUMAB FOLLOWED BY POSTSURGICAL ADJUVANT NIVOLUMAB IN MUSCLE-INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER 4735O | KEYNOTE-866: PERIOPERATIVE PEMBROLIZUMAB OR PLACEBO + NEOADJUVANT CISPLATIN AND GEMCITABINE IN PATIENTS WITH MUSCLE-INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER: THE DOUBLE-BLIND, PHASE 3 KEYNOTE-866 STUDY Senior Faculty [headshots] Dr Morgan Clin Onc | Dr Choueiri Med Onc | Dr Gillessen Med Onc | Dr Agarwal Med Onc | Dr Zhang Med Onc | Dr Powles Med Onc | Dr Rini Med Onc | Dr Grivas Med Onc | Dr Merseburger Urologist | Dr Omlin Med Onc | Dr Apolo Med Onc | Dr Necchi Med Onc | Dr Heng Med Onc | Dr Pal Med Onc | Dr Grande Med Onc | Dr Hammers Med Onc Faculty [headshots] Dr Gandur Med Onc | Dr Membribes Med Onc | Dr Nizam Med Onc

[Slide 1] ADC | Target | Payload | Session | Title MRG007 (ARR-217) | CDH17 | Topo1i | Rapid oral (LBA): Developmental therapeutic | LBA34 - First-in-human study of MRG007 (ARR-217), a CDH17-directed exatecan ADC, in patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors HS-20122 | EGFR x cMET | Topo1i | Proffered paper: Developmental therapeutics | 1000O - HS-20122, a Novel EGFR/cMET Bispecific Antibody Drug Conjugate, in Advanced Solid Tumors IBI3001 | EGFR x B7H3 | Topo1i | Proffered paper: Developmental therapeutics | 1001O - Safety and efficacy of IBI3001, an anti-EGFR/B7H3 bispecific ADC, in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors: Results of a multi-regional phase 1 study CM518D1 | CDH17 | Topo1i | Poster: Developmental therapeutics | 1015P - First-in-human study of CM518D1: a novel CDH17 ADC in advanced solid tumors YL211 | cMET | Topo1i | Poster: Developmental therapeutics | 1017P - Phase 1 First-in-Human (FIH) Results of YL211, a c-Met targeting Antibody-Drug Conjugate (ADC), in patients (pts) with Advanced Solid Tumors OBI-992 | TROP2 | Topo1i | Poster: Developmental therapeutics | 1018P - Phase 1 dose-escalation trial of novel TROP2-targeted antibody-drug conjugate OBI-992 in patients with advanced solid tumors BHV-1530 | FGFR3 | Topo1i | Poster: Developmental therapeutics | 1019P - Phase 1 study of BHV-1530, a first-in-class FGFR3 ADC in Advanced Tumors MGC026 | B7H3 | Topo1i | Poster: Developmental therapeutics | 1020P - Phase 1, first-in-human study of MGC026, a B7-H3–targeted antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) in advanced solid tumors TJ101 | EGFR x B7H3 | Topo1i | Poster: Developmental therapeutics | 1021P - Preliminary safety and pharmacokinetics of TJ101, an EGFR × B7-H3 bispecific antibody-drug conjugate, in patients with advanced solid tumors: results from an ongoing global Phase I study SYS6023 | HER3 | Topo1i | Poster: Developmental therapeutics | 1028P - First-in-human study of SYS6023 in patients (pts) with malignant solid tumors SHR-4394 | PSMA | Topo1i | Poster: Metastatic prostate cancer | 2228P - A Phase 1 Study of SHR-4394, a PSMA-targeted Antibody-drug Conjugate, in Patients with Prostate Cancer. BG-C477 | CEACAM5 | Topo1i | Poster: NSCLC, locally advanced | 2567P - First-in-human study of BG-C477, a novel CEA-targeting ADC, in advanced solid tumors: initial results in NSCLC HS-20108 | SEZ6 | Topo1i | Poster: SCLC | 3814P - Phase 1 Study of HS-20108, a SEZ6 Targeting Antibody-Drug Conjugate, in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors HDM2020 | FGFR2b | Topo1i | Poster: Miscellaneous | 4864P - A Phase I Clinical Study of HDM2020 (FGFR2b-ADC) in Patients with Advanced FGFR2b Positive Solid Tumors: Results from Dose Escalation

[Slide 1] ESMO26 TOP TEN BY ONCOALERT BREAST CANCER OncoAlert 360° Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues WWW.ONCOALERT360.COM LBA50 | PANKU-BREAST01: RANDOMIZED PHASE III STUDY OF IZALONTAMAB BRENGITECAN (IZA-BREN) IN PREVIOUSLY TREATED UNRESECTABLE LOCALLY ADVANCED OR METASTATIC (LA/M) HORMONE RECEPTOR-POSITIVE/HER2-NEGATIVE (HR+/HER2-) BREAST CANCER (BC) 1842O | FOURLIGHT-1: EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF ATIRMOCICLIB (ATI) + FULVESTRANT (FUL) IN PATIENTS (PTS) WITH HR+/HER2– ADVANCED/METASTATIC BREAST CANCER (MBC) WHO PROGRESSED ON PRIOR CDK4/6 INHIBITOR (CDK4/6I) IN A RANDOMIZED PHASE 2 STUDY (FOURLIGHT-1) LBA25 | NATALEE: ADJUVANT RIBOCICLIB (RIB) + NONSTEROIDAL AROMATASE INHIBITOR (NSAI) IN PATIENTS (PTS) WITH HR+/HER2– EARLY BREAST CANCER (EBC): NATALEE 6-Y OVERALL SURVIVAL (OS) AND EFFICACY OUTCOMES LBA27 | APEX-BREAST01: TQB2102 VERSUS CHEMOTHERAPY IN HER2-LOW RECURRENT OR METASTATIC BREAST CANCER (R/M BC) - RESULTS FROM A RANDOMIZED PHASE 3 STUDY LBA51 | KEYNOTE-B49: RESULTS FROM KEYNOTE-B49: A PHASE 3, RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND STUDY OF PEMBROLIZUMAB (PEMBRO) VS PLACEBO (PBO) PLUS CHEMOTHERAPY (CT) IN PARTICIPANTS (PTS) WITH HR+/HER2– ADVANCED BREAST CANCER (ABC) LBA13 | HORIZON-BREAST06: TRASTUZUMAB REZETECAN (SHR-A1811) IN HER2-LOW ADVANCED BREAST CANCER (BC): A RANDOMIZED, PHASE 3 STUDY (HORIZON-BREAST06) LBA26 | POP-DURVA: SHORT-TERM PREOPERATIVE DURVALUMAB FOR STAGE I TNBC: FIRST RESULTS FROM THE PHASE II UNLOCK 14 - POP-DURVA TRIAL 4RO | SWITCH: TARGET SWITCHING WITH CONSERVED-PAYLOAD NOVEL ADCS IN PATIENTS WITH METASTATIC BREAST CANCER FOLLOWING PRIOR ADC THERAPY (SWITCH): A PROSPECTIVE, OPEN-LABEL, PHASE 2 PLATFORM TRIAL 1RO | POSTMONARCH: OVERALL SURVIVAL FROM THE PHASE 3 POSTMONARCH TRIAL OF ABEMACICLIB + FULVESTRANT VS PLACEBO + FULVESTRANT FOR HR+, HER2- ADVANCED BREAST CANCER FOLLOWING PROGRESSION ON A PRIOR CDK4/6 INHIBITOR + ENDOCRINE THERAPY LBA49 | DESTINY-BREAST09: A DESTINY-BREAST09 (DB-09) ANALYSIS OF TRASTUZUMAB DERUXTECAN (T-DXD) + PERTUZUMAB (P) VS TAXANE + TRASTUZUMAB + PERTUZUMAB (THP) FOR PATIENTS (PTS) WITH HER2+ ADVANCED/METASTATIC BREAST CANCER (A/MBC) AND BASELINE (BL) BRAIN METASTASES (BMS) Senior Faculty [Headshots] Dr Morgan Clin Onc · Dr Rugo Med Onc · Dr Lambertini Med Onc · Dr Loibl Med Onc · Dr Tolaney Med Onc · Dr Bianchini MedOnc · Dr Bartsch Med Onc · Dr. Hamilton Med Onc · Dr Graff Med Onc · Dr de Azambuja Med Onc · Dr Aftimos Med Onc · Dr Punie Med Onc Faculty [Headshots] Dr Agostinetto Med Onc · Dr Bonzano Rad Onc · Dr Griguolo Med Onc · Dr Jankovic Med Onc

[Slide 1] ESMO26 TOP TEN BY ONCOALERT GI CANCER OncoAlert360 Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues LBA87 AZUR-1: CLINICAL COMPLETE RESPONSE WITH DOSTARLIMAB MONOTHERAPY IN DMMR/MSI-H LOCALLY ADVANCED RECTAL CANCER: FIRST RESULTS FROM THE GLOBAL REGISTRATIONAL TRIAL LBA32 CHECKMATE 8HW: FINAL OVERALL SURVIVAL RESULTS: NIVOLUMAB PLUS IPILIMUMAB VERSUS NIVOLUMAB OR CHEMOTHERAPY IN MSI-H/DMMR METASTATIC COLORECTAL CANCER 789RO TRIDENTE: RECHALLENGE WITH ENCORAFENIB, BINIMETINIB AND CETUXIMAB IN BRAF V600E-MUTANT METASTATIC COLORECTAL CANCER: PHASE II STUDY LBA79 HERIZON-GEA-01: ZANIDATAMAB + CHEMOTHERAPY ± TISLELIZUMAB FOR FIRST-LINE HER2-POSITIVE ADVANCED/METASTATIC GASTROESOPHAGEAL ADENOCARCINOMA: SECOND INTERIM ANALYSIS 2875O KEYNOTE-975: PEMBROLIZUMAB OR PLACEBO PLUS CONCURRENT DEFINITIVE CHEMORADIOTHERAPY IN ESOPHAGEAL AND GASTROESOPHAGEAL JUNCTION CANCER: PHASE 3 RANDOMIZED STUDY 2877RO GERCOR-GONO DEWI: WATCH-AND-WAIT STRATEGY FOR DOSTARLIMAB IN LOCALIZED DMMR/MSI-H GASTROESOPHAGEAL ADENOCARCINOMA: FIRST INTERIM ANALYSIS OF THE PHASE II STUDY LBA77 G-HOPE-001: ARCOTATUG TAVATECAN (IBI343/TAK-921) VERSUS TREATMENT OF PHYSICIAN'S CHOICE IN PREVIOUSLY TREATED ADVANCED GASTRIC OR GEJ ADENOCARCINOMA: FIRST INTERIM ANALYSIS OF THE RANDOMIZED PHASE 3 STUDY LBA8 HARMONI-GI1: IVONESCIMAB PLUS CHEMOTHERAPY VERSUS DURVALUMAB PLUS CHEMOTHERAPY AS FIRST-LINE TREATMENT FOR ADVANCED BILIARY TRACT CANCER: RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PHASE 3 TRIAL LBA21 ACTICCA-1: ADJUVANT GEMCITABINE PLUS CISPLATIN VERSUS CAPECITABINE IN RESECTED BILIARY TRACT CANCER: PHASE 3 TRIAL LBA22 OPTIMUM: MAINTENANCE OLAPARIB WITH OR WITHOUT DURVALUMAB IN DDR GENE-MUTATED ADVANCED BILIARY TRACT CANCER: RANDOMIZED PHASE 2 STUDY LBA82 RASOLUTE 302: DARAXONRASIB, A RAS(ON) MULTI-SELECTIVE INHIBITOR, VS CHEMOTHERAPY IN PREVIOUSLY TREATED METASTATIC PANCREATIC ADENOCARCINOMA: ADDITIONAL SUBGROUP ANALYSES FROM THE PHASE 3 STUDY LBA83 AMPLIFY-7P: SEVEN-VALENT MKRAS-SPECIFIC LYMPH NODE TARGETED AMPHIPHILE IMMUNOTHERAPY VERSUS OBSERVATION IN RESECTED PANCREATIC DUCTAL ADENOCARCINOMA: RANDOMIZED PHASE 2 STUDY Senior Faculty Dr Morgan Clin Onc | Dr. Eng Med Onc | Dr Westphalen Med Onc | Dr O'Kane Med Onc Faculty Dr Akkus Med Onc | Dr Hornstein Med Onc | Dr Pacheco Med Onc [faculty headshots] WWW.ONCOALERT360.COM

[Slide 1] ESMO CONGRESS 2026 ESMO 2026 TOP 10 ABSTRACTS MADRID · IFEMA · 23–27 OCT 2026 · ALL TIMES MADRID LOCAL SAT 24 OCT 2026 LBA3 | DeLLphi-305: TARLATAMAB + DURVA MAINTENANCE, ES-SCLC | JACOB SANDS · 17:18–17:30 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 SUN 25 OCT 2026 LBA66 | OptiTROP-Lung06: 1L sac-TMT + PEMBRO, PD-L1-NEGATIVE | CAICUN ZHOU · 10:53–11:03 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 LBA67 | OptiTROP-Lung04: sac-TMT FINAL OS, EGFR-MUTATED | WEN FENG FANG · 11:03–11:13 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 LBA68 | SIGVOTATUG VEDOTIN VS DOCETAXEL, 2L+ NSQ NSCLC | SOLANGE PETERS · 11:13–11:23 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 LBA5 | Krascendo 1: DIVARASIB VS SOTORASIB/ADAGRASIB | FERDINANDOS SKOULIDIS · 16:30–16:42 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 LBA6 | SAFFRON: OSIMERTINIB + SAVOLITINIB, MET AFTER OSI | SHUN LU · 16:54–17:06 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 MON 26 OCT 2026 LBA69 | SANOVO: SAVOLITINIB + OSIMERTINIB, 1L EGFR/MET | YI-LONG WU · 08:30–08:40 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 LBA71 | PANKU-Lung01: iza-bren AFTER A 3RD-GENERATION EGFR TKI | LI ZHANG · 09:22–09:32 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 LBA72 | HERON-Lung01: RUZALTATUG REZETECAN (HER3 ADC) | YI-LONG WU · 09:32–09:42 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 LBA64 | Neotorch: PERIOPERATIVE TORIPALIMAB, FINAL ANALYSIS | SHUN LU · 15:23–15:33 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 SELECTED & PROVIDED BY DR. MEHRPOUYA MOBIN All ten in one calendar file. Link in the post. LUNGSUMMIT.ORG

[Slide 1] ESMO26 TOP TEN BY ONCOALERT LUNG CANCER OncoAlert 360 [logo] Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues WWW.ONCOALERT360.COM LBA3 DELLPHI-305: TARLATAMAB PLUS DURVALUMAB VS DURVALUMAB AS FIRST-LINE MAINTENANCE FOLLOWING DURVALUMAB, PLATINUM AND ETOPOSIDE IN EXTENSIVE-STAGE SCLC: PRIMARY ANALYSIS OF THE PHASE 3 TRIAL LBA5 KRASCENDO 1: EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF DIVARASIB VS SOTORASIB OR ADAGRASIB IN PREVIOUSLY TREATED LOCALLY ADVANCED OR METASTATIC KRAS G12C-MUTATED NSCLC LBA6 SAFFRON: OSIMERTINIB + SAVOLITINIB VS PLATINUM-PEMETREXED IN EGFRM MET-OVEREXPRESSED AND/OR -AMPLIFIED ADVANCED NSCLC POST-OSIMERTINIB: PHASE 3 PRIMARY RESULTS LBA67 OPTITROP-LUNG04: FINAL OS ANALYSIS OF SACITUZUMAB TIRUMOTECAN VERSUS PLATINUM-BASED CHEMOTHERAPY IN EGFR-MUTATED NSCLC AFTER PROGRESSION ON EGFR-TKI: PHASE III STUDY LBA66 OPTITROP-LUNG06: SACITUZUMAB TIRUMOTECAN PLUS PEMBROLIZUMAB VERSUS CHEMOTHERAPY PLUS PEMBROLIZUMAB AS FIRST-LINE TREATMENT FOR PD-L1-NEGATIVE ADVANCED NON-SQUAMOUS NSCLC: RANDOMIZED PHASE 3 STUDY 2614O PERSEE: PEMBROLIZUMAB WITH OR WITHOUT PLATINUM-BASED CHEMOTHERAPY AS FIRST-LINE TREATMENT IN ADVANCED NSCLC WITH PD-L1 ≥50%: PHASE 3 TRIAL LBA69 SANOVO: SAVOLITINIB OR PLACEBO COMBINED WITH OSIMERTINIB IN TREATMENT-NAÏVE ADVANCED NSCLC WITH EGFR MUTATION AND MET OVEREXPRESSION: PHASE 3 RESULTS 2618RO IFCT-2103 DIAL: CONTINUATION PEMBROLIZUMAB (± PEMETREXED) UP TO 2 YEARS VERSUS OBSERVATION IN METASTATIC NSCLC WITH DISEASE CONTROL AT 6 MONTHS: PHASE 2 ANALYSIS LBA71 PANKU-LUNG01: RANDOMIZED PHASE III STUDY OF IZALONTAMAB BRENGITECAN IN EGFR-MUTANT NON-SQUAMOUS NSCLC AFTER PROGRESSION ON A THIRD-GENERATION EGFR TKI 2613O SARON: PRIMARY RESULTS OF A RANDOMISED-CONTROLLED TRIAL OF CONSOLIDATION RADIOTHERAPY FOR SYNCHRONOUS OLIGOMETASTATIC NON-SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER Senior Faculty [headshots] Dr Morgan Clin Onc Dr Liu Med Onc Dr Popat Med Onc Dr Lovly Med Onc Dr Lopes Med Onc Dr Aggarwal Med Onc Dr Reck Med Onc Dr Massuti Med Onc Dr Malapelle Pathologist Ms Feldman Patient Advocate Associate Faculty Dr Mirallas Med Onc Dr Özkerim Med Onc

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 KEY TRIALS DAY 1 PREVIEW | 23 OCT [Location/time | Tumor | Trial / regimen / abstract | Title | Presenter | institution logo] Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6 13:30-13:40 | Breast Cancer | TALENT T-DXd ± Anastrozole LBA23 | Final results of TALENT: A neoadjuvant trial of T-DXd with or without anastrozole, or in sequence with chemotherapy for HER2-low, HR+ early-stage breast cancer | Sara A. Hurvitz | [UCLA Health Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center logo] Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6 14:25-14:35 | Breast Cancer | NATALEE Ribo + NSAI LBA25 | Adjuvant ribociclib (RIB) + nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) in patients (pts) with HR+/HER2- early breast cancer (EBC): NATALEE 6-y overall survival (OS) and efficacy outcomes | Dennis J. Slamon | [logo] Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6 14:35-14:45 | Breast Cancer | PANKU-Breast01 Iza-bren LBA50 | PANKU-Breast01: Randomized phase III study of izalontamab brengitecan (iza-bren) in previously treated unresectable locally advanced or metastatic (LA/M) hormone receptor-positive/HER2- negative (HR+/HER2-) breast cancer (BC) | Bo Lan | [logo] Almeria Auditorium - Hall 9 13:30-13:40 | GI Cancer | G-HOPE-001 Arcotatug tavatecan vs TPC LBA77 | Arcotatug tavatecan (IBI343/TAK-921) versus treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in previously treated, advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (G/GEJA): First interim analysis of the randomized, open-label, phase 3, G-HOPE-001 study | Kohei Shitara | [logo] Almeria Auditorium - Hall 9 13:40-13:50 | GI Cancer | SANO Active surveillance vs standard surgery (after neoadj CRT) LBA78 | Active surveillance versus standard surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer: Long-term results of a cluster-randomised controlled trial (SANO) | Sanjiv S. Gangaram-Panday | [Erasmus MC logo] Almeria Auditorium - Hall 9 13:50-14:00 | GI Cancer | KEYNOTE-975 Pembro + CRT 2875O | Pembrolizumab or placebo plus concurrent definitive chemoradiotherapy in esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer: The phase 3 randomized KEYNOTE-975 study | Manish A. Shah | [MSD logo] Almeria Auditorium - Hall 9 14:22-14:32 | GI Cancer | RASolute 302 Daraxon vs Chemo LBA82 | Daraxonrasib, a RAS(ON) multi-selective inhibitor vs chemotherapy in previously treated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC): Additional subgroup analyses from the ph3 RASolute 302 study | Zev A. Wainberg | [logo] Barcelona Auditorium - Hall 9 13:30-13:40 | GU Cancer | KEYNOTE-866 Pembro + Gem + Cis 4735O | Perioperative pembrolizumab (pembro) or placebo (pbo) + neoadjuvant cisplatin (cis) and gemcitabine (gem) in participants (pts) with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC): the double-blind, phase 3 KEYNOTE-866 study | Jens Bedke | [MSD logo] Barcelona Auditorium - Hall 9 13:40-13:50 | GU Cancer | ENERGIZE Nivo + Chemo -> Nivo 4736O | Results from a phase 3 trial of neoadjuvant (neoadj) chemotherapy alone vs in combination with nivolumab followed by postsurgical adjuvant nivolumab in patients (pts) with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) | Andrea Necchi | [logo] Barcelona Auditorium - Hall 9 14:22-14:32 | GU Cancer | KEYNOTE-905 Pembro or EV + Pembro 4733O | Perioperative pembrolizumab (pembro) or enfortumab vedotin (EV) plus pembro in pts with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) who are cisplatin-ineligible: ad hoc analysis from KEYNOTE-905 | Anders Ullén | [MSD logo] Barcelona Auditorium - Hall 9 14:32-14:42 | GU Cancer | KEYNOTE-B15 EV + Pembro 4734O | ctDNA analysis of the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-B15 trial: neoadjuvant and adjuvant (neoadj-adj) enfortumab vedotin (EV) + pembrolizumab (pembro) for participants (pts) with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) who are eligible for cisplatin | Jonathan A. Chatzkel | [MSD logo] Bilbao Auditorium - Hall 3 14:34-14:39 | GU Cancer | CAPItello-281 Capi + Abi vs Pbo +Abi LBA56 | Capivasertib (capi) + abiraterone (abi) vs placebo (pbo) + abi in patients (pts) with PTEN-deficient metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC): Updated overall survival (OS) from CAPItello-281 | Karim Fizazi | [AstraZeneca logo] Almeria Auditorium - Hall 9 16:15-16:20 | GI Cancer | HERIZON-GEA-01 Zani + Chemo ± Tisle LBA79 | Zanidatamab (zani) + chemotherapy (CT) ± tislelizumab (TIS) for first-line (1L) HER2-positive (HER2+) advanced/metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (mGEA): Second interim analysis (IA) from HERIZON-GEA-01 | Kohei Shitara | [logo] Almeria Auditorium - Hall 9 16:42-16:47 | GI Cancer | DEWI Dosta (Watch-and-wait) 2877RO | Watch-and-wait (W&W) strategy for dostarlimab in localized deficient dMMR/MSI-H gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA): Results from the first interim analysis of the GERCOR-GONO DEWI phase II study | Thierry André | [GERCOR logo] Almeria Auditorium - Hall 9 16:47-16:52 | GI Cancer | RAMIRIS Ram + FOLFIRI vs Ram + Pacli 2878RO | FOLFIRI plus ramucirumab versus paclitaxel plus ramucirumab as second-line therapy for taxane-pretreated patients with advanced or metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma–Final results of the phase III IKFs602/AIO RAMIRIS Study | Sylvie Lorenzen | [IKF logo] LARVOL

[Slide 1] Breast Cancer: Top Trending Abstracts on X Ahead of ESMO 2026 [legend, color-coded] ADC | IO | CDK4/6i, SERD | HER2 TKI, Aromatase inhibitor | ctDNA surveillance, Ultrasensitive monitoring, Dx Radiopharmaceutical [columns: Date | Abstract ID | Presenter | Phase | Abstract Title | Erika Hamilton | Mitsuo Terada | Paolo Tarantino | Yakup Ergün | ChatGPT 5.6 Sol | Gemini 3.8 Flash | Claude Opus 5.5 | Grok 4.7] Oct 23 | LBA25 | Slamon | P3 | NATALEE: Adj RIB + NSAI in HR+/HER2 eBC - 6 yrs OS and efficacy outcomes | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X Oct 24 | LBA51 | Rugo | P3 | KEYNOTE-B49: Pembro vs Pbo + CT in HR+/HER2- AdvBC | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X Oct 23 | LBA50 | Bo Lan | P3 | PANKU-Breast01: Iza-bren in previously treated unresec LA/m HR+/HER2- BC | | | X | X | X | X | X | X Oct 24 | LBA14 | Redfern | P3 | FINER: Fulv + Ipatasertib as tx for HER2- and ER+ mBC: OS Results | | | X | X | X | X | X | X Oct 24 | LBA16 | Pistilli | P3 | VIKTORIA-1: Geda + fulv ± palbo vs SOC in HR+/HER2- AdvBC - Updated results | | | | X | X | X | X | X Oct 24 | 1RO | Kalinsky | P3 | postMONARCH: Abema + fulv vs placebo + fulv for HR+ HER2- AdvBC following progression on a prior CDK4/6i + EC therapy - OS results | | | | X | X | X | X | X Oct 26 | 4639RO | Man Li | P3 | OptiTROP-Breast01: Sacituzumab tirumotecan vs CT in previously treated loc recurr/mTNBC - Final OS analysis | | | X | | X | X | X | X Oct 23 | LBA23 | Hurvitz | P2 | TRIO-US B-12 TALENT: Neoadj T-DXd ± anastrozole, or in seq with CT for HER2-low, HR+ eBC - Final results | X | X | X | X | | | | Oct 23 | 538RO | Werutsky | P3 | lidERA BC: PROs trial of GIRE in pts with ER+ HER2- eBC | X | | X | | | | X | X Oct 24 | 1842O | Giordano | P2 | FOURLIGHT-1: ATI + FULV in HR+/HER2- Adv/mBC who progressed on prior CDK4/6i - Efficacy and safety | X | | X | | | | X | X Oct 23 | LBA24 | Mamounas | P3 | NSABP B-42: Ext letro in postmeno women with HR+ BC who have completed previous adj therapy with an AI - Final Analysis | X | X | X | | | | | Oct 23 | 542RO | Ozaki | P3 | INSPIRE: Prognostic impact of postope ctDNA surveillance on RFS and molecular lead time in H-risk BC | X | X | X | | | | | Oct 24 | 2RO | Tolaney | P3 | evERA BC: GIRE + E in ER+ HER2- AdvBC in the post-CDK4/6i setting - Retrospective exploratory biomarker analyses | | | | X | X | X | | Oct 24 | LBA96 | Dent | P3 | TROPION-Breast02: 1L Dato-DXd vs CT in loc recurr inoperable or mTNBC for whom IO was not an option: Exploratory analysis of pts with brain met | X | | X | | | | | Oct 24 | LBA26 | Ribeiro | P2 | POP-DURVA: Short-term preope durva for stage I TNBC - First results | | X | X | | | | | Oct 26 | LBA49 | Saura Manich | P3 | DESTINY-Breast09: T-DXd + P vs THP in HER2+ Adv/mBC and BL BMs | X | | X | | | | | Oct 26 | 1767RO | Sammons | P2 | BRIDGET: Tucatinib added to trastuzumab/pertuzumab/ado-trastuzumab emtansine after isolated intracranial progression in Adv HER2+ BC | | X | X | | | | | Oct 23 | 544RO | De Placido | P3 | GIM3 FATA: Tx schedule and three AIs comparison in postmeno HR+ eBC - Final analysis | | | X | | | | | Oct 23 | 539RO | Barrios | P3 | DESTINY-Breast05: HRQoL + T-DXd vs T-DM1 in H-Risk HER2+ eBC | | | X | | | | | Oct 23 | 540RO | Barcenas | – | B-STRONGER-I: Ultrasensitive monitoring of early ctDNA dynamics during neoadj tx in eTNBC - Pre-Interim Results | | | X | | | | | Oct 24 | 3RO | Gennari | P2 | 2013-000287-29: 18F-FES PET-defined whole-body ER heterogeneity identifies EC responsiveness and predicts survival in ER+/HER2- mBC | | | | X | | | | Format and methodology credit: Dr. Mike Thompson LARVOL

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 · Madrid ESMO Top 10 Anticipated LBAs Madrid Oct 23–27, 2026 US clinic Presidential / LBA watchlist HRs embargoed until presentation 1 INTerpath-001 2 VOLGA 3 DeLLphi-305 4 SAFFRON 5 TroFuse-005 6 Krascendo 1 7 HARMONi-GI1 8 CLARITY-Gastric01 9 OptiTROP-Lung06/04 10 G-HOPE-001 Pre-congress pick list · no invented efficacy numbers

[Slide 1] exclusive FEATURING [circular headshot] Balazs Halmos, MD, MS [circular headshot] Dylan Fortman, MD OncLive Find out which lung cancer presentations experts are most excited to see at the 2026 ESMO Congress. Sign up to read OncLive's preview of some of the most anticipated abstracts ahead of the conference.

[Slide 1] GU Cancer: Top Trending Abstracts on X Ahead of ESMO 2026 [Legend] ADC / IO / PARP, TKI, AKT, MTI, CYP17 inhibitor / Plasma ctDNA genomic profiling [Column headers (KOLs / AI models)] Andrea Necchi | Axel Merseburger | Karine Tawagi | Kohji Takemura | Niklas Klümper | Tom Powles | Toni Choueiri | Yuksel Urun | ChatGPT 5.6 Sol | Gemini 3.8 Flash | Claude Opus 5.5 | Grok 4.7 Date | Abstract ID | Presenter | Phase | Abstract Title | X marks Oct 23 | 4736O | Necchi | P3 | ENERGIZE: Neoadj CT alone vs in combi with nivo f/d by postsurgical adj nivo in MIBC | X: Necchi, Merseburger, Klümper, Powles, Choueiri, Urun, ChatGPT, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | 4735O | Bedke | P3 | KEYNOTE-866: Periope pembro or pbo + neoadj cis + gem in MIBC | X: Necchi, Merseburger, Klümper, Powles, Choueiri, Urun, ChatGPT, Claude, Grok Oct 24 | LBA2 | Powles | P3 | VOLGA: Periop durva ± tremelimumab + neoadj EV in MIBC | X: Merseburger, Takemura, Klümper, Choueiri, Urun, ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | 4734O | Chatzkel | P3 | KEYNOTE-B15: Neoadj-adj EV + Pembro in MIBC who are eligible for cis - ctDNA analysis | X: Tawagi, Klümper, Powles, Urun, ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Grok Oct 25 | 3587O | Heng | P3 | LITESPARK-011: Bel + len vs cabo for adv RCC after anti-PD-(L)1 therapy - Final analysis | X: Merseburger, Tawagi, Choueiri, Urun, ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | 4733O | Ullén | P3 | KEYNOTE-905: Periop Pembro or EV + pembro in pts with MIBC who are cis-ineligible - ad hoc analysis | X: Klümper, Powles, Urun, ChatGPT, Claude, Grok Oct 24 | LBA4 | Niazi | P3 | DASL-HiCaP: Darolutamide + ADT and definitive or salvage locoregional RT for loc very H-risk PC - Interim analysis | X: Merseburger, Takemura, Choueiri, Urun, Claude Oct 24 | 4737RO | De Santis | P3 | POTOMAC: Durva + BCG (I+M) for BCG-Naïve, H-Risk NMIBC: Early Recurr + CFS in pts with Papillary Only Tumours | X: Merseburger, Choueiri, Urun, Gemini, Grok Oct 24 | 2215O | Fizazi | P3 | PEACE-1: Abiraterone acetate + prednisone for de novo mCSPC - Long-term OS | X: Merseburger, Choueiri, Urun, ChatGPT Oct 25 | 3589RO | Choueiri | P3 | KEYNOTE-564: adj pembro vs pbo in ccRCC - Final protocol-prespecified analysis | X: Merseburger, Choueiri, Urun, Claude Oct 24 | 4742O | Sweis | P1 | TROPHY-U-01: SG + EV + ZIM in tx-Naive mUC - Interim Results | X: Powles, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | LBA56 | Fizazi | P3 | CAPItello-281: Capi + abi vs pbo + abi in PTEN-deficient mHSPC - Updated OS | X: Urun, ChatGPT, Gemini Oct 23 | 2222RO | Azad | P3 | TALAPRO-3: PROs in men with mCSPC and HRR gene alterations receiving TALA + ENZA vs PBO + ENZA | X: Tawagi, ChatGPT, Claude Oct 23 | 2219RO | Azad | P3 | TALAPRO-3: TALA + ENZA vs PBO + ENZA in HRR gene-mut mCSPC - Utility of ctDNA TF as a prognostic biomarker | X: Tawagi, ChatGPT, Claude Oct 25 | 3586O | Choueiri | P3 | LITESPARK-012: 1L pembro + len + bel or MK-1308A + len in adv RCC | X: Merseburger, Choueiri, Urun Oct 25 | 3591RO | Maughan | P2 | PAPMET2: Cabo ± atezo in mPRCC - First results | X: Merseburger, Choueiri, Urun Oct 24 | LBA53 | Briganti | P3 | PROTEUS: Periope APA + ADT with RP + PLND vs RP + PLND alone in H-risk LPC/LAPC | X: Merseburger, Urun Oct 24 | 4749O | Tiancheng Liu | P2 | WUTSUP-02: Neoadj Tislelizumab + Disitamab Vedotin for UTUC - Mid-term Results | X: Powles, Grok Oct 23 | 1209RO | Hui Han | P2 | NCT06415318: Neoadj toripalimab + CT for LA penile squamous cell carcinoma | X: Tawagi Oct 23 | 2221RO | Khalaf | P2 | PLUDO: Patient Reported QoL for Doc vs Lutetium177-617-PSMA (LuP) for mCRPC | X: Tawagi Oct 23 | 2220RO | Mehra | – | PROMPT: Plasma ctDNA as standalone or adjunct to tumour tissue for HRR and PI3K/AKT genotyping in mCRPC | X: Tawagi Oct 23 | 2217RO | Von Amsberg | P1/2 | KEYNOTE-365: Pembro + carbo + etoposide CT or CT alone for NEPC - Updated results from cohort I | X: Tawagi Oct 24 | 4740RO | Maroto | P1/2 | KEYNOTE-869: EV ± Pembro as 1L tx for cis-ineligible LA/mUC - Long-Term Follow-up Analysis from Cohorts DE/A and K | X: Powles Oct 24 | 4739RO | Bian | P2 | SKB264-II-06: Sac-TMT + Pembro for LA/mUC | X: Powles Oct 24 | 4748RO | Yang | P2 | NCT05723991: Neoadj Disitamab Vedotin + Gem in MIBC pts with HER2 2 3+ Interim Prognostic Outcomes | X: Tawagi Format and methodology credit: Dr. Mike Thompson [LARVOL logo]

[Slide 1] Lung Cancer: Top Trending Abstracts on X Ahead of ESMO 2026 [colour key:] ADC BsAb IO KRAS G12C, EGFR TKI, MET TKI Radiotherapy [column headers (voices):] Amol Akhade | Bijoy Telivala | Chandrakanth MV | Jose Fernando Moura | Mario Balsa | Masahiro Torasawa | Patrick Forde | Rishabh Jain | Riyaz Shah | Rohit Malde | Yakup Ergün | ChatGPT 5.6 Sol | Gemini 3.8 Flash | Claude Opus 5.5 | Grok 4.7 Date | Abstract ID | Presenter | Phase | Abstract Title Oct 24 | LBA3 | Sands | P3 | DeLLphi-305: Tarlatamab + durva vs durva as 1LM therapy following durva + EP in ES-SCLC - Primary analysis | X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Oct 25 | LBA6 | Shun Lu | P3 | SAFFRON: Osi + savo vs plat-pem in EGFRm MET-OE and/or -amplified (AMP) adv NSCLC post-osi - Primary results | X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Oct 25 | LBA5 | Skoulidis | P3 | Krascendo 1: Diva vs Soto or Ada in previously treated LA/m KRAS G12C-mut NSCLC - Efficacy and safety results | X X X X X X X X X (Amol Akhade through Riyaz Shah) X X X X X (Yakup Ergün, ChatGPT 5.6 Sol, Gemini 3.8 Flash, Claude Opus 5.5, Grok 4.7) Oct 25 | LBA67 | Feng Fang | P3 | OptiTROP-Lung04: Sac-TMT vs platinum-based CT in EGFRm NSCLC after progression on EGFR-TKI - Final OS analysis | X (Chandrakanth MV) X X X X X (Yakup Ergün, ChatGPT 5.6 Sol, Gemini 3.8 Flash, Claude Opus 5.5, Grok 4.7) Oct 26 | LBA69 | Yi-Long Wu | P3 | SANOVO: Savo / pbo + osi in tx-naïve adv NSCLC with EGFRm and MET overexpression | X (Mario Balsa) X X X X X (Yakup Ergün, ChatGPT 5.6 Sol, Gemini 3.8 Flash, Claude Opus 5.5, Grok 4.7) Oct 25 | LBA68 | Peters | P3 | SigVie-002: SV vs DTX in previously treated non-sqNSCLC | X (Chandrakanth MV) X (Rishabh Jain) X X X (ChatGPT 5.6 Sol, Gemini 3.8 Flash, Claude Opus 5.5) Oct 25 | LBA66 | Caicun Zhou | P3 | OptiTROP-Lung06: Sac-TMT + pembro vs CT + pembro as 1L tx for PD-L1-neg adv non-sq NSCLC | X X X X X (Yakup Ergün, ChatGPT 5.6 Sol, Gemini 3.8 Flash, Claude Opus 5.5, Grok 4.7) Oct 26 | LBA71 | Li Zhang | P3 | PANKU-Lung01: Iza-bren in EGFRm non-sq NSCLC after progression on a third-generation EGFR TKI | X X X X X (Yakup Ergün, ChatGPT 5.6 Sol, Gemini 3.8 Flash, Claude Opus 5.5, Grok 4.7) Oct 25 | 2614O | Decroisette | P3 | PERSEE: Pembro ± platinum-based CT as 1L tx in adv NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥50% | X (Yakup Ergün) X (Grok 4.7) Oct 24 | LBA73 | Sebastian | P2 | PACE-LUNG: Efficacy of additional CT for pts with EGFRm NSCLC with the continued presence of plasma ctDNA EGFRm at week 3 after start of osi 1L tx | X (Yakup Ergün) Oct 25 | 2613O | McDonald | P2 | SARON: Consolidation radiotherapy for synchronous oligometastatic NSCLC - Primary Results | X (Yakup Ergün) Format and methodology credit: Dr. Mike Thompson LARVOL

[Slide 1] GI Cancer: Top Trending Abstracts on X Ahead of ESMO 2026 [Legend] ADC / BsAb / IO / CAR-T / pan-RAS, VEGFR-2, FGFR2b inhibitor, Seven mKRAS variants / Somatostatin analogue, Radiopharmaceutical [Column headers (KOLs / AI models)] Daisuke Kotani | Erman Akkus | Sharlene Gill | ChatGPT 5.6 Sol | Gemini 3.8 Flash | Claude Opus 5.5 | Grok 4.7 Date | Abstract ID | Presenter | Phase | Abstract Title | X marks Oct 25 | LBA7 | Rui-Hua Xu | P3 | CLARITY-Gastric 01: Sone-Ve in 2L+ Adv/m Claudin 18.2+ GEC | X: Akkus, Gill, ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Grok Oct 25 | LBA8 | Jian Zhou | P3 | HARMONi-GI1: Ivo + CT vs durva + CT as 1L tx for adv BTC | X: Akkus, Gill, ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | LBA77 | Shitara | P3 | G-HOPE-001: Arcotatug tavatecan vs TPC in previously treated, adv G/GEJA - First interim analysis | X: Akkus, Gill, ChatGPT, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | 2875O | Shah | P3 | KEYNOTE 975: Pembro/pbo + concurr definitive chemoRT in esophageal and GEJ cancer | X: Akkus, Gill, ChatGPT, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | 2877RO | André | P2 | DEWI: W&W strategy for dostarlimab in localized deficient dMMR/MSI-H GEA - First interim analysis | X: Kotani, Akkus, Gill, Gemini, Claude Oct 23 | LBA80 | Ruixing Zhang | P2/P3 | KC-WISE: Anbenitamab + CT for previously treated HER2+ GC/GEJC - Updated OS analysis | X: Kotani, Akkus, Gemini, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | LBA79 | Shitara | P3 | HERIZON-GEA-01: Zani + CT ± TIS for 1L HER2+ adv/mGEA - Second Interim Analysis | X: Kotani, ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | 2878RO | Lorenzen | P3 | RAMIRIS: FOLFIRI + ramucirumab vs pacli + ramucirumab as 2L therapy for taxane-pretreated pts with adv/mGEA - Final Results | X: Kotani, Akkus, Gill, Gemini Oct 24 | LBA21 | Wege | P3 | ACTICCA-1: Adj CT + gem + cis compared to SOC after curative intent resection of cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma | X: Akkus, Gill, Claude, Grok Oct 24 | LBA48 | Kudo | P3 | EMERALD-3: T + D ± L + TACE in eeHCC - Liver function trajectory and post-progression outcomes | X: Akkus, Gill, Gemini, Grok Oct 23 | LBA78 | Gangaram-Panday | – | SANO: Active surveillance vs standard surg after neoadj chemoRT for oesophageal cancer - Long-term results | X: Akkus, Gill, ChatGPT Oct 23 | LBA82 | Wainberg | P3 | RASolute 302: Daraxonrasib vs CT in previously treated mPDAC - Additional subgroup analyses | X: Akkus, Gill, Grok Oct 23 | LBA81 | Dazhi Xu | P3 | LOMAC: Four Months of Adj XELOX vs Six Months in Stage II–IIIB GC | X: Kotani, Akkus, Claude Oct 23 | LBA83 | O'Reilly | P2 | AMPLIFY-7P: Seven-Valent mKRAS-specific Lymph Node Targeted Amphiphile IO vs Observation in Resected PDAC | X: Akkus, ChatGPT, Grok Oct 24 | 459O | Azad | P2/P3 | COMPANION-002: Paclitaxel ± tovecimig in previously treated pts with adv BTC | X: Akkus, Gill, Grok Oct 26 | 1678RO | Llovet | P3 | LEAP-012: Lenva + Pembro vs Dual Pbo + TACE for unresec non-mHCC - Long-term OS Results | X: Akkus, Gill, Claude Oct 23 | 2396RO | Halfdanarson | P1/P2 | 212-Pb-VMT: [212Pb]VMT-α-NET in adv SSTR2+ NETs: Cohorts 1–3 safety and efficacy results | X: Akkus, Gill Oct 23 | 2395RO | Chhajlani | P4 | SAUNA: Concomitant SST Analog use in 2L therapy of gastroenteropancreatic NETs - Survival Results | X: Akkus, Gill Oct 24 | 1679O | Chon | P1 | BGB-B2033-101: BGB-B2033 Monotherapy - First Disclosure of DO and DE Update in Adv HCC | X: Akkus, Gill Oct 24 | LBA32 | Lonardi | P3 | CheckMate 8HW: Nivo + ipi vs nivo/CT in MSI-H/dMMR mCRC - Final OS results | X: Gill, ChatGPT Oct 25 | LBA87 | Cercek | P2 | AZUR-1: Clinical CR + Dostarlimab monotherapy in dMMR/MSI-H LARC - First Results | X: Gill, ChatGPT Oct 26 | 2392O | Panpan Zhang | P1/2 | NCT06157827: Opamtistomig + CT as 1L tx for adv EP-NEC | X: Akkus, Gill Oct 26 | 1680RO | Qi Zhang | P1 | NCT05155189: C-CAR031 in adv HCC - Updated Results | X: Akkus, Gill Oct 23 | 2879RO | Modesto | P2 | ARION: Durva + definitive chemoRT vs definitive chemoRT in LA esophagus carcinoma | X: Akkus Oct 23 | 2883RO | Wainberg | P3, P3 | FORTITUDE-101, FORTITUDE-102: Bemarituzuma in Adv GC/GEJ by FGFR2 Amplification Status - Exploratory Biomarker Analysis | X: Akkus Format and methodology credit: Dr. Mike Thompson [LARVOL logo]

[Slide 1] [cancernetwork logo] cancernetwork home of the journal ONCOLOGY ESMO CONGRESS 2026 PREVIEW GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY The Data to Watch at ESMO 2026 De-Escalation and ADCs 1 KEYNOTE-C93 ENDOMETRIAL First-line pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy in dMMR disease 2 TroFuse-005 ENDOMETRIAL Sacituzumab tirumotecan after chemotherapy and immunotherapy 3 BEHOLD-1 OVARIAN B7-H4–targeted mocertatug rezetecan in PROC 4 REJOICE-Ovarian01 OVARIAN CDH6-directed raludotatug deruxtecan in PROC 5 DUO-E ENDOMETRIAL Interim OS with durvalumab ± olaparib Featuring insights from Eirwen M. Miller, MD, and Nujsaubnusi C. Vue, MD, of Allegheny Health Network Read the full preview › CANCERNETWORK.COM

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 Breast Cancer Abstracts [pink ribbon] LBA25 NATALEE Ribociclib + a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor. HR-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer. [capsule and pill icons + breast icon labeled AI] Focus: Six-year efficacy and overall survival outcomes following adjuvant treatment. LBA50 PANKU-Breast01 Izalontamab brengitecan. Previously treated unresectable locally advanced or metastatic HR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. [antibody-drug conjugate icon] Focus: Randomized phase III evaluation of treatment efficacy and safety. 538RO PROs from lidERA Giredestrant, an oral SERD. ER-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer. [capsule icon + patient icon] Focus: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including quality of life, symptoms and treatment tolerability versus standard endocrine therapy. 1842O FOURLIGHT-1 Atirmociclib (selective CDK4 inhibitor) + fulvestrant. HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer after CDK4/6 inhibitor treatment. [capsule icon + antibody icon] Key result: Median PFS was 9.4 vs 6.6 months (HR 0.60), according to previously reported topline results.

[Slide 1] Late-breaking abstracts ESMO 2026 6 Late-Breakers to Watch [video play button] 1 INTerpath-001 (LBA1) 2 Krascendo 1 (LBA5) 3 TroFuse-005 4 KEYNOTE-C93 5 FOURLIGHT-1 6 AZUR-1

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 BREAST CANCER PREVIEW • OCT 23-27 • MADRID 6 Breast Cancer Trials to Watch at ESMO 2026 3 breast oncologists on the data they are tracking in Madrid cancernetwork® home of the journal ONCOLOGY [headshot] Erika Hamilton, MD Sarah Cannon Research Institute [headshot] Jasmin Hundal, MD Breast medical oncologist [headshot] Nusrat Jahan, MD University of Alabama at Birmingham 1 KEYNOTE-B49 Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in HR+/HER2− advanced disease (LBA51) 2 SWITCH Switching to novel ADCs after prior ADC therapy (4RO) 3 PANKU-Breast01 Bispecific ADC iza-bren in HR+/HER2− disease (LBA50) 4 VIKTORIA-1 Updated gedatolisib data in HR+/HER2− advanced disease (LBA16) 5 evERA ctDNA biomarker analyses of giredestrant plus everolimus (2RO) 6 DESTINY-Breast11 MRI responses during neoadjuvant T-DXd in HER2+ early disease (543RO) cancernetwork.com @cancernetwrk

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 Lung Cancer Abstract Highlights DeLLphi-305 (LBA3) Tarlatamab + durvalumab vs. durvalumab alone as first-line maintenance for ES-SCLC, testing DLL3-directed T-cell engagement earlier in treatment. OptiTROP-Lung06 (LBA66) Sacituzumab tirumotecan (TROP2 ADC) + pembrolizumab vs. chemotherapy + pembrolizumab in first-line PD-L1-negative advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. OptiTROP-Lung04 (LBA67) Final overall survival analysis of sacituzumab tirumotecan vs. platinum-based chemotherapy after EGFR-TKI progression in EGFR-mutated NSCLC. Sigvotatug Vedotin (LBA68) A phase III comparison with docetaxel in previously treated nonsquamous NSCLC, examining efficacy and safety. KRASCENDO 1 (LBA5) Divarasib vs. sotorasib or adagrasib in previously treated KRAS G12C-mutated NSCLC, offering a direct comparison within the targeted therapy class. SAFFRON (LBA6) Osimertinib + savolitinib vs. platinum-pemetrexed after osimertinib progression in EGFR-mutated NSCLC with MET overexpression and/or amplification. SANOVO (LBA69) Savolitinib + osimertinib vs. osimertinib alone in treatment-naïve EGFR-mutated NSCLC with MET overexpression, exploring upfront dual-target inhibition. PANKU-Lung01 (LBA71) Izalontamab brengitecan, a bispecific ADC, in EGFR-mutated nonsquamous NSCLC after progression on a third-generation EGFR-TKI. HERON-Lung01 (LBA72) Ruzaltatug rezetecan, a HER3-directed ADC, vs. platinum-based chemotherapy after EGFR-TKI progression in EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC. Neotorch (LBA64) Final analysis of perioperative toripalimab + chemotherapy in resectable stage II–III NSCLC, focusing on long-term outcomes. [icons: lungs, antibodies, DNA helix, pills, scalpel]

[Slide 1] touchONCOLOGY [logo] " ESMO is always a highlight of the oncology calendar, bringing together the latest science, fresh perspectives and the experts shaping the future of cancer care. In genitourinary oncology, I am particularly looking forward to addressing key questions in perioperative and curative-intent treatment across muscle-invasive bladder cancer and high-risk localised prostate cancer. The real value of this meeting lies in turning scientific progress into better clinical decisions and, ultimately, better outcomes for our patients. [headshot photo] Prof Axel S Merseburger Editor-in-Chief, touchONCOLOGY ESMO 2026 MADRID, SPAIN 23-27 OCTOBER 2026

[Slide 1] HUTCHMED Highlights Clinical Data to be Presented at ESMO Congress 2026 October 23-27, 2026 | Madrid, Spain HUTCHMED [logo] Sponsored Studies Abstract title | Presenter/ Lead author | Presentation details Osimertinib (osi) + savolitinib (savo) vs platinum–pemetrexed (plat–pem) in EGFRm MET-overexpressed (OE) and/or -amplified (AMP) advanced NSCLC post-osi: SAFFRON Phase (Ph) 3 primary results | Shun Lu (Shanghai, China) | LBA6 Presidential Symposium II Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6 Sunday, October 25, 2026 16:30 - 18:15 CEST Savolitinib or Placebo Combined with Osimertinib in Treatment-Naïve Advanced NSCLC with EGFR Mutation and MET Overexpression: Results from the Phase 3 SANOVO Study | Yi-Long Wu (Guangzhou, China) | LBA69 Proffered paper 2: NSCLC, metastatic Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6 Monday, October 26, 2026 08:30 - 10:00 CEST Updated results from a fruquintinib Expanded Access Program for patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer | Stefan Kasper (Essen, Germany) | 848P Poster Session: Colon cancer Association between dose adjustment and treatment outcomes in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma receiving fruquintinib plus sintilimab: A post-hoc analysis of the FRUSICA-2 trial | Yuanyuan Qu (Shanghai, China) | 3655eP E-poster Session: Renal cancer Efficacy of fruquintinib plus sintilimab in special populations with advanced renal cell carcinoma: A subgroup analysis of FRUSICA-2 study | Kaiwei Yang (Beijing, China) | 3667eP E-poster Session: Renal cancer Final phase 2 analysis of surufatinib plus camrelizumab, nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine in first-line metastatic pancreatic cancer | Shukui Qin (Nanjing, China) | 3156P Poster Session: Pancreatic cancer [Slide 2] HUTCHMED Highlights Clinical Data to be Presented at ESMO Congress 2026 October 23-27, 2026 | Madrid, Spain HUTCHMED [logo] Investigator-initiated Studies (1/2) Abstract title | Presenter/ Lead author | Presentation details Fruquintinib plus capecitabine maintenance after first-line anti-EGFR antibody plus chemotherapy in RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: A phase Ib/II study | Lin Yang/ Letian Zhang (Beijing, China) | 877eP E-poster Session: Colon cancer Real-world effectiveness and safety of fruquintinib in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in Spain: The FrESP study | Ana Fernandez Montes (Ourense, Spain) | 880eP E-poster Session: Colon cancer CONCEPT (COmbinatioN of CEtuximab Plus fruquintinib Treatment ± immunotherapy): A multicenter, randomized, open-label phase II trial in first-line pMMR RAS/BRAF wild-type unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer | Kefeng Ding (Hangzhou, China) | 890eP E-poster Session: Colon cancer A real-world study of low-dose fruquintinib combined with trifluridine/tipiracil hydrochloride (TAS-102) in the third-line and beyond treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer | Yuehong Cui/ Li Liang (Shanghai, China) | 903eP E-poster Session: Colon cancer Real-world outcomes with fruquintinib in heavily pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer: Impact of patient and disease characteristics | Maria Maddalena Laterza (Pozzuoli, Italy) | 964eP E-poster Session: Colon cancer A phase II, open-label, randomized study of doublet chemotherapy (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI) plus fruquintinib compared with doublet chemotherapy (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI) plus bevacizumab in second line setting for a metastatic colorectal cancer: ULYSSE- FFCD2406 - PRODIGE115 (trials in progress) | Jean Marc Phelip (Saint-Étienne, France) | 991eTiP E-poster Session: Colon cancer Phase II study of fruquintinib plus utidelone in platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer (FRUTD Trial) | Zheng Feng (Shanghai, China) | 1283P Poster Session: Gynaecological cancers Fruquintinib plus eribulin in patients with metastatic HR+, HER2-breast cancer after progression on endocrine therapy plus CDK4/6 inhibitor: Updated results from a phase II study | Yuan Yuan (Nanjing, China) | 1896eP E-poster Session: HR+ breast cancer Fruquintinib plus sintilimab and XELOX as first-line treatment for advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: A single-arm, open-label, multicenter phase II study | Hua Wang (Nanchang, China) | 2980eP E-poster Session: Oesophagogastric cancer Fruquintinib plus cadonilimab and S-1 in previously treated unresectable locally advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: preliminary efficacy and safety results from a phase Ib/II study | Huiyan Luo (Guangzhou, China) | 2981eP E-poster Session: Oesophagogastric cancer Nanoliposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) combined with fruquintinib as second-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer: A single-arm, open-label, dose-escalation and expansion phase I/II trial | Jieer Ying/ Qi Xu (Hangzhou, China) | 2986eP E-poster Session: Oesophagogastric cancer FRUQUITAS trial: ENGIC intergroup randomized phase III of trifluridine/tipiracil +/- fruquintinib in pre-treated metastatic gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma | David Tougeron (Poitiers, France) | 3079eTiP E-poster Session: Oesophagogastric cancer [Slide 3] HUTCHMED Highlights Clinical Data to be Presented at ESMO Congress 2026 October 23-27, 2026 | Madrid, Spain HUTCHMED [logo] Investigator-initiated Studies (2/2) Abstract title | Presenter/Lead author | Presentation details CHOICE III: short-course preoperative radiotherapy followed by fruquintinib plus anti–PD-1 antibody (serplulimab) for neoadjuvant treatment of pMMR/MSS mid-to-low locally advanced rectal cancer: A single-arm, single-center, prospective phase II study | Wei Zhang (Shanghai, China) | 3582eTiP E-poster Session: Rectal and anal cancer First-line fruquintinib plus serplulimab for metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma: Updated results from the phase II FRONTIER study | Jiwei Huang (Shanghai, China) | 3614P Poster Session: Renal cancer Latest efficacy and safety analysis of surufatinib combined with EP regimen and serplulimab as first-line treatment for extrapulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma | Tao Zhang/ Zhenyu Lin (Wuhan, China) | 2394RO Rapid Oral Session: NETs and endocrine tumours Pamplona Auditorium - Hall 5 Friday, October 23, 2026 16:15 - 17:45 CEST Surufatinib combined with toripalimab and nab-paclitaxel/ gemcitabine chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced pancreatobiliary-type ampullary carcinoma: A prospective phase II Clinical Trial | Juan Du (Nanjing, China) | 507eP E-poster Session: Biliary tract cancer, incl. cholangiocarcinoma Efficacy and safety of surufatinib in combination with CAPTEM in advanced G2/G3 Neuroendocrine Tumors: Results from a single-arm, phase II Trial | Wei Wang (Guangzhou, China) | 2403P Poster Session: Neuroendocrine tumours Surufatinib plus S-1/temozolomide as first-line therapy in MGMT-low advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (SUSTEM-p): An open-label, single-centre phase Ib/II trial | Yihebali Chi (Beijing, China) | 2411P Poster Session: Neuroendocrine tumours Updated results of a prospective, open-label study of surufatinib plus CAPTEM as conversion therapy for unresectable pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors | Ziyao Wang (Chengdu, China) | 2412P Poster Session: Neuroendocrine tumours Matching-adjusted indirect comparison of surufatinib versus high-dose OCT-LAR in patients with advanced GEP-NETs who progressed on prior SSA Therapy | Jianming Xu (Beijing, China) | 2415P Poster Session: Neuroendocrine tumours Surufatinib combined with octreotide LAR for the treatment of G1/G2 GEP-NETs: A single-arm, prospective, open-label phase II study | Xiaofeng Sun (Nanjing, China) | 2439eP E-poster Session: Neuroendocrine tumours Six weeks of induction gemcitabine plus nab paclitaxel (AG) followed by sequential surufatinib plus AG or AG alone as first line therapy for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC): A single center, two cohort, phase II study | Jin Xu/ Jialin Li (Shanghai, China) | 3168P Poster Session: Pancreatic cancer A phase Ib/II study of radiotherapy combined with surufatinib and sintilimab for localized high-risk limb and trunk soft tissue sarcomas: A prospective single-center trial | Yan Wang (Shanghai, China) | 3739P Poster Session: Sarcoma Surufatinib plus serplulimab, etoposide, and carboplatin as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC): Updated results from a single-arm, phase Ia/Ib trial | Haipeng Xu/ Longfeng Zhang (Fuzhou, China) | 3831P Poster Session: Small cell lung cancer

[Slide 1] #ESMO26 | #Oncology | #MedicalAffairs | #ClinicalTrials | #Pharma 10 DAYS UNTIL ESMO THE 10 ABSTRACTS EVERYONE KEEPS TALKING ABOUT. [Illustration of a printed booklet: ESMO 2026 CONGRESS PROGRAMME; tab labelled TOP 10] Top 10 Abstracts 1 INTerpath-001 [circled] 2 VOLGA 3 DeLLphi-305 4 DASL-HiCaP 5 KRAScendo 1 6 SAFFRON 7 CLARITY-Gastric 01 8 HARMONi-GI1 9 TroFuse-005 10 OptiTROP-Lung06 Most talked about is not always most useful for patients.

[Slide 1] NSCLC, metastatic 2805eP - First-line BRAF/MEK inhibition versus immune checkpoint inhibitor-based therapy in BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic NSCLC: A meta-analysis Presentation Number 2805eP Speakers Yakup Ergün (Diyarbakır, Türkiye) Authors Yakup Ergün (Diyarbakır, Türkiye), Rohit Gosain (Buffalo, United States of America), Rahul Gosain (Rochester, United States of America) Abstract Background The optimal first-line treatment for patients with BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic NSCLC remains unclear. While current ESMO and NCCN guidelines prioritize BRAF/MEK inhibition, no randomized trials have directly compared targeted therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based regimens. We performed a meta-analysis of retrospective studies to compare efficacy outcomes between these strategies. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Retrospective studies comparing first-line BRAF/MEK inhibitor combinations versus ICI-based therapies (monotherapy or chemoimmunotherapy) were included. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), while objective response rate (ORR) was evaluated as a secondary endpoint. Effect sizes were pooled as hazard ratios (HRs) for survival outcomes and odds ratios (ORs) for ORR with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using fixed- or random-effects models based on heterogeneity. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic. Results Four retrospective studies including 589 patients (BRAF/MEK: n=384; ICI-based: n=205) were analyzed. No statistically significant difference in PFS was observed between the two strategies (HR 1.22; 95% CI 0.89-1.68; p=0.22; I²=0%); however, a numerical trend favored BRAF/MEK inhibition. Similarly, OS did not differ significantly (HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.59-1.73; p=0.97), although substantial heterogeneity was present (I²=69%). In contrast, ORR was significantly higher with BRAF/MEK inhibition compared to ICI-based therapy (61% vs 48%, OR 0.60; 95% CI 0.37-0.97; p=0.04; I²=0%). Conclusions In this meta-analysis of retrospective data, BRAF/MEK inhibition was associated with significantly higher response rates, while no statistically significant differences were observed in survival outcomes. A consistent numerical trend in PFS favoring targeted therapy suggests a potential efficacy signal that may not reach statistical significance due to the limited number of studies and patients. The substantial heterogeneity observed in OS further limits definitive interpretation.

[Slide 1] MY TOP 10 LUNG CANCER ABSTRACTS #ESMO26 01 LBA3 DeLLphi-305 Phase III primary analysis: Tarlatamab + durvalumab vs durvalumab as 1L maintenance after durvalumab + platinum/etoposide in ES-SCLC Jacob Sands 02 2614O PERSEE Phase III pembrolizumab with or without platinum-based chemotherapy as 1L treatment in advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥50% Chantal Decroisette 03 LBA66 OptiTROP-Lung06 Phase III sacituzumab tirumotecan + pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy + pembrolizumab in 1L PD-L1-negative advanced non-squamous NSCLC Caicun Zhou 04 LBA6 SAFFRON Phase III primary results: Osimertinib + savolitinib vs platinum–pemetrexed in EGFR-mutant, MET-overexpressed/amplified advanced NSCLC after osimertinib Shun Lu 05 LBA5 KRAScendo 1 Phase III divarasib vs sotorasib or adagrasib in previously treated advanced KRAS G12C-mutated NSCLC Ferdinandos Skoulidis 06 LBA67 OptiTROP-Lung04 Final OS analysis: Sacituzumab tirumotecan vs platinum-based chemotherapy in EGFR-mutated NSCLC after EGFR-TKI progression Wen Feng Fang 07 2613O SARON Primary results: Randomized trial of consolidation radiotherapy for synchronous oligometastatic NSCLC Fiona McDonald 08 LBA69 SANOVO Phase III savolitinib or placebo + osimertinib in treatment-naïve advanced NSCLC with EGFR mutation and MET overexpression Yi-Long Wu 09 LBA71 PANKU-Lung01 Phase III izalontamab brengitecan in EGFR-mutant non-squamous NSCLC after progression on a third-generation EGFR TKI Li Zhang 10 LBA73 PACE-LUNG Single-arm phase II: Adding chemotherapy for EGFR-mutant NSCLC with persistent plasma EGFR-mutant ctDNA at week 3 of 1L osimertinib Martin Sebastian @dr_yakupergun

[Slide 1] THE LANCET Search for... ARTICLES · Volume 407, Issue 10548, P2607-2619, June 27, 2026 Download Full Issue Sacituzumab tirumotecan plus pembrolizumab versus pembrolizumab in PD-L1-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (OptiTROP-Lung05): interim analysis of a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial [Slide 2] A Progression-free survival Legend: Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab | Pembrolizumab [Inset table] Number of events/patients (%) | Median progression-free survival (95% CI) Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab 66/208 (32%) NR (13·6–NE) Pembrolizumab 128/205 (62%) 5·7 (4·3–7·0) Hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0·35 (95% CI, 0·26–0·47) p<0·0001 [12-month landmark labels on curves] 62 (54–70) ; 29 (22–37) Number at risk (censored) Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab: 208 (0), 208 (0), 195 (2), 187 (2), 182 (3), 164 (9), 144 (23), 126 (36), 120 (38), 90 (59), 62 (82), 47 (97), 20 (123), 18 (125), 1 (141), 0 (142) Pembrolizumab: 205 (0), 195 (5), 149 (6), 129 (7), 127 (8), 108 (11), 84 (21), 67 (26), 61 (28), 46 (39), 28 (51), 24 (55), 9 (69), 8 (70), 1 (76), 0 (77) A Tumour proportion score of 1 to 49% [Inset table] Number of events/patients (%) | Median progression-free survival (95% CI) Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab 40/125 (32%) NR (11·1–NE) Pembrolizumab 84/123 (68%) 4·3 (2·9–5·5) Hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0·28 (95% CI, 0·19–0·41) Number at risk (censored) Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab: 125 (0), 125 (0), 117 (2), 113 (2), 108 (3), 97 (8), 84 (17), 73 (26), 69 (27), 48 (42), 34 (53), 25 (62), 11 (75), 10 (76), 1 (84), 0 (85) Pembrolizumab: 123 (0), 117 (3), 81 (4), 67 (4), 66 (5), 53 (7), 38 (12), 27 (17), 24 (19), 16 (24), 11 (29), 10 (30), 2 (37), 1 (38), 0 (39), ·· (··) [Survival data captured as a table — no point estimates read from the curve] Endpoint: Progression-free survival (ITT; and TPS 1-49% subgroup) Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab (overall) | 208 | NR | 13·6–NE Pembrolizumab (overall) | 205 | 5·7 | 4·3–7·0 Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab (TPS 1-49%) | 125 | NR | 11·1–NE Pembrolizumab (TPS 1-49%) | 123 | 4·3 | 2·9–5·5 HR: 0·35 (overall); 0·28 (TPS 1-49%) HR CI: 0·26–0·47 (overall); 0·19–0·41 (TPS 1-49%) P: p<0·0001 (overall); not printed for TPS 1-49% Overall, at 12-month dashed line: 62 (54–70) Sac-TMT+pembro vs 29 (22–37) pembrolizumab Note: Values exactly as printed on the Lancet figure; unit for landmarks (%) inferred from the y-axis label 'Progression-free survival (%)'. [Slide 3] C Non-squamous NSCLC Legend: Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab | Pembrolizumab [Inset table] Number of events/patients (%) | Median progression-free survival (95% CI) Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab 29/123 (24%) NR (13·6–NE) Pembrolizumab 70/124 (56%) 6·6 (4·3–8·7) Hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0·28 (95% CI, 0·18–0·43) Number at risk (censored) Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab: 123 (0), 123 (0), 118 (0), 114 (0), 110 (1), 104 (4), 88 (17), 73 (30), 69 (32), 51 (47), 35 (60), 26 (69), 11 (84), 11 (84), 0 (94), ·· (··) Pembrolizumab: 124 (0), 116 (5), 89 (6), 76 (7), 75 (8), 66 (8), 51 (18), 38 (23), 34 (25), 25 (33), 15 (39), 12 (42), 4 (50), 4 (50), 1 (53), 0 (54) D Squamous NSCLC [Inset table] Number of events/patients (%) | Median progression-free survival (95% CI) Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab 37/85 (44%) NR (8·3–NE) Pembrolizumab 58/80 (73%) 5·5 (4·1–7·0) Hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0·44 (95% CI, 0·29–0·66) Number at risk (censored) Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab: 85 (0), 85 (0), 77 (2), 73 (2), 72 (2), 60 (5), 56 (6), 53 (6), 51 (6), 39 (12), 27 (22), 21 (28), 9 (39), 7 (41), 1 (47), 0 (48) Pembrolizumab: 80 (0), 78 (0), 59 (0), 52 (0), 51 (0), 42 (2), 33 (2), 29 (2), 27 (2), 21 (5), 13 (11), 12 (12), 5 (18), 4 (19), 0 (22), ·· (··) Time (months) [Survival data captured as a table — no point estimates read from the curve] Endpoint: Progression-free survival by histology Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab (non-squamous) | 123 | NR | 13·6–NE Pembrolizumab (non-squamous) | 124 | 6·6 | 4·3–8·7 Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab (squamous) | 85 | NR | 8·3–NE Pembrolizumab (squamous) | 80 | 5·5 | 4·1–7·0 HR: 0·28 (non-squamous); 0·44 (squamous) HR CI: 0·18–0·43 (non-squamous); 0·29–0·66 (squamous) P: not printed Note: Values exactly as printed. [Slide 4] B Tumour proportion score of 50% or greater [Inset table] Number of events/patients (%) | Median progression-free survival (95% CI) Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab 26/83 (31%) NR (NE–NE) Pembrolizumab 44/82 (54%) 9·5 (6·9–13·8) Hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0·47 (95% CI, 0·29–0·77) Time (months) Number at risk (censored) Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab: 83 (0), 83 (0), 78 (0), 74 (0), 74 (0), 67 (1), 60 (6), 53 (10), 51 (11), 42 (17), 28 (29), 22 (35), 9 (48), 8 (49), 0 (57), ·· (··) Pembrolizumab: 82 (0), 78 (2), 68 (2), 62 (3), 61 (3), 55 (4), 46 (9), 40 (9), 37 (9), 30 (15), 17 (22), 14 (25), 7 (32), 7 (32), 1 (37), 0 (38) [Survival data captured as a table — no point estimates read from the curve] Endpoint: Progression-free survival, TPS >=50% subgroup Sac-TMT plus pembrolizumab | 83 | NR | NE–NE Pembrolizumab | 82 | 9·5 | 6·9–13·8 HR: 0·47 HR CI: 0·29–0·77 P: not printed Note: Values exactly as printed.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 Industry Satellite Symposium Transforming the Treatment Journey in EGFR-Mutant NSCLC Sunday, 25 October 2026, 13:00-14:30 CET Cordoba Auditorium, Hall 4, IFEMA MADRID, Madrid, Spain Faculty Chaired by: Lizza Hendriks Maastricht University Medical Center, The Netherlands Antonio Passaro European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy Presented by: Stephen Liu MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, United States Antonio Calles Gregorio Marañón University General Hospital, Madrid, Spain Learning objectives After attending this symposium, participants should be able to: Evaluate emerging clinical evidence on targeted therapies supporting the management of patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC Apply recent data to optimize treatment strategies and patient outcomes in clinical practice

[Slide 1 - photo of conference stage/screen] 7th EOS 2026 Annual Conference EOS - Emirates Oncology Society Where We Are Today Standard of care for ES-SCLC is evolving Row 1: Chemotherapy + Immunotherapy -> Maintenance Lurbinectedin -> Tarlatamab -> ADC Row 2: Chemotherapy + Immunotherapy -> Maintenance Tarlatamab -> ADCs -> ? Row 3: ADC + Immunotherapy -> Maintenance Tarlatamab -> ? -> ? Georgetown | Lombardi Next: Dr. Fureder Thorsten - Targeting Rare and Atypical Driver Alterations: ROS1, HER2, NTRK

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 Top 10 Lung Cancer Trials to Watch 23 - 27 October 2026 | Madrid, Spain @DrRishabhOnco [illustrations: lungs, Madrid Cibeles palace] 1 TARGETED THERAPY & MOLECULARLY DEFINED NSCLC — NEXT-GENERATION TARGETED STRATEGIES 1 DeLLphi-305 LBA3 Tarlatamab + durvalumab vs durvalumab maintenance in ES-SCLC Can adding tarlatamab improve survival in ES-SCLC? 2 SAFFRON LBA6 Osimertinib + savolitinib vs platinum-pemetrexed after osimertinib in MET-altered EGFR+ NSCLC Can MET inhibition overcome resistance to osimertinib? 3 ANTIBODY-DRUG CONJUGATES (ADCs) — NEW ADCs EXPANDING TREATMENT OPTIONS 3 Krascendo 1 LBA5 Divarasib vs sotorasib or adagrasib in previously treated KRAS G12C NSCLC Can a next-generation KRAS G12C inhibitor improve outcomes? 4 OptiTROP-Lung06 LBA66 Sacituzumab tirumotecan + pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy + pembrolizumab in 1L PD-L1-negative nonsquamous NSCLC Can an ADC improve outcomes in PD-L1-negative NSCLC? 5 OptiTROP-Lung04 LBA67 Sacituzumab tirumotecan vs chemotherapy after EGFR-TKI progression in NSCLC (final OS) Does sacituzumab tirumotecan improve overall survival? 5 IMMUNOTHERAPY & OTHER STRATEGIES — NEW COMBINATIONS, NEW SETTINGS 6 SigVie-002 LBA68 Sigvotatug vedotin vs docetaxel in previously treated nonsquamous NSCLC Does an integrin αvβ6 ADC improve outcomes? 7 SARON 26130 Consolidation radiotherapy in synchronous oligometastatic NSCLC Does consolidation RT improve survival? 8 PERSEE 26140 Pembrolizumab alone vs pembrolizumab + chemotherapy in 1L NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥50% Is chemotherapy needed with pembrolizumab in high PD-L1 NSCLC? 9 DeLLphi-304 38080 Extended OS follow-up of tarlatamab in previously treated SCLC Long-term survival with tarlatamab in SCLC? 10 ASTRIDE 38090 Serplulimab vs atezolizumab + chemo in 1L ES-SCLC Does serplulimab improve survival in ES-SCLC?

[Slide 1] DATA FEATURED AT ESMO 2026 Madrid, Spain | October 23-27, 2026 Booth #8014 ORAL PRESENTATION: 2072O [CLINICAL] Efficacy and safety of lifileucel + pembrolizumab in ICI-naïve advanced melanoma: final results from IOV-COM-202 Date: Fri, Oct 23, 2026 Time: 16:15-17:45 RAPID ORAL PRESENTATION: 3725RO [CLINICAL] Lifileucel in patients with undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma or dedifferentiated liposarcoma Date: Mon, Oct 26, 2026 Time: 08:30-10:00 POSTER: 2125P [HEOR] Lifileucel vs nivolumab + relatlimab in anti-PD-(L)1-resistant advanced melanoma: a match-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) of efficacy outcomes POSTER: 2117P [HEOR] Indirect comparison of overall survival between lifileucel vs standard of care in US real-world settings in anti-PD-1-resistant advanced melanoma POSTER: 4359P [TRANSLATIONAL] Enrichment of putative tumor-reactive clones in NSCLC patients responding to lifileucel: temporal single cell analysis from a clinical trial HEOR, health economics and outcomes research IOVANCE BIOTHERAPEUTICS

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 / THORACIC ONCOLOGY Five lung cancer trials PREMEETING EVIDENCE SNAPSHOT • 21 OCTOBER 2026 Topline announcements ≠ full results. New LBA effect sizes not verified. LBA3 DeLLphi-305 ES-SCLC • Maintenance after durvalumab-platinum-etoposide Tarlatamab + durvalumab vs durvalumab SPONSOR TOPLINE: OS, PFS and ORR improved significantly. Watch: absolute OS gain, subsequent therapy, CRS and neurologic toxicity. LBA5 KRAScendo 1 Previously treated advanced KRAS G12C-mutated NSCLC Divarasib vs sotorasib or adagrasib SPONSOR TOPLINE: PFS and OS improved significantly. Watch: CNS efficacy, control-drug subgroups and hepatotoxicity. LBA6 SAFFRON EGFR-mutated NSCLC • MET overexpression/amplification post-osimertinib Osimertinib + savolitinib vs platinum doublet SPONSOR TOPLINE: PFS and OS improved significantly. Watch: MET assay thresholds, biomarker subgroups and tolerability. LBA67 OptiTROP-Lung04 EGFR-mutated NSCLC after EGFR-TKI progression • Final OS update Sacituzumab tirumotecan (sac-TMT) vs platinum chemotherapy PUBLISHED: PFS 8.3 vs 4.3 mo; HR 0.49 (95% CI 0.39-0.62). Prior interim OS HR 0.60 (95% CI 0.44-0.82). Final OS pending review. LBA66 OptiTROP-Lung06 First-line PD-L1-negative (TPS <1%) advanced nonsquamous NSCLC Sac-TMT + pembrolizumab vs chemotherapy + pembrolizumab SPONSOR TOPLINE: PFS improved; positive OS trend only. Watch: OS maturity, benefit magnitude, toxicity and quality of life. EVIDENCE KEY Sponsor topline = company-reported findings; numerical new LBA results not verified. Sources: Amgen, 08 Sep 2026; Roche, 02 Jul 2026; AstraZeneca, 17 Aug 2026; Kelun-Biotech, 14-15 Jul / 22 Sep 2026; Fang et al., NEJM, doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2512071. OS: overall survival • PFS: progression-free survival • ORR: objective response rate Gilberto Lopes | Evidence first. Clinical context matters.

[Slide 1] Proffered Paper session 2614O - Pembrolizumab with or without platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment in advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥50%: PERSEE phase 3 trial (GFPC 01-2020) Speakers Chantal Decroisette (Lyon, France, CEDEX) Lecture Time 10:25 - 10:35 Abstract Background Pembrolizumab (pembro) monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy are standard first-line options in advanced PD-L1 ≥50% NSCLC. We evaluated whether adding platinum-based chemotherapy improves outcomes versus pembro monotherapy. Methods This multicentre open-label phase 3 trial enrolled patients (pts) with untreated stage IV or not amenable to radiotherapy stage III PD-L1 ≥50% NSCLC, PS 0-1 and no EGFR/ALK alterations. Pts, stratified by histology and presence of brain metastases, were randomised (1:1) to pembro plus platinum-based chemotherapy (pembro-CT) (paclitaxel for squamous, pemetrexed for non-squamous histology) for four cycles followed by maintenance pembro + pemetrexed, or pembro alone. Primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS) by blinded central review (BCR) per RECIST v1.1. Key secondary endpoints included investigators assessed PFS, overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DoR) and safety. The study was powered to test the superiority for PFS of pembro-CT over pembro (HR 0.70), with 80% power and a two-sided alpha of 5%. Results Between December 2020 and December 2023, 321 pts were randomised across 28 French centres. Median age was 64 years (59-69), 32.4% of pts were female, 2.2% were non-smokers, 23.4% had brain metastases, and 19.6% had squamous histology. At the cut-off date of 7 April 2026, the median follow-up was 38.7 (35.3-41.6) months. By BCR, pembro-CT significantly improved PFS compared with pembro: HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.43-0.74; p <0.001; median 16.1 (11.0-34.1) vs 6.9 (5.5-9.3) months. Median PFS by investigators was 13.7 (9.3-25.4) vs 6.9 (4.7-9.2) months (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.46-0.78). Median OS was 50.2 (32.6-NR) vs 29.9 (23.4-47.9) months (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.57-1.05), ORR 77.5% vs 50.3%, DoR 30 (13.1-NR) vs 15.6 (9.8-32.8) months (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.59-1.24) for pembro-CT and pembro, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 TRAEs occurred in 53.8% and 19.3% of pts in the pembro-CT and pembro arms, respectively. Conclusions In first line treatment of advanced PD-L1 ≥50% NSCLC, PERSEE demonstrates a significant improvement of PFS with pembro-CT compared to pembro monotherapy and may help refine treatment selection. Clinical trial identification [cut off]

[Slide 1] Tarlatamab plus durvalumab (durva) vs durva as 1L maintenance (1LM) therapy following durva, platinum, and etoposide (1L durva + EP) in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC): Primary analysis of the phase 3 DeLLphi-305 trial Saturday, 24 Oct 2026 17:18 - 17:30 Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6 Save Note Session 24 Oct 16:30 Presidential Symposium I 1h45m

[Slide 1] MADRID 2026 ESMO Liquid Biopsy oral presentations selection at #ESMO26 [X] @isliquidbiopsy @RobertoBoreaMD [LinkedIn] InternationalSocietyOfLiquidBiopsy ISLB INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF LIQUID BIOPSY Abstract | Tumor Type | Title | Presenter | Location | Day&Time 2219RO | mCSPC | Utility of ctDNA tumor fraction (TF) as a prognostic biomarker in TALAPRO-3: phase 3 study of talazoparib (TALA) + enzalutamide (ENZA) vs placebo (PBO) + ENZA in patients (pts) with homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene-mutated metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) | Arun Azad (Australia) | Bilbao Auditorium Hall 3 | Fri, 23.10.26 14:02 - 14:07 4734O | Bladder Cancer | ctDNA analysis of the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-B15 trial: neoadjuvant and adjuvant (neoadj-adj) enfortumab vedotin (EV) + pembrolizumab (pembro) for participants (pts) with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) who are eligible for cisplatin | Jonathan Chatzkel (USA) | Barcelona Auditorium Hall 9 | Fri, 23.10.26 14:32 - 14:42 540RO | TNBC | Ultrasensitive monitoring of early ctDNA dynamics during neoadjuvant treatment in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer: Pre-interim results from the B-STRONGER-I study | Carlos Barcenas (USA) | Alicante Auditorium Hall 6 | Fri, 23.10.26 16:47 - 16:52 LBA73 | NSCLC | PACE-LUNG: A multicenter, single-arm, phase II clinical trial evaluating the efficacy of additional chemotherapy for patients with EGFRm NSCLC with the continued presence of plasma ctDNA EGFRm at week 3 after start of osimertinib first-line treatment (AIO-TRK-0422/ass) | Martin Sebastian (Germany) | Almeria Auditorium Hall 9 | Sat, 24.10.26 08:30 - 08:35 2719RO | NSCLC | FLAURA2: Analysis of on-treatment plasma EGFRm dynamics and associated clinical outcomes in patients (pts) with EGFRm advanced NSCLC treated with first-line (1L) osimertinib (osi) ± platinum-pemetrexed (plat-pem) | David Planchard (France) | Almeria Auditorium Hall 9 | Sat, 24.10.26 08:35 - 08:40 2636RO | NSCLC | Characterizing resistance mechanisms and predictors of early progression and long-term response to lorlatinib: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analyses from the CROWN study | Ben Solomon (Australia) | Almeria Auditorium Hall 9 | Sat, 24.10.26 09:05 - 09:10 787RO | mCRC | Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA)-guided re-treatment (re-tx) with encorafenib and cetuximab (EC) in patients (pts) with chemorefractory BRAFV600E mutated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): The proof-of-concept single arm phase II BRICKET trial by GONO | Marco Maria Germani (Italy) | Alicante Auditorium Hall 6 | Sat, 24.10.26 14:45 - 14:50 LBA36 | Endometrial Cancer | Clinical utility of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) for participants with resected, high-risk dMMR endometrial cancer (EC) receiving adjuvant treatment: Results from the ENGOT-en11/GOG-3053/KEYNOTE-B21 study | Lubomir Bodnar (Poland) | Barcelona Auditorium Hall 9 | Sat, 24.10.26 14:55 - 15:05 4244RO | NSCLC | NeoCOAST-2: Association of ctDNA clearance with clinical outcomes in a global platform phase 2 perioperative trial | Tina Cascone (USA) | Leon Auditorium Hall 4 | Sun, 25.10.26 08:30 - 08:35 LBA59 | CSCC | C-POST phase 3 trial of adjuvant (adj) cemiplimab (cemi) vs placebo (pbo) for high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC): Updated overall survival (OS) and outcomes from circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) analyses | Danny Rischin (Australia) | Granada Auditorium Hall 4 | Sun, 25.10.26 10:42 - 10:47 LBA94 | NSCLC | Error-corrected plasma whole-genome sequencing for personalised and tumour-agnostic minimal residual disease detection in TRACERx | Jonathan Wan (UK) | Cordoba Auditorium Hall 4 | Sun, 25.10.26 14:45 - 14:55 LBA35 | Lung Cancer | Tumor intrinsic and extrinsic origins of circulating genomic and proteomic biomarkers for early detection of lung cancer | Victor Velculescu (USA) | Granada Auditorium Hall 4 | Sun, 25.10.26 14:45 - 14:55 1536RO | HNSCC | ctDNA analysis of the phase 3 KEYNOTE-412 trial: Pembrolizumab (pembro) or placebo (pbo) + concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LA HNSCC) | Jean-Pascal Machiels (Belgium) | Madrid Auditorium Hall 4 | Sun, 25.10.26 14:50 - 14:55 4236O | CRC | Clinical significance of ultrasensitive ctDNA detection for molecular residual disease assessment in resectable colorectal cancer in MONSTAR-SCREEN-3 | Yuichiro Tsukada (Japan) | Cordoba Auditorium Hall 4 | Sun, 25.10.26 14:55 - 15:05 LBA62 | NSCLC | ctDNA clearance (CL) during neoadjuvant treatment (neoadj Tx) and its association with outcomes in patients (pts) with resectable/borderline resectable stage IIB-IIIB NSCLC from MDT-BRIDGE | Jonathan Spicer (Canada) | Burgos Auditorium Hall 3 | Mon, 26.10.26 10:35 - 10:40 1769RO | Breast Cancer | CTC characterization with the DETECT CTC score predicts therapy response in triple-positive aBC: Translational results of the phase III DETECT V study | Kerstin Pfister (Germany) | Alicante Auditorium Hall 6 | Mon, 26.10.26 11:17 - 11:22 1151RO | Multi-cancer | Efficiency and safety of cancer signal origin (CSO)-guided diagnostic workups following multi-cancer early detection (MCED) testing: Results from PATHFINDER 2 (PF2) | Dax Kurbegov (USA) | Salamanca Auditorium Hall 10 | Mon, 26.10.26 15:17 - 15:22

[Slide 2] [Photo: two women talking in an office] LATE-BREAKING ORAL PRESENTATION First global Phase 2 clinical data from ROSETTA Lung-107 evaluating an investigational PD-L1xVEGF-A bispecific immunomodulator plus chemotherapy in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer following prior immunotherapy BIONTECH

[Slide 1] Rapid Oral session 2618RO - Analysis of the phase 2 part of IFCT-2103 DIAL phase 2-3 randomized trial, comparing continuation pembrolizumab (± pemetrexed) up to 2 years versus observation (± pemetrexed), in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) with disease control (DC) at 6 months Speakers Anne Claire Toffart (La Tronche, France) Lecture Time 09:14 - 09:19 Abstract Background Optimal duration of 1L immunotherapy (io) in mNSCLC patients, with DC remains debatable. We aimed to study de-escalation by stopping pembrolizumab in patients with 6-months DC after chemo-io induction, as compared to 24 months. Methods This randomized open-label trial included treatment-naïve 18-75 yrs. mNSCLC patients (pts), ECOG PS 0-1, w/o actionable tumor molecular alteration, stratified according to PS, histology (SCC. vs. non-SCC), PD-L1 tumor level, sex and quality of response (stable vs. objective response). They received 4 cycles of 1L platinum-based chemo doublet+pembro, either paclitaxel-carboplatin, followed by maintenance pembro, for SCC patients or pemetrexed-platinum, followed by pembro + pemetrexed continuation for non-SCC patients. At 6 months, patients with DC were randomized 1:1 either to pembrolizumab (± pemetrexed in non-SCC patients) continuation until 2 years, or to observation (± pemetrexed). Primary outcome was 18-mo. overall survival (OS) from inclusion. Secondary outcomes included safety from randomization. Results From May 2022 to March 2024, 197 patients (68.0% male, 63.3y median age, 66% stage IVB, 70.6% adenocarcinoma), were accrued. 93 (47.2%) patients were randomized: to the continuation control arm (n=47) or the de-escalation arm (n=46). In Dec. 2025, the phase II analysis involved 84 first eligible patients (42 in each arm). Both arms were well balanced according to clinical and biological characteristics. Median follow-up was 27.9 months 95%CI [25.0 - 31.1]. At 18 months, 83.3%, 95%CI [72.1 - 94.6] were alive in the continuation arm vs. 88.1%, 95%CI [78.3 - 97.9] in the de-escalation arm. In the 93 randomized patients, grade 3-4 rates from randomization were 14.9% and 6.5%, while all-grade irAEs were 85.1% and 47.8%, in the continuation arms and the de-escalation arms, respectively. Conclusions In patients with 6-mo DC, similar rates of 18-mo OS were observed in both arms, while leading to lower frequency of irAEs in the de-escalation arm. Accrual in the trial phase 3 part is continuing.

[Slide 1] 2614O - Pembrolizumab with or without platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment in advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥50%: PERSEE phase 3 trial (GFPC 01-2020) Speakers Chantal Decroisette (Lyon, France, CEDEX) Lecture Time 10:25 - 10:35 Abstract Background Pembrolizumab (pembro) monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy are standard first-line options in advanced PD-L1 ≥50% NSCLC. We evaluated whether adding platinum-based chemotherapy improves outcomes versus pembro monotherapy. Methods This multicentre open-label phase 3 trial enrolled patients (pts) with untreated stage IV or not amenable to radiotherapy stage III PD-L1 ≥50% NSCLC, PS 0-1 and no EGFR/ALK alterations. Pts, stratified by histology and presence of brain metastases, were randomised (1:1) to pembro plus platinum-based chemotherapy (pembro-CT) (paclitaxel for squamous, pemetrexed for non-squamous histology) for four cycles followed by maintenance pembro + pemetrexed, or pembro alone. Primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS) by blinded central review (BCR) per RECIST v1.1. Key secondary endpoints included investigators assessed PFS, overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DoR) and safety. The study was powered to test the superiority for PFS of pembro-CT over pembro (HR 0.70), with 80% power and a two-sided alpha of 5%. Results Between December 2020 and December 2023, 321 pts were randomised across 28 French centres. Median age was 64 years (59-69), 32.4% of pts were female, 2.2% were non-smokers, 23.4% had brain metastases, and 19.6% had squamous histology. At the cut-off date of 7 April 2026, the median follow-up was 38.7 (35.3-41.6) months. By BCR, pembro-CT significantly improved PFS compared with pembro: HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.43-0.74; p <0.001; median 16.1 (11.0-34.1) vs 6.9 (5.5-9.3) months. Median PFS by investigators was 13.7 (9.3-25.4) vs 6.9 (4.7-9.2) months (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.46-0.78). Median OS was 50.2 (32.6-NR) vs 29.9 (23.4-47.9) months (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.57-1.05), ORR 77.5% vs 50.3%, DoR 30 (13.1-NR) vs 15.6 (9.8-32.8) months (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.59-1.24) for pembro-CT and pembro, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 TRAEs occurred in 53.8% and 19.3% of pts in the pembro-CT and pembro arms, respectively. Conclusions In first line treatment of advanced PD-L1 ≥50% NSCLC, PERSEE demonstrates a significant improvement of PFS with pembro-CT compared to pembro monotherapy and may help refine treatment selection.

[Slide 1] MADRID 2026 ESMO congress MADRID SPAIN 23-27 OCTOBER 2026 Neuroendocrine SELECTED ABSTRACTS Proffered paper: NETs and endocrine tumours | 26 October 2026 · 10:15-11:45 LBA57 - Opamtistomig (LBL-024) monotherapy in advanced extra-pulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma (EP-NEC) after ≥2 prior lines of therapies: results from a pivotal, registrational phase IIb study of a novel PD-L1×4-1BB bispecific antibody 2392O - Opamtistomig (LBL-024), a novel PD-L1×4-1BB bispecific antibody, combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced extrapulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma: Results from a phase Ib/II trial 2393O - First results from a phase 2 trial of second-line pumitamig (PD-L1 × VEGF-A bsAb) plus chemotherapy in unresectable neuroendocrine neoplasms 4208O - Updated results of randomized phase 3 study of selpercatinib vs cabozantinib or vandetanib (C/V) in advanced, kinase inhibitor-naïve, RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer (MTC) 4209O - Primary results from the SETHY trial: Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) in advanced/metastatic differentiated thyroid carcinoma (DTC) and anaplastic thyroid carcinoma (ATC) Rapid oral: NETs and endocrine tumours | 23 October 2026 · 16:15-17:45 2394RO - Latest efficacy and safety analysis of surufatinib combined with EP regimen and serplulimab as first-line treatment for extrapulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma 2395RO - Concomitant somatostatin analog use in second-line therapy of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: Survival results from the retrospective RetroSAUNA study 2396RO - Cohort level safety and efficacy results for [212Pb]VMT-a-NET in advanced somatostatin receptor subtype 2 (SSTR2+)-expressing neuroendocrine tumors (NETs): Cohorts 1-3 2397RO - Subgroup analysis of the ongoing phase Ib DAREON-7 study: Outcomes with first-line (1L) obrixtamig plus standard of care (SoC) in neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs) by DLL3 expression status 1202RO - Pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib in advanced adrenocortical carcinoma after failure of mitotane- and platinum-based chemotherapy: Phase II ACCOMPLISH trial (KCSG GU21-14) 4210RO - I-124 PET-guided risk-adapted versus broad adjuvant radioiodine therapy in differentiated thyroid carcinoma: Results from the randomized CLERAD-PROBE trial 4211RO - The efficacy and safety of becotatug vedotin and pucotenlimab in EGFR-positive unresectable anaplastic/poorly differentiated thyroid cancer: Preliminary results from a phase II clinical trial 4212RO - Molecular determinants of cabozantinib efficacy in advanced radioiodine-refractory (RAIR) differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC): The GETNE-CABOTHYROID trial 4213RO - BRAF V600E-mutant anaplastic thyroid carcinoma: Real-world outcomes of BRAF/MEK inhibition - A multicentre retrospective study from the French ENDOCAN-TUTHYREF network Nieves Martínez Lago · @DraMartinezLago | #ESMO26

[Slide 1] KRASCENDO 1 Divarasib at ESMO 2026 Head-to-head phase III • KRAS G12C-mutated NSCLC Conference preview • Full numerical data pending [Lung / KRAS icon] A direct randomized comparison of next-generation divarasib versus first-generation KRAS G12C inhibitors in previously treated advanced NSCLC. STUDY DESIGN • Population: previously treated advanced KRAS G12C-mutated NSCLC • Experimental arm: divarasib • Comparator: sotorasib or adagrasib • Trial: randomized phase III (KRASCENDO 1) WHAT ROCHE HAS REPORTED • Progression-free survival: clinically meaningful, statistically significant improvement • Overall survival: statistical significance achieved at interim analysis • Safety: consistent with prior data; no new safety signals reported WHAT IS STILL NEEDED • Effect sizes and hazard ratios • Absolute PFS and OS outcomes • Detailed toxicity and discontinuation data • Subgroup analyses and follow-up context ESMO 2026 Madrid, Spain Late-breaking abstract: LBA5 Presentation date: October 25, 2026 WHY IT MATTERS If the full results are convincing, divarasib could reshape treatment selection after progression in KRAS G12C-positive NSCLC. Until the full presentation, this remains a promising company-reported readout rather than a fully appraised practice-changing result. Sources: Roche press release, July 2, 2026; Roche ESMO 2026 update, October 19, 2026. [Tropical/Madrid skyline illustration]

[Slide 1] METASTATIC ESCC Choosing the Treatment Based on ESMO 2026 Clinical Practice Guideline MV Onco ↓ Fitness • Nutrition • PD-L1 ↓ FIRST LINE PD-L1 POSITIVE → Chemotherapy + ONE: • Nivolumab - TPS ≥1% • Pembrolizumab - CPS ≥10 • Tislelizumab - TAP ≥5% • Toripalimab - CPS ≥1* PD-L1 NEGATIVE / LOW → Platinum-based doublet chemotherapy (platinum + fluoropyrimidine or taxane) ↓ PROGRESSION ↓ Prior immunotherapy? YES → Taxane OR irinotecan NO → Nivolumab OR tislelizumab - Regardless of PD-L1 ① Selected patients with TPS ≥1%: Nivolumab + ipilimumab is an alternative. Caution: higher early-progression risk. ② CPS ≠ TPS ≠ TAP. Use the drug-specific cut-off. ③ *Toripalimab + cisplatin-paclitaxel: European approval is PD-L1-independent; the guideline algorithm uses CPS ≥1.

[Slide 1] SAFFRON | THE MET ESCAPE Can Dual Blockade Beat Chemotherapy? MV Onco [Diagram: lung tumour between EGFR and MET receptor schematics] EGFR-mutated NSCLC → Osimertinib → EGFR [blocked] → EGFR signalling blocked ✓ Acquired MET-mediated resistance → MET amplification / overexpression → MET bypass signalling → MET → Tumour growth continues Osimertinib + Savolitinib → OSIMERTINIB + SAVOLITINIB → DUAL EGFR + MET INHIBITION ① HOW COMMON IS MET-HIGH? Approximately 34% High MET overexpression and/or amplification after third-generation EGFR-TKI progression. ② HOW IS MET-HIGH DETECTED? • IHC: MET 3+ in ≥90% tumour cells OR • FISH: MET gene copy number ≥10 MET amplification ≠ MET exon 14 skipping. ③ SAVANNAH | PHASE II Osimertinib + savolitinib • ORR 56% • Median PFS 7.4 months ④ SAFFRON | PHASE III • 338 patients | Randomized • Osimertinib + savolitinib VS • Platinum + pemetrexed • PFS and OS superiority reported. Sponsor-reported topline findings. ⑤ ESMO 2026 • LBA6 | 25 OCTOBER • Presidential Symposium II • Prof. Shun Lu HOW LARGE IS THE SURVIVAL BENEFIT? Detailed numerical results awaited. FINAL TAKE-HOME SAVANNAH FOUND THE SIGNAL. SAFFRON REPORTED THE SURVIVAL BENEFIT. ESMO WILL REVEAL THE MAGNITUDE. [Slide 2] SAFFRON | PHASE III Why MET? Who Qualifies? How Was the Trial Designed? ESMO 2026 • LBA6 MV Onco 01 - WHY DOES OSIMERTINIB FAIL? EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC ↓ Osimertinib blocks EGFR signalling ↓ Tumour activates MET bypass signalling ↓ MET-driven acquired resistance Approximately 34% may develop high MET overexpression and/or amplification after third-generation EGFR-TKI progression. Prevalence depends on biomarker thresholds. 02 - WHAT EXACTLY IS MET-HIGH? MET AMPLIFICATION • Increased MET gene copy number. • Detected by FISH. MET OVEREXPRESSION • Increased MET protein expression. • Detected by IHC. SAFFRON MET-HIGH CRITERIA • IHC: 3+ staining in ≥90% of tumour cells OR • FISH: MET gene copy number ≥10 Either criterion can qualify. MET exon 14 skipping ≠ MET amplification. MET exon 14 skipping was NOT the selection biomarker. 03 - WHO ENTERED SAFFRON? • 338 patients | Global Phase III • Advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC • Common sensitizing EGFR mutations: Exon 19 deletion / L858R • Progression after first- or second-line osimertinib • High MET overexpression and/or amplification ↓ RANDOMIZATION 1:1 04 - WHAT WERE THE TWO ARMS? ARM A - DUAL TARGETED THERAPY: Osimertinib 80 mg OD + Savolitinib 300 mg BD VERSUS ARM B - CHEMOTHERAPY: Platinum + pemetrexed 05 - WHAT WAS THE TRIAL TESTING? • Primary endpoint: Progression-free survival (PFS) • Key secondary endpoint: Overall survival (OS) • Additional efficacy and safety assessments. THE CENTRAL QUESTION Can blocking EGFR + MET outperform chemotherapy after osimertinib resistance? BOTTOM TAKE-HOME EGFR remains the driver. MET becomes the escape route. SAFFRON targets both. PART 2 → SAVANNAH SIGNAL TO SAFFRON SURVIVAL RESULTS [Slide 3] SAFFRON | PHASE III From SAVANNAH Signal to Survival Benefit ESMO 2026 • LBA6 MV Onco 01 - WHAT DID SAVANNAH SHOW? Phase II | MET-high EGFR-mutated NSCLC After progression on first-line osimertinib. Osimertinib + savolitinib Primary efficacy population: • ORR 56% • Median PFS 7.4 months High MET defined by: • IHC 3+ in ≥90% tumour cells OR • FISH MET copy number ≥10 The biological signal was encouraging. 02 - DID RANDOMIZED PHASE II DATA SUPPORT IT? SAVANNAH randomized subset | n = 73 • Savolitinib + osimertinib (n = 48) vs • Savolitinib + placebo (n = 25) ORR: 58% vs 16% Median PFS: 8.3 vs 3.6 months Blinded independent central review. Exploratory randomized evidence supporting continued EGFR blockade alongside MET inhibition. 03 - WHAT HAS SAFFRON REPORTED? Global Phase III | 338 patients • Osimertinib + savolitinib vs • Platinum-pemetrexed August 2026 sponsor announcement: ✔ Statistically significant PFS improvement ✔ Statistically significant OS improvement ✔ Clinically meaningful benefit reported Important: Sponsor-reported topline results. Exact survival medians and HRs awaited. 04 - WHAT MUST ESMO REVEAL? Five questions that matter 1. How much longer is median PFS? 2. What is the PFS hazard ratio? 3. How large is the OS benefit? 4. What are the grade ≥3 toxicities? 5. Does benefit differ by MET IHC vs FISH status? Additional clinical question: Will dual EGFR/MET blockade become a preferred option after osimertinib progression? 05 - WATCH AT ESMO 2026 LBA6 | PRESIDENTIAL SYMPOSIUM II • 25 October 2026 • 16:30-18:15 CEST • Madrid, Spain • Presenter: Prof. Shun Lu • SAFFRON Phase III primary results. FINAL TAKE-HOME SAVANNAH identified the signal. SAFFRON reported a survival advantage. ESMO will tell us how much it matters. Positive topline ≠ complete clinical evidence.

[Slide 1] Rapid Oral session 789RO - TRIDENTE: A phase II study of rechallenge with encorafenib (ENCO), binimetinib (BINI), and cetuximab (CET) in BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) Speakers Daisuke Kotani (Kashiwa, Japan) Lecture Time 14:55 - 15:00 Abstract Background The BEACON CRC and BREAKWATER trials established ENCO + CET-based therapy as a standard-of-care for BRAF V600-mutant mCRC. Based on the efficacy of BRAF/MEK inhibitor rechallenge in BRAF V600-mutant melanoma, TRIDENTE trial evaluated the clinical utility of rechallenge with ENCO + BINI + CET in patients with BRAF V600E mutant mCRC who previously responded and then progressed on ENCO + CET-based therapy. Methods TRIDENTE (jRCTs031210511) is a multicenter, single-arm, phase II study. Key eligibility criteria included: RAS WT/BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC; ECOG PS 0-1; refractory or intolerant to fluoropyrimidine-based regimens and anti-PD-1 therapy (if MSI-H); and history of prior ENCO + CET-based therapy with at least a partial response (PR) followed by disease progression. A ENCO-free interval of ≥ 4 months after the last ENCO dose was required. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR). With a threshold ORR of 3% and an expected ORR of 20%, 21 patients were required (one-sided alpha = 0.05, power 80%). In exploratory analysis using circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), resistance genomic alterations were defined as mutations in KRAS, NRAS, MAP2K1, EGFR or amplifications in MET, BRAF, KRAS. Results Between Jan 2022 and Apr 2025, 21 patients were enrolled across 12 institutions. Median age was 58 years; 17 patients (81%) had ECOG PS 0. The median number of prior lines was 3. Previous ENCO + CET-based regimens were ENCO + CET (62%) and ENCO + CET + BINI (38%). The primary endpoint was met; ORR was 19.0% (90%CI, 6.8-38.4%), including 4 PRs. Stable disease was observed in 12 patients, and tumor shrinkage occurred in 11 patients (52.4%). Median PFS and OS were 2.8 and 9.6 months, respectively. No unexpected adverse events were observed. Among 20 patients with baseline ctDNA results, the ORR was 25.0% (3/12) in those without genomic alterations versus 12.5% (1/8) in those with alterations. Conclusions Rechallenge with ENCO + BINI + CET demonstrated clinical activity and manageable safety profile in patients with BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC who were initially sensitive but subsequently progressed on ENCO + CET-based therapy.

[Slide 1] [Roche logo] ESMO 2026 Industry Satellite Symposium Advancing the Frontiers of Lung Cancer Care Monday, 26 October 2026, 13:00–14:30 CET Oviedo Auditorium, Hall 5, IFEMA Madrid, Madrid, Spain Meeting Chair: Faculty: [headshots] Stephen V Liu — USA Ferdinandos Skoulidis — USA Terri Conneran — USA Margarita Majem — Spain Agenda: Welcome and Introduction: the Evolving Map of Lung Cancer Stephen V Liu Charting the Path Forward in KRAS G12C Lung Cancer Ferdinandos Skoulidis Walking the Path: a Patient Perspective of Living with KRAS-mutated Lung Cancer Terri Conneran Mapping the Role of Immunotherapy in Frail & Elderly Patients Margarita Majem Shifting Paradigms in ES-SCLC and the Next Wave of ADCs in Lung Cancer Stephen V Liu and Margarita Majem Panel Discussion, Q&A and Meeting Close Stephen V Liu, Ferdinandos Skoulidis and Margarita Majem [illustration: purple lung-tree with two clinicians] This scientific meeting is sponsored by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. It is intended for healthcare professionals outside the United States of America (US). Date of preparation: September 2026 M-XX-00024512

[Slide 1] SARON Systemic therapy +/- consolidation RT in oligometastatic NSCLC AGA-negative NSCLC 1-5 mets, <=3 organs Stable/responding after 6-8 wk SACT n = 140 → RANDOMIZE Continue SACT (n = 70) SACT + radical RT (n = 70) Primary RT delivered (ESMO 2026) 51 Conventional RT 11 SABR 62/70 received RT; 54 received SABR to >=1 metastatic site Primary OS: 28 vs 31 mo; HR 0.99 (95% CI 0.63-1.55), P = .95 Not statistically significant ESTRO 2025: thoracic safety substudy (n = 13) 55 Gy / 20 fx Primary CFRT: 10/13 pts (77%) 27 Gy / 3 fx Thoracic-metastasis SABR: 4/14 lesions Most common schedules in the substudy; not the full-cohort dose distribution. No G3+ RT-related acute toxicity in these 13 pts (through 3 months). McDonald et al. ESMO 2026, 2613O. Ratnakumaran et al. ESTRO 2025, 2471. Primary SABR: protocol N0 pathway. [Slide 2] [logos: SARON, Cancer Research UK, Cancer Trials Centre, UCL, RTTQA Radiotherapy Trials Quality Assurance] Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SABR) for Oligometastatic NSCLC Lung primary (+/- nodes) suitable for radical RT or SABR, with 1-5 synchronous oligometastatic disease ↓ 6-8 weeks induction systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) ↓ 140 patients randomised 1:1 Investigational arm: CFRT (Conventional fractionated radiotherapy) or SABR to primary (+/- nodes) & SABR / SRS (Stereotactic radiosurgery) to metastases Maximum of further 4-6 weeks of induction SACT + maintenance Control arm: Maximum of further 4-6 weeks of induction SACT + maintenance Thoracic SABR Safety Sub-Study (TSSS) Patients treated CFRT to primary (+/- nodes) & SABR to thoracic metastases [CT dose-wash images: sagittal, coronal and axial planes] Fig 1: Example of CFRT to primary & SABR to thoracic spine Report acute toxicity (<3months post radiotherapy) and dosimetric association

[Slide 1] ESMO EUROPEAN SOCIETY FOR MEDICAL ONCOLOGY | ESMO 2026 MADRID, SPAIN 23 – 27 OCTOBER 2026 RAPID ORAL SESSION Analysis of the phase 2 part of IFCT-2103 DIAL phase 2-3 randomized trial, comparing continuation pembrolizumab (± pemetrexed) up to 2 years versus observation (± pemetrexed), in patients with metastatic NSCLC with disease control (DC) at 6 months Anne Claire Toffart (Grenoble, France) Sunday, 26.10.2026 (09:14 - 09:19) | Rapid oral session: 09:14 - 09:19 POSTER Encorafenib plus binimetinib in patients (pts) with BRAFV600E-mutant advanced non-small cell lung cancer: updated efficacy and safety results from the IFCT-1904 ENCO-BRAF phase 2 trial Charles Ricordel (Rennes, France) Monday, 26.10.2026 (12:00 - 12:45) POSTER Quality assurance of delineation and dosimetry of the RTEP7-IFCT-1402 multicentre randomised phase II trial Laura Haas (Rouen, France) Monday, 26.10.2026 (12:00 - 12:45) POSTER (TRIAL IN PROGRESS) IFCT-2404 COMET: a phase III trial of tepotinib versus investigator's choice treatment in patients with pre-treated MET exon 14 skipping NSCLC Alexis Cortot (Lille, France) Monday, 26.10.2026 (12:00 - 12:45)

[Slide 1] TARLATAMAB IN SCLC Five Phase III DeLLphi Trials MV Onco DeLLphi TRIAL | SETTING | COMPARISON 304 | Second-line ES-SCLC | Tarlatamab vs chemotherapy 305 | Maintenance ES-SCLC, After chemo-durvalumab | Tarlatamab + durvalumab vs durvalumab 306 | Limited-stage SCLC, After concurrent CRT | Tarlatamab vs placebo 312 | First-line ES-SCLC, Induction + maintenance | Tarlatamab + chemo + durvalumab → Tarlatamab + durvalumab maintenance vs Chemo + durvalumab → Durvalumab maintenance alone 315 | Second-line ES-SCLC | Subcutaneous vs IV tarlatamab, Drug-exposure comparison ES = extensive stage | CRT = chemoradiotherapy

[Slide 1] 2719RO - FLAURA2: Analysis of on-treatment plasma EGFRm dynamics and associated clinical outcomes in patients (pts) with EGFRm advanced NSCLC treated with first-line (1L) osimertinib (osi) ± platinum–pemetrexed (plat–pem) Speakers David Planchard (Villejuif, France) Lecture Time 08:35 - 08:40 Abstract Background In the phase III FLAURA2 trial (NCT04035486), 1L osi + plat–pem led to significantly improved PFS and OS vs osi mono in pts with EGFRm advanced NSCLC. In our previous analysis, EGFRm clearance at Week (Wk) 3 and 6 was prognostic, but not predictive of a PFS benefit with osi + plat–pem vs osi mono. We report exploratory analyses of PFS and OS by plasma EGFRm clearance at Wks 1, 2, 3 and 6 to understand if EGFRm clearance rates differ between treatment arms, and to evaluate the use of early EGFRm circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) dynamics for identifying pts most likely to benefit from osi + plat–pem. Methods Pts with untreated EGFRm (Ex19del or L858R) advanced NSCLC were randomised 1:1 to receive either osi (80 mg QD) + plat–pem (Q3W; 4 cycles) followed by osi (QD) + pem (Q3W), or osi (QD) mono, until PD or discontinuation. BL and Wks 1, 2, 3 and 6 plasma EGFRm were analysed by ddPCR (Biodesix). Clearance was defined as undetected EGFRm ctDNA post-treatment start, where it was detected at BL. Association between clearance and PFS (by investigator assessment; DCO: 03 April 2023) and OS (DCO: 12 June 2025) was examined. Results Among pts with evaluable BL and Wk 1, 2, 3 and 6 plasma ddPCR results, the rate of clearance was 38%, 64%, 81%, and 88%, in the osi + plat–pem arm, respectively, and 42%, 64%, 71%, and 89%, in the osi mono arm, respectively. A consistent PFS and OS benefit was seen with osi + plat–pem vs osi mono, irrespective of clearance status (Table). Conclusions On-treatment EGFRm clearance was prognostic, but not predictive of PFS or OS benefit with osi + plat–pem at all timepoints; efficacy of osi + plat–pem was superior to osi mono regardless of clearance status. Clearance rates were comparable across treatment arms and timepoints. Studies using ultra-sensitive multi-marker ctDNA assays are planned to investigate early ctDNA dynamics as a predictive biomarker. Table: 2719RO [columns: Timepoint, Week | EGFRm clearance (Y/N) | Osi + plat–pem, n (%) | Osi mono, n (%) | Osi + plat–pem vs osi mono PFS HR (95% CI) | Osi + plat–pem vs osi mono OS HR (95% CI)] 1 | Y | 39 (38) | 55 (42) | 0.56 (0.31, 1.03) | 0.79 (0.45, 1.37) | N | 65 (63) | 76 (58) | 0.52 (0.34, 0.81) | 0.69 (0.47, 1.02) 2 | Y | 72 (64) | 85 (64) | 0.52 (0.34, 0.81) | 0.69 (0.46, 1.03) | N | 41 (36) | 48 (36) | 0.56 (0.33, 0.96) | 0.78 (0.48, 1.26) 3 | Y | 88 (81) | 100 (71) | 0.50 (0.34, 0.75) | 0.84 (0.58, 1.21) | N | 21 (19) | 40 (29) | 0.59 (0.30, 1.16) | 0.65 (0.36, 1.20) 6 | Y | 92 (88) | 122 (89) | 0.52 (0.36, 0.76) | 0.73 (0.52, 1.04) | N | 13 (12) | 15 (11) | 0.40 (0.16, 0.97) | 0.50 (0.22, 1.13) CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; N, no; Y, yes.

[Slide 1] DeLLphi-305 CAN WE DELAY THE NEXT RELAPSE? Final results awaited at ESMO 2026 MV Onco WHO ENTERED? EXTENSIVE-STAGE SCLC [Illustration: patient receiving infusion] After 3-4 cycles: Platinum + etoposide + durvalumab Disease controlled • ECOG 0-1 ↓ 563 patients → Randomized 1:1 TARLATAMAB + DURVALUMAB | DURVALUMAB ALONE [Mechanism diagram: T cell (CD3) - Tarlatamab - SCLC cell (DLL3, PD-L1) - Durvalumab] Recruit T cells + release the brake [Mechanism diagram: SCLC cell (PD-L1) - Durvalumab] Release the PD-L1 brake 01 THE QUESTION Does adding tarlatamab during maintenance help patients live longer? 02 WHAT IS ANNOUNCED? Sponsor reports improved: Overall survival • PFS • Response 03 WHAT DO WE STILL NEED? • Exact benefit • CRS / neurological toxicity • Quality of life • Treatment after progression Bring tarlatamab in before relapse? Positive topline announcement. Full numerical results awaited at ESMO 2026.

[Slide 1] Results Between December 2020 and December 2023, 321 pts were randomised across 28 French centres. Median age was 64 years (59-69), 32.4% of pts were female, 2.2% were non- smokers, 23.4% had brain metastases, and 19.6% had squamous histology. At the cut-off date of 7 April 2026, the median follow-up was 38.7 (35.3-41.6) months. By BCR, pembro-CT significantly improved PFS compared with pembro: HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.43-0.74; p <0.001; median 16.1 (11.0-34.1) vs 6.9 (5.5-9.3) months. Median PFS by investigators was 13.7 (9.3-25.4) vs 6.9 (4.7-9.2) months (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.46- 0.78). Median OS was 50.2 (32.6-NR) vs 29.9 (23.4-47.9) months (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.57- 1.05), ORR 77.5% vs 50.3%, DoR 30 (13.1-NR) vs 15.6 (9.8-32.8) months (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.59-1.24) for pembro-CT and pembro, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 TRAEs occurred in 53.8% and 19.3% of pts in the pembro-CT and pembro arms, respectively.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 / HEAD & NECK CANCER 1L R/M HNSCC HexAgon-HN [PRESS RELEASE] LBA42 • NCT06295731 [registry] DESIGN & TREATMENT Phase 2/3 • randomized Phase 2 primary analysis Ordastobart (INBRX-106; OX40 agonist) + pembro vs pembro POPULATION 68 randomized; 63 evaluable 1L R/M HNSCC PD-L1 CPS ≥20 Evaluable: combo n=29; control n=34 ENDPOINTS & READOUT Phase 2 primary: cORR 48.3% vs 26.5% Combo vs pembro alone Median PFS: 9.6 vs 4.9 mo Cutoff: 19 Aug 2026; PFS maturing CONTEXT PD-L1 CPS ≥20 selects a narrower population than KEYNOTE-048 (all-comers; CPS subgroups) and other 1L trials using CPS ≥1. OrigAMI-4 • Cohort 5 [ABSTRACT] 1539RO • NCT06385080 DESIGN & TREATMENT Phase 1b/2 • cohort analysis Subcutaneous amivantamab + pembro + carboplatin (carboplatin ≤6 cycles) POPULATION 30 treated; 29 evaluable 1L R/M HNSCC PD-L1 CPS ≥1 22 HPV-unrelated; 7 HPV+ oropharyngeal ENDPOINTS & READOUT Primary: investigator ORR 77% / 29% HPV-unrelated (17/22) / HPV+ (2/7), respectively RECIST v1.1; confirmed responses CONTEXT Ongoing randomized phase 3 OrigAMI-5 (NCT07276399) in HPV-unrelated disease compares against SOC platinum (carbo or cisplatin) + 5-FU + pembro. Izalontamab brengitecan + pembro [ABSTRACT] 1542RO • NCT06437522 DESIGN & TREATMENT Phase 2 • safety run-in + expansion EGFR×HER3 ADC + pembro Iza-bren 2.5 or 2.75 mg/kg, days 1 & 8 every 3 weeks POPULATION 78 in stage II (China) 1L R/M HNSCC 2.5 mg/kg: n=38 2.75 mg/kg: n=40 ENDPOINTS & READOUT Primary: ORR + RP2D 47.4% cORR At selected RP2D: 2.5 mg/kg ORR 55.3%; median PFS 8.2 mo Median follow-up: 11.9 mo CONTEXT Response rates broadly in range of other novel agents + pembro (e.g., petosemtamab, ficerafusp alfa). Cross-trial comparison only. LOCALLY ADVANCED HNSCC SMART-KEY [ABSTRACT] 1537RO • LACOG 0720 • NCT04943445 DESIGN & TREATMENT Phase 2 • single-arm 9 centers; cisplatin-free Carboplatin + paclitaxel + pembro induction → IMRT + pembro → pembro consolidation POPULATION 43 patients Newly diagnosed stage III–IVB glottic / supraglottic squamous cell carcinoma ENDPOINTS & READOUT Primary: 2-year LFS 65.1% 80% CI 54.9–73.5 Laryngectomy-free survival CONTEXT Interesting strategy replacing concurrent cisplatin with induction chemo (3 cycles) and pembro, continued for ~1 year overall. Patient selection (PD-L1 IHC, tumor burden) is key to interpreting this hypothesis-generating study. SUBSEQUENT-LINE R/M NPC TAISHAN-301 [PUBLIC INFO] LBA43 • NCT06629597 [registry] DESIGN & TREATMENT Phase 3 • randomized, open-label Tam-peli (YL201; B7-H3 ADC) vs investigator-choice docetaxel, capecitabine or gemcitabine POPULATION Heavily pretreated R/M NPC Prior PD-(L)1 inhibitor + ≥2 chemotherapy lines Analyzed sample size not given in cited release ENDPOINTS & READOUT Co-primary: BICR ORR + OS ORR endpoint met Sponsor-reported interim result OS immature; numerical efficacy not disclosed in cited release CONTEXT Similar randomized phase 3 NPC design supported China approval of EGFR×HER3 ADC iza-bren (ORR 54.6%). Both ADCs carry topoisomerase-I payloads.

[Slide 1] Primary results of SARON: a randomised-controlled trial of consolidation radiotherapy for synchronous oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer Sunday, 25 Oct 2026 10:15 - 10:25 Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6

[Slide 1] 2700RO - Improving prevention of moderate to severe dermatologic adverse events in EGFR-mutant advanced NSCLC treated with first-line (1L) subcutaneous (SC) amivantamab + lazertinib: First results from a new COCOON cohort Speakers Byoung Chul Cho (Seoul, Republic of Korea) Lecture Time 08:40 - 08:45 Abstract Background Dermatologic AEs are associated with EGFR-targeted therapies such as amivantamab (ami) + lazertinib (laz). EGFR inhibitor-associated secondary zinc deficiency is linked to increased risk of severe skin AEs. In the phase 2 COCOON study (NCT06120140), enhanced dermatologic management (DM; tetracycline for 12 wks, ceramide-based moisturizer, topical clindamycin, chlorhexidine) led to significantly reduced grade ≥2 dermatologic AEs of interest (DAEIs) by Wk 12 vs standard of care DM (42% vs 75%; P<0.0001) in pts receiving 1L intravenous (IV) ami + laz; scalp DAEIs were also meaningfully reduced (10% vs 26%; P=0.005). With COCOON DM, dose interruptions, reductions and discontinuations due to AEs were 55%, 27% and 12% (Cho JTO 2025). SC ami has shown shorter administration time (<5 min) and higher pt convenience vs IV (Leighl JCO 2024). Here are first results from a new COCOON cohort using an optimized DM regimen with zinc supplementation in pts receiving SC ami + laz. Methods 70 pts receiving SC ami on standard Q4W dosing + oral laz were enrolled. Pts also received optimized COCOON DM (oral tetracycline for 24 wks; ceramide-based moisturizer + oral zinc gluconate throughout the study; chlorhexidine for nails and clindamycin for scalp were omitted). Primary endpoint was incidence of grade ≥2 DAEIs by Wk 12. Results As of 24-Apr-26, 70 pts (median age, 63 y; 66% female) received ≥1 dose of SC ami + laz plus optimized COCOON DM (median follow-up, 3.8 mo). Among 65 pts with ≥12 wks of follow-up, overall incidence of grade ≥2 DAEIs by Wk 12 was 34%; 1 pt had grade 3 DAEIs; no grade 4–5 DAEIs were reported. Incidence of grade ≥2 DAEIs by Wk 12 was 5% for scalp and 18% for paronychia. Few pts had dose reductions (11%) or discontinuations (3%) due to AEs; 29% had interruptions. Updated results will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions These results suggest that SC ami + laz with an optimized COCOON DM regimen led to numerical reductions in grade ≥2 DAEIs vs IV ami + laz with standard COCOON DM. Few AE-related dose modifications/discontinuations were observed, supporting the benefit of proactive DM in pts receiving SC ami + laz.

[Slide 1] 2511O - Final analysis of adjuvant pembrolizumab (pembro) in resected early-stage non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Phase 3 PEARLS/KEYNOTE-091 study Speakers Mary E. O'Brien (London, United Kingdom) Lecture Time 15:43 - 15:53 Abstract Background At the second interim analysis (IA2) of PEARLS/KEYNOTE-091 of participants (pts) with resected, stage IB–IIIA NSCLC, adjuvant pembro improved DFS vs placebo in the ITT population (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63–0.91; P = 0.0014) and in the subgroup that received chemotherapy (chemo; HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.60–0.89). We report results, including OS, from the final analysis (FA) of PEARLS/KEYNOTE-091 (NCT02504372). Methods Eligible pts aged ≥18 y with completely resected, pathologically confirmed stage IB (T ≥4 cm), II, or IIIA NSCLC per AJCC v7 received ≤4 cycles of adjuvant chemo per local guidelines and were randomized 1:1 to 18 cycles (~1 y) of adjuvant pembro 200 mg or placebo Q3W. Primary endpoints were DFS per RECIST v1.1 by investigator assessment in the ITT and PD-L1 TPS ≥50% populations. Secondary endpoints included OS, lung cancer–specific survival (LCSS), and safety. Results 1177 pts were included in the ITT population (pembro, n = 590; placebo, n = 587). Median follow-up from randomization to data cutoff (Jan 21, 2026) was 87.7 (range, 68.6–120.1) mo. 6-y OS (95% CI) was 68.5% (64.5%–72.1%) for pembro and 66.4% (62.4%–70.1%) for placebo (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.81–1.18; P = 0.41826) in the ITT population and 68.9% (64.6%–72.8%) and 65.4% (61.0%–69.4%), respectively, in pts who received chemo (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.74–1.12). DFS and LCSS results are in the table. Grade ≥3 AEs occurred in 197/580 pts (34.0%) with pembro and 149/581 (25.6%) with placebo. Grade ≥3 immune-mediated AEs and infusion reactions occurred in 46 (7.9%) and 11 pts (1.9%), respectively. Conclusions At the final analysis of PEARLS/KEYNOTE-091, adjuvant pembrolizumab continued to demonstrate a consistent DFS benefit versus placebo in resected early-stage NSCLC, with a favorable trend in LCSS. Safety remained manageable. While OS did not show a statistically significant improvement, it was a secondary endpoint and the study was not powered to detect an OS benefit. Table: 2511O [columns: ITT Population — Pembro (n = 590) | Placebo (n = 587) ; Pts Who Received Chemo — Pembro (n = 506) | Placebo (n = 504)] DFS Median (95% CI), mo | 58.7 (47.0–70.4) | 43.3 (35.0–55.6) | 58.7 (47.0–70.5) | 39.1 (31.3–51.7) 6-y DFS (95% CI), % | 44.0 (39.7–48.2) | 39.2 (35.0–43.2) | 43.6 (38.9–48.1) | 38.1 (33.7–42.5) HR (95% CI) | 0.85 (0.73–0.98) [ITT] | 0.80 (0.68–0.94) [received chemo] LCSS Median (95% CI), mo | NR (NR–NR) | NR (NR–NR) | NR (NR–NR) | NR (NR–NR) 6-y LCSS (95% CI), % | 81.3 (77.7–84.4) | 76.9 (73.1–80.2) | 81.6 (77.7–84.9) | 75.0 (70.8–78.7) HR (95% CI) | 0.81 (0.63–1.03) [ITT] | 0.69 (0.53–0.91) [received chemo] NR, not reached.

[Slide 1] 3809O - Randomized trial of serplulimab or atezolizumab plus chemotherapy in USA patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ASTRIDE) Speakers David R. Gandara (Sacramento, United States of America) Lecture Time 14:55 - 15:05 Abstract Background Serplulimab (serplu), a programmed death 1 inhibitor, demonstrated significant survival benefits in the international, randomized phase 3 ASTRUM-005 study. ASTRIDE aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of serplu vs atezolizumab (atezo), in USA patients (pts) with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC), per FDA request. Methods Pts with histologically or cytologically confirmed ES-SCLC and ≤1 prior cycle of chemotherapy (chemo) for ES-SCLC were randomized 1:1 to receive up to 4 cycles of serplu (300 mg) or atezo, each in combination with carboplatin and etoposide, followed by maintenance serplu or atezo, respectively. Allowing 1 prior cycle of chemo reflected real-world practice. Treatments were administered intravenously every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). As a bridging study, the statistical design was descriptive only. Results From July 2022 to October 2025, 201 USA pts were enrolled at 63 centers and randomized to the serplu (n=101) or atezo (n=100) group. As of February 18, 2026, median follow-up was 14.1 months (mo, 95% CI, 11.4–18.5). The proportion of pts with liver metastasis was higher in the serplu group (49.5% vs 40.0%). Other baseline characteristics were balanced. In the ITT, median OS was 12.4 mo with serplu and 10.2 mo with atezo; 24-mo OS rates were 32.2% and 17.6%, respectively. Detailed efficacy results are shown below (Table). Outcomes also appeared more favorable with serplu in pts without prior 1-cycle chemo (Table). The incidence and severity of adverse events were comparable between groups, with no new safety signals identified. Table: 3809O Summary of efficacy [columns: ITT — Serplulimab (n=101) | Atezolizumab (n=100) ; Without 1-cycle chemo — Serplulimab (n=82) | Atezolizumab (n=76)] IRRC assessed ORR, % | 64.4 | 67.0 | 68.3 | 64.5 IRRC assessed DOR, months | 4.2 | 4.0 | 4.4 | 4.1 IRRC assessed median PFS, months | 5.4 | 4.9 | 5.5 | 5.2 HR (95% CI) | 0.95 (0.67, 1.35) [ITT] | 0.97 (0.65, 1.45) [without 1-cycle chemo] Median OS, months | 12.4 | 10.2 | 13.4 | 10.8 HR (95% CI) | 0.82 (0.56, 1.20) [ITT] | 0.77 (0.50, 1.17) [without 1-cycle chemo] OS rate at 24 months, % | 32.2 | 17.6 | 34.8 | 17.2 Median OS in pts without liver metastasis, months | 18.9 | 13.2 | 18.9 | 13.2 HR (95% CI) | 0.60 (0.33, 1.09) [ITT] | 0.63 (0.33, 1.19) [without 1-cycle chemo] Median OS in pts with liver metastasis, months | 8.6 | 8.2 | 9.0 | 8.4 HR (95% CI) | 0.85 (0.51, 1.42) [ITT] | 0.77 (0.43, 1.37) [without 1-cycle chemo] Conclusions Serplu plus chemo compared favorably with the comparator in this bridging trial, showing numerically longer OS and higher 24-mo OS rates vs atezo plus chemo in USA pts with ES-SCLC. These results support the benefit of serplu and the applicability of ASTRUM-005 findings to the USA population.

[Slide 1] DeLLphi-308 • Subcutaneous tarlatamab formulation • Will lowering the Cmax to reduce CRS • 15mg SC had similar exposure to 10mg IV Key Treatment-Related Adverse Events by Grade 15 mg Q2W SC-treated patients (n = 40) TRAE, n (%) | G1 | G2 | ≥ G3 | Overall CRS | 11 (28) | 4 (10) | 0 | 15 (38) ICANS | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 Injection site reactions | 18 (45) | 2 (5) | 0 | 20 (50) Dysgeusia | 14 (35) | 5 (13) | 0 | 19 (48) Neutropenia | 2 (5) | 2 (5) | 0 | 4 (10) CRS – IV, historical DeLLphi-304 (n = 252)[1] | 107 (42) | 32 (13) | 3 (1) | 142 (56) [Figure: swimmer plot, x-axis Duration of Treatment (Weeks) and Best Overall Response, 0–70; legend: Partial Response (green), Stable Disease (blue), Progressive Disease (red), Not Evaluable (grey), • First PD, ▶ Ongoing Treatment. Longest bars ~55–60 weeks ongoing.] Rocha, WCLC 2026 Georgetown | Lombardi [Podium placard: 12TH ALL IRELAND LUNG CANCER CONFERENCE, Johnstown House Hotel, Enfield, Co. Meath, Friday 16th / Saturday 17th October 2026 — LUNG CANCER RAPID FIRE] [Slide 2] Tambotatug Pelitecan (Tam-Peli, YL201) • TAISHAN-302 – Phase III trial, 2L SCLC, China only, tam-peli vs topotecan Key eligibility criteria: • Histologically or cytologically confirmed SCLC • Progressed after 1 prior line of platinum-based therapy • At least one measurable lesion per RECIST v1.1 • ECOG PS 0-1 R 1:1 N=451 Treatment until disease progression per RECIST v1.1 or intolerable toxicity. Crossover between arms is not permitted. Tam-Peli: 2.0 mg/kg, D1 Q3W, maximum dose of 200 mg Topotecan: 1.2 mg/m2, D1-5 Q3W* Stratification factors • Disease status (local** or systemic disease) • Brain metastasis (yes or no) • Chemotherapy-free interval (<90 or ≥90 days) Primary endpoint: • OS Key secondary endpoints: • PFS by investigators • ORR by investigators Other secondary endpoints: • DCR, DoR, TTR by investigators • Safety, PK, and immunogenicity Exploratory endpoints: • Intracranial efficacy Zhang, WCLC 2026; Zhao, NEJM 2026 Georgetown | Lombardi [Figure: trial schema with randomisation circle and two arm boxes.] [Podium placard: 12TH ALL IRELAND LUNG CANCER CONFERENCE — LUNG CANCER RAPID FIRE] [Slide 3] Where We Are Today • Standard of care for ES-SCLC is evolving [Row 1 (blue):] Chemotherapy + Immunotherapy → Maintenance Lurbinectedin → Tarlatamab → ADC [Row 2 (blue/teal):] Chemotherapy + Immunotherapy → Maintenance Tarlatamab → ADCs → ? [Row 3 (green):] ADC + Bispecifics + Tarlatamab → ? → ? → ? Georgetown | Lombardi [Figure: three chevron sequence rows; speaker at podium, two panellists seated at right.] [Podium placard: 12TH ALL IRELAND LUNG CANCER CONFERENCE — LUNG CANCER RAPID FIRE]

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 / MADRID EVIDENCE NOTES [ESMO Congress Madrid 2026 logo] PRESIDENTIAL SYMPOSIA / 1 WHICH DATA WILL ACTUALLY CHANGE CARE? Five positive Phase 3 toplines • Effect sizes still await Madrid 01 INTerpath-001 | LBA1 · OCT 24 Resected stage IIB–IV melanoma · adjuvant · n=1,137 ARMS Intismeran + pembrolizumab ↔ pembrolizumab KNOWN RFS + DMFS met READOUT Phase 2b RFS HR 0.51; Phase 3 HR and absolute gain? 02 VOLGA | LBA2 · OCT 24 Cisplatin-ineligible MIBC · cystectomy · n=695 ARMS Durvalumab + enfortumab vedotin ↔ surgery ± adjuvant care KNOWN EFS + OS met READOUT Absolute OS, surgery completion and toxicity 03 DeLLphi-305 | LBA3 · OCT 24 Extensive-stage SCLC · first-line maintenance · n=563 ARMS Tarlatamab + durvalumab ↔ durvalumab KNOWN OS + PFS met READOUT Survival gain, CRS and monitoring burden 04 KRAScendo 1 | LBA5 · OCT 25 KRAS G12C NSCLC · head-to-head · n=338 ARMS Divarasib ↔ sotorasib / adagrasib KNOWN PFS + OS met READOUT Absolute gain over sotorasib/adagrasib 05 SAFFRON | LBA6 · OCT 25 EGFR-mutant NSCLC · MET resistance after osimertinib ARMS Savolitinib + osimertinib ↔ platinum + pemetrexed KNOWN PFS + OS met READOUT MET threshold, OS magnitude and toxicity Positive company toplines. Full HRs, confidence intervals and event counts are still needed. 19 OCT 2026 • ESMO programme + sponsor toplines drozdogan.com

[Slide 1] 3816RO - SKB500 (a novel B7-H3–targeted antibody-drug conjugate) in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC): Results from a phase I study Speakers Haifeng Liu (Changchun, China) Lecture Time 10:20 - 10:25 Abstract Background SKB500 is an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) targeting B7 homolog 3 (B7-H3), an antigen overexpressed in many solid tumors, comprising an antibody conjugated to a topoisomerase I inhibitor payload via a cleavable pyrimidine-tripeptide linker. Here we present updated safety and antitumor activity of SKB500 in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) from the multicenter, open-label phase I study (NCT06736327). Methods In this phase I study, heavily pretreated patients (pts) with unresectable SCLC were enrolled in expansion cohorts and received SKB500 at 12 mg/kg or 16 mg/kg every three weeks (Q3W) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary efficacy endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. Results As of April 20, 2026, 61 pts were treated and followed up for ≥6 weeks at 12 mg/kg (n=40) and 16 mg/kg (n=21), with a median follow-up of 4.6 months. All pts had received platinum-based therapy, with 85.2% having previously received PD-(L)1 inhibitor therapy. The ORR was 67.2% (70.0% for 12 mg/kg vs 61.9% for 16 mg/kg), with a median DoR of 5.8 months and a median PFS of 7.2 months (Table). Biomarker analysis indicated that B7-H3 expression showed no significant predictive value for treatment outcomes, while preliminary data suggested a correlation between SLFN11 levels and clinical activity. A lower frequency of Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) was observed in the 12 mg/kg than in the 16 mg/kg cohort (Table). The most common Grade ≥3 TRAEs were white blood cell count decreased (12 mg/kg: 15.0% vs 16 mg/kg: 28.6%), lymphocyte count decreased (10.0% vs 28.6%), platelet count decreased (10.0% vs 9.5%), and anemia (7.5% vs 19.0%). Table: 3816RO | 12 mg/kg Q3W (N=40) | 16 mg/kg Q3W (N=21) ORR, % (95% CI) | 70.0 (53.5, 83.4) | 61.9 (38.4, 81.9) cORR, % (95% CI) | 55.0 (38.5, 70.7) | 47.6 (25.7, 70.2) DCR, % (95% CI) | 95.0 (83.1, 99.4) | 81.0 (58.1, 94.6) mDoR, mo (95% CI) | 5.8 (3.1, NE) | 5.8 (2.6, NE) mPFS, mo (95% CI) | 7.2 (4.3, NE) | 5.6 (3.9, NE) 6-mo PFS rate, % (95% CI) | 57.6 (34.6, 75.0) | 41.8 (14.9, 67.1) mOS, mo (95% CI) | NR (NE, NE) | NR (4.4, NE) 6-mo OS rate, % (95% CI) | 84.2 (65.3, 93.3) | 60.2 (26.8, 82.2) Grade ≥3 TRAEs, n (%) | 19 (47.5) | 13 (61.9) TRAEs leading to dose discontinuation, n (%) | 1 (2.5) | 0 DCR, disease control rate; DoR, duration of response; PFS, progression-free survival; OS, overall survival. Conclusions SKB500 demonstrated a more favorable safety profile and better clinical activity at 12 mg/kg than at 16 mg/kg in pts with SCLC, supporting further clinical development.

[Slide 1] 3808O - Tarlatamab in previously treated SCLC: Extended follow-up of overall survival from the phase 3 DeLLphi-304 trial Speakers Charles M. Rudin (New York, United States of America) Lecture Time 14:45 - 14:55 Abstract Background Tarlatamab, a DLL3-targeting bispecific T-cell engager (BiTE®) immunotherapy, demonstrated a 40% reduced risk of death and a favorable safety profile vs chemotherapy (CTx) in patients (pts) with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) after first-line (1L) platinum-based CTx. The initial publication was based on a median follow-up of only 11.2 months (mo). We now report long-term efficacy and safety data from DeLLphi-304. Methods Pts were randomized 1:1 to tarlatamab or CTx (topotecan, lurbinectedin or amrubicin). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), disease control (DC), duration of response (DOR), and safety. Results With extended follow-up (median 23 mo), tarlatamab continued to show lower risk of death vs CTx (HR 0.62; 95% CI, 0.51–0.76), with longer OS (median 13.6 vs 8.4 mo). The reduced mortality risk was maintained across high-risk subgroups, including pts with baseline platinum-resistant disease and those with brain metastases (Table). Tarlatamab showed consistent benefit in PFS vs CTx (HR 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57–0.84; median 4.2 vs 3.2 mo). OS at 18 mo was higher with tarlatamab (42% vs 24%), as was 12-mo PFS (21% vs 6%), indicating sustained benefit. DOR was longer with tarlatamab vs CTx (Table), with more ongoing responses at 12 mo (42% vs 10% of responders), and a higher proportion with sustained (≥ 52 week) DC (24% vs 4%). Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs; 28% vs 63%) and discontinuations due to TRAEs (3% vs 7%) were less frequent with tarlatamab vs CTx. Tarlatamab showed long-term tolerability with TRAEs decreasing over time and no new safety signals. Table: 3808O Long-term Efficacy Outcomes | Tarlatamab n = 254 | CTx n = 255 OS Median, mo | 13.6 (11.9–15.8) | 8.4 (7.2–10.2) HR overall | 0.62 (0.51–0.76) HR (subgroup): platinum-resistant disease† | 0.65 (0.48–0.86) HR (subgroup): baseline brain metastases | 0.52 (0.38–0.70) 12-mo OS, % | 56 (50–62) | 39 (33–45) 18-mo OS, % | 42 (36–48) | 24 (19–29) PFS* Median, mo | 4.2 (3.0–4.4) | 3.2 (2.9–4.2) HR overall | 0.69 (0.57–0.84) 12-mo PFS, % | 21 (16–26) | 6 (3–10) DOR,* median, mo | 7.1 (4.5–12.4) | 5.5 (4.2–5.7) DC Rate,* % | 68 (62–74) | 64 (58–70) Sustained DC* (≥ 52 weeks), n (%) | 62 (24) | 11 (4) *Per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 †Platinum-resistant: chemotherapy-free interval < 90 days Parentheses show 95% CI unless noted Conclusions With extended follow-up, tarlatamab demonstrated a durable survival benefit with a manageable safety profile vs CTx, with no new safety signals, reinforcing its role as the standard of care treatment in pts with SCLC after 1L platinum-based CTx, including those with high-risk disease.

[Slide 1] Dr. Aakash Desai Associate Director, Phase 1 and Precision Oncology @ADesaiMD My Top Picks for ESMO 2026! CLINICAL REVIEW ESMO Congress 2026 · Madrid · Oct 23–27 · Thoracic phase 3 readouts and early-phase ADCs, ranked 7 | 2658RO | c-Met ADC Temab-A Telisotuzumab adizutecan: c-Met-directed ADC with a Top1i payload Phase 1 first-in-human study, overall survival analysis in nonsquamous NSCLC Rapid Oral 1: NSCLC, metastatic Sat Oct 24 · 09:27 CEST AbbVie reports: EGFR wild-type (n=48): ORR 50%, median OS 13.8 mo EGFR-mutant (n=41): ORR 63%, median OS 16.2 mo EGFR wild-type, c-Met 3+ ≥25%: median OS ~19.2 mo Watching: Does c-Met expression level select who benefits? Phase 3 AndroMETa-Lung-167 vs standard of care is underway. 1 | LBA6 | EGFR + MET SAFFRON Osimertinib + savolitinib vs platinum–pemetrexed EGFRm, MET-overexpressed and/or amplified NSCLC after osimertinib Presidential Symposium II Sun Oct 25 · 16:54 CET Sponsor topline: PFS and OS met (AstraZeneca / HUTCHMED) Watching: How large is the benefit, and which MET IHC/FISH cutoff selects patients? 2 | LBA3 | DLL3×CD3 DeLLphi-305 Tarlatamab + durvalumab vs durvalumab 1L maintenance in ES-SCLC after durvalumab + platinum–etoposide Presidential Symposium I Sat Oct 24 · 17:18 CEST Sponsor topline: OS met at interim; PFS and ORR also met (Amgen) Watching: How big is the OS gain, and can clinics deliver T-cell engager monitoring in maintenance? 3 | LBA5 | KRAS G12C Krascendo 1 Divarasib vs sotorasib or adagrasib Previously treated KRAS G12C-mutated advanced NSCLC Presidential Symposium II Sun Oct 25 · 16:30 CET Sponsor topline: PFS met; OS significant at interim (Roche) Watching: How wide is the gap within the G12C class, and at what tolerability? 4 | LBA66 | TROP2 ADC OptiTROP-Lung06 Sac-TMT + pembrolizumab vs chemo + pembrolizumab 1L PD-L1-negative (TPS <1%) nonsquamous NSCLC Proffered Paper 1: NSCLC, metastatic Sun Oct 25 · 10:53 CET Sponsor topline: PFS met at interim; positive OS trend (Kelun-Biotech) Watching: Can a TROP2 ADC replace the platinum doublet alongside IO? 5 | LBA71 | EGFR×HER3 PANKU-Lung01 Iza-bren (bispecific ADC) vs platinum–pemetrexed EGFR-mutant nonsquamous NSCLC after a 3rd-gen EGFR TKI Proffered Paper 2: NSCLC, metastatic Mon Oct 26 · 09:14 CET Sponsor topline: PFS met at interim (Sichuan Biokin) Watching: First effect sizes: how big is the PFS gain, and at what toxicity? 6 | 3837RO | SEZ6 ADC ABBV-706 SEZ6-directed Top1i ADC, phase 1 Relapsed/refractory SCLC Rapid Oral: Non-metastatic NSCLC and other thoracic Mon Oct 26 · 10:15 CET AbbVie reports: ORR 56%, median OS 12.4 mo at 1.8 mg/kg (2L+, n=41) Watching: Where does SEZ6 fit next to DLL3 and B7-H3 in SCLC? Key Clinical Impacts & Future Directions • After osimertinib: MET (SAFFRON), TROP2 (OptiTROP-Lung04 final OS, LBA67) or EGFR×HER3 (PANKU-Lung01): which patients get which next step? • ES-SCLC: Does tarlatamab move into 1L maintenance, and how does that reshape later lines (DLL3, SEZ6, B7-H3)? • KRAS G12C: Does a next-generation inhibitor reset the second-line standard? • 1L PD-L1-negative: Can an ADC replace platinum chemotherapy alongside pembrolizumab? • Biomarkers: MET IHC/FISH, c-Met level, SEZ6: which assays will we need at diagnosis and at progression? • Phase 1 to phase 3: Will early ADC signals hold up against standard of care? Times are Madrid local (CEST on Oct 24; CET from Oct 25). Toplines are as stated in sponsor releases; full data pending. Not medical advice. Source: ESMO 2026 Congress program | Design: Dr. Aakash Desai

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 | MADRID EVIDENCE NOTES MADRID 2026 ESMO congress [logo] PRESIDENTIAL SYMPOSIA / 2 SAFFRON Targeting MET-driven resistance after osimertinib in EGFR-mutated NSCLC MET overexpression/amplification • Targeted combination • OS and PFS positive [lung illustration with inset: MET overexpression / amplification] 01 DISEASE & PATIENT POPULATION • EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC • Progressed after osimertinib • MET overexpression and/or gene amplification • Second-line setting Why it matters? • MET activation is a key resistance mechanism after osimertinib. • A targeted strategy in a biomarker-selected population addresses an important unmet need. 02 STUDY DESIGN Phase 3 Randomized open-label n = 345 MET overexpression and/or amplification International multicenter Second-line after osimertinib 03 TREATMENT ARMS Osimertinib + savolitinib (MET inhibitor) VS Platinum + pemetrexed (investigator's choice) 04 KEY RESULTS (Company topline, presented at ESMO 2026) Progression-free survival (PFS) POSITIVE HR, median values and 95% CI not yet disclosed Overall survival (OS) POSITIVE HR, median values and 95% CI not yet disclosed 05 TAKE-HOME POINTS Addresses a key resistance mechanism Targets MET overexpression/amplification after osimertinib in EGFR-mutated NSCLC. Both PFS and OS met primary endpoints First randomized data showing improvement in both PFS and OS in this biomarker-selected setting. Key questions remain • Magnitude of benefit (HR, medians) • Safety profile and grade ≥3 AEs • Access and regulatory strategy • Generalizability beyond the study population ! A positive press release is not a clinical verdict. Read the full data, absolute benefit, toxicity and patient selection when results are presented. 19 OCT 2026 • ESMO program + company press release drozdogan.com

[Slide 1] 4156RO - Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment in recurrent/metastatic thymic carcinoma: Results from the iTHYM phase II study Speakers Xue Hou (Guangzhou, China) Lecture Time 11:07 - 11:12 Abstract Background Recurrent or metastatic thymic carcinoma is a rare and aggressive malignancy with limited prospective evidence for systemic treatment. Platinum-based chemotherapy remains a standard first-line option, but durable disease control remains suboptimal. This study aimed to evaluate ivonescimab, a PD-1/VEGF bispecific antibody, combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for this population. Methods iTHYM is a prospective, multi-center, single-arm phase II study of ivonescimab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel as first-line treatment for recurrent/metastatic thymic carcinoma, followed by ivonescimab maintenance until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival rate (PFS6m); secondary endpoints included ORR, DCR, DoR, PFS, OS, and safety. Simon's two-stage design defined success as no more than 10 progression events at 6 months among 24 treated patients (NCT06750952). Results As of July 31, 2026, 24 patients were enrolled and treated. Among 24 evaluable for response, 20 achieved partial response and 4 had stable disease, yielding an ORR of 83.3% and a DCR of 100.0%. Nineteen patients were evaluable for the primary endpoint, and all 19 remained progression-free at 6 months. After a median follow-up of 10.2 months, four patients experienced progression at 7.0, 8.1, 10.8, and 18.2 months. Based on the pre-specified Simon decision rule, the study met its primary endpoint of PFS6m. Median PFS and OS were not reached. Safety was manageable and consisted mainly of chemotherapy-related hematologic toxicities; ivonescimab-related adverse events were mostly low-grade, including hemorrhage (oral hemorrhage and epistaxis) (9/24, 37.5%), rash/pruritus (8/24, 33.3%), and proteinuria (3/24, 12.5%). Grade 3 proteinuria occurred in 2/24 (8.3%); Grade 3 acute coronary syndrome occurred in 1/24 (4.2%), leading to permanent discontinuation of ivonescimab. Conclusions Ivonescimab plus taxanes and carboplatin showed encouraging antitumor activity and manageable safety as first-line treatment for recurrent/metastatic thymic carcinoma. The iTHYM study met its pre-specified primary endpoint of 6-month PFS rate. Longer follow-up is ongoing to define the final PFS6m estimate, durability of benefit, and long-term outcomes.

[Slide 1] 2519O - Association of biomarkers with efficacy in the phase 3 KEYNOTE-671 study of perioperative pembrolizumab (Pembro) plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy (Chemo) in early-stage non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) Speakers Marina C. Garassino (Chicago, United States of America) Lecture Time 15:33 - 15:43 Abstract Background In KEYNOTE-671, perioperative pembro plus neoadjuvant chemo improved EFS, OS, major pathological response (MPR), and pathological complete response (pCR) vs neoadjuvant chemo and surgery in resectable stage II–IIIB (N2) NSCLC. We report associations of 18-gene T-cell–inflamed gene expression profile (TcellinfGEP) and tumor mutational burden (TMB) with efficacy in KEYNOTE-671, and present EFS and OS by TcellinfGEP, TMB, and KRAS mutation status. Methods Participants (pts) in this post hoc analysis had an evaluable baseline tumor sample, which was used for RNA sequencing (RNAseq) to assess TcellinfGEP and whole exome sequencing (WES) for TMB and KRAS mutation status (also with matched-normal sample). Associations of TcellinfGEP and TMB with EFS and OS were analyzed by an adjusted Cox proportional hazards model and with MPR and pCR by a logistic regression model; 1-sided (pembro) and 2-sided (placebo) P values were calculated (prespecified α = 0.05). Analyses of EFS and OS in biomarker-based subgroups were performed. Results Of 797 pts, 387 had RNAseq data (pembro, n = 198; placebo, n = 189) and 459 had WES data (pembro, n = 230; placebo, n = 229). TcellinfGEP was positively associated with EFS (P = 0.021) and MPR (P = 0.019) for pembro, with OS for placebo (P = 0.002). TMB was positively associated with EFS (P = 0.000164) and OS (P = 0.005) for pembro and with MPR (pembro, P = 0.001; placebo, P = 0.014) and pCR (pembro, P = 0.000695; placebo, P = 0.044) for both arms. EFS and OS HRs were generally comparable across subgroups by TcellinfGEP, TMB, and KRAS mutation status (Table). Table: 2519O Associations of biomarkers with EFS and OS in the pembro vs placebo arm [columns: N | EFS^a HR (95% CI) | OS HR (95% CI)] TcellinfGEP low (<1st tertile) | 129 | 0.71 (0.46–1.11) | 0.59 (0.36–0.97) TcellinfGEP high (≥1st tertile) | 258 | 0.53 (0.38–0.75) | 0.82 (0.55–1.22) TMB low (<175 mutation/exome) | 266 | 0.63 (0.47–0.86) | 0.70 (0.49–1.01) TMB high (≥175 mutation/exome) | 193 | 0.49 (0.32–0.73) | 0.67 (0.40–1.12) KRAS mutation^b | 86 | 0.73 (0.42–1.28) | 0.88 (0.45–1.75) KRAS wild-type^b | 169 | 0.75 (0.50–1.12) | 0.85 (0.49–1.47) ^aPer RECIST version 1.1 by investigator. ^bMatched normal nonsquamous only. Conclusions Positive associations of baseline TcellinfGEP and TMB with efficacy were observed for both treatment arms. The benefits of perioperative pembro vs neoadjuvant chemo were observed regardless of TcellinfGEP, TMB, and KRAS mutation status, supporting its use for early-stage NSCLC.

[Slide 1] 2617RO - Phase I study of TIL therapy in combination with chemoimmunotherapy in ≥2nd line advanced NSCLC patients Speakers Laurie Steinbusch (Leiden, Netherlands) Lecture Time 08:57 - 09:02 Abstract Background Based on (pre)clinical studies Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes (TIL) treatment may be a potent therapeutic option in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However toxicities associated with preconditioning treatment is a limiting factor for elderly patients (pts) with comorbid conditions such as NSCLC pts. Our group has shown that carboplatin and paclitaxel is a less toxic option while preserving optimal conditions for the infused TIL. We assessed safety of TIL therapy preceded by chemotherapy with or without (w/wo) immunotherapy. Methods This is a single-arm, single-center, phase 1 study, evaluating TIL therapy in adult pts with advanced NSCLC with progressive disease on first-line treatment of (chemo)immunotherapy and at least one lesion suitable for resection or biopsy for TIL retrieval. Pts received 3 cycles of IV Carboplatin AUC 5 plus Paclitaxel 175mg/m2 (cohort 1) and pembrolizumab every 3 weeks 100-200mg based on weight (cohort 2). On day 7 after the second and after the third course of chemotherapy patients received 2,5-10 x 10^8 TIL as an IV infusion. The primary endpoint was safety of TIL therapy. Anti-tumor activity and feasibility of study procedure were key secondary objectives. Results Between Dec 20, 2023 and Nov 26, 2025, 13 pts were included (median age 68 years [IQR 61- 71]). Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events included anemia, thrombocytopenia (both in 2 patients [15%]), febrile neutropenia and nausea (both in 1 patient [8%]), all chemotherapy related. Immunotherapy related toxicity hepatitis grade 3 and renal tubular acidosis grade 1 occurred in 1 pt. No toxicity of the TIL infusion and no grade 5 toxicity was observed. At data cutoff (May 12, 2026), 3 of 13 patients (23%) had an objective response per RECIST v1.1 and a disease control rate of 69%. Median progression free survival is 3.4 months (IQR 2.1-6.2) and overall survival 8 months (IQR 4.1-19.7). In 85% (17/20 patients, 11 biopsies, 6 resections) TIL product was successfully produced. Conclusions This phase 1 study of TIL therapy preceded by Carboplatin and Paclitaxel w/wo Pembrolizumab in patients with NSCLC in ≥2nd line demonstrated manageable safety and encouraging anti-tumor activity and supports further investigation of this combination.

[Slide 1] Professional Reviewed Abstracts | AMCP Nexus 2026 | October 26-29 S71 [phone overlay: 73 de 128] [Left column — end of preceding, unrelated abstract on BCG-unresponsive HR-NMIBC:] 10/31/2024). Patients with HR-NMIBC with CIS (as of the HR-NMIBC diagnosis date) were assessed for BCG discontinuation (last instillation before a gap of >180 days, following adequate induction [≥5 instillations in 70 days] and maintenance [≥2 instillations in 180 days]). BCG-unresponsive was defined as receiving subsequent guideline-recommended treatment (index date) within 365 days of BCG discontinuation. EFS (i.e., time without disease recurrence or progression) was defined based on codes for transurethral resection of bladder tumor, biopsy, systemic chemotherapy, non-index intravesical therapy, radiotherapy, radical cystectomy, pembrolizumab, diagnosis of muscle-invasive or metastatic bladder cancer, or death. EFS was described using Kaplan-Meier analyses among patients with bladder-sparing therapy after BCG discontinuation. RESULTS: Overall, there were 130 patients with BCG-unresponsive HR-NMIBC with CIS ± PAP (mean age: 70 years; 77% male; 78% White). Among 108 patients initiating bladder-sparing therapies as next treatment, gemcitabine (52%), mitomycin (16%), pembrolizumab (15%), gemcitabine/docetaxel (14%), nadofaragene firadenovec-vncg (2%), docetaxel (1%), and doxorubicin (1%) were used. Among these patients, median EFS was 5.9 months (95% CI: 4.7, 12.1). The proportion of patients with recurrence, progression, or death was 28% at 3 months, 50% at 6 months, 59% at 12 months, 69% at 24 months and 74% at 36 months. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment choice varied among patients with BCG-unresponsive HR-NMIBC with CIS. Despite radical cystectomy being recommended for BCG-unresponsive patients, most received bladder-sparing therapy, with 50% having disease recurrence, progression, or death within 6 months. These findings highlight a significant unmet need for more effective bladder-sparing therapies among BCG-unresponsive patients with HR-NMIBC with CIS ± PAP. SPONSORSHIP: Johnson & Johnson 269 IMforte: Characterization of hospitalization and health care resource utilization with lurbinectedin + atezolizumab maintenance therapy for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer in a phase 3 randomized trial Nguyen A1, Paz-Ares L2, Borghaei H3, Liu S4, Peters S5, Reck M6, Cuchelkar V7, Mohan S7, Lin Y7, Fuller D1, Profant D8, Bhatt K1, Herbst R9; amy.nguyen@jazzpharma.com 1Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Philadelphia, PA, USA; 2Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, H12O-CNIO Lung Cancer Unit, Universidad Complutense and Ciberonc, Madrid, Spain; 3Department of Hematology and Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA; 4Department of Medical Oncology, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA; 5Department of Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland; 6LungenClinic, Airway Research Center North, German Center for Lung Research, Grosshansdorf, Germany; 7Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA, USA; 8Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Carlsbad, CA, USA; 9Department of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA BACKGROUND: Extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) is an aggressive disease with poor prognosis. Among patients (pts) with ES-SCLC, rates of complications that drive health care resource utilization (HCRU) are high. The phase 3 IMforte (NCT05091567) trial demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in progression-free and overall survival with lurbinectedin + atezolizumab (L+A) vs atezolizumab alone (A) for first-line maintenance treatment (1Lm) of ES-SCLC. OBJECTIVE: To describe hospitalizations and HCRU from IMforte pts receiving 1Lm with L+A vs A. METHODS: Eligible pts with ES-SCLC who were progression free after induction with atezolizumab, carboplatin, and etoposide were randomized 1:1 to receive 1Lm L+A or A every 3 weeks. Details of all-cause and treatment-related inpatient hospitalizations and supportive care during 1Lm were summarized descriptively. RESULTS: As of February 12, 2025, the median treatment duration was 4.4 (L)/4.8 (A) and 2.1 months in the L+A and A arms. One or more treatment-related hospitalizations occurred in 25/242 (10%) pts in the L+A arm and 6/240 (3%) pts in the A arm. The median (quartile 1 [Q1]–Q3) number and total length of treatment-related hospitalizations were 1 (1–1) admission and 7 (4–14) days in the L+A arm and 1 (1–1) admission and 7 (2–13) days in the A arm, respectively. Regardless of relationship to study drug, 60/242 (25%) and 34/240 (14%) pts had an all-cause hospitalization in the L+A and A arms, respectively. The median (Q1–Q3) number and total length of all-cause hospitalizations were 1 (1–2) admission and 7 (5–14) days in the L+A arm and 1 (1–1) admission and 9 (4–17) days in the A arm, respectively. The most common preferred term used among all-cause hospitalizations was pneumonia (L+A, n=5 [2%]; A, n=6 [3%]). Most pts (215/242 [89%]) in the L+A arm used granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, compared to 28/240 (12%) in the A arm. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with the extended treatment duration, L+A appeared to be associated with a higher incidence of hospitalization than A. Nonetheless, the frequency remained low: 90% of all pts in the L+A arm did not experience a treatment-related hospitalization. Among pts who were hospitalized, the number of visits and lengths of stay were similar Vol. 33, No. 10-d | October 2026 | JMCP.org S72 Professional Reviewed Abstracts | AMCP Nexus 2026 | October 26-29 between treatment arms, suggesting L+A did not increase inpatient burden on a per-event basis. Overall, L+A showed a manageable and predictable HCRU pattern, supporting its feasibility from clinical and health economic perspectives. SPONSORSHIP: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd and Jazz Pharmaceuticals [right column of S72 — start of unrelated abstract:] perceived benefits of switching from bid to qd varied depending on overall pill burden and daily routines. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment frequency, disease severity, and pill burden influence patient preference and anticipated adherence in MF, PV, and GVHD. Patients demonstrated a clear preference for qd regimens, which may support adherence through simplified treatment routines. Willingness to switch [cut off]

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 / MADRID EVIDENCE NOTES 23–27 OCT 2026 MADRID, SPAIN PRESIDENTIAL SYMPOSIUM I / LBA3 · 24 OCT DeLLphi-305 TARLATAMAB + DURVALUMAB MAINTENANCE MET THE OS ENDPOINT Post-induction ES-SCLC • first-line maintenance 24 OCT 2026, Saturday 16:30 Madrid | 17:30 TSİ Presenter Jacob Sands OS met · PFS met · ORR met · effect size pending 01 PATIENTS • Extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) • No progression after 3–4 cycles of platinum + etoposide + durvalumab • ECOG PS 0–1 02 ARMS Tarlatamab + durvalumab (maintenance) • Tarlatamab (DLL3-directed T-cell engager) + Durvalumab (PD-L1 inhibitor) → R 1:1 → n = 563 Durvalumab alone (maintenance) • Durvalumab (PD-L1 inhibitor) PHASE 3 | RANDOMIZED | OPEN-LABEL | MULTICENTER | n = 563 03 KNOWN NOW ✓ Prespecified interim analysis met the primary endpoint: overall survival (OS) ✓ Progression-free survival (PFS) also met its endpoint ✓ Objective response rate (ORR) also improved significantly 04 NOT YET DISCLOSED ? Hazard ratio and 95% CI ? Median OS and median PFS ? Absolute survival differences ? Detailed CRS/ICANS rates ? Grade 3+ toxicity and treatment discontinuation 05 CLINICAL READOUT Key question: How much OS is gained by moving a DLL3-directed T-cell engager into maintenance before relapse, and is that gain large enough to justify CRS/ICANS monitoring and added treatment burden? Data status: company topline + ESMO 2026 programme; full LBA3 presentation pending. Sources: Amgen/AstraZeneca topline, 8 Sep 2026; DeLLphi-305 / NCT06211036; ESMO 2026 programme. drozdogan.com Congress news · Scientific summaries · Clinical perspective

[Slide 1] MADRID 2026 ESMO congress | Madrid, Spain 24–28 October 2026 Selected presentations on BRAF-mutant NSCLC Clinical trials – Targeted therapies • 2651P – Encorafenib plus binimetinib in patients (pts) with BRAF V600E-mutant advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Updated efficacy and safety results from the IFCT-1904 ENCO-BRAF phase 2 trial Therapy sequence and clinical management of BRAF V600E-NSCLC • 2840eP – Real-world management of BRAF-mutated NSCLC in Italy: National and macroregional patterns from an oncologist survey • 2805eP – First-line BRAF/MEK inhibition versus immune checkpoint inhibitor–based therapy in BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic NSCLC: A meta-analysis • 2791eP – First-line immunotherapy with or without chemotherapy versus BRAF plus MEK inhibitors in BRAF V600-mutated metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis • 4292P – Multi-omics identifies predictive markers for BRAF/MEK inhibitors used outside labelled indications in patients with BRAF-V600E mutated solid tumors Translational research and biomarkers • 4368P – Clinical and molecular heterogeneity of BRAF non-V600E alterations across solid tumors: A nationwide Japanese C-CAT registry study

[Slide 1] 2616RO - A phase 2 study of CS2009, a first-in-class PD-1/VEGF/CTLA-4 trispecific antibody, in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) Speakers Anwen Xiong (Shanghai, China) Lecture Time 08:35 - 08:40 Abstract Background CS2009 is a novel PD-1/VEGF/CTLA-4 trispecific antibody. Preclinical and clinical studies demonstrated promising anti-tumor activity in solid tumors. Here, we report the safety and efficacy data from a phase 2 study of CS2009 in advanced NSCLC. Methods Patients (pts) with advanced NSCLC were enrolled across different lines of therapy. In the first-line (1L) setting, pts without actionable genomic alterations received either CS2009 monotherapy (mono) or CS2009 + chemotherapy (chemo) (pemetrexed + carboplatin for non-squamous [NSQ] pts; paclitaxel + carboplatin for squamous [SQ] pts.) In the second- or third-line (2/3L) setting, pts who had received prior platinum-based chemo and anti-PD-(L)1 therapy were treated with CS2009 + docetaxel. CS2009 was dosed at 20 or 30 mg/kg Q3W. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed ORR per RECIST v1.1. Results As of April 19, 2026, 86 pts were treated (median age 65.6 [range 38-82]; 77.9% male; 82.6% with ECOG PS 1; 40.7% NSQ; 76.7% PD-L1 TPS≥1%). In pts receiving CS2009 mono (n=46), any-grade and grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 67.4% and 6.5% of pts, respectively. The most common TRAEs were AST increased (17.4%), ALT increased (15.2%), hyperthyroidism (13.0%) and rash (13.0%); all grade ≥3 TRAEs were single-case events. In pts receiving CS2009 + chemo (n=40), any-grade and grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 65.0% and 30.0% of pts, respectively. The most common TRAEs were neutrophil count decreased (35.0%), WBC count decreased (30.0%) and anaemia (30.0%). CS2009 did not appear to increase chemo-associated toxicity. No unexpected safety signals were observed. In preliminary efficacy assessment among evaluable pts, ORR/DCR in 1L mono (PD-L1 TPS ≥50%) and 1L SQ combination (PD-L1 TPS <50%) cohorts were 81.3%/100% (n=16) and 75.0%/100% (n=8), respectively. Encouraging responses have been observed in other cohorts. Updated data from the 1L mono (n ~ 60, PD-L1 TPS ≥1%) and combination (n ~ 60, SQ & NSQ) cohorts will be presented at the congress. Conclusions CS2009 mono and CS2009 + chemo were both well tolerated and demonstrated promising anti-tumor activity in NSCLC. Phase 3 studies of CS2009 + chemo in advanced NSCLC are planned.

[Slide 1] 2618RO - Analysis of the phase 2 part of IFCT-2103 DIAL phase 2-3 randomized trial, comparing continuation pembrolizumab (± pemetrexed) up to 2 years versus observation (± pemetrexed), in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) with disease control (DC) at 6 months Speakers Anne Claire Toffart (La Tronche, France) Lecture Time 09:14 - 09:19 Abstract Background Optimal duration of 1L immunotherapy (io) in mNSCLC patients. with DC remains debatable. We aimed to study de-escalation by stopping pembrolizumab in patients with 6-months DC after chemo-io induction, as compared to 24 months. Methods This randomized open-label trial included treatment-naïve 18-75 yrs. mNSCLC patients (pts), ECOG PS 0-1, w/o actionable tumor molecular alteration, stratified according to PS, histology (SCC. vs. non-SCC), PD-L1 tumor level, sex and quality of response (stable vs. objective response). They received 4 cycles of 1L platinum-based chemo doublet+pembro, either paclitaxel-carboplatin, followed by maintenance pembro, for SCC patients or pemetrexed-platinum, followed by pembro + pemetrexed continuation for non-SCC patients. At 6 months, patients with DC were randomized 1:1 either to pembrolizumab (± pemetrexed in non-SCC patients) continuation until 2 years, or to observation (± pemetrexed). Primary outcome was 18-mo. overall survival (OS) from inclusion. Secondary outcomes included safety from randomization. Results From May 2022 to March 2024, 197 patients (68.0% male, 63.3y median age, 66% stage IVB, 70.6% adenocarcinoma), were accrued. 93 (47.2%) patients were randomized: to the continuation control arm (n=47) or the de-escalation arm (n=46). In Dec. 2025, the phase II analysis involved 84 first eligible patients (42 in each arm). Both arms were well balanced according to clinical and biological characteristics. Median follow-up was 27.9 months 95%CI [25.0 - 31.1]. At 18 months, 83.3%, 95%CI [72.1 - 94.6] were alive in the continuation arm vs. 88.1%, 95%CI [78.3 - 97.9] in the de-escalation arm. In the 93 randomized patients, grade 3-4 rates from randomization were 14.9% and 6.5%, while all-grade irAEs were 85.1% and 47.8%, in the continuation arms and the de-escalation arms, respectively. Conclusions In patients with 6-mo DC, similar rates of 18-mo OS were observed in both arms, while leading to lower frequency of irAEs in the de-escalation arm. Accrual in the trial phase 3 part is continuing.

[Slide 1] 2615O - Dalmelitinib plus aumolertinib versus platinum-based chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC patients with MET amplification post EGFR TKI: A randomized, phase 3 study Speakers Ziming Li (Shanghai, China) Lecture Time 08:40 - 08:50 Abstract Background MET amplification (MET-amp) is a key resistance mechanism to EGFR TKIs. Dalmelitinib (HS-10241), a novel oral MET TKI, demonstrated promising efficacy when combined with Aumolertinib in MET-amplified advanced NSCLC post EGFR TKIs in a phase 1b study (NCT05430386). Here, we reported the phase 3 results of this combination. Methods This randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase 3 study (NCT06110663) enrolled advanced NSCLC patients (pts) with EGFR mutation-positive and MET-amp (GCN ≥5 or MET/CEP7 ≥2) post EGFR TKIs. Eligible pts were randomized 1:1 to receive either Dalmelitinib plus Aumolertinib (TKI-combo) or platinum-based chemotherapy (Chemo). The primary endpoint was PFS assessed by IRC and analyzed in all randomized pts. Results As of Dec 10, 2025, 314 pts were randomized (156/158 in TKI-combo/Chemo group). Baseline characteristics between two groups were balanced, with 296 pts (94.3%) having received prior 3rd-generation EGFR TKI. Primary analysis demonstrated superior efficacy of TKI-combo over chemo with significant improvement in PFS (mPFS-IRC 6.2 vs. 4.4 months, HR 0.601, P<0.001; mPFS-Investigator 6.9 vs. 4.6 months), and clinical benefit was observed across all efficacy endpoints (Table), including a trend toward survival benefit based on preliminary OS results. No obvious difference was observed in overall severity (grade ≥3: 50.0% vs. 51.0%) of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) between two groups with different safety profiles. In TKI-combo group, most TEAEs were low grade, reversible and manageable without new safety signal; most common grade ≥3 TEAEs were liver enzyme elevations. Table: 2615O Efficacy accessed by IRC [columns: TKI-combo group (N=156) | Chemo group (N=158)] Primary endpoint mPFS, months (95% CI) | 6.2 (5.6, 9.7) | 4.4 (4.2, 5.5) HR (95% CI) | 0.601 (0.448, 0.805) Secondary endpoints ORR, % (95% CI) | 59.6 (51.5, 67.4) | 38.6 (31.0, 46.7) mDoR, months (95% CI) | 9.7 (7.0, 14.0) | 4.4 (3.0, 8.4) DCR, % (95% CI) | 84.6 (78.0, 89.9) | 74.1 (66.5, 80.7) mOS&, months (95% CI) | NR (17.5, NE) | 19.6 (14.6, NE) HR (95% CI) | 0.840 (0.524, 1.346) &46.8% pts in Chemo group were crossed over to TKI-combo. HR, hazard rate; IRC, independent review committee; m, median; NE, not estimable; NR, not reached. Conclusions Dalmelitinib plus Aumolertinib showed superior clinical benefit in advanced NSCLC pts with EGFR mutation-positive and MET-amp (GCN ≥5), majority of whom failed 3rd-generation EGFR TKIs. This suggested a new treatment option for this population.

[Slide 1] LA FDA RETIRA LA APROBACIÓN DE LURBINECTEDIN ( ZEPZELCA ) PARA EL CÁNCER DE PULMÓN DE CÉLULAS PEQUEÑAS PREVIAMENTE TRATADO . CURE TODAY : 9 DE SEPTIEMBRE 2026 . [Embedded small version of the wide summary infographic - same graphic as image _s4; too small to read here] Su estudio confirmatorio fue el ensayo LAGOON de FASE III , que no alcanzó su objetivo principal . En sus resultados financieros del segundo trimestre, publicados el 3 de agosto de 2026, Jazz Pharmaceuticals anunció que, basándose en los resultados de LAGOON y en consonancia con la FDA, planeaba solicitar a la agencia que eliminara la indicación de segunda línea de la ficha técnica . Ninguno de los grupos tratados con Zepzelca vivió más tiempo que el grupo tratado con quimioterapia . [Embedded dark graphic with FDA logo - same graphic as image _s3] LA MEDIANA DE SUPERVIVENCIA GLOBAL, EL PUNTO EN EL QUE LA MITAD DE LAS PERSONAS DE UN GRUPO SEGUÍAN VIVAS , FUE : · 8,7 MESES SOLO CON LURBINECTEDIN ( ZEPZELCA ) . · 10,9 MESES CON LURBINECTEDIN ( ZEPZELCA ) MÁS IRINOTECÁN . · 10,7 MESES CON TOPOTECAN O IRINOTECÁN . ENTRE LAS PERSONAS CUYO CÁNCER SE HABÍA EXTENDIDO al CEREBRO O la MÉDULA ESPINAL, UN GRUPO MÁS PEQUEÑO , LA MEDIANA DE SUPERVIVENCIA FUE DE 7,1 MESES CON ZEPZELCA SOLO ( 58 PERSONAS ) EN COMPARACIÓN CON 10,3 MESES CON QUIMIOTERAPIA ( 56 PERSONAS ) . EFECTOS SECUNDARIOS : JAZZPHARMA NO INFORMÓ DE NUEVOS PROBLEMAS DE SEGURIDAD . Se observaron efectos secundarios graves (de grado 3 o superior) relacionados con el tratamiento en el 35 % de las personas que recibieron Zepzelca sola, en el 62,6 % de las que recibieron Zepzelca más irinotecán y en el 64,4 % de las que recibieron quimioterapia . [Slide 2] ESTÁ RETIRADA DE MERCADO COMO TRATAMIENTO DE SEGUNDA LÍNEA DE SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER EXTENSIVE-STAGE. NO AFECTA AL TRATAMIENTO DE MANTENIMIENTO DE PRIMERA LÍNEA ... QUE SIGUE EN PIE. A TENER MUY EN CUENTA : ESTA RETIRADA NO AFECTA NI MODIFICA PARA NADA A LA APROBACIÓN DEL TRATAMIENTO IMFORTE ( LURBINECTEDIN MAS ATEZOLIZUMAB ) PARA MANTENIMIENTO EN PRIMERA LINEA SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER . [Left screenshot - cure] cure | News | Articles | October 9, 2026 FDA Withdraws Zepzelca Approval for Previously Treated Small Cell Lung Cancer Author(s) Quincy Attobrah The FDA withdrew Zepzelca's accelerated approval for small cell lung cancer after the LAGOON trial failed to show longer survival. Its maintenance use with Tecentriq is unaffected. Neither Zepzelca group lived longer than the chemotherapy group. Median overall survival, the point at which half the people in a group were alive, was: • 8.7 months with Zepzelca alone • 10.9 months with Zepzelca plus irinoteca[n] • 10.7 months with topotecan or irinotecan [Right screenshot - MedPath] MedPath FDA Pulls Zepzelca Approval in Previously Treated Small Cell Lung Cancer KEY INSIGHTS • The FDA withdrew the accelerated approval of Zepzelca (lurbinectedin) for metastatic small cell lung cancer that progressed during or after platinum-based chemotherapy, effective Sept. 30, 2026. • The confirmatory phase 3 LAGOON trial did not meet its primary overall survival endpoint, with median survival of 8.7 months for Zepzelca alone versus 10.7 months for chemotherapy. • The withdrawal does not affect Zepzelca plus Tecentriq (atezolizumab) as maintenance treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer, an approval based on the separate IMforte trial. [Slide 3] FDA U.S. FOOD & DRUG ADMINISTRATION # LA FDA RETIRA LA APROBACIÓN DE LURBINECTEDIN ( ZEPZELCA ) PARA EL CÁNCER DE PULMÓN DE CÉLULAS PEQUEÑAS PREVIAMENTE TRATADO . CURE : 9 DE SEPTIEMBRE 2026 . En sus resultados financieros del segundo trimestre, publicados el 3 de agosto de 2026, Jazz Pharmaceuticals anunció que, basándose en los resultados de LAGOON y en consonancia con la FDA, planeaba solicitar a la agencia que eliminara la indicación de segunda línea de la ficha técnica . EFECTOS SECUNDARIOS : JAZZPHARMA No informó de nuevos problemas de seguridad . Se observaron efectos secundarios graves (de grado 3 o superior) relacionados con el tratamiento en el 35 % de las personas que recibieron Zepzelca sola, en el 62,6 % de las que recibieron Zepzelca más irinotecán y en el 64,4 % de las que recibieron quimioterapia . [Red warning triangle; red stamp: SIN BENEFICIO EN SUPERVIVENCIA] [Slide 4] LA FDA RETIRA LA APROBACIÓN DE LURBINECTEDIN ( ZEPZELCA ) PARA EL CÁNCER DE PULMÓN DE CÉLULAS PEQUEÑAS PREVIAMENTE TRATADO . CURE : 9 DE SEPTIEMBRE 2026 . SU ESTUDIO CONFIRMATORIO FUE EL ENSAYO LAGOON DE FASE III , QUE NO ALCANZÓ SU OBJETIVO PRINCIPAL . En sus resultados financieros del segundo trimestre, publicados el 3 de agosto de 2026, Jazz Pharmaceuticals anunció que, basándose en los resultados de LAGOON y en consonancia con la FDA, planeaba solicitar a la agencia que eliminara la indicación de segunda línea de la ficha técnica . SUPERVIVENCIA GLOBAL (MEDIANA) Ninguno de los grupos tratados con Zepzelca vivió más tiempo que el grupo tratado con quimioterapia . 8,7 MESES SOLO CON LURBINECTEDIN ( Zepzelca ) 10,9 MESES CON LURBINECTEDIN ( ZEPZELCA ) + IRINOTECAN 10,7 MESES CON TOPOTECAN O IRINOTECAN ENTRE LAS PERSONAS CUYO CÁNCER SE HABÍA EXTENDIDO AL CEREBRO O A LA MÉDULA ESPINAL , LA MEDIANA DE SUPERVIVENCIA FUE DE : 7,1 MESES CON Zepzelca SOLO ( 58 personas ) 10,3 MESES CON QUIMIOTERAPIA ( 56 personas ) EFECTOS SECUNDARIOS : JAZZPHARMA No informó de nuevos problemas de seguridad . Se observaron efectos secundarios graves (de grado 3 o superior) relacionados con el tratamiento en el 35 % de las personas que recibieron Zepzelca sola, en el 62,6 % de las que recibieron Zepzelca más irinotecán y en el 64,4 % de las que recibieron quimioterapia . [Three red circles] 35% ZEPZELCA SOLA · 62,6% ZEPZELCA + IRINOTECAN · 64,4% QUIMIOTERAPIA LO IMPORTANTE A RECORDAR : LA RETIRADA DE LURBINECTEDIN ( ZEPZELCA ) NO AFECTA AL TRATAMIENTO DE MANTENIMIENTO DE PRIMERA LÍNEA ... QUE SIGUE EN PIE. [Green check] EL TRATAMIENTO DE MANTENIMIENTO DE PRIMERA LÍNEA CONTINÚA VIGENTE.

[Slide 1] 2574RO - Neoadjuvant toripalimab plus chemotherapy with or without tifcemalimab (anti-BTLA antibody) in potentially resectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (LungMate-014): A randomized, phase II trial Speakers Peng Zhang (Shanghai, China) Lecture Time 10:45 - 10:50 Abstract Background Perioperative toripalimab plus chemotherapy has improved outcomes in resectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and tifcemalimab combined with toripalimab has shown promising activity in advanced disease. Here, we first evaluated the addition of tifcemalimab to neoadjuvant toripalimab plus chemotherapy in patients with potentially resectable stage III NSCLC. Methods In this open-label, single-center, phase II trial, patients with potentially resectable disease were randomized 1:1 to receive toripalimab plus chemotherapy with tifcemalimab (TCT) or without tifcemalimab (TC) for 4 cycles. Surgical resectability was reassessed by multidisciplinary discussion. The primary endpoint was pathological complete response (pCR). Secondary endpoints included major pathological response (MPR), objective response rate (ORR), R0 resection, safety, event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS). Results As of August 29, 2024, 118 patients were randomized in two arms. Patient characteristics were well balanced between the arms. pCR rates were 32.2% vs. 25.4% in the TCT and TC arms, respectively. Subgroup analyses showed higher pCR rates in patients with non-squamous histology (31.6% vs. 15.0%) and those with PD-L1 TPS <1% (35.7% vs. 25.9%). Surgery was performed in 67.8% and 59.3% of patients in the TCT and TC arms, with all achieving R0 resection. Grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 77.6% and 75.4% of patients, with no new safety signals. At a median follow-up of 26.6 months, 24-month EFS rates were 71.1% vs. 66.0%, and 24-month OS rates were 83.0% vs. 76.1% in the TCT and TC arms. Subgroup analyses suggested a trend toward improved survival in patients with non-squamous histology (24-month OS: 89.5% vs. 79.4%) and those with PD-L1 TPS <1% (24-month OS: 88.1% vs. 69.6%). Conclusions The addition of tifcemalimab to neoadjuvant toripalimab plus chemotherapy showed encouraging efficacy and manageable safety in potentially resectable stage III NSCLC. Notably, this strategy revealed enhanced benefit in patients with non-squamous histology and those with PD-L1 TPS <1%, supporting further evaluation in larger randomized trials.

[Slide 1] KEYNOTE-671 | ESMO 2026 The Biomarker Detective Story MV Onco T-CELL INFLAMMATION — HIGH TcellinfGEP "Better outcomes!" [Cartoon T cell with magnifying glass over a tumor] EFS HR: High 0.53 / Low 0.71 TMB — HIGH TMB "Better outcomes in BOTH arms!" [Cartoon tumor with mutation flags] EFS HR: High 0.49 / Low 0.63 KRAS "KRAS didn't distinguish benefit!" [Cartoon: KRAS MUTATED (PEMBRO BENEFIT) and KRAS WILD-TYPE (PEMBRO BENEFIT)] EFS HR: 0.73 / 0.75 [Cartoon: doctor in detective hat in front of a locked door "WHO REALLY NEEDS PEMBROLIZUMAB?" with sign "PREDICTIVE BIOMARKER NOT FOUND"; thought bubble TcellinfGEP? TMB? KRAS?] TAKE-HOME PROGNOSTIC ≠ PREDICTIVE • Biomarkers were associated with outcomes. • None was validated to select or exclude patients from perioperative pembrolizumab. [Slide 2] KEYNOTE-671 | ESMO 2026 What Did the Biomarkers Reveal? MV Onco 01 WHY THIS ANALYSIS? KEYNOTE-671 established: • Perioperative pembrolizumab + chemotherapy improves EFS and OS in resectable NSCLC. THE QUESTION: • Can biomarkers identify who benefits most? 02 WHICH BIOMARKERS? • TcellinfGEP – 18-gene T-cell inflammation signature. • TMB – Tumor mutational burden. • KRAS – Mutated versus wild-type. • 797 randomized patients. • Exploratory biomarker analysis. 03 WHAT DID T-CELL INFLAMMATION REVEAL? Higher TcellinfGEP was associated with: • Pembrolizumab arm : Better EFS and MPR. • Placebo arm : Better OS. INSIGHT → Immune inflammation may reflect favorable tumor biology, not necessarily greater pembrolizumab benefit. 04 WHAT DID TMB REVEAL? Higher TMB was associated with: • Pembrolizumab arm : Better EFS, OS, MPR and pCR. • Placebo arm : Better MPR and pCR. INSIGHT → Higher TMB was associated with better pathological responses in BOTH arms. PART 2 → Can biomarkers predict pembrolizumab benefit? [Slide 3] KEYNOTE-671 | ESMO 2026 Can Biomarkers Predict Pembrolizumab Benefit? MV Onco 01 DID T-CELL INFLAMMATION CHANGE BENEFIT? EFS HR: Pembrolizumab vs placebo • TcellinfGEP HIGH → 0.53 • TcellinfGEP LOW → 0.71 • Both estimates favored pembrolizumab. • Higher inflammation showed numerically greater EFS benefit. • But predictive value was NOT established. 02 DID HIGH TMB CHANGE BENEFIT? EFS HR: Pembrolizumab vs placebo • TMB HIGH → 0.49 • TMB LOW → 0.63 • Both estimates favored pembrolizumab. • Low TMB did NOT eliminate treatment benefit. • No proven predictive TMB cutoff. 03 DID KRAS STATUS MATTER? EFS HR: Pembrolizumab vs placebo • KRAS MUTATED → 0.73 • KRAS WILD-TYPE → 0.75 • Nearly identical hazard ratios. • KRAS mutation did NOT demonstrate differential pembrolizumab benefit. • Subgroup numbers were small. 04 CAN BIOMARKERS GUIDE TREATMENT? PROGNOSTIC ≠ PREDICTIVE • Prognostic → Indicates likely outcomes. • Predictive → Identifies differential treatment benefit. • No biomarker demonstrated validated predictive utility in this exploratory analysis. TAKE-HOME • TcellinfGEP, TMB and KRAS cannot currently select who should receive or omit perioperative pembrolizumab.

[Slide 1] 2613O - Primary results of SARON: A randomised-controlled trial of consolidation radiotherapy for synchronous oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer Speakers Fiona McDonald (London, United Kingdom) Lecture Time 10:15 - 10:25 Abstract Background Standard first-line systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without actionable genomic alteration (AGA-negative) is chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy. We investigated whether patients with synchronous oligometastatic (OM) AGA-negative NSCLC benefit from the addition of consolidation radiotherapy (RT). Methods SARON, a multicentre phase II trial, randomised (1:1) patients with NSCLC, 1–5 metastases in ≤3 organs, to SACT with or without radical RT. The control arm changed to include immunotherapy in January 2020. The experimental arm received radical RT to the lung primary ± locoregional lymph nodes, and stereotactic ablative RT (SABR) to OM sites. Stratification included SACT, histology, N-stage, number of metastases, brain metastases and recruiting site. Primary and major secondary endpoints were overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results 140 patients were randomised across 22 UK centres (October 2016 to July 2023). Median age was 68 years (range 45–85), 59.3% male, 58.6% adenocarcinoma, 52.9% N-stage 2/3, 62.9% 1x OM site (23.6% 2x, 9.3% 3x, 3.6% 4x, 0.7% 5x OM sites), and 6.4% brain metastases. SACT was 40.0% chemotherapy, 15.0% immunotherapy and 45.0% combination. Median SACT cycles received in both arms was 4, and 62/70 (88.6%) received RT (51 conventional and 11 SABR to primary, 54 SABR to ≥1 OM site). After 37.4 months median follow-up, median OS was 31.0 versus 28.0 months (HR=0.99, 95%CI 0.63–1.55, p=0.95) and median PFS 13.9 versus 8.9 months (HR=0.64, 95%CI 0.43–0.95, p=0.03) in the SACT+RT and SACT arms, respectively. The cumulative incidence of local failure within 12 months was 13.0% versus 39.5% (p<0.01), compared to 36.2% versus 32.3% (p=0.28) for new distant metastasis, respectively. The grade ≥3 adverse event rate was 28.6% in both arms; 6 patients had a grade 3 event possibly related to RT. EORTC QLQ-C30 and LC13 quality of life measures were similar in both arms. Conclusions Patients with synchronous OM AGA-negative NSCLC receiving first-line SACT+RT achieved better local disease control and longer PFS than SACT alone with acceptable side-effects, however, this did not translate into survival benefit.

[Slide 1] PERSEE | ESMO 2026 PD-L1 ≥50% NSCLC: Is Adding Chemo Worth It? MV Onco Pembrolizumab Alone [illustration of lungs with large tumour] PFS: 6.9 months Response: 50% Severe toxicity: 19% Pembrolizumab + Chemotherapy [illustration of lungs with smaller tumour] PFS: 16.1 months Response: 78% Severe toxicity: 54% [warning icon] DID PATIENTS LIVE LONGER? OS: 50.2 vs 29.9 months Not statistically significant TAKE-HOME ✓ MORE CHEMO = BETTER DISEASE CONTROL ✓ BUT MORE TOXICITY ✓ OS BENEFIT NOT PROVEN [Slide 2] PERSEE | ESMO 2026 PART 1/3 — PD-L1 ≥50% NSCLC: Is Pembrolizumab Alone Enough? MV Onco 01 WHY PERSEE? Advanced NSCLC | PD-L1 ≥50% Two established first-line options: • Pembrolizumab alone • Pembrolizumab + platinum chemotherapy THE BIG QUESTION Does adding chemotherapy improve outcomes enough to justify its toxicity? No previous definitive head-to-head phase III comparison in this population. 02 TRIAL DESIGN PERSEE (GFPC 01-2020) Phase III | Randomized | Open-label • 321 patients | 28 French centres • Randomization 1:1 • Median follow-up: 38.7 months Primary endpoint: PFS by blinded central review Secondary endpoints: OS, ORR, DoR and safety. 03 WHO WERE THE PATIENTS? Previously untreated advanced NSCLC • PD-L1 TPS ≥50% • Stage IV or stage III unsuitable for radiotherapy • ECOG PS 0–1 • No EGFR/ALK alterations • Brain metastases: 23.4% • Squamous histology: 19.6% • Median age: 64 years. 04 WHAT WAS COMPARED? ARM A — PEMBRO + CHEMO Pembrolizumab + platinum doublet × 4 cycles • Squamous: paclitaxel-based • Nonsquamous: pemetrexed-based ↓ Maintenance pembrolizumab ± pemetrexed ARM B — PEMBRO ALONE Pembrolizumab monotherapy No upfront chemotherapy. TAKE-HOME • PD-L1 ≥50% does not automatically mean chemotherapy is unnecessary. • PERSEE directly tested whether adding chemotherapy improves outcomes. • NEXT: Better PFS – But Better Survival? [Slide 3] PERSEE | ESMO 2026 PART 2/3 — PD-L1 ≥50% NSCLC: Does Adding Chemotherapy Improve Survival? MV Onco 01 DID CHEMOTHERAPY IMPROVE PFS? Median PFS | Blinded Central Review Pembro + chemo 16.1 months Pembro alone 6.9 months HR 0.56 (95% CI 0.43–0.74) P < .001 ✓ 44% relative reduction in progression/death hazard. ✓ Primary endpoint MET. 02 DID OVERALL SURVIVAL IMPROVE? Median OS Pembro + chemo 50.2 months Pembro alone 29.9 months HR 0.77 (95% CI 0.57–1.05) Numerical OS difference: +20.3 months. [warning icon] No statistically significant OS advantage demonstrated. 03 DID MORE PATIENTS RESPOND? Objective Response Rate (ORR) Pembro + chemo 77.5% Pembro alone 50.3% Absolute improvement: +27.2 percentage points Median Duration of Response (DoR) Pembro + chemo 30 months Pembro alone 15.6 months HR 0.86 (95% CI 0.59–1.24) [warning icon] DoR difference not statistically established. 04 WHAT WAS THE TOXICITY COST? Grade ≥3 Treatment-Related Adverse Events Pembro + chemo 53.8% Pembro alone 19.3% +34.5 percentage points [warning icon] Severe treatment-related toxicity was substantially higher with chemotherapy. TAKE-HOME Better PFS. Higher Response. More Toxicity. • Adding chemotherapy significantly improved PFS and ORR. • An OS advantage remains unproven. • The decision requires balancing disease control against toxicity. [Slide 4] PERSEE | ESMO 2026 PART 3/3 — PD-L1 ≥50% NSCLC: Who Really Needs Chemotherapy? MV Onco 01 SHOULD EVERY PATIENT RECEIVE CHEMO? NO — NOT AUTOMATICALLY. PERSEE demonstrated: • Significantly better PFS • Higher response rate • No statistically established OS benefit • Substantially greater severe toxicity } Better disease control ≠ Proven survival benefit. 02 WHO MAY BENEFIT FROM UPFRONT CHEMO? Consider Pembro + Chemotherapy • High tumour burden • Rapidly progressive disease • Symptomatic visceral metastases • Need for rapid tumour shrinkage • ECOG 0–1 and chemotherapy-fit } Clinical considerations — not validated predictive subgroups. 03 WHO MAY RECEIVE PEMBRO ALONE? Consider Pembrolizumab Momotherapy • Low-volume disease • Relatively indolent progression • Minimal cancer-related symptoms • Higher concern about chemotherapy toxicity • Strong preference to avoid chemotherapy } Patient selection remains essential. 04 WHAT QUESTIONS REMAIN? Important Limitations • Open-label trial • OS benefit not statistically demonstrated • Subsequent treatment may influence OS • Limited information on predictive subgroups • ECOG 0–1 population limits generalizability } Can we identify patients who truly need chemotherapy upfront? TAKE-HOME ✓ PD-L1 ≥50% Is Not a Chemo-Free Guarantee. ✓ PERSEE supports better disease control with chemoimmunotherapy. ✓ But more treatment ≠ better survival for everyone. ✓ Individualize treatment based on disease aggressiveness, fitness and toxicity.

[Slide 1] 4158RO - Clinicopathological and transcriptomic characteristics of mesotheliomas with MTAP loss: From the NETMESO MESOPATH and RENAPE networks' experience in 1433 pleural and peritoneal mesothelioma Speakers Sylvie Lantuejoul (Lyon, France) Lecture Time 11:12 - 11:17 Abstract Background The loss of 5 methylthioadenosine phosphorylase (MTAP) is a CDKN2A/B homozygous deletion (HD) surrogate marker in mesothelioma. It has been suggested as a predictive biomarker for PRMT5/MAT2A inhibitors, and as a poor prognostic factor in small series of mesothelioma. We describe here the clinicopathological and transcriptomic characteristics of mesotheliomas with MTAP loss in the largest real-world cohort. Methods A total of 1433 mesotheliomas, including 1232 pleural (PM), 201 peritoneal (PeM) mesothelioma and 41 fibroses, were retrieved from the MESOBANK database between 2024 and 2026. All diagnoses were certified by NETMESO-MESOPATH and RENAPE pathologists. MTAP immunohistochemistry was carried out with the RBT-MTAP mAb (BioSB) for all cases, and CDKN2A FISH for 99 cases. Exome RNA sequencing was performed for 203 cases, including 104 with MTAP loss and 99 with MTAP retained. Results MTAP cytoplasmic and nuclear staining was lost in 48% PM and 16% of PeM cases, and in 42% Epithelioid (E-PM), 70% Biphasic (B-PM), and 73% Sarcomatoid (S-PM) subtypes (p<0,0001). Nearly 10% of the cases showed heterogeneous MTAP expression. Concordance between MTAP IHC and CDKN2A/B FISH was 80%. In multivariable analyses, MTAP loss was more frequent in males (p=0,001) and older patients (p<0,001). There was no correlation with asbestose exposure, grade or pattern in EM, nor with BAP1 or NF2 alterations. There was no correlation either with survival, except for S-PM with MTAP loss with a better ovserall survival (p=0,0001). Mesothelioma with MTAP under-expressed exhibited low CDKN2A/B, innate and adaptative immunity and fibroblast differentiation gene expressions, and SATB2, WNT and TGFbeta pathways' overexpression. Conclusions MTAP IHC is an easy interpretable and reliable marker with a concordance of 80% with CDKN2A/B HD. MTAP loss predominates in the pleural M, and in BM and SM subtypes. It does not correlate with survival, except in S-PM where MTAP loss is associated with a better survival.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 BARCELONA | 24 – 28 OCTOBER 2026 SAFFRON TRIAL Osimertinib + Savolitinib after Osimertinib Resistance in EGFR-mutant Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer A TARGETED SOLUTION FOR MET-MEDIATED RESISTANCE 1. BACKGROUND & RATIONALE • Osimertinib is standard first-line therapy for EGFR-mutant NSCLC, but most patients ultimately develop resistance. • MET amplification or overexpression is a common mechanism of acquired resistance (≈ 10–20%). • Dual inhibition of EGFR and MET may overcome this resistance. Initial response to osimertinib EGFR mutation (eg. exon 19 del, L858R) EGFR Osimertinib Tumour cell survival inhibited Acquired resistance: MET activation EGFR MET amplification or overexpression MET Osimertinib MET signalling bypasses EGFR inhibition Tumour cell proliferation and survival Dual targeting strategy Osimertinib (EGFR TKI) + Savolitinib (MET inhibitor) EGFR MET Dual blockade suppresses tumour growth MET alterations in osimertinib resistance [pie chart] MET [illegible] 10–15% Other mechanisms 60–70% MET amplification 5–10% MET-driven resistance occurs in ~10-20% of patients progressing on osimertinib 2. TRIAL DESIGN Trial name: SAFFRON Phase: Phase III Registry: NCT05261399 Design: Randomised, open-label, multicentre, global Population: Locally advanced or metastatic EGFR-mutant NSCLC progressing on osimertinib with MET amplification or overexpression Sample size: ~345 patients Primary endpoints: Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) Key secondary endpoints: Objective response rate (ORR), safety, duration of response 3. PATIENT ELIGIBILITY (KEY CRITERIA) Inclusion criteria (example) • EGFR-mutant NSCLC (eg. exon 19 del, L858R) • Radiological progression on osimertinib • Evidence of MET overexpression and/or MET amplification (as per trial assay) • Measurable disease (RECIST 1.1) • Adequate organ function • ECOG 0–1 (typical) Key exclusion criteria (example) • Concurrent targetable alterations requiring alternative therapy • Prior MET inhibitor therapy • Symptomatic or uncontrolled CNS metastases • Significant comorbidities 4. TREATMENT ARMS A. Osimertinib + Savolitinib Osimertinib 80 mg once daily (standard dose) + Savolitinib 300 mg once daily (typical dose used in trial) B. Platinum-based chemotherapy (Investigator's choice) Platinum + pemetrexed (± maintenance pemetrexed) or other platinum doublet as per protocol 5. ENDPOINTS Primary endpoints • Progression-free survival (PFS) • Overall survival (OS) Secondary endpoints • Objective response rate (ORR) • Duration of response • Disease control rate (DCR) • Safety and tolerability • Quality of life (may be included) 6. KEY RESULTS The SAFFRON trial has been reported to meet its primary endpoints of PFS and OS compared with platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with MET-altered EGFR-mutant NSCLC after osimertinib progression. Detailed numerical results (median PFS, median OS, hazard ratios, confidence intervals, subgroup analyses and toxicity) will be presented at ESMO 2026. 7. SAFETY PROFILE (EXPECTED) Common adverse events with savolitinib (in addition to osimertinib toxicities) • Peripheral oedema • Nausea, diarrhoea • Increased creatinine • Proteinuria • Fatigue • Anemia Known osimertinib adverse events • Rash • Diarrhoea • QT prolongation • Interstitial lung disease (rare) 8. POTENTIAL ADVANTAGES • Targets a defined resistance mechanism (MET-driven) • Oral targeted combination • May delay need for chemotherapy • Maintains EGFR inhibition • Potential for better PFS and OS compared to chemotherapy (as reported) 9. KEY QUESTIONS • Magnitude of PFS and OS benefit • Which MET alterations derive the most benefit (amplification vs overexpression) • Assay used for MET detection and positivity threshold • Intracranial efficacy • Toxicity profile and dose modifications • Sequencing with other targeted options • Applicability to Indian and global patient populations 10. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS • Potential to establish a biomarker-directed treatment option after osimertinib in MET-altered EGFR-mutant NSCLC. • Should be used only in patients with confirmed MET amplification or overexpression as per trial criteria. • May change the treatment algorithm if a clinically meaningful OS benefit is confirmed. • Final adoption will depend on full data, regulatory approval, availabilty and local guidelines. Take Home Message: SAFFRON represents a promising targeted strategy to address MET-mediated resistance after osimertinib in EGFR-mutant NSCLC. Await full ESMO 2026 presentation for detailed efficacy and safety results. Credit: Dr Rohit Malde MD DNB FRCR (UK) | CONSULTANT CLINICAL ONCOLOGIST

[Slide 1] 2636RO - Characterizing resistance mechanisms and predictors of early progression and long-term response to lorlatinib: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analyses from the CROWN study Speakers Ben J. Solomon (Melbourne, Australia) Lecture Time 09:05 - 09:10 Abstract Background In the phase 3 CROWN study (NCT03052608), lorlatinib showed unprecedented progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in patients (pts) with previously untreated advanced ALK+ NSCLC, with median PFS not reached after 7 y of follow-up. Despite durable outcomes, a minority of pts (≈20%) experienced disease progression or death within 1 y of treatment. We analyzed ctDNA from pts in CROWN to identify potential resistance mechanisms and predictors of early progression and long-term response to lorlatinib. Methods 296 pts were randomized 1:1 to lorlatinib 100 mg QD or crizotinib 250 mg BID. In the lorlatinib arm (n=149), blood samples collected at baseline (BL; n=120) and end of treatment from pts with progression (EOT; n=18) were used for ctDNA analyses (Guardant Infinity). Early progressors (EPs) are pts with PFS events at ≤1 y; long-term responders (LTRs) are pts without PFS events at 7 y. Analyses included characterization of resistance mechanisms at EOT; comparisons of BL genomic alterations in EPs and LTRs, and between pts with and without intracranial (IC) progression; and efficacy analyses by longitudinal assessment of methylation-based tumor fraction (TF). Results Analyses of paired BL and EOT ctDNA samples (n=17) revealed no new ALK resistance mutations and showed that bypass (RTK/RAS/MAPK) and other cancer-related pathways, eg, inflammatory response and angiogenesis pathway, may lead to resistance to lorlatinib. BL ctDNA analyses showed more genomic alterations in EPs than LTRs (median 10 vs 6). FGFR4, DICER1, and ARAF genomic alterations were more frequent in pts with vs without IC progression (25-38% vs ≤3%). BL TF level was prognostic for PFS. On-treatment decrease in TF at wk 4 and wk 24 was associated with longer PFS. Additional pathway analyses in EPs will be presented. Conclusions ctDNA analyses from CROWN suggest lorlatinib resistance is primarily mediated through bypass pathway and other potential tumorigenic inflammatory and angiogenic mechanisms rather than on-target ALK mutations. BL genomic complexity and on-treatment changes in methylation-based TF may help identify pts at risk of early progression.

[Slide 1] 2652RO - First-line (1L) olomorasib + chemoimmunotherapy (chemo-IO) in KRAS G12C-mutant NSCLC: Updated results from the LOXO-RAS-20001 and SUNRAY-01 trials Speakers Marcelo V. Negrao (Houston, United States of America, SP) Lecture Time 09:19 - 09:24 Abstract Background Olomorasib, a potent, selective next-generation KRAS G12C inhibitor with CNS activity, has demonstrated promising efficacy and durability in patients (pts) with advanced KRAS G12C-mutant NSCLC in combination with chemo-IO, the current 1L standard of care (SOC) for pts with NSCLC and PD-L1 expression 0-100%. Here, with an additional 9 mo of follow-up, we report updated results in 1L pts from LOXO-RAS-20001 and the SUNRAY-01 safety lead-in. Methods Pts with advanced KRAS G12C-mutant NSCLC, PD-L1 0-100%, and ECOG PS 0-1 received olomorasib 50 or 100 mg orally BID with pembrolizumab + chemotherapy (per label). Pts who received one cycle of SOC prior to enrollment were eligible. Safety was the primary endpoint. Key secondary endpoints were ORR per RECIST v1.1, DOR, and PFS. Results As of 5 March 2026, 77 pts received olomorasib + chemo-IO; 25 pts (32%) received 1 prior cycle of SOC; PD-L1 expression: 34% were <1%, 40% were 1-49%, and 23% were ≥50%, (3% unknown). Median follow-up was 18.7 mo (IQR, 16.8-20.3). ORR was 61% (47/77), with a median DOR of 14.5 mo and median PFS of 11.8 mo (Table). Efficacy by PD-L1 expression is shown in the Table. No new safety signals were identified. Any grade TRAEs (≥20% of pts) were nausea (44%), anemia (39%), fatigue (39%), diarrhea (32%), and AST/ALT increased (31%/27%). The most common grade ≥3 TRAEs were anemia (16%), neutrophil count decreased (12%), and ALT/AST increased (12%/10%). TRAEs were manageable with supportive care, dose adjustments, and/or corticosteroids. TRAEs led to olomorasib dose reduction in 21% of pts; and discontinuation of all study treatment in 8% of pts. Table: 2652RO Response and time-to-event endpoints (efficacy evaluable pts) Endpoint | Olomorasib (50 or 100 mg BID) + Chemo-IO All pts* PD-L1 0-100% N = 77 | Pts with PD-L1 <1% n = 26 | Pts with PD-L1 1-49% n = 31 | Pts with PD-L1 ≥50% n = 18 ORR**,†, % (n/N) | 61 (47/77) | 50 (13/26) | 68 (21/31) | 67 (12/18) BOR, n (%) PR† | 47 (61) | 13 (50) | 21 (68) | 12 (67) SD | 19 (25) | 8 (31) | 7 (23) | 4 (22) PD | 3 (4) | 2 (8) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) NE | 6 (8) | 3 (12) | 2 (6) | 1 (6) DCR, % (n/N) | 88 (68/77) | 81 (21/26) | 94 (29/31) | 94 (17/18) mDOR**, mo (95% CI) | 14.5 (10.3 - NE) | 14.4 (5.6 - NE) | NE (8.5 - NE) | NE (6.1 - NE) mPFS**, mo (95% CI) | 11.8 (9.6 - 21.5) | 9.7 (5.9 - 15.9) | 12.1 (5.9 - NE) | NE (7.7 - NE) *PD-L1 status unknown for 2 pts **ORR per RECIST v1.1, DOR, and PFS were investigator assessed †Confirmed responses. Conclusions Olomorasib + chemo-IO continues to demonstrate durable efficacy and a manageable safety profile across PD-L1 levels, including in higher-risk pts with PD-L1 0-49%. These updated findings support the ongoing phase 3 SUNRAY-01 trial comparing 1L chemo-IO + olomorasib or placebo in pts with KRAS G12C-mutant NSCLC and PD-L1 0-100%.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 ORAL PRESENTATIONS LUNG CANCER FPN: 2652P RAPID ORAL First-line (1L) Olomorasib + Chemoimmunotherapy (Chemo-IO) in KRAS G12C-Mutant NSCLC: Updated Results from the LOXO-RAS-20001 and SUNRAY-01 Trials Rapid oral 2: NSCLC, metastatic Presenter: Marcelo Negrao October 25 | Barcelona Auditorium - Hall 9 | 8:30 AM - 10:00 AM Intended for HCPs only Lilly A MEDICINE COMPANY

[Slide 1] 2658RO - Overall survival (OS) analysis of telisotuzumab adizutecan in patients (pts) with nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSQ NSCLC): Phase 1 first-in-human study Speakers David Sommerhalder (San Antonio, United States of America) Lecture Time 09:27 - 09:32 Abstract Background c-Met (or MET) protein is highly expressed in NSCLC and has a poor prognosis. Telisotuzumab adizutecan (ABBV-400; Temab-A) is an antibody drug conjugate (ADC) consisting of an anti c-Met antibody conjugated to a Top1i payload. In an ongoing phase 1 study (NCT05029882), Temab-A showed promising efficacy and manageable safety in pts with NSQ NSCLC. Herein, we present OS for pts with NSQ NSCLC. Methods Enrolled pts with advanced EGFR wildtype (WT) or mutant (MUT) NSQ NSCLC that progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy and immune checkpoint or targeted therapy received Temab-A once every 21 days. Primary endpoint was confirmed investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS) and OS. Tumor tissue c-Met protein expression was retrospectively assessed by IHC via central laboratory. Results The EGFR WT cohort enrolled 48 pts (median follow-up: 27 months [mo]; median prior lines of therapy [LoT] 2 [range, 1–9]) and the EGFR MUT cohort enrolled 41 pts (median follow-up: 26 mo; median prior LoT: 3 [1–8]). Most pts received 2.4 mg/kg dose (EGFR WT: 81%, 39/48; EGFR MUT: 88%, 36/41); the remaining received 3.0 mg/kg. Median duration of treatment was 5.6 and 10 mo in the EGFR WT and EGFR MUT cohorts, respectively. Median OS for EGFR WT and EGFR MUT was 13.8 mo and 16.2 mo (Table). Among EGFR WT patients, the prevalence of c-MET expression ≥3+ staining intensity in ≥10% and ≥25% tumor cells was 43% (20/46) and 33% (15/46), respectively. Among EGFR MUT patients, it was 56% (19/34) and 41% (14/34), respectively. Median OS was longer in EGFR WT pts with c-MET above these thresholds (≥3+, ≥10%: 25.2 mo; ≥3+, ≥25%: 19.2 mo). No new safety signals were observed. Table: 2658RO [columns: EGFR WT — Total N=48^a | ≥3+, ≥10% n=20^b | ≥3+, ≥25% n=15^b ; EGFR MUT — Total N=41^c | ≥3+, ≥10% n=24^b | ≥3+, ≥25% n=19^b] ORR, n (%) | 24 (50) | 12 (60) | 9 (60) | 26 (63) | 17 (71) | 13 (68) Median DOR, mo (95% CI) | 5.6 (4.2–12.3) | 5.6 (3.8–12.4) | 6.3 (2.8–21.8) | 9.7 (8.3–12.4) | 9.9 (6.9–13.5) | 10.9 (8.3–14.3) Median PFS, mo (95% CI) | 6.8 (5.4–7.3) | 7.2 (5.5–9.0) | 8.0 (5.3–9.8) | 10.9 (8.3–12.3) | 11.0 (9.4–12.6) | 12.2 (9.6–14.7) Median OS, mo (95% CI) | 13.8 (9.0–25.2) | 25.2 (7.5–NE) | 19.2 (7.1–NE) | 16.2 (11.6–19.9) | 15.6 (10.6–19.6) | 16.2 (10.6–21.0) ^a3.0 mg/kg (n=9). ^bAvailable IHC. ^c3.0 mg/kg (n=5). DOR, duration of response; IHC, immunohistochemistry; mo, months; NE, not estimable; ORR, objective response rate. Conclusions Temab-A exhibited promising OS in a heavily pretreated NSCLC population. OS rates compared favorably to those reported in the same indications with chemotherapy or other ADCs.

[Slide 1] 3837RO - ABBV-706: A first-in-class SEZ6-targeted topoisomerase 1 inhibitor (Top1i)-antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) with robust antitumour activity in relapsed/refractory small cell lung cancer (R/R SCLC) Speakers Anne C. Chiang (New Heaven, United States of America) Lecture Time 10:15 - 10:20 Abstract Background SEZ6 exhibits higher expression on SCLC cells than other SCLC therapeutic targets. ABBV-706 is a SEZ6-targeted ADC that selectively delivers a potent, cytotoxic Top1i payload (adizutecan) to SEZ6-expressing tumour cells. Phase (Ph) 1 results of ABBV-706 monotherapy in R/R SCLC (NCT05599984), including biomarker-response associations and ABBV-706 preclinical activity, are presented. Methods Archival tumour tissue was collected at baseline for immunohistochemistry (IHC) and RNA-Seq. Serum neuroendocrine proGRP and circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) were assessed longitudinally. Binding and trafficking of SEZ6 on normal lung alveolar and SCLC cell lines were determined by flow cytometry and high content imaging. Adizutecan potency and activity was assessed in vitro; RNA-Seq was performed on SCLC cells. Results As of Sept 27, 2025, 124 patients (pts) with R/R SCLC received ABBV-706. Among pts with second-line plus (2L+) R/R SCLC who received the recommended Ph 3 dose of 1.8 mg/kg Q3W in Part 2a dose optimization (n=41), an objective response rate (ORR) of 56% and median overall survival (mOS) of 12.4 months (mo) was observed. In a subset with 2L R/R SCLC (n=17), ORR was 82% and mOS was 14.3 mo. Among 2L+ R/R SCLC, safety was comparable with prior data. ABBV-706 drove rapid declines in ctDNA and proGRP as early as cycle (C) 2 day (D) 1. At C3D1, 100% ctDNA clearance was associated with improved progression-free survival and OS. SEZ6 IHC expression was highly prevalent (93% above a 1% [1+ cutoff]), stable across therapy lines, and similar in responders and non-responders. SEZ6 was absent on human normal alveolar lung cells. Preclinically, SEZ6 antibody showed minimal binding and lysosomal trafficking in normal human pulmonary alveolar epithelial cells; significant trafficking in SEZ6-expressing SCLC cells was observed. Adizutecan potently reduced viability and increased expression of MHC-I, PD-L1, and key immune pathways in SCLC cell lines. Conclusions ABBV-706 monotherapy shows promising clinical benefit in heavily pretreated R/R SCLC with biomarker and preclinical data reinforcing its selective, differentiated, and potent antitumour profile.

[Slide 1] 2661RO - Results of a multicenter, phase II, open-label, randomized trial evaluating OSE2101 plus docetaxel or OSE2101 plus nivolumab as second-line therapy in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) progressing after first-line chemo-immunotherapy Speakers Federico Cappuzzo (Rome, Italy) Lecture Time 08:52 - 08:57 Abstract Background OSE2101 is a neo-epitope vaccine designed to induce antigen-specific cytotoxic T lymphocyte responses in HLA-A2 positive patients. Prognosis after progression following first-line chemo-immunotherapy for metastatic NSCLC remains poor. Combi-TED evaluated OSE2101 combined with docetaxel or nivolumab in this setting. Methods Adults with metastatic/unresectable HLA-A2 positive NSCLC, without actionable EGFR mutations or ALK/ROS1 rearrangements, progressing after at least 4 cycles of chemo- immunotherapy or 2 cycles of chemo-immunotherapy followed by 2 cycles of immunotherapy, were randomized (1:1:1) to OSE2101+docetaxel (O+D), OSE2101+nivolumab (O+N), or docetaxel alone (D). Primary endpoint was 1-year overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included OS, progression-free survival (PFS), and safety. A one-sided exact binomial test evaluated whether 1-year OS exceeded the predefined 20% threshold. Bayesian analyses assessed the probability of improved 1-year OS versus D. Final results will be available in SEP2026. Results At the cut-off date (30MAR2026), 106 patients were randomized (35 in T+D, 34 in T+N, and 29 in D) and 93 reached 1-year of follow-up. 1-year, OS rates are 15/34: 44% (90% confidence interval [CI], 30–60) for O+D, 14/32: 44% (CI, 29–60) for O+N, and 7/27: 26% (CI, 13–43) for D. The statistical significance is confirmed for O+D (p=0.001), O+N (p=0.002), but not for D (p=0.287). Bayesian analyses suggested posterior probability >90% of improved 1-year survival versus docetaxel alone for both OSE2101-based combinations. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 89%, 82%, and 79% of patients. Drug-related serious adverse events were reported in 17%, 24%, and 17% of patients. No unexpected safety signals were observed. Conclusions OSE2101-based combinations showed improved 1-year overall survival compared with docetaxel alone in metastatic NSCLC progressing after first-line chemo-immunotherapy, without increasing toxicity, supporting further evaluation of vaccine-based immunotherapy strategies in this setting.

[Slide 1] 2631RO - First-line BAT8008 (TROP2-ADC) plus BAT1308 (anti-PD-1) for advanced NSCLC: Results from a multicenter phase 2 study Speakers Shao Dong Hong (Guangzhou, China) Lecture Time 09:22 - 09:27 Abstract Background TROP2 ADC–immunotherapy combinations are being actively explored as first-line (1L) therapy for patients (pts) with advanced NSCLC, but payload-related myelosuppression and target-associated stomatitis remain key tolerability concerns that may compromise clinical benefit. BAT8008 is a novel exatecan-based TROP2 ADC with a stable cleavable PEG8 linker and DAR of ~6, engineered to widen the therapeutic window. We report preliminary efficacy and safety of BAT8008 plus BAT1308, an anti-PD-1 antibody, as 1L therapy in NSCLC. Methods This multicenter, open-label, single-arm phase 2 trial enrolled treatment-naïve pts with advanced NSCLC. Pts received BAT8008 (2.4 mg/kg) and BAT1308 (200 mg) intravenously once every 2 weeks. Primary endpoints included safety and objective response rate (ORR). Results As of April 28, 2026, 97 patients were enrolled (median age 64 years; 53.6% with squamous histology; 89% with ECOG PS 1). Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 87.6%, with grade (G) ≥3 TRAEs in 38.1% of pts. Despite the high DAR, severe (≥G3) stomatitis and hematological toxicities were relatively uncommon: anemia (7.2%), stomatitis (7.2%), leucocytopenia (14.4%) and neutropenia (15.5%). No new immune-related safety signals were observed. Among 76 efficacy-evaluable pts, ORR was 57.9%, disease control rate (DCR) was 89.5%, and 6-mo progression-free survival (PFS) rate was 64.8%. Antitumor activity was observed across PD-L1 subgroups and histologies (Table). Updated results, including PFS and safety data will be presented at the conference. Table: 2631RO Anti-tumor activity stratified by PD-L1 expression and histology Variables | TPS unknown | TPS <1% | TPS 1-49% | TPS ≥50% | Squamous | Nonsquamous n | 3 | 36 | 19 | 18 | 39 | 37 ORR (%) | 67 | 47 | 53 | 83 | 56 | 59 DCR (%) | 100 | 86 | 89 | 94 | 92 | 86 6-mo PFS (95% CI), % | 100.0 (100.0-100.0) | 46.7 (31.5-69.4) | 76.9 (59.1-100.0) | 80.4 (62.4-100.0) | 61.9 (47.1-81.3) | 68.0 (53.6-86.1) Conclusions BAT8008 plus BAT1308 showed clinically meaningful activity with manageable toxicity in advanced NSCLC. The findings support the planned randomized evaluation of this regimen and suggest a potentially favorable activity–toxicity balance for prolonged IL combination therapy.

[Slide 1] Tissue-based biomarkers Transcription factor subtypes ASCL1 (SCLC-A), NEUROD1 (SCLC-N), POU2F3 (SCLC-P), ATOH1, SCLC-I [Heatmap graphic] Protein expression DLL3 SLFN11 PD-L1/PD-1 [Three IHC tissue micrographs] Tumour DNA Tumour mutational burden Neoantigen load [DNA double-helix graphic] Tumour immune microenvironment CD8+ T cell infiltration CD4 expression MHC I & II gene signatures MHC I expression [Tumour cell cluster with immune cells graphic] [Centre: torso illustration with lungs, tumour, biopsy needle and blood draw] Blood-based biomarkers Circulating tumour cells Numbers Somatic mutations Copy number alterations SFN11 expression [Cell cluster graphic] Circulating tumour DNA Concentration Tumour mutational burden Somatic mutations Variant allele frequency Methylation profiling Nucleosome profiling [DNA fragments graphic] Cytokines IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, TNFα [Cytokine dots graphic] Serum auto-antibodies Anti-VGCC, Anti-VGKC Anti-intracellular neuronal antigens [Antibody graphic]

[Slide 1] IVONESCIMAB (AK112) | ESMO 2026 Can One Bispecific Antibody Replace an IO-TKI Combination? MV Onco 01 WHY THIS STUDY? • IMDC favorable-risk advanced ccRCC • Can dual PD-1 + VEGF-A blockade work WITHOUT a separate TKI? 02 WHAT IS IVONESCIMAB? AK112 – Tetravalent bispecific antibody • PD-1 → Enhances antitumor immunity • VEGF-A → Blocks angiogenesis One antibody. Two targets. [Antibody schematic labeled PD-1 / VEGF-A] 03 STUDY DESIGN • Phase Ib/II | Single-arm | First-line • 26 patients enrolled • 21 response evaluable • Ivonescimab every 3 weeks • RP2D → 30 mg/kg • Median follow-up → 9.1 months 04 DID TUMORS RESPOND? ORR → 57.1% (12/21) • All partial responses. DCR → 95.2% (20/21) • Only ONE patient had RECIST progression. 05 SURVIVAL & SAFETY • Median PFS → Not reached • 12-month PFS → 87.9% • 18-month PFS → 87.9% • Grade ≥3 TRAEs → 26.9% • Proteinuria → 42.3% • Hypertension → 26.9% • No treatment-related deaths. 06 TAKE-HOME Promising activity with TKI-free ivonescimab monotherapy. BUT: • Small, single-arm study. • Short follow-up. Immature survival data. • Promising ORR ≠ Proven survival benefit. • Not yet practice-changing.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 / MADRID EVIDENCE NOTES 23–27 OCT 2026 MADRID, SPAIN PRESIDENTIAL SYMPOSIUM II / LBA5 KRAScendo 1 DIVARASIB BEATS SOTORASIB/ADAGRASIB ON PFS AND INTERIM OS Previously treated KRAS G12C-mutant advanced/metastatic NSCLC 25 OCT 2026, Sunday 16:30 Madrid | 18:30 TSİ Presenter To be confirmed ✓ PFS superior ✓ Interim OS significant ✓ Effect size pending 01 PATIENTS • Previously treated locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) • KRAS G12C mutation positive 02 ARMS Divarasib — Orally once daily (KRAS G12C inhibitor) ↔ Active comparator — Sotorasib Orally once daily OR Adagrasib Orally twice daily Phase 3 | Randomized | Open-label | Global multicenter | n = 338 1:1 03 KNOWN NOW • Primary endpoint of BICR-assessed PFS favored divarasib. • Prespecified interim OS analysis was statistically significant. • No new safety signals reported in the topline release. 04 NOT YET DISCLOSED • Hazard ratios and 95% CIs • Median PFS and median OS • Absolute survival differences • ORR and duration of response • Detailed grade 3+ toxicity and discontinuation rates • Distribution of sotorasib vs adagrasib in the active-control arm 05 CLINICAL READOUT The key question is magnitude, not positivity: against a strong active-control arm, how large are the PFS/OS gains, and do they justify toxicity and daily treatment burden? This is a direct within-class randomized comparison; do not compare earlier phase 1 medians head-to-head. Data status: Company topline + ESMO 2026 programme; full LBA5 presentation pending. Sources: drozdogan.com; Genentech/Roche topline, 1 Jul 2026; KRAScendo 1 / NCT06497556; ESMO 2026 programme. drozdogan.com

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 - Conference Cal... cslide.ctimeetingtech.com Proffered Paper session Results As of April 2, 2026, 149 pts were enrolled (40 colorectal cancer [CRC], 40 gastric cancer [GC], 27 lung squamous cell carcinoma [SQCC], 23 lung adenocarcinoma [LUAD], and 19 other solid tumors). No dose limiting toxicity occurred. Maximum tolerated dose was not reached. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 137 (91.9%) pts, of whom 76 (51.0%) were grade ≥3. TRAEs with incidence >20% were anemia (33.6%), and aspartate aminotransferase increased (21.5%). Twenty-five (16.8%) pts discontinued any of the study treatment due to TRAEs. TRAEs leading to death occurred in 5 (3.4%) pts. Efficacy for these cohorts in the efficacy-evaluable set was shown in the table. CCR8-positive was defined as tumor-associated positive immune cell count proportion ≥1. Table: 1949O Efficacy in advanced solid tumors | | Total | GC | CRC | SQCC | LUAD | | ORR across all dose level, % | 23.0% (N=135) | 18.4% (N=38) | 23.5% (N=34) | 24.0% (N=25, all received prior immunotherapy) | 23.8% (N=21) | | ORR at 500 mg, % | 27.1% (N=70) | 19.0% (N=21) | 36.4% (N=11) | 41.7% (N=12) | 15.4% (N=13) | | ORR at 500 mg who had positive CCR8 expression, % | 37.8% (N=45) | 23.5% (N=17) | 50.0% (N=8) | 83.3% (N=6) | 16.7% (N=6) | [Red hand-drawn arrow pointing at the SQCC column and a red box around the CRC 50.0% (N=8) and SQCC 83.3% (N=6) cells]

[Slide 2] #ESMO26 KEY PRESENTATIONS Rapid Oral 283RO Assessing bemarituzumab in patients with advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer by fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) amplification status in the FORTITUDE study, which suggests that FGFR2 amplification may identify a more treatment-sensitive subgroup. Friday, Oct 23, 2026 Location: Almeria Auditorium - Hall 9 Session: 4:15-5:45pm Presentation: 5:19-5:24pm Rapid Oral LBA73 Evaluating ctDNA-guided treatment intensification in untreated advanced or metastatic EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to identify patients who may benefit from intensified first-line therapy in the PACE-LUNG study—a multicenter, Phase II trial of additional chemotherapy for patients with persistent EGFR-mutant ctDNA in plasma at Week 3 after starting first-line osimertinib. Saturday, Oct 24, 2026 Location: Almeria Auditorium - Hall 9 Session: 8:30-10:00am Presentation: 8:30-8:35am Rapid Oral 263RO Characterizing resistance mechanisms and predictors of early progression and long-term response to lorlatinib from the CROWN study. Findings suggest that baseline genomic complexity and on-treatment changes in methylation-based tissue-free assays may help identify patients at risk of early progression. Saturday, Oct 24, 2026 Location: Almeria Auditorium - Hall 9 Session: 8:30-10:00am Presentation: 9:05-9:10am Poster 4403P Using serial Guardant360 Liquid testing in a Phase 2 study with MD Anderson to examine clonal and subclonal resistance during anti-EGFR rechallenge in metastatic colorectal cancer to distinguish genuine resistance evolution from changes caused by fluctuating ctDNA levels, potentially improving patient selection for anti-EGFR rechallenge. Friday, Oct 23, 2026 Session: 3:15-4:00pm Poster 2566P Exploring post-surgical MRD and pathological complete response (pCR) after perioperative nivolumab in resectable Stage III NSCLC. In this exploratory analysis from NADIM II, pCR was associated with MRD negativity and excellent 5-year survival. In non-pCR patients, MRD negativity identified patients with favorable long-term outcomes, whereas detectable MRD defined a high-risk subgroup with early recurrence. Monday, Oct 26, 2026 Session: 12:00-12:45pm [blue carousel back-arrow icon at right edge]

[Slide 1] #ESMO26 · PUBLISHED TOPLINE DeLLphi-305 LBA3 Presidential Symposium I Sat Oct 24 · 17:18 CEST Tarlatamab + durvalumab vs durvalumab 1L maintenance in ES-SCLC without progression after durvalumab + platinum–etoposide DESIGN • Phase 3, randomized 1:1, open-label, global • N = 563 • Treated and untreated asymptomatic brain mets allowed • Monitoring 1–2 h after C1D1 and C1D8 tarlatamab (6–8 h in some regions incl. Europe) • Primary: OS · Secondary: PFS, ORR PUBLISHED TOPLINE OS Met at prespecified interim (primary) PFS Significant improvement (secondary) ORR Significant improvement (secondary) "statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival ... compared to durvalumab alone" No hazard ratios, medians or response rates disclosed yet. Full results at ESMO. Source: Amgen press release, 8 Sep 2026 (AstraZeneca release same day). Sponsor: Amgen, partial funding by AstraZeneca. Dr. Aakash Desai | @ADesaiMD

[Slide 1] #ESMO26 · PUBLISHED TOPLINE SAFFRON LBA6 Presidential Symposium II Sun Oct 25 · 16:54 CET Osimertinib + savolitinib vs platinum–pemetrexed EGFRm NSCLC, MET-overexpressed and/or amplified, after osimertinib DESIGN • Phase 3, randomized, open-label, global • N = 338; 230 centers, 29 countries • Savolitinib 300 mg BID + osimertinib 80 mg QD vs platinum doublet • Progression on 1L or 2L osimertinib; high MET cutoffs (IHC/FISH) from SAVANNAH • Primary: PFS · Key secondary: OS, ORR PUBLISHED TOPLINE PFS Met (primary endpoint) OS Met (key secondary) Safety No new safety findings "statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in both PFS and OS versus doublet platinum-based chemotherapy" No hazard ratios, medians or response rates disclosed yet. Full results at ESMO. Source: AstraZeneca and HUTCHMED press releases, 17 Aug 2026 (high-level results). Design details: same releases. Dr. Aakash Desai | @ADesaiMD

[Slide 1] Optimizing the NSCLC Treatment Landscape: Impact for Today and Insights for Tomorrow A Bristol Myers Squibb Sponsored Industry Satellite Symposium at the ESMO Congress 2026 Friday, 23 October 2026 | 9:45 – 11:15 AM CEST Madrid Auditorium, Hall 4, IFEMA Madrid Bristol Myers Squibb Mariano Provencio, MD, PhD Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro Madrid, Spain Antonio Passaro, MD, PhD Istituto Europeo di Oncologia IRCCS Milan, Italy Enriqueta Felip, MD, PhD Vall d'Hebron University Hospital Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Autonomy, Spain Marcia K. Horn, JD International Cancer Advocacy Network (ICAN) Phoenix, AZ, USA Speakers are paid consultants of Bristol Myers Squibb This satellite symposium is not eligible for CME credits.

[Slide 1] Dr. Aakash Desai Associate Director, Phase 1 and Precision Oncology @ADesaiMD My Top Picks for ESMO 2026! CLINICAL REVIEW ESMO Congress 2026 · Madrid · Oct 23–27 · Thoracic phase 3 readouts and early-phase ADCs, ranked 7 | 2658RO | c-Met ADC Temab-A Telisotuzumab adizutecan: c-Met-directed ADC with a Top1i payload Phase 1 first-in-human study, overall survival analysis in nonsquamous NSCLC Rapid Oral 1: NSCLC, metastatic Sat Oct 24 · 09:27 CEST AbbVie reports: EGFR wild-type (n=48): ORR 50%, median OS 13.8 mo EGFR-mutant (n=41): ORR 63%, median OS 16.2 mo EGFR wild-type, c-Met 3+ ≥25%: median OS ~19.2 mo Watching: Does c-Met expression level select who benefits? Phase 3 AndroMETa-Lung-167 vs standard of care is underway. 1 | LBA6 | EGFR + MET SAFFRON Osimertinib + savolitinib vs platinum–pemetrexed EGFRm, MET-overexpressed and/or amplified NSCLC after osimertinib Presidential Symposium II Sun Oct 25 · 16:54 CET Sponsor topline: PFS and OS met (AstraZeneca / HUTCHMED) Watching: How large is the benefit, and which MET IHC/FISH cutoff selects patients? 2 | LBA3 | DLL3×CD3 DeLLphi-305 Tarlatamab + durvalumab vs durvalumab 1L maintenance in ES-SCLC after durvalumab + platinum–etoposide Presidential Symposium I Sat Oct 24 · 17:18 CEST Sponsor topline: OS met at interim; PFS and ORR also met (Amgen) Watching: How big is the OS gain, and can clinics deliver T-cell engager monitoring in maintenance? 3 | LBA5 | KRAS G12C Krascendo 1 Divarasib vs sotorasib or adagrasib Previously treated KRAS G12C-mutated advanced NSCLC Presidential Symposium II Sun Oct 25 · 16:30 CET Sponsor topline: PFS met; OS significant at interim (Roche) Watching: How wide is the gap within the G12C class, and at what tolerability? 4 | LBA66 | TROP2 ADC OptiTROP-Lung06 Sac-TMT + pembrolizumab vs chemo + pembrolizumab 1L PD-L1-negative (TPS <1%) nonsquamous NSCLC Proffered Paper 1: NSCLC, metastatic Sun Oct 25 · 10:53 CET Sponsor topline: PFS met at interim; positive OS trend (Kelun-Biotech) Watching: Can a TROP2 ADC replace the platinum doublet alongside IO? 5 | LBA71 | EGFR×HER3 PANKU-Lung01 Iza-bren (bispecific ADC) vs platinum–pemetrexed EGFR-mutant nonsquamous NSCLC after a 3rd-gen EGFR TKI Proffered Paper 2: NSCLC, metastatic Mon Oct 26 · 09:14 CET Sponsor topline: PFS met at interim (Sichuan Biokin) Watching: First effect sizes: how big is the PFS gain, and at what toxicity? 6 | 3837RO | SEZ6 ADC ABBV-706 SEZ6-directed Top1i ADC, phase 1 Relapsed/refractory SCLC Rapid Oral: Non-metastatic NSCLC and other thoracic Mon Oct 26 · 10:15 CET AbbVie reports: ORR 56%, median OS 12.4 mo at 1.8 mg/kg (2L+, n=41) Watching: Where does SEZ6 fit next to DLL3 and B7-H3 in SCLC? Key Clinical Impacts & Future Directions • After osimertinib: MET (SAFFRON), TROP2 (OptiTROP-Lung04 final OS, LBA67) or EGFR×HER3 (PANKU-Lung01): which patients get which next step? • ES-SCLC: Does tarlatamab move into 1L maintenance, and how does that reshape later lines (DLL3, SEZ6, B7-H3)? • KRAS G12C: Does a next-generation inhibitor reset the second-line standard? • 1L PD-L1-negative: Can an ADC replace platinum chemotherapy alongside pembrolizumab? • Biomarkers: MET IHC/FISH, c-Met level, SEZ6: which assays will we need at diagnosis and at progression? • Phase 1 to phase 3: Will early ADC signals hold up against standard of care? Times are Madrid local (CEST on Oct 24; CET from Oct 25). Toplines are as stated in sponsor releases; full data pending. Not medical advice. Source: ESMO 2026 Congress program | Design: Dr. Aakash Desai

[Slide 1] Aulos Bioscience to Present Phase 2 Data for Imneskibart With Avelumab in Adenocarcinoma Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer at ESMO Congress 2026 #ESMO26 aulos™ [background: 3D rendering of red antibody molecules on blue]

[Slide 1] [Henlius logo] Henlius ESMO 2026 Serplulimab ESMO Proffered Paper U.S. Bridging Study: ASTRIDE [3D antibody molecule illustration] ● Head-to-head comparison in 1L ES-SCLC, with numerically longer OS ● Supports the applicability of ASTRUM-005 findings to the U.S. population First report on ASTRIDE Study Results (Serplulimab + Chemo vs. Atezolizumab + Chemo in 1L ES-SCLC) Largest U.S. Enrollment in an ES-SCLC Bridging Study 201 ES-SCLC Pts Enrolled in the U.S. 63 U.S. Enrollment Sites Longer Survival Median OS: 12.4 months vs. 10.2 months 24-month OS rate: 32.2% vs. 17.6% Median PFS per IRRC assessment: 5.4 months vs. 4.9 months Comparable Safety Profile Comparable incidence and severity of adverse events No new safety signals identified [Badge: ESMO 2026 BREAKTHROUGH ★★★] [calendar icon] Presentation Time: Local time 14:55–15:05, October 26, 2026 [person icon] Leading PI: Dr. David R. Gandara, UC Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center A Differentiated PD-1 Inhibitor Approved indications: sqNSCLC, ES-SCLC, ESCC, nsqNSCLC and GC A Distinct Mechanism Advancing Treatment in Lung and Gastrointestinal Cancers Approved in 50+ countries and regions, covering nearly half of the world's population Included in reimbursement or public healthcare coverage systems in 10+ European countries Serplulimab is not approved in the U.S.

[Slide 1] PEARLS / KEYNOTE-091 ESMO 2026 Recurrence Delayed. Survival Unchanged. MV Onco [Hand-drawn illustration: IV bag labelled PEMBROLIZUMAB dripping into a pair of lungs with a tumour; two alarm clocks labelled RECURRENCE CLOCK (teal) and SURVIVAL CLOCK (red)] DFS HR 0.85 Recurrence delayed ✓ OS HR 0.98 No proven survival gain WE DELAYED THE RECURRENCE CLOCK... BUT DID WE EXTEND THE SURVIVAL CLOCK? [IV bag labelled 1 YEAR OF PEMBROLIZUMAB] Grade ≥3 AEs: 34% vs 25.6% [Slide 2] PEARLS / KEYNOTE-091 | ESMO 2026 Did Adjuvant Pembrolizumab Prevent Recurrence? MV Onco ① WHY KEYNOTE-091? • Completely resected early-stage NSCLC • Recurrence remains common after surgery. • Can ONE YEAR of adjuvant pembrolizumab reduce recurrence? ② WHO ENTERED? • Stage IB (≥4 cm), II or IIIA — AJCC v7 • Completely resected NSCLC • Any PD-L1 expression • Adjuvant chemotherapy permitted • N = 1,177 patients ③ RANDOMIZATION N = 1,177 | 1:1 PEMBROLIZUMAB 200 mg IV Q3W × 18 cycles, n = 590 VS PLACEBO Q3W × 18 cycles, n = 587 Duration ≈ 1 year ④ WHAT DID EARLIER ANALYSIS SHOW? SIGNIFICANT DFS BENEFIT ITT population: • HR 0.76 (95% CI 0.63–0.91) • P = 0.0014 Prior chemotherapy subgroup: • HR 0.73 (95% CI 0.60–0.89) → Early recurrence benefit established. ⑤ DID DFS BENEFIT PERSIST? Median follow-up: 87.7 months 6-YEAR DFS • Pembrolizumab → 44.0% • Placebo → 39.2% HR 0.85 (95% CI 0.73–0.98) Median DFS: 58.7 vs 43.3 months TAKE-HOME • DFS benefit persists after 7 years. • But HR shifts 0.76 → 0.85. • Does this translate into LONGER SURVIVAL? Continued in Part 2 → [Slide 3] PEARLS / KEYNOTE-091 | ESMO 2026 PART 2/3 Better DFS – But Are Patients Living Longer? MV Onco ① DID OVERALL SURVIVAL IMPROVE? NO SIGNIFICANT OS BENEFIT 6-year OS: • Pembrolizumab → 68.5% • Placebo → 66.4% • HR 0.98 (95% CI 0.81–1.18) • P = 0.418 → Only 2.1% absolute difference. ② WHAT ABOUT PRIOR CHEMOTHERAPY? 6-year OS: • Pembrolizumab → 68.9% • Placebo → 65.4% • HR 0.91 (95% CI 0.74–1.12) → Numerical advantage. → Still NO demonstrated OS benefit. ③ DID LUNG CANCER DEATHS DECREASE? 6-year lung cancer-specific survival: • Pembrolizumab → 81.3% • Placebo → 76.9% • HR 0.81 (95% CI 0.63–1.03) → Favorable trend. → NOT statistically significant. ④ WHAT ABOUT LCSS AFTER CHEMO? 6-year lung cancer-specific survival: • Pembrolizumab → 81.6% • Placebo → 75.0% • HR 0.69 (95% CI 0.53–0.91) → 6.6% absolute difference. → Encouraging subgroup finding. But secondary endpoint – interpret cautiously. ⑤ WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? Median follow-up: 87.7 months DFS benefit persists: • HR 0.85 But overall survival: • HR 0.98 TAKE-HOME Better DFS ≠ Proven OS Benefit After 7.3 years, pembrolizumab delays recurrence. But patients have NOT been shown to live longer overall. Continued in Part 3 → Toxicity & Practice Implications [Slide 4] PEARLS / KEYNOTE-091 | ESMO 2026 DFS Benefit Without OS Benefit — Is It Worth It? MV Onco 1. WHAT WAS THE PRICE OF BENEFIT? • Grade ≥3 adverse events: – Pembrolizumab → 34.0% – Placebo → 25.6% • Grade ≥3 immune-mediated AEs / infusion reactions: – 7.9% vs 1.9% → More severe toxicity with pembrolizumab. 2. WHY DID DFS NOT TRANSLATE INTO OS? • Possible explanations: • Effective treatment after recurrence • Competing non-cancer deaths • Delayed recurrence ≠ prevented death • Trial not powered for OS These explanations remain unproven. 3. IS KEYNOTE-091 STILL POSITIVE? • YES — FOR DFS • Final DFS: HR 0.85 (95% CI 0.73–0.98) → Persistent recurrence benefit. • But final OS: HR 0.98 (95% CI 0.81–1.18) → NO demonstrated survival advantage. DFS-positive ≠ OS-positive. 4. SHOULD THIS CHANGE PRACTICE? • Adjuvant pembrolizumab remains an option for eligible patients. • But consider: • Absolute DFS benefit • Stage and recurrence risk • PD-L1 and driver mutation status • Prior platinum chemotherapy • Immune toxicity and patient preference Do NOT compare trials indirectly. 5. WHAT IS THE REAL LESSON? • After 7.3 YEARS: • 6-year DFS → 44.0% vs 39.2% • 6-year OS → 68.5% vs 66.4% • Severe AEs → 34.0% vs 25.6% TAKE-HOME PEMBROLIZUMAB DELAYS RECURRENCE. LONGER OVERALL SURVIVAL REMAINS UNPROVEN. The question is no longer simply: "Does it improve DFS?" But: "How much benefit justifies one year of immunotherapy?"

[Slide 1] UPCOMING FDA DECISION PDUFA: NOVEMBER 14, 2026 Ivonescimab PD-1/VEGF Bispecific Antibody FOR ADVANCED EGFR-MUTATED LUNG CANCER AFTER PROGRESSION ON THIRD-GENERATION EGFR-TKI (e.g., osimertinib) HARMONi PHASE III TRIAL 438 patients with advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC 6.8 months Ivonescimab + chemotherapy 4.4 months Placebo + chemotherapy Median Progression-Free Survival (PFS) 48% lower risk of progression or death (HR 0.52) P < 0.0001 16.8 vs 14.0 months Median Overall Survival (not statistically significant; HR 0.79) 28% vs 15% Serious treatment-related adverse events Dual action: PD-1 blockade + VEGF inhibition in a single antibody ECHELON MEDICAL & AESTHETICS www.echelonmedicalnyc.com DR. NICOLE M. BATTY MEDICAL ONCOLOGIST & HEMATOLOGIST ECHELON MEDICAL & AESTHETICS [lung illustration; portrait of a woman in glasses and white coat]

[Slide 1] #ESMO26 · PUBLISHED TOPLINE Krascendo 1 LBA5 Presidential Symposium II Sun Oct 25 · 16:30 CET Divarasib vs sotorasib or adagrasib Previously treated advanced KRAS G12C-mutated NSCLC (head-to-head) DESIGN • Phase 3, randomized, open-label, multicentre • N = 338 • Divarasib QD vs sotorasib QD or adagrasib BID • Primary: PFS by BICR • Secondary: OS, confirmed ORR, DoR, safety PUBLISHED TOPLINE PFS Met (primary, BICR) OS Significant at interim analysis Safety No new findings; common TRAEs manageable, reversible "clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvements in both progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)" No hazard ratios, medians or response rates disclosed yet. Full results at ESMO. Source: Roche press release (ad hoc announcement), 2 Jul 2026; Genentech release 1 Jul 2026 (US). Dr. Aakash Desai | @ADesaiMD

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 • Thoracic oncology sessions on my list Oct 23–27 • Madrid • Times: Madrid (Beijing) Oct 23 (Fri) 13:30 (19:30) SCLC: Can we finally tackle it? 13:30 (19:30) Liquid biopsies in advanced lung cancer Oct 24 (Sat) 08:30 (14:30) LBA73 PACE-LUNG • FLAURA2 plasma EGFR 10:15 (16:15) Borderline resectable stage III NSCLC (MDT) 14:45 (20:45) Rare thoracic tumours: thymic, NETs 16:30 (22:30) Presidential I • LBA3 DeLLphi-305 Oct 25 (Sun) 10:15 (17:15) LBA66 OptiTROP-Lung06 • LBA67 OptiTROP-Lung04 • SARON 16:30 (23:30) Presidential II • LBA5 Krascendo-1 • LBA6 SAFFRON Oct 26 (Mon) 08:30 (15:30) LBA69 SANOVO • LBA71 PANKU-Lung01 • LBA72 HERON-Lung01 10:15 (17:15) THRIVE • iTHYM • LBA62 MDT-BRIDGE 14:45 (21:45) LBA64 Neotorch • KEYNOTE-671 biomarkers • DeLLphi-304 16:30 (23:30) Periop strategies in oncogene-driven resectable NSCLC Schedule per ESMO online programme; subject to change. @yanwanpu1527

[Slide 2] HAYSTACK MRD® by Quest Diagnostics® "Circulating tumor DNA as a marker of durable remission after non-operative management of mismatch repair deficient rectal cancer" October 23, 3:15PM-4:00 PM Presentation number: 4389P Session: Translational research and biomarker [Slide 3] HAYSTACK MRD® by Quest Diagnostics® "Clinical utility of ultra-sensitive ctDNA MRD monitoring in advanced NSCLC" E-poster Presentation number: 2728eP Session: NSCLC, metastatic

[Slide 1] TOPO1i ADCs B7-H3: Elfetabart drozuntecan (Elfe-D; DB-1311/BNT324) · Ifinatamab deruxtecan (I-DXd) · MGC026 · QLC5508 (MHB088C) · Risvutatug rezetecan (Ris-Rez) · SYS6043 · Tambotatug pelitecan (Tam-Peli) HER3: DB-1310 · Patritumab deruxtecan (HER3-DXd) · Ruzaltatug rezetecan · SHR-A2009 · SYS6023 · YL202/BNT326 HER2: IBI354 · JSKN003 · TQB2102 · Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) · Trastuzumab pamirtecan (T-Pam) · Trastuzumab rezetecan (SHR-A1811) TROP2: Datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) · OBI-992 · Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) · Sacituzumab tirumotecan (Sac-TMT) FRα: Sofetabart mipitecan (Sofe-M) · Torvutatug samrotecan (Torvu-sam) · ZW191 cMET: SHR-1826 · Telisotuzumab adizutecan (Temab-A, ABBV-400) · YL211 CLDN18.2: SHR-A1904 · Arcotatug tavatecan (IBI343/TAK-921) EGFR x B7-H3: IBI3001 · TJ101 DLL3: SHR-4849 · ZL-1310 CEACAM5: BG-C477 · Precemtabart tocentecan (Precem-TcT) CDH17: CM518D1 · MRG007 (ARR-217) SEZ6: HS-20108 ROR1: HDM2005 PSMA x STEAP1: ABBV-969 PSMA: SHR-4394 PD-L1: HLX43 Nectin4: SHR-A2102 FGFR3: BHV-1530 (AMB302) FGFR2b: HDM2020 EGFR x HER3: Izalontamab brengitecan (Iza-bren) EGFR x cMET: HS-20122 CDH6: Raludotatug deruxtecan (R-DXd) B7-H4: Mocertatug rezetecan (Mo-Rez) Auristatin ADCs CLDN18.2: ATG-022 · Sonesitatug vedotin (Sone-Ve) Nectin4: Bulumtatug fuvedotin (BFv, 9MW2821) · Enfortumab vedotin (EV) ITGB6: Sigvotatug vedotin (SV) HER2: Disitamab vedotin (DV) EGFR: Becotatug vedotin (MRG003) cMET: Telisotuzumab vedotin (Teliso-V) CLDN6: Ixotatug vedotin (TORL-1-23) CD20: TRS005 5T4: JK06 BCMA: Belantamab mafodotin Maytansinoid ADCs HER2: Trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) FRα: Mirvetuximab soravtansine (Mirv) [Figure: three boxed panels; targets on the left with branching lines to colour-coded dots and agent names. No trial names or data values on the image.]

[Slide 1] ADC | Target | Payload | Session | Title MRG007 (ARR-217) | CDH17 | Topo1i | Rapid oral (LBA): Developmental therapeutic | LBA34 - First-in-human study of MRG007 (ARR-217), a CDH17-directed exatecan ADC, in patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors HS-20122 | EGFR x cMET | Topo1i | Proffered paper: Developmental therapeutics | 1000O - HS-20122, a Novel EGFR/cMET Bispecific Antibody Drug Conjugate, in Advanced Solid Tumors IBI3001 | EGFR x B7H3 | Topo1i | Proffered paper: Developmental therapeutics | 1001O - Safety and efficacy of IBI3001, an anti-EGFR/B7H3 bispecific ADC, in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors: Results of a multi-regional phase 1 study CM518D1 | CDH17 | Topo1i | Poster: Developmental therapeutics | 1015P - First-in-human study of CM518D1: a novel CDH17 ADC in advanced solid tumors YL211 | cMET | Topo1i | Poster: Developmental therapeutics | 1017P - Phase 1 First-in-Human (FIH) Results of YL211, a c-Met targeting Antibody-Drug Conjugate (ADC), in patients (pts) with Advanced Solid Tumors OBI-992 | TROP2 | Topo1i | Poster: Developmental therapeutics | 1018P - Phase 1 dose-escalation trial of novel TROP2-targeted antibody-drug conjugate OBI-992 in patients with advanced solid tumors BHV-1530 | FGFR3 | Topo1i | Poster: Developmental therapeutics | 1019P - Phase 1 study of BHV-1530, a first-in-class FGFR3 ADC in Advanced Tumors MGC026 | B7H3 | Topo1i | Poster: Developmental therapeutics | 1020P - Phase 1, first-in-human study of MGC026, a B7-H3–targeted antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) in advanced solid tumors TJ101 | EGFR x B7H3 | Topo1i | Poster: Developmental therapeutics | 1021P - Preliminary safety and pharmacokinetics of TJ101, an EGFR × B7-H3 bispecific antibody-drug conjugate, in patients with advanced solid tumors: results from an ongoing global Phase I study SYS6023 | HER3 | Topo1i | Poster: Developmental therapeutics | 1028P - First-in-human study of SYS6023 in patients (pts) with malignant solid tumors SHR-4394 | PSMA | Topo1i | Poster: Metastatic prostate cancer | 2228P - A Phase 1 Study of SHR-4394, a PSMA-targeted Antibody-drug Conjugate, in Patients with Prostate Cancer. BG-C477 | CEACAM5 | Topo1i | Poster: NSCLC, locally advanced | 2567P - First-in-human study of BG-C477, a novel CEA-targeting ADC, in advanced solid tumors: initial results in NSCLC HS-20108 | SEZ6 | Topo1i | Poster: SCLC | 3814P - Phase 1 Study of HS-20108, a SEZ6 Targeting Antibody-Drug Conjugate, in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors HDM2020 | FGFR2b | Topo1i | Poster: Miscellaneous | 4864P - A Phase I Clinical Study of HDM2020 (FGFR2b-ADC) in Patients with Advanced FGFR2b Positive Solid Tumors: Results from Dose Escalation

[Slide 1] ESMO CONGRESS 2026 ESMO 2026 TOP 10 ABSTRACTS MADRID · IFEMA · 23–27 OCT 2026 · ALL TIMES MADRID LOCAL SAT 24 OCT 2026 LBA3 | DeLLphi-305: TARLATAMAB + DURVA MAINTENANCE, ES-SCLC | JACOB SANDS · 17:18–17:30 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 SUN 25 OCT 2026 LBA66 | OptiTROP-Lung06: 1L sac-TMT + PEMBRO, PD-L1-NEGATIVE | CAICUN ZHOU · 10:53–11:03 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 LBA67 | OptiTROP-Lung04: sac-TMT FINAL OS, EGFR-MUTATED | WEN FENG FANG · 11:03–11:13 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 LBA68 | SIGVOTATUG VEDOTIN VS DOCETAXEL, 2L+ NSQ NSCLC | SOLANGE PETERS · 11:13–11:23 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 LBA5 | Krascendo 1: DIVARASIB VS SOTORASIB/ADAGRASIB | FERDINANDOS SKOULIDIS · 16:30–16:42 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 LBA6 | SAFFRON: OSIMERTINIB + SAVOLITINIB, MET AFTER OSI | SHUN LU · 16:54–17:06 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 MON 26 OCT 2026 LBA69 | SANOVO: SAVOLITINIB + OSIMERTINIB, 1L EGFR/MET | YI-LONG WU · 08:30–08:40 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 LBA71 | PANKU-Lung01: iza-bren AFTER A 3RD-GENERATION EGFR TKI | LI ZHANG · 09:22–09:32 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 LBA72 | HERON-Lung01: RUZALTATUG REZETECAN (HER3 ADC) | YI-LONG WU · 09:32–09:42 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 LBA64 | Neotorch: PERIOPERATIVE TORIPALIMAB, FINAL ANALYSIS | SHUN LU · 15:23–15:33 · ALICANTE AUDITORIUM, HALL 6 SELECTED & PROVIDED BY DR. MEHRPOUYA MOBIN All ten in one calendar file. Link in the post. LUNGSUMMIT.ORG

[Slide 1] ESMO26 TOP TEN BY ONCOALERT LUNG CANCER OncoAlert 360 [logo] Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues WWW.ONCOALERT360.COM LBA3 DELLPHI-305: TARLATAMAB PLUS DURVALUMAB VS DURVALUMAB AS FIRST-LINE MAINTENANCE FOLLOWING DURVALUMAB, PLATINUM AND ETOPOSIDE IN EXTENSIVE-STAGE SCLC: PRIMARY ANALYSIS OF THE PHASE 3 TRIAL LBA5 KRASCENDO 1: EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF DIVARASIB VS SOTORASIB OR ADAGRASIB IN PREVIOUSLY TREATED LOCALLY ADVANCED OR METASTATIC KRAS G12C-MUTATED NSCLC LBA6 SAFFRON: OSIMERTINIB + SAVOLITINIB VS PLATINUM-PEMETREXED IN EGFRM MET-OVEREXPRESSED AND/OR -AMPLIFIED ADVANCED NSCLC POST-OSIMERTINIB: PHASE 3 PRIMARY RESULTS LBA67 OPTITROP-LUNG04: FINAL OS ANALYSIS OF SACITUZUMAB TIRUMOTECAN VERSUS PLATINUM-BASED CHEMOTHERAPY IN EGFR-MUTATED NSCLC AFTER PROGRESSION ON EGFR-TKI: PHASE III STUDY LBA66 OPTITROP-LUNG06: SACITUZUMAB TIRUMOTECAN PLUS PEMBROLIZUMAB VERSUS CHEMOTHERAPY PLUS PEMBROLIZUMAB AS FIRST-LINE TREATMENT FOR PD-L1-NEGATIVE ADVANCED NON-SQUAMOUS NSCLC: RANDOMIZED PHASE 3 STUDY 2614O PERSEE: PEMBROLIZUMAB WITH OR WITHOUT PLATINUM-BASED CHEMOTHERAPY AS FIRST-LINE TREATMENT IN ADVANCED NSCLC WITH PD-L1 ≥50%: PHASE 3 TRIAL LBA69 SANOVO: SAVOLITINIB OR PLACEBO COMBINED WITH OSIMERTINIB IN TREATMENT-NAÏVE ADVANCED NSCLC WITH EGFR MUTATION AND MET OVEREXPRESSION: PHASE 3 RESULTS 2618RO IFCT-2103 DIAL: CONTINUATION PEMBROLIZUMAB (± PEMETREXED) UP TO 2 YEARS VERSUS OBSERVATION IN METASTATIC NSCLC WITH DISEASE CONTROL AT 6 MONTHS: PHASE 2 ANALYSIS LBA71 PANKU-LUNG01: RANDOMIZED PHASE III STUDY OF IZALONTAMAB BRENGITECAN IN EGFR-MUTANT NON-SQUAMOUS NSCLC AFTER PROGRESSION ON A THIRD-GENERATION EGFR TKI 2613O SARON: PRIMARY RESULTS OF A RANDOMISED-CONTROLLED TRIAL OF CONSOLIDATION RADIOTHERAPY FOR SYNCHRONOUS OLIGOMETASTATIC NON-SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER Senior Faculty [headshots] Dr Morgan Clin Onc Dr Liu Med Onc Dr Popat Med Onc Dr Lovly Med Onc Dr Lopes Med Onc Dr Aggarwal Med Onc Dr Reck Med Onc Dr Massuti Med Onc Dr Malapelle Pathologist Ms Feldman Patient Advocate Associate Faculty Dr Mirallas Med Onc Dr Özkerim Med Onc

[Slide 1] [Photo: lab scientist in white coat and black gloves holding up a sample cartridge with blue-lit channels] TEMPUS ESMO CONGRESS 2026 Tempus announces 13 abstracts accepted for presentation at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress 2026

Insilico Medicine (HKEX: 3696) | ESMO Sunday, October 25, 2026, 08:30-10:00, Madrid, Spain Cordoba Auditorium - Hall 4 Insilico Medicine to Present First-in-Human Data for AI-Designed Pan-TEAD Inhibitor ISM6331 at ESMO 2026

[Slide 1] OncoAlert360 Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues ONCOALERT 4SIGHT ESMO 2026 | MADRID DeLLphi-304 Tarlatamab in previously treated SCLC: Extended follow-up of overall survival from the phase 3 DeLLphi-304 trial TO BE PRESENTED AT #ESMO2026 BY: CHARLES RUDIN, MD MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER [headshot] [Slide 2] Methods DESIGN 1:1 randomization to tarlatamab or chemotherapy (topotecan, lurbinectedin or amrubicin); 254 vs 255 patients. POPULATION SCLC after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. ENDPOINTS Primary: OS. Secondary: PFS, disease control, DOR and safety. FOLLOW-UP Extended median follow-up 23 mo (initial publication: 11.2 mo). Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Results OS Median 13.6 (11.9–15.8) vs 8.4 (7.2–10.2) mo; HR 0.62 (95% CI 0.51–0.76). 12-mo OS 56% vs 39%; 18-mo OS 42% vs 24%. HIGH-RISK SUBGROUPS Platinum-resistant disease (chemotherapy-free interval <90 days): HR 0.65 (95% CI 0.48–0.86). Baseline brain metastases: HR 0.52 (95% CI 0.38–0.70). PFS & RESPONSE Median PFS 4.2 vs 3.2 mo; HR 0.69 (95% CI 0.57–0.84); 12-mo PFS 21% vs 6%. Median DOR 7.1 vs 5.5 mo; sustained (≥52-week) disease control 24% vs 4%. SAFETY Grade ≥3 TRAEs 28% vs 63%; discontinuation due to TRAEs 3% vs 7%. TRAEs decreased over time; no new safety signals. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Conclusion Durable survival benefit with tarlatamab vs chemotherapy at extended follow-up The authors describe a manageable safety profile with no new safety signals, and state the data reinforce tarlatamab's role as standard of care after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, including in high-risk disease. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 1] [OncoAlert360 logo] Oncology · For Colleagues · By Colleagues ONCOALERT 4SIGHT ESMO 2026 | MADRID SARON A randomised-controlled trial of consolidation radiotherapy for synchronous oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer TO BE PRESENTED AT #ESMO2026 BY: DR FIONA MCDONALD THE ROYAL MARSDEN [headshot photo; Madrid skyline illustration] [Slide 2] Methods DESIGN 1:1 randomization to SACT ± radical RT; 140 patients, Oct 2016–Jul 2023. The control arm changed to include immunotherapy in Jan 2020. Stratified by SACT, histology, N-stage, number of metastases, brain metastases and site. POPULATION AGA-negative NSCLC with 1–5 metastases in ≤3 organs. Median age 68; 58.6% adenocarcinoma; 52.9% N2/3; 62.9% one OM site; 6.4% brain metastases. TREATMENT Experimental arm: radical RT to the lung primary ± locoregional nodes, plus SABR to OM sites. SACT: 40.0% chemotherapy, 15.0% immunotherapy, 45.0% combination; median 4 cycles in both arms. ENDPOINTS Primary and major secondary endpoints: OS and PFS. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Results All comparisons: SACT + RT vs SACT alone OS Median follow-up 37.4 mo. Median OS 31.0 vs 28.0 mo; HR 0.99 (95% CI 0.63–1.55); p=0.95. PFS Median PFS 13.9 vs 8.9 mo; HR 0.64 (95% CI 0.43–0.95); p=0.03. FAILURE PATTERNS 12-month cumulative incidence of local failure 13.0% vs 39.5% (p<0.01); new distant metastasis 36.2% vs 32.3% (p=0.28). DELIVERY & SAFETY 62/70 (88.6%) received RT. Grade ≥3 AEs 28.6% in both arms; 6 patients had a grade 3 event possibly related to RT. EORTC QLQ-C30 and LC13 quality of life similar in both arms. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Conclusion Better local control and longer PFS with SACT + RT, but no survival benefit Setting: synchronous oligometastatic AGA-negative NSCLC receiving first-line SACT. The authors describe the side effects as acceptable. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 1] [OncoAlert 360 logo] Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues ONCOALERT 4SIGHT ESMO 2026 | MADRID PERSEE Pembrolizumab with or without platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment in advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥50% TO BE PRESENTED AT #ESMO2026 BY: CHANTAL DECROISETTE, MD CENTRE LÉON BÉRARD [headshot of Chantal Decroisette] [Madrid Metropolis building backdrop] [Slide 2] Methods DESIGN 1:1 randomization, stratified by histology and brain metastases; 321 patients, Dec 2020–Dec 2023. Data cutoff Apr 7, 2026; median follow-up 38.7 mo. POPULATION Untreated stage IV NSCLC, or stage III not amenable to radiotherapy; PD-L1 ≥50%; PS 0–1; no EGFR/ALK alterations. TREATMENT Pembrolizumab + platinum-based chemotherapy (paclitaxel for squamous, pemetrexed for non-squamous) for 4 cycles, then maintenance pembrolizumab + pemetrexed; vs pembrolizumab alone. ENDPOINTS Primary: PFS by blinded central review (RECIST v1.1), powered for HR 0.70 (80% power, two-sided α 5%). Key secondary: investigator PFS, OS, ORR, DoR, safety. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Results All comparisons: pembrolizumab + chemotherapy vs pembrolizumab alone PFS (BCR) Median 16.1 (11.0–34.1) vs 6.9 (5.5–9.3) mo; HR 0.56 (95% CI 0.43–0.74); p<0.001. PFS (INV) & OS Investigator PFS 13.7 vs 6.9 mo; HR 0.60 (95% CI 0.46–0.78). Median OS 50.2 (32.6–NR) vs 29.9 (23.4–47.9) mo; HR 0.77 (95% CI 0.57–1.05). RESPONSE ORR 77.5% vs 50.3%. Median DoR 30 (13.1–NR) vs 15.6 (9.8–32.8) mo; HR 0.86 (95% CI 0.59–1.24). SAFETY Grade ≥3 TRAEs 53.8% vs 19.3%. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Conclusion Pembrolizumab-chemotherapy significantly improved PFS vs pembrolizumab monotherapy Setting: first-line treatment of advanced PD-L1 ≥50% NSCLC. The authors state that PERSEE may help refine treatment selection. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 1] exclusive FEATURING [circular headshot] Balazs Halmos, MD, MS [circular headshot] Dylan Fortman, MD OncLive Find out which lung cancer presentations experts are most excited to see at the 2026 ESMO Congress. Sign up to read OncLive's preview of some of the most anticipated abstracts ahead of the conference.

[Slide 1] [ESMO Congress Madrid 2026 logo] 3836P - Real-world treatment patterns among European patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC): Insights from the RESONANCE study Presentation Number 3836P Speakers Nicolas Girard (Paris, France) Results Overall, 623 pts were identified. At diagnosis, the median (IQR) age was 67 (61–73) years, 57.8% were male and 23.1% had brain metastases; median (IQR) follow-up was 8.3 (4.1–14.6) months. At 1L (N=551), most pts received platinum-based CT + IO (62.8%); tx patterns in the 2L+ setting were more variable (Table). For pts who were platinum-sensitive post-1L, the most common 2L and third-line (3L) tx were platinum-based CT without IO (47.5%, 58/122) and topotecan monotherapy (22%, 13/59), respectively; for pts who were platinum-resistant/refractory, topotecan monotherapy was the most common tx at 2L (41%, 43/105) and 3L (22.2%, 8/36). Conclusions The RESONANCE study suggests no tx consensus exists in the 2L+ setting for ES-SCLC, potentially due to few effective options. Recent approvals of tarlatamab and lurbinectedin, along with ongoing evaluations of novel therapies, may reshape tx patterns.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 INDUSTRY SATELLITE SYMPOSIUM OCT 25 SUNDAY 13:00 – 14:30 [Headshot photograph of a woman with long reddish-blonde hair, dark top, grey background] "SCLC has been treated with chemotherapy, with or without ICIs, with very minimal advances in the last decades. But nowadays, we need to face absolute changes with the introduction of TCEs and ADCs. SOLANGE PETERS, SWITZERLAND

[Slide 1] Lung Cancer: Top Trending Abstracts on X Ahead of ESMO 2026 [colour key:] ADC BsAb IO KRAS G12C, EGFR TKI, MET TKI Radiotherapy [column headers (voices):] Amol Akhade | Bijoy Telivala | Chandrakanth MV | Jose Fernando Moura | Mario Balsa | Masahiro Torasawa | Patrick Forde | Rishabh Jain | Riyaz Shah | Rohit Malde | Yakup Ergün | ChatGPT 5.6 Sol | Gemini 3.8 Flash | Claude Opus 5.5 | Grok 4.7 Date | Abstract ID | Presenter | Phase | Abstract Title Oct 24 | LBA3 | Sands | P3 | DeLLphi-305: Tarlatamab + durva vs durva as 1LM therapy following durva + EP in ES-SCLC - Primary analysis | X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Oct 25 | LBA6 | Shun Lu | P3 | SAFFRON: Osi + savo vs plat-pem in EGFRm MET-OE and/or -amplified (AMP) adv NSCLC post-osi - Primary results | X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Oct 25 | LBA5 | Skoulidis | P3 | Krascendo 1: Diva vs Soto or Ada in previously treated LA/m KRAS G12C-mut NSCLC - Efficacy and safety results | X X X X X X X X X (Amol Akhade through Riyaz Shah) X X X X X (Yakup Ergün, ChatGPT 5.6 Sol, Gemini 3.8 Flash, Claude Opus 5.5, Grok 4.7) Oct 25 | LBA67 | Feng Fang | P3 | OptiTROP-Lung04: Sac-TMT vs platinum-based CT in EGFRm NSCLC after progression on EGFR-TKI - Final OS analysis | X (Chandrakanth MV) X X X X X (Yakup Ergün, ChatGPT 5.6 Sol, Gemini 3.8 Flash, Claude Opus 5.5, Grok 4.7) Oct 26 | LBA69 | Yi-Long Wu | P3 | SANOVO: Savo / pbo + osi in tx-naïve adv NSCLC with EGFRm and MET overexpression | X (Mario Balsa) X X X X X (Yakup Ergün, ChatGPT 5.6 Sol, Gemini 3.8 Flash, Claude Opus 5.5, Grok 4.7) Oct 25 | LBA68 | Peters | P3 | SigVie-002: SV vs DTX in previously treated non-sqNSCLC | X (Chandrakanth MV) X (Rishabh Jain) X X X (ChatGPT 5.6 Sol, Gemini 3.8 Flash, Claude Opus 5.5) Oct 25 | LBA66 | Caicun Zhou | P3 | OptiTROP-Lung06: Sac-TMT + pembro vs CT + pembro as 1L tx for PD-L1-neg adv non-sq NSCLC | X X X X X (Yakup Ergün, ChatGPT 5.6 Sol, Gemini 3.8 Flash, Claude Opus 5.5, Grok 4.7) Oct 26 | LBA71 | Li Zhang | P3 | PANKU-Lung01: Iza-bren in EGFRm non-sq NSCLC after progression on a third-generation EGFR TKI | X X X X X (Yakup Ergün, ChatGPT 5.6 Sol, Gemini 3.8 Flash, Claude Opus 5.5, Grok 4.7) Oct 25 | 2614O | Decroisette | P3 | PERSEE: Pembro ± platinum-based CT as 1L tx in adv NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥50% | X (Yakup Ergün) X (Grok 4.7) Oct 24 | LBA73 | Sebastian | P2 | PACE-LUNG: Efficacy of additional CT for pts with EGFRm NSCLC with the continued presence of plasma ctDNA EGFRm at week 3 after start of osi 1L tx | X (Yakup Ergün) Oct 25 | 2613O | McDonald | P2 | SARON: Consolidation radiotherapy for synchronous oligometastatic NSCLC - Primary Results | X (Yakup Ergün) Format and methodology credit: Dr. Mike Thompson LARVOL

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 INDUSTRY SATELLITE SYMPOSIUM OCT 25 SUNDAY 13:00 - 14:30 [Headshot of Solange Peters] SOLANGE PETERS, SWITZERLAND REDEFINING THE STANDARDS: THE ERA OF DLL3 T-CELL ENGAGERS Talk at 13:20 · Salamanca Auditorium · Hall 10 · IFEMA Madrid

[Slide 2] Background Adjuvant Pembrolizumab in Resected Early-Stage NSCLC: PEARLS/KEYNOTE-091 Final Analysis Randomized phase 3 (EORTC/ETOP) At the second interim analysis, adjuvant pembrolizumab improved DFS vs placebo in resected stage IB–IIIA NSCLC (ITT HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.63–0.91; P=0.0014) and in patients who received chemotherapy (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.60–0.89). This is the final analysis, including OS. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Methods DESIGN 1:1 randomization to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo Q3W for 18 cycles (~1 year). POPULATION Completely resected stage IB (T ≥4 cm), II or IIIA NSCLC (AJCC v7); ≤4 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy per local guidelines. ITT 1177 (590 vs 587). ENDPOINTS Primary: investigator-assessed DFS in the ITT and PD-L1 TPS ≥50% populations. Secondary: OS, lung cancer–specific survival (LCSS) and safety. FOLLOW-UP Data cutoff Jan 21, 2026; median follow-up 87.7 mo (range 68.6–120.1). Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Results All comparisons: pembrolizumab vs placebo DFS ITT: median 58.7 vs 43.3 mo; HR 0.85 (95% CI 0.73–0.98); 6-y DFS 44.0% vs 39.2%. Chemotherapy subgroup: median 58.7 vs 39.1 mo; HR 0.80 (95% CI 0.68–0.94). OS ITT 6-y OS 68.5% vs 66.4%; HR 0.98 (95% CI 0.81–1.18); P=0.41826. Chemotherapy subgroup: 68.9% vs 65.4%; HR 0.91 (95% CI 0.74–1.12). LCSS ITT 6-y LCSS 81.3% vs 76.9%; HR 0.81 (95% CI 0.63–1.03). Chemotherapy subgroup: 81.6% vs 75.0%; HR 0.69 (95% CI 0.53–0.91). SAFETY Grade ≥3 AEs 34.0% vs 25.6%. Grade ≥3 immune-mediated AEs and infusion reactions occurred in 46 (7.9%) and 11 (1.9%) patients, respectively. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 1] COMPANY-REPORTED DATA (TAIHO) Zipalertinib EGFR ex20ins or uncommon EGFR-mutant NSCLC with active CNS metastases (incl. leptomeningeal) 30.2% Intracranial ORR RANO-BM; 95% CI 17.2–46.1 n=43 RANO-BM-evaluable patients REZILIENT2 Cohort C [bar chart] Intracranial, % — n=43; axis from 0 — iORR 30.2% | iDCR 72.1% Source: Taiho Oncology / Cullinan Therapeutics press release, Oct 19, 2026; ESMO 2026 poster. Company-reported, not peer reviewed. [video play button overlay]

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 INDUSTRY SATELLITE SYMPOSIUM OCT 25 SUNDAY 13:00 - 14:30 [Headshot of Martin Reck] MARTIN RECK, GERMANY THE ROLE OF IMMUNE CHECKPOINT BLOCKADE IN SCLC: ACHIEVEMENTS & LIMITATIONS Talk at 13:05 · Salamanca Auditorium · Hall 10 · IFEMA Madrid

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 INDUSTRY SATELLITE SYMPOSIUM LUNG SUMMIT ON SCLC SUNDAY, 25 OCTOBER 2026 13:00 – 14:30 CET SALAMANCA AUDITORIUM, HALL 10 IFEMA MADRID, MADRID, SPAIN [four headshots] GIANNIS MOUNTZIOS GREECE NOEMÍ REGUART SPAIN SOLANGE PETERS SWITZERLAND MARTIN RECK GERMANY AMGEN MAIN SPONSOR BeOne CO-SPONSOR [Slide 2] SALAMANCA AUDITORIUM, HALL 10, IFEMA MADRID, SPAIN SUNDAY, 25 OCTOBER 2026, 13:00 – 14:30 CET 13:00 WELCOME & INTRODUCTION — S. PETERS SCLC JOURNEY AS AN IMMUNOTHERAPY CONTINUUM 13:05 THE ROLE OF ICB IN SCLC: ACHIEVEMENTS & LIMITATIONS — M. RECK THE CURRENT AND ESTABLISHED ROLE OF ICIs IN ES-SCLC 13:20 REDEFINING THE STANDARDS: THE ERA OF DLL3 T-CELL ENGAGERS — S. PETERS INTRODUCING DLL3-TARGETING TCEs AS DRIVER OF A PARADIGM SHIFT 13:40 PRACTICAL MANAGEMENT OF DLL3 T-CELL ENGAGERS — G. MOUNTZIOS HOW MANAGING T-CELL ENGAGERS DIFFERS FROM MANAGING ICIs 14:00 THE EVOLVING ALGORITHM: SEQUENCING INNOVATIVE STRATEGIES — N. REGUART INTEGRATION OF DLL3 TCEs INTO PATIENT MANAGEMENT SCENARIOS 14:15 FACULTY ROUNDTABLE & AUDIENCE Q&A — ALL SPEAKERS OPEN DISCUSSION, AUDIENCE QUESTIONS & PATIENT CASES 14:30 CLOSING REMARKS — S. PETERS ACCREDITED WITH 2 CME CREDIT POINTS [badges: CME CERTIFIED 2 ECMEC POINTS BY UEMS-EACCME; U.E.M.S.] SUBMIT QUESTIONS IN ADVANCE AT GRILLSPEAKERS.COM [QR code] HOW TO FIND US HALL 10 EXHIBITION AREA | SANTANDER | SALAMANCA AVENIDA HALL 8 EXHIBITION AREA [venue map sketch] © 2026 LUNG SUMMIT · ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 INDUSTRY SATELLITE SYMPOSIUM OCT 25 SUNDAY 13:00 – 14:30 [headshot of Giannis Mountzios] "SCLC is a very rapidly evolving field. We will highlight the recent advances, including TCEs, ADCs and the combinations that are coming in the first-line setting of this disease. GIANNIS MOUNTZIOS, GREECE

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 INDUSTRY SATELLITE SYMPOSIUM OCT 25 SUNDAY 13:00 - 14:30 [Headshot of Martin Reck] "We are going to discuss the most recent data on SCLC. There is so much going on, and it is very much in favor of our patients with advanced SCLC." MARTIN RECK, GERMANY

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 OCT 24 SATURDAY 17:18 – 17:30 JACOB SANDS, USA ES-SCLC: TARLATAMAB + DURVALUMAB AS 1L MAINTENANCE LBA3 · PRESIDENTIAL SYMPOSIUM I · HALL 6 [Figure: headshot of Jacob Sands.]

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 Lung Cancer Abstract Highlights DeLLphi-305 (LBA3) Tarlatamab + durvalumab vs. durvalumab alone as first-line maintenance for ES-SCLC, testing DLL3-directed T-cell engagement earlier in treatment. OptiTROP-Lung06 (LBA66) Sacituzumab tirumotecan (TROP2 ADC) + pembrolizumab vs. chemotherapy + pembrolizumab in first-line PD-L1-negative advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. OptiTROP-Lung04 (LBA67) Final overall survival analysis of sacituzumab tirumotecan vs. platinum-based chemotherapy after EGFR-TKI progression in EGFR-mutated NSCLC. Sigvotatug Vedotin (LBA68) A phase III comparison with docetaxel in previously treated nonsquamous NSCLC, examining efficacy and safety. KRASCENDO 1 (LBA5) Divarasib vs. sotorasib or adagrasib in previously treated KRAS G12C-mutated NSCLC, offering a direct comparison within the targeted therapy class. SAFFRON (LBA6) Osimertinib + savolitinib vs. platinum-pemetrexed after osimertinib progression in EGFR-mutated NSCLC with MET overexpression and/or amplification. SANOVO (LBA69) Savolitinib + osimertinib vs. osimertinib alone in treatment-naïve EGFR-mutated NSCLC with MET overexpression, exploring upfront dual-target inhibition. PANKU-Lung01 (LBA71) Izalontamab brengitecan, a bispecific ADC, in EGFR-mutated nonsquamous NSCLC after progression on a third-generation EGFR-TKI. HERON-Lung01 (LBA72) Ruzaltatug rezetecan, a HER3-directed ADC, vs. platinum-based chemotherapy after EGFR-TKI progression in EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC. Neotorch (LBA64) Final analysis of perioperative toripalimab + chemotherapy in resectable stage II–III NSCLC, focusing on long-term outcomes. [icons: lungs, antibodies, DNA helix, pills, scalpel]

[Slide 2] RESEARCH UPDATES IN MTAP LOSS • Genomic and biomarker landscape of MTAP loss/KRAS G12D mutant vs. MTAP loss/KRAS non-mutated advanced NSCLC • MTAP loss and HPV status in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC): A genomic landscape study [blurred photo of glittering coloured spheres] [Foundation Medicine icon]

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 INDUSTRY SATELLITE SYMPOSIUM OCT 25 SUNDAY 13:00 - 14:30 [headshot photo] " There is so much going on in small cell lung cancer, and it is very much in favor of our patients. MARTIN RECK, GERMANY

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 INDUSTRY SATELLITE SYMPOSIUM OCT 25 SUNDAY 13:00 – 14:30 "With T-cell engagers arriving in small cell lung cancer, the question is no longer only which treatment to give, but in which order, and for which patient." NOEMÍ REGUART, SPAIN [Figure: headshot of Noemí Reguart.]

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 INDUSTRY SATELLITE SYMPOSIUM LUNG SUMMIT ON SCLC FROM IO-STANDARDS TO THE TCE ERA SUNDAY, 25 OCTOBER 2026 13:00 – 14:30 CET SALAMANCA AUDITORIUM, HALL 10 IFEMA MADRID, MADRID, SPAIN [faculty headshots] GIANNIS MOUNTZIOS GREECE | NOEMÍ REGUART SPAIN | SOLANGE PETERS SWITZERLAND | MARTIN RECK GERMANY 13:00 WELCOME & INTRODUCTION — SCLC JOURNEY AS AN IMMUNOTHERAPY CONTINUUM — S. PETERS 13:05 THE ROLE OF ICB IN SCLC: ACHIEVEMENTS & LIMITATIONS — THE CURRENT AND ESTABLISHED ROLE OF ICIs IN ES-SCLC — M. RECK 13:20 REDEFINING THE STANDARDS: THE ERA OF DLL3 T-CELL ENGAGERS — INTRODUCING DLL3-TARGETING TCEs AS DRIVER OF A PARADIGM SHIFT — S. PETERS 13:40 PRACTICAL MANAGEMENT OF DLL3 T-CELL ENGAGERS — HOW MANAGING T-CELL ENGAGERS DIFFERS FROM MANAGING ICIs — G. MOUNTZIOS 14:00 THE EVOLVING ALGORITHM: SEQUENCING INNOVATIVE STRATEGIES — INTEGRATION OF DLL3 TCEs INTO PATIENT MANAGEMENT SCENARIOS — N. REGUART 14:15 FACULTY ROUNDTABLE & AUDIENCE Q&A — OPEN DISCUSSION, AUDIENCE QUESTIONS & PATIENT CASES — ALL SPEAKERS 14:30 CLOSING REMARKS — S. PETERS AMGEN MAIN SPONSOR | BeOne CO-SPONSOR [U.E.M.S. / CME CERTIFIED 2 ECMEC POINTS BY UEMS-EACCME] ACCREDITED + CME-CERTIFIED © 2026 LUNG SUMMIT · ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 INDUSTRY SATELLITE SYMPOSIUM OCT 25 SUNDAY 13:00 – 14:30 [portrait of Noemí Reguart] "The question is no longer only which treatment to give, but in which order." NOEMÍ REGUART, SPAIN

[Slide 1] HUTCHMED Highlights Clinical Data to be Presented at ESMO Congress 2026 October 23-27, 2026 | Madrid, Spain HUTCHMED [logo] Sponsored Studies Abstract title | Presenter/ Lead author | Presentation details Osimertinib (osi) + savolitinib (savo) vs platinum–pemetrexed (plat–pem) in EGFRm MET-overexpressed (OE) and/or -amplified (AMP) advanced NSCLC post-osi: SAFFRON Phase (Ph) 3 primary results | Shun Lu (Shanghai, China) | LBA6 Presidential Symposium II Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6 Sunday, October 25, 2026 16:30 - 18:15 CEST Savolitinib or Placebo Combined with Osimertinib in Treatment-Naïve Advanced NSCLC with EGFR Mutation and MET Overexpression: Results from the Phase 3 SANOVO Study | Yi-Long Wu (Guangzhou, China) | LBA69 Proffered paper 2: NSCLC, metastatic Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6 Monday, October 26, 2026 08:30 - 10:00 CEST Updated results from a fruquintinib Expanded Access Program for patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer | Stefan Kasper (Essen, Germany) | 848P Poster Session: Colon cancer Association between dose adjustment and treatment outcomes in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma receiving fruquintinib plus sintilimab: A post-hoc analysis of the FRUSICA-2 trial | Yuanyuan Qu (Shanghai, China) | 3655eP E-poster Session: Renal cancer Efficacy of fruquintinib plus sintilimab in special populations with advanced renal cell carcinoma: A subgroup analysis of FRUSICA-2 study | Kaiwei Yang (Beijing, China) | 3667eP E-poster Session: Renal cancer Final phase 2 analysis of surufatinib plus camrelizumab, nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine in first-line metastatic pancreatic cancer | Shukui Qin (Nanjing, China) | 3156P Poster Session: Pancreatic cancer [Slide 2] HUTCHMED Highlights Clinical Data to be Presented at ESMO Congress 2026 October 23-27, 2026 | Madrid, Spain HUTCHMED [logo] Investigator-initiated Studies (1/2) Abstract title | Presenter/ Lead author | Presentation details Fruquintinib plus capecitabine maintenance after first-line anti-EGFR antibody plus chemotherapy in RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: A phase Ib/II study | Lin Yang/ Letian Zhang (Beijing, China) | 877eP E-poster Session: Colon cancer Real-world effectiveness and safety of fruquintinib in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in Spain: The FrESP study | Ana Fernandez Montes (Ourense, Spain) | 880eP E-poster Session: Colon cancer CONCEPT (COmbinatioN of CEtuximab Plus fruquintinib Treatment ± immunotherapy): A multicenter, randomized, open-label phase II trial in first-line pMMR RAS/BRAF wild-type unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer | Kefeng Ding (Hangzhou, China) | 890eP E-poster Session: Colon cancer A real-world study of low-dose fruquintinib combined with trifluridine/tipiracil hydrochloride (TAS-102) in the third-line and beyond treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer | Yuehong Cui/ Li Liang (Shanghai, China) | 903eP E-poster Session: Colon cancer Real-world outcomes with fruquintinib in heavily pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer: Impact of patient and disease characteristics | Maria Maddalena Laterza (Pozzuoli, Italy) | 964eP E-poster Session: Colon cancer A phase II, open-label, randomized study of doublet chemotherapy (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI) plus fruquintinib compared with doublet chemotherapy (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI) plus bevacizumab in second line setting for a metastatic colorectal cancer: ULYSSE- FFCD2406 - PRODIGE115 (trials in progress) | Jean Marc Phelip (Saint-Étienne, France) | 991eTiP E-poster Session: Colon cancer Phase II study of fruquintinib plus utidelone in platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer (FRUTD Trial) | Zheng Feng (Shanghai, China) | 1283P Poster Session: Gynaecological cancers Fruquintinib plus eribulin in patients with metastatic HR+, HER2-breast cancer after progression on endocrine therapy plus CDK4/6 inhibitor: Updated results from a phase II study | Yuan Yuan (Nanjing, China) | 1896eP E-poster Session: HR+ breast cancer Fruquintinib plus sintilimab and XELOX as first-line treatment for advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: A single-arm, open-label, multicenter phase II study | Hua Wang (Nanchang, China) | 2980eP E-poster Session: Oesophagogastric cancer Fruquintinib plus cadonilimab and S-1 in previously treated unresectable locally advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: preliminary efficacy and safety results from a phase Ib/II study | Huiyan Luo (Guangzhou, China) | 2981eP E-poster Session: Oesophagogastric cancer Nanoliposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) combined with fruquintinib as second-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer: A single-arm, open-label, dose-escalation and expansion phase I/II trial | Jieer Ying/ Qi Xu (Hangzhou, China) | 2986eP E-poster Session: Oesophagogastric cancer FRUQUITAS trial: ENGIC intergroup randomized phase III of trifluridine/tipiracil +/- fruquintinib in pre-treated metastatic gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma | David Tougeron (Poitiers, France) | 3079eTiP E-poster Session: Oesophagogastric cancer [Slide 3] HUTCHMED Highlights Clinical Data to be Presented at ESMO Congress 2026 October 23-27, 2026 | Madrid, Spain HUTCHMED [logo] Investigator-initiated Studies (2/2) Abstract title | Presenter/Lead author | Presentation details CHOICE III: short-course preoperative radiotherapy followed by fruquintinib plus anti–PD-1 antibody (serplulimab) for neoadjuvant treatment of pMMR/MSS mid-to-low locally advanced rectal cancer: A single-arm, single-center, prospective phase II study | Wei Zhang (Shanghai, China) | 3582eTiP E-poster Session: Rectal and anal cancer First-line fruquintinib plus serplulimab for metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma: Updated results from the phase II FRONTIER study | Jiwei Huang (Shanghai, China) | 3614P Poster Session: Renal cancer Latest efficacy and safety analysis of surufatinib combined with EP regimen and serplulimab as first-line treatment for extrapulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma | Tao Zhang/ Zhenyu Lin (Wuhan, China) | 2394RO Rapid Oral Session: NETs and endocrine tumours Pamplona Auditorium - Hall 5 Friday, October 23, 2026 16:15 - 17:45 CEST Surufatinib combined with toripalimab and nab-paclitaxel/ gemcitabine chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced pancreatobiliary-type ampullary carcinoma: A prospective phase II Clinical Trial | Juan Du (Nanjing, China) | 507eP E-poster Session: Biliary tract cancer, incl. cholangiocarcinoma Efficacy and safety of surufatinib in combination with CAPTEM in advanced G2/G3 Neuroendocrine Tumors: Results from a single-arm, phase II Trial | Wei Wang (Guangzhou, China) | 2403P Poster Session: Neuroendocrine tumours Surufatinib plus S-1/temozolomide as first-line therapy in MGMT-low advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (SUSTEM-p): An open-label, single-centre phase Ib/II trial | Yihebali Chi (Beijing, China) | 2411P Poster Session: Neuroendocrine tumours Updated results of a prospective, open-label study of surufatinib plus CAPTEM as conversion therapy for unresectable pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors | Ziyao Wang (Chengdu, China) | 2412P Poster Session: Neuroendocrine tumours Matching-adjusted indirect comparison of surufatinib versus high-dose OCT-LAR in patients with advanced GEP-NETs who progressed on prior SSA Therapy | Jianming Xu (Beijing, China) | 2415P Poster Session: Neuroendocrine tumours Surufatinib combined with octreotide LAR for the treatment of G1/G2 GEP-NETs: A single-arm, prospective, open-label phase II study | Xiaofeng Sun (Nanjing, China) | 2439eP E-poster Session: Neuroendocrine tumours Six weeks of induction gemcitabine plus nab paclitaxel (AG) followed by sequential surufatinib plus AG or AG alone as first line therapy for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC): A single center, two cohort, phase II study | Jin Xu/ Jialin Li (Shanghai, China) | 3168P Poster Session: Pancreatic cancer A phase Ib/II study of radiotherapy combined with surufatinib and sintilimab for localized high-risk limb and trunk soft tissue sarcomas: A prospective single-center trial | Yan Wang (Shanghai, China) | 3739P Poster Session: Sarcoma Surufatinib plus serplulimab, etoposide, and carboplatin as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC): Updated results from a single-arm, phase Ia/Ib trial | Haipeng Xu/ Longfeng Zhang (Fuzhou, China) | 3831P Poster Session: Small cell lung cancer

[Slide 1] OPTIMUM-01 | POSTER 2086P Darovasertib and Crizotinib for HLA-A*02–Positive Metastatic Uveal Melanoma: Results from the Phase 2 OptimUM-01 Study 24 October 2026 | 12:00–12:45 p.m. CEST [IDEAYA BIOSCIENCES logo] [Slide 2] OPTIMUM-02 | POSTER 2104P Darovasertib with Crizotinib vs Investigator's Choice as First-Line Treatment for Patients with HLA-A2-Negative Metastatic Uveal Melanoma (OptimUM-02): A Subgroup Analysis 24 October 2026 | 12:00–12:45 p.m. CEST [IDEAYA BIOSCIENCES logo] [Slide 3] OPTIMUM-09 | POSTER 2092P Neoadjuvant Darovasertib in Primary Uveal Melanoma: Follow-Up Data from the Phase 2 OptimUM-09 Study 24 October 2026 | 12:00–12:45 p.m. CEST [IDEAYA BIOSCIENCES logo] [Slide 4] IDE849 | POSTER 3815P SHR-4849 (IDE849), an ADC Targeting Delta-Like Ligand 3 (DLL3), in Relapsed Small Cell Lung Carcinoma (SCLC) and Other Neuroendocrine Carcinomas (NECs): Long-Term Results from the Phase 1 Study 24 October 2026 | 12:00–12:45 p.m. CEST [IDEAYA BIOSCIENCES logo]

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 INDUSTRY SATELLITE SYMPOSIUM LUNG SUMMIT ON SCLC FROM IO-STANDARDS TO THE TCE ERA SUNDAY, 25 OCTOBER 2026 13:00 – 14:30 CET SALAMANCA AUDITORIUM, HALL 10 IFEMA MADRID, MADRID, SPAIN [Four headshots] GIANNIS MOUNTZIOS GREECE NOEMÍ REGUART SPAIN SOLANGE PETERS SWITZERLAND MARTIN RECK GERMANY 13:00 WELCOME & INTRODUCTION SCLC JOURNEY AS AN IMMUNOTHERAPY CONTINUUM — S. PETERS 13:05 THE ROLE OF ICB IN SCLC: ACHIEVEMENTS & LIMITATIONS THE CURRENT AND ESTABLISHED ROLE OF ICIs IN ES-SCLC — M. RECK 13:20 REDEFINING THE STANDARDS: THE ERA OF DLL3 T-CELL ENGAGERS INTRODUCING DLL3-TARGETING TCEs AS DRIVER OF A PARADIGM SHIFT — S. PETERS 13:40 PRACTICAL MANAGEMENT OF DLL3 T-CELL ENGAGERS HOW MANAGING T-CELL ENGAGERS DIFFERS FROM MANAGING ICIs — G. MOUNTZIOS 14:00 THE EVOLVING ALGORITHM: SEQUENCING INNOVATIVE STRATEGIES INTEGRATION OF DLL3 TCEs INTO PATIENT MANAGEMENT SCENARIOS — N. REGUART 14:15 FACULTY ROUNDTABLE & AUDIENCE Q&A OPEN DISCUSSION, AUDIENCE QUESTIONS & PATIENT CASES — ALL SPEAKERS

ESMO 2026 Top 10 (ish) Breast Cancer Abstracts @PTarantinoMD 1. FOURLIGHT-1 (A. Giordano et al.) -> Announced to be positive, this randomized phase 2 trial evaluated the benefit of selective CDK4 inhibition with atirmociclib (+fulvestrant) in 2L HR+ MBC. Highly awaited. 2. BRIDGET (S. Sammons et al.) -> Could the addition of tucatinib to HP (or T-DM1) lead to favorable outcomes among pts with isolated PD from HER2+ MBC? Important data on an understudied setting. 3. TALENT (S. Hurvitz et al.) -> Preliminary results from TALENT were quite disappointing, with neoadjuvant T-DXd/AI showing low pCR rate in HR+/HER2- breast cancer. At ESMO, we will see updated results, including the first data with T-DXd used in sequence with chemo in this setting. 4. SWITCH (L. Fan et al.) -> Could keeping the payload (TOPO1i) but switching the target enable for continued efficacy with ADCs? SATEEN suggested limited benefit for this strategy in HER2+ disease. The SWITCH phase 2 trial tests this strategy with 4 novel TOPO1 ADCs in HR+/HER2- disease. 5. KEYNOTE-B49 (H. Rugo et al.) -> Immunotherapy has struggled to find its place in HR+ disease. This phase 3 trial tested whether using pembro early (added to 1L chemo) and in a selected population (PD-L1+) could prove beneficial for patients with HR+ MBC. 6. POP-DURVA (J. Ribeiro et al.) -> Standard treatment for stage I TNBC remains undefined. POP-DURVA tests 2 infusions of neoadjuvant durva in stage I TNBC with sTIL of >= 5%, with primary endpoint pCR 7. NSABP B42 (E. Mamounas et al.) -> The prior 10-year analysis of NSABP B42 demonstrated a significant DFS (but not OS) advantage with 10 vs 5 years of adjuvant AI in postmenopausal patients. This final analysis will clarify the long-term impact of extended AI therapy, which is increasingly utilized in practice. 8. MRD studies -> Interesting studies evaluating the prognostic role of MRD in HER2+ MBC with exceptional response (Nozawa et al.), neoadjuvant TNBC (Barcenas et al') and in the surveillance setting (Ozaki et al.) 9. Exotic TOPO 1 ADC phase 3 trials -> At ESMO, we will see primary results of multiple phase 3 trials of TOP1 ADCs vs chemo conducted in China, including HORIZON-Breast06 (SHR-A1811 for HER2-low MBC), APEX-Breast01 (TQB2102 for HER2-low MBC) and PANKU-Breast01 (Iza-Bren for HR+/HER2- MBC) 10. Updates from NATALEE (6y), FINER (OS), TROPION-Breast02 (brain mets), DESTINY-Breast09 (brain mets), GIM3 FATA (AI comparison), lidERA (PROs), DESTINY-Breast05 (PROs), OptiTROP-Breast01 (OS) Bonus: CHARISMA (P. Tarantino et al.) -> How does breast cancer escape ADC treatment? We conducted multiomic profiling of biopsies collected pre/post-ADCs, with identification of novel mechanisms of resistance.

[Slide 1] Rapid Oral session 4RO - Target switching with conserved-payload novel ADCs in patients with metastatic breast cancer following prior ADC therapy (SWITCH): A prospective, open-label, phase 2 platform trial Speakers Lei Fan (Shanghai, China) Lecture Time 10:20 - 10:25 Abstract Background Resistance to antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) is an inevitable challenge in metastatic breast cancer (MBC), but the optimal post-progression sequencing strategy remains unclear. The SWITCH trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of a "target/payload switching" strategy using novel ADCs in patients with ADC-refractory MBC. Methods SWITCH is a prospective, open-label, phase 2 platform trial. Patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-negative) MBC who progressed on at least one prior ADC were enrolled. Based on prior treatment history, participants were randomly assigned to four novel ADC cohorts: SHR-A1811 (Cohort A), SHR-A1921 (Cohort B), SHR-A2009 (Cohort C), or SHR-A2102 (Cohort D), all carrying a topoisomerase I inhibitor (TOP1i) payload. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR). Results Between Oct 21, 2024, and Dec 30, 2025, 58 HER2-negative patients were screened, 54 of whom were randomly assigned (Cohort A: n=10; B: n=12; C: n=12; D: n=20). The population was heavily pretreated, with the majority (94.4%) having prior exposure to TOP1i-based ADCs. Confirmed ORRs were limited across all cohorts: 0% in Cohort A, 8.3% in Cohort B, 0% in Cohort C, and 5% in Cohort D. Responses were observed only in patients switching from the microtubule inhibitor-based ADC disitamab vedotin (RC48) to a TOP1 inhibitor-based ADC, whereas no responses occurred after switching between ADCs with the same payload class despite antigen switching. Treatment-related adverse events were consistent with known profiles of each ADC and manageable. Conclusions Rechallenging ADC-refractory MBC with novel agents targeting alternative antigens yielded limited responses, which suggested that payload cross-resistance was a primary driver of resistance. Diversified payload mechanisms in subsequent ADC sequencing were important to restore therapeutic sensitivity.

ESMO CONGRESS 2026 - MADRID - 23-27 OCTOBER BREAST CANCER My Top 10 Oral Presentations to Watch Personal picks from Erika P. Hamilton, MD - Chief Development Officer, Late Phase & Director, Breast Cancer Research Program Proffered Paper & Rapid Oral sessions - All in Alicante Auditorium - Hall 6 - Times in Madrid local time Sarah Cannon Research Institute Clocks change from CEST to CET overnight 24-25 Oct FRIDAY - 23 OCTOBER 2026 LBA23 (Abstract) - Final results of TALENT: A neoadjuvant trial of T-DXd with or without anastrozole, or in sequence with chemotherapy for HER2-low, HR+ early-stage breast cancer. Sara A. Hurvitz - Seattle, USA. Proffered Paper 1: Breast cancer, early and advanced stage. Why it matters: Can an ADC move into the curative HR+ setting? 13:30 to 13:40 CEST est. slot LBA24 (Abstract) - Final Analysis of NRG Oncology/NSABP B-42, a Randomized, Double-blinded, Placebo-controlled Trial of Extended Letrozole in Postmenopausal Women with Hormone-receptor Positive Breast Cancer Who Have Completed Previous Adjuvant Therapy with an Aromatase Inhibitor. Eleftherios P. Mamounas - Orlando, USA. Proffered Paper 1: Breast cancer, early and advanced stage. Why it matters: The final long-term answer on extended letrozole. 14:15 to 14:25 CEST est. slot LBA25 (Abstract) - Adjuvant ribociclib (RIB) + nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) in patients (pts) with HR+/HER2- early breast cancer (EBC): NATALEE 6-y overall survival (OS) and efficacy outcomes. Dennis J. Slamon - Los Angeles, USA. Proffered Paper 1: Breast cancer, early and advanced stage. Why it matters: Our first look at OS for ribociclib; an OS benefit has already been seen with abemaciclib. 14:25 to 14:35 CEST est. slot 538RO (Abstract) - Patient (pt)-reported outcomes (PROs) from the Phase III lidERA Breast Cancer (BC) trial of giredestrant (GIRE) in pts with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative early BC (ER+, HER2- eBC). Gustavo Werutsky - Porto Alegre, Brazil. Rapid Oral: Breast cancer, early stage. Why it matters: Tolerability of the first adjuvant oral SERD: key to 5+ years of adherence. 16:20 to 16:25 CEST est. slot 542RO (Abstract) - Prognostic impact of postoperative ctDNA surveillance on relapse-free survival and molecular lead time in high-risk breast cancer: JCOG1204A1. Yukinori Ozaki - Koto-ku, Japan. Rapid Oral: Breast cancer, early stage. Why it matters: How much lead time does ctDNA surveillance buy after surgery? 16:42 to 16:47 CEST est. slot SATURDAY - 24 OCTOBER 2026 LBA51 (Abstract) - Results From KEYNOTE-B49: A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind Study of Pembrolizumab (Pembro) vs Placebo (Pbo) Plus Chemotherapy (CT) in Participants (Pts) With HR+/HER2- Advanced Breast Cancer (ABC). Hope S. Rugo - Duarte, USA. Proffered Paper 2: Breast cancer, early and advanced stage. Why it matters: Does immunotherapy have a place in metastatic HR+ disease? 08:30 to 08:40 CEST est. slot 1842O (Abstract) - Efficacy and safety of atirmociclib (ATI) + fulvestrant (FUL) in patients (pts) with HR+/HER2- advanced/metastatic breast cancer (mBC) who progressed on prior CDK4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) in a randomized phase 2 study (FOURLIGHT-1). Antonio Giordano - Boston, USA. Proffered Paper 2: Breast cancer, early and advanced stage. Why it matters: Randomized data for a CDK4-selective inhibitor after CDK4/6. 08:50 to 09:00 CEST est. slot LBA96 (Abstract) - First-line (1L) datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) vs chemotherapy in patients (pts) with locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) for whom immunotherapy was not an option: Exploratory analysis of pts with brain metastases in TROPION-Breast02. Rebecca A. Dent - Singapore. Proffered Paper 2: Breast cancer, early and advanced stage. Why it matters: CNS activity of first-line Dato-DXd in TNBC. 09:25 to 09:35 CEST est. slot MONDAY - 26 OCTOBER 2026 4RO (Abstract) - Target switching with conserved-payload novel ADCs in patients with metastatic breast cancer following prior ADC therapy (SWITCH): a prospective, open-label, phase 2 platform trial. Lei Fan - Shanghai, China. Rapid Oral 2: Breast cancer, advanced stage. Why it matters: Prospective data on ADC sequencing: switch the target, keep the payload. 10:20 to 10:25 CET est. slot LBA49 (Abstract) - A DESTINY-Breast09 (DB-09) analysis of trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) + pertuzumab (P) vs taxane + trastuzumab + pertuzumab (THP) for patients (pts) with HER2+ advanced/metastatic breast cancer (a/mBC) and baseline (BL) brain metastases (BMs). Cristina Saura Manich - Barcelona, Spain. Rapid Oral 2: Breast cancer, advanced stage. Why it matters: First-line T-DXd + pertuzumab in patients with brain metastases. 11:00 to 11:05 CET est. slot Source: ESMO Congress 2026 online programme. Session times are official; individual slots are estimated from presentation order and durations. My personal selection and opinions; not an official ESMO or Sarah Cannon Research Institute list or endorsement.

[Slide 1] Rapid Oral session 4640RO - Bulumtatug fuvedotin (BFv, 9MW2821), a nectin-4-directed antibody-drug conjugate (ADC), in patients with locally advanced or metastatic triple negative breast cancer (la/mTNBC) previously treated with topoisomerase I inhibitor (TopI)-based ADCs: Results from a phase 2 study Speakers Yanchun Meng (Shanghai, China) Lecture Time 10:30 - 10:35 Abstract Background BFv is an ADC delivering monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE) to Nectin-4-expressing cells, a target highly expressed in TNBC. For patients with prior exposure to TopI-based ADCs, switching to a Nectin-4-targeted ADC with a distinct payload (MMAE) represents a rational therapeutic strategy. We report efficacy and safety data from the cohort of la/mTNBC patients previously treated with TopI-based ADCs in the phase 2 study of BFv (NCT06492005). Methods Cohort A enrolled la/mTNBC patients with prior TopI-based ADC therapy. BFv was given intravenously at 1.25 mg/kg on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results As of April 10, 2026, 62 patients were enrolled, of whom 60 were evaluable for response. Median age was 50.5 years (range 32-73). Liver metastases were present in 33% of patients, and 42% had received ≥3 prior lines of therapy. All patients (100%) had received prior TopI-based ADCs: 48% received TROP-2-targeted ADCs, and 33% received HER2-targeted ADCs. All patients had prior taxane-based chemotherapy; 35% also received immune checkpoint inhibitors. The ORR was 30.0% (95% CI 18.85%-43.21%) and DCR was 80.0% (95% CI 67.67%-89.22%). Median PFS was 3.7 months (95% CI 2.96-4.34), and median DOR was 8.7 months (95% CI 2.79-NR). OS data were not mature. Common TRAEs (≥20%) included increased AST/ALT, neutropenia, leukopenia, hypertriglyceridemia, rash, hypercholesterolemia, hyperglycemia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, asthenia, and increased GGT. Grade ≥3 TRAEs (≥5%) included neutropenia, leukopenia, and increased AST. Conclusions BFv demonstrated promising antitumor activity with a manageable safety profile in heavily pretreated patients with la/mTNBC who had all received prior TopI-based ADCs. The first pivotal trial for this indication worldwide is underway.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 TOP 15 BREAST CANCER TRIALS TO WATCH Pre-congress watchlist | Grouped by breast cancer subtype 23 - 27 OCTOBER 2026 | MADRID, SPAIN [Photo of Madrid Metropolis building] HR+ / HER2- BREAST CANCER Endocrine therapy, targeted combinations and immunotherapy 1 FOURLIGHT-1 - Atirmociclib + fulvestrant in 2L HR+/HER2- MBC [CDK4 icon] 2 PANKU-Breast01 - EGFRxHER3 bispecific ADC in HR+/HER2- MBC 3 KEYNOTE-B49 - Pembrolizumab + chemotherapy in PD-L1+ HR+/HER2- MBC 4 NATALEE - 6-year outcomes of adjuvant ribociclib in HR+/HER2- early breast cancer [KM curve icon, "6 YEARS" calendar icon] 5 FINER / MA.40 - Overall survival with ipatasertib + fulvestrant after CDK4/6i [AKT icon] 6 NSABP B-42 - Long-term outcomes of extended adjuvant aromatase inhibition 7 TALENT - Neoadjuvant T-DXd-based sequencing in HR+/HER2-low early breast cancer 8 SWITCH - ADC sequencing after prior ADC exposure in HR+/HER2- MBC HER2-POSITIVE / HER2-LOW BREAST CANCER Next-generation ADCs and targeted approaches 9 BRIDGET - Tucatinib-based treatment for isolated progression in HER2+ MBC [HER2 icon] 10 DESTINY-Breast09 - CNS outcomes update with first-line T-DXd + pertuzumab in HER2+ MBC [brain icon] 11 HORIZON-Breast06 - Trastuzumab rezetecan in HER2-low MBC 12 APEX-Breast01 - Novel TOP1 ADC in HER2-low MBC TRIPLE-NEGATIVE BREAST CANCER Immunotherapy and next-generation ADCs 13 TROPION-Breast02 - CNS outcomes update with datopotamab deruxtecan in TNBC [brain icon] 14 POP-DURVA - Neoadjuvant durvalumab in stage I TNBC 15 OptiTROP-Breast01 - Final overall survival with sacituzumab tirumotecan in TNBC OTHER IMPORTANT ABSTRACTS TO WATCH VIKTORIA-1 - After CDK4/6i | postMONARCH - After CDK4/6i | lidERA - Patient-reported outcomes | DESTINY-Breast05 - Patient-reported outcomes | GIM3 FATA - AI comparison | MRD studies - Prognostic role across settings | CHARISMA - Mechanisms of ADC resistance [ESMO logo] GOOD SCIENCE BETTER MEDICINE BEST PRACTICE @DrRishabhOnco DM - Medical Oncology (AIIMS, New Delhi) [X logo]

[Slide 1] MADRID 2026 ESMO congress | MADRID SPAIN 23-27 OCTOBER 2026 | ESMO Rapid Oral session 4449RO - Paired-biopsy multi-omic analysis reveals target-independent mechanisms of antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) resistance in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) Speakers Paolo Tarantino (Boston, United States of America) Lecture Time 11:27 - 11:47 Abstract Background Resistance mechanisms to ADCs remain poorly characterized. We sought to define molecular adaptations associated with ADC resistance through integrated multi-omic profiling of paired tumor samples collected from patients treated with ADCs.

[Slide 1] Proffered Paper session LBA25 - Adjuvant ribociclib (RIB) + nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) in patients (pts) with HR+/HER2− early breast cancer (EBC): NATALEE 6-y overall survival (OS) and efficacy outcomes Speakers Dennis J. Slamon (Los Angeles, United States of America) Lecture Time 14:25 - 14:35 [Abstract] Background The phase 3 NATALEE trial demonstrated a statistically significant invasive disease−free survival (iDFS) benefit with adjuvant RIB + NSAI in pts with high-risk stage II/III HR+/HER2− EBC. We present a prespecified analysis of OS and efficacy outcomes with 6 y of follow-up. [Slide 2] Results At the data cutoff (15 May 2026), all pts were off RIB for a median of 38 mo and beyond the predefined NSAI study regimen. With a median OS follow-up of 66.5 mo, RIB + NSAI showed an OS benefit over NSAI alone (HR, 0.809 [95% CI: 0.661-0.989]; nominal 1-sided P=.019), with increasing absolute benefit over time from 1.2% (93.89% vs 92.73%) at 5 y to 2.1% (91.86% vs 89.73%) at 6 y, that was consistent across key subgroups. BCSS (HR, 0.706 [95% CI: 0.559-0.890]) was supportive of OS benefit. With a median iDFS follow-up of 66.3 mo, RIB + NSAI demonstrated a persistent iDFS benefit over NSAI alone (HR, 0.741 [95% CI: 0.646-0.849]; nominal 1-sided P<.0001), with the absolute iDFS benefit increasing from 4.1% (85.32% vs 81.24%) at 5 y to 5.3% (83.23% vs 77.92%) at 6 y. DDFS (HR, 0.744 [95% CI: 0.646-0.858]) and DRFS (HR, 0.738 [95% CI: 0.634-0.858]) benefits were also maintained. No new safety signals were observed. Conclusions With 6 y of follow-up and all pts off RIB (median, ≈3 y), the sustained reduction in recurrence risk and positive OS results with RIB + NSAI over NSAI alone continue to demonstrate a substantial and clinically relevant benefit for pts with high-risk stage II/III HR+/HER2− EBC, supporting the use of RIB + NSAI in the adjuvant setting across the broad NATALEE-eligible population. [Slide 3] Methods Pts with HR+/HER2− EBC were randomized 1:1 to receive RIB (400 mg/d; 3 wk on/1 wk off for 3 y) + NSAI (letrozole 2.5 mg/d or anastrozole 1 mg/d for 5 y) or NSAI alone. Premenopausal women and men also received goserelin. Pts had stage IIA (if N1 or if N0 with additional high-risk factors), stage IIB, or stage III disease per AJCC, 8th ed. OS, breast cancer−specific survival (BCSS), iDFS, distant disease−free survival (DDFS), and distant recurrence−free survival (DRFS) were evaluated via Kaplan-Meier methods. Statistical comparisons were conducted by stratified log-rank test.

[Slide 1] Rapid Oral session 543RO - DESTINY-Breast11: MRI-assessed objective responses during neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) with trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) followed by paclitaxel + trastuzumab + pertuzumab (THP) vs dose-dense doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide followed by THP (ddAC-THP) in HER2+ early breast cancer (eBC) Speakers Jean-Francois Boileau (Montreal, Canada, QC) Lecture Time 17:09 - 17:14 Abstract Background In the Phase 3 DESTINY-Breast11 study (NCT05113251), NAT with T-DXd-THP showed a statistically significant, clinically meaningful improvement in pathologic complete response (pCR) rate and improved safety profile vs ddAC-THP in high-risk, HER2+ eBC. We report analyses of radiological assessments conducted by breast MRI and association with pCR. Methods Patients (pts) were randomized to one of three arms, including T-DXd-THP (4+4 cycles) and ddAC-THP (4+4 cycles). Breast MRI scans were taken at screening, mid-NAT (after Cycle 4), and end of treatment (EOT). Objective response rate (ORR; per RECIST 1.1 per investigator; prespecified exploratory endpoint) was analyzed in pts with baseline scans, and association of response with pCR (ypT0/Tis ypN0) was assessed post hoc. Results Mid-NAT ORR and complete response [CR] rate were higher with T-DXd-THP (N=309) vs ddAC-THP (N=313) overall (ΔORR: 26.5%; ΔCR: 10.7%; Table), and across hormone receptor (HR) status (ORR: HR-, 80.0% [64/80] vs 57.3% [47/82]; HR+, 76.2% [173/227] vs 48.5% [112/231]). At EOT, ORRs were higher vs mid-NAT. Median best % change in target lesion size was greater with T-DXd-THP vs ddAC-THP at mid-NAT (-59% vs -35%) and further increased through EOT (-81% vs -74%). The positive predictive value of mid-NAT CR for pCR was 90.2% (T-DXd-THP) and 87.5% (ddAC-THP), but negative predictive value was lower at 36.6% and 43.6%, respectively. Table: 543RO [Table - column alignment is collapsed in the screenshot; raw text as rendered:] T-DXd-THP N=309 | Overall n % | pCR n %* | Non-pCR n %* Mid-NAT objective response 239 77.3 13.3169 70.7 90.270 29.3 CR 41 64.1 22.737 66.7 54.34 9.8 PR 198 132 66 33.3 45.7 NR 70 38 32 EOT objective response 287 92.9 27.8202 70.4 83.785 29.6 16.3 CR 86 65.0 72 64.7 22.714 35.3 77.3 PR 201 7.1 130 71 NR 22 5 17 ddAC-THP N=313 | Overall n % | pCR n %* | Non-pCR n %* Mid-NAT objective response 159 50.8 115 72.3 87.544 27.7 12.5 CR 8 2.6 7 71.5 41.61 28.5 58.4 PR 151 48.2 49.2108 43 NR 154 64 90 EOT objective response 273 87.2 24.6172 63.0 75.310137.0 24.7 CR 77 62.6 12.858 58.2 17.519 41.8 82.5 PR 196 114 82 NR 40 7 33 *Percentages based on the overall number of pts in the response category. NR, non-response; PR, partial response

[Slide 1] 1RO - Overall survival from the phase 3 postMONARCH trial of abemaciclib + fulvestrant vs placebo + fulvestrant for HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer following progression on a prior CDK4/6 inhibitor + endocrine therapy Speakers Kevin Kalinsky (Atlanta, United States of America) Lecture Time 10:59 - 11:04 Abstract Background The phase 3 postMONARCH trial demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) with abemaciclib + fulvestrant vs placebo + fulvestrant in HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC) following progression on a prior CDK4/6i + endocrine therapy (ET). Here we report the final overall survival (OS) analysis. Methods postMONARCH was a global, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Eligible patients had disease progression on a CDK4/6i + aromatase inhibitor as initial therapy for ABC or recurrence on/after adjuvant CDK4/6i + ET; no other prior therapy for ABC was permitted. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive abemaciclib + fulvestrant or placebo + fulvestrant. The final OS analysis was pre-specified at 200 OS events (one-sided p-value boundary p = 0.023). Time-to-event analyses used Kaplan-Meier methods and stratified Cox models to estimate the HR and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results 368 patients were randomized 1:1 (abemaciclib + fulvestrant, n = 182; placebo + fulvestrant, n = 186). At data cutoff (06 Mar 2026), median follow-up was approximately 36 months with 200 events observed (90 [49.5%] vs 110 [59.1%]). Median OS was numerically longer with abemaciclib + fulvestrant vs placebo + fulvestrant: 32.1 months (95% CI 27.2-38.1) vs 24.6 months (95% CI 22.5-28.8); however, statistical significance was not reached (HR: 0.80, 95% CI 0.60-1.06; p=0.1145). Consistent OS differences were observed across subgroups. Updated PFS was consistent with the primary analysis (HR: 0.78, 95% CI 0.62-0.99; nominal p = 0.0390). PFS by blinded independent central review, time to second progression, and chemotherapy-free survival also favored abemaciclib. Safety was consistent with the established abemaciclib profile; no new signals were identified. Conclusions Abemaciclib + fulvestrant resulted in numerically longer median OS vs placebo + fulvestrant, however statistical significance was not reached. While absolute PFS benefit was modest, the overall evidence supports consideration of abemaciclib-based treatment for patients with HR+, HER2- ABC after disease progression on prior CDK4/6i + ET.

[Slide 1] Rapid Oral session 4639RO - Final OS analysis of sacituzumab tirumotecan versus chemotherapy in previously treated locally recurrent or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: Phase III OptiTROP-Breast01 Speakers Man Li (Dalian, China) Lecture Time 10:15 - 10:20 Abstract Background Sacituzumab tirumotecan (sac-TMT) is a TROP2-directed ADC with a unique bifunctional linker and a belotecan-derivative topoisomerase I inhibitor payload. In phase III OptiTROP-Breast01, sac-TMT significantly improved PFS and demonstrated a statistically significant OS benefit vs physician's choice chemotherapy at the prespecified interim OS analysis (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36-0.78; one-sided p=0.0005) in previously treated locally recurrent/metastatic TNBC. Here, we report final OS with extended follow-up. Methods Pts with mTNBC who had received ≥ 2 prior systemic therapies, including ≥ 1 in the metastatic setting, were randomized 1:1 to sac-TMT or physician's choice chemotherapy. OS was a key secondary endpoint. OS was adjusted for subsequent ADC therapy using RPSFT model; censoring at subsequent ADC initiation was performed as a sensitivity analysis. Results A total of 263 pts were randomized to sac-TMT (n=130) or chemotherapy (n=133). As of Sep 17, 2025, the median follow-up was 29.4 mo. The statistically significant OS benefit observed at interim analysis was sustained in the final analysis. Median OS was 14.7 mo (95% CI, 12.1-20.1) with sac-TMT vs 9.9 mo (95% CI, 8.6-11.8) with chemotherapy (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.45-0.80). The survival benefit was durable, with 24-mo OS rates of 33.8% vs 21.4% and 30-mo OS rates of 26.8% vs 13.2%. OS benefit was generally consistent across prespecified subgroups, including prior PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor exposure and HER2-low disease. Subsequent ADC therapy was received by 27.8% of pts in the chemotherapy arm. After adjustment for subsequent ADC therapy, median OS was 14.7 vs 9.4 mo, with an adjusted HR of 0.55 (95% CI, 0.39-0.73); sensitivity analysis censoring pts at subsequent ADC initiation was consistent. No new safety signals were observed. Conclusions With nearly 30 mo of follow-up, sac-TMT sustained the statistically significant OS benefit previously observed at interim analysis. Sac-TMT provided durable survival benefit vs chemotherapy, including across clinically relevant subgroups and after adjustment for subsequent ADC therapy, supporting the use of sac-TMT in previously treated mTNBC.

[Slide 1] 681eP - Effect of adding carboplatin to taxane plus dual HER2 blockade on pathologic complete response in Neoadjuvant HER2-positive breast cancer: A meta-analysis Presentation Number 681eP Speakers Yakup Ergün (Diyarbakır, Türkiye) Authors Yakup Ergün (Diyarbakır, Türkiye), Hayati Arvas (Mardin, Türkiye) Abstract Background To evaluate whether the addition of carboplatin to taxane plus trastuzumab and pertuzumab (THP) in the neoadjuvant treatment of HER2-positive early breast cancer provides an incremental benefit in terms of pathologic complete response (pCR). Methods A systematic literature search was conducted from inception in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Studies comparing neoadjuvant TCHP versus THP were included. The primary endpoint was pCR in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Prespecified subgroup analyses were performed according to hormone receptor (HR) status, lymph node status, clinical stage, and tumor grade. Effect sizes were calculated as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic. Results A total of 8 studies (2 prospective and 6 retrospective), comprising 2,529 patients, were included. In the ITT population, pCR rates were 62.2% in the TCHP arm and 61.7% in the THP arm. The addition of carboplatin did not result in a statistically significant improvement in pCR (OR 1.15; 95% CI 0.82-1.60; p=0.42; I²=68%). In the HR-negative subgroup, pCR rates were 74.5% versus 78.6% (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.35-2.76), while in the HR-positive subgroup they were 54.4% versus 54.2% (OR 1.01; 95% CI 0.78-1.30), with no significant differences observed. Among node-negative patients, pCR rates were 67.8% and 67.3% (OR 1.09; 95% CI 0.60-1.98), and among node-positive patients 59.9% and 63.4% (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.64-1.19). In clinical stage II disease, pCR rates were 63.0% and 65.7% (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.60-1.29), and in stage III disease 59.8% and 63.6% (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.48-1.55). Conclusions In neoadjuvant HER2-positive breast cancer, the addition of carboplatin to taxane plus dual HER2 blockade does not significantly improve pCR rates in the overall population or in any of the evaluated clinical subgroups. Based on the available evidence, a patient-tailored, selective approach appears more rational than the routine use of carboplatin.

[Slide 1] Rapid Oral session 544RO - Final analysis of the GIM3 FATA trial: Treatment schedule and three aromatase inhibitors (AIs) comparison in postmenopausal HR-positive (HR+) early breast cancer (eBC) Speakers Pietro De Placido (Napoli, Italy) Lecture Time 16:15 - 16:20 Abstract Background Adjuvant AI therapy is standard for postmenopausal women with HR+ eBC. The optimal schedule [upfront vs sequential AI use after tamoxifen (T)] and the relative efficacy of the three third-generation AIs: anastrozole (A), exemestane (E), letrozole (L) remain unresolved. GIM3 FATA is the only randomized trial prospectively powered to address both questions in parallel, fully investigator-initiated and academically funded. Methods Postmenopausal women with HR+ eBC were randomly assigned 1:1:1:1:1:1 to 5 years of A, E, or L, given upfront or after 2 years of T. Co-primary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) for upfront vs switch and DFS across the three AIs. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), distant DFS, distant relapse-free survival, relapse-free survival, and breast cancer-free interval, analyzed under updated STEEP 2.0 criteria. Results Between March 2007 and July 2012, 3697 patients were enrolled at 76 Italian centers; median age was 64 years. At a median follow-up of 88.9 months, 796 DFS (792 required) events and 491 deaths had occurred. For upfront vs switch there was no statistically significant difference for DFS (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.82-1.09) and OS (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74-1.06). The 10-year DFS was 79.1% (95% CI 76.1-81.7) with A, 74.2% (95% CI 70.9-77.2) with E, and 76.6% (95% CI 73.3-79.5) with L (global log-rank p=0.028; pairwise comparison: E vs A statistically significant p=0.010, E vs L p=0.06, L vs A p=0.51). In the adjusted Cox model stratified by treatment schedule, the HR for DFS for E vs A was 1.23 (95% CI 1.04-1.46). 10-year OS was not different among A, E and L (global log-rank p=0.25). Toxicity differed by schedule (more musculoskeletal events with upfront; more T-related events with switch) and by AI (more hypercholesterolemia with non-steroidal AIs). Conclusions No schedule was superior, but E was associated with worse DFS. Schedule and AI choice should be individualized by tolerability and comorbidities. Pharmaco-economic considerations are advised since both E and L are nearly twice as expensive as A in most countries. Clinical trial identification This trial is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database, number 2006-004018-42, NCT00541086.

[Slide 1] TOP-1 Breast-conserving surgery without RT or endocrine therapy Age 70+; ER+ / HER2- Small, low-grade breast cancer n = 792 → BCS alone | 5-year invasive local recurrence* 14.8% *Ipsilateral invasive recurrence: 95% CI 12.3-17.5%; competing-risk estimate. Median follow-up 5.1 years. Prospective observational cohort; no randomized comparator. 114/123 recurrences underwent salvage surgery. Bouwman et al. ESMO 2026, 545RO. Eligibility: <=1 cm, grade 1/2 or <=2 cm, grade 1; clear margins.

[Slide 1] [search icon] Proffered Paper session LBA23 - Final results of TALENT: A neoadjuvant trial of T-DXd with or without anastrozole, or in sequence with chemotherapy for HER2-low, HR+ early-stage breast cancer Speakers Sara A. Hurvitz (Seattle, United States of America) Lecture Time 13:30 - 13:40 Abstract Background Pathologic complete response (pCR) in HR+/HER2-negative breast cancer (BC) is uncommon. T-DXd, a HER2-targeted antibody drug conjugate, improves progression-free and overall survival vs chemotherapy in metastatic HER2-low BC. TALENT (NCT04553770) is a phase II, 2-stage neoadjuvant study evaluating T-DXd + endocrine therapy or in sequence with chemotherapy in pts with HR+/HER2-low early BC. Methods Pts with untreated, operable invasive early HR+/HER2-low BC were randomized 1:1 to receive 6 cy of T-DXd (5.4 mg/kg q21d) alone (Arm A) or with anastrozole (1 mg PO QD) (Arm B). An arm was expanded if ≥2 pCR (RCB0) were observed. After 29 pts enrolled, subsequent pts received 8 cy. After Arms A/B, Arm C was added to evaluate 4 cy T-DXd → 4 cy docetaxel 75 mg/m2 + cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 (TC) in <58 pts. Biopsies were taken at baseline, pre-cy2 & surgery. Imaging/biomarkers were assessed at baseline, cy 2 & surgery. Endpoints: Residual Cancer Burden (RCB), safety, overall response rate (ORR) & biomarkers. Ki67, HER2, ER & PR were evaluated centrally, and TROP2 & HER2 levels were quantified (quant) by TROPLEX for Arms A & B. Results From 11/2020 - 02/2026, 132 pts were enrolled. Pts in Arm C were more likely to have node+ disease (81%) vs. Arms A/B (53%, 55%). Overall rates of pCR/near-pCR (RCB 0/1) were 16% (Arm A), 17% (Arm B), and 17% (10/58 Arm C). HER2 levels were higher in pts with RCB0 (2691 & 1221 amol/mm2) vs RCB1/2/3 (715-947 & 440-608 amol/mm2) at Baseline & cy 2, respectively. Table: LBA23 [Table] | Arm A (N=45) n (%) | Arm B (N=29) n (%) | Arm C (N=58) n (%) Baseline characteristics Stage I/II/III | 0/32 (71)/13 (29) | 0/26 (90)/3 (10) | 2 (3)/43 (74)/13 (22) Node+ | 24 (53) | 16 (55) | 47 (81) Grade III | 19 (42) | 11 (38) | 29 (50) Ki67>20% (central) | 33 (73) | 24 (83) | 43 (74) Antigen quant (med amol/mm2) Baseline→Cy2→Surgery HER2 | 707→334→150 | 778→331→83 | - TROP2 | 1097→1371→10011001→952→925- [as printed; columns run together] Results: Evaluable RCB0 | 3/42 (7) | 1/29 (3) | 5/55 (9) ORR | 28/42 (67) | 19/29 (66) | 37/57 (65) Results ITT | 6 cycles (N=15) | 8 cycles (N=30) | 6 cycles (N=14) | 8 cycles (N=15) | 8 cycles (N=58) RCB0 | 0 | 3 (10) | 0 | 1 (7) | 5 (9) RCB1 | 2 (13) | 2 (7) | 1 (7) | 3 (20) | 5 (9) Gr >3 Treatment Emergent AE | 3 (20) | 8 (27) | 3 (21) | 2 (13) | 16 (28) Interstitial Lung Disease (all Gr 2) | 0 | 0 | 1 (7) | 0 | 2 (3) Conclusions In this first study to report outcomes with neoadjuvant T-DXd in HR+/HER2-low BC, T-DXd–based therapy was associated with low pCR rates. ILD was rare. HER2 was higher in tumors with RCB0 versus RCB1/2/3, suggesting HER2 level may correlate with treatment outcome. HER2 levels declined significantly on treatment, whereas TROP2 expression remained stable. ER, PR, & Ki67 analyses will be presented.

[Slide 1] Proffered Paper session LBA50 - PANKU-Breast01: Randomized phase III study of izalontamab brengitecan (iza-bren) in previously treated unresectable locally advanced or metastatic (LA/M) hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-) breast cancer (BC) Speakers Bo Lan (Beijing, China) Lecture Time 14:35 - 14:45 [Abstract] Background Although first-line endocrine therapy plus CDK4/6 inhibitors has improved clinical outcome of HR+/HER2- BC, patients (pts) inevitably develop resistance and survival outcomes remain poor with subsequent therapy. Iza-bren is a first-in-class bispecific antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) against EGFR and HER3, containing a potent topoisomerase I inhibitor payload (Ed-04). [Slide 2] Methods Eligible pts had unresectable LA/M HR+/HER2- BC (HR+, ER≥1% and/or PR≥1%; HER2-, IHC 0, 1+, or 2+/ISH-), progressed after at least 1L of endocrine therapy and 1 or 2L prior chemotherapy, and had previously received CDK4/6 inhibitors and taxanes. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive iza-bren (2.5 mg/kg D1D8 Q3W) or TPC (eribulin, capecitabine, gemcitabine, or vinorelbine). The primary endpoint was PFS by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoint included OS. The pre-planned final analysis for PFS serves as the interim analysis for OS. [Slide 3] Results As of Jul 21, 2026, a total of 383 pts were randomized and treated (iza-bren/TPC, 190/193). Median follow-up for PFS was 15.24 vs 13.63 mo (iza-bren/TPC). Iza-bren significantly improved PFS by BICR vs TPC; mPFS was 8.18 mo (95% CI, 6.93-8.58) vs 4.01 mo (95% CI, 2.92-4.30) (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.33-0.53; P<0.0001). OS was immature at the interim analysis, and no detrimental effect was observed. The cORR by BICR was 40.5% with iza-bren vs 20.2% with TPC, and mDOR was 6.93 vs 4.21 mo, respectively. Grade ≥3 TRAEs were predominantly hematologic in nature. TRAEs were manageable with standard supportive care, and only 1.6% of pts discontinued iza-bren treatment due to TRAEs. Adjudicated ILD occurred in 2 (1.1%) pts with iza-bren (grade 1 or 2). No new safety signals were identified. Conclusions The study met its primary endpoint at the prespecified analysis. Iza-bren demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS vs TPC in previously treated HR+/HER2- BC. The safety profile was manageable and consistent with previous studies. The results support iza-bren as a new standard of care option in this population in China.

[Slide 1] [search icon] Proffered Paper session LBA25 - Adjuvant ribociclib (RIB) + nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) in patients (pts) with HR+/HER2− early breast cancer (EBC): NATALEE 6-y overall survival (OS) and efficacy outcomes Speakers Dennis J. Slamon (Los Angeles, United States of America) Lecture Time 14:25 - 14:35 Abstract Background The phase 3 NATALEE trial demonstrated a statistically significant invasive disease–free survival (iDFS) benefit with adjuvant RIB + NSAI in pts with high-risk stage II/III HR+/HER2− EBC. We present a prespecified analysis of OS and efficacy outcomes with 6 y of follow-up. Methods Pts with HR+/HER2− EBC were randomized 1:1 to receive RIB (400 mg/d; 3 wk on/1 wk off for 3 y) + NSAI (letrozole 2.5 mg/d or anastrozole 1 mg/d for 5 y) or NSAI alone. Premenopausal women and men also received goserelin. Pts had stage IIA (if N1 or if N0 with additional high-risk factors), stage IIB, or stage III disease per AJCC, 8th ed. OS, breast cancer–specific survival (BCSS), iDFS, distant disease–free survival (DDFS), and distant recurrence–free survival (DRFS) were evaluated via Kaplan-Meier methods. Statistical comparisons were conducted by stratified log-rank test. Results At the data cutoff (15 May 2026), all pts were off RIB for a median of 38 mo and beyond the predefined NSAI study regimen. With a median OS follow-up of 66.5 mo, RIB + NSAI showed an OS benefit over NSAI alone (HR, 0.809 [95% CI: 0.661-0.989]; nominal 1-sided P=.019), with increasing absolute benefit over time from 1.2% (93.89% vs 92.73%) at 5 y to 2.1% (91.86% vs 89.73%) at 6 y, that was consistent across key subgroups. BCSS (HR, 0.706 [95% CI: 0.559-0.890]) was supportive of OS benefit. With a median iDFS follow-up of 66.3 mo, RIB + NSAI demonstrated a persistent iDFS benefit over NSAI alone (HR, 0.741 [95% CI: 0.646-0.849]; nominal 1-sided P<.0001), with the absolute iDFS benefit increasing from 4.1% (85.32% vs 81.24%) at 5 y to 5.3% (83.23% vs 77.92%) at 6 y. DDFS (HR, 0.744 [95% CI: 0.646-0.858]) and DRFS (HR, 0.738 [95% CI: 0.634-0.858]) benefits were also maintained. No new safety signals were observed. Conclusions With 6 y of follow-up and all pts off RIB (median, ≈3 y), the sustained reduction in recurrence risk and positive OS results with RIB + NSAI over NSAI alone continue to demonstrate a substantial and clinically relevant benefit for pts with high-risk stage II/III HR+/HER2− EBC, supporting the use of RIB + NSAI in the adjuvant setting across the broad NATALEE-eligible population.

[Slide 1] GIM3 FATA | ESMO 2026 Are All AIs Equal - Or Is One Better? MV Onco [large question mark illustration] [three pill bottles labelled:] ANASTROZOLE LETROZOLE EXEMESTANE 10 YEARS LATER... Did the choice of AI really matter? The Results May Surprise You. [Slide 2] GIM3 FATA | ESMO 2026 PART 1/2 Upfront AI or Tamoxifen First - Does Sequencing Matter? MV Onco 01 WHY GIM3 FATA? • Postmenopausal HR+ early breast cancer. • Adjuvant aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are standard. • But TWO questions remained: • Upfront AI or tamoxifen → AI? • Are all three AIs equally effective? • GIM3 FATA tested BOTH questions. [illustration of woman at a signpost: "Upfront AI (5 years)" OR "Tamoxifen (2 years) → AI (3 years)"] 02 TRIAL DESIGN • Phase III | Randomized | 3,697 patients • 76 Italian centres | Median age 64 years • SIX ARMS - 1:1:1:1:1:1 UPFRONT: 5 years of AI SWITCH: Tamoxifen 2 years → AI 3 years • Three AIs evaluated: • Anastrozole • Letrozole • Exemestane • Co-primary endpoints: DFS by schedule and DFS by AI. [boxes:] Upfront AI 5 years • Anastrozole • Letrozole • Exemestane Tamoxifen → AI Tamoxifen 2 years → AI 3 years • Anastrozole • Letrozole • Exemestane 03 DID UPFRONT AI IMPROVE DFS? NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE • Upfront AI vs tamoxifen → AI • DFS HR 0.95 • 95% CI 0.82 - 1.09 • Neither schedule demonstrated superiority. [calendar graphic:] Disease-Free Survival (DFS) HR 0.95 95% CI 0.82 - 1.09 04 DID OVERALL SURVIVAL IMPROVE? NO SIGNIFICANT OS BENEFIT • OS HR 0.88 • 95% CI 0.74 - 1.06 • Median follow-up: 88.9 months • 796 DFS events • 491 deaths • No demonstrated survival advantage with upfront AI. [calendar graphic:] Overall Survival (OS) HR 0.88 95% CI 0.74 - 1.06 Median follow-up 88.9 months 05 TAKE-HOME Upfront AI ≠ Proven Superior Survival • Starting with an AI did not significantly improve DFS or OS compared with tamoxifen followed by AI. • Both schedules remain reasonable options. • Individualize sequencing by recurrence risk, tolerability and comorbidities. NEXT: Are all three aromatase inhibitors equally effective? [Slide 3] GIM3 FATA | ESMO 2026 PART 2/2 Three Aromatase Inhibitors - Are They Really Equal? MV Onco 01 WHICH AI PERFORMED BEST? 10-YEAR DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL • Anastrozole - 79.1% • Letrozole - 76.6% • Exemestane - 74.2% Global log-rank p = 0.028 Anastrozole showed the highest DFS. [three pill bottles: Anastrozole, Letrozole, Exemestane] 02 WERE DIFFERENCES SIGNIFICANT? Exemestane vs Anastrozole • DFS HR 1.23 (95% CI 1.04 - 1.46) • 23% higher relative hazard of a DFS event with exemestane. Pairwise comparisons: • Exemestane vs Anastrozole: p = 0.010 • Exemestane vs Letrozole: p = 0.060 • Letrozole vs Anastrozole: p = 0.510 Only E vs A was statistically significant. [balance scale graphic: A vs E] Exemestane had worse DFS than Anastrozole 03 DID BETTER DFS TRANSLATE INTO OS? NO SIGNIFICANT OS DIFFERENCE • 10-year OS across the three AIs: Global log-rank p = 0.25 Better DFS with anastrozole vs exemestane did NOT establish longer survival. [hourglass graphic] DFS benefit ≠ Proven OS benefit 04 WHAT ABOUT TOXICITY? UPFRONT AI • More musculoskeletal adverse events. TAMOXIFEN → AI • More tamoxifen-related adverse events. NONSTEROIDAL AIs • Anastrozole and letrozole: - More hypercholesterolemia. AI choice should consider toxicity, comorbidities and adherence. 05 TAKE-HOME Are All Aromatase Inhibitors Equal? Not necessarily. • Anastrozole showed significantly better DFS than exemestane. • Letrozole was not significantly different from either AI. • No demonstrated OS advantage among the three. • DFS differences require interpretation alongside distant-recurrence outcomes and other trials. • Choose the AI thoughtfully - not solely by class. [dartboard graphic with labels Anastrozole, Letrozole, Exemestane]

[Slide 1] NATALEE | ESMO 2026 Part 1 – Has Ribociclib Finally Improved Overall Survival? MV Onco 01 — THE TRIAL • NATALEE | Phase III • Stage II-III HR+/HER2- early breast cancer • Ribociclib 400 mg/day 3 weeks ON / 1 week OFF × 3 years + nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor VS • Aromatase inhibitor alone 02 — SIX-YEAR OVERALL SURVIVAL Ribociclib + AI vs AI alone 91.86% vs 89.73% Absolute OS gain: +2.1 percentage points HR 0.809 | 95% CI 0.661 – 0.989 Approximately 19% lower hazard of death. 03 — IS OS STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT? • Nominal one-sided P = 0.019 • 95% CI excludes 1. • BUT... • Did OS cross the prespecified multiplicity-adjusted significance boundary? • Formal OS significance not yet established from the abstract. 04 — TAKE-HOME • An encouraging OS signal at 6 years. • Absolute OS difference: +2.1 percentage points. • iDFS benefit was already established. • Nominal significance ≠ Confirmed formal OS success. • Await full statistical analysis. [Slide 2] NATALEE | ESMO 2026 Part 2 – Does the Benefit Persist After Ribociclib Stops? MV Onco 1. SIX-YEAR iDFS Ribociclib + AI vs AI alone 83.23% vs 77.92% Absolute iDFS gain: +5.3 percentage points HR 0.741 95% CI 0.646–0.849 Approximately 26% lower hazard of invasive disease or death. 2. DISTANT RECURRENCE & CANCER DEATH Distant disease-free survival (DDFS) : HR 0.744 Distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) : HR 0.738 Breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) : HR 0.706 All favour ribociclib. 3. DOES THE BENEFIT LAST? Ribociclib treatment: 3 years Median time off ribociclib: 38 months Absolute iDFS benefit: At 5 years: +4.1 percentage points → At 6 years: +5.3 percentage points Benefit persists after treatment stops. No new safety signals observed. 4. TAKE-HOME • Three years of ribociclib. • Sustained iDFS benefit at six years. • Absolute iDFS separation continues to increase. • But longer follow-up is needed to distinguish delayed recurrence from durable prevention.

[Slide 1] postMONARCH | ESMO 2026 After CDK4/6 Progression: Does Abemaciclib Help? MV Onco HR-positive / HER2-negative advanced breast cancer Progression after CDK4/6 inhibitor + endocrine therapy 368 patients • Randomised 1:1 Abemaciclib - fulvestrant 182 patients Placebo - fulvestrant 186 patients Original median PFS 6.0 months vs 5.3 months Modest but statistically significant benefit HR 0.73 Final median OS 32.1 months vs 24.6 months Numerically longer; not statistically significant HR 0.80 • p = 0.1145 Better disease control. Survival benefit remains unproven. An option to consider in selected patients after prior CDK4/6 progression. [cartoon illustrations of patient and physician] [Slide 2] postMONARCH | Part 1 Abemaciclib After CDK4/6 Progression? MV Onco 01 — THE QUESTION • HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer • Cancer progresses on a CDK4/6 inhibitor + endocrine therapy. • Can adding abemaciclib to fulvestrant improve disease control? 02 — WHO WAS INCLUDED? • Progression on: CDK4/6 inhibitor + aromatase inhibitor as first treatment for advanced disease OR • Recurrence during or after adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitor + endocrine therapy • No other prior treatment for advanced disease. 03 — WHAT WAS COMPARED? • 368 patients • Randomised 1:1 Abemaciclib + fulvestrant 182 patients versus Placebo + fulvestrant 186 patients • Phase III • Double-blind 04 — TAKE-HOME • The trial tested adding abemaciclib to a new endocrine backbone after progression on prior CDK4/6 therapy. • Does CDK4/6 inhibition still have a role after progression? [Slide 3] postMONARCH | Part 2 PFS Benefit. Survival Benefit Unproven. MV Onco 01 ORIGINAL PFS RESULTS Median progression-free survival • Abemaciclib + fulvestrant: 6.0 months • Placebo + fulvestrant: 5.3 months HR 0.73 | 95% CI 0.57–0.95 Statistically significant benefit. Median difference: 0.7 months. 02 UPDATED PFS The PFS benefit persisted. HR 0.78 | 95% CI 0.62–0.99 Nominal p = 0.0390 03 FINAL OVERALL SURVIVAL Median overall survival • Abemaciclib + fulvestrant: 32.1 months • Placebo + fulvestrant: 24.6 months HR 0.80 | 95% CI 0.60–1.06 p = 0.1145 Numerically longer survival. NOT statistically significant. 04 TAKE-HOME • Modest absolute PFS benefit. • Overall survival numerically favoured abemaciclib + fulvestrant. • A survival benefit remains UNPROVEN. [Slide 4] postMONARCH | Part 3 What Does It Mean for Practice? MV Onco 01 — WHAT THE TRIAL SUPPORTS • Abemaciclib + fulvestrant can improve disease control after prior CDK4/6 inhibitor therapy. • The absolute PFS benefit was modest. 02 — WHAT IT DOES NOT PROVE • Longer overall survival was NOT statistically established. • A 7.5-month difference in median OS does not mean a proven 7.5-month survival gain. 03 — KNOW THE LIMITS • Compared with fulvestrant alone. • No direct comparison with other active treatment options. • No other prior treatment for advanced disease was permitted. • No new safety signals identified. 04 — TAKE-HOME • Reasonable option after prior CDK4/6 progression. • PFS benefit remains consistent. • Numerically longer OS, but not statistically significant. • Supports considering abemaciclib + fulvestrant in selected patients.

[Slide 1] Proffered Paper session LBA23 - Final results of TALENT: A neoadjuvant trial of T-DXd with or without anastrozole, or in sequence with chemotherapy for HER2-low, HR+ early-stage breast cancer Speakers Sara A. Hurvitz (Seattle, United States of America) Lecture Time 13:30 - 13:40 [Abstract] Background Pathologic complete response (pCR) in HR+/HER2-negative breast cancer (BC) is uncommon. T-DXd, a HER2-targeted antibody drug conjugate, improves progression-free and overall survival vs chemotherapy in metastatic HER2-low BC. TALENT (NCT04553770) is a phase II, 2-stage neoadjuvant study evaluating T-DXd + endocrine therapy or in sequence with chemotherapy in pts with HR+/HER2-low early BC. [Slide 2] Conclusions In this first study to report outcomes with neoadjuvant T-DXd in HR+/HER2-low BC, T-DXd−based therapy was associated with low pCR rates. ILD was rare. HER2 was higher in tumors with RCB0 versus RCB1/2/3, suggesting HER2 level may correlate with treatment outcome. HER2 levels declined significantly on treatment, whereas TROP2 expression remained stable. ER, PR, & Ki67 analyses will be presented. Clinical trial identification NCT04553770. Legal entity responsible for the study Translational Research In Oncology - US (TRIO-US). [Slide 3] TALENT Trial | ESMO 2026 | LBA23 HR+/HER2-low early breast cancer Outcome | T-DXd | T-DXd + AI | T-DXd → TC N | 45 | 29 | 58 ORR | 67% | 66% | 65% pCR | 7% | 3% | 9% pCR + near-pCR | 16% | 17% | 17%

[Slide 1] ESMO CONGRESS | MADRID 2026 Sara Tolaney, MD, MPH HER2-Positive Breast Cancer: ADC Strategies for First Line Metastatic and Early Disease Industry Sponsored Satelite Symposium: Redrawing the Breast Cancer Roadmap Advancing Novel Therapies Into First-Line and Early Disease Date: Friday, October 23, 2026 Time: 09:45 - 11:15 CEST | 3:45 - 5:15 AM EST Location: Pamplona Auditorium, Hall 5 [headshot] Dana-Farber Cancer Institute

[Slide 1] Proffered Paper session LBA24 - Final analysis of NRG oncology/NSABP B-42, a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of extended letrozole in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor positive breast cancer who have completed previous adjuvant therapy with an aromatase inhibitor Speakers Eleftherios P. Mamounas (Orlando, United States of America) Lecture Time 14:15 - 14:25 Abstract Background NSABP B-42 evaluated whether 5 yrs of letrozole (L) vs placebo (P) improves disease-free survival (DFS) in patients who received 5 yrs of endocrine therapy. Previous 10-yr results showed that L significantly improved the primary endpoint of DFS and secondary endpoints of breast cancer-free interval (BCFI) and distant recurrence (DR) with no significant improvement in overall survival (OS). Here we report the final trial analysis of 15-yr outcome data. Methods A total of 3,966 postmenopausal patients with stage I-III, hormone-receptor positive breast cancer, disease-free after 5 yrs of an aromatase inhibitor (AI) or ≤3 yrs of tamoxifen à AI for total of 5 yrs, were randomized 1:1 to 5 yrs of L 2.5 mg PO daily or P. Stratification was by pathologic nodal status, prior tamoxifen or not, and baseline DEXA T scores (>-2.0, ≤-2.0 SD). Primary endpoint was DFS. Secondary endpoints included OS, BCFI and DR. Differences in outcomes between L and P were assessed by stratified log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards models. Results Follow-up of trial patients was completed in 08/26, with median follow-up of 15.9 yrs. Since the 10-yr update, 538 additional DFS events were recorded. The 15-yr results continue to show a modest but significant improvement in DFS (HR=0.85, 95%CI=0.77 to 0.94,15-yr DFS: P=56.5%, L=61.6%), BCFI (HR=0.78, 95%CI=0.67 to 0.92,15-yr BCFI risk: P=18.3%, L=14.7%) and DR (HR=0.72, 95%CI=0.57 to 0.91,15-yr DR risk: P=9.7%, L=6.9%). The L effect on DFS was consistent across subgroups by stratification factors. There was no significant improvement in OS (HR=0.92, 95%CI=0.82 to 1.05, 15-yr OS: P=72.3%, L=74.0%). Conclusions With over 15 yrs of follow-up, the B-42 trial continues to demonstrate a sustained and clinically meaningful benefit with extended letrozole therapy on DFS and key secondary endpoints consistent with the original and 10-yr updated results. No attenuation of treatment effect was observed from year 10 to year 15.

[Slide 1] Proffered Paper session LBA13 - Trastuzumab rezetecan (SHR-A1811) in HER2-low advanced breast cancer (BC): A randomized, phase 3 study (HORIZON-Breast06) Speakers Ying Fan (Beijing, China) Lecture Time 13:40 - 13:50 Abstract Background HORIZON-Breast06 is a pivotal, randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase 3 study comparing trastuzumab rezetecan (a HER2 ADC) with physician's choice of chemotherapy in patients (pts) with HER2-low advanced BC who had received ≤1 prior line of chemotherapy for metastatic disease, with prior endocrine therapy required for hormone receptor (HR)-positive disease. Methods Pts were randomized (1:1) to receive trastuzumab rezetecan (6.4 mg/kg IV, Q3W) or physician's choice of chemotherapy (taxanes, eribulin, capecitabine, or gemcitabine). The co-primary endpoints were PFS by blinded independent central review (BICR) in chemo-naïve (0 prior line of chemotherapy for metastatic disease) and overall pts. Results As of Mar 20, 2026, 551 pts were randomized (trastuzumab rezetecan, n=277; chemotherapy, n=274; chemo-naïve: 81.5%; HR-positive: 73.0%; prior CDK4/6 inhibitor: 64.8%). Median follow-up was 18.0 months (95% CI 16.8–19.3) for all patients. Trastuzumab rezetecan significantly prolonged PFS by BICR in both chemo-naïve (median 16.6 vs. 6.8 months; HR 0.25, 95% CI 0.19–0.33; P<0.0001; table) and overall pts (median 16.4 vs. 6.8 months; HR 0.27, 95% CI 0.21–0.34; P<0.0001). The PFS benefit was consistent across all prespecified subgroups, including HR-negative disease (16.5 vs. 6.8 months; HR 0.34) and HR-positive disease (16.4 vs. 6.7 months; HR 0.24). OS data remain immature, with a trend favoring trastuzumab rezetecan. Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 84.1% (trastuzumab rezetecan) and 67.9% (chemotherapy) of patients, respectively. Interstitial lung disease (ILD) was reported in only 7 pts (2.5%) with trastuzumab rezetecan. Table: LBA13 [Table] Chemo-naïve patients: Trastuzumab rezetecan (N=225) | Chemotherapy (N=224) | Overall patients: Trastuzumab rezetecan (N=277) | Chemotherapy (N=274) PFS Events, n (%) | 91 (40.4) | 146 (65.2) | 130 (46.9) | 185 (67.5) Median (95% CI), months | 16.6 (14.0–19.4) | 6.8 (5.7–7.0) | 16.4 (14.0–16.8) | 6.8 (5.7–6.9) 12-mo rate, % (95% CI) | 65.2 (57.6–71.8) | 18.9 (12.8–25.8) | 63.1 (56.4–69.1) | 18.0 (12.7–24.1) HR (95% CI); 1-sided P | 0.25 (0.19–0.33); P<0.0001 | 0.27 (0.21–0.34); P<0.0001 OS Events, n (%) | 43 (19.1) | 55 (24.6) | 66 (23.8) | 77 (28.1) 12-mo rate, % (95% CI) | 92.0 (87.3–95.1) | 83.0 (76.9–87.6) | 90.6 (86.2–93.6) | 81.4 (75.9–85.8) ORR, % (95% CI) | 76.0 (69.9–81.4) | 43.3 (36.7–50.1) | 75.5 (69.9–80.4) | 41.2 (35.4–47.3) Conclusions Trastuzumab rezetecan significantly improved PFS over physician's choice of chemotherapy in pts with HER2-low advanced BC regardless of prior lines of chemotherapy or HR status, with a trend toward OS benefit and a favorable safety profile including a low incidence of ILD.

[Slide 1] [search icon] Proffered Paper session LBA50 - PANKU-Breast01: Randomized phase III study of izalontamab brengitecan (iza-bren) in previously treated unresectable locally advanced or metastatic (LA/M) hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-) breast cancer (BC) Speakers Bo Lan (Beijing, China) Lecture Time 14:35 - 14:45 Abstract Background Although first-line endocrine therapy plus CDK4/6 inhibitors has improved clinical outcome of HR+/HER2- BC, patients (pts) inevitably develop resistance and survival outcomes remain poor with subsequent therapy. Iza-bren is a first-in-class bispecific antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) against EGFR and HER3, containing a potent topoisomerase I inhibitor payload (Ed-04). Methods Eligible pts had unresectable LA/M HR+/HER2- BC (HR+, ER≥1% and/or PR≥1%; HER2-, IHC 0, 1+, or 2+/ISH-), progressed after at least 1L of endocrine therapy and 1 or 2L prior chemotherapy, and had previously received CDK4/6 inhibitors and taxanes. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive iza-bren (2.5 mg/kg D1D8 Q3W) or TPC (eribulin, capecitabine, gemcitabine, or vinorelbine). The primary endpoint was PFS by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoint included OS. The pre-planned final analysis for PFS serves as the interim analysis for OS. Results As of Jul 21, 2026, a total of 383 pts were randomized and treated (iza-bren/TPC, 190/193). Median follow-up for PFS was 15.24 vs 13.63 mo (iza-bren/TPC). Iza-bren significantly improved PFS by BICR vs TPC; mPFS was 8.18 mo (95% CI, 6.93-8.58) vs 4.01 mo (95% CI, 2.92-4.30) (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.33-0.53; P<0.0001). OS was immature at the interim analysis, and no detrimental effect was observed. The cORR by BICR was 40.5% with iza-bren vs 20.2% with TPC, and mDOR was 6.93 vs 4.21 mo, respectively. Grade ≥3 TRAEs were predominantly hematologic in nature. TRAEs were manageable with standard supportive care, and only 1.6% of pts discontinued iza-bren treatment due to TRAEs. Adjudicated ILD occurred in 2 (1.1%) pts with iza-bren (grade 1 or 2). No new safety signals were identified. Conclusions The study met its primary endpoint at the prespecified analysis. Iza-bren demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS vs TPC in previously treated HR+/HER2- BC. The safety profile was manageable and consistent with previous studies. The results support iza-bren as a new standard of care option in this population in China.

[Slide 1] FOURLIGHT-1 | ESMO 2026 After CDK4/6 Progression... Can CDK4 Still Be Targeted? MV Onco HR+/HER2− advanced breast cancer Progression on prior adjuvant or first-line CDK4/6 inhibitor Randomized phase II • Open-label • 263 patients Atirmociclib 300 mg twice daily + fulvestrant n = 126 versus Investigator's choice Fulvestrant OR everolimus + exemestane n = 137 [illustration: cell-cycle wheel (G1, S, G2, M, "Cancer cell cycle") with a broken brake labeled "Prior CDK4/6 inhibitor" / "Disease progressed" and a new brake labeled "Atirmociclib Selective CDK4 inhibitor" plus a lever "+ Fulvestrant Endocrine suppression"] MEDIAN PFS Atirmociclib + fulvestrant 9.4 months vs 6.6 months Investigator's choice HR 0.60 | 95% CI 0.440 – 0.825 40% lower hazard of progression or death OTHER EFFICACY OUTCOMES Numerically higher ORR 19.3% vs 11.3% Median response duration 14.8 vs 9.3 months Clinical benefit ≥24 weeks 61.9% vs 46.0% SAFETY [blood cell illustration] Treatment-related: • Neutropenia 46.4% • Leukopenia 32.8% 4.0% discontinued atirmociclib because of treatment-related adverse events Cytopenia grades not specified in abstract TAKE-HOME ✓ CDK4 can remain a therapeutic target after CDK4/6 inhibitor progression. ✓ Promising phase II PFS benefit. ✓ Overall survival immature.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 / BREAST CANCER 24 OCT 2026 / PRE-CONGRESS WATCH RIBOCICLIB + NSAI • NATALEE • PHASE 3 DOES ADJUVANT BENEFIT LAST? 6-year follow-up in HR-positive / HER2-negative early breast cancer [illustration of tumor cells and antibody] WHO IS THIS ABOUT? Stage II–III HR+/HER2– early breast cancer Adjuvant ribociclib + nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor vs NSAI alone Ribociclib 400 mg (3 weeks on / 1 week off) + endocrine therapy Question now: does earlier iDFS benefit remain durable at 6 years? LBA25 • 6-YEAR FOLLOW-UP • PRESENTATION PENDING KEY READOUT OS maturity • absolute iDFS difference • late recurrences Grade 3+ toxicity • treatment discontinuation • clinical relevance WHAT WE NEED TO SEE IN MADRID DURABILITY: Is the early iDFS gain sustained over time? SURVIVAL: Is there an emerging OS signal, or is follow-up still immature? TRADE-OFF: How should efficacy be weighed against toxicity and treatment burden? Presented data pending • Do not infer OS benefit before the full readout Source: ESMO 2026 programme listing • NATALEE study context • drozdogan.com

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 / BREAST CANCER 23 OCT 2026 / PRE-CONGRESS WATCH TRASTUZUMAB DERUXTECAN • TALENT • LBA23 ARE ADCs MOVING INTO CURATIVE CARE? A neoadjuvant strategy in HER2-low / HR-positive early breast cancer [illustration: ADC binding HER2-low tumor cell; labels "ADC", "HER2-low tumor cell"] WHO IS THIS FOR? HER2-low / HR+ early breast cancer TALENT: neoadjuvant trastuzumab deruxtecan ± anastrozole or sequenced with chemotherapy Core question: Can T-DXd move from metastatic disease into the preoperative curative setting? And where should it sit relative to endocrine therapy or chemotherapy? LBA23 • PRESENTATION PENDING • FULL DATA NOT YET DISCLOSED KEY READOUT • pathologic response / residual disease • chemotherapy-free activity • endocrine contribution • ILD / pneumonitis and toxicity • future treatment architecture WHAT SHOULD WE LOOK FOR IN MADRID? ACTIVITY: Will we see meaningful preoperative tumor response? POSITIONING: What is the best sequence among the ADC, anastrozole and chemotherapy? BALANCE: How should efficacy, toxicity and treatment burden be weighed in early disease? No full presentation yet • pCR, survival or practice change should not be assumed before the full readout Source: ESMO 2026 programme listing • TALENT study context • drozdogan.com PRE-CONGRESS WATCH

[Slide 1] SWITCH | ESMO 2026 New Target. Same Payload. Same Resistance? MV Onco [illustration: ADC-resistant cancer cell with HER2 and TROP2 receptors] HER2-targeted ADC TOP1i Different targets. Same payload class. TROP2-targeted ADC TOP1i ADC-resistant cancer cell Different payload class may overcome resistance Microtubule inhibitor (MMAE) Microtubule inhibitor → TOP1i TOP1i Response observed (2/54) 54 patients | Phase II | 94.4% previously exposed to TOP1i ADCs ONLY 2/54 RESPONDED A: 0% | B: 8.3% | C: 0% | D: 5% TAKE-HOME • Changing the target alone produced limited responses. • Payload cross-resistance may matter more than antigen switching. • Change the weapon - not just the address? • Small phase II trial. Hypothesis-generating. [Slide 2] SWITCH | ESMO 2026 PART 1/2 New Target. Same Payload. Does It Work? MV Onco 01 WHY SWITCH? • HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer • Resistance to antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) is an emerging challenge. • After progression on an ADC, what should we change? ○ The antigen target? ○ The cytotoxic payload? • Can changing the target alone overcome resistance? [illustration: Before ADC response / After ADC progression (resistance)] 02 TRIAL DESIGN • Phase II | Prospective | Open-label • 54 patients | HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer • Progression after ≥1 prior ADC • Four investigational ADC cohorts assigned according to prior treatment history. • Primary endpoint: Investigator-assessed ORR [four bottles:] SHR-A1811 Cohort A (n=10) SHR-A1921 Cohort B (n=12) SHR-A2009 Cohort C (n=12) SHR-A2102 Cohort D (n=20) All FOUR ADCs carried a TOP1 inhibitor payload 03 WHICH ADCs WERE TESTED? • Four investigational ADCs with different targets and constructs. • All used the SAME TOP1 inhibitor payload. • Cohort A - SHR-A1811 (n=10) • Cohort B - SHR-A1921 (n=12) • Cohort C - SHR-A2009 (n=12) • Cohort D - SHR-A2102 (n=20) [ADC illustration] Different antigen targets and ADC constructs / Same cytotoxic payload (TOP1 inhibitor) 04 HOW HEAVILY PRETREATED? • 94.4% had prior TOP1i-based ADC exposure. • Most patients had already received an ADC with the same payload class. • Could another TOP1i-based ADC restore sensitivity? [pictogram] 94.4% had prior TOP1i-based ADC exposure 05 WHAT WERE THE RESULTS? CONFIRMED OBJECTIVE RESPONSE RATE • Cohort A - 0% • Cohort B - 8.3% • Cohort C - 0% • Cohort D - 5% Only 2 of 54 patients responded (3.7%). TAKE-HOME • Changing the ADC construct while retaining a TOP1i payload produced very limited responses. • NEXT: Is payload cross-resistance the missing explanation? [Slide 3] SWITCH | ESMO 2026 Change the Target - Or Change the Payload? PART 2/2 MV Onco 01 WHERE DID RESPONSES OCCUR? ONLY AFTER SWITCHING PAYLOAD CLASS Both responders had previously received: Disitamab vedotin (RC48) • Microtubule inhibitor payload (MMAE) [ADC illustration] RC48 (Disitamab vedotin) Target: HER2 Payload: MMAE (microtubule inhibitor) Then switched to: TOP1i-based ADC - Different target, Payload: TOP1 inhibitor 2 responses among 54 patients → No responses were observed after switching between ADCs with the same TOP1i payload class. 02 WHY DID TARGET SWITCHING FAIL? POSSIBLE PAYLOAD CROSS-RESISTANCE ADC resistance may involve: • Antigen loss or downregulation • Impaired internalization • Drug efflux mechanisms • Altered TOP1 activity • Enhanced DNA damage repair [cell illustration labelled: Antigen loss downregulation, Impaired internalization, Drug efflux, Altered TOP1 activity, Enhanced DNA damage repair] Changing the antigen may not overcome resistance to the cytotoxic payload. Different target ≠ Different killing mechanism 03 WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR ADC SEQUENCING? Consider progression after T-DXd. T-DXd (HER2) Payload: DXd (TOP1 inhibitor) → Sacituzumab govitecan (TROP2) Payload: SN-38 (TOP1 inhibitor) • HER2 → TROP2: Different targets • DXd → SN-38: Different molecules • Both: TOP1 inhibitor payload class • Potential for cross-resistance despite antigen switching. Important: SWITCH does NOT establish that sacituzumab govitecan is ineffective after T-DXd. 04 WHAT ARE THE LIMITATIONS? Small, hypothesis-generating phase II trial • Only 54 patients • Only 2 confirmed responses • Small, treatment-history-selected cohorts • No direct randomized comparison of payload-switching strategies • No definitive mechanistic proof of cross-resistance • Safety was described as manageable, without detailed toxicity rates in the abstract. Association ≠ Proof of mechanism 05 WHAT SHOULD FUTURE TRIALS TEST? Three sequencing strategies: A Different target + Same payload class B Same target + Different payload class C Different target + Different payload class • Integrate antigen expression and molecular resistance biomarkers. • Which strategy can truly restore ADC sensitivity? TAKE-HOME New Target. Same Payload. Limited Responses. • SWITCH suggests that payload-class cross-resistance may contribute substantially to ADC failure. • Changing the antigen alone may be insufficient. • The next frontier in ADC sequencing may be changing the weapon - not merely its address. • Hypothesis-generating, not practice-changing. [dartboard with arrows illustration]

[Slide 1] Proffered Paper session LBA23 - Final results of TALENT: A neoadjuvant trial of T-DXd with or without anastrozole, or in sequence with chemotherapy for HER2-low, HR+ early-stage breast cancer Speakers Sara A. Hurvitz (Seattle, United States of America) Lecture Time 13:30 - 13:40 Abstract Background Pathologic complete response (pCR) in HR+/HER2-negative breast cancer (BC) is uncommon. T-DXd, a HER2-targeted antibody drug conjugate, improves progression-free and overall survival vs chemotherapy in metastatic HER2-low BC. TALENT (NCT04553770) is a phase II, 2-stage neoadjuvant study evaluating T-DXd + endocrine therapy or in sequence with chemotherapy in pts with HR+/HER2-low early BC. Methods Pts with untreated, operable invasive early HR+/HER2-low BC were randomized 1:1 to receive 6 cy of T-DXd (5.4 mg/kg q21d) alone (Arm A) or with anastrozole (1 mg PO QD) (Arm B). An arm was expanded if ≥2 pCR (RCB0) were observed. After 29 pts enrolled, subsequent pts received 8 cy. After Arms A/B, Arm C was added to evaluate 4 cy T-DXd → 4 cy docetaxel 75 mg/m2 + cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2 (TC) in <58 pts. Biopsies were taken at baseline, pre-cy2 & surgery. Imaging/biomarkers were assessed at baseline, cy 2 & surgery. Endpoints: Residual Cancer Burden (RCB), safety, overall response rate (ORR) & biomarkers. Ki67, HER2, ER & PR were evaluated centrally, and TROP2 & HER2 levels were quantified (quant) by TROPLEX for Arms A & B. Results From 11/2020 - 02/2026, 132 pts were enrolled. Pts in Arm C were more likely to have node+ disease (81%) vs. Arms A/B (53%, 55%). Overall rates of pCR/near-pCR (RCB 0/1) were 16% (Arm A), 17% (Arm B), and 17% (10/58 Arm C). HER2 levels were higher in pts with RCB0 (2691 & 1221 amol/mm2) vs RCB1/2/3 (715-947 & 440-608 amol/mm2) at Baseline & cy 2, respectively. Table: LBA23 [Table — header: Arm A (N=45) n (%) | Arm B (N=29) n (%) | Arm C (N=58) n (%); data columns are printed offset from the headers; values transcribed left-to-right as printed] Baseline characteristics Stage I/II/III | 0/32 (71)/13 (29) | 0/26 (90)/3 (10) | 2 (3)/43 (74)/13 (22) Node+ | 24 (53) | 16 (55) | 47 (81) Grade III | 19 (42) | 11 (38) | 29 (50) Ki67>20% (central) | 33 (73) | 24 (83) | 43 (74) Antigen quant (med amol/mm2) Baseline → Cy2 → Surgery HER2 | 707 → 334 → 150 | 778 → 331 → 83 | - TROP2 | 1097 → 1371 → 10011001 → 952 → 925- [as printed; cell boundary garbled in source] Results: Evaluable RCB0 | 3/42 (7) | 1/29 (3) | 5/55 (9) ORR | 28/42 (67) | 19/29 (66) | 37/57 (65) Results ITT | 6 cycles (N=15) | 8 cycles (N=30) | 6 cycles (N=14) | 8 cycles (N=15) | 8 cycles (N=58) RCB0 | 0 | 3 (10) | 0 | 1 (7) | 5 (9) RCB1 | 2 (13) | 2 (7) | 1 (7) | 3 (20) | 5 (9) Gr >3 Treatment Emergent AE | 3 (20) | 8 (27) | 3 (21) | 2 (13) | 16 (28) Interstitial Lung Disease (all Gr 2) | 0 | 0 | 1 (7) | 0 | 2 (3) Conclusions In this first study to report outcomes with neoadjuvant T-DXd in HR+/HER2-low BC, T-DXd-based therapy was associated with low pCR rates. ILD was rare. HER2 was higher in tumors with RCB0 versus RCB1/2/3, suggesting HER2 level may correlate with treatment outcome. HER2 levels declined significantly on treatment, whereas TROP2 expression remained stable. ER, PR, & Ki67 analyses will be presented.

[Slide 1] SWITCH vs SATEEN | ESMO 2026 ADC Sequencing: Is the Payload the Problem? MV Onco PARAMETER | SWITCH | SATEEN Population | HER2-negative MBC | HER2-positive MBC Design | Phase II platform | Phase II single-arm Patients | 54 | 27 Prior ADC | ≥1 ADC | T-DXd Strategy | Change ADC target/construct | Sacituzumab govitecan + trastuzumab Payload | TOP1i → TOP1i in previously TOP1i-exposed patients | DXd → SN-38 (both TOP1i) ORR | 3.7% (2/54) | 3.7% (1/27) Key finding | No responses after same-class TOP1i switching. | Primary endpoint not met. Additional result | Both responses after MMAE → TOP1i. | Median PFS: 2.3 months. Conclusion | Possible payload cross-resistance. | Limited activity after T-DXd. BOTH STUDIES → ORR 3.7% Different populations. Similar concern about sequential TOP1i-based ADCs. TAKE-HOME 1 TARGET SWITCHING MAY NOT BE ENOUGH. Changing the antigen does not necessarily overcome resistance. 2 SAME PAYLOAD CLASS MAY MEAN CROSS-RESISTANCE. Different TOP1 inhibitors may share resistance mechanisms. 3 PAYLOAD DIVERSIFICATION DESERVES STUDY. Changing the cytotoxic mechanism may be more useful than changing the target alone. 4 NOT YET PRACTICE-CHANGING. Small phase II studies; mechanistic cross-resistance remains unproven. Different Targets. Same Payload Class. Limited Responses.

[Slide 1] NATALEE | ESMO 2026 3 Years of Ribociclib. Does the Benefit Keep Growing? MV Onco 01 THE TRIAL Stage II-III HR+/HER2- early breast cancer Ribociclib 400 mg/day × 3 years + aromatase inhibitor VS Aromatase inhibitor alone 02 SIX-YEAR OVERALL SURVIVAL Ribociclib + AI AI alone 91.86% vs 89.73% Absolute OS gain: +2.1 pp HR 0.809 | 95% CI 0.661–0.989 Nominal one-sided P = 0.019 03 iDFS BENEFIT GROWS Absolute iDFS advantage 5 years → +4.1 pp 6 years → +5.3 pp 6-year iDFS HR 0.741 Median time off ribociclib: 38 months Benefit persists after treatment cessation. 04 TAKE-HOME • Sustained iDFS benefit after stopping ribociclib. • Encouraging OS signal: +2.1 pp at 6 years. BUT • Nominal OS significance ≠ Confirmed formal significance. • Full statistical testing details awaited.

[Slide 1] TALENT | ESMO 2026 | LBA23 THE TUMOUR SHRANK. BUT THE CANCER SURVIVED. MV Onco HR+/HER2-low breast cancer [illustration: large breast tumour → shrunken tumour after T-DXd] T-DXd ORR 65–67% Residual viable cancer cells pCR ONLY 3–9% HER2 ↓ TROP2 ↔ What makes these cells survive? TAKE-HOME SHRINKAGE ≠ ERADICATION Adding endocrine therapy or sequential TC showed no clear pCR improvement. [Slide 2] TALENT | ESMO 2026 | LBA23 Part 1 – Tumour Shrinkage Without Tumour Eradication? MV Onco 01 THE QUESTION • HR+/HER2-low early breast cancer • T-DXd works in metastatic disease. • Can it eradicate tumours before surgery? TALENT | Phase II | N = 132 02 THREE STRATEGIES • T-DXd alone — n = 45 • T-DXd + anastrozole — n = 29 • T-DXd → TC chemotherapy — n = 58 TC = docetaxel + cyclophosphamide 03 THE RESULTS | Outcome | T-DXd (n = 45) | + AI (n = 29) | → TC (n = 58) | | ORR | 67% | 66% | 65% | | pCR | 7% | 3% | 9% | | pCR + near-pCR | 16% | 17% | 17% | • ~2 in 3 tumours shrank. • Fewer than 1 in 10 achieved pCR. 04 WHY THE DISCONNECT? • ORR ≠ pCR • ORR = Tumour shrinkage • pCR = No residual invasive cancer • HR+ tumours may shrink substantially while viable cancer persists. • Adding anastrozole or sequential TC showed no clear improvement in pCR. • Small phase II cohorts; no definitive comparative conclusions. TAKE-HOME • T-DXd shrinks tumours — but rarely achieves pCR in HR+/HER2-low disease. • Low pCR does not necessarily exclude long-term benefit. [Slide 3] TALENT | ESMO 2026 | LBA23 Part 2 – What Did TALENT Reveal About ADC Resistance? MV Onco 1 DOES HER2 LEVEL MATTER? Tumours achieving RCB0 (pCR) had higher HER2 expression than RCB1–3 tumours. Higher HER2 → Better pathological response? Exploratory association only. No validated HER2 threshold. 2 WHAT HAPPENED TO HER2? HER2 expression declined significantly during T-DXd treatment. Possible explanations: • Elimination of HER2-expressing cells. • Selection of HER2-lower tumour cells. • Adaptive changes in HER2 expression. Could residual disease become HER2-lower? Mechanism remains unproven. HER2 ↓ TROP2 ↔ 3 WHAT ABOUT TROP2? TROP2 expression remained relatively stable. HER2 ↓ | TROP2 ↔ Could TROP2-directed ADCs target residual disease after T-DXd? Biological hypothesis — not tested in TALENT. Stable expression does not guarantee ADC sensitivity. 4 WAS TALENT DISAPPOINTING? Tumour shrinkage: 65–67% ORR Pathological clearance: Only 3–9% pCR Long-term benefit: Unknown • HR+ breast cancer often has low pCR rates. • pCR alone cannot determine long-term benefit. • Mature recurrence outcomes are needed. TAKE-HOME • T-DXd shrinks tumours, but residual disease may have altered HER2 expression. • Stable TROP2 raises a sequencing hypothesis — not a proven treatment strategy.

[Slide 1] ESMO CONGRESS 2026 · MADRID · 23-27 OCTOBER 10 breast cancer abstracts I will not miss Late-breaking phase III data, mature survival analyses and the next ADC questions 1 NATALEE LBA25 6-year OS with adjuvant ribociclib in HR+/HER2- early BC Fri 23 Oct · 13:30 · Hall 6 2 TALENT LBA23 Neoadjuvant T-DXd ± anastrozole in HR+/HER2-low early BC: final results Fri 23 Oct · 13:30 · Hall 6 3 PANKU-Breast01 LBA50 Iza-bren, an EGFR x HER3 bispecific ADC, phase III in pretreated HR+/HER2- MBC Fri 23 Oct · 13:30 · Hall 6 4 KEYNOTE-B49 LBA51 Pembrolizumab + chemotherapy, phase III in HR+/HER2- advanced BC Sat 24 Oct · 08:30 · Hall 6 5 FINER / MA.40 LBA14 Overall survival with ipatasertib + fulvestrant after CDK4/6i Sat 24 Oct · 08:30 · Hall 6 6 FOURLIGHT-1 1842O Selective CDK4 inhibition: atirmociclib + fulvestrant post CDK4/6i Sat 24 Oct · 08:30 · Hall 6 7 postMONARCH 1RO Overall survival with abemaciclib + fulvestrant after a prior CDK4/6i Sat 24 Oct · 10:15 · Hall 9 8 VIKTORIA-1 LBA16 Gedatolisib + fulvestrant ± palbociclib: updated phase III results Sat 24 Oct · 10:15 · Hall 9 9 DESTINY-Breast09 LBA49 T-DXd + pertuzumab vs THP in patients with baseline brain metastases Mon 26 Oct · 10:15 · Hall 6 10 OptiTROP-Breast01 4639RO Final OS: sacituzumab tirumotecan vs chemotherapy in pretreated mTNBC Mon 26 Oct · 10:15 · Hall 6 Also on my list: HORIZON-Breast06 (LBA13) · TROPION-Breast02 brain mets (LBA96) · SWITCH (4RO) · lidERA PROs (538RO) · TOP-1 (545RO) Madrid local time. No breast trial in the Presidential Symposia this year. Halls: check the ESMO app on the day. @nicolobattisti

[Slide 1] INSPIRE-LM Intrathecal trastuzumab + pertuzumab for HER2+ breast LM HER2+ breast cancer Leptomeningeal mets KPS >=60 n = 30 → IT trastuzumab + pertuzumab | Median OS* 36.2 mo | 1-year OS 79% *Primary endpoint: OS. Median OS 95% CI 19.4 months-not reached; median follow-up 26 months. Single-arm phase II. IT doses: 80 mg each; 29/30 received WBRT or proton CSI before/during IT therapy. Ahmed et al. ESMO 2026, 1768RO. No randomized comparator; RT dose not reported.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 POSTER PRESENTATIONS FPN: 112eP ePoster Imlunestrant Exposure-Response (E-R) Analyses in Patients (Pts) with Advanced/Metastatic Breast Cancer (MBC) Available electronically, Advanced breast cancer, other Intended for HCPs only [Lilly logo] A MEDICINE COMPANY

[Slide 1] PANKU-Breast01 | ESMO 2026 | LBA50 TWO TARGETS. DOUBLE THE PFS. BUT WILL PATIENTS LIVE LONGER? MV Onco [illustration: breast cancer tumour; bispecific ADC binding EGFR and HER3; chemotherapy] Breast cancer tumour IZA-BREN EGFR HER3 Chemotherapy IZA-BREN MEDIAN PFS IZA-BREN 8.18 MONTHS versus CHEMOTHERAPY 4.01 MONTHS HR 0.41 | 59% LOWER HAZARD ORR: 40.5% vs 20.2% OVERALL SURVIVAL? STILL IMMATURE. [Slide 2] PANKU-Breast01 | ESMO 2026 | LBA50 Part 1 – Can a Bispecific ADC Double PFS? MV Onco 01 THE CLINICAL QUESTION • HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer. • Progression after endocrine therapy. • Previously received CDK4/6 inhibitors and taxanes. • 1-2 prior chemotherapy lines. • Can a bispecific ADC outperform chemotherapy? 02 TRIAL DESIGN & TREATMENTS Phase III | N = 383 | Randomized 1:1 ▶ IZA-BREN (n = 190) – EGFR + HER3 bispecific ADC. – TOP1 inhibitor payload (Ed-04). – 2.5 mg/kg IV, Days 1 & 8, every 3 weeks. ▶ PHYSICIAN'S CHOICE (n = 193) – Eribulin / Capecitabine – Gemcitabine / Vinorelbine Primary endpoint → BICR-assessed PFS 03 DID IT DOUBLE PFS? Median PFS Iza-bren → 8.18 months Chemotherapy → 4.01 months HR 0.41 (95% CI 0.33–0.53) P < 0.0001 59% LOWER HAZARD OF PROGRESSION OR DEATH ~2× MEDIAN PFS 04 DID MORE TUMOURS RESPOND? Objective response rate Iza-bren → 40.5% vs Chemotherapy → 20.2% Median duration of response Iza-bren → 6.93 months vs Chemotherapy → 4.21 months TAKE-HOME • Iza-bren nearly doubled median PFS and ORR versus chemotherapy. • Overall survival remains immature. [Slide 3] PANKU-Breast01 | ESMO 2026 | LBA50 Part 2 – Is Iza-bren the Next ADC Standard? MV Onco 01 HOW SAFE IS IZA-BREN? • Grade ≥3 toxicities: Predominantly hematologic. • ILD → 1.1% (2 patients) Both grade 1-2. • Discontinuation due to TRAEs → 1.6% ✓ Manageable early safety profile. • Long-term safety needs confirmation. 02 WHAT ABOUT OVERALL SURVIVAL? OS DATA IMMATURE • No detrimental OS effect observed at interim analysis. • PFS HR → 0.41 • But PFS benefit ≠ proven OS benefit. • Survival advantage NOT YET established. 03 HOW DOES IT FIT AMONG ADCs? • T-DXd → HER2 • Sacituzumab govitecan → TROP2 • Iza-bren → EGFR + HER3 All deliver TOP1 inhibitor payloads. • No head-to-head ADC comparison. • Efficacy after prior ADCs remains unknown. • Optimal ADC sequencing unresolved. 04 WHAT QUESTIONS REMAIN? • Does PFS translate into OS? • Does efficacy differ in HER2-zero vs HER2-low? • Can it overcome resistance to prior ADCs? • Will EGFR/HER3 expression predict benefit? TAKE-HOME • Iza-bren offers impressive PFS benefit with manageable reported toxicity. • But OS, ADC sequencing and long-term safety remain unanswered.

[Slide 1] TALENT | LBA23 | #ESMO26 TUMORS SHRANK. pCR STAYED LOW. HR+/HER2-low early breast cancer · Phase II · 132 patients @DrRishabhOnco Arm A T-DXd alone 7% pCR (RCB0) Arm B T-DXd + anastrozole 3% pCR (RCB0) Arm C T-DXd → docetaxel/cyclophosphamide (TC) 9% pCR (RCB0) pCR + near-pCR (RCB0/1) | 16% | 17% | 17% Objective response rate (ORR) | 67% | 66% | 65% NO CLEAR PATHOLOGIC BENEFIT FROM ADDING THERAPY • Radiologic tumor shrinkage common (ORR ~65–67%), but true pCR remained low. • No improvement in RCB0/1 with anastrozole or chemotherapy sequence. • Phase II study with baseline differences (Arm C had more node-positive patients) → exploratory; not practice changing. [cartoon physician and breast illustration]

[Slide 1] BREAKING NEWS NATALEE Phase III Adjuvant ribociclib + NSAI in HR+/HER2− early breast cancer 6-year OS and efficacy update First overall survival benefit with longer follow-up @FernandoOnco ONCOLOGY BASED ON EVIDENCE FOR A BETTER PRACTICE Population High-risk stage II/III HR+/HER2− EBC Stage IIA (if N1 or N0 + additional high-risk factors), stage IIB, or stage III Premenopausal women and men also received goserelin 1:1 Randomization Ribociclib 400 mg/day 3 weeks on / 1 week off for 3 years + NSAI (letrozole 2.5 mg/day or anastrozole 1 mg/day) for 5 years vs NSAI alone Endpoints OS BCSS iDFS DDFS and DRFS RESULTS Data cutoff: 15 May 2026 | Median OS follow-up: 66.5 months Overall survival (OS) 6-year OS rate 91.86% RIB + NSAI | 89.73% NSAI alone HR 0.809 95% CI 0.661–0.989 | nominal 1-sided P = .019 +2.1% absolute OS benefit at 6 years 5-year OS: 93.89% vs 92.73% Invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) 6-year iDFS rate 83.23% RIB + NSAI | 77.92% NSAI alone HR 0.741 95% CI 0.646–0.889 | nominal 1-sided P < .0001 +5.3% absolute iDFS benefit at 6 years 5-year iDFS: 85.32% vs 81.24% Breast cancer–specific survival (BCSS) HR 0.706 95% CI 0.559–0.890 Distant outcomes DDFS HR 0.744 95% CI 0.646–0.858 DRFS HR 0.738 95% CI 0.634–0.858 Safety No new safety signals observed All patients were off ribociclib Median time off RIB: 38 months THE BIG ADVANCE With 6 years of follow-up, adjuvant ribociclib + NSAI shows a sustained reduction in recurrence risk and a new overall survival benefit in high-risk HR+/HER2− early breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS • First OS benefit reported for NATALEE • Absolute OS benefit increased from 1.2% at 5 years to 2.1% at 6 years • Absolute iDFS benefit increased from 4.1% at 5 years to 5.3% at 6 years • Benefit persisted after completion of ribociclib treatment Clinical question Does this 6-year update cement ribociclib as a standard adjuvant option across the broad NATALEE-eligible population? What's your take? @FernandoOnco | Discussing today. Improving tomorrow. #BreastCancer #NATALEE #Ribociclib #Adjuvant

[Slide 1] Considerations for 1L Therapy for HER2-Positive MBC PATINA THP → ET + HP + Palbociclib ▪ ER+, HER2+ ▪ De novo ▪ Non-visceral ▪ HER2 3+ ▪ PI3KCA wildtype HER2CLIMB-05 THP → ET + HP + Tucatinib ▪ ER+, HER2+ ▪ De novo ▪ Non-visceral ▪ HER2 3+ ▪ PI3KCA wildtype DESTINY-Breast09 T-DXd + Pertuzumab ▪ Recurrent disease within 12 mo adjuvant therapy ▪ HER2 3+ or 2+ ▪ PIK3CA mutant ▪ Significant BMs ▪ Significant visceral disease Can we merge these concepts and substitute taxane induction with T-DXd + P and follow with maintenance strategies? Expert perspectives Sara Tolaney, MD, PhD [Slide 2] Conclusion ▪ Treatment for HER2+ BC continues to evolve, with T-DXd now having a role in 1L MBC and in the preoperative and residual disease settings ▪ Figuring out how to tailor therapy in both the early and metastatic settings will be critical [puzzle-piece graphic]

[Slide 1] [photo of Madrid Metropolis building] ESMO 2026 · RESEARCH UPDATE ADC Sequencing in Breast Cancer at ESMO 2026 Key Points • Sac-TMT sustained an OS benefit. • Same-payload ADCs showed cross-resistance. • SYS6043 showed early activity. • BFv remained active after TopI ADCs. • Payload switching may guide sequencing. [MedJ logo] [ESMO logo]

[Slide 1] ESMO26 TOP TEN BY ONCOALERT BREAST CANCER OncoAlert 360° Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues WWW.ONCOALERT360.COM LBA50 | PANKU-BREAST01: RANDOMIZED PHASE III STUDY OF IZALONTAMAB BRENGITECAN (IZA-BREN) IN PREVIOUSLY TREATED UNRESECTABLE LOCALLY ADVANCED OR METASTATIC (LA/M) HORMONE RECEPTOR-POSITIVE/HER2-NEGATIVE (HR+/HER2-) BREAST CANCER (BC) 1842O | FOURLIGHT-1: EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF ATIRMOCICLIB (ATI) + FULVESTRANT (FUL) IN PATIENTS (PTS) WITH HR+/HER2– ADVANCED/METASTATIC BREAST CANCER (MBC) WHO PROGRESSED ON PRIOR CDK4/6 INHIBITOR (CDK4/6I) IN A RANDOMIZED PHASE 2 STUDY (FOURLIGHT-1) LBA25 | NATALEE: ADJUVANT RIBOCICLIB (RIB) + NONSTEROIDAL AROMATASE INHIBITOR (NSAI) IN PATIENTS (PTS) WITH HR+/HER2– EARLY BREAST CANCER (EBC): NATALEE 6-Y OVERALL SURVIVAL (OS) AND EFFICACY OUTCOMES LBA27 | APEX-BREAST01: TQB2102 VERSUS CHEMOTHERAPY IN HER2-LOW RECURRENT OR METASTATIC BREAST CANCER (R/M BC) - RESULTS FROM A RANDOMIZED PHASE 3 STUDY LBA51 | KEYNOTE-B49: RESULTS FROM KEYNOTE-B49: A PHASE 3, RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND STUDY OF PEMBROLIZUMAB (PEMBRO) VS PLACEBO (PBO) PLUS CHEMOTHERAPY (CT) IN PARTICIPANTS (PTS) WITH HR+/HER2– ADVANCED BREAST CANCER (ABC) LBA13 | HORIZON-BREAST06: TRASTUZUMAB REZETECAN (SHR-A1811) IN HER2-LOW ADVANCED BREAST CANCER (BC): A RANDOMIZED, PHASE 3 STUDY (HORIZON-BREAST06) LBA26 | POP-DURVA: SHORT-TERM PREOPERATIVE DURVALUMAB FOR STAGE I TNBC: FIRST RESULTS FROM THE PHASE II UNLOCK 14 - POP-DURVA TRIAL 4RO | SWITCH: TARGET SWITCHING WITH CONSERVED-PAYLOAD NOVEL ADCS IN PATIENTS WITH METASTATIC BREAST CANCER FOLLOWING PRIOR ADC THERAPY (SWITCH): A PROSPECTIVE, OPEN-LABEL, PHASE 2 PLATFORM TRIAL 1RO | POSTMONARCH: OVERALL SURVIVAL FROM THE PHASE 3 POSTMONARCH TRIAL OF ABEMACICLIB + FULVESTRANT VS PLACEBO + FULVESTRANT FOR HR+, HER2- ADVANCED BREAST CANCER FOLLOWING PROGRESSION ON A PRIOR CDK4/6 INHIBITOR + ENDOCRINE THERAPY LBA49 | DESTINY-BREAST09: A DESTINY-BREAST09 (DB-09) ANALYSIS OF TRASTUZUMAB DERUXTECAN (T-DXD) + PERTUZUMAB (P) VS TAXANE + TRASTUZUMAB + PERTUZUMAB (THP) FOR PATIENTS (PTS) WITH HER2+ ADVANCED/METASTATIC BREAST CANCER (A/MBC) AND BASELINE (BL) BRAIN METASTASES (BMS) Senior Faculty [Headshots] Dr Morgan Clin Onc · Dr Rugo Med Onc · Dr Lambertini Med Onc · Dr Loibl Med Onc · Dr Tolaney Med Onc · Dr Bianchini MedOnc · Dr Bartsch Med Onc · Dr. Hamilton Med Onc · Dr Graff Med Onc · Dr de Azambuja Med Onc · Dr Aftimos Med Onc · Dr Punie Med Onc Faculty [Headshots] Dr Agostinetto Med Onc · Dr Bonzano Rad Onc · Dr Griguolo Med Onc · Dr Jankovic Med Onc

[Slide 2] OncoAlert 360 · GUARD INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM 2026 · #GUARDSymposium2026 16-18 SEP 02 · REAL-WORLD EVIDENCE 49% Objective response to platinum after EV and pembrolizumab in the MSKCC cohort: 46 of 236 patients treated, median DOR 5.2 months, mPFS 5.0 months, mOS 12 months. No difference between cisplatin and carboplatin, on a sample far too small to claim equivalence. Sternschuss M, et al. ESMO Open. 2026;11(8):108318. #guardsymposium2026 X @GuardConsortium · GUARD CONSORTIUM Presented by: [Spanish flag] Dr. Urbano Anido Herranz · University of Santiago de Compostela [Slide 3] OncoAlert 360 · GUARD INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM 2026 · #GUARDSymposium2026 16-18 SEP 04 · SEQUENCING IN PRACTICE Four randomised trials will answer this [Table] TRIAL · NCT | PHASE · N | ENTRY AFTER EV+P | COMPARISON | PRIMARY | SPAIN TROPION-Urothelial03 · NCT07129993 | 2/3 · 630 | Progression during/after 1L EV+P; platinum-eligible | Dato-DXd + carbo/cis vs gemcitabine + carbo/cis | PFS-BICR + OS | No sites IZABRIGHT-Bladder01 · NCT07106762 | 2/3 · 470 | Progression on/after immunotherapy; platinum-eligible; ≤2 lines | Iza-bren, bispecific EGFR×HER3 ADC, vs platinum chemotherapy | PFS-BICR + OS | 11 sites TroFuse-031 · NCT07419295 | 3 · 590 | Prior anti-PD-(L)1 and platinum and EV; ≤2 lines | Sac-TMT vs investigator's choice non-platinum chemotherapy | OS | 8 sites SG + pembrolizumab, NCI · NCT06524544 | 3 · 320 | Anti-PD-(L)1-resistant, primary resistance excluded; prior EV mandatory | SG + pembrolizumab vs physician's choice chemotherapy | OS | US only An anti-TROP2 ADC or any topoisomerase I payload used off-trial closes four of these protocols at once. Mature data 2029–2030. #guardsymposium2026 X @GuardConsortium · GUARD CONSORTIUM Presented by: [Spanish flag] Dr. Urbano Anido Herranz · University of Santiago de Compostela [Slide 4] OncoAlert 360 · GUARD INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM 2026 · #GUARDSymposium2026 16-18 SEP 04 · SEQUENCING IN PRACTICE Messages to take home 01 EV + pembrolizumab has moved the bottleneck to second line. 02 Platinum dominates real-world second line: ORR 49%, mPFS 5.0 mo, mOS 12 mo. 03 No evidence that cisplatin beats carboplatin here; choose on fitness. 04 Sequencing is no longer only "by line" — test FGFR3 and HER2 early. 05 Third line is biomarker-directed: erdafitinib, T-DXd, and trials for the rest. #guardsymposium2026 X @GuardConsortium · GUARD CONSORTIUM Presented by: [Spanish flag] Dr. Urbano Anido Herranz · University of Santiago de Compostela

[Slide 1] OncoAlert360 Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues ONCOALERT 4SIGHT ESMO 2026 | MADRID BRIDGET A phase II trial of tucatinib added to trastuzumab/pertuzumab or ado-trastuzumab emtansine after isolated intracranial progression in patients with advanced HER2-positive breast cancer TO BE PRESENTED AT #ESMO2026 BY: SARAH SAMMONS, MD UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND [headshot photo] [Slide 2] Methods DESIGN Single-arm phase II; tucatinib 300 mg BID added continuously to ongoing HP or T-DM1. POPULATION HER2+ MBC with a first or second isolated intracranial event and stable/no ECD on HP or T-DM1, within 12 weeks of SRS. ECOG PS 0–2; SRS to all brain lesions ≥5 mm; no prior HER2/EGFR TKI; whole-brain radiation excluded. ENDPOINT Primary: iPFS per RANO-BM vs a historical exponential control (median 5.0 mo); one-sample log-rank test, one-sided α=0.05, 90% power, N=43 evaluable. PATIENTS 48 enrolled, 47 evaluable; median age 53.5; 66% ER+; 66% with no ECD; 93.6% on HP backbone; 80.9% enrolled after their first intracranial event. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Results iPFS Median follow-up 19.6 mo (95% CI 15.6–26.1). Intracranial progression in 17 patients (36.2%); median iPFS not reached; one-sample log-rank p<0.0001 (H0: median iPFS = 5 mo). LANDMARKS iPFS 91% at 6 mo, 64% at 12 mo and 59% at 18 mo. EXTRACRANIAL Extracranial progression in 2 patients (4.3%). SAFETY Grade ≥3 AEs in 15% (7/47). Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Conclusion Adding tucatinib to HP after radiation met the primary iPFS endpoint More than half of patients remained free of intracranial progression at 18 months. The authors state the findings support early tucatinib after local therapy as a well-tolerated strategy to improve intracranial disease control in HER2+ isolated brain progression. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 1] OncoAlert 360 · GUARD INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM 2026 · #GUARDSymposium2026 16-18 SEP The next ADC wave in UC Target diversification HER2 and TROP2 now have meaningful clinical validation EGFR×HER3 and new targets broaden the antigen landscape. Payload diversification Topo-I payloads increasingly dominate next-generation programs New cytotoxics needed Sequencing treatments Can an ADC can work after EV? More important than ADC-naïve disease. #guardsymposium2026 X @GuardConsortium · GUARD CONSORTIUM Metastatic urothelial cancer ADC landscape · 2 Presented by: [US flag] Dr. Jonathan Rosenberg · Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center [presenter headshot] [Slide 2] OncoAlert 360 · GUARD INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM 2026 · #GUARDSymposium2026 16-18 SEP NEXUS-01: LY4052301 Nectin-4 TOPO1i: Antitumor Activity in mUC Post EV validates Nectin-4 as a target in selected patients Topo-I naïve, CYP2D6 AS ≥0.5 [Table] Efficacy Evaluable Participants(a) | Total (n=36) ORR(b), % (n) | 33 (12) CR, n (%) | 1 (3) PR, n (%) | 11(c) (31) SD, n (%) | 15 (42) DCR, % (n) | 75 (27) ▪ LY4052031 demonstrated promising antitumor activity post EV ▪ ORR 47% (7/15) at 3.6 mg/kg [Waterfall plot: Best % Change from Baseline, y-axis −100 to +60; ~36 bars colour-coded by dose level; dashed line at −30%; one bar marked # at top-left (~+60%), one bar marked * near −20%] Dose Level (Q3W): 2.4 mg/kg · 3.6 mg/kg · 4.2 mg/kg · 4.8 mg/kg BOR: PR · uPR · SD · PD ▼ Treatment Ongoing * Discontinued prior EV due to toxicity Iyer et al. J Clin Oncol. 2026;44(suppl 16):4508 #guardsymposium2026 X @GuardConsortium · GUARD CONSORTIUM Presented by: [US flag] Dr. Jonathan Rosenberg · Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center [Slide 3] OncoAlert 360 · GUARD INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM 2026 · #GUARDSymposium2026 16-18 SEP The mUC treatment landscape is becoming a target × payload matrix [Matrix: rows = payload class; columns = Nectin-4 | HER2 | TROP2 | EGFR×HER3 | TA-MUC1 / B7-H3] MMAE / auristatin: Nectin-4 — 9MW2821, SYS6002 | HER2 — Disitamab, MRG002 SN-38: TROP2 — Sacituzumab govitecan* DXd / exatecan-like Topo-I: Nectin-4 — SHR-A2102, LY4052031, LY4101174 | HER2 — SHR-A1811 | TROP2 — Dato-DXd, OBI-992 | TA-MUC1 / B7-H3 — DS-3939a, BGB-C354 Belotecan-derived Topo-I: TROP2 — Sac-TMT Novel Topo-I / other: Nectin-4 — ADRX-0706 | EGFR×HER3 — Iza-bren *urothelial indication withdrawn after phase III OS failure. 6 Presented by: [US flag] Dr. Jonathan Rosenberg · Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center [Slide 4] OncoAlert 360 · GUARD INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM 2026 · #GUARDSymposium2026 16-18 SEP Conclusions ADC development in urothelial cancer needs to shift from individual drugs toward rational sequencing strategies EV/P sets a high bar • Post-EV activity is the clinically relevant question for new ADCs • ADC-naïve response rates alone may be increasingly difficult to interpret • Combination approaches are being investigated Resistance mechanisms may be diverse • EV resistance does not necessarily equal loss of Nectin-4 • Target biology, payload resistance and ADC engineering may each contribute There may be >1 rational next ADC • Retain Nectin-4 but change payload / engineering • Or switch both target and payload — e.g., TROP2/DXd or HER2/DXd Biomarker assessment may not be one-time event • Expression, membrane localization and heterogeneity may all matter • Archival tissue may not reflect current whole-body target availability • Molecular imaging could ultimately help guide sequencing Which ADC should come next, when, and for whom. Presented by: [US flag] Dr. Jonathan Rosenberg · Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

[Slide 1] OncoAlert 360 [logo] Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues ONCOALERT 4SIGHT ESMO 2026 | MADRID postMONARCH Overall survival of abemaciclib + fulvestrant vs placebo + fulvestrant for HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer following progression on a prior CDK4/6 inhibitor + endocrine therapy TO BE PRESENTED AT #ESMO2026 BY: KEVIN KALINSKY, MD WINSHIP CANCER INSTITUTE [headshot photo; Madrid Metropolis building illustration] [Slide 2] Methods DESIGN Global, double-blind, placebo-controlled; 1:1 randomization to abemaciclib + fulvestrant or placebo + fulvestrant. POPULATION HR+, HER2- ABC with progression on CDK4/6i + AI as initial ABC therapy, or recurrence on/after adjuvant CDK4/6i + ET; no other prior ABC therapy. OS ANALYSIS Final OS analysis pre-specified at 200 OS events; one-sided p-value boundary p=0.023. STATISTICS Kaplan-Meier methods; stratified Cox models to estimate HR and 95% CI. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Results All comparisons: abemaciclib + fulvestrant vs placebo + fulvestrant OS Median OS 32.1 mo (95% CI 27.2-38.1) vs 24.6 mo (95% CI 22.5-28.8); HR 0.80 (95% CI 0.60-1.06); p=0.1145; statistical significance not reached. FOLLOW-UP 368 randomized (182 vs 186). Data cutoff Mar 6, 2026; median follow-up ~36 mo; 200 OS events (90 [49.5%] vs 110 [59.1%]). PFS & OTHER Updated PFS HR 0.78 (95% CI 0.62-0.99); nominal p=0.0390. PFS by BICR, time to second progression and chemotherapy-free survival also favored abemaciclib. SUBGROUPS & SAFETY Consistent OS differences across subgroups. Safety consistent with the established abemaciclib profile; no new signals identified. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Conclusion Numerically longer median OS; statistical significance not reached While absolute PFS benefit was modest, the overall evidence supports consideration of abemaciclib-based treatment for patients with HR+, HER2- ABC after disease progression on prior CDK4/6i + ET. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 1] OncoAlert 360® Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues ONCOALERT 4SIGHT ESMO 2026 | MADRID evERA A phase III trial of giredestrant + everolimus in patients with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced BC in the post-CDK4/6 inhibitor setting TO BE PRESENTED AT #ESMO2026 BY: JACOB SANDS, MD DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE [headshot photo of a woman; Madrid building background] [Slide 2] Methods DESIGN 1:1 randomization to daily giredestrant + everolimus, or tamoxifen/exemestane/fulvestrant + everolimus, until progression or unacceptable toxicity. POPULATION ER+, HER2– aBC in the post-CDK4/6i setting; 373 enrolled. ctDNA Baseline plasma ctDNA evaluated prospectively by FoundationOne Liquid CDx; evaluable in 365/373. ANALYSES ESR1 variants, ctDNA tumor fraction (cTF) and other genomic variants; PFS by subgroup. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Results All HRs: giredestrant + everolimus vs SOC ET + everolimus (unstratified, exploratory) GENOMIC LANDSCAPE Most common alterations: TP53 42%, PIK3CA 32%, GATA3 18%, RB1 18%. cTF balanced between arms; 67% had high (≥1%) cTF. PFS BY cTF Overall: cTF ≥1% HR 0.52 (0.39–0.70); cTF <1% HR 0.61 (0.40–0.94). ESR1m: cTF ≥1% HR 0.45 (0.31–0.65); cTF <1% HR 0.32 (0.16–0.68). PFS BY ALTERATION TP53m HR 0.65 (0.45–0.93); PIK3CAm 0.55 (0.36–0.83); GATA3m 0.80 (0.48–1.35); RB1m 0.65 (0.38–1.12). ESR1 VARIANTS 207 ESR1m patients: D538G 57%, Y537X 60%; 34% had >1 variant. PFS HR by residue: D538 0.58 (0.38–0.89); Y537 0.35 (0.22–0.54); L536 0.67 (0.28–1.63); E380 0.30 (0.11–0.83). Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Conclusion Giredestrant + everolimus maintained PFS benefit regardless of cTF status The authors report PFS benefit across all ESR1 variants, independent of clonality, and across poor prognostic subgroups (e.g., TP53, GATA3, RB1). Higher cTF was associated with worse prognosis; baseline alterations were consistent with a post-CDK4/6i population. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 1] [OncoAlert 360 logo] OncoAlert360 Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues ONCOALERT 4SIGHT ESMO 2026 | MADRID GIM3 FATA Treatment schedule and three aromatase inhibitors (AIs) comparison in postmenopausal HR-positive (HR+) early breast cancer (eBC) TO BE PRESENTED AT #ESMO2026 BY: PIETRO DE PLACIDO, MD UNIVERSITY OF NAPLES FEDERICO II [headshot of Pietro De Placido; Madrid Metropolis building in background] Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 2] Methods DESIGN 1:1:1:1:1:1 randomization to 5 years of anastrozole, exemestane or letrozole, given upfront or after 2 years of tamoxifen. POPULATION 3,697 postmenopausal women with HR+ early breast cancer, enrolled March 2007 to July 2012; median age 64. ENDPOINTS Co-primary: DFS for upfront vs switch, and DFS across the three AIs. SECONDARY OS, distant DFS, distant RFS, RFS and breast cancer-free interval, analysed under STEEP 2.0 criteria. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Results SCHEDULE Median follow-up 88.9 months; 796 DFS events, 491 deaths. Upfront vs switch: DFS HR 0.95 (95% CI 0.82-1.09); OS HR 0.88 (0.74-1.06). DFS BY AI 10-year DFS 79.1% anastrozole, 76.6% letrozole, 74.2% exemestane (global p=0.028). E vs A p=0.010; E vs L p=0.06; L vs A p=0.51. E VS A Adjusted Cox model stratified by schedule: DFS HR 1.23 (95% CI 1.04-1.46). No statistically significant difference in 10-year OS across AIs (p=0.25)" for precision. TOXICITY More musculoskeletal events upfront, more tamoxifen-related events with switch. More hypercholesterolaemia with non- steroidal AIs. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Conclusion No schedule wins, but exemestane trails on DFS Schedule and AI choice should be individualized by tolerability and comorbidities. Pharmaco-economic considerations are advised, since both exemestane and letrozole are nearly twice as expensive as anastrozole in most countries. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 1] Breast Cancer: Top Trending Abstracts on X Ahead of ESMO 2026 [legend, color-coded] ADC | IO | CDK4/6i, SERD | HER2 TKI, Aromatase inhibitor | ctDNA surveillance, Ultrasensitive monitoring, Dx Radiopharmaceutical [columns: Date | Abstract ID | Presenter | Phase | Abstract Title | Erika Hamilton | Mitsuo Terada | Paolo Tarantino | Yakup Ergün | ChatGPT 5.6 Sol | Gemini 3.8 Flash | Claude Opus 5.5 | Grok 4.7] Oct 23 | LBA25 | Slamon | P3 | NATALEE: Adj RIB + NSAI in HR+/HER2 eBC - 6 yrs OS and efficacy outcomes | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X Oct 24 | LBA51 | Rugo | P3 | KEYNOTE-B49: Pembro vs Pbo + CT in HR+/HER2- AdvBC | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X Oct 23 | LBA50 | Bo Lan | P3 | PANKU-Breast01: Iza-bren in previously treated unresec LA/m HR+/HER2- BC | | | X | X | X | X | X | X Oct 24 | LBA14 | Redfern | P3 | FINER: Fulv + Ipatasertib as tx for HER2- and ER+ mBC: OS Results | | | X | X | X | X | X | X Oct 24 | LBA16 | Pistilli | P3 | VIKTORIA-1: Geda + fulv ± palbo vs SOC in HR+/HER2- AdvBC - Updated results | | | | X | X | X | X | X Oct 24 | 1RO | Kalinsky | P3 | postMONARCH: Abema + fulv vs placebo + fulv for HR+ HER2- AdvBC following progression on a prior CDK4/6i + EC therapy - OS results | | | | X | X | X | X | X Oct 26 | 4639RO | Man Li | P3 | OptiTROP-Breast01: Sacituzumab tirumotecan vs CT in previously treated loc recurr/mTNBC - Final OS analysis | | | X | | X | X | X | X Oct 23 | LBA23 | Hurvitz | P2 | TRIO-US B-12 TALENT: Neoadj T-DXd ± anastrozole, or in seq with CT for HER2-low, HR+ eBC - Final results | X | X | X | X | | | | Oct 23 | 538RO | Werutsky | P3 | lidERA BC: PROs trial of GIRE in pts with ER+ HER2- eBC | X | | X | | | | X | X Oct 24 | 1842O | Giordano | P2 | FOURLIGHT-1: ATI + FULV in HR+/HER2- Adv/mBC who progressed on prior CDK4/6i - Efficacy and safety | X | | X | | | | X | X Oct 23 | LBA24 | Mamounas | P3 | NSABP B-42: Ext letro in postmeno women with HR+ BC who have completed previous adj therapy with an AI - Final Analysis | X | X | X | | | | | Oct 23 | 542RO | Ozaki | P3 | INSPIRE: Prognostic impact of postope ctDNA surveillance on RFS and molecular lead time in H-risk BC | X | X | X | | | | | Oct 24 | 2RO | Tolaney | P3 | evERA BC: GIRE + E in ER+ HER2- AdvBC in the post-CDK4/6i setting - Retrospective exploratory biomarker analyses | | | | X | X | X | | Oct 24 | LBA96 | Dent | P3 | TROPION-Breast02: 1L Dato-DXd vs CT in loc recurr inoperable or mTNBC for whom IO was not an option: Exploratory analysis of pts with brain met | X | | X | | | | | Oct 24 | LBA26 | Ribeiro | P2 | POP-DURVA: Short-term preope durva for stage I TNBC - First results | | X | X | | | | | Oct 26 | LBA49 | Saura Manich | P3 | DESTINY-Breast09: T-DXd + P vs THP in HER2+ Adv/mBC and BL BMs | X | | X | | | | | Oct 26 | 1767RO | Sammons | P2 | BRIDGET: Tucatinib added to trastuzumab/pertuzumab/ado-trastuzumab emtansine after isolated intracranial progression in Adv HER2+ BC | | X | X | | | | | Oct 23 | 544RO | De Placido | P3 | GIM3 FATA: Tx schedule and three AIs comparison in postmeno HR+ eBC - Final analysis | | | X | | | | | Oct 23 | 539RO | Barrios | P3 | DESTINY-Breast05: HRQoL + T-DXd vs T-DM1 in H-Risk HER2+ eBC | | | X | | | | | Oct 23 | 540RO | Barcenas | – | B-STRONGER-I: Ultrasensitive monitoring of early ctDNA dynamics during neoadj tx in eTNBC - Pre-Interim Results | | | X | | | | | Oct 24 | 3RO | Gennari | P2 | 2013-000287-29: 18F-FES PET-defined whole-body ER heterogeneity identifies EC responsiveness and predicts survival in ER+/HER2- mBC | | | | X | | | | Format and methodology credit: Dr. Mike Thompson LARVOL

[Slide 1] [OncoAlert 360 logo — Oncology · For Colleagues · By Colleagues] ONCOALERT 4SIGHT ESMO 2026 | MADRID FOURLIGHT-1 Efficacy and safety of atirmociclib + fulvestrant in patients with HR+/HER2– advanced/metastatic breast cancer who progressed on prior CDK4/6 inhibitor TO BE PRESENTED AT #ESMO2026 BY: ANTONIO GIORDANO, MD DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE [headshot of Antonio Giordano; Madrid Metropolis building background] [Slide 2] Methods DESIGN 1:1 randomization, open-label, multicenter; stratified by disease site (visceral vs nonvisceral) and prior CDK4/6i duration (<12 vs ≥12 mo). TREATMENT Atirmociclib 300 mg PO BID + fulvestrant vs investigator's choice: fulvestrant alone or everolimus + exemestane. POPULATION 263 patients with HR+/HER2– mBC who progressed on prior adjuvant or 1L CDK4/6i (126 vs 137); median age 57. Data cutoff Jan 12, 2026; median follow-up 13.7 vs 13.6 mo. ENDPOINTS Primary: investigator-assessed PFS. Secondary: OS, ORR, DOR, CBR and safety. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Results All comparisons: atirmociclib + fulvestrant vs investigator's choice (fulvestrant, n=79; everolimus + exemestane, n=58) PFS Median 9.4 (7.3–13.6) vs 6.6 (3.8–7.8) mo; HR 0.60 (95% CI 0.440–0.825); 1-sided p=0.0007. Consistent PFS benefit across most prespecified subgroups. RESPONSE ORR 19.3% vs 11.3% (measurable disease, n=109 vs 115); odds ratio 1.914 (95% CI 0.849–4.366); 1-sided p=0.0451. Median DOR 14.8 vs 9.3 mo. CBR & OS CBR 61.9% vs 46.0%; odds ratio 1.972 (95% CI 1.154–3.382); 1-sided p=0.0041. OS not yet mature. SAFETY Most common TRAEs with atirmociclib: neutropenia (46.4%) and leukopenia (32.8%). 4.0% discontinued atirmociclib due to TRAEs. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Conclusion Atirmociclib (+ fulvestrant): first next-generation CDKi to significantly improve PFS after prior CDK4/6i The authors describe the PFS improvement as clinically meaningful, with a manageable safety profile. They state the data support development in earlier lines, including an ongoing phase 3 study of atirmociclib vs CDK4/6i (+ letrozole) in 1L HR+/HER2– mBC. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 Breast Cancer Abstracts [pink ribbon] LBA25 NATALEE Ribociclib + a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor. HR-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer. [capsule and pill icons + breast icon labeled AI] Focus: Six-year efficacy and overall survival outcomes following adjuvant treatment. LBA50 PANKU-Breast01 Izalontamab brengitecan. Previously treated unresectable locally advanced or metastatic HR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. [antibody-drug conjugate icon] Focus: Randomized phase III evaluation of treatment efficacy and safety. 538RO PROs from lidERA Giredestrant, an oral SERD. ER-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer. [capsule icon + patient icon] Focus: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including quality of life, symptoms and treatment tolerability versus standard endocrine therapy. 1842O FOURLIGHT-1 Atirmociclib (selective CDK4 inhibitor) + fulvestrant. HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer after CDK4/6 inhibitor treatment. [capsule icon + antibody icon] Key result: Median PFS was 9.4 vs 6.6 months (HR 0.60), according to previously reported topline results.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 BREAST CANCER PREVIEW • OCT 23-27 • MADRID 6 Breast Cancer Trials to Watch at ESMO 2026 3 breast oncologists on the data they are tracking in Madrid cancernetwork® home of the journal ONCOLOGY [headshot] Erika Hamilton, MD Sarah Cannon Research Institute [headshot] Jasmin Hundal, MD Breast medical oncologist [headshot] Nusrat Jahan, MD University of Alabama at Birmingham 1 KEYNOTE-B49 Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in HR+/HER2− advanced disease (LBA51) 2 SWITCH Switching to novel ADCs after prior ADC therapy (4RO) 3 PANKU-Breast01 Bispecific ADC iza-bren in HR+/HER2− disease (LBA50) 4 VIKTORIA-1 Updated gedatolisib data in HR+/HER2− advanced disease (LBA16) 5 evERA ctDNA biomarker analyses of giredestrant plus everolimus (2RO) 6 DESTINY-Breast11 MRI responses during neoadjuvant T-DXd in HER2+ early disease (543RO) cancernetwork.com @cancernetwrk

[Slide 2] 11790975 09/2026 NOVARTIS NATALEE: 6 year data in patients with early breast cancer. 13:00–15:00 CET 23rd October 2026 Alicante Auditorium

[Slide 2] 11790975 10/2026 NOVARTIS PSMA-targeted RLT Prostate Cancer: Present and future. [speakers icon] Prof Jochen Walz (Chair) Dr Zhuoran Yao Dr Josep Maria Piulats Dr Désirée Deandreis [clock icon] 13:00–14:30 CET, 24th October 2026 [location icon] Málaga Auditorium [Slide 3] 11790975 10/2026 NOVARTIS From risk to recurrence: Personalizing strategies in HR+/HER2- Breast Cancer. [speakers icon] Prof Peter A. Fasching (Chair) Dr Stephanie L. Graff Dr Dejan Juric Dr Fatima Cardoso [clock icon] 13:00–14:30 CEST, 26th October 2026 [location icon] Madrid Auditorium

[Slide 1] OncoAlert360® Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues ONCOALERT 4SIGHT ESMO 2026 | MADRID 4449RO Paired-biopsy multi-omic analysis reveals target-independent mechanisms of antibody–drug conjugate (ADC) resistance in metastatic breast cancer TO BE PRESENTED AT #ESMO2026 BY: PAOLO TARANTINO, MD DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE [headshot] [Slide 2] Background Target-Independent Mechanisms of ADC Resistance in MBC: Paired-Biopsy Multi-Omic Analysis Translational study, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Resistance mechanisms to ADCs remain poorly characterized. This study aimed to define molecular adaptations associated with ADC resistance through integrated multi-omic profiling of paired tumor samples from patients treated with ADCs. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Methods COHORT Matched pre-treatment and post-progression biopsies from 26 patients with MBC treated at Dana-Farber. SUBTYPES 35% HER2+ (IHC 3+ or IHC 2+/ISH+), 46% HR+/HER2–, 19% triple-negative. TREATMENT Trastuzumab deruxtecan (n=11), sacituzumab govitecan (n=12), or both (n=3). PROFILING Integrated IHC, mass spectrometry and whole-exome sequencing; selected alterations functionally validated in preclinical models. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Results TARGET CHANGES T-DXd: HER2 protein decrease in 8/14 (57%); some HER2 expression retained in all, none became HER2-null. SG: no consistent TROP2 downregulation (5/14 increase, 3/14 decrease). PROTEOMICS In >50% of patients: increased efflux transporters (ABCB1, ABCC1) and changes in DNA damage response (MSH2, MSH6, PRKDC), trafficking (CAV1), glycosylation (MAN2A2) and ferroptosis (HMOX1) proteins. GENOMICS After T-DXd progression: loss of ERBB2 amplification (2 cases); new ABCB1/ABCB4 amplifications (co-amplified in 2) and ABCC1 amplification (1). FUNCTIONAL Several cross-platform hits, including ABC transporter upregulation, showed decreased intracellular payload accumulation and reduced ADC sensitivity; the authors state this supports causality. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 1] ESMO CONGRESS 2026 Madrid, Spain - Video Highlights ENCORE MEDICAL EDUCATION Supported by Educational Grants from Menarini/Stemline and Novartis Global Begins Oct. 23 on BreastCancerPro.com VIKTORIA-1: Updated results of a randomized, open-label, phase 3 study of gedatolisib (geda) + fulvestrant (fulv) ± palbociclib (palbo) vs standard of care in patients (pts) with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC) (Study 2) Presented by: Barbara Pistilli, MD Villejuif, France Ultrasensitive monitoring of early ctDNA dynamics during neoadjuvant treatment in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer: Pre-interim results from the B-STRONGER-I study Presented by: Carlos H. Barcenas, MD Houston, Texas, US DESTINY-Breast11: MRI-assessed objective responses during neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) with trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) followed by paclitaxel + trastuzumab + pertuzumab (THP) vs dose-dense doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide followed by THP (ddAC-THP) in HER2+ early breast cancer (eBC) Presented by: Jean-Francois Boileau, MD Montreal, QC, Canada [Figure: headshots of the three presenters; Madrid skyline footer.]

[Slide 1] ESMO CONGRESS 2026 Madrid, Spain - Video Highlights [Encore Medical Education logo] Supported by Educational Grants from Menarini/Stemline and Novartis Global Starting Oct. 23 on BreastCancerPro.com Featured Presenations Include: [headshot] Radiation Therapy Followed by Intrathecal (IT) Trastuzumab/Pertuzumab in the Management of HER2+ Breast Leptomeningeal Metastasis: Results from a Phase II Multi-Institutional Study, (INSPIRE-LM) Presented by: Kamran Ahmed, MD Tampa, FL - USA [headshot] Short-term preoperative durvalumab for stage I TNBC: first results from thephase II UNLOCK 14 - POP-DURVA trial Presented by: Joana M. Ribeiro, MD Villejuif, France [headshot] APEX-Breast01: TQB2102 versus chemotherapy in HER2-low recurrent or metastatic breast cancer (r/m BC): Results from a randomized phase 3 study Presented by: Shusen Wang, MD Guangzhou, China [Madrid skyline illustration]

[Slide 1] ESMO GOOD SCIENCE BETTER MEDICINE BEST PRACTICE ESMO 2026 · MADRID GUT ONC LAB GI ABSTRACTS I'M WATCHING Oct 23–27 · Times are Madrid local (CEST through Oct 24, CET from Oct 25) BELOW THE BELT AZUR-1 LBA87 Sun 25 11:00 Dostarlimab alone in stage II/III MSI-H rectal cancer This will be positive. Incredibly positive. This is already what I'm doing in clinical practice and is a massive step forward for the 5–10% of rectal cancer patients that are MSI-H. Yay. IROCAS LBA29 Sun 25 10:15 Adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX vs mFOLFOX6, T4/N2 colon Important study, and honestly, it is going to predict if US-CIRCULATE will be positive. If this is negative, CIRCULATE will be a nail-biter. CheckMate 8HW LBA32 Sat 24 15:42 Final OS: nivo/ipi vs nivo vs chemo, MSI-H mCRC What happens when you do a trial with an agent that essentially cures a disease against another that cures most people? It is a really long damn trial. Excited for the final OS data. Will it be positive? TBD, but I certainly think the magnitude of benefit of dual IO makes it better than single agent, and this data could reinforce that practice. UNION 3530O Sun 25 11:10 SCRT → camrelizumab + CAPOX, locally advanced rectal pCR reported at ~40% in 2024, let's see if more people were cured. Some criticism in changing radiation schedule and adding IO compared to standard, but will set the stage for future studies. EMT2 LBA30 Sun 25 10:25 EPA vs placebo after CRC liver metastasis resection It's like fish oil but better. File this in the ALASCCA category of "costs nothing, helps people" if positive. ALASCCA + CHALLENGE <3 QTX3034 790RO Sat 24 15:15 KRAS G12D inhibitor + cetuximab ± mFOLFOX6, mCRC Sick study. Moving us to molecularly driven treatments in earlier line settings for CRC. Where the field MUST move. If this isn't positive I will eat a hat (a small one, preferably organic). EC + FOLFIRI beyond PD 788RO Sat 24 14:50 Continuing encorafenib + cetuximab past progression, BRAF V600E mCRC Already doing this in clinical practice with patients who have BRAF+ disease w/o resistance mechanism on ctDNA at progression. Data for its use is HUGELY welcome. BOT/BAL in the real world 905eP ePoster · 3771P Mon 26 12:00 Botensilimab + balstilimab: refractory MSS mCRC (AGEO) and advanced sarcoma (Spanish EAP) Gives us a look at Bot Bal in real world. Important data, multiple attempts to use CPI in advanced disease have provided mixed results, what happens when we use stronger agents? RUNNER-UP Biweekly TAS-102 + bev LBA31 Sat 24 15:37 Biweekly vs standard schedule, refractory mCRC Runner up only because Cathy Eng already convincingly showed this is the dosing schedule we should be using. I already use this in clinical practice. Great to randomize but should be positive. UPPER GI CLARITY-Gastric01 + G-HOPE-001 LBA7 Sun 25 17:18 · LBA77 Fri 23 13:30 CLDN18.2 ADCs, pretreated gastric/GEJ The next generation of CLDN18.2 is here. Expect less explosive emesis and improved outcomes. KEYNOTE-975 2875O Fri 23 13:50 Pembro + definitive chemoRT, esophageal/GEJ Merck joins the D-FLOT era for patients still receiving definitive chemoRT. After the CROSS/FLOT study the impact of this is going to be less, but still important for patients receiving definitive chemoRT. HERIZON-GEA-01 LBA79 Fri 23 16:15 Zanidatamab ± tislelizumab, 1L HER2+ GEA My practice in HER2+ upper GI/GEA has moved to Zani, will be helpful to see the longer-term outcomes here. SANO LBA78 Fri 23 13:40 Active surveillance vs surgery after nCRT, long-term People deserve to keep their organs. Our ability to offer this only improves when we layer in tools like ctDNA. Interested in what we can extrapolate to other organ systems (especially for MSI-H). PANCREAS RASolute 302 LBA82 Fri 23 14:22 Daraxonrasib subgroups, 2L+ metastatic PDAC Every subgroup likely benefited. G12V more than others. Maybe there will be another standing ovation? Come for the science, stay for the clapping. AMPLIFY-7P LBA83 Fri 23 14:32 mKRAS vaccine vs observation, resected PDAC Vaccine therapies are the next frontier. Merck has pushed them forward in Melanoma where they are an amazing success, very interested in the randomized data here. Even if negative it will be critical data to learn from. HCC / BILIARY HARMONi-GI1 LBA8 Sun 25 17:42 Ivonescimab vs durvalumab + GemCis, 1L BTC PD-1/VEGF emerges in GI. Let's see the benefit. China only. ACTICCA-1 LBA21 Sat 24 10:25 Adjuvant GemCis vs capecitabine, resected BTC Might immediately change the standard of care for resected BTC. Worth tuning in for. Nicholas J. Hornstein, MD, PhD Full abstracts online Oct 19 · LBAs at presentation

[Slide 1] Figure 1. Management of local and locoregional OSCC and GOAC. Local and locoregional oesophageal or gastric cancer Multidisciplinary treatment planning [IV, A] OSCC[a] Locally advanced OSCC (cT2-T4 or cN1-3, M0) Resectable tumours, willing and fit for surgery? Yes → Neoadjuvant CRT (CROSS regimen)[d] [I, A; MCBS A][e] → Restaging (exclusion of M1) → Radical surgery[i] [I, A] → Adjuvant nivolumab[l,m] [I, A; MCBS A][e] No → Definitive CRT[f] [III, B] → Follow-up (every 3 months)[h] [IV, B] → Salvage resection[j] [IV, C] (dashed box) Early-stage disease (cT1 cN0 M0) → Endoscopic[g] or surgical resection [III, B] GOAC Locally advanced GOAC (cT2-T4 or cN1-3, M0)[b,c] Preferred: Preoperative D-FLOT [I, A; MCBS A][e] (for alternative options, see footnote b) → Restaging (exclusion of M1) → Radical surgery [I, A][k] → Post-operative D-FLOT + durvalumab maintenance[m] [I, A; MCBS A][e] If unresectable OGJ or unwilling or unfit for surgery: Definitive CRT [III, B] and/or refer to Figure 3 [Watermark: "Journal Pre-proof"] [Figure: treatment algorithm flowchart; teal = neoadjuvant/definitive CRT, red = surgery/resection, blue = systemic/adjuvant therapy.]

[Slide 1] Metastatic Gastric / GEJ Adenocarcinoma First-Line Treatment | ESMO 2026 MV Onco START → TEST 4 BIOMARKERS HER2 | PD-L1 | MSI/MMR | CLDN18.2 [four-branch flow diagram] HER2-POSITIVE → Zanidatamab + tislelizumab + chemotherapy If unavailable: Trastuzumab + chemotherapy Add pembrolizumab if CPS ≥1. HER2-NEGATIVE MSI-H or dMMR → Anti-PD-1 + chemotherapy HER2-NEGATIVE MSS PD-L1 CPS ≥5 → Nivolumab + chemotherapy PD-L1 CPS ≥1 → Pembrolizumab + chemotherapy PD-L1 TAP ≥5% → Tislelizumab + chemotherapy CLDN18.2 ≥75% (IHC 2+/3+) → Zolbetuximab + chemotherapy BIOMARKER-NEGATIVE → Platinum + fluoropyrimidine Selected fit patients → Consider TFOX. TAKE-HOME Test biomarkers first. Choose treatment accordingly. Biomarker positivity may overlap. Drug access and approvals vary.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 Top 10 GI Cancer Trials to Watch 23 - 27 October 2026 | Madrid, Spain @DrRishabhOnco 1 CLARITY-Gastric 01 — LBA7 — Presidential Symposium — Sonesitatug vedotin vs investigator's choice — Gastric/GEJ cancer (CLDN18.2+, previously treated) 2 HARMONi-GI1 — LBA8 — Presidential Symposium — Ivonescimab + chemo vs durvalumab + chemo — Biliary tract cancer (1L advanced) 3 KEYNOTE-975 — 2875O — Pembrolizumab + chemoRT vs chemoRT — Esophageal/GEJ cancer (locally advanced) 4 G-HOPE-001 — LBA77 — Arcotatug tavatecan vs physician's choice — Gastric/GEJ cancer (CLDN18.2+, previously treated) 5 HERIZON-GEA-01 — LBA79 — Zanidatamab + chemo ± tislelizumab — HER2+ gastric/GEJ cancer (1L, updated outcomes) 6 GERCOR-GONO DEWI — 2877RO — Dostarlimab (nonoperative approach) — Localized dMMR/MSI-H gastric/GEJ cancer 7 LOMAC — LBA81 — 4 months vs 6 months adjuvant CAPOX — Gastric cancer (post D2 gastrectomy) 8 KC-WISE — LBA80 — Anbenitamab + chemo after trastuzumab — HER2+ gastric/GEJ cancer (post trastuzumab) 9 RAMIRIS — 2878RO — FOLFIRI + ramucirumab vs paclitaxel + ramucirumab — Gastric/GEJ cancer (after taxane therapy) 10 FORTITUDE-101/102 — 2883RO — Bemaritzumab-based therapy in FGFR2-amplified gastric/GEJ cancer — Gastric/GEJ cancer (FGFR2 amplification) [cartoon organ and antibody illustrations; Madrid building]

[Slide 1] 3136RO - Randomised phase II study of mFOLFIRINOX ± SBRT in patients with high risk, borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer: Results of the AGITG MASTERPLAN trial Speakers Andrew Oar (Southport, Australia) Lecture Time 17:14 - 17:19 Abstract Background Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) delivers high-dose, precision radiotherapy (RT). Despite advances in chemotherapy (CT) for pancreatic cancer (PC), locoregional recurrences (LRR) are frequent and contribute to morbidity/mortality. Methods Eligible pts had operable disease with ≥1 high risk feature (>4 cm, extrapancreatic extension, or node positive), or BRPC, or LAPC. High-risk operable and BRPC pts were classified as potentially operable PC (POPC), while LAPC/medically inoperable pts as inoperable PC (IPC). Staging followed AGITG guidelines with central radiology review. CT was clinician choice: mFOLFIRINOX or gem/nab-paclitaxel. Pts were randomised 2:1 to 3mths of CT+SBRT (I) or to 3mths CT alone (C). SBRT was 40Gy in 5 fractions with fiducial marker guidance and real time RT quality assurance. After CT±SBRT, pts were evaluated for surgery. Following resection pts received 3mths adjuvant CT. Pts unsuitable for resection, continued CT for further 3mths. The primary endpoint was 12mth LRR. Secondary endpoints included resection rate, margin status, toxicity per CTCAE (v5.0), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results Across 14 sites 75 pts were enrolled with 1 ineligible, including 48 POPC and 26 IPC. 12mth LRR rates were 20.2 % (95% CI: 9.9-33.2%) v 52.0% (95% CI: 30.3-69.9%) in I and C respectively (p=0.022). In POPC, 12mth LRR rates were 19.7% (95% CI: 7.8–35.6) (I) v 52.9% (95% CI: 25.9–74.1) (C) (p=0.031), and in IPC 21.4% (95% CI: 4.8–45.8) (I) v 50.0% (95% CI: 11.4-80.2) (C) (p=0.16). Overall Grade 3+ toxicity occurred in 70.2% (I) and 64.0% (C) (p=0.27). Median PFS was 11.9 v 6.3 mths (p=0.002) and median OS 22.0 v 14.0 mths (p=0.006) in I and C, respectively. Table: 3136RO Clinicodemographics and outcomes | | C=Control (n=25) | I=Investigational (n=49) | P value | | Demographics | | | | | Median age (IQR) | 66 (55-70) | 65 (58-70) | 0.89 | | % Male | 72% | 51% | 0.08 | | Baseline Ca19.9 (median, IQR) | 340 (60-977) | 180 (34-1152) | 0.60 | | Staging | - | - | | | Operable with ≥1 high-risk feature | 3 (12%) | 1 (2.0%) | - | | BRPC | 14 (56%) | 30 (61%) | - | | IPC | 8 (32%) | 18 (37%) | 0.69 | | cN0 | 60% | 71% | 0.32 | | Treatment | | | | | CT regimen | - | - | - | | mFOLFIRINOX | 23 (92%) | 44 (90%) | - | | Gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel | 2 (8%) | 3 (6%) | 1.0 | | Withdrawal prior to chemotherapy | 0 (0%) | 2 (4%) | | | SBRT commenced | NA | 39 (80%) | NA | | Surgical Outcomes (POPC only; n=48) | C=Control (n=17) | I=Investigational (n=31) | | | Resection performed n (%) | 10 (59%) | 21 (68%) | 0.54 | | R0 resection (>1mm) | 4/10 (40%) | 13/21 (62%) | 0.44 | Conclusions SBRT improved LRR and PFS without additional toxicity. A significant OS signal was observed in this cohort. Further research to optimise the role of SBRT is required.

#ESMO26 - SPOTLIGHT ON KEY GI ABSTRACTS (Abstracts to be released Oct 19th) @GillSharlene GI Upper Digestive Presidential Symposium (Oct 25) LBA7 - CLARITY-Gastric 01 (CG-01): a Phase 3 study of sonesitatug vedotin (Sone-Ve) in second or later-line (2L+) advanced or metastatic Claudin 18.2 (CLDN18.2) positive gastroesophageal carcinoma (GEC). Dr. Rui-Hua Xu (China) LBA8 - HARMONi-GI1 - Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy versus durvalumab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer: A randomized, controlled, double-blinded phase 3 trial. Dr. Jian Zhou (China) Proffered Paper Session 1 (Oct 23) LBA77 - G-HOPE-001 - Arcotatug tavatecan (IBI343/TAK-921) versus treatment of physician's choice in previously treated advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: First interim analysis of the randomized phase 3 G-HOPE-001 study. Dr. Kohei Shitara (Japan) LBA78 - SANO - Active surveillance versus standard surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer: Long-term results of a cluster-randomised controlled trial. Dr. Sanjiv S. Gangaram-Panday (Netherlands) 2875O - KEYNOTE-975 - Pembrolizumab or placebo plus concurrent definitive chemoradiotherapy in esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer: The phase 3 randomized KEYNOTE-975 study. Dr. Manish Shah (USA) LBA82 - Daraxonrasib, a RAS(ON) multi-selective inhibitor vs chemotherapy in previously treated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC): Additional subgroup analyses from the Ph3 RASolute 302 study. Dr. Zev Wainberg (USA) Proffered Paper Session 2 (Oct 24) LBA21 - ACTICCA-1 - Adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin compared with standard of care after curative-intent resection of cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma. Dr. Henning Wege (Germany) 459O - A randomized trial of paclitaxel +/- tovecimig in previously treated patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. Dr. Nilofer Azad (USA) LBA48 - Liver function trajectory and post-progression outcomes in the Phase 3 EMERALD-3 study of tremelimumab (T) + durvalumab (D) +/- lenvatinib (L) + transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) in participants (pts) with embolisation-eligible hepatocellular carcinoma (eeHCC). Dr. Masatoshi Kudo (Japan) 1679O - Phase 1 study of BGB-B2033 (GPC3 x 4-1BB bispecific antibody) Monotherapy: First Disclosure of Dose Optimization (DO) and Dose Escalation (DE) Update in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) [remainder of list obscured by chat-app UI overlay in the screenshot]

[Slide 1] GEJ CANCER CROSS vs FLOT ESMO 2026 | MV Onco 1. THE QUESTION Resectable esophageal / GEJ adenocarcinoma. CROSS or FLOT? 2. ESOPEC – THE ANSWER Median overall survival 66 months FLOT | 37 months CROSS HR 0.70 FLOT wins. 3. MATTERHORN – THE NEXT STEP Durvalumab + FLOT improves survival in gastric/GEJ cancer. D-FLOT → Preferred where eligible FLOT → Standard alternative No direct D-FLOT vs CROSS trial. 4. THE TAKE-HOME Fit, eligible GEJ patient → D-FLOT / FLOT FLOT unsuitable → Consider CROSS if appropriate Siewert type | Fitness | MDT decision

[Slide 1] Rapid Oral session 2878RO - FOLFIRI plus ramucirumab versus paclitaxel plus ramucirumab as second-line therapy for taxane-pretreated patients with advanced or metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma-Final results of the phase III IKFs602/AIO RAMIRIS Study Speakers Sylvie Lorenzen (Munich, Germany) Lecture Time 16:47 - 16:52 Abstract Background Ramucirumab (Ram) as monotherapy or plus paclitaxel is approved as 2nd-line treatment for advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA). Many patients (pts) are pretreated with a taxane in previous lines, these may benefit from a non-cross resistant chemotherapy backbone regimen which was indicated by results from the phase II part of this trial. Methods This is an international, randomized, investigator initiated, phase II/III trial. Taxane-pretreated pts with GEA who have progressed after a fluoropyrimidine/platinum-containing regimen were randomized 1:1 to either FOLFIRI plus Ram q2w (Arm A) or paclitaxel (d 1, 8, 15 q28d) plus Ram q2w (Arm B). Co-primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and objective overall response rate (ORR), further endpoints included DCR, PFS, quality of life and safety. Efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Results 319 pts were enrolled between 2019 and 2024 and 317 analyzed within ITT (Arm A, 158; Arm B, 159; median age 60 years, 76% male). There was no significant difference in median OS (A, 8.7 vs. B, 7.5 mo, HR 0.95, p=.33, median FU A, 52, B, 31 mo) and ORR (A, 25.3% vs. B, 22.6%, p=.29 ). Median PFS was longer in Arm A with 5.5 vs. B, 3.7 mo (HR 0.7, p=.003) and DCR was A, 64% and B, 61%. Combination of Ram and FOLFIRI was not associated with more grade 3-5 adverse events in Arm A vs. B (70% vs. 68% of safety population N=304). Most common grade 3/4 adverse events included neutropenia (A, 17%, B, 12%), hypertension (A, 10%, B, 8%), anemia (A, B, 6%), and lung infection (A, 3%, B, 6%). 47% of the pts in Arm A and 55% in Arm B had at least one serious adverse event. Conclusions The RAMIRIS trial demonstrated feasibility of the combination of FOLFIRI and Ram. The co-primary endpoints were not met, however, PFS was clearly improved and trends towards a benefit of Ram/FOLFIRI regarding all other efficacy endpoints were seen. These findings support the personalization of treatment decisions in pts with taxane-pretreated advanced GEA after failure of standard therapy. More data will be presented at the meeting.

[Slide 1] MADRID 2026 ESMO congress MADRID SPAIN 23-27 OCTOBER 2026 Hepatobiliopancreatic SELECTED ABSTRACTS Presidential Symposium II | 25 October 2026 | 17:42-18:15 LBA8 - Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy versus durvalumab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer: a randomized, controlled, double- blinded, phase 3 trial (HARMONi-GI1) Proffered paper 1: Gastrointestinal tumour, upper digestive | 23 October 2026 | 13:30-15:00 LBA82 - Daraxonrasib, a RAS(ON) multi-selective inhibitor vs chemotherapy in previously treated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC): Additional subgroup analyses from the Ph3 RASolute 302 study. LBA83 - Seven-Valent mKRAS-specific Lymph Node Targeted Amphiphile Immunotherapy Versus Observation in Resected Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC): the AMPLIFY-7P randomized Phase 2 study Proffered paper 2: Gastrointestinal tumours, upper digestive | 24 October 2026 | 10:15-11:45 459O - A randomized trial of paclitaxel ± tovecimig in previously treated patients with advanced biliary tract cancer LBA21 - Adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin compared to standard of care after curative intent resection of cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma (ACTICCA-1 trial) LBA48 - Liver function trajectory and post-progression outcomes in the Phase 3 EMERALD-3 study of tremelimumab (T) + durvalumab (D) ± lenvatinib (L) + transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE) in participants (pts) with embolisation-eligible hepatocellular carcinoma (eeHCC) 1679O - Phase I study of BGB-B2033 (GPC3 x 4-1BB bispecific antibody) monotherapy: First disclosure of dose optimization (DO) and dose escalation (DE) update in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) Rapid oral 1: Gastrointestinal tumour, upper digestive | 23 October 2026 | 16:45-18:15 3136RO - Randomised phase II study of mFOLFIRINOX ± SBRT in patients with high risk, borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer: Results of the AGITG MASTERPLAN trial Rapid oral 2: Gastrointestinal tumour, upper digestive | 26 October 2026 | 14:45-16:15 LBA85 - HRS-4642 Plus Chemotherapy ± Adebrelimab as Perioperative Therapy in KRAS G12D-Mutant Pancreatic Cancer: Preliminary Results of a Phase 2 Study 3137RO - Safety and efficacy of INCB161734, a novel oral KRAS G12D inhibitor, in combination with chemotherapy in patients (pts) with advanced/metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) 1678RO - Phase 3 LEAP-012 study of lenvatinib + pembrolizumab vs dual placebo with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for unresectable non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma: Long-term OS results LBA22 - OPTIMUM: A randomized phase 2 study of maintenance olaparib (Ola) with or without durvalumab (Durva) in DDR gene-mutated advanced biliary tract cancer (aBTC) 473RO - Subcutaneous anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody envafolimab plus gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) versus GEMOX alone as first-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer in Chinese patients: A randomized, open-label, multicenter, registrational phase III trial Nieves Martínez Lago · @DraMartinezLago | #ESMO26

[Slide 1] SANO Surgery vs surveillance after CRT (41.4 Gy in 23 fractions) Locally advanced esophageal cancer ~75% adenocarcinoma cCR after CRT n = 309 → RANDOMIZE Standard surgery (n = 111) | 5-year OS 54% | 5-year distant metastases 29% Active surveillance (n = 198) | 5-year OS 50% | 5-year distant metastases 46% Hospital-level randomization 12 hospitals; stepped-wedge Counts include crossover OS: HR 1.17 (95% CI 0.77-1.77), surveillance vs surgery; not statistically significant. Distant metastases: cumulative incidence; P < .01. Primary endpoint: 2-year OS (NI margin: 15 points). van der Wilk et al. Lancet Oncol 2025;26:425-436. 5-year update: ESMO 2026, LBA78.

[Slide 1] Abstract Proffered Paper session LBA78 - Active surveillance versus standard surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer: Long-term results of a cluster-randomised controlled trial (SANO) Speakers Sanjiv S. Gangaram-Panday (Rotterdam, Netherlands) Lecture Time 13:40 - 13:50 Abstract Background The Surgery As Needed for Oesophageal cancer (SANO)-trial demonstrated that active surveillance is non-inferior to standard surgery in terms of two-year overall survival in patients with a complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). Active surveillance resulted in improved quality of life. Here, we report 5-year outcomes. [Slide 2] Methods From 2017 to 2021, a multicentre stepped-wedge cluster-randomised non-inferiority trial was conducted. Patients with locally advanced oesophageal cancer who achieved complete clinical response (defined as no tumour detected on endoscopic biopsies, -ultrasound, or PET-CT) underwent active surveillance or standard surgery. Cox regression was used to compare 5-year overall and disease-free survival, and the cumulative incidence of distant metastases was estimated using competing risk analysis. [Slide 3] Results A total of 309 patients were included, 198 underwent active surveillance and 111 underwent standard surgery. Median follow-up was 76 months (IQR 67–86). Five-year overall survival was not statistically significantly different between active surveillance and standard surgery (50%, 95%CI 34-57 vs. 54%, 95%CI 46-64; HR 1.17, 95%CI 0.77-1.77) with similar results across histologic subtypes. Disease-free survival was not statistically significantly different (HR 1.39, 95% CI 0.94-2.06). The cumulative incidence of distant metastases at five years was significantly higher in the active surveillance group compared to the standard surgery group (46%, 95%CI 39-53 vs. 29%, 95%CI 21-37; P<.01). Overall, 85 of 198 patients (43%) were spared non-beneficial oesophagectomy, including those with sustained complete clinical response at last follow-up or distant metastases detected within six months after nCRT. Conclusions Overall survival at 5 years is not statistically significantly different between active surveillance and standard surgery in patients with oesophageal cancer and a complete clinical response after nCRT, despite a higher incidence of distant metastases in the active surveillance group. These findings support active surveillance as a feasible treatment strategy in these patients.

[Slide 1] KEYNOTE-975 | ESMO 2026 More Immunotherapy. No Better Survival. MV Onco [patient icons] 703 PATIENTS • Previously untreated unresectable esophageal or GEJ cancer • Phase III | Randomized 1:1 • PD-L1 CPS ≥10 • Primary EFS analysis negative [calendar icon] 47.1 MONTHS Median follow-up [illustration of esophagus with tumor; two IV bags with radiation beams] Pembrolizumab + dCRT Placebo + dCRT [stopwatch] EFS 15.2 months NO SIGNIFICANT EFS BENEFIT HR 0.97 | P = 0.3994 [stopwatch] EFS 14.7 months OVERALL SURVIVAL (PD-L1 CPS ≥10) Pembrolizumab + dCRT: 32.2 months Placebo + dCRT: 35.0 months HR 1.00 – No demonstrated OS benefit SAFETY • Grade 5 AEs: 13% vs 10% • Treatment discontinuation: 34% vs 27% (Pembrolizumab + dCRT vs Placebo + dCRT) TAKE-HOME • Adding pembrolizumab to definitive CRT did not improve EFS or demonstrate an OS benefit. • PD-L1 CPS ≥10 did not rescue the strategy.

[Slide 1] 2877RO - Watch-and-wait (W&W) strategy for dostarlimab in localized deficient dMMR/MSI-H gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA): Results from the first interim analysis of the GERCOR-GONO DEWI phase II study Speakers Thierry André (Paris, France, CEDEX 12) Lecture Time 16:42 - 16:47 Abstract Background Patients (Pts) with dMMR/MSI-H localized GEA have better survival after surgery and scant/no benefit from chemotherapy. Preoperative immune checkpoint inhibitors demonstrated high rates of pathologic complete response (CR), supporting chemotherapy/surgery-free strategies. DEWI trial evaluates whether surgery can be omitted in Pts achieving clinical CR (cCR), defined as CR on endoscopy with tumor-free biopsies and normal CT imaging after dostarlimab, using a W&W strategy. Methods Pts with localized dMMR/MSI-H GEA, PS 0-1, and clinical stage T2-T4 NxM0 were included and received dostarlimab 500 mg q3w for 4 cycles. An adaptive treatment strategy was defined based on assessment at 12 and 24 weeks (w) according to cCR to decide to continue dostarlimab for 24w with a W&W strategy or to operate. The primary endpoint is the rate of cCR at 1 year (1y-cCR) without GEA surgery, with the objective of demonstrating a 1y-cCR rate >25% (50% expected). Secondary endpoints include survival outcomes and safety. Results Between Jan 2024 and Dec 2025, 60 Pts were included; one was excluded prior to treatment. A planned first interim analysis of the primary endpoint was conducted in the first 24 evaluable Pts for 1y-cCR. The median age was 65 years; 18/6 Pts were male/female, oesogastric junction/stomach in 9/15 Pts. The 1y-cCR rate was 62.5% (15/24), and continuation of enrollment was recommended by the Independent Data Monitoring Committee. No events (relapse or death) occurred in Pts with 1y-cCR with a median follow-up of 16.20 months (95%CI 12.22-17.22). Two events were observed in Pts without 1y-cCR: one metastatic progression and one postoperative death. Overall grade 3-4 dostarlimab-related adverse events occurred in 5 Pts (21%). Nine/24 Pts underwent surgery, all achieving R0 with TNM: yT1N0 (n=2), yT1N1 (n=1), yT3-N1-2 (n=4), and yT4N0 (n=2); TRG (Becker): TRG2 (n=3), TRG 3 (n=6). Three Pts had anastomotic fistula. Conclusions Dostarlimab in Pts with localized dMMR/MSI-H GEA led to a 62.5% 1y-cCR at the first interim analysis, enabling organ preservation. An update on the 60 included Pts is planned for the meeting.

[Slide 1] 3530O - Neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy followed by camrelizumab and chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC): The phase 3 UNION trial Speakers Zhen Yu Lin (Wuhan, China) Lecture Time 11:10 - 11:20 Abstract Background Despite the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, recurrence and distant metastasis remain common in LARC. Effective immunotherapy-based strategies for the predominantly proficient mismatch repair/microsatellite-stable population remain limited. UNION is the first phase 3 trial to evaluate a neoadjuvant strategy incorporating radiotherapy, immunotherapy, and chemotherapy in LARC. Here we present the prespecified event-free survival (EFS) analysis. Methods Patients with cT3-4 or N+ rectal adenocarcinoma (tumor located ≤10 cm from the anal verge) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive short-course radiotherapy (SCRT; 25 Gy/5f; experimental group) or long-course chemoradiotherapy (50.4 Gy/28f with concurrent capecitabine 825 mg/m2 twice daily; standard of care group) followed by 2 neoadjuvant cycles and 6 adjuvant cycles of capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX). The experimental group additionally received neoadjuvant and adjuvant camrelizumab (200 mg, day 1) since CAPOX treatment for up to 17 cycles. The primary endpoint was blinded independent review committee (BIRC)-assessed pathological complete response rate. Key secondary endpoints with prespecified α allocation were investigator-assessed EFS and overall survival. Results Between July 2021 and March 2023, 231 patients were randomized to the experimental group (n=113) and standard of care group (n=118). As of October 1, 2025, the median follow-up duration was 36.8 months (95% CI, 34.8-37.8) and 35.6 months (95% CI, 34.3-36.9), respectively. The 3-year EFS rate was significantly higher in the experimental group compared with standard of care (91.3% [95% CI, 83.9-95.4] vs 77.4% [95% CI, 67.9-84.4], hazard ratio=0.33 [95% CI, 0.15-0.71], P=0.0029). BIRC-assessed EFS consistently favored the experimental group. During the whole treatment period, the incidence of grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events was 51.3% (59/115) and 48.2% (54/112), respectively. Conclusions UNION is the first phase 3 trial to demonstrate a significant improvement in EFS with an immunotherapy-based regimen in LARC. This neoadjuvant strategy represents a new standard of care.

[Slide 1] Proffered Paper session LBA82 - Daraxonrasib, a RAS(ON) multi-selective inhibitor vs chemotherapy in previously treated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC): Additional subgroup analyses from the ph3 RASolute 302 study Speakers Zev A. Wainberg (Los Angeles, United States of America) Lecture Time 14:22 - 14:32 Abstract Background Multiagent systemic chemo offers limited benefit in mPDAC. Aberrant RAS(ON) signaling drives PDAC; >90% of cases harbor mutant (mut) RAS, and RAS WT PDAC remains dependent on RAS pathway signaling. Daraxonrasib is an oral, RAS(ON) multi-selective, tri-complex inhibitor of active, GTP-bound mut and WT RAS. Daraxonrasib significantly improved OS and PFS vs SOC chemo in pts with previously treated mPDAC overall (with or without an identified tumor RAS mut; mOS 13.2 vs 6.7 mo; HR, 0.40; mPFS 7.2 vs 3.6 mo; HR, 0.49) and in pts with RAS G12 mut mPDAC (OS HR, 0.40; PFS HR, 0.45) with manageable safety in the RASolute 302 primary analysis (NCT06625320). We report additional subgroup analyses from RASolute 302. [Slide 2] OS in subgroups | | n (%) Daraxonrasib n=248 | Chemo n=252 | OS HR (95% CI) | Tumor RAS mut status | G12D | 95 (38) | 121 (48) | 0.49 (0.33-0.74) | | G12V | 102 (41) | 76 (30) | 0.32 (0.19-0.54) | | G12R | 30 (12) | 31 (12) | 0.61 (0.29-1.30) | | RAS Q61 | 11 (4) | 11 (4) | 0.37 (0.09-1.44) | | No RAS mut identified | 9 (4) | 7 (3) | 0.43 (0.09-1.98) | Conclusions Daraxonrasib demonstrated OS benefit vs chemo across clinically relevant subgroups including pts with or without an identified tumor RAS mut. Directionally consistent OS benefit across these subgroups further reinforces the potential for daraxonrasib to be a new SOC for eligible pts with mPDAC. [Slide 3] Methods Pts with previously treated mPDAC were randomized 1:1 to daraxonrasib 300 mg PO QD or investigator's choice of SOC chemo (GnP, mFOLFIRINOX, Nal-IRI+5-FU/LV, or FOLFOX). Dual primary endpoints (EPs) were OS and PFS in the RAS G12 mut population; key secondary EPs included OS and PFS in the overall population. Additional analyses evaluated OS in clinically relevant subgroups by locally determined tumor RAS mut status, preselected chemo regimen, and disease setting of prior treatment. Results At data cutoff (10 Feb 2026), median follow-up was 8.5 mo (range, 3.2-15.9). OS benefit with daraxonrasib vs chemo was observed across all RAS mut subgroups (Table). Daraxonrasib showed a consistent OS treatment effect across preselected chemo subgroups (HRs, 0.32-0.46). OS data by disease setting of prior treatment will also be presented. Table: LBA82

[Slide 1] 2879RO - Durvalumab plus definitive chemoradiotherapy versus definitive chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced esophagus carcinoma: ARION PRODIGE 67 randomized phase 2 trial Speakers Marie-Anouchka Modesto (Toulouse, France) Lecture Time 17:09 - 17:14 Abstract Background In locally advanced or unresectable esophageal cancer, definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is the standard of care (SoC) combining radiotherapy with platinum-based chemotherapy, resulting in a 2-year disease-free survival of 25%, which remains an unmet medical need. As immune checkpoint inhibitors increase survival in the metastatic setting, a multicentric, this open-label, comparative phase II ARION trial was designed to assess efficacy and safety of PD1/PDL1 blockade by durvalumab (D) added to SoC. Methods Patients (pts) ≥18 years old, WHO performance status ≤1, non-metastatic, locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) or unresectable adenocarcinoma (ADK), (stratified by tumor stage, histology, centers) were randomized between arm A with 12 monthly 1500 mg (D) infusions added to SoC (IMRT 50 Gy/25 daily fractions over 5 weeks) and 6 cycles of FOLFOX regimen: oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, Leucovorin 200 mg/m2, 5-FU 400 mg/m2 bolus then continuous 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h) or arm B (SoC). Primary endpoint was centrally reviewed progression-free survival (cPFS). Overall survival (OS), PFS and safety were secondary endpoints. 74 cPFS events were required to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.55 with 90% power (10% one-sided alpha). Results Between May 2019 and May 2024, 112 pts were randomized (Arm A: SoC + D, n=58 / Arm B: SoC, n=54) in 13 French sites. Analysis was performed after a 24-month follow-up. Median age was 67 years, 68% were male, 77% were SCC, 70% had nodal extension. There was no significant difference between arms for cPFS, PFS and OS (table). Treatment-related adverse events (AE) were higher in arm A. Grade ≥ 3 AE rates were similar in both arms. Table: 2879RO | | Arm A (exp) 12-month rate [95%CI] | Arm B (SoC) 12-month rate [95%CI] | Adjusted HR* [95%CI] [80%CI] | 1-sided p-value | | cPFS | 48.6% [34.6; 61.3] | 48.9% [34.7; 61.7] | 0.91 [0.55; 1.49] [0.66; 1.25] | 0.351 | | PFS | 50.1% [36.2; 62.5] | 48.1% [33.7; 61.2] | 0.92 [0.56; 1.50] [0.67; 1.27] | 0.369 | | OS | 75.1% [61.6; 84.4] | 67.9% [53.6; 78.7] | 0.99 [0.59; 1.68] [0.70; 1.40] | 0.489 | *for Histological subtype, Stage Conclusions In this indication, Durvalumab with CRT compared to SoC did not improve PFS. There was no new safety signal. Longer survival, follow-up and predictive factors for treatment efficacy will be presented.

[Slide 1] NON-METASTATIC ESCC Choosing the Curative Path Based on ESMO 2026 Clinical Practice Guideline MV Onco ESCC • M0 ↓ Stage • Nutrition • Fitness • MDT ↓ Superficial lesion suitable for endoscopic cure? YES → Endoscopic en bloc resection Favourable pathology → Surveillance Adverse pathology → MDT for further treatment NO → Resectable and fit for surgery? YES → CROSS chemoradiotherapy → Restage → Surgery → Resection pathology ypT0N0 → Surveillance Residual tumour and/or nodes, R0 resection • M0 → Nivolumab x 1 year NO / DECLINES SURGERY → Definitive chemoradiotherapy 50 Gy / 25 fractions → Response assessment + surveillance → Persistent / local recurrent disease? → Consider selected salvage surgery at an experienced centre 1. Cervical ESCC: Definitive CRT often preferred. 2. RT contraindicated in resectable disease: Consider neoadjuvant DCF → surgery. 3. Clinical complete response after CROSS: This guideline still recommends surgery. 4. After definitive CRT: Routine immunotherapy is not established.

[Slide 1] MADRID 2026 ESMO congress MADRID SPAIN 23-27 OCTOBER 2026 Gastroesophageal | SELECTED ABSTRACTS Presidential Symposium II | 25 October 2026 · 17:18-17:42 LBA7 - CLARITY-Gastric 01 (CG-01): a Phase 3 study of sonesitatug vedotin (Sone-Ve) in second or later-line (2L+) advanced or metastatic Claudin 18.2 (CLDN18.2) positive gastroesophageal carcinoma (GEC) Proffered paper 1: Gastrointestinal tumour, upper digestive | 23 October 2026 · 13:30-15:00 LBA77 - Arcotatug tavatecan (IBI343/TAK-921) versus treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in previously treated, advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (G/GEJA): First interim analysis of the randomized, open-label, phase 3, G-HOPE-001 study LBA78 - Active surveillance versus standard surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer: long-term results of a cluster-randomised controlled trial (SANO) 2875O - Pembrolizumab or placebo plus concurrent definitive chemoradiotherapy in esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer: The phase 3 randomized KEYNOTE-975 study Rapid oral 1: Gastrointestinal tumour, upper digestive | 23 October 2026 · 16:45-18:15 LBA79 - Zanidatamab (zani) + chemotherapy (CT) ± tislelizumab (TIS) for first-line (1L) HER2-positive (HER2+) advanced/metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (mGEA): second interim analysis (IA) from HERIZON-GEA-01 LBA80 - Anbenitamab plus chemotherapy for previously treated HER2-positive gastric or gastroesophageal carcinomas (GC/GEJC): Updated overall survival (OS) analysis of KC-WISE 2876RO - TQB2102, a novel HER2 bispecific antibody-drug conjugate, combined with bemotrizumab with or without capecitabine as first-line therapy for HER2-positive advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer: A phase II study 2877RO - Watch-and-wait (W&W) strategy for dostarlimab in localized deficient dMMR/MSI-H gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA): Results from the first interim analysis of the GERCOR-GONO DEWI phase II study 2878RO - FOLFIRI plus ramucirumab versus paclitaxel plus ramucirumab as second-line therapy for taxane-pretreated patients with advanced or metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma-Final results of the phase III IKFs602/AIO RAMIRIS Study LBA81 - Four Months of Adjuvant XELOX versus Six Months in Stage II-IIIB Gastric Cancer - The LOMAC Randomized Trial 2879RO - Durvalumab plus definitive chemoradiotherapy versus definitive chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced esophagus carcinoma: ARION PRODIGE 67 randomized phase 2 trial 2883RO - Efficacy of bemarituzumab in patients with advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer (GC/GEJ) by FGFR2 amplification status: Exploratory biomarker analysis from FORTITUDE-101 (F101) and FORTITUDE-102 (F102) Nieves Martínez Lago · @DraMartinezLago | #ESMO26

[Slide 1] Proffered Paper session 2875O - Pembrolizumab or placebo plus concurrent definitive chemoradiotherapy in esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer: The phase 3 randomized KEYNOTE-975 study Speakers Manish A. Shah (New York, United States of America) Lecture Time 13:50 - 14:00 Abstract Background The role of immunotherapy in participants (pts) with locally advanced, esophageal cancer (EC) treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) is not established. KEYNOTE-975 (NCT04210115) is an international phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo (pbo) controlled multicenter study that examines dCRT ± pembro in pts with previously untreated locally advanced unresectable esophageal and GEJ cancer. We report results from the second interim analysis (IA2). Methods Eligible pts with histologically confirmed cTX N+ M0 or cT2-T4a NX M0 esophageal squamous cell cancer (ESCC) or adenocarcinoma (EAC) or GEJ cancer, or cTX N+ M1 cervical or upper thoracic EC with supraclavicular lymph node metastases only, ECOG PS 0-1, and who were ineligible for curative surgery but suitable for dCRT, were randomized 1:1 to 200 mg pembro or pbo Q3W for 8 cycles then 400 mg pembro or pbo Q6W for 5 cycles + site choice of dCRT (5-fluorouracil + cisplatin [FP] with radiotherapy [RT] 50 Gy or 60 Gy, or FOLFOX with RT 50 Gy). Dual-primary endpoints were event-free survival (EFS) by investigator and OS in pts with PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) ≥10, CPS ≥1, and all pts. Data cut-off was Jan 21, 2026. Results A total of 703 pts were randomized (349 pembro + dCRT; 354 pbo + dCRT). Median follow-up was 47.1 mo (range, 21.7-70.2) in all pts. At IA2, in pts with PD-L1 CPS ≥10, EFS was not improved with pembro + dCRT vs pbo + dCRT (median 15.2 vs 14.7 mo; HR 0.97; 95% CI, 0.77-1.23 [P=0.3994; P-value boundary for significance 0.0193]). In pts with PD-L1 CPS ≥10, median OS was 32.2 mo vs 35.0 mo (HR 1.00; 95% CI, 0.77-1.30 [nominal P-value 0.5003]). As EFS was not positive in PD-L1 CPS ≥10, EFS in PD-L1 CPS ≥1 and all pts, and OS were not tested for statistical significance, and the study was stopped. Grade ≥3 AEs occurred in 100% of pts in each arm, with grade 5 AEs in 44 (13%) vs 37 (10%) pts. Discontinuation due to any AE occurred in 117 (34%) vs 97 (27%) pts. Conclusions Pembrolizumab + dCRT vs pbo + dCRT did not significantly improve EFS in untreated unresectable esophageal or GEJ cancer with PD-L1 CPS ≥10. No new safety signals were observed.

[Slide 1] Can SBRT Improve Pancreatic Cancer Outcomes? MV Onco 01 - THE CLINICAL QUESTION Chemotherapy treats systemic disease. But local recurrence remains common. Can adding SBRT improve outcomes? 02 - WHO WAS STUDIED? 74 eligible patients | 14 centres • High-risk operable pancreatic cancer • Borderline-resectable disease • Locally advanced / inoperable disease 03 - RANDOMISED 2:1 SBRT ARM - 49 patients: 3 months chemotherapy → SBRT: 40 Gy / 5 fractions CONTROL - 25 patients: 3 months chemotherapy → No planned SBRT 04 - WHICH CHEMOTHERAPY? • Predominantly mFOLFIRINOX (~90%) • Alternative: Gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel 05 - WHAT WAS MEASURED? Primary endpoint: Locoregional recurrence at 12 months Secondary endpoints: PFS • OS • Surgery • Toxicity BOTTOM TAKE-HOME MASTERPLAN tested whether adding just 5 fractions of SBRT could improve outcomes beyond chemotherapy alone. [Slide 2] Did SBRT Really Improve Local Control? MV Onco 01 - PRIMARY ENDPOINT Locoregional recurrence at 12 months (lower is better) SBRT + chemotherapy: 20.2% Chemotherapy alone: 52.0% p = 0.022 Absolute reduction: 31.8 percentage points 02 - POTENTIALLY OPERABLE High-risk operable + borderline-resectable (lower is better) SBRT: 19.7% Control: 52.9% p = 0.031 Significant improvement in local control. 03 - INOPERABLE DISEASE Locally advanced / medically inoperable (lower is better) SBRT: 21.4% Control: 50.0% p = 0.16 Numerically better, but not statistically significant. 04 - WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? • Adding SBRT reduced locoregional recurrence. • The overall primary endpoint was met. • Subgroup results need cautious interpretation. BOTTOM TAKE-HOME SBRT significantly improved 12-month locoregional control - but does better local control translate into longer survival? [Slide 3] Did SBRT Improve Survival? MV Onco 01 - OVERALL SURVIVAL Median OS SBRT: 22 months Control: 14 months P = 0.006 8-month longer median survival. 02 - PROGRESSION-FREE SURVIVAL Median PFS SBRT: 11.9 months Control: 6.3 months P = 0.002 5.6-month improvement. 03 - DID MORE PATIENTS UNDERGO SURGERY? Among potentially operable patients: Resection: 68% vs 59% R0 among resected: 62% vs 40% Neither difference was stattistically significant. 04 - WHAT ABOUT TOXICITY? Grade ≥3 adverse events: SBRT: 70.2% Control: 64.0% P = 0.27 No stattistically significant difference. BOTTOM TAKE-HOME SBRT improved PFS and showed an encouraging OS signal. But this was a small phase II trial. [Slide 4] Is SBRT Ready to Change Practice? MV Onco 01 - WHY IS MASTERPLAN IMPORTANT? • Randomized phase II trial. • Better local control. • Encouraging PFS and OS signals. • But only 74 eligible patients. 02 - WHAT ABOUT ALLIANCE A021501? • Alliance A021501: Adding hypofractionated radiation after mFOLFIRINOX did not improve outcomes. • MASTERPLAN: SBRT improved local control, with encouraging survival results. • Different trials. Different populations. • Direct comparison is inappropriate. 03 - WHAT ARE THE LIMITATIONS? • Small phase II study. • Mixed resectability groups. • Only 80% started assigned SBRT. • OS was a secondary endpoint. • Phase III confirmation is needed. 04 - SHOULD PRACTICE CHANGE TODAY? • Not routinely. • Consider SBRT selectively after MDT discussion. • Patient selection remains crucial. • Await mature data and larger trials. BOTTOM TAKE-HOME • MASTERPLAN strengthens the case for SBRT in selected pancreatic cancer patients. • Promising evidence ≠ New standard of care.

[Slide 2] RASolute 302: RAS subgroup analysis late-breaking abstract LBA82 October 23, 1:30–3:00 p.m. CEST Almeria Auditorium, Hall 9 RevMed [Slide 3] Industry Sponsored Satellite Symposium: Advances in RAS-targeted therapies in NSCLC and PDAC October 26, 6:30–8:00 p.m. CEST Salamanca Auditorium, Hall 10 RevMed

[Slide 1] HARMONi-GI1 IS DURVALUMAB'S THRONE UNDER THREAT? MV Onco [Cartoon: antibody on a throne labelled DURVALUMAB + CHEMO saying "I'm the established standard!"; bispecific antibody labelled PD-1 / VEGF, IVONESCIMAB + CHEMO saying "I may improve survival!"; frightened tumour labelled Biliary tract cancer] PHASE III | ADVANCED BILIARY TRACT CANCER Ivonescimab + chemotherapy vs Durvalumab + chemotherapy WHAT WE KNOW ☑ OS superiority met - sponsos-reported ☑ PFS endpoint met ☑ Response-rate endpoint met ⚠ Sponsor-reported topline results. Actual survival numbers and detailed safety data awaited. WATCH OUT AT ESMO 2026! OCTOBER 25, 2026 PRESIDENTIAL SYMPOSIUM II LATE-BREAKING ABSTRACT: LBA8 Presenter: Jian Zhou | Madrid | 4:30-6:15 PM CEST ? HOW MANY EXTRA MONTHS OF SURVIVAL? | ? WILL GALLBLADDER CANCER BENEFIT TOO? Could BTC get a new first-line standard? The numbers will decide.

[Slide 1] Proffered Paper session 3530O - Neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy followed by camrelizumab and chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC): The phase 3 UNION trial Speakers Zhen Yu Lin (Wuhan, China) Lecture Time 11:10 - 11:20 Abstract Background Despite the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, recurrence and distant metastasis remain common in LARC. Effective immunotherapy-based strategies for the predominantly proficient mismatch repair/microsatellite-stable population remain limited. UNION is the first phase 3 trial to evaluate a neoadjuvant strategy incorporating radiotherapy, immunotherapy, and chemotherapy in LARC. Here we present the prespecified event-free survival (EFS) analysis. Methods Patients with cT3-4 or N+ rectal adenocarcinoma (tumor located ≤10 cm from the anal verge) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive short-course radiotherapy (SCRT; 25 Gy/5f; experimental group) or long-course chemoradiotherapy (50.4 Gy/28f with concurrent capecitabine 825 mg/m² twice daily; standard of care group) followed by 2 neoadjuvant cycles and 6 adjuvant cycles of capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX). The experimental group additionally received neoadjuvant and adjuvant camrelizumab (200 mg, day 1) since CAPOX treatment for up to 17 cycles. The primary endpoint was blinded independent review committee (BIRC)-assessed pathological complete response rate. Key secondary endpoints with prespecified α allocation were investigator-assessed EFS and overall survival. Results Between July 2021 and March 2023, 231 patients were randomized to the experimental group (n=113) and standard of care group (n=118). As of October 1, 2025, the median follow-up duration was 36.8 months (95% CI, 34.8-37.8) and 35.6 months (95% CI, 34.3-36.9), respectively. The 3-year EFS rate was significantly higher in the experimental group compared with standard of care (91.3% [95% CI, 83.9-95.4] vs 77.4% [95% CI, 67.9-84.4], hazard ratio=0.33 [95% CI, 0.15-0.71], P=0.0029). BIRC-assessed EFS consistently favored the experimental group. During the whole treatment period, the incidence of grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events was 51.3% (59/115) and 48.2% (54/112), respectively. Conclusions UNION is the first phase 3 trial to demonstrate a significant improvement in EFS with an immunotherapy-based regimen in LARC. This neoadjuvant strategy represents a new standard of care.

[Slide 1] Rapid Oral session Rapid oral 1: Gastrointestinal tumour, upper digestive Date Fri, 23.10.2026 Chairs Maria Ignez Braghiroli (Sao Paulo, Brazil, SP), Feng Wang (Guangzhou, China), Lucjan S. Wyrwicz (Warsaw, Poland) Room Almeria Auditorium - Hall 9 Time 16:15 - 17:45 Rapid Oral session LBA79 - Zanidatamab (zani) + chemotherapy (CT) ± tislelizumab (TIS) for first-line (1L) HER2-positive (HER2+) advanced/metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (mGEA): second interim analysis (IA) from HERIZON-GEA-01 Speakers Kohei Shitara (Kashiwa, Japan, Chiba) Lecture Time 16:15 - 16:20 Rapid Oral session LBA80 - Anbenitamab plus chemotherapy for previously treated HER2-positive gastric or gastroesophageal carcinomas (GC/GEJC): Updated overall survival (OS) analysis of KC-WISE Speakers Ruixing Zhang (Shijiazhuang, China, Hebei) Lecture Time 16:20 - 16:25 Rapid Oral session 2876RO - TQB2102, a Novel HER2 Bispecific Antibody-Drug Conjugate, Combined with Bemotrizumab with or without Capecitabine as First-Line Therapy for HER2-Positive Advanced Gastric/Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: A Phase II Study Speakers Miaozhen Qiu (Guangzhou, China) Lecture Time 16:25 - 16:30 Rapid Oral session Invited Discussant LBA79, LBA80 and 2876RO Speakers Maria Ignez Braghiroli (Sao Paulo, Brazil, SP) Lecture Time 16:30 - 16:42 Rapid Oral session 2877RO - Watch-and-wait (W&W) strategy for dostarlimab in localized deficient dMMR/MSI-H gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA): Results from the first interim analysis of the GERCOR-GONO DEWI phase II study Speakers Thierry André (Paris, France, CEDEX 12) Lecture Time 16:42 - 16:47 Rapid Oral session 2878RO - FOLFIRI plus ramucirumab versus paclitaxel plus ramucirumab as second-line therapy for taxane-pretreated patients with advanced or metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma–Final results of the phase III IKFs602/AIO RAMIRIS Study Speakers Sylvie Lorenzen (Munich, Germany) Lecture Time 16:47 - 16:52 Rapid Oral session LBA81 - Four Months of Adjuvant XELOX versus Six Months in Stage II–IIIB Gastric Cancer — The LOMAC Randomized Trial Speakers Dazhi Xu (Shanghai, China) Lecture Time 16:52 - 16:57

[Slide 1] MADRID 2026 ESMO congress MADRID SPAIN 23-27 OCTOBER 2026 Colorectal SELECTED ABSTRACTS Proffered paper: Gastrointestinal tumours, lower digestive | 25 October 2026 · 10:15-11:45 LBA29 | IROCAS: A randomized phase III trial of adjuvant treatment intensification with mFOLFIRINOX versus mFOLFOX6 in high-risk stage III (T4 and/or N2) colon cancer. LBA30 | Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) versus placebo after resection of colorectal cancer liver metastases (EMT2): A multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial LBA87 | Clinical Complete Response With Dostarlimab Monotherapy in dMMR/MSI-H Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer (LARC): First Results From the Global Registrational AZUR-1 Trial 3530O | Neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy followed by camrelizumab and chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC): The phase 3 UNION trial Rapid oral: Gastrointestinal tumours, lower digestive | 24 October 2026 · 14:45-16:15 787RO | Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA)-guided re-treatment (re-tx) with encorafenib and cetuximab (EC) in patients (pts) with chemorefractory BRAFV600E mutated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): The proof-of-concept single arm phase II BRICKET trial by GONO 788RO | Encorafenib plus cetuximab (EC) beyond progression in combination with FOLFIRI in BRAF V600E metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients (pts) progressing on EC: Results from the ECLYPse phase II trial 789RO | TRIDENTE: A phase II study of rechallenge with encorafenib (ENCO), binimetinib (BINI), and cetuximab (CET) in BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) 790RO | Preliminary clinical results of QTX3034, an oral G12D-preferring KRAS inhibitor, in combination with cetuximab ± mFOLFOX6 in patients with KRASG12D-mutated colorectal cancer (CRC) 791RO | Long-term follow-up of telisotuzumab adizutecan (ABBV-400, Temab-A) in combination with bevacizumab (Bev) vs standard of care (SOC) in patients (pts) with 3L+ colorectal cancer (CRC): Updated results of a phase 1 study LBA31 | Biweekly versus conventional trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer: the pragmatic phase 3 PRABITAS trial LBA32 | Final overall survival results from CheckMate 8HW: nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus nivolumab or chemotherapy in MSI-H/dMMR metastatic colorectal cancer Nieves Martínez Lago · @DraMartinezLago | #ESMO26

[Slide 1] Proffered Paper session LBA77 - Arcotatug tavatecan (IBI343/TAK-921) versus treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in previously treated, advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (G/GEJA): First interim analysis of the randomized, open-label, phase 3, G-HOPE-001 study Speakers Kohei Shitara (Kashiwa, Japan, Chiba) Lecture Time 13:30 - 13:40 [Abstract] Background Arcotatug tavatecan is a novel CLDN18.2-targeted ADC comprising an Fc-silenced antibody designed to reduce on target, off-tumor toxicity and conjugated to an exatecan-derived TOPO I inhibitor payload for selective delivery to tumor cells. Here, we report the prespecified first interim analysis (IA1) of the G-HOPE-001 study. [Slide 2] Results In IA1, 408 pts from China and Japan (male: 62.0%, median age: 58.0, ECOG PS 1: 71.6%, primary tumor at stomach: 81.6%, primary tumor resection: 43.6%) were randomized to arcotatug tavatecan (N=203) and TPC (N=205) arms. IRRC-assessed median PFS was 5.5 months vs 2.9 months (HR: 0.47 [95% CI: 0.34-0.65], p-value <0.0001). With 34.8% of events, median OS was 9.9 months vs 7.4 months (HR: 0.63 [95% CI: 0.45-0.89]). IRRC-assessed ORR was 23.6% in arcotatug tavatecan and 5.3% in TPC. Grade ≥3 (G3+) TEAEs occurred in 45.8% pts with arcotatug tavatecan vs 57.9% pts with TPC. Common gastrointestinal TEAEs (≥10%) with arcotatug tavatecan vs TPC were nausea (38.9% vs 40.6%), vomiting (22.2% vs 28.4%) and diarrhea (12.8% vs 34.5%). Interstitial lung disease was not observed. TRAEs leading to treatment discontinuation occurred in 1.0% of pts in each arm. No TRAE led to death. Conclusions Arcotatug tavatecan demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS with a manageable safety profile versus TPC for CLDN18.2+ G/GEJA in the 3L+ setting. OS results will be evaluated at the prespecified IA2. [Slide 3] Methods Patients (pts) with unresectable or metastatic G/GEJA, CLDN18.2 IHC ≥2+ in ≥75% of tumor cells who had progressed on 2-4 prior regimens were randomized 1:1 to arcotatug tavatecan 6mg/kg Q3W or TPC (irinotecan, paclitaxel or trifluridine/tipiracil) until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Stratification factors were regions, primary tumor site and prior gastrectomy. Primary endpoints were IRRC-assessed PFS per RECIST v1.1 and OS. The prespecified IA1 included the PFS final analysis and an OS futility analysis, with a data cutoff of February 13, 2026.

[Slide 1] Rapid Oral session 788RO - Encorafenib plus cetuximab (EC) beyond progression in combination with FOLFIRI in BRAF V600E metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients (pts) progressing on EC: Results from the ECLYPse phase II trial Speakers Maria Alessandra Calegari (Rome, Italy) Lecture Time 14:50 - 14:55 Abstract Background There is an unmet need for effective treatments in pts with BRAF V600E mCRC progressing on targeted therapy. ECLYPse was designed to address this issue based on two key premises: first, the hypothesis that due to intratumoral heterogeneity at progression, a disease subset may remain sensitive to EC; and second, the evidence of a synergistic activity of targeted agents in combination with chemotherapy (Cht) in first-line setting. Methods ECLYPse (NCT06640166) is a multicenter, single-arm, phase II study evaluating EC continuation beyond progression (E 300 mg daily, C 500mg/m2 i.v. every 2 weeks) in combination with FOLFIRI in pts with BRAF V600E mCRC progressing on second-line EC. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed 6-month PFS rate in the ITT population. The study design (single-stage, α=0.05, 80% power) required enrolling 25 patients and observing ≥7 patients alive without progression at 6 months to reject the null hypothesis (H0: 6-month PFS ≤10%). Secondary endpoints included OS and safety. Results Between June 12, 2024 and April 15, 2026, 25 patients were enrolled. Main pts' characteristics were: men 68%, median age 65 yrs (range 37–84 yrs), ECOG PS 0 68%, right-sided primary tumor 64%, synchronous metastases 72%, peritoneal metastases 64%, liver metastases 64%, pMMR tumor 92%. As of May 8, 2026, with a median follow-up of 7.6 months, 14 disease progression events were observed. The investigator-assessed 6-month PFS rate was 69.5% (95% CI, 51.7–93.6%), and the mPFS was 7.1 months (95% CI, 6.2–NE months). Median OS was not reached; 6- and 12-month OS rates were 94.1% (95% CI, 83.6–100%) and 83.7% (95% CI, 64.5–100%), respectively. No new safety signal were observed, with adverse events occurring with the expected frequency and grade. Conclusions ECLYPse met its primary endpoint, with about two-thirds of the pts progression-free at 6 months. Continuing EC beyond progression on second-line plus Cht appears to extend disease control in this poor-prognosis population. These findings may serve as a pathfinder to guide future research in the post-BREAKWATER era and help identify the optimal therapeutic strategy.

[Slide 1] Proffered Paper session Proffered paper: Gastrointestinal tumours, lower digestive Date Sun, 25.10.2026 Chairs Guillermo Argiles Martinez (New York, United States of America) Room Almeria Auditorium - Hall 9 Time 10:15 - 11:45 Proffered Paper session LBA29 - IROCAS: A randomized phase III trial of adjuvant treatment intensification with mFOLFIRINOX versus mFOLFOX6 in high-risk stage III (T4 and/or N2) colon cancer. Speakers Jaafar Bennouna (Suresnes, France) Lecture Time 10:15 - 10:25 Proffered Paper session LBA30 - Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) versus placebo after resection of colorectal cancer liver metastases (EMT2): A multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial Speakers Mark A. Hull (Leeds, United Kingdom) Lecture Time 10:25 - 10:35 Proffered Paper session Invited Discussant LBA29 and LBA30 Lecture Time 10:35 - 10:47 Proffered Paper session Q&A and discussion Lecture Time 10:47 - 11:00 Proffered Paper session LBA87 - Clinical Complete Response With Dostarlimab Monotherapy in dMMR/MSI-H Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer (LARC): First Results From the Global Registrational AZUR-1 Trial Speakers Andrea Cercek (New York, United States of America, NY) Lecture Time 11:00 - 11:10 Proffered Paper session 3530O - Neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy followed by camrelizumab and chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC): The phase 3 UNION trial Speakers Zhen Yu Lin (Wuhan, China) Lecture Time 11:10 - 11:20 Proffered Paper session Invited Discussant LBA87 and 353O Speakers David Tougeron (Poitiers, France, CEDEX) Lecture Time 11:20 - 11:32 Proffered Paper session Q&A and discussion Lecture Time 11:32 - 11:45

[Slide 1] MASTERPLAN Can 5 Fractions of SBRT Improve Survival? MV Onco THE TRIAL 74 patients | Randomized 2:1 | Phase II High-risk operable, borderline-resectable or inoperable pancreatic cancer. Chemotherapy + SBRT (n=49) versus Chemotherapy alone (n=25) Predominantly mFOLFIRINOX. SBRT: 40 Gy in 5 fractions. [Illustration: chemotherapy IV bag connected to a pancreas with a tumor, and a linear accelerator head delivering beams labeled "SBRT – 5 fractions"] THE RESULTS LOCAL RECURRENCE AT 12 MONTHS SBRT: 20.2% Control: 52.0% p = 0.022 MEDIAN OVERALL SURVIVAL SBRT: 22 months Control: 14 months p = 0.006 MEDIAN PFS SBRT: 11.9 months Control: 6.3 months p = 0.002 SURGERY & SAFETY Resection: 68% vs 59% R0 among resected: 62% vs 40% Neither difference statistically significant. Grade ≥3 adverse events: 70.2% vs 64.0% No statistically significant difference. THE CLINICAL QUESTION Better local control. Promising survival. But only 74 patients in a Phase II trial. Practice-changing? Not yet. Phase III confirmation needed. Oar A, et al. AGITG MASTERPLAN. ESMO 2026; Abstract 3136RO.

[Slide 1] Rapid Oral session 787RO - Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA)-guided re-treatment (re-tx) with encorafenib and cetuximab (EC) in patients (pts) with chemorefractory BRAFV600E mutated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): The proof-of-concept single arm phase II BRICKET trial by GONO Speakers Marco Maria Germani (Pisa, Italy) Lecture Time 14:45 - 14:50 Abstract Background Current therapies for BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC after progression (PD) to EC are modestly effective. Resistance is largely driven by genomic alterations that can potentially decay after EC withdrawal, providing a rationale for ctDNA-guided EC re-tx. Methods BRICKET (NCT06578559) is a proof-of-concept single arm phase II trial where BRAFV600E mut mCRC pts who achieved disease control for ≥ 6 months (mos) with previous EC and then experienced PD underwent centralized ctDNA analysis (GUARDANT360 CDx, Guardant Health) after failure of one intervening EC-free line of therapy. Only pts with BRAFV600E mutation (mut), and no KRAS, NRAS, MAP2K1 mut and MET amplification (ampl) in their ctDNA were eligible. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). With an ORR of 0.05 for p0 (null hypothesis) and 0.25 for p1 (alternative hypothesis), and 2-sided-α and β errors of 0.05 and 0.20, 16 pts were required and p0 could be rejected if ≥ 3 had an objective response. Results Between August 2024 and December 2025, 30 pts underwent molecular screening and ctDNA was successfully detected in 29 cases (96.7%). One or more resistance alterations were found in 11 (37.9%) of them, being KRAS mut (N=17), NRAS mut (N=3) and MET ampl (N=2) the most frequent. In other 2 pts (6.9%), BRAFV600E mut was not detectable. 14 (87.5%) out of 16 enrolled pts had received previous EC without concomitant chemotherapy and 13 (81.3%) were re-treated after the 3rd line. No objective responses were reported. 6 pts (37.5%) had disease stabilization, lasting a median of 2.9 mos (95% CI: 1.0 – not assessable). All pts experienced PD and 11 (68.8%) died, resulting in median PFS and OS of 2.9 (95% CI: 2.0 – 3.4) and 9.1 mos (95% CI: 4.0 – 13.0), respectively. No new safety signals were observed. Conclusions EC re-tx did not show signals of activity in BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC pts without common genomic drivers of resistance to EC in their ctDNA. Whether pts treated upfront with chemotherapy plus EC as per current guidelines, potentially less likely to develop genomic resistance, may benefit from ctDNA-guided EC re-tx, could be object of future studies.

[Slide 1] Background The Surgery As Needed for Oesophageal cancer (SANO)-trial demonstrated that active surveillance is non-inferior to standard surgery in terms of two-year overall survival in patients with a complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). Active surveillance resulted in improved quality of life. Here, we report 5-year outcomes. Methods From 2017 to 2021, a multicentre stepped-wedge cluster-randomised non-inferiority trial was conducted. Patients with locally advanced oesophageal cancer who achieved complete clinical response (defined as no tumour detected on endoscopic biopsies, -ultrasound, or PET-CT) underwent active surveillance or standard surgery. Cox regression was used to compare 5-year overall and disease-free survival, and the cumulative incidence of distant metastases was estimated using competing risk analysis. Results A total of 309 patients were included, 198 underwent active surveillance and 111 underwent standard surgery. Median follow-up was 76 months (IQR 67–86). Five-year overall survival was not statistically significantly different between active surveillance and standard surgery (50%, 95%CI 34-57 vs. 54%, 95%CI 46-64; HR 1.17, 95%CI 0.77-1.77) with similar results across histologic subtypes. Disease-free survival was not statistically significantly different (HR 1.39, 95% CI 0.94-2.06). The cumulative incidence of distant metastases at five years was significantly higher in the active surveillance group compared to the standard surgery group (46%, 95%CI 39-53 vs. 29%, 95%CI 21-37; P<.01). Overall, 85 of 198 patients (43%) were spared non-beneficial oesophagectomy, including those with sustained complete clinical response at last follow-up or distant metastases detected within six months after nCRT. Conclusions Overall survival at 5 years is not statistically significantly different between active surveillance and standard surgery in patients with oesophageal cancer and a complete clinical response after nCRT, despite a higher incidence of distant metastases in the active surveillance group. These findings support active surveillance as a feasible treatment strategy in these patients.

[Slide 1] MADRID 2026 ESMO congress MADRID SPAIN 23-27 OCTOBER 2026 Sarcoma SELECTED ABSTRACTS Presidential Symposium III | 26 October 2026 · 16:30-16:54 LBA9 - Risvutatug Rezetecan (Ris-Rez) versus Gemcitabine and Docetaxel (GD) in Heavily Pretreated Patients (pts) with Relapsed or Refractory (R/R) Osteosarcoma: Primary Results from the Phase 3 ARTEMIS-011 Study Proffered paper: Sarcoma | 24 October 2026 · 14:45-16:15 LBA89 - Primary Analysis of TANGENT: A Phase 3 Randomised Trial Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of Emactuzumab in Patients With Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumours 3715O - A phase 1/2 trial of zolucatetide, a first-in-class direct β-catenin:TCF inhibitor: Updated safety and efficacy in patients with desmoid tumors 3714O - HH2853, an EZH1/2 inhibitor, in patients with epithelioid sarcoma: Promising anti-tumor activity results from the pivotal phase II (HH2853-G101 cohort 2) study 3716O - SELNET 7.2: A phase II trial exploring cirtuvivint in certain translocation-related soft-tissue sarcomas Rapid oral: Sarcoma | 08:30-10:00 3717RO - Phase 3 peak crossover: Bezuclastinib + sunitinib combination following sunitinib monotherapy in patients with GIST 3718RO - Molecular response (MR) in KIT circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) from StrateGIST 1: A phase 1/1b study of velzatinib (IDRX-42) in patients (pts) with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) 3719RO - Final results from the first-in-human phase I trial of NB003, a potent and selective KIT inhibitor, in patients (pts) with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) 3720RO - Nab-paclitaxel plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in advanced or unresectable malignant vascular tumors: Results from a phase II study 3721RO - Quantitative PARP1 H-score as a predictive biomarker for trabectedin plus olaparib combination in advanced soft tissue sarcoma: Exploratory analysis of the TOMAS2 study 3722RO - Trastuzumab deruxtecan in patients with desmoplastic small round cell tumors (DSRCT): A retrospective analysis from the French Sarcoma Group 3723RO - Desmoid tumors (DTs) from the NETSARC+ registry: Tumor characteristics, management strategies, and outcomes in 3457 patients 3724RO - Patient reported outcomes (PROs) with varegacestat versus placebo (PBO) in progressing desmoid tumors: Results from RINGSIDE Part B 3725RO - Lifileucel in patients with undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS) or dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLS) Nieves Martínez Lago · @DraMartinezLago | #ESMO26

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 / GUIDELINE [ESMO Congress Madrid 2026 logo] A NEW ROADMAP FOR GASTRIC & OESOPHAGEAL CANCER ESMO 2026 / FOUR CLINICAL SHIFTS IN ONE GUIDELINE 01 KNOW THE BIOLOGY BEFORE TREATMENT Core tests in gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma HER2 | MSI / dMMR | PD-L1 CPS + TAP | CLDN18.2 Oesophageal SCC: PD-L1; assess DPD before fluoropyrimidines. 02 RESECTABLE GASTRIC / GEJ MATTERHORN · durvalumab + FLOT ↔ FLOT 2-year event-free survival 67.4% ↔ 58.5% Overall survival: HR 0.78 03 RESECTABLE OESOPHAGEAL ADENOCARCINOMA ESOPEC · perioperative FLOT ↔ CROSS chemoradiation Median overall survival 66 ↔ 37 months HR for death 0.70 04 ADVANCED HER2-POSITIVE ADENOCARCINOMA HERIZON-GEA-01 · zanidatamab + tislelizumab + chemo ↔ trastuzumab + chemo · first line Median overall survival 26.4 ↔ 19.2 months HR 0.72 · FDA-approved triplet EXPERT READOUT Histology, stage, biomarkers and access determine the choice. Sources: Al-Batran et al. Ann Oncol, 15 Oct 2026 · MATTERHORN / ESOPEC / HERIZON-GEA-01 drozdogan.com

[Slide 1] Background Arcotatug tavatecan is a novel CLDN18.2-targeted ADC comprising an Fc-silenced antibody designed to reduce on target, off-tumor toxicity and conjugated to an exatecan-derived TOPO I inhibitor payload for selective delivery to tumor cells. Here, we report the prespecified first interim analysis (IA1) of the G-HOPE-001 study. Methods Patients (pts) with unresectable or metastatic G/GEJA, CLDN18.2 IHC ≥2+ in ≥75% of tumor cells who had progressed on 2-4 prior regimens were randomized 1:1 to arcotatug tavatecan 6mg/kg Q3W or TPC (irinotecan, paclitaxel or trifluridine/tipiracil) until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Stratification factors were regions, primary tumor site and prior gastrectomy. Primary endpoints were IRRC-assessed PFS per RECIST v1.1 and OS. The prespecified IA1 included the PFS final analysis and an OS futility analysis, with a data cutoff of February 13, 2026. Results In IA1, 408 pts from China and Japan (male: 62.0%, median age: 58.0, ECOG PS 1: 71.6%, primary tumor at stomach: 81.6%, primary tumor resection: 43.6%) were randomized to arcotatug tavatecan (N=203) and TPC (N=205) arms. IRRC-assessed median PFS was 5.5 months vs 2.9 months (HR: 0.47 [95% CI: 0.34-0.65], p-value <0.0001). With 34.8% of events, median OS was 9.9 months vs 7.4 months (HR: 0.63 [95% CI: 0.45-0.89]). IRRC-assessed ORR was 23.6% in arcotatug tavatecan and 5.3% in TPC. Grade ≥3 (G3+) TEAEs occurred in 45.8% pts with arcotatug tavatecan vs 57.9% pts with TPC. Common gastrointestinal TEAEs (≥10%) with arcotatug tavatecan vs TPC were nausea (38.9% vs 40.6%), vomiting (22.2% vs 28.4%) and diarrhea (12.8% vs 34.5%). Interstitial lung disease was not observed. TRAEs leading to treatment discontinuation occurred in 1.0% of pts in each arm. No TRAE led to death. Conclusions Arcotatug tavatecan demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS with a manageable safety profile versus TPC for CLDN18.2+ G/GEJA in the 3L+ setting. OS results will be evaluated at the prespecified IA2.

[Slide 1] RASolute 302 | ESMO 2026 | LBA82 ONE DRUG. MULTIPLE RAS MUTATIONS. NEARLY DOUBLE THE SURVIVAL. MV Onco DARAXONRASIB Oral RAS(ON) inhibitor [illustration: pancreas with tumour regions labelled] KRAS G12D KRAS G12V KRAS G12R RAS Q61 MEDIAN OVERALL SURVIVAL 13.2 months vs 6.7 months HR 0.40 Daraxonrasib vs chemotherapy PFS: 7.2 months vs 3.6 months | HR 0.49 Mutation subgroup findings are exploratory. Broad RAS inhibition. Major survival gain. [Slide 2] RASolute 302 | ESMO 2026 | LBA82 Part 1 – Has Daraxonrasib Doubled Survival in Pancreatic Cancer? MV Onco 01 THE CLINICAL QUESTION • Previously treated metastatic pancreatic cancer. • Chemotherapy offers limited survival benefit. • Can we target RAS directly? • Daraxonrasib = Oral multi-selective RAS(ON) inhibitor. • Targets active, GTP-bound RAS. 02 THE TRIAL • RASolute 302 | Phase III | N = 500 • Daraxonrasib 300 mg orally daily vs • Investigator's-choice chemotherapy GnP / mFOLFIRINOX / nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV / FOLFOX • Dual primary endpoints: OS + PFS in RAS G12-mutated disease. 03 OVERALL SURVIVAL Daraxonrasib vs Chemotherapy 13.2 months vs 6.7 months HR 0.40 60% lower hazard of death Median OS difference: +6.5 months 04 PROGRESSION-FREE SURVIVAL Daraxonrasib vs Chemotherapy 7.2 months vs 3.6 months HR 0.49 51% lower hazard of progression or death Median PFS difference: +3.6 months TAKE-HOME • One oral RAS inhibitor. Nearly doubled median OS and PFS. • Potentially practice-changing in previously treated metastatic pancreatic cancer. Median follow-up: 8.5 months. [Slide 3] RASolute 302 | ESMO 2026 | LBA82 Part 2 – Does the RAS Mutation Matter? MV Onco 01 DOES THE RAS MUTATION MATTER? Overall survival HR by mutation: • G12D → 0.49 (0.33–0.74) • G12V → 0.32 (0.19–0.54) • G12R → 0.61 (0.29–1.30) • Q61 → 0.37 (0.09–1.44) G12D and G12V show favourable survival effect. • G12V had the lowest numerical HR. But no proven difference in efficacy between mutations. 02 WHAT ABOUT RAS-WILD-TYPE? • No RAS mutation identified: OS HR 0.43 95% CI: 0.09–1.98 • Only 16 patients. • Favourable numerical trend. • Exploratory — NOT definitive. • No mutation identified ≠ confirmed RAS-wild-type. 03 DID CHEMOTHERAPY CHOICE MATTER? • Survival benefit directionally consistent across chemotherapy-choice subgroups. • OS HR range: 0.32–0.46 • Not driven by a single chemotherapy comparator. • However, subgroup results do not prove superiority over every individual regimen. 04 WHAT ARE THE LIMITATIONS? STRENGTHS • Phase III randomized evidence. • Large overall survival benefit. • Consistent direction across RAS subgroups. CAUTIONS • Median follow-up: 8.5 months. • Small G12R, Q61 and no-identified-RAS groups. • No proven mutation-specific superiority. • Longer follow-up needed. TAKE-HOME ONE RAS INHIBITOR. MULTIPLE MUTATIONS. • Daraxonrasib shows directionally favourable survival effects across RAS subgroups. • Broad RAS inhibition — not mutation-specific superiority — is the key message.

[Slide 1] ARION Durvalumab added to definitive CRT for esophageal cancer Locally advanced Esophageal cancer 77% squamous n = 112 → RANDOMIZE FOLFOX + RT (n = 54) | 12-month central PFS* 48.9% + durvalumab (n = 58) | 12-month central PFS* 48.6% *Primary endpoint: centrally reviewed PFS. HR 0.91 (95% CI 0.55-1.49), P = .351; not significant. OS HR 0.99 (0.59-1.68), P = .489; not statistically significant. Reported P values are one-sided. Modesto et al. ESMO 2026, 2879RO. Randomized phase II. IMRT 50 Gy/25 fx + FOLFOX; durvalumab monthly x12.

[Slide 1] UNION Short-course RT + CAPOX + camrelizumab vs long-course CRT Locally advanced Rectal cancer cT3-4 or N+; <=10 cm n = 231 → RANDOMIZE 3-year EFS CRT + CAPOX (n = 118) 77.4% SCRT + CAPOX + camrelizumab 91.3% EFS HR 0.33 (95% CI 0.15-0.71), P = .0029. Prespecified secondary endpoint; primary pCR reported earlier. Control: 50.4 Gy/28 fx + capecitabine; experimental (n = 113): 25 Gy/5 fx. Both: surgery + perioperative CAPOX. Lin et al. ESMO 2026, 3530O. Phase III; camrelizumab also given adjuvantly. Multiple treatment components differ.

[Slide 1] SANO | ESMO 2026 | LBA78 Save the Oesophagus. But at what cost? MV Onco COMPLETE CLINICAL RESPONSE (cCR) [illustration: oesophagus branching to two strategies] ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE OESOPHAGECTOMY OESOPHAGUS PRESERVED 5-year OS: 50% 5-year OS: 54% [illustrations: liver, lungs, bone with metastases] Distant metastases: 46% Distant metastases: 29% SIMILAR SURVIVAL. +17% POINTS DISTANT METASTASES. Does organ preservation compromise distant disease control? Association observed; causality not established. [Slide 2] SANO | ESMO 2026 | LBA78 Part 1 – Can We Avoid Oesophagectomy After Complete Response? MV Onco 01 THE CLINICAL QUESTION • Locally advanced oesophageal cancer. • Complete clinical response (cCR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: • Must everyone undergo oesophagectomy? • Or can we monitor and operate only when needed? 02 THE SANO TRIAL • Multcicentre, cluster-randomised trial. • N = 309 • Active surveillance: 198 patients • Standard surgery: 111 patients • Median follow-up: 76 months • cCR assessed by endoscopic biopsies, EUS and PET-CT. 03 FIVE-YEAR SURVIVAL Active Surveillance vs Surgery • 5-year OS: 50% vs 54% HR 1.17 (95% CI 0.77–1.77) No statistically significant difference. • DFS: HR 1.39 (95% CI 0.94–2.06) No statistically significant difference. No significant difference ≠ Proven equivalence. 04 HOW MANY AVOIDED SURGERY? 43% (85/198) • Avoided an oesophagectomy classified as non-beneficial. • Included patients with sustained cCR or early distant metastatic progression. Organ preservation is feasible in selected patients. BUT THERE IS A CATCH... SAME SURVIVAL. MORE METASTASES? Continued in Part 2. [Slide 3] SANO | ESMO 2026 | LBA78 Part 2 – Same Survival. More Metastases? MV Onco 01 THE DISTANT METASTASIS PARADOX 5-year cumulative incidence: Active Surveillance vs Surgery 46% vs 29% +17 percentage points P < 0.01 Significantly MORE distant metastases with surveillance. Yet 5-year OS was not significantly different. 02 HOW CAN THIS HAPPEN? Possible explanations: • Subsequent treatments may influence survival. • Longer follow-up may reveal survival differences. • The study may lack precision to detect an OS difference. The mechanism remains unproven. Does residual local disease contribute to distant spread? An important hypothesis — NOT established. 03 THE ORGAN-PRESERVATION TRADE-OFF WHAT WE GAIN • 43% avoided an oesophagectomy classified as non-beneficial. • Earlier results showed better quality of life. WHAT CONCERNS US • Higher distant-metastasis incidence. • Uncertain long-term oncological equivalence. Organ preservation ≠ Risk-free surveillance. 04 TAKE-HOME Active surveillance is a feasible option in carefully selected patients achieving cCR after nCRT. Requires: • Expert multidisciplinary assessment. • Intensive surveillance. • Timely salvage surgery when indicated. 5-year OS: No significant difference. Distant metastases: Significantly higher. THE KEY QUESTION: Are we preserving the oesophagus at the cost of distant disease control?

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 / MADRID REPORTING FROM MADRID ESMO 2026 / DAY ONE LIVE CONGRESS NOTES [MADRID 2026 ESMO congress logo] MADRID • CONGRESS NOTES MUSTAFA ÖZDOĞAN MD · MADRID 2026 FRIDAY 23 OCTOBER MADRID TIME · CEST (UTC+2) WHAT I'M FOLLOWING TODAY 11:30 OPENING SESSION The scientific programme begins 13:30 // ESMO-MCBS How large must a benefit be to matter? UPPER GI ORAL ABSTRACTS KEYNOTE-975 on the agenda 15:15 mRNA VACCINES Context ahead of Saturday's INTerpath-001 (LBA1) I'M HERE IN THE HALLS I'll share the results, absolute gains and clinical implications. ESMO 2026 • Madrid • 23–27 October 2026 | drozdogan.com

[Slide 1] ESMO GOOD SCIENCE BETTER MEDICINE BEST PRACTICE ESMO 2026 · MADRID GUT ONC LAB GI ABSTRACTS I'M WATCHING Oct 23–27 · Times are Madrid local (CEST through Oct 24, CET from Oct 25) BELOW THE BELT AZUR-1 LBA87 Sun 25 11:00 Dostarlimab alone in stage II/III MSI-H rectal cancer This will be positive. Incredibly positive. This is already what I'm doing in clinical practice and is a massive step forward for the 5–10% of rectal cancer patients that are MSI-H. Yay. IROCAS LBA29 Sun 25 10:15 Adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX vs mFOLFOX6, T4/N2 colon Important study, and honestly, it is going to predict if US-CIRCULATE will be positive. If this is negative, CIRCULATE will be a nail-biter. CheckMate 8HW LBA32 Sat 24 15:42 Final OS: nivo/ipi vs nivo vs chemo, MSI-H mCRC What happens when you do a trial with an agent that essentially cures a disease against another that cures most people? It is a really long damn trial. Excited for the final OS data. Will it be positive? TBD, but I certainly think the magnitude of benefit of dual IO makes it better than single agent, and this data could reinforce that practice. UNION 3530O Sun 25 11:10 SCRT → camrelizumab + CAPOX, locally advanced rectal pCR reported at ~40% in 2024, let's see if more people were cured. Some criticism in changing radiation schedule and adding IO compared to standard, but will set the stage for future studies. EMT2 LBA30 Sun 25 10:25 EPA vs placebo after CRC liver metastasis resection It's like fish oil but better. File this in the ALASCCA category of "costs nothing, helps people" if positive. ALASCCA + CHALLENGE <3 QTX3034 790RO Sat 24 15:15 KRAS G12D inhibitor + cetuximab ± mFOLFOX6, mCRC Sick study. Moving us to molecularly driven treatments in earlier line settings for CRC. Where the field MUST move. If this isn't positive I will eat a hat (a small one, preferably organic). EC + FOLFIRI beyond PD 788RO Sat 24 14:50 Continuing encorafenib + cetuximab past progression, BRAF V600E mCRC Already doing this in clinical practice with patients who have BRAF+ disease w/o resistance mechanism on ctDNA at progression. Data for its use is HUGELY welcome. BOT/BAL in the real world 905eP ePoster · 3771P Mon 26 12:00 Botensilimab + balstilimab: refractory MSS mCRC (AGEO) and advanced sarcoma (Spanish EAP) Gives us a look at Bot Bal in real world. Important data, multiple attempts to use CPI in advanced disease have provided mixed results, what happens when we use stronger agents? RUNNER-UP Biweekly TAS-102 + bev LBA31 Sat 24 15:37 Biweekly vs standard schedule, refractory mCRC Runner up only because Cathy Eng already convincingly showed this is the dosing schedule we should be using. I already use this in clinical practice. Great to randomize but should be positive. UPPER GI CLARITY-Gastric01 + G-HOPE-001 LBA7 Sun 25 17:18 · LBA77 Fri 23 13:30 CLDN18.2 ADCs, pretreated gastric/GEJ The next generation of CLDN18.2 is here. Expect less explosive emesis and improved outcomes. KEYNOTE-975 2875O Fri 23 13:50 Pembro + definitive chemoRT, esophageal/GEJ Merck joins the D-FLOT era for patients still receiving definitive chemoRT. After the CROSS/FLOT study the impact of this is going to be less, but still important for patients receiving definitive chemoRT. HERIZON-GEA-01 LBA79 Fri 23 16:15 Zanidatamab ± tislelizumab, 1L HER2+ GEA My practice in HER2+ upper GI/GEA has moved to Zani, will be helpful to see the longer-term outcomes here. SANO LBA78 Fri 23 13:40 Active surveillance vs surgery after nCRT, long-term People deserve to keep their organs. Our ability to offer this only improves when we layer in tools like ctDNA. Interested in what we can extrapolate to other organ systems (especially for MSI-H). PANCREAS RASolute 302 LBA82 Fri 23 14:22 Daraxonrasib subgroups, 2L+ metastatic PDAC Every subgroup likely benefited. G12V more than others. Maybe there will be another standing ovation? Come for the science, stay for the clapping. AMPLIFY-7P LBA83 Fri 23 14:32 mKRAS vaccine vs observation, resected PDAC Vaccine therapies are the next frontier. Merck has pushed them forward in Melanoma where they are an amazing success, very interested in the randomized data here. Even if negative it will be critical data to learn from. HCC / BILIARY HARMONi-GI1 LBA8 Sun 25 17:42 Ivonescimab vs durvalumab + GemCis, 1L BTC PD-1/VEGF emerges in GI. Let's see the benefit. China only. ACTICCA-1 LBA21 Sat 24 10:25 Adjuvant GemCis vs capecitabine, resected BTC Might immediately change the standard of care for resected BTC. Worth tuning in for. Nicholas J. Hornstein, MD, PhD Full abstracts online Oct 19 · LBAs at presentation

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 | Negative Phase 3 KEYNOTE-975 Unresectable oesophagual / GEJ cancer • Definitive chemoradiotherapy ± pembrolizumab • n=703 • 17:30 • Abstract 2875O Study question [illustration of oesophagus and stomach with tumour at GEJ] Does adding pembrolizumab to definitive chemoradiotherapy improve outcomes in unresectable oesophageal/GEJ cancer? Key results / Efficacy PD-L1 CPS ≥10 EFS: HR 0,97 (0.77–1.23) OS: HR 1.00 No meaningful benefit A clear negative phase 3 result Safety profile [skull icon] Grade 5 AEs: 13% vs 10% [IV bag icon] Discontinued any study drug due to AEs: 34% vs 27% Higher toxicity with pembrolizumab Take-home message Adding pembrolizumab to definitive chemoradiotherapy did not improve EFS or OS, with higher rates of fatal toxicity and treatment discontinuation. A clean negative, at a cost. [lightbulb icon] Why does this matter? Even in phase 3 studies, more therapy is not always better. The balance between treatment intensification and real clinical benefit must be cafefully considered. Source: #ESMO26 • Abstract 2875O • KEYNOTE-975 • Presenter: Manish A. Shah

[Slide 1] KEYNOTE-975 Pembrolizumab added to definitive CRT for esophageal cancer Locally advanced Esophageal / GEJ Not surgical candidates n = 703 → RANDOMIZE CRT + placebo (n = 354) | Median EFS, CPS >=10* 14.7 mo CRT + pembro (n = 349) | Median EFS, CPS >=10* 15.2 mo *EFS in CPS >=10: HR 0.97 (95% CI 0.77-1.23), P = .3994; not statistically significant. CPS >=10 OS: 35.0 vs 32.2 months; HR 1.00 (0.77-1.30), not formally tested after hierarchy failure. Shah et al. ESMO 2026, 2875O. Phase III. CRT: FP + 50/60 Gy or FOLFOX + 50 Gy; up to 1 year of IO.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 / MADRID EVIDENCE NOTES [Madrid skyline silhouette] [ESMO congress Madrid 2026 logo] PRESIDENTIAL SYMPOSIUM II / LBA8 25 OCT 2026, SUNDAY 16:30 Madrid | 18:30 Istanbul HARMONi-GI1 CAN A PD-1/VEGF BISPECIFIC BEAT AN ACTIVE STANDARD IN ADVANCED BILIARY TRACT CANCER? 1L advanced BTC • ivonescimab + chemotherapy vs durvalumab + chemotherapy [illustration of liver/biliary tract with bispecific antibody icon] PD-1 / VEGF bispecific 01 DISEASE & PATIENT POPULATION [liver illustration] • Unresectable locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer • First-line systemic treatment • Randomized study in advanced BTC • BTC population including gallbladder cancer and intra/extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma subtypes 02 STUDY DESIGN Phase 3 Randomized / double-blind n = 682 China / multicentre Primary endpoint: OS 03 TREATMENT ARMS Experimental arm Ivonescimab + chemotherapy PD-1 / VEGF bispecific VS Control arm Durvalumab + chemotherapy active immunotherapy standard 04 WHAT WE KNOW NOW [bar chart icon with rising arrow] • Primary OS endpoint met at a pre-specified interim analysis • Clinically meaningful and statistically significant superiority reported • Key secondary endpoints PFS and ORR were also positive • Data source: company topline announcement + ESMO programme ✓ OS superiority signal against an active standard. NOT YET DISCLOSED [document with question mark icon] • OS HR and 95% CI • Median OS / PFS and absolute differences • Magnitude of ORR and duration of response • Grade ≥3 toxicity and discontinuation • Generalisability beyond China Awaiting full LBA8 presentation. 05 CLINICAL READING [magnifying glass icon] Key question: not just whether it is positive, but how large the gain is against an active control — and how far a single-region dataset can be generalised. Positive PFS/OS signals matter; absolute benefit, toxicity balance and external validity will determine practice impact. Data status: company topline announcement + ESMO 2026 programme; full presentation and detailed outcomes awaited. Sources: drozdogan.com • Akeso/Summit topline, 25 Aug 2026 • HARMONi-GI1 (AK112-309) • ESMO 2026 programme drozdogan.com

[Slide 1] Incyte [phone alarm-app mockup] Edit Alarm + Booth 8024 Hall 8 SATURDAY, OCTOBER 24 — 2:30-4:00 a.m. ET [8:30-10:00 a.m. CEST] — TGFBR2×PD-1 IN MSS CRC SUNDAY, OCTOBER 25 — 3:30-5:00 a.m. ET [8:30-10:00 a.m. CET] — KRAS G12D IN CRC MONDAY, OCTOBER 26 — 9:45-11:15 a.m. ET [2:45-4:15 p.m. CET] — KRAS G12D IN PDAC

[Slide 1] LBA79 - Zanidatamab (zani) + chemotherapy (CT) ± tislelizumab (TIS) for first-line (1L) HER2-positive (HER2+) advanced/metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (mGEA): Second interim analysis (IA) from HERIZON-GEA-01 Speakers Kohei Shitara (Kashiwa, Japan, Chiba) Lecture Time 16:15 - 16:20 [Abstract button] Background In the primary analysis of progression-free survival (PFS) and first IA (IA1) of overall survival (OS) of the phase 3 HERIZON-GEA-01 trial (NCT05152147), zani + CT ± TIS significantly prolonged PFS and, with TIS, provided a significant OS benefit (HR 0.72) vs trastuzumab (tras) + CT (Shitara, et al. NEJM. 2026), supporting the US approval of these regimens in 1L HER2+ mGEA. Here, we present the planned second IA of OS (IA2). Methods Patients (pts) with untreated HER2+ mGEA were randomized 1:1:1 to zani (1800 mg [<70 kg]/2400 mg [≥70 kg] IV every 3 weeks [Q3W]) + CT (capecitabine/oxaliplatin or 5-FU/cisplatin) ± TIS (200 mg IV Q3W) or tras + CT. PFS (by blinded independent central review) and OS were primary endpoints. At IA2, formal OS comparisons were tested in sequence: zani + CT vs tras + CT, then zani + CT + TIS vs zani + CT. Results 914 pts were randomized. With a median follow-up of 35.3 mo (data cutoff: 15 July 2026; 9.4 mo longer than IA1), zani + CT significantly improved OS vs tras + CT (HR 0.76 [95% CI: 0.62–0.93]; P = 0.0088; median OS, 22.9 mo [95% CI: 19.9–27.6] vs 19.6 mo [95% CI: 16.9–22.2]). A 4-mo longer median OS was observed with zani + TIS + CT (27.0 mo [95% CI: 23.7–32.2]) vs zani + CT (HR 0.81 [95% CI: 0.65–1.00]), although the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.0502). The OS benefit of zani + TIS + CT vs tras + CT observed at IA1 (HR 0.72) was sustained at IA2 with an improved HR (0.65 [95% CI: 0.52–0.80]). Estimated 36-mo OS was 39.8% for zani + CT + TIS, 31.5% for zani + CT, and 22.9% for tras + CT. Median duration of treatment was 46.6 (40.5 for zani) wks with zani + CT + TIS, 31.1 (30.1 for zani) wks with zani + CT, and 30.0 (28.2 for tras) wks with tras + CT. The safety profiles were consistent with IA1. Conclusions At IA2, zani + CT led to a statistically significant and clinically meaningful OS improvement vs tras + CT. With longer follow-up, zani + CT + TIS showed improved OS benefit over tras + CT and there was a meaningful trend for OS improvement vs zani + CT. Unchanged safety profiles support the tolerability of prolonged treatment. These results continue to support zani combined with CT ± TIS as a new HER2-directed 1L standard of care in HER2+ mGEA.

[Slide 1] G-HOPE-001 | ESMO 2026 | LBA77 SAME TARGET. NEW WEAPON. CLDN18.2 ADC vs Chemotherapy MV Onco CHEMOTHERAPY PFS: 2.9 months ORR: 5.3% IBI343 | CLDN18.2 ADC PFS: 5.5 months ORR: 23.6% [illustration: tumour mass, chemo IV bag on left; ADC antibodies binding on right] CLDN18.2 Arcotatug tavatecan (IBI343) TOP1 inhibitor payload Most tumour cells remain viable Fewer viable tumour cells PFS HR 0.47 53% LOWER PROGRESSION/DEATH HAZARD CLDN18.2-positive tumour cells survive OS: 9.9 vs 7.4 months BUT OS IS IMMATURE Will the benefit survive longer follow-up? [Slide 2] G-HOPE-001 | ESMO 2026 | LBA77 Part 1 – Can a CLDN18.2 ADC Beat Chemotherapy? MV Onco 01 THE CLINICAL QUESTION • Advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma • Progression after 2–4 prior regimens. • CLDN18.2 IHC ≥2+ in ≥75% of tumour cells. • Can a CLDN18.2 ADC outperform chemotherapy? 02 THE TRIAL G-HOPE-001 | Phase III | N = 408 Arcotatug tavatecan (IBI343) 6 mg/kg IV Q3W n = 203 VS Physician's choice chemotherapy n = 205 Irinotecan / paclitaxel / trifluridine-tipiracil Primary endpoints: PFS and OS. 03 THE PFS & RESPONSE RESULTS Median PFS 5.5 vs 2.9 months HR 0.47 (95% CI 0.34–0.65) 53% lower progression/death hazard. Objective response rate 23.6% vs 5.3% Absolute ORR gain: +18.3 percentage points. 04 THE OS QUESTION Median OS 9.9 vs 7.4 months HR 0.63 (95% CI 0.45–0.89) But only 34.8% of OS events occurred. OS IMMATURE – NOT YET DEFINITIVE. TAKE-HOME • PFS hazard reduced by 53%. • ORR approximately 4.5-fold higher. • Mature OS results awaited. [Slide 3] G-HOPE-001 | ESMO 2026 | LBA77 Part 2 – What Makes This CLDN18.2 ADC Different? MV Onco 01 WHY IS IBI343 DIFFERENT? Arcotatug tavatecan = CLDN18.2-targeted ADC • Fc-silenced antibody + • Exatecan-derived TOP1 inhibitor payload. Zolbetuximab • Anti-CLDN18.2 antibody • Relies primarily on immune-mediated cytotoxicity. IBI343 (Arcotatug tavatecan) • Anti-CLDN18.2 ADC • Delivers cytotoxic payload • Exatecan-derived TOP1 inhibitor inside tumour cells. 02 THE SAFETY SURPRISE Grade ≥3 TEAEs 45.8% vs 57.9% IBI343 Chemotherapy Diarrhoea 12.8% vs 34.5% IBI343 Chemotherapy ILD: 0 cases observed. No treatment-related deaths. No observed ILD ≠ No ILD risk. 03 THE SEQUENCING DILEMMA Can IBI343 work after zolbetuximab? • Same target: CLDN18.2. • Different mechanisms: • Zolbetuximab → Immune-mediated cytotoxicity. • IBI343 → TOP1 payload delivery. Post-zolbetuximab efficacy remains uncertain. 04 WHAT REMAINS UNANSWERED? • Mature OS? → Only 34.8% of OS events occurred. • After zolbetuximab? → Benefit not established. • Lower CLDN18.2 expression? → Not studied in this trial. • Beyond East Asia? → Further generalisability data needed. TAKE-HOME • One target. Two different therapeutic strategies. • CLDN18.2 ADC shows promising efficacy with manageable toxicity. • Optimal sequencing and mature OS remain the key questions.

[Slide 1] My picks - CRC and PDAC - #ESMO26 Dr Jose Tapia · Barts Cancer Centre- X: @TapiajC1 MADRID 2026 ESMO congress · MADRID SPAIN 23-27 OCTOBER 2026 COLORECTAL CANCER LBA32 | CheckMate 8HW | Mature OS data Mature OS results from Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab vs Nivolumab vs Chemotherapy in MSI-H/dMMR mCRC. Relevant to inform patients. Keen to see updated data on subsequent therapies. LBA87 | AZUR-1 | Organ preservation Clinical CR with Dostarlimab monotherapy in dMMR/MSI-H locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). First results from the global registrational trial. Potential to establish an organ-preserving treatment approach for selected patients. LBA29 | IROCAS | Adjuvant intensification RCT Ph3 of adjuvant intensification with mFOLFIRINOX vs mFOLFOX6 in high-risk stage III (T4 and/or N2) colon cancer. Does benefit justify additional toxicity? 788RO | ECLYPse | Beyond progression Ph2 Encorafenib + Cetuximab (EC) + FOLFIRI beyond PD to EC in BRAF V600E mCRC. Particularly interested in pts who previously had IO. 787RO and 789RO are other interesting strategies in this setting. 790RO | QTX3034 | KRAS G12D in CRC Preliminary clinical results. An oral G12D-preferring KRAS inhibitor + Cetuximab ± mFOLFOX6 in patients with KRAS G12D-mutated CRC. Data could inform development of targeted strategies. PANCREATIC CANCER LBA82 | RASolute 302 | RAS(ON) inhibition Additional subgroup analyses from the Ph3 RASolute 302 study. Keen to see data on G12 variant subpopulation (G12D, G12V, and G12R), non-colon 12 mut (G14 and Q61) and RAS wild-type. 3137RO | INCB161734 | G12D plus chemo Ph1 = Safety and efficacy. A novel oral KRAS G12D inhibitor + chemo advanced/metastatic PDAC. Will be interesting to see data on AE grades, interruptions and discontinuations. Are all the KRAS inh the same? LBA85 | HRS-4642 | Perioperative G12D Ph2. Perioperative strategy in KRAS-G12Dm PDAC. Non-covalent KRAS G12D inh + chemo ± adebrelimab (anti-PD-L1). Keen on seeing data on downstaging, % surgery/SBAR, and eradication of micrometastatic disease. LBA83 | AMPLIFY-7P | Adjuvant vaccine Ph2 RCT. Seven-valent mKRAS-specific lymph node targeted amphiphile immunotherapy vs AS in resected PDAC. Innovative immunotherapy. Does treatment intensification in selected population translate into clinical benefit? Abstract titles as listed in the ESMO 2026 programme. Selection reflects titles only; data not yet reviewed.

[Slide 1] October 22, 2026 Myriad Genetics Releases New MONSTAR-SCREEN-3 Data Demonstrating the Potential of Ultra-Sensitive MRD Detection in Colorectal and Pancreatic Cancers Myriad genetics

[Slide 1] ESMO26 TOP TEN BY ONCOALERT GI CANCER OncoAlert360 Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues LBA87 AZUR-1: CLINICAL COMPLETE RESPONSE WITH DOSTARLIMAB MONOTHERAPY IN DMMR/MSI-H LOCALLY ADVANCED RECTAL CANCER: FIRST RESULTS FROM THE GLOBAL REGISTRATIONAL TRIAL LBA32 CHECKMATE 8HW: FINAL OVERALL SURVIVAL RESULTS: NIVOLUMAB PLUS IPILIMUMAB VERSUS NIVOLUMAB OR CHEMOTHERAPY IN MSI-H/DMMR METASTATIC COLORECTAL CANCER 789RO TRIDENTE: RECHALLENGE WITH ENCORAFENIB, BINIMETINIB AND CETUXIMAB IN BRAF V600E-MUTANT METASTATIC COLORECTAL CANCER: PHASE II STUDY LBA79 HERIZON-GEA-01: ZANIDATAMAB + CHEMOTHERAPY ± TISLELIZUMAB FOR FIRST-LINE HER2-POSITIVE ADVANCED/METASTATIC GASTROESOPHAGEAL ADENOCARCINOMA: SECOND INTERIM ANALYSIS 2875O KEYNOTE-975: PEMBROLIZUMAB OR PLACEBO PLUS CONCURRENT DEFINITIVE CHEMORADIOTHERAPY IN ESOPHAGEAL AND GASTROESOPHAGEAL JUNCTION CANCER: PHASE 3 RANDOMIZED STUDY 2877RO GERCOR-GONO DEWI: WATCH-AND-WAIT STRATEGY FOR DOSTARLIMAB IN LOCALIZED DMMR/MSI-H GASTROESOPHAGEAL ADENOCARCINOMA: FIRST INTERIM ANALYSIS OF THE PHASE II STUDY LBA77 G-HOPE-001: ARCOTATUG TAVATECAN (IBI343/TAK-921) VERSUS TREATMENT OF PHYSICIAN'S CHOICE IN PREVIOUSLY TREATED ADVANCED GASTRIC OR GEJ ADENOCARCINOMA: FIRST INTERIM ANALYSIS OF THE RANDOMIZED PHASE 3 STUDY LBA8 HARMONI-GI1: IVONESCIMAB PLUS CHEMOTHERAPY VERSUS DURVALUMAB PLUS CHEMOTHERAPY AS FIRST-LINE TREATMENT FOR ADVANCED BILIARY TRACT CANCER: RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PHASE 3 TRIAL LBA21 ACTICCA-1: ADJUVANT GEMCITABINE PLUS CISPLATIN VERSUS CAPECITABINE IN RESECTED BILIARY TRACT CANCER: PHASE 3 TRIAL LBA22 OPTIMUM: MAINTENANCE OLAPARIB WITH OR WITHOUT DURVALUMAB IN DDR GENE-MUTATED ADVANCED BILIARY TRACT CANCER: RANDOMIZED PHASE 2 STUDY LBA82 RASOLUTE 302: DARAXONRASIB, A RAS(ON) MULTI-SELECTIVE INHIBITOR, VS CHEMOTHERAPY IN PREVIOUSLY TREATED METASTATIC PANCREATIC ADENOCARCINOMA: ADDITIONAL SUBGROUP ANALYSES FROM THE PHASE 3 STUDY LBA83 AMPLIFY-7P: SEVEN-VALENT MKRAS-SPECIFIC LYMPH NODE TARGETED AMPHIPHILE IMMUNOTHERAPY VERSUS OBSERVATION IN RESECTED PANCREATIC DUCTAL ADENOCARCINOMA: RANDOMIZED PHASE 2 STUDY Senior Faculty Dr Morgan Clin Onc | Dr. Eng Med Onc | Dr Westphalen Med Onc | Dr O'Kane Med Onc Faculty Dr Akkus Med Onc | Dr Hornstein Med Onc | Dr Pacheco Med Onc [faculty headshots] WWW.ONCOALERT360.COM

[Slide 1] [OncoAlert 360 logo] OncoAlert360 Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues ONCOALERT 4SIGHT ESMO 2026 | MADRID KEYNOTE-975 Pembrolizumab or placebo plus concurrent definitive chemoradiotherapy in esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer TO BE PRESENTED AT #ESMO2026 BY: MANISH A. SHAH, MD WEILL CORNELL MEDICINE [headshot of Manish A. Shah; Madrid Metropolis building in background] Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 2] Methods DESIGN 1:1 randomization (n=703: 349 pembrolizumab, 354 placebo), double-blind; IA2, data cutoff Jan 21, 2026; median follow-up 47.1 mo (all patients). POPULATION ESCC, EAC or GEJ cancer (cTX N+ M0 or cT2–T4a NX M0), or cTX N+ M1 cervical/upper thoracic EC with supraclavicular lymph node metastases only; ECOG PS 0–1; ineligible for curative surgery but suitable for dCRT. TREATMENT Pembrolizumab or placebo 200 mg Q3W × 8, then 400 mg Q6W × 5, plus site-choice dCRT: FP + RT 50 or 60 Gy, or FOLFOX + RT 50 Gy. ENDPOINTS Dual primary: investigator-assessed EFS and OS in PD-L1 CPS ≥10, CPS ≥1, and all patients. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Results All comparisons: pembrolizumab + dCRT vs placebo + dCRT EFS, CPS ≥10 Median EFS 15.2 vs 14.7 mo; HR 0.97 (95% CI 0.77–1.23); P=0.3994 (significance boundary 0.0193). OS, CPS ≥10 Median OS 32.2 vs 35.0 mo; HR 1.00 (95% CI 0.77-1.30); nominal P=0.5003. TESTING EFS was not positive in CPS ≥10. EFS in CPS ≥1 and all patients, and OS, were therefore not tested for statistical significance, and the study was stopped. SAFETY Grade ≥3 AEs in 100% of patients in each arm. Grade 5 AEs 13% vs 10% (44 vs 37). Discontinuation due to AEs 34% vs 27%. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Conclusion Pembrolizumab + dCRT did not significantly improve EFS in CPS ≥10 Population: untreated, unresectable esophageal or GEJ cancer with PD-L1 CPS ≥10. No new safety signals were observed. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 1] [OncoAlert360 logo] Oncology · For Colleagues · By Colleagues ONCOALERT 4SIGHT ESMO 2026 | MADRID DEWI Trial Watch-and-wait (W&W) strategy for dostarlimab in localized deficient dMMR/MSI-H gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA) TO BE PRESENTED AT #ESMO2026 BY: THIERRY ANDRÉ, MD SORBONNE UNIVERSITÉ [headshot photo; Madrid skyline illustration] Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 2] Methods POPULATION Localized dMMR/MSI-H GEA, clinical stage T2–T4 NxM0, PS 0–1. 60 patients included Jan 2024–Dec 2025; one excluded before treatment. TREATMENT Dostarlimab 500 mg q3w for 4 cycles. cCR assessment at 12 and 24 weeks decides between continuing dostarlimab for 24 weeks with watch-and-wait, or surgery. cCR DEFINITION CR on endoscopy with tumor-free biopsies and normal CT imaging. ENDPOINTS Primary: 1-year cCR rate without GEA surgery (objective >25%; 50% expected). Secondary: survival outcomes and safety. First interim analysis in the first 24 evaluable patients. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Results 1-YEAR cCR 62.5% (15/24); the IDMC recommended continuing enrollment. Median age 65; 18 male, 6 female; esogastric junction 9, stomach 15. OUTCOMES No events (relapse or death) in patients with 1-year cCR; median follow-up 16.20 mo (95% CI 12.22–17.22). Two events in patients without 1-year cCR: one metastatic progression, one postoperative death. SURGERY 9/24 underwent surgery, all R0: yT1N0 (2), yT1N1 (1), yT3N1–2 (4), yT4N0 (2). Becker TRG2 (3), TRG3 (6). Three anastomotic fistulas. SAFETY Grade 3–4 dostarlimab-related AEs in 5 patients (21%). Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Conclusion 62.5% 1-year cCR with dostarlimab at the first interim analysis Setting: localized dMMR/MSI-H GEA. The authors state this enabled organ preservation; an update on all 60 included patients is planned for the meeting. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 1] OncoAlert360 Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues ONCOALERT 4SIGHT ESMO 2026 | MADRID LEAP-012 Phase 3 study of lenvatinib + pembrolizumab vs dual placebo with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for unresectable non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma TO BE PRESENTED AT #ESMO2026 BY: JOSEP M. LLOVET, MD ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI IDIBAPS - HOSPITAL CLÍNIC [headshot photo] [Slide 2] Methods DESIGN 1:1 randomization: TACE + pembrolizumab 400 mg IV Q6W + lenvatinib 12 mg (BW ≥60 kg) or 8 mg (BW <60 kg) PO QD, vs TACE + dual placebo, for ≤2 years. POPULATION Non-metastatic HCC not amenable to curative treatment; liver-only disease with no portal vein invasion; Child-Pugh A; ECOG PS 0–1. 480 patients (237 vs 243). ENDPOINTS Primary: PFS per RECIST v1.1 by BICR, and OS. Secondary: ORR, DOR and TTP per RECIST v1.1 by BICR, and safety. FOLLOW-UP Median follow-up 44.2 mo (range 31.3–62.1); 253 OS events at IA3. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Results OS Median 40.4 (34.4–47.0) vs 40.8 (35.2–45.8) mo; HR 0.98 (95% CI 0.76–1.26). 24/36-month OS 74.4%/55.3% vs 67.5%/55.4%. PFS Median 14.6 (12.6–16.7) vs 10.2 (8.1–12.3) mo; HR 0.70 (95% CI 0.56–0.89). 24/36-month PFS 23.9%/19.1% vs 18.9%/12.4%. RESPONSE & TTP ORR 48.1% vs 33.7% (RECIST v1.1); 71.3% vs 49.4% (mRECIST). Median DOR 14.3 vs 12.6 mo; median TTP 16.6 vs 10.4 mo. SAFETY Grade ≥3 TRAEs 72.2% vs 32.0%; discontinuation due to TRAEs 8.9% vs 1.7%; TRAE-related deaths 4 (1.7%) vs 2 (0.8%). Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Conclusion LEAP-012 met its PFS endpoint but did not show OS benefit The authors state that a median OS of ~40 months sets a new benchmark for trial design in unresectable, non-metastatic HCC, and that the safety profile of lenvatinib + pembrolizumab was consistent with previous reports and earlier LEAP-012 analyses. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 1] [OncoAlert360 logo] OncoAlert360® Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues ONCOALERT 4SIGHT ESMO 2026 | MADRID RAMIRIS FOLFIRI plus ramucirumab versus paclitaxel plus ramucirumab as second- line therapy for taxane-pretreated patients with advanced or metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma TO BE PRESENTED AT #ESMO2026 BY: MAGDALENA SCHECK, MD TUM KLINIKUM RECHTS DER ISAR [headshot photo of presenter; Madrid building illustration; arrow] [Slide 2] Background FOLFIRI + Ramucirumab vs Paclitaxel + Ramucirumab After a Taxane in Advanced GEA: RAMIRIS Phase III International, randomized, investigator-initiated phase II/III (IKF/AIO) Ramucirumab, alone or with paclitaxel, is approved as second-line treatment for advanced GEA. Many patients are pretreated with a taxane and may benefit from a non-cross- resistant chemotherapy backbone, as indicated by results from the trial's phase II part. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Methods DESIGN 1:1 randomization: FOLFIRI + ramucirumab q2w (Arm A) vs paclitaxel (d1, 8, 15 q28d) + ramucirumab q2w (Arm B). POPULATION Taxane-pretreated GEA progressing after a fluoropyrimidine/platinum regimen. 319 enrolled 2019–2024; 317 in ITT (158 vs 159); median age 60; 76% male. ENDPOINTS Co-primary: OS and ORR. Further endpoints: DCR, PFS, quality of life and safety. ANALYSIS Efficacy in the ITT population; safety population N=304. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Results All comparisons: Arm A (FOLFIRI + ramucirumab) vs Arm B (paclitaxel + ramucirumab) OS Median 8.7 vs 7.5 mo; HR 0.95; p=.33 (median follow-up 52 vs 31 mo). No significant difference. ORR & DCR ORR 25.3% vs 22.6%; p=.29. DCR 64% vs 61%. PFS Median 5.5 vs 3.7 mo; HR 0.7; p=.003. SAFETY Grade 3–5 AEs 70% vs 68%. Grade 3/4: neutropenia 17% vs 12%, hypertension 10% vs 8%, anemia 6% in both arms, lung infection 3% vs 6%. ≥1 serious AE: 47% vs 55%. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 1] GI Cancer: Top Trending Abstracts on X Ahead of ESMO 2026 [Legend] ADC / BsAb / IO / CAR-T / pan-RAS, VEGFR-2, FGFR2b inhibitor, Seven mKRAS variants / Somatostatin analogue, Radiopharmaceutical [Column headers (KOLs / AI models)] Daisuke Kotani | Erman Akkus | Sharlene Gill | ChatGPT 5.6 Sol | Gemini 3.8 Flash | Claude Opus 5.5 | Grok 4.7 Date | Abstract ID | Presenter | Phase | Abstract Title | X marks Oct 25 | LBA7 | Rui-Hua Xu | P3 | CLARITY-Gastric 01: Sone-Ve in 2L+ Adv/m Claudin 18.2+ GEC | X: Akkus, Gill, ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Grok Oct 25 | LBA8 | Jian Zhou | P3 | HARMONi-GI1: Ivo + CT vs durva + CT as 1L tx for adv BTC | X: Akkus, Gill, ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | LBA77 | Shitara | P3 | G-HOPE-001: Arcotatug tavatecan vs TPC in previously treated, adv G/GEJA - First interim analysis | X: Akkus, Gill, ChatGPT, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | 2875O | Shah | P3 | KEYNOTE 975: Pembro/pbo + concurr definitive chemoRT in esophageal and GEJ cancer | X: Akkus, Gill, ChatGPT, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | 2877RO | André | P2 | DEWI: W&W strategy for dostarlimab in localized deficient dMMR/MSI-H GEA - First interim analysis | X: Kotani, Akkus, Gill, Gemini, Claude Oct 23 | LBA80 | Ruixing Zhang | P2/P3 | KC-WISE: Anbenitamab + CT for previously treated HER2+ GC/GEJC - Updated OS analysis | X: Kotani, Akkus, Gemini, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | LBA79 | Shitara | P3 | HERIZON-GEA-01: Zani + CT ± TIS for 1L HER2+ adv/mGEA - Second Interim Analysis | X: Kotani, ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | 2878RO | Lorenzen | P3 | RAMIRIS: FOLFIRI + ramucirumab vs pacli + ramucirumab as 2L therapy for taxane-pretreated pts with adv/mGEA - Final Results | X: Kotani, Akkus, Gill, Gemini Oct 24 | LBA21 | Wege | P3 | ACTICCA-1: Adj CT + gem + cis compared to SOC after curative intent resection of cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma | X: Akkus, Gill, Claude, Grok Oct 24 | LBA48 | Kudo | P3 | EMERALD-3: T + D ± L + TACE in eeHCC - Liver function trajectory and post-progression outcomes | X: Akkus, Gill, Gemini, Grok Oct 23 | LBA78 | Gangaram-Panday | – | SANO: Active surveillance vs standard surg after neoadj chemoRT for oesophageal cancer - Long-term results | X: Akkus, Gill, ChatGPT Oct 23 | LBA82 | Wainberg | P3 | RASolute 302: Daraxonrasib vs CT in previously treated mPDAC - Additional subgroup analyses | X: Akkus, Gill, Grok Oct 23 | LBA81 | Dazhi Xu | P3 | LOMAC: Four Months of Adj XELOX vs Six Months in Stage II–IIIB GC | X: Kotani, Akkus, Claude Oct 23 | LBA83 | O'Reilly | P2 | AMPLIFY-7P: Seven-Valent mKRAS-specific Lymph Node Targeted Amphiphile IO vs Observation in Resected PDAC | X: Akkus, ChatGPT, Grok Oct 24 | 459O | Azad | P2/P3 | COMPANION-002: Paclitaxel ± tovecimig in previously treated pts with adv BTC | X: Akkus, Gill, Grok Oct 26 | 1678RO | Llovet | P3 | LEAP-012: Lenva + Pembro vs Dual Pbo + TACE for unresec non-mHCC - Long-term OS Results | X: Akkus, Gill, Claude Oct 23 | 2396RO | Halfdanarson | P1/P2 | 212-Pb-VMT: [212Pb]VMT-α-NET in adv SSTR2+ NETs: Cohorts 1–3 safety and efficacy results | X: Akkus, Gill Oct 23 | 2395RO | Chhajlani | P4 | SAUNA: Concomitant SST Analog use in 2L therapy of gastroenteropancreatic NETs - Survival Results | X: Akkus, Gill Oct 24 | 1679O | Chon | P1 | BGB-B2033-101: BGB-B2033 Monotherapy - First Disclosure of DO and DE Update in Adv HCC | X: Akkus, Gill Oct 24 | LBA32 | Lonardi | P3 | CheckMate 8HW: Nivo + ipi vs nivo/CT in MSI-H/dMMR mCRC - Final OS results | X: Gill, ChatGPT Oct 25 | LBA87 | Cercek | P2 | AZUR-1: Clinical CR + Dostarlimab monotherapy in dMMR/MSI-H LARC - First Results | X: Gill, ChatGPT Oct 26 | 2392O | Panpan Zhang | P1/2 | NCT06157827: Opamtistomig + CT as 1L tx for adv EP-NEC | X: Akkus, Gill Oct 26 | 1680RO | Qi Zhang | P1 | NCT05155189: C-CAR031 in adv HCC - Updated Results | X: Akkus, Gill Oct 23 | 2879RO | Modesto | P2 | ARION: Durva + definitive chemoRT vs definitive chemoRT in LA esophagus carcinoma | X: Akkus Oct 23 | 2883RO | Wainberg | P3, P3 | FORTITUDE-101, FORTITUDE-102: Bemarituzuma in Adv GC/GEJ by FGFR2 Amplification Status - Exploratory Biomarker Analysis | X: Akkus Format and methodology credit: Dr. Mike Thompson [LARVOL logo]

[Slide 1] Key Eligibility Criteria: • MIBC clinical stage cT2-T4aN0-N1 • Participants who have elected bladder preservation • Eligible for CRT • ECOG PS 0-2 → Randomize 2:1 N ~400 Arm A → Sac-TMT 4 mg/kg q2w x 6 + MK-3475A 790 mg q6w x 2 [Induction Therapy] → RT + Radiosensitizing Chemotherapy [Local Therapy] → MK-3475A q6w x 7 [Consolidation Therapy] → Arm B → RT + Radiosensitizing Chemotherapy [Local Therapy] → Efficacy Assessments • CT Scan (*) • Cystoscopy (+/-biopsy) Primary Endpoint: EFS Secondary Endpoint: OS, DMFS, BI-EFS, Time of NMIBC, DSS, Cystectomy rate, Safety and Tolerability

ESMO 2026: 10 GU Clinical Trials I'm Watching Presidential + selected oral / proffered presentations Clinical trials only - translational work excluded. PRESIDENTIAL (2 PRESENTATIONS) 1. VOLGA - Perioperative durvalumab with or without tremelimumab plus neoadjuvant enfortumab vedotin in muscle-invasive bladder cancer | Bladder | Presenter: Thomas B. Powles 2. DASL-HiCaP (ANZUP1801) - Darolutamide with ADT and definitive or salvage locoregional radiation therapy for localized, very high-risk prostate cancer | Prostate | Presenter: Tamim Niazi SELECTED ORAL / PROFFERED (8 PRESENTATIONS) 3. LITESPARK-012 - First-line pembrolizumab + lenvatinib + belzutifan or MK-1308A + lenvatinib in advanced RCC | Kidney | Presenter: Toni K. Choueiri 4. LITESPARK-011 - Final analysis: belzutifan + lenvatinib versus cabozantinib after anti-PD-(L)1 therapy in advanced RCC | Kidney | Presenter: Daniel Y. Heng 5. KEYNOTE-564 - Final protocol-prespecified analysis of adjuvant pembrolizumab versus placebo in clear-cell RCC | Kidney | Presenter: Toni K. Choueiri 6. SWOG S2200 - Cabozantinib with or without atezolizumab in metastatic papillary RCC | Kidney | Presenter: Benjamin L. Maughan 7. KEYNOTE-866 - Perioperative pembrolizumab or placebo plus neoadjuvant cisplatin/gemcitabine in muscle-invasive bladder cancer | Bladder | Presenter: Jens Bedke 8. Phase 3 perioperative nivolumab study - Neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone versus chemotherapy + nivolumab followed by adjuvant nivolumab in muscle-invasive bladder cancer | Bladder | Presenter: Andrea Necchi 9. PEACE-1 - Long-term overall survival with abiraterone acetate + prednisone in de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer | Prostate | Presenter: Karim Fizazi 10. POTOMAC - Durvalumab in combination with BCG induction and maintenance for BCG-naive, high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer | Bladder | Presenter: Maria De Santis Curated from ESMO 2026 presidential, oral and proffered GU sessions. ESMO 2026, Madrid, 23-27 October 2026 @DrChoueiri

[Slide 1] Proffered Paper session 4735O - Perioperative pembrolizumab (pembro) or placebo (pbo) + neoadjuvant cisplatin (cis) and gemcitabine (gem) in participants (pts) with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC): the double-blind, phase 3 KEYNOTE-866 study Speakers Jens Bedke (Stuttgart, Germany) Lecture Time 13:30 - 13:40 Proffered Paper session 4736O - Results from a phase 3 trial of neoadjuvant (neoadj) chemotherapy alone vs in combination with nivolumab followed by postsurgical adjuvant nivolumab in patients (pts) with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) Speakers Andrea Necchi (Milan, Italy) Lecture Time 13:40 - 13:50 Proffered Paper session 4742O - Sacituzumab Govitecan (SG) Combined With Enfortumab Vedotin (EV) and Zimberelimab (ZIM) in Treatment-Naive Metastatic Urothelial Cancer (mUC): Interim Results From Phase 1b TROPHY-U-01 Cohort 7 Speakers Randy Sweis (Chicago, United States of America) Lecture Time 13:50 - 14:00 Proffered Paper session Invited Discussant 4735O, 4736O and 4742O Speakers Robert Jones (Bearsden, United Kingdom) Lecture Time 14:00 - 14:12 [Slide 2] Proffered Paper session 4733O - Perioperative pembrolizumab (pembro) or enfortumab vedotin (EV) plus pembro in pts with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) who are cisplatin-ineligible: ad hoc analysis from KEYNOTE-905 Speakers Anders Ullén (Stockholm, Sweden) Lecture Time 14:22 - 14:32 Proffered Paper session 4734O - ctDNA analysis of the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-B15 trial: neoadjuvant and adjuvant (neoadj-adj) enfortumab vedotin (EV) + pembrolizumab (pembro) for participants (pts) with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) who are eligible for cisplatin Speakers Jonathan A. Chatzkel (Tampa, United States of America) Lecture Time 14:32 - 14:42 Proffered Paper session Invited Discussant 4733O and 4734O Speakers Min Yuen Teo (New York, United States of America, NY) Lecture Time 14:42 - 14:52 Proffered Paper session Q&A and discussion Lecture Time 14:52 - 15:00 [Slide 3] Rapid Oral session 4739RO - Sacituzumab Tirumotecan (Sac-TMT) + Pembrolizumab (Pembro) for Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma (la/mUC): Results From a Phase 2 Study (2870-002/SKB264-II-06) Speakers Xiaojie Bian (Shanghai, China) Lecture Time 10:45 - 10:50 Rapid Oral session 4740RO - Enfortumab Vedotin (EV) With or Without Pembrolizumab (P) as First-Line (1L) Treatment for Cisplatin (cis)-Ineligible Locally Advanced Or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma (la/mUC): Long-Term Follow-up Analysis from EV-103 Cohorts DE/A and K Speakers Jose Pablo Maroto Rey (Barcelona, Spain) Lecture Time 10:50 - 10:55 Rapid Oral session 4749RO - Neoadjuvant Tislelizumab plus Disitamab Vedotin for UTUC: Mid-term Results of the Phase II WUTSUP-02 Trial Speakers Tiancheng Liu (Chengdu, China) Lecture Time 10:55 - 11:00 Rapid Oral session Invited Discussant 4739RO, 4740RO and 4749RO Speakers Britt B. Suelmann (Utrecht, Netherlands) Lecture Time 11:00 - 11:15

[Slide 1] Key Eligibility Criteria: • MIBC clinical stage cT2-T4aN0-N1 • Participants who have elected bladder preservation • Eligible for CRT • ECOG PS 0-2 Randomize 2:1 N ~400 Arm A Sac-TMT 4 mg/kg q2w x 6 + MK-3475A 790 mg q6w x 2 Induction Therapy RT + Radiosensitizing Chemotherapy Local Therapy MK-3475A q6w x 7 Consolidation Therapy Arm B RT + Radiosensitizing Chemotherapy Local Therapy Efficacy Assessments • CT Scan (*) • Cystoscopy (+/-biopsy) Primary Endpoint: EFS Secondary Endpoint: OS, DMFS, BI-EFS, Time of NMIBC, DSS, Cystectomy rate, Safety and Tolerability

[Slide 1] Proffered Paper session 3588O - Phase 1 results of XmAb819, a novel ENPP3 x CD3 bispecific, in advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) Speakers Sumanta K. Pal (Duarte, United States of America) Lecture Time 09:22 - 09:32 Proffered Paper session 3592O - Efficacy and Safety of AK112 (Ivonescimab), a PD-1/VEGF Bispecific Antibody, as First-Line Treatment for Patients with IMDC Favorable-Risk Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma (aRCC): Results from a Phase Ib/II Study Speakers Jun Guo (Beijing, China) Lecture Time 09:32 - 09:42 Proffered Paper session Invited Discussant 3588O and 3592O Speakers Manuela Schmidinger (Vienna, Austria) Lecture Time 09:42 - 09:52 Proffered Paper session Q&A and discussion Lecture Time 09:52 - 10:00 [Slide 2] Proffered Paper session 3586O - First-line pembrolizumab + lenvatinib + belzutifan or MK-1308A + lenvatinib in advanced RCC: randomized open-label phase 3 LITESPARK-012 study Speakers Toni K. Choueiri (Boston, United States of America) Lecture Time 08:30 - 08:40 Proffered Paper session 3587O - Final analysis of the phase 3 LITESPARK-011 study: belzutifan (bel) plus lenvatinib (len) versus cabozantinib (cabo) for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) after anti–PD-(L)1 therapy Speakers Daniel Y. Heng (Calgary, Canada, OH) Lecture Time 08:40 - 08:50 Proffered Paper session LBA88 - PErioperative PEmbrolizumab (P) plus metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) versus MDT alone in patients (pts) with oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma (omRCC): the randomized phase II PE-PE trial. Speakers Roberto Iacovelli (Rome, Italy) Lecture Time 08:50 - 09:00 [Slide 3] 14:01 5G Rapid Oral session Time 14:45 - 16:15 Rapid Oral session 3589RO - Final protocol-prespecified analysis of the phase 3 KEYNOTE-564 trial of adjuvant pembrolizumab versus placebo in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) Speakers Toni K. Choueiri (Boston, United States of America) Lecture Time 14:45 - 14:50 Rapid Oral session 3590RO - Patient reported outcomes in resected renal cell carcinoma: adjuvant durvalumab versus active monitoring in the RAMPART trial Speakers Sophie Merrick (London, United Kingdom) Lecture Time 14:50 - 14:55 Rapid Oral session 3604RO - Diagnostic and Staging Performance of CAIX-Targeted [68Ga]Ga-DPI-4452 PET/CT in Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Prospective Trial Speakers Liangyou Gu (Beijing, China) Lecture Time 14:55 - 15:00 Rapid Oral session Invited Discussant 3589RO, 3590RO and 3604RO Speakers Camillo Guglielmo Porta (Bari, Italy) Lecture Time 15:00 - 15:12 Rapid Oral session [partially clipped at bottom] Close Session Details cslide.ctimeetingtech.com — Private

[Slide 1] [Photo: speaker at a lectern (badge reads 'URO-ONKO FORUM 2026' — partly legible) presenting a slide; four panellists seated] Cisplatin eligible [blue, top — trial name not printed]: GC x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation ; GC + Durva x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Durva x 8 [red check mark] KN-866 NCT03924856: GC x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation ; GC + Pembro x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Pembro x 13 ENERGIZE NCT03661320: GC x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation ; GC + Nivo x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Nivo x [number clipped] [red box around KN-866 and ENERGIZE rows] [orange, bottom — trial name not printed]: EV + Pembro x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | EV x 5 + Pembro x 13 ; GC x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation [red check mark] Cisplatin ineligible KN-905/EV-303 NCT03924895 [red check mark]: EV + Pembro x 3 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | EV x 6 + Pembro x 14 ; No preop therapy | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation Volga NCT04960709 [red box]: Durva + EV x 3 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Durva x 9 ; Durva/Treme + EV x 3 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Treme x 1 + Durva x 9 ; No preop therapy | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Per physician choice Modified from Rosenberg [J.] Presented at ESMO 2025 [... c]ombination with pembro is not registered by EMA f[or the] treatment of cis[platin-eligible] MIBC patients. [bottom line partly obscured by panellists]

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 GU Trials to Watch Presidential + selected oral / proffered presentations ESMO 2026 MADRID 23–27 OCTOBER 2026 17 trials | Prostate 5 | Bladder 6 | Kidney 6 PROSTATE | 5 trials 1 DASL-HiCaP (ANZUP1801) — Darolutamide + ADT with definitive or salvage locoregional radiotherapy in localized, very high-risk prostate cancer. 2 PROTEUS substudy (LBA 53) — Perioperative apalutamide + ADT around radical prostatectomy in high-risk localized prostate cancer. 3 PEACE-1 — Long-term overall survival with abiraterone + prednisone in de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. 4 CAPItello-281 (LBA56) — Capivasertib + abiraterone vs placebo + abiraterone in PTEN-deficient metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: updated OS. 5 2045O — Transcriptome classifier risk stratification and ARPI intensification for clinically very high-risk prostate cancer. BLADDER | 6 trials 6 VOLGA — Perioperative durvalumab ± tremelimumab + neoadjuvant enfortumab vedotin in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. 7 KEYNOTE-866 — Perioperative pembrolizumab or placebo + neoadjuvant cisplatin/gemcitabine in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. 8 Phase 3 perioperative nivolumab study — Neoadjuvant chemotherapy ± nivolumab, followed by adjuvant nivolumab, in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. 9 POTOMAC — Durvalumab + BCG induction and maintenance in BCG-naive, high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. 10 KEYNOTE-905 (4733O) — Perioperative pembrolizumab or enfortumab vedotin + pembrolizumab in cisplatin-ineligible muscle-invasive bladder cancer: ad hoc analysis. 11 KEYNOTE-B15 ctDNA (4734O) — ctDNA analysis of neoadjuvant/adjuvant enfortumab vedotin + pembrolizumab in cisplatin-eligible muscle-invasive bladder cancer. KIDNEY | 6 trials 12 LITESPARK-012 — First-line pembrolizumab + lenvatinib + belzutifan or MK-1308A + lenvatinib in advanced RCC. 13 LITESPARK-011 — Final analysis of belzutifan + lenvatinib versus cabozantinib after anti-PD-(L)1 therapy in advanced RCC. 14 KEYNOTE-564 — Final protocol-prespecified analysis of adjuvant pembrolizumab versus placebo in clear-cell RCC. 15 SWOG S2200 — Cabozantinib ± atezolizumab in metastatic papillary RCC. 16 PE-PE (LBA88) — Perioperative pembrolizumab plus metastasis-directed therapy versus MDT alone in oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma. 17 AK112 / Ivonescimab (3592O) — First-line PD-1/VEGF bispecific antibody in IMDC favorable-risk advanced RCC: phase Ib/II results. CLINICAL TRIALS SHAPING THE NEXT ERA IN GENITOURINARY CANCERS X @dryukselurun [watercolour Madrid skyline illustration]

[Slide 1] Perioperative MIBC Trials: Chemo/IO and ADC/IO Approaches Cis-Eligible Niagara (reported 2024) FDA approval March 2025 EU approval July 2025 GC x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation GC + Durva x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Durva x 8 KN-866 GC x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation GC + Pembro x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Pembro x 13 ENERGIZE GC x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation GC + Nivo x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Nivo x 9 EV-304/KN-B15 (reported: Feb 2026) EV + Pembro x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | EV x 5 + Pembro x 13 GC x 4 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation Cis-Ineligible EV-303/KN-905 (reported 2025; FDA approval Nov 2025) EV + Pembro x 3 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | EV x 6 + Pembro x 14 No preop therapy | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Observation VOLGA Durva + EV x 3 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Durva x 9 Durva/Treme + EV x 3 | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Treme x 1 + Durva x 9 No preop therapy | Radical Cystectomy and PLND | Per physician choice

[Slide 1] Merck European Commission Approves KEYTRUDA® (pembrolizumab) Plus Padcev® (enfortumab vedotin-ejfv) as Perioperative Treatment for Adults With Resectable Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer (MIBC) - Merck.com

Proffered paper 1: Genitourinary tumour, renal and urothelial Date: Fri, 23.10.2026 Chairs: Anja Lorch (Zurich, Switzerland), Axel Bex (London, United Kingdom) Room: Barcelona Auditorium - Hall 9 Time: 13:30 - 15:00

[Slide 1] ESMO CONGRESS 2026 · MADRID · 23–27 OCTOBER | #ESMO2026 GU Oncology: 11 Trials I'm Watching Presidential, late-breaking and proffered papers — sorted by tumour entity PROSTATE 3 trials 1 DASL-HiCaP (ANZUP1801) [PRESIDENTIAL] — Darolutamide + ADT with definitive or salvage locoregional RT in localised, very high-risk prostate cancer. Presenter: Tamim Niazi 2 PROTEUS substudy [LBA 53] — Perioperative apalutamide + ADT around radical prostatectomy in high-risk localised disease. Presenter: Alberto Briganti · Sat 10:15, Proffered Paper 3 PEACE-1 — Long-term overall survival with abiraterone + prednisone in de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. Presenter: Karim Fizazi "PROTEUS substudy (LBA 53) also a potential practice changer." — Prof. Boris Hadaschik, comment on the GU picks BLADDER 4 trials 4 VOLGA [PRESIDENTIAL] — Perioperative durvalumab ± tremelimumab + neoadjuvant enfortumab vedotin in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Presenter: Thomas B. Powles 5 KEYNOTE-866 — Perioperative pembrolizumab or placebo + neoadjuvant cisplatin/gemcitabine in MIBC. Presenter: Jens Bedke 6 Perioperative nivolumab (Ph 3) — Neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone vs chemo + nivolumab, followed by adjuvant nivolumab, in MIBC. Presenter: Andrea Necchi 7 POTOMAC — Durvalumab + BCG induction and maintenance in BCG-naïve, high-risk NMIBC. Presenter: Maria De Santis KIDNEY 4 trials 8 LITESPARK-012 — First-line pembrolizumab + lenvatinib + belzutifan or MK-1308A + lenvatinib in advanced RCC. Presenter: Toni K. Choueiri 9 LITESPARK-011 — Final analysis: belzutifan + lenvatinib vs cabozantinib after anti-PD-(L)1 in advanced RCC. Presenter: Daniel Y. Heng 10 KEYNOTE-564 — Final protocol-prespecified analysis of adjuvant pembrolizumab vs placebo in clear-cell RCC. Presenter: Toni K. Choueiri 11 SWOG S2200 — Cabozantinib ± atezolizumab in metastatic papillary RCC. Presenter: Benjamin L. Maughan Prof. Dr. Axel S. Merseburger Department of Urology · UKSH Campus Lübeck Selection builds on Toni Choueiri's GU picks + PROTEUS added · clinical trials only

[Slide 1] available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: euoncology.europeanurology.com eau European Association of Urology [EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY journal cover thumbnail] Clinical Outcomes of Bladder-sparing Management Versus Early Radical Cystectomy in cT1 Micropapillary Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Sagar R. Patel a, Mikael Rauf a, Yimin Geng b, David Hinojosa-Gonzalez c, Joseph B. Black a, Taeweon Lee a, Amanda A. Myers d, Charles Guo e, Roger Li f, Joshua J. Meeks g, Piyush Agarwal h, Stephen Williams i, Omar Alhalabi j, Andrea Necchi k, Laura S. Mertens l, Paolo Gontero m, Neema Navai a, Ashish M. Kamat a,*

[Slide 1] Fri 23 Oct | Sat 24 Oct | Sun 25 Oct [Fri 23 Oct] 13:30 · Rapid oral - ctDNA and PROs - 2219RO to 2222RO 15:15 · Posters - Imaging and PSA - 2046P 2048P 2272P 2287P 16:15 · Symposium - Emerging therapies - AR, IO, RLT, new targets [Sat 24 Oct] 10:15 · Proffered paper - PEACE-1 long-term OS - 2215O · mHSPC [Sun 25 Oct] 16:30 · Presidential - DASL-HiCaP - LBA4 · very high-risk Legend: [red] Headline orals | [green] Rapid oral, posters and symposium

[Slide 1] PERIOPERATIVE IMMUNOTHERAPY IN MIBC Cross-trial comparison | Phase III Study populations were not identical; cross-trial comparisons are descriptive, not head-to-head. NIAGARA (Durvalumab) N = 1,063 Durvalumab arm: 533 | Control arm: 530 INCLUSION CRITERIA • Adults; resectable MIBC cT2–T4a, N0/1, M0 • Urothelial or mixed transitional histology • Candidate for radical cystectomy • ECOG 0–1 • CrCl ≥40 mL/min • No prior systemic chemotherapy/immunotherapy for MIBC TREATMENT ARMS ARM A (n = 533): Durvalumab + gemcitabine/cisplatin × 4 cycles → radical cystectomy → adjuvant durvalumab × 8 cycles ARM B (n = 530): Gemcitabine/cisplatin × 4 cycles → radical cystectomy; no adjuvant treatment KEY RESULTS Pathological complete response (pCR) 33.8% vs 25.8% (formal analysis; not statistically significant) Exploratory later reanalysis: 37.3% vs 27.5% Event-free survival (EFS) HR 0.68 (95% CI 0.56–0.82); P < 0.001 24-month EFS: 67.8% vs 59.8% Overall survival (OS) HR 0.75 (95% CI 0.59–0.93); P = 0.0106 24-month OS: 82.2% vs 75.2% KEYNOTE-866 (Pembrolizumab) N = 907 Pembrolizumab arm: 453 | Control arm: 454 INCLUSION CRITERIA • Adults; MIBC T2–T4aN0M0 or T1–T4aN1M0 • ≥50% urothelial histology • Clinically non-metastatic • Eligible for radical cystectomy + pelvic lymph-node dissection • ECOG 0–1 • Adequate organ function • Cisplatin eligible • No prior systemic therapy for MIBC TREATMENT ARMS ARM A (n = 453): Pembrolizumab + gemcitabine/cisplatin × 4 cycles → surgery → adjuvant pembrolizumab × 13 cycles ARM B (n = 454): Placebo + gemcitabine/cisplatin × 4 cycles → surgery → adjuvant placebo × 13 cycles KEY RESULTS Pathological complete response (pCR) 44.4% vs 35.8% (estimated difference 8.9 points; 95% CI 2.5–15.1) Event-free survival (EFS) HR 0.88 (95% CI 0.71–1.10); P = 0.1366 Median EFS: 74.1 mo vs not reached (NR) Overall survival (OS) HR 1.00 (95% CI 0.79–1.27) Not formally tested in this analysis CA017-078 (Nivolumab) N = 653 Nivolumab arm: 325 | Control arm: 328 INCLUSION CRITERIA • Adults with previously untreated resectable MIBC • Eligible for radical cystectomy and agreed to surgery • ECOG 0–1 • No clinically significant node-positive or metastatic disease • No prior systemic therapy or radiotherapy for bladder cancer • Note: trial protocol included multiple arms overall, but the displayed abstract compares the nivolumab + GC arm with GC control. TREATMENT ARMS ARM A (n = 325): Nivolumab + gemcitabine/cisplatin × 4 cycles → surgery → adjuvant nivolumab × 9 cycles ARM B (n = 328): Gemcitabine/cisplatin × 4 cycles → surgery; no adjuvant nivolumab in control arm KEY RESULTS Pathological complete response (pCR) 39.1% vs 29.6% Event-free survival (EFS) HR 0.94 (95.74% CI 0.71–1.25); P = 0.67 Median EFS: not reached (NR) vs 67.6 mo Overall survival (OS) HR 0.88 (95% CI 0.64–1.21) Immature Primary endpoints not statistically significant KEY TAKEAWAY Similar ~9–10 percentage-point pCR gains; only NIAGARA demonstrated statistically significant EFS and OS benefit in the reported analysis. GC = gemcitabine/cisplatin. Eligibility criteria are concise summaries, not full protocols. Arm order is experimental vs control. [footer partially cut off]

[Slide 1] Perioperative IMFINZI® (durvalumab) plus neoadjuvant enfortumab vedotin granted Priority Review in the US for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer

[Slide 1] MADRID 2026 ESMO Liquid Biopsy oral presentations selection at #ESMO26 [X] @isliquidbiopsy @RobertoBoreaMD [LinkedIn] InternationalSocietyOfLiquidBiopsy ISLB INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF LIQUID BIOPSY Abstract | Tumor Type | Title | Presenter | Location | Day&Time 2219RO | mCSPC | Utility of ctDNA tumor fraction (TF) as a prognostic biomarker in TALAPRO-3: phase 3 study of talazoparib (TALA) + enzalutamide (ENZA) vs placebo (PBO) + ENZA in patients (pts) with homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene-mutated metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) | Arun Azad (Australia) | Bilbao Auditorium Hall 3 | Fri, 23.10.26 14:02 - 14:07 4734O | Bladder Cancer | ctDNA analysis of the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-B15 trial: neoadjuvant and adjuvant (neoadj-adj) enfortumab vedotin (EV) + pembrolizumab (pembro) for participants (pts) with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) who are eligible for cisplatin | Jonathan Chatzkel (USA) | Barcelona Auditorium Hall 9 | Fri, 23.10.26 14:32 - 14:42 540RO | TNBC | Ultrasensitive monitoring of early ctDNA dynamics during neoadjuvant treatment in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer: Pre-interim results from the B-STRONGER-I study | Carlos Barcenas (USA) | Alicante Auditorium Hall 6 | Fri, 23.10.26 16:47 - 16:52 LBA73 | NSCLC | PACE-LUNG: A multicenter, single-arm, phase II clinical trial evaluating the efficacy of additional chemotherapy for patients with EGFRm NSCLC with the continued presence of plasma ctDNA EGFRm at week 3 after start of osimertinib first-line treatment (AIO-TRK-0422/ass) | Martin Sebastian (Germany) | Almeria Auditorium Hall 9 | Sat, 24.10.26 08:30 - 08:35 2719RO | NSCLC | FLAURA2: Analysis of on-treatment plasma EGFRm dynamics and associated clinical outcomes in patients (pts) with EGFRm advanced NSCLC treated with first-line (1L) osimertinib (osi) ± platinum-pemetrexed (plat-pem) | David Planchard (France) | Almeria Auditorium Hall 9 | Sat, 24.10.26 08:35 - 08:40 2636RO | NSCLC | Characterizing resistance mechanisms and predictors of early progression and long-term response to lorlatinib: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analyses from the CROWN study | Ben Solomon (Australia) | Almeria Auditorium Hall 9 | Sat, 24.10.26 09:05 - 09:10 787RO | mCRC | Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA)-guided re-treatment (re-tx) with encorafenib and cetuximab (EC) in patients (pts) with chemorefractory BRAFV600E mutated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): The proof-of-concept single arm phase II BRICKET trial by GONO | Marco Maria Germani (Italy) | Alicante Auditorium Hall 6 | Sat, 24.10.26 14:45 - 14:50 LBA36 | Endometrial Cancer | Clinical utility of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) for participants with resected, high-risk dMMR endometrial cancer (EC) receiving adjuvant treatment: Results from the ENGOT-en11/GOG-3053/KEYNOTE-B21 study | Lubomir Bodnar (Poland) | Barcelona Auditorium Hall 9 | Sat, 24.10.26 14:55 - 15:05 4244RO | NSCLC | NeoCOAST-2: Association of ctDNA clearance with clinical outcomes in a global platform phase 2 perioperative trial | Tina Cascone (USA) | Leon Auditorium Hall 4 | Sun, 25.10.26 08:30 - 08:35 LBA59 | CSCC | C-POST phase 3 trial of adjuvant (adj) cemiplimab (cemi) vs placebo (pbo) for high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC): Updated overall survival (OS) and outcomes from circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) analyses | Danny Rischin (Australia) | Granada Auditorium Hall 4 | Sun, 25.10.26 10:42 - 10:47 LBA94 | NSCLC | Error-corrected plasma whole-genome sequencing for personalised and tumour-agnostic minimal residual disease detection in TRACERx | Jonathan Wan (UK) | Cordoba Auditorium Hall 4 | Sun, 25.10.26 14:45 - 14:55 LBA35 | Lung Cancer | Tumor intrinsic and extrinsic origins of circulating genomic and proteomic biomarkers for early detection of lung cancer | Victor Velculescu (USA) | Granada Auditorium Hall 4 | Sun, 25.10.26 14:45 - 14:55 1536RO | HNSCC | ctDNA analysis of the phase 3 KEYNOTE-412 trial: Pembrolizumab (pembro) or placebo (pbo) + concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LA HNSCC) | Jean-Pascal Machiels (Belgium) | Madrid Auditorium Hall 4 | Sun, 25.10.26 14:50 - 14:55 4236O | CRC | Clinical significance of ultrasensitive ctDNA detection for molecular residual disease assessment in resectable colorectal cancer in MONSTAR-SCREEN-3 | Yuichiro Tsukada (Japan) | Cordoba Auditorium Hall 4 | Sun, 25.10.26 14:55 - 15:05 LBA62 | NSCLC | ctDNA clearance (CL) during neoadjuvant treatment (neoadj Tx) and its association with outcomes in patients (pts) with resectable/borderline resectable stage IIB-IIIB NSCLC from MDT-BRIDGE | Jonathan Spicer (Canada) | Burgos Auditorium Hall 3 | Mon, 26.10.26 10:35 - 10:40 1769RO | Breast Cancer | CTC characterization with the DETECT CTC score predicts therapy response in triple-positive aBC: Translational results of the phase III DETECT V study | Kerstin Pfister (Germany) | Alicante Auditorium Hall 6 | Mon, 26.10.26 11:17 - 11:22 1151RO | Multi-cancer | Efficiency and safety of cancer signal origin (CSO)-guided diagnostic workups following multi-cancer early detection (MCED) testing: Results from PATHFINDER 2 (PF2) | Dax Kurbegov (USA) | Salamanca Auditorium Hall 10 | Mon, 26.10.26 15:17 - 15:22

[Slide 1] Event-free survival probability HR 1.33 (95% CI 0.87–2.03) Log-rank p=0.181 Time (months) Legend: EV + pembrolizumab | Pembrolizumab Number at risk P: 155, 135, 126, 120, 115, 110, 104, 102 EVP: 170, 140, 116, 56, 56, 42, 35, 3 Time (months) [0, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42] [Survival data captured as a table — no point estimates read from the curve] Endpoint: Event-free survival (reconstructed IPD indirect comparison) EV + pembrolizumab (EVP) | 170 | not printed Pembrolizumab (P) | 155 | not printed HR: 1.33 HR CI: 0.87–2.03 P: Log-rank p=0.181 Note: n taken from the number-at-risk row at time 0. Reference arm for the HR is not stated on the figure.

[Slide 2] The Uromigos™ Prostate Cancer. Who benefits from treatment intensification? High-risk prostate cancer isn't one uniform patient population. Identifying who needs additional systemic treatment remains a central question. DASL-HiCaP New evidence on adding darolutamide in very high-risk localized disease. PROTEUS A subgroup analysis comparing intensified treatment around surgery with prostatectomy alone. PEACE-1 Long-term survival findings that may help clarify the role of prostate-directed radiotherapy in metastatic disease. Key theme: Patient selection may be just as important as the treatment being added. [prostate anatomy illustration] [Slide 3] The Uromigos™ Kidney Cancer. Is there a future for triplet therapy? Triplet therapy continues to evolve in advanced kidney cancer. New data at ESMO 2026 may help define which patients benefit most and how to manage associated toxicity. LITESPARK-012 First-line belzutifan + pembrolizumab + lenvatinib in advanced clear cell RCC. Treatment sequences How emerging data may inform optimal sequencing and patient selection. Toxicity management Balancing efficacy with tolerability remains a key consideration. Key theme: Better patient selection and thoughtful toxicity management will be essential. [kidney anatomy illustration] [Slide 4] The Uromigos™ Bladder Cancer. How much treatment is enough? At ESMO 2026, new data will help inform how to optimize perioperative strategies in bladder cancer, including the right intensity and sequencing of treatment. VOLGA Perioperative durvalumab + chemotherapy in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. KEYNOTE-905 Perioperative pembrolizumab + chemotherapy and long-term outcomes. Treatment decisions Emerging data may help refine who benefits from perioperative therapy and how to balance efficacy with toxicity. Key theme: Finding the right patients — and the right amount of treatment — remains critical. [bladder anatomy illustration]

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 TOP 10 GU CANCER TRIALS TO WATCH Pre-congress watchlist | Grouped by GU subspecialty 23-27 October 2026 | Madrid, Spain PROSTATE CANCER 1 DASL-HiCaP - Darolutamide + ADT + RT in very high-risk localized prostate cancer 2 PROTEUS - Perioperative apalutamide + ADT in high-risk localized prostate cancer 3 CAPItello-281 - Updated OS with capivasertib + abiraterone in PTEN-deficient mHSPC 4 PEACE-1 - Long-term OS benefit with abiraterone in de novo mCSPC BLADDER / UROTHELIAL CANCER 5 VOLGA - Perioperative durvalumab ± tremelimumab with neoadjuvant enfortumab vedotin in cisplatin-ineligible MIBC 6 KEYNOTE-866 - Perioperative pembrolizumab + gem/cis in cisplatin-eligible MIBC 7 ENERGIZE / CA017-078 - Perioperative nivolumab + cisplatin-based chemotherapy in MIBC KIDNEY CANCER (RCC) 8 LITESPARK-011 - Belzutifan + lenvatinib vs cabozantinib after prior PD-(L)1 in advanced RCC 9 LITESPARK-012 - Belzutifan- or quavonlimab-containing first-line regimens with pembrolizumab + lenvatinib in advanced RCC 10 KEYNOTE-564 - Final prespecified analysis of adjuvant pembrolizumab in clear-cell RCC @DrRishabhOnco OTHER GU ABSTRACTS TO WATCH: PE-PE | KEYNOTE-B15 | TALAPRO-3 | NIAGARA | SWOG S2200 [Madrid skyline line-art illustrations]

[Slide 1] NIAGARA vs KEYNOTE-866 Same Cancer. Different Trial Outcomes. MV Onco [Cartoon: bladder illustration; left stage - physician in 'DURVA' lab coat holding a trophy; right stage - physician in 'PEMBRO' lab coat holding a sheet reading 'Higher pCR ✓' with a histology image] NIAGARA EFS improved ✓ OS improved ✓ POSITIVE TRIAL KEYNOTE-866 EFS endpoint not met ✗ NEGATIVE PRIMARY ENDPOINT Better pCR ≠ Proven Survival Benefit Separate trials. Not a head-to-head comparison. [Slide 2] KEYNOTE-866 | ESMO 2026 Does Adding Pembrolizumab Improve Outcomes in Bladder Cancer? MV Onco 01 - WHAT WAS THE QUESTION? In muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC): Does adding pembrolizumab to chemotherapy before surgery and continuing it after surgery improve outcomes? 02 - WHO WERE THE PATIENTS? • 907 patients • Cisplatin-eligible MIBC • ECOG 0-1 • Randomized Phase III trial. 03 - WHAT WAS COMPARED? Standard treatment: Gemcitabine + cisplatin x 4 cycles → Radical cystectomy → Placebo Experimental treatment: Same chemotherapy + pembrolizumab → Radical cystectomy → Pembrolizumab x 13 cycles 04 - WHAT DID WE WANT TO IMPROVE? Primary endpoint: • Event-free survival (EFS) Other important outcomes: • Pathological complete response (pCR) • Overall survival (OS) TAKE-HOME Can adding immunotherapy before and after surgery improve long-term outcomes? That was the KEYNOTE-866 question. [Slide 3] KEYNOTE-866 | ESMO 2026 Better Tumour Response. But Better Survival? MV Onco 01 DID MORE TUMOURS DISAPPEAR? Pathological complete response (pCR) • Pembrolizumab: 44.4% • Placebo: 35.8% → Yes - higher pCR with pembrolizumab. → But pCR was not formally tested. 02 DID PATIENTS REMAIN EVENT-FREE LONGER? Event-free survival • HR 0.88 • P = 0.1366 → No statistically significant benefit. → This was the primary endpoint. 03 DID PATIENTS LIVE LONGER? Overall survival • HR 1.00 • Median OS not reached in either arm. → No demonstrated survival advantage. → OS was not formally tested. 04 WHAT ABOUT TOXICITY? Grade 3-5 adverse events: • Pembrolizumab: 80.2% • Placebo: 75.1% → Numerically more severe toxicity with pembrolizumab. TAKE-HOME Better pCR ≠ Proven Survival Benefit • KEYNOTE-866 failed to meet its primary EFS endpoint. • No demonstrated EFS or OS advantage with perioperative pembrolizumab. • Higher pCR alone is insufficient to change practice.

[Slide 1] ESMO CONGRESS 2026 Anticipated Highlights Madrid · October 23-27 1 INTerpath-001 · LBA1 · Sat Presidential I Intismeran plus pembrolizumab, resected IIB-IV melanoma. First phase 3 individualized neoantigen win: recurrence risk cut 42%. 2 VOLGA · LBA2 · Sat Presidential I Perioperative durvalumab plus neoadjuvant EV in cisplatin-ineligible MIBC. EFS/OS positive at interim; FDA priority review. 3 LITESPARK-011 · 3587O · Renal proffered Final: belzutifan plus lenvatinib held PFS post-immunotherapy in ccRCC; OS non-significant. QoL 3595RO may shape sequencing. 4 LITESPARK-012 · 3586O · Renal proffered First-line belzutifan combinations vs pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib in ccRCC. Missed PFS and OS endpoints. 5 DASL-HiCaP · LBA4 · Prostate late-breaking Interim: darolutamide plus ADT with radiotherapy in very-high-risk localized prostate cancer. 6 CAPItello-281 · LBA56 · Prostate late-breaking Updated OS: capivasertib plus abiraterone in PTEN-deficient metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. 7 Perioperative bladder cancer · Fri orals KEYNOTE-866, ENERGIZE, and KEYNOTE-905 ad hoc: refining immunotherapy around cystectomy. 8 AI in oncology · Fri 10:15 AM + LBA20 Sat Educational session on digital health and AI, Barcelona Hall 9 Friday morning, plus the Agendia AI digital pathology late-breaker, Bilbao Hall 3 Saturday 2:45 PM. Cross-tumor practice changers first, then GU depth · ESMO 2026, Madrid

[Slide 1] Friday, 23 October 2026 Time | Session | Room | GU focus / key abstracts 13:30–15:00 | Proffered Paper 1: GU tumours, renal and urothelial | Barcelona Aud. – Hall 9 | Bladder/urothelial — KEYNOTE-866 perioperative pembro ; neoadj chemo ± nivolumab; TROPHY-U-01 Cohort 7 SG+EV+zimberelimab; KEYNOTE-905; KEYNOTE-B15 ctDNA 13:30–15:00 | Rapid Oral: GU tumours, prostate, penile and testis | Bilbao Aud. – Hall 3 | Penile — neoadj toripalimab+chemo; Testis/GCT — ixotatug vedotin, Claudin-6 ADC; Prostate — KEYNOTE-365 cohort I NEPC; liquid-biopsy/CH vs HRR; TALAPRO-3 ctDNA; PROMPT; CCTG PR21 QoL Lu-177-PSMA vs docetaxel; TALAPRO-3 PROs; CAPItello-281 OS 14:45–16:15 | Rare GU cancers | Granada Aud. – Hall 4 | Urachal carcinoma; small-cell NE; squamous; papillary RCC; unclassifiable RCC 16:15–17:45 | Emerging therapeutic in PCa | Bilbao Aud. – Hall 3 | Prostate — novel AR therapies; immune-based therapy; radioligand therapy; ADCs 16:30–18:15 | Presidential Symposium I | Alicante Aud. – Hall 6 | Bladder — VOLGA perioperative durvalumab ± treme + neoadj EV in MIBC (LBA2, 16:54); Prostate — DASL-HiCaP darolutamide + ADT + RT in very high-risk localized disease (LBA4, 17:42) [Slide 2] Saturday, 24 October 2026 Time | Session | Room | GU focus / key abstracts 10:15–11:45 | Proffered Paper: GU tumours, prostate, penile and testis | Barcelona Aud. – Hall 9 | Prostate — PEACE-1 long-term OS abiraterone (2215O); JNJ-6143 oral AR PROTAC (2216O); PROTEUS substudy perioperative apalutamide (LBA53); transcriptome classifier + ARPI in very high-risk disease (2045O) 10:15–11:45 | Rapid Oral 1: GU tumours, renal and urothelial | Bilbao Aud. – Hall 3 | Bladder/urothelial — POTOMAC durvalumab+BCG in NMIBC (4737RO); KEYNOTE-B15 HRQoL (4738RO); disitamab vedotin+gem in HER2+ MIBC (4748RO); Sac-TMT+pembro (4739RO); EV-103 cohorts (4740RO); WUTSUP-02 UTUC (4749RO); NIAGARA molecular subtypes (4741RO); GDFather-NEO nivolumab ± visugromab (4757RO) [Slide 3] Sunday, 25 October 2026 Time | Session | Room | GU focus / key abstracts 08:30–10:00 | Proffered Paper 2: GU tumours, renal and urothelial | Almeria Aud. – Hall 9 | Kidney/RCC — LITESPARK-012 1L pembro+lenvatinib+belzutifan (3586O); LITESPARK-011 final analysis (3587O); PE-PE perioperative pembro + MDT in oligomet RCC (LBA88); XmAb819 ENPP3×CD3 bispecific (3588O); ivonescimab PD-1/VEGF (3592O) 10:15–11:45 | Emerging new systemic therapies for RCC | Bilbao Aud. – Hall 3 | Kidney/RCC — HIF2α agents; CAR-T/bispecifics/new ICIs; ADCs; vaccines 14:45–16:15 | Rapid Oral 2: GU tumours, renal and urothelial | Barcelona Aud. – Hall 9 | Kidney/RCC — KEYNOTE-564 final prespecified analysis adjuvant pembro (3589RO); RAMPART PROs (3590RO); CAIX [68Ga]DPI-4452 PET/CT (3604RO); SWOG S2200 papillary RCC (3591RO); REPRINT EV+pembro collecting-duct/medullary (3612RO); UCL70802 anti-CD70 CAR-T (3615RO); plasma KIM-1 (3593RO); CARE1 PD-L1 (3594RO); LITESPARK-011 HRQoL (3595RO)

[Slide 1] Merck European Commission Approves KEYTRUDA® (pembrolizumab) Plus Padcev® (enfortumab vedotin-ejfv) as Perioperative Treatment for Adults With Resectable Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer (MIBC) - Merck.com

[Slide 1] PEACE-1 | ESMO 2026 Does Triplet Therapy Improve Survival? The Long-Term Update MV Onco 01 - WHAT CHANGED? Same PEACE-1 trial. Longer follow-up. 2022 → 4.4 years follow-up ESMO 2026 → 7.7 years follow-up Now we have more mature survival data. 02 - WHAT WAS COMPARED? 710 patients in the docetaxel-based group. Doublet: ADT + Docetaxel versus Triplet: ADT + Docetaxel + Abiraterone 03 - DID PATIENTS LIVE LONGER? Updated median overall survival: Doublet → 4.4 YEARS Triplet → 6.2 YEARS NEARLY 22 MONTHS LONGER with triplet therapy. 04 - DOES THE BENEFIT LAST? At 8 years: Doublet → 27% ALIVE Triplet → 40% ALIVE Approximately 13 more patients alive per 100 treated. TAKE-HOME → Adding abiraterone improves survival. → The benefit persists with long-term follow-up.

[Slide 1] KEYNOTE-B15 | ESMO 2026 The ctDNA Detective Story MV Onco [Cartoon: detective physician with magnifying glass over two blood tubes; speech bubble: "I can predict RISK... not prescribe the NEXT MOVE!"; characters labelled EV, PEMBRO, CHEMOTHERAPY] EV + PEMBRO: 82.1% CLEARED ✓ CHEMOTHERAPY: 66.7% CLEARED ctDNA: PROGNOSTIC ✓ | PREDICTIVE ? [Slide 2] KEYNOTE-B15 | ESMO 2026 Does EV + Pembrolizumab Clear ctDNA Better? MV Onco 01 - WHAT WAS STUDIED? • KEYNOTE-B15 / EV-304 • 808 patients with cisplatin-eligible muscle-invasive bladder cancer. • 405 → EV + pembrolizumab • 403 → Cisplatin + gemcitabine • Perioperative treatment with radical cystectomy. 02 - WHAT WAS THE QUESTION? • Can EV + pembrolizumab eliminate circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) more effectively than chemotherapy? • ctDNA measured using the Signatera assay. 03 - WHAT HAPPENED TO ctDNA? Patients remaining ctDNA-positive: • Before treatment: EV + Pembro: 52.4% | Chemotherapy: 56.8% • Before surgery: EV + Pembro: 13.0% | Chemotherapy: 19.7% • After surgery: EV + Pembro: 4.8% | Chemotherapy: 13.5% [Illustration: bladder with two blood tubes labelled EV + PEMBRO and CHEMOTHERAPY] Less detectable ctDNA with EV + Pembro (symbolic depiction, not individual patient samples) 04 - THE MOST IMPORTANT RESULT ctDNA CLEARANCE • 82.1% - EV + Pembrolizumab • 66.7% - Chemotherapy • 15.4 percentage points higher with EV + pembrolizumab. TAKE-HOME • EV + pembrolizumab achieves greater ctDNA clearance and lower postsurgical ctDNA positivity than cisplatin-gemcitabine. Exploratory biomarker analysis. ctDNA negativity does not necessarily mean cure. [Slide 3] KEYNOTE-B15 | ESMO 2026 Does ctDNA Status Predict Better Outcomes? MV Onco 01 - DOES ctDNA STATUS MATTER? YES. Patients with detectable ctDNA had poorer outcomes. ctDNA-negative patients had: • Better event-free survival (EFS). • Higher pathological complete response (pCR). Observed in both treatment arms. [Illustration: ctDNA negative → Lower recurrence risk; ctDNA positive → Higher recurrence risk] 02 - WHAT IF ctDNA WAS POSITIVE BEFORE TREATMENT? EV + Pembrolizumab vs Chemotherapy EFS HR: 0.54 95% CI: 0.37-0.80 Approximately 46% lower hazard of an EFS event with EV + pembrolizumab. 03 - WHAT IF ctDNA WAS NEGATIVE BEFORE TREATMENT? EV + Pembrolizumab vs Chemotherapy EFS HR: 0.68 95% CI: 0.37-1.26 Favourable point estimate. But confidence interval crosses 1. 04 - WHAT ABOUT ctDNA AFTER SURGERY? EV + Pembrolizumab vs Chemotherapy ctDNA-positive: EFS HR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.30-1.35 ctDNA-negative: EFS HR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.29-0.81 Treatment effect estimates favour EV + pembrolizumab in both groups. TAKE-HOME • ctDNA status is prognostic. • Detectable ctDNA identifies patients with poorer outcomes. • EV + pembrolizumab shows favourable EFS estimates across ctDNA subgroups. Small scientific caution: • Exploratory subgroup analysis. Some confidence intervals cross 1; differential treatment benefit by ctDNA status is not established. [Slide 4] KEYNOTE-B15 | ESMO 2026 PART 3 - Can ctDNA Guide Treatment Decisions? MV Onco 01 IS ctDNA PROGNOSTIC? YES ✓ • ctDNA-positive → Poorer outcomes. • ctDNA-negative → Better outcomes. • ctDNA clearance → Associated with improved EFS and pCR. • ctDNA helps estimate recurrence risk. 02 IS ctDNA PREDICTIVE? NOT ESTABLISHED • Does ctDNA identify who benefits MORE from EV + pembrolizumab? Not proven. • EV + pembrolizumab showed favourable EFS estimates across ctDNA subgroups. • Prognostic ≠ Predictive. 03 CAN WE CHANGE TREATMENT BASED ON ctDNA? NOT YET • ctDNA-negative after surgery? → Cannot safely omit adjuvant treatment based on this result alone. • ctDNA-positive after surgery? → No validated ctDNA-guided escalation strategy from this analysis. • ctDNA negativity ≠ Cure. [Illustration: physician holding a ctDNA report; signpost RISK ESTIMATION ✓ / TREATMENT SELECTION ?] A useful compass, not yet a treatment roadmap. 04 WHAT ARE THE LIMITATIONS? • Exploratory biomarker analysis. • Not all patients had evaluable ctDNA. • Small postsurgical ctDNA-positive subgroups. • No randomized ctDNA-guided treatment decisions. ↳ Clinical utility requires prospective validation. TAKE-HOME ☑ ctDNA is a promising prognostic biomarker in MIBC. ☑ But it is NOT yet validated to select, escalate or omit perioperative treatment. ☑ Better molecular clearance ≠ Proof that ctDNA-guided treatment improves survival.

[Slide 1] VOLGA (Imfinzi + neoadjuvant EV only) • Neoadjuvant: 3 cycles (21 days each) of durvalumab 1500 mg Day 1 + EV 1.25 mg/kg Days 1 and 8. • Adjuvant: 9 cycles (28 days each) of durvalumab 1500 mg Day 1 only. No EV after surgery. cancernetwork.com EV + pembrolizumab (KEYNOTE-905/EV-303) • Neoadjuvant: 3 cycles (21 days each) of pembrolizumab 200 mg Day 1 + EV 1.25 mg/kg Days 1 and 8. • Adjuvant: 6 more cycles of EV + pembrolizumab, then pembrolizumab monotherapy to complete 17 total pembrolizumab cycles (~1 year). Total EV = 9 cycles. nejm.org [clipped last line:] The practical difference is that VOLGA stops EV after[...]

[Slide 1] Acknowledgements @WyattLab Vancouver Prostate Centre Andrew Murtha Asli Munzur Catherine Wang Cecily Bernales David Müller Grainne Donnellan Jack Bacon Jan Pieter Vanwelkenhuyzen John Pham Karan Parekh Kamal Azzam Maria Stephenson Melissa Koudjanian Ruby Liao Sarah Ng Sofie Tolmeijer Tiffany Xie Zoe Shong + recent alumni: E Kwan, G Vandekerkh[obscured], … Warner, E Ritch, T Sumiyoshi, K Rostin, [obscured] Kim Chi; BC Cancer Corinne Maurice-Dror Bernie Eigl Matti Annala; U of Tampere Joonatan Sipola Tuomo Virtanen Jussi Nikkola Matti Nykter Felix Feng; UCSF David Quigley Martin Gleave; UBC Peter Black Nathan Lack Gillian Vandekerkhove Nicolette Fonseca; Uvic Piet Ost; UGent Niven Mehra; RadboudUMC Nielka van Erp David Takeda; NCI/NIH ANZUP investigators Michael Hofman; Arun Azad Ian Davis Ed Kwan Shahneen Sandhu Louise Emmett Andre Bergman & Wilbert Zwart Thank you to all patients and their families! [funder logos: Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, BC Cancer Foundation, Movember, Canadian Cancer Society, Canadian Cancer Trials Group, CIHR IRSC, Prostate Cancer Foundation, BCAN, Cancer Research Society] alexander.wyatt@ubc.ca blogs.ubc.ca/wyattlab VANCOUVER PROSTATE CENTRE BC CANCER THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA [photo: presenter at podium in front of screen]

[Slide 1] LITESPARK-012 | ESMO 2026 Why Did Two Triplets Fail in Advanced RCC? MV Onco The Idea Pembrolizumab + lenvatinib works well in advanced ccRCC. Can adding another mechanism do better? [Signpost] PFS / OS / Tumor response [Cartoon: three teams of drug characters crossing a crumbling bridge toward a boulder labeled "Advanced ccRCC"] Arm A Triplet: Pembro + Lenvatinib + Belzutifan (HIF-2α) Arm B Triplet: Pembro + Lenvatinib + Quavonlimab (CTLA-4) Control Standard doublet: Pembro + Lenvatinib Pembrolizumab + Lenvatinib + Belzutifan PFS 20.8 mo HR 1.08 P = 0.84 No improvement ✗ MK-1308A (Pembrolizumab + Quavonlimab) + Lenvatinib PFS 20.7 mo HR 1.07 P = 0.82 No improvement ✗ Pembrolizumab + Lenvatinib PFS 23.7 mo New standard remains strong ✓ OS 52.0 mo HR 1.04 No improvement ✗ OS Not reached HR 1.12 No improvement ✗ OS Not reached Continues to do well ORR 69.1% ORR 69.0% ORR 76.3% Highest response rate! TAKE-HOME More drugs ≠ Better outcomes Neither adding belzutifan nor CTLA-4 blockade improved PFS or OS. Pembrolizumab + lenvatinib remains an established first-line standard in advanced ccRCC. LITESPARK-012 | NCT04736706 | ESMO 2026 [Slide 2] LITESPARK-012 | ESMO 2026 Why Did Two Triplets Fail in Advanced RCC? MV Onco 01 WHY THIS TRIAL? • Pembrolizumab + lenvatinib is an established first-line regimen in advanced ccRCC. • Can adding another mechanism improve outcomes? • Belzutifan → HIF-2α inhibition • Quavonlimab → CTLA-4 blockade [Cartoon: kidney labeled RCC with Pembro, Lenvatinib, Belzutifan (HIF-2α inhibition), Quavonlimab (CTLA-4 blockade) characters] 02 HOW WAS THE TRIAL DESIGNED? • Phase III | Open-label | 1,688 patients • Previously untreated advanced ccRCC. • Randomization 1:1:1 • Dual primary endpoints: PFS and OS. • Median follow-up: 43.6 months. ARM A (n = 560): Pembrolizumab + Lenvatinib + Belzutifan ARM B (n = 562): MK-1308A (Pembrolizumab + Quavonlimab) + Lenvatinib CONTROL (n = 566): Pembrolizumab + Lenvatinib 03 DID ADDING BELZUTIFAN IMPROVE PFS? • Median PFS: • Triplet: 20.8 months • Control: 23.7 months HR 1.08 (95% CI 0.93–1.26) P = 0.84 NO PFS BENEFIT ✗ 04 DID CTLA-4 BLOCKADE IMPROVE PFS? • Median PFS: • Triplet: 20.7 months • Control: 23.7 months HR 1.07 (95% CI 0.92–1.25) P = 0.82 NO PFS BENEFIT ✗ 05 DID PATIENTS LIVE LONGER? • Median OS: • Belzutifan triplet: 52.0 months • CTLA-4 triplet: Not reached • Control: Not reached OS HR: • Belzutifan triplet: 1.04 • CTLA-4 triplet: 1.12 NEITHER TRIPLET IMPROVED OS. TAKE-HOME Adding HIF-2α or CTLA-4 inhibition failed to improve efficacy over pembrolizumab + lenvatinib. LITESPARK-012 | NCT04736706 | ESMO 2026 [Slide 3] LITESPARK-012 | ESMO 2026 Why Did Two Triplets Fail in Advanced RCC? MV Onco 01 DID MORE DRUGS SHRINK MORE TUMORS? Objective response rate (ORR): • Belzutifan triplet → 69.1% • CTLA-4 triplet → 69.0% • Standard doublet → 76.3% Surprisingly, the standard doublet had the highest numerical response rate! [Cartoon: three tumor characters holding signs 69.1%, 69.0%, 76.3%] 02 DID CTLA-4 HELP INTERMEDIATE/POOR-RISK PATIENTS? IMDC intermediate/poor risk: Median PFS: • CTLA-4 triplet: 20.5 months • Control: 23.5 months HR 1.12 Median OS: • CTLA-4 triplet: 39.1 months • Control: 46.2 months HR 1.17 No demonstrated benefit even in this higher-risk population. 03 WAS TREATMENT DISCONTINUATION HIGHER? Patients discontinuing any study drug due to adverse events: • Belzutifan triplet → 51.6% • CTLA-4 triplet → 51.4% • Standard doublet → 36.2% Both triplets caused substantially more treatment discontinuation. Grade ≥3 adverse events: • Belzutifan triplet → 87.2% • CTLA-4 triplet → 88.7% • Standard doublet → 84.8% (Same treatment order) 04 WHY MIGHT BOTH TRIPLETS HAVE FAILED? Reason 1 — Strong control arm Pembrolizumab + lenvatinib already achieved: • PFS 23.7 months • ORR 76.3% Reason 2 — Reduced drug exposure Median pembrolizumab/MK-1308A duration: • Belzutifan triplet → 14.1 months • CTLA-4 triplet → 11.8 months • Control → 21.2 months Higher discontinuation may have reduced effective treatment exposure. Reason 3 — More mechanisms ≠ More efficacy Adding HIF-2α or CTLA-4 inhibition did not translate into improved outcomes. These are plausible explanations, not proven causes. 05 DOES THIS INVALIDATE BELZUTIFAN? NO. • This trial tested belzutifan in a specific first-line triplet. • It does not negate its benefit in other established RCC settings. • Treatment line, combination partners and tolerability matter. [Cartoon kidney holding sign: Belzutifan still has a role in other RCC settings] TAKE-HOME MORE DRUGS ≠ BETTER OUTCOMES • Neither triplet improved PFS or OS. • Both increased treatment discontinuation. • Pembrolizumab + lenvatinib remains an established first-line standard. LITESPARK-012 | NCT04736706 | ESMO 2026

[Slide 1] NIAGARA vs CA017-078 SAME CANCER. DIFFERENT OUTCOMES. MV Onco [Cartoon: bladder illustration; a doctor labeled "DURVA" holding a trophy "EFS + OS ✓" standing on a podium labeled NIAGARA in front of a waterfall; a doctor labeled "NIVO" holding a ribbon "pCR ↑" next to an empty trophy pedestal reading "NO EFS WIN", on a podium labeled CA017-078] NIAGARA — POSITIVE TRIAL CA017-078 — NEGATIVE TRIAL HIGHER pCR ≠ PROVEN SURVIVAL BENEFIT Different trials. No head-to-head comparison. [Slide 2] CA017-078 | ESMO 2026 NIVOLUMAB + CHEMOTHERAPY IN MIBC MV Onco PART 1/2 1 WHY THIS TRIAL? Cisplatin-based chemotherapy → Surgery Standard treatment for eligible MIBC. THE QUESTION Can adding NIVOLUMAB before and after surgery improve outcomes? 2 WHO ENTERED? • Phase III randomized trial • N = 653 • Previously untreated MIBC • cT2–T4a N0 M0 • Resectable disease • Cisplatin eligible 3 RANDOMIZATION N = 653 | 1:1 ARM A — n = 325 GC + NIVOLUMAB × 4 cycles ↓ SURGERY ↓ Adjuvant NIVOLUMAB × 9 cycles VS ARM B — n = 328 GC × 4 cycles ↓ SURGERY GC = Gemcitabine + Cisplatin 4 DID NIVOLUMAB IMPROVE EFS? NO SIGNIFICANT BENEFIT EFS HR = 0.94 95.74% CI 0.71–1.25 P = 0.67 Median EFS: NIVO arm → Not reached GC arm → 67.6 months Median follow-up: 54.5 months 5 DID NIVOLUMAB IMPROVE pCR? NIVO + GC → 39.1% GC alone → 29.6% Absolute difference = 9.5 percentage points NOT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT TAKE-HOME Higher numerical pCR ≠ Proven EFS benefit. CA017-078 failed to meet its primary endpoints. [Slide 3] WHY DID NIVOLUMAB FAIL? MV Onco | PART 2/2 1 DID PATIENTS LIVE LONGER? Overall survival (OS) • HR = 0.88 • 95% CI 0.64 – 1.21 • OS data immature. • NO PROVEN SURVIVAL BENEFIT. 2 WAS TOXICITY HIGHER? Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events: • NIVO + GC → 45.9% • GC alone → 49.5% • No numerical increase in severe treatment-related toxicity. 3 WHY IS THIS SURPRISING? NIAGARA Durvalumab + GC → Surgery → Durvalumab • EFS improved ✓ • OS improved ✓ CA017-078 Nivolumab + GC → Surgery → Nivolumab • EFS not significantly improved ✗ • pCR not significantly improved ✗ Different trials. No head-to-head comparison. 4 DOES THIS CONTRADICT CHECKMATE 274? NO. • CheckMate 274: Adjuvant nivolumab after surgery in high-risk urothelial carcinoma. → Disease-free survival improved. • CA017-078: Perioperative nivolumab in resectable MIBC. → Primary endpoints not met. Different populations. Different strategies. 5 WHAT SHOULD CHANGE IN PRACTICE? • Do not routinely adopt this perioperative nivolumab regimen based on CA017-078. • NIAGARA supports perioperative durvalumab in eligible patients. • Adjuvant nivolumab retains its evidence in the appropriate high-risk postoperative setting. • ctDNA-guided treatment selection remains unvalidated. TAKE-HOME NOT ALL PERIOPERATIVE IMMUNOTHERAPY TRIALS ARE POSITIVE. • NIAGARA → Positive EFS and OS results. • CA017-078 → No significant EFS or pCR benefit. • Cross-trial differences do not prove one antibody is superior.

[Slide 1] LIVE INTERACTIVE WEBINAR Bladder cancer updates from the second half of 2026 [Five circular headshots of the panellists] Q&A with global experts: Dr Alison Birtle Rosemere Cancer Centre, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals, Preston, UK Dr Ignacio Durán Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla, Santander, Spain Prof Axel Merseburger Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany Dr José Domínguez-Escrig Fundación Instituto Valenciano de Oncología (IVO), Valencia, Spain Prof Morgan Rouprêt Pitié-Salpétrière Hospital, Paris, France 16th November 2026 17:00 GMT / 18:00 CET Register now: ecancer.org/bladder To help improve the quality of bladder cancer care globally, this webinar, sponsored by Johnson & Johnson, will address the care of bladder cancer patients and available treatment options. Data from the ESMO and EMUC meetings will be covered, along with the potential impact of key research, and the chance for the audience to pose questions. ecancer.org UK Charity number 1176307 Supported by an independent educational grant from Johnson & Johnson

[Slide 1] SWOG S2200 | ESMO 2026 A PFS Win. But Is It Enough? MV Onco OS BENEFIT? NOT PROVEN [Cartoon: superhero doctor labeled CABO with a shield; a pair labeled CABO and ATEZO holding a trophy "PFS ✓"] HR 0.46 [Cartoon: doctor with magnifying glass reading a sheet "ONLY 33 PATIENTS!"] Promising... but we need more evidence! PFS WIN ✓ OS NOT PROVEN NOT PRACTICE-CHANGING YET [Slide 2] SWOG S2200 | ESMO 2026 Does Adding Atezolizumab Improve Outcomes in Papillary RCC? MV Onco 01 — WHY THIS TRIAL? PAPMET established cabozantinib as an effective treatment for metastatic papillary RCC. The unanswered question: Does adding immunotherapy improve outcomes further? 02 — WHAT WAS COMPARED? Randomized Phase II | SWOG S2200 33 eligible patients with metastatic papillary RCC. • Arm A (n = 16) Cabozantinib 60 mg daily. • Arm B (n = 17) Cabozantinib 60 mg daily + atezolizumab 1200 mg IV every 3 weeks. Median follow-up: 24 months. [Cartoon: capsule characters "Cabozantinib alone" and "Cabozantinib + atezolizumab" with flag PFS ✓ and signpost "OS ?"] 03 — DID ADDING ATEZOLIZUMAB IMPROVE PFS? YES — Nominally significant PFS HR 0.46 90% CI: 0.22–0.97 One-sided p = 0.043 54% lower hazard of progression or death. 04 — DID PATIENTS LIVE LONGER? NO OS BENEFIT DEMONSTRATED OS HR 1.67 90% CI: 0.59–4.70 One-sided p = 0.79 Survival advantage not established. TAKE-HOME • PFS improved, but OS benefit was not demonstrated. • A promising signal from a very small randomized trial. [Slide 3] SWOG S2200 | ESMO 2026 Is This a Practice-Changing Trial? MV Onco 01 — WAS TOXICITY HIGHER? Grade 3–4 adverse events: • Cabozantinib + Atezolizumab: 65% (11/17) • Cabozantinib alone: 75% (12/16) • No obvious increase in severe toxicity. • Small numbers limit interpretation. 02 — WHAT WAS THE BIGGEST PROBLEM? SEVERE UNDER-ACCRUAL • Planned: 180 patients • Enrolled: 36 patients • Eligible: 33 patients • Trial terminated in January 2026 due to poor recruitment. • The study was substantially underpowered. 03 — HOW STRONG IS THE EVIDENCE? • PFS met the prespecified nominal significance threshold. • BUT: – Only 33 eligible patients. – One-sided statistical testing. – Wide confidence intervals. – No demonstrated OS benefit. • Statistically positive ≠ Definitively practice-changing. 04 — SHOULD WE ADD ATEZOLIZUMAB ROUTINELY? • NOT YET. • Cabozantinib remains an evidence-supported treatment option. • Adding atezolizumab showed a promising PFS signal. • However, routine adoption requires stronger confirmatory evidence. TAKE-HOME • Promising PFS signal. • No proven survival advantage. • Too few patients for definitive conclusions. • SWOG S2200 is hypothesis-generating, not practice-changing. [Cartoon: doctor with magnifying glass over "33 PATIENTS" sheet; flag PFS ✓; warning sign MORE EVIDENCE NEEDED]

[Slide 1] LITESPARK-011 | ESMO 2026 Better Tumor Control. But Longer Survival? MV Onco BELZUTIFAN + LENVATINIB Belzutifan inhibits HIF-2α Lenvatinib inhibits VEGFR angiogenic signalling [Illustration: kidney with tumor shrinking] Smaller tumor Better control PFS: 14.8 months ORR: 53.1% DOR: 22.0 months CABOZANTINIB Inhibits multiple TK receptors (eg, VEGFR, MET, AXL) [Illustration: kidney with tumor] Residual disease persists PFS: 10.8 months ORR: 40.2% DOR: 11.9 months OVERALL SURVIVAL 33.7 vs 28.6 months HR 0.85 (95% CI 0.70–1.03) OS NOT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT [Cartoon: doctor with magnifying glass comparing sheets "Belzutifan + Lenvatinib 33.7 mo" and "Cabozantinib 28.6 mo"] One-sided P = 0.04689 Required P ≤ 0.0223 Grade ≥3 adverse events: 85.4% (Belzutifan + Lenvatinib) | 83.0% (Cabozantinib) — High in both arms TAKE-HOME Better PFS. More Responses. Longer DOR. But No Proven OS Benefit. [Slide 2] LITESPARK-011 | ESMO 2026 Did Belzutifan + Lenvatinib Improve Disease Control? MV Onco 01 WHY THIS TRIAL? • Advanced clear-cell RCC frequently progresses after immunotherapy. • Cabozantinib is an established post-IO option. QUESTION: Can adding HIF-2α inhibition to VEGFR blockade improve outcomes? [Illustration: kidney "Post Immunotherapy progression" → HIF-2α inhibition + VEGFR blockade] 02 WHO WERE THE PATIENTS? • Phase III | N = 747 • Advanced ccRCC after anti-PD-(L)1 therapy. • Progression after first- or second-line immunotherapy, or within 6 months of adjuvant immunotherapy. 03 WHAT WERE THE TREATMENTS? Randomisation 1:1 Belzutifan + Lenvatinib (n = 371) 120 mg + 20 mg orally daily VERSUS Cabozantinib (n = 376) 60 mg orally daily Belzutifan → HIF-2α inhibitor Lenvatinib → Multikinase inhibitor targeting VEGFR 04 WHAT WAS THE TRIAL TESTING? • Dual primary endpoints: – PFS – blinded independent central review – Overall survival (OS) • Key secondary endpoint: ORR • Other endpoints: DOR and safety. • Median follow-up: 38.8 months • Data cutoff: 2 February 2026 [Clipboard: Endpoints ☑ PFS (BICR) ☑ OS ☑ ORR ☑ DOR ☑ Safety] 05 DID PFS IMPROVE? YES – PFS BENEFIT MAINTAINED! Median PFS: • Belzutifan + Lenvatinib → 14.8 months • Cabozantinib → 10.8 months HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.62–0.88) 26% relative reduction in progression/death hazard. 36-month PFS: 20.5% vs 12.6% PFS significance was established at an earlier analysis; not formally retested at final analysis. BOTTOM TAKE-HOME Belzutifan + Lenvatinib delivers superior disease control compared with cabozantinib after immunotherapy. But does better PFS translate into longer survival? Continued in Part 2 → [Slide 3] LITESPARK-011 | ESMO 2026 Better Tumor Control – But Longer Survival? MV Onco 01 DID PATIENTS LIVE LONGER? Median overall survival (OS): • Belzutifan + Lenvatinib → 33.7 months • Cabozantinib → 28.6 months • Numerical difference → +5.1 months • HR 0.85 (95% CI 0.70 – 1.03) • OS favored the combination numerically. • But OS superiority was NOT statistically demonstrated. [Illustration: balance scale 33.7 months (Belzutifan + Lenvatinib) vs 28.6 months (Cabozantinib), labeled OS] 02 WHY WAS P = 0.04689 NOT SIGNIFICANT? • Observed one-sided P = 0.04689 • Prespecified significance boundary = 0.0223 • 0.04689 > 0.0223 • The required statistical threshold was NOT crossed. • Also, the 95% CI included 1. • OS primary endpoint NOT MET. 03 WHAT HAPPENED AT 3 YEARS? Estimated 36-month overall survival: • Belzutifan + Lenvatinib → 48.9% • Cabozantinib → 40.6% • Absolute numerical difference → +8.3 percentage points • More patients were estimated to be alive at 3 years with the combination. • However, this does not establish statistically significant OS superiority. 04 DID MORE TUMORS RESPOND? Objective response rate (ORR): • Belzutifan + Lenvatinib → 53.1% • Cabozantinib → 40.2% • Absolute improvement → +12.9 percentage points • More than half of patients responded with the combination. • ORR benefit was established at an earlier analysis and maintained at final analysis. 05 WERE RESPONSES MORE DURABLE? Median duration of response (DOR): • Belzutifan + Lenvatinib → 22.0 months • Cabozantinib → 11.9 months • Numerical difference → +10.1 months • Median response duration was nearly doubled. • Better response durability – but no proven OS advantage. TAKE-HOME Better PFS + Higher ORR + Longer DOR ≠ Proven Overall Survival Benefit • LITESPARK-011 improved tumor control but missed its prespecified OS significance boundary. • Next: Toxicity, subsequent therapy and clinical implications. Continued in Part 3 → [Slide 4] LITESPARK-011 | ESMO 2026 Is Belzutifan + Lenvatinib Practice-Changing? MV Onco 01 WAS TOXICITY HIGHER? Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events: • Belzutifan + Lenvatinib → 85.4% • Cabozantinib → 83.0% Severe adverse-event rates were broadly similar, but high in both arms. Different toxicity profiles: • Belzutifan → Anemia, hypoxia • Lenvatinib → Hypertension, diarrhea, fatigue Similar severe-event rates ≠ Identical tolerability. 02 COULD SUBSEQUENT THERAPY AFFECT OS? Among patients who discontinued treatment, subsequent therapy was received by: • Belzutifan + Lenvatinib → 63.4% (173/273) • Cabozantinib → 62.7% (203/324) Rates were similar. But subsequent treatment regimens were not detailed. Could later HIF-2α inhibitor exposure dilute OS differences? Possible — but unproven. 03 WHY DID PFS BENEFIT NOT TRANSLATE INTO PROVEN OS BENEFIT? Three possible explanations: 1 Subsequent treatments Effective later-line therapy may reduce OS differences. 2 Modest OS effect HR 0.85 did not cross the prespecified statistical boundary. 3 PFS ≠ OS Delaying progression does not guarantee longer survival. These are hypotheses, not proven explanations. 04 WHAT QUESTIONS REMAIN? • Which subsequent treatments were received? • Did OS differ by IMDC risk or prior therapy? • What were the quality-of-life outcomes? • How often were doses reduced or interrupted? • Is upfront combination better than sequential treatment? Optimal treatment sequencing remains uncertain. 05 IS THIS PRACTICE-CHANGING? YES — stronger evidence for disease control. • PFS benefit → Established • ORR benefit → Established • DOR → Numerically longer BUT: • OS superiority → NOT demonstrated • Grade ≥3 toxicity → High in both arms Belzutifan + lenvatinib is an effective post-IO treatment option, but selection requires balancing efficacy, toxicity and patient factors. TAKE-HOME Better Tumor Control ≠ Proven Longer Survival • LITESPARK-011 supports belzutifan + lenvatinib after immunotherapy in advanced ccRCC. • The strongest evidence is for PFS and response benefit — NOT overall survival superiority.

[Slide 1] THREE TRIALS. THREE DIFFERENT OUTCOMES. NIAGARA vs KEYNOTE-866 vs CA017-078 Perioperative Immunotherapy in MIBC | ESMO 2026 MV Onco PARAMETER | NIAGARA | KEYNOTE-866 | CA017-078 01. DRUG / TARGET | Durvalumab PD-L1 | Pembrolizumab PD-1 | Nivolumab PD-1 02. PATIENTS | N = 1,063 | N = 907 | N = 653 03. TRIAL DESIGN | Phase III Open-label | Phase III Double-blind | Phase III Open-label comparison 04. DISEASE STAGE | T2–T4a N0–N1 (T2N0 capped ~40%) | T2–T4a N0 or T1–T4a N1 | T2–T4a N0 (~77% T2) 05. TREATMENT | GC + Durva × 4 ↓ Surgery Durva × 8 | GC + Pembro × 4 ↓ Surgery Pembro × 13 | GC + Nivo × 4 ↓ Surgery Nivo × 9 06. PRIMARY ENDPOINTS | EFS + pCR | EFS | EFS + pCR 07. EVENT-FREE SURVIVAL | HR 0.68 P < 0.001 SIGNIFICANT ✓ | HR 0.88 P = 0.1366 NOT SIGNIFICANT ✗ | HR 0.94 P = 0.67 NOT SIGNIFICANT ✗ 08. OVERALL SURVIVAL | HR 0.75 Significant ✓ | HR 1.00 Not formally tested | HR 0.88 OS immature 09. PATHOLOGICAL COMPLETE RESPONSE | 33.8% vs 25.8% Primary analysis NS | 44.4% vs 35.8% Not formally tested | 39.1% vs 29.6% Not significant 10. FINAL TRIAL OUTCOME | POSITIVE ✓ EFS + OS benefit | NEGATIVE ✗ Primary EFS not met | NEGATIVE ✗ Primary endpoints not met • NIAGARA: T2N0 enrollment deliberately capped at ~40%; pCR P = 0.004 (required P < 0.001). • KEYNOTE-866: pCR and OS not formally tested after EFS failure. • CA017-078: Open-label A vs B comparison within a partially blinded 3-arm ENERGIZE trial. TAKE-HOME • ONLY NIAGARA DEMONSTRATED SIGNIFICANT EFS AND OS BENEFIT. • KEYNOTE-866 and CA017-078 did not meet their primary efficacy endpoints. • Different trial outcomes ≠ Proven PD-L1 superiority over PD-1.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 MADRID, SPAIN KEYNOTE-866 Perioperative Pembrolizumab or Placebo + Neoadjuvant Cisplatin and Gemcitabine in Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer [ESMO 2026 MADRID stamp; Madrid Metropolis building photo] Study Design Phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 907 patients randomized (453 vs 454) Data cutoff: January 26, 2026 Median follow-up: 60.9 months Patient Population • Muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) • cT2–T4aN0M0 or cT1–T4aN1M0 • ≥50% urothelial histology (centrally assessed) • ECOG PS 0–1 • No prior systemic therapy • Cisplatin-eligible • Suitable for radical cystectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection [illustration of a bladder with tumor] Randomization (n = 907) Pembrolizumab + Gemcitabine + Cisplatin n = 453 ← 1:1 → Placebo + Gemcitabine + Cisplatin n = 454 Treatment Regimen Experimental Arm – Pembrolizumab (n = 453) Neoadjuvant (4 cycles, Q3W) • Pembrolizumab 200 mg IV (day 1) • Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² (day 1, 8) • Cisplatin 70 mg/m² (day 1) → Radical cystectomy + PLND → Adjuvant: Pembrolizumab 200 mg IV Q3W × 13 cycles Control Arm – Placebo (n = 454) Neoadjuvant (4 cycles, Q3W) • Placebo (day 1) • Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² (day 1, 8) • Cisplatin 70 mg/m² (day 1) → Radical cystectomy + PLND → Adjuvant: Placebo Q3W × 13 cycles Endpoints Primary endpoint Investigator-assessed Event-Free Survival (EFS) Key secondary endpoints • Pathological complete response (pCR) (by central review) • Overall survival (OS) Secondary endpoint • Safety Results Event-Free Survival (Primary Endpoint) [Kaplan-Meier curves, two arms: Pembrolizumab, Placebo; x-axis Months 0–84; y-axis Event-free survival (%)] Median EFS 74.1 mo vs NR HR 0.88 (95% CI 0.71–1.10) P = 0.1366 Pathological Complete Response (pCR) [bar chart: pCR rate (%)] 44.4% Pembrolizumab (n = 453) 35.8% Placebo (n = 454) Absolute difference 8.9% (95% CI 2.5–15.1) Overall Survival (OS) [Kaplan-Meier curves, two arms: Pembrolizumab, Placebo; x-axis Months 0–84; y-axis Overall survival (%)] Median OS NR in both arms HR 1.00 (95% CI 0.79–1.27) Not formally tested due to statistical design Surgery Rate Underwent surgery (pembrolizumab vs placebo) [bar chart] 91.6% Pembrolizumab | 87.9% Placebo Safety | | Pembrolizumab (n = 453) | Placebo (n = 454) | Any treatment-emergent AE | 99.8% | 98.7% Grade 3–5 AE | 80.2% | 75.1% Grade 5 AE | 3.8% | 4.5% Hypothyroidism (any grade) | 10.4% | – Grade 3–5 hypothyroidism | 0% | – Most frequent immune-mediated AE with pembrolizumab: hypothyroidism 10.4% (grade 3–5: 0%) Key Take Home Messages Perioperative pembrolizumab did NOT significantly improve event-free survival in cisplatin-eligible MIBC. Pathological complete response rate was higher with pembrolizumab (44.4% vs 35.8%), but not formally tested. No overall survival benefit at this analysis (HR 1.00). Safety profile was manageable but with higher grade 3–5 toxicity in the pembrolizumab arm. These results do not establish a new standard of care. Await full publication and guideline updates. Conclusion • Perioperative pembrolizumab did not significantly improve EFS in cisplatin-eligible MIBC. • Higher pCR rate observed, but secondary and not formally tested. • No OS benefit demonstrated at current follow-up. • Safety consistent with known pembrolizumab profile and manageable. Dr Rohit Malde MD DNB FRCR (UK) Consultant Clinical Oncologist [Survival data captured as a table — no point estimates read from the curve] Endpoint: Event-Free Survival (EFS), investigator-assessed, primary endpoint Pembrolizumab + gemcitabine + cisplatin | 453 | 74.1 mo Placebo + gemcitabine + cisplatin | 454 | NR HR: 0.88 HR CI: 95% CI 0.71–1.10 P: 0.1366 Note: Second KM panel on the same image: Overall Survival — median NR in both arms; HR 1.00 (95% CI 0.79–1.27); not formally tested due to statistical design. No landmark percentages printed. Data cutoff January 26, 2026; median follow-up 60.9 months. KOL-made infographic (Rohit Malde), not a conference slide.

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 / MADRID EVIDENCE NOTES 23–27 OCTOBER 2026 MADRID, SPAIN PRESIDENTIAL SYMPOSIUM I / LBA4 DASL-HiCaP DAROLUTAMIDE + ADT + RT: THE MFS QUESTION IN VERY-HIGH-RISK LOCALISED PROSTATE CANCER Definitive or salvage radiotherapy population • International phase 3 trial 24 OCTOBER 2026, Saturday 16:30 Madrid | 17:30 Istanbul Presenter Tamim Niazi 01 PATIENTS • Localised or locoregionally advanced very-high-risk prostate cancer • Primary definitive radiotherapy OR post-prostatectomy salvage radiotherapy population • No distant metastases on conventional imaging • Pelvic nodal involvement allowed 02 STUDY DESIGN PHASE 3 | RANDOMISED DOUBLE-BLIND | INTERNATIONAL | PLACEBO-CONTROLLED | 1:1 n = 1,107 randomized 2024 ASCO/JCO baseline report: n=1,107 randomized; ANZUP Aug 2026 update reported 1,106 enrolled (minor source discrepancy). 03 TREATMENT ARMS Darolutamide arm: Darolutamide 600 mg twice daily for 96 weeks + ADT (LHRH analogue) + Definitive or salvage radiotherapy Control: Placebo for 96 weeks + ADT (LHRH analogue) + Definitive or salvage radiotherapy 04 ENDPOINTS Primary endpoint: Metastasis-free survival (MFS) — metastasis on conventional imaging or death Key secondary endpoints • Overall survival (OS) • Prostate cancer-specific survival • PSA progression-free survival • Time to subsequent hormonal therapy • Time to castration resistance • Adverse events • Health-related quality of life RESULTS NOT YET DISCLOSED • LBA4 will present the interim analysis • No public HR, 95% CI, median MFS/OS, p values, absolute benefit or detailed toxicity rates yet • Interpret after the congress presentation. 05 CLINICAL READOUT Key question: Does adding darolutamide to ADT + RT produce a clinically meaningful MFS gain in very-high-risk localised prostate cancer, large enough to justify added toxicity and 96 weeks of treatment? Comparison with abiraterone evidence is indirect; DASL-HiCaP is not a head-to-head darolutamide-vs-abiraterone trial. Data status: ESMO programme + trial registry + prior baseline report; LBA4 interim results pending presentation. Sources: NCT04136353; J Clin Oncol 2024 ASCO GU baseline; ANZUP 2026; ESMO 2026 programme. drozdogan.com

[Slide 1] VOLGA | ESMO 2026 Cisplatin-Free. Adjuvant EV-Free. MV Onco VOLGA IS A RIVER! Europe's longest river — flowing through Russia to the Caspian Sea. [Map sketch: Volga River, RUSSIA, Caspian Sea] [Illustration: bladder with tumor; crossed-out CISPLATIN vial labeled "CISPLATIN-FREE!"; boat carrying EV and DURVALUMAB vials "EV before surgery" toward a bridge labeled CYSTECTOMY; "Durvalumab after surgery"; crossed-out EV vial "ADJUVANT EV-FREE!"; sunrise labeled "LONGER SURVIVAL"] A NEW COURSE FOR BLADDER CANCER? EV before surgery. Durvalumab after surgery. VOLGA | ESMO 2026 | MV Onco [Slide 2] VOLGA | ESMO 2026 PART 1/3 Can We Treat MIBC Without Cisplatin? MV Onco 1. WHY VOLGA? Muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) • Up to 50% cannot receive cisplatin • ~50% recur after cystectomy • NIAGARA → cisplatin-eligible patients THE GAP: CISPLATIN-INELIGIBLE MIBC 2. THE QUESTION Can neoadjuvant ENFORTUMAB VEDOTIN + DURVALUMAB ± TREMELIMUMAB followed by surgery and immunotherapy IMPROVE SURVIVAL? 3. WHO ENTERED? • MIBC planned for radical cystectomy • Cisplatin-ineligible OR declined cisplatin • Curative-intent treatment 4. RANDOMIZATION N = 695 | 1 : 1 : 1 ARM 1 — TRIPLET Neoadjuvant: EV + Durvalumab × 3 cycles, Tremelimumab × 2 cycles ↓ CYSTECTOMY ↓ Adjuvant: Durvalumab × 9 cycles, Tremelimumab × 1 cycle ARM 2 — DOUBLET Neoadjuvant: EV + Durvalumab × 3 cycles ↓ CYSTECTOMY ↓ Adjuvant: Durvalumab × 9 cycles ARM 3 — CONTROL Radical cystectomy ± Approved adjuvant therapy 5. WHAT WERE WE MEASURING? DUAL PRIMARY • EFS — Arm 1 vs Control • EFS — Arm 2 vs Control KEY SECONDARY OS • pCR • DFS • Downstaging EFS EVENTS: • Recurrence after surgery • Progression without surgery • Failure of surgery with residual disease • Death VOLGA | Phase III • Open-label • 182 centres • 25 countries | NCT04960709 | PART 1/3 [Slide 3] VOLGA | ESMO 2026 Did Patients Live Longer? MV Onco PART 2/3 1 DID EVENT-FREE SURVIVAL IMPROVE? YES — BOTH EXPERIMENTAL ARMS • EV + Durvalumab → Significant EFS improvement • EV + Durvalumab + Tremelimumab → Significant EFS improvement } Both compared with surgery-based control. 2 DID PATIENTS LIVE LONGER? • EV + DURVALUMAB → Significant OS benefit → Clinically meaningful improvement • EV + DURVA + TREME → Favorable OS trend → NOT statistically significant at interim 3 DID TREMELIMUMAB ADD BENEFIT? • Triplet → EFS positive • Triplet → OS not yet significant MORE IMMUNOTHERAPY ≠ MORE SURVIVAL Incremental benefit remains uncertain. 4 WHAT ABOUT SAFETY? • EV + Durvalumab: No new safety signals reported. • Known toxicities: • EV → Rash • Neuropathy • Hyperglycemia • Durvalumab → Immune-related adverse events • Tremelimumab → Additional immune toxicity risk 5 WHAT NUMBERS ARE STILL AWAITED? • Full ESMO presentation pending: • EFS and OS hazard ratios • Absolute survival benefit • pCR and downstaging rates • Grade ≥3 adverse events • Treatment discontinuations POSITIVE TOPLINE ≠ COMPLETE DATA VOLGA | ESMO 2026 • Powles et al. • LBA2 Full presentation: 24 October 2026 PART 2/3 [Slide 4] VOLGA | ESMO 2026 PART 3/3 Is This a New Standard of Care? MV Onco 1 WHAT MAKES VOLGA UNIQUE? • ENFORTUMAB VEDOTIN → Given ONLY before surgery • After cystectomy: → Durvalumab maintenance • NO ADJUVANT EV • Potentially less cumulative toxicity. 2 HOW IS IT DIFFERENT FROM NIAGARA? NIAGARA • Cisplatin-ELIGIBLE MIBC • Gemcitabine + Cisplatin + Durvalumab VOLGA • Cisplatin-INELIGIBLE / DECLINING MIBC • EV + Durvalumab • DIFFERENT PATIENT POPULATIONS. • No direct cross-trial comparison. 3 WHAT ABOUT EV + PEMBROLIZUMAB? EV + PEMBROLIZUMAB • EV before AND after surgery VOLGA • EV ONLY before surgery • Can postoperative EV be avoided? • NOT PROVEN BY CROSS-TRIAL COMPARISON. 4 WHAT IS THE FDA STATUS? • 25 SEPTEMBER 2026 • FDA granted PRIORITY REVIEW EV + Durvalumab • For cisplatin-ineligible / declining MIBC • Decision expected: Q4 2026 • PRIORITY REVIEW ≠ APPROVAL. 5 TAKE-HOME • CISPLATIN-FREE PERIOPERATIVE THERAPY • EV + Durvalumab → Significant EFS benefit → Significant OS benefit • EV restricted to neoadjuvant phase. • POTENTIAL NEW STANDARD OF CARE. • Await full efficacy and safety data. VOLGA | Powles et al. | ESMO 2026 • LBA2 | NCT04960709 | PART 3/3

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 –GU topics– My TOP3: ① VOLGA, ② LITESPARK-011&012, ③ ANZUP1801 [Column headers] NMIBC | MIUC (Perioperative) | Metastatic UC VOLGA (phase 3) Neoadjuvant EV + Perioperative Durva ± Treme KEYNOTE-866 (phase 3) Neoadjuvant GC ± Perioperative Pembro GC + Nivolumab (phase 3) Neoadjuvant GC ± Perioperative Nivo Exploratory/ad hoc analysis of major Phase 3 KEYNOTE-B15 (phase 3) CDDP-eligible Perioperative EVP, ctDNA analysis KEYNOTE-905 (phase 3) CDDP-ineligible Perioperative EVP NIAGARA (phase 3) Neoadjuvant GC+Durva TROPHY-U-01 C7 (phase 1b) SG + EV + Zimberelimab for treatment naïve mUC interim analysis SKB264-II-06 (phase 2) sacTMT + Pembrolizumab EV103 cohorts DE/A&K (phase 1) 1st line EV ± Pembro, long term outcomes PE-PE (phase 2) MDT ± Perioperative Pembro Oligometa RCC KEYNOTE-564 (phase 3) Final analysis of adjuvant Pembro LITESPARK-012 (phase 3) 1st line Lenva/Pembro/Belzutifan or MK-1308A/Lenva vs Lenva/Pembro LITESPARK-011 (phase 3) Post-PD-(L)1 Lenva/Belzutifan vs Cabo, final analysis XmAb819 (phase 1) XmAb819 (novel ENPP3/CD3 BsAb) AK112 (phase 1b/2) Ivonescimab (PD-1/VEGF BsAb) 1st line for IMDC favor cohort SWOG S2200 (phase 2) Cabo ± Atezo for papirally RCC KIM-1 dynamics study KIM-1 analysis during 1st line ICI ± Cabo [Column headers] RCC (Perioperative) | Metastatic RCC DASL-HiCaP/ANZUP1801 (phase 3) Darolutamide with ADT and definitive/salvage RT for localized, very high-risk PC PROTEUS substudy (phase 3) Perioperative Apalutamide + ADT with RP/PLND vs RP/PLND alone [Column headers] Local PC / BCR | mHSPC m0CRPC | mCRPC JNJ-6143 (phase 1) First-in-class oral AR-targeted RIPTAC CAPitello-281 (phase 3) Capiva + Abi for PTEN-loss mHSPC Updated OS analysis PEACE-1 (phase 3) Long-term OS analysis @KohjiToncol

[Slide 1] UrologyWatch.com ESMO 2026 Oct 23 to 27, Madrid 10 GU trials to watch | Live coverage Follow ESMO 2026 on UrologyWatch ▶ VOLGA, DASL-HiCaP, LITESPARK, KEYNOTE-564, PEACE-1 ▶ Study summaries and takeaways for urologists Built by urologists, for urologists urologywatch.com

[Slide 1] WHY DID ONLY NIAGARA SUCCEED? NIAGARA vs KEYNOTE-866 vs CA017-078 Four Questions Worth Asking | ESMO 2026 MV Onco 01 DID NIAGARA ENROLL HIGHER-RISK PATIENTS? NIAGARA: T2N0 capped at ~40%. CA017-078: ~77% T2 (N0). NIAGARA EFS by stage: T2N0 → HR 0.81 Higher than T2N0 → HR 0.61 Interpretation: Higher-risk enrichment may matter. Treatment-by-stage interaction unproven. 02 DID THE EFS DEFINITION MATTER? NIAGARA counted failure to undergo cystectomy as an EFS event. Sensitivity analyses remained consistent ✓ OS also improved: HR 0.75 ✓ Interpretation: Endpoint differences deserve scrutiny. EFS definition cannot explain away the OS benefit. 03 PD-L1 vs PD-1: DOES BIOLOGY MATTER? NIAGARA: Durvalumab → PD-L1 KEYNOTE-866: Pembrolizumab → PD-1 CA017-078: Nivolumab → PD-1 PD-L1 blockade preserves PD-1–PD-L2 signalling. Interpretation: Biologically interesting. Clinically unproven. No evidence of PD-L1 superiority. 04 THE pCR–EFS PARADOX NIAGARA: pCR gain +8.0 pp → EFS HR 0.68 KEYNOTE-866: pCR gain +8.6 pp → EFS HR 0.88 CA017-078: pCR gain +9.5 pp → EFS HR 0.94 Interpretation: Similar numerical pCR gains. Different EFS outcomes. pCR is not a validated surrogate for survival in MIBC. TAKE-HOME WHY ONLY NIAGARA? Patient selection? EFS definition? PD-L1 biology? No definitive explanation yet. NIAGARA demonstrated EFS and OS benefit. Cross-trial comparisons cannot establish antibody superiority.

[Slide 2] Proffered paper 1: Genitourinary tumour, renal and urothelial Date Fri, 23.10.2026 Chairs Anja Lorch (Zurich, Switzerland), Axel Bex (London, United Kingdom) Room Barcelona Auditorium - Hall 9 Time 13:30 - 15:00 [Slide 3] Rapid oral: Genitourinary tumours, prostate, penile and testis Date Fri, 23.10.2026 Chairs Thomas Hwang (Boston, United States of America), Edmond M. Kwan (Melbourne, Australia), Alison H. Reid (Sutton, United Kingdom) Room Bilbao Auditorium - Hall 3 Time 13:30 - 15:00

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 / MADRID EVIDENCE NOTES [ESMO Congress Madrid 2026 logo] PRESIDENTIAL SYMPOSIUM I / LBA2 VOLGA Perioperative durvalumab with neoadjuvant enfortumab vedotin is topline-positive for EFS and OS in cisplatin-ineligible or cisplatin-declining muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Presentation 24 October 2026 16:30 Madrid | 17:30 Istanbul Presenter Thomas Powles 01 PATIENTS • Muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) • Ineligible for or declined cisplatin-based chemotherapy • Planned for curative-intent radical cystectomy 02 STUDY DESIGN • Phase 3, randomized, open-label • Global • n = 695 (three arms) • Randomization 1:1:1 03 TREATMENT ARMS Arm 1 EV + durvalumab + tremelimumab • Neoadjuvant enfortumab vedotin + durvalumab + tremelimumab • Radical cystectomy • Adjuvant durvalumab + tremelimumab Arm 2 EV + durvalumab • Neoadjuvant enfortumab vedotin + durvalumab • Radical cystectomy • Adjuvant durvalumab Control Surgery ± approved adjuvant therapy • Radical cystectomy • With or without approved adjuvant therapy (according to current standards) 04 WHAT IS KNOWN • Planned interim analysis / company topline. • Arm 2 (EV + durvalumab) vs control: met EFS and showed a statistically significant and clinically meaningful OS benefit. • Arm 1 (EV + durvalumab + tremelimumab) vs control: met EFS, but OS showed only a favourable trend and was not statistically significant at this interim analysis. NOT YET DISCLOSED • Hazard ratios, 95% confidence intervals and p values • Absolute EFS and OS differences • Pathologic complete response (pCR) and downstaging rates • Detailed grade 3+ toxicity and discontinuation rates 05 CLINICAL READOUT The key issue is not only that the study is positive. How large is the absolute EFS/OS gain when enfortumab vedotin is given only neoadjuvantly, and does the added treatment burden and toxicity justify the regimen? Does adding tremelimumab provide meaningful additional value? Data status: company topline + ESMO 2026 programme. Full LBA2 presentation pending. Source: AstraZeneca topline (14 May & 25 Sep 2026) | ESMO 2026 programme | VOLGA (NCT04960709) drozdogan.com Congress news · Scientific summaries · Clinical perspective

[Slide 1] Perioperative apalutamide (APA) plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with radical prostatectomy plus pelvic lymph node dissection (RP + PLND) vs RP + PLND alone in patients (pts) with high-risk localized or locally advanced prostate cancer (HR LPC/LAPC): PROTEUS Substudy Saturday, 24 Oct 2026 10:57 - 11:07 Barcelona Auditorium - Hall 9 [buttons:] Saved | Note

[Slide 1] KEYNOTE-564 ESMO 2026 Seven Years Later... Are Patients Living Longer? MV Onco [Illustration: sutured kidney, vial labeled "ONE YEAR OF PEMBROLIZUMAB", a path with milestone stones 1 YEAR, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 YEARS leading to a figure walking toward a sunrise] 7-YEAR DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL 57.2% vs 44.6% 7-YEAR OVERALL SURVIVAL 82.3% vs 76.6% Pembrolizumab vs Placebo LESS RECURRENCE. MORE PATIENTS ALIVE. KEYNOTE-564 — The survival benefit endures. [Slide 2] KEYNOTE-564 | ESMO 2026 PART 1/2 Seven Years Later — Are Patients Living Longer? MV Onco 1. WHY KEYNOTE-564? • Clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). • Recurrence remains a concern after nephrectomy. • Adjuvant pembrolizumab improved DFS and OS in earlier analyses. THE QUESTION: DOES THE BENEFIT LAST? 2. WHAT WAS THE STUDY? Phase III | Randomized | N = 994 PEMBROLIZUMAB (n = 496) 200 mg IV every 3 weeks versus PLACEBO (n = 498) Up to 17 cycles (~1 year). • Primary endpoint → DFS • Key secondary endpoint → OS 3. WHY IS THIS UPDATE IMPORTANT? • Earlier analyses established DFS and OS benefit. • ESMO 2026 — FINAL ANALYSIS • Median follow-up: 85.9 months Approximately 7.2 years. • Data cutoff: February 4, 2026. DO THE BENEFITS REMAIN DURABLE? 4. DID RECURRENCE DECREASE? YES — DFS BENEFIT MAINTAINED • 7-year DFS: 57.2% vs 44.6% Pembrolizumab vs Placebo • HR 0.68 (95% CI 0.56–0.82) → 32% lower DFS-event hazard. → 12.6 percentage-point absolute difference. • Median DFS: NR vs 68.3 months. 5. DID PATIENTS LIVE LONGER? YES — OS BENEFIT MAINTAINED • 7-year OS: 82.3% vs 76.6% Pembrolizumab vs Placebo • HR 0.70 (95% CI 0.53–0.92) → 30% lower death hazard. → 5.7 percentage-point absolute difference. • Median OS: NR in both arms. TAKE-HOME One year of adjuvant pembrolizumab delivers durable DFS and OS benefit in appropriately selected high-risk ccRCC. KEYNOTE-564 | Phase III | NCT03142334 | ESMO 2026 | PART 1/2 [Slide 3] KEYNOTE-564 | ESMO 2026 PART 2/2 Who Benefits Most — And Is Practice Changing? MV Onco 1. WHO BENEFITED FROM PEMBROLIZUMAB? DFS BENEFIT ACROSS RISK GROUPS Intermediate-high risk → HR 0.71 (95% CI 0.58–0.87) High risk → HR 0.54 (95% CI 0.31–0.94) M1 NED → HR 0.50 (95% CI 0.26–0.96) All three DFS estimates favor pembrolizumab. 2. DID EVERY SUBGROUP LIVE LONGER? OVERALL SURVIVAL — IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE Intermediate-high risk → HR 0.66 (95% CI 0.48–0.91) High risk → HR 0.92 (95% CI 0.44–1.90) M1 NED → HR 0.54 (95% CI 0.19–1.53) CAUTION: OS benefit is established overall, but NOT statistically demonstrated in every subgroup. 3. WHAT ABOUT M1 NED? M1 NED = METASTATIC, NO EVIDENCE OF DISEASE Metastases completely resected. DFS HR → 0.50 OS HR → 0.54 → Encouraging recurrence reduction. → OS estimate remains uncertain. DFS BENEFIT ≠ PROVEN SUBGROUP OS BENEFIT 4. ANY NEW SAFETY CONCERNS? Median follow-up: 85.9 months No new serious treatment-related adverse events reported. However: • Immune-related toxicity remains relevant. • Some endocrine toxicities may be permanent. Adjuvant treatment requires careful patient selection. 5. TAKE-HOME KEYNOTE-564 REINFORCES THE STANDARD OF CARE At approximately 7 years: DFS HR → 0.68 OS HR → 0.70 One year of pembrolizumab provides durable DFS and OS benefit. Subgroup OS estimates require cautious interpretation. THE MESSAGE: Adjuvant pembrolizumab remains a standard option for appropriately selected high-risk ccRCC after surgery. KEYNOTE-564 | Phase III | NCT03142334 | ESMO 2026 | PART 2/2

[Slide 1] The drug's own target predicts who it works for. 322 people with metastatic urothelial cancer treated in routine care. Median survival 21.5 months with high tumour NECTIN4 RNA versus 14.2 months with low. NECTIN4 did not track outcomes in 232 people given pembrolizumab alone. [Forest plot, x-axis log scale 0.3 / 0.5 / 0.7 / 1.0, dashed line at 1.0 labelled "no difference"] NECTIN4 high vs low unadjusted | 0.67 (0.46 to 0.98) NECTIN4 high vs low adjusted | 0.62 (0.41 to 0.93) Mutation burden high vs low | 0.57 (0.33 to 0.96) Either marker high vs both low | 0.61 (0.42 to 0.88) Hazard ratio for death, first-line enfortumab vedotin + pembrolizumab Source: Cho et al., Eur Urol 2026, doi 10.1016/j.eururo.2026.08.005. Retrospective, not a randomised comparison.

[Slide 1] Perioperative IMFINZI® (durvalumab) plus neoadjuvant enfortumab vedotin granted Priority Review in the US for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer PUBLISHED 25 September 2026 Based on VOLGA Phase III trial results which demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in event-free survival and overall survival

[Slide 1] ESMO 2026 INDUSTRY SATELLITE SYMPOSIUM Navigating the Changing Landscape of mCRPC Management: Reviewing Roads Travelled and Exploring Emerging Directions Sunday, 25 October 2026 18:30 – 20:00 CET Salamanca Auditorium, Hall 10 IFEMA Madrid, Madrid, Spain Chair [headshot] Bertrand Tombal, MD, PhD Université Catholique de Louvain Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc Brussels, Belgium Faculty [headshot] Silke Gillessen, MD Univerisità della Svizzera Italiana Lugano, Switzerland EOC-Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland (IOSI) Bellinzona, Switzerland Patient Advocate [headshot] Erik Briers, MS, PhD European Prostate Cancer Coalition (Europa Uomo) Antwerp, Belgium PeerVoice [prostate illustration graphic]

[Slide 1] De Novo vs Metachronous Metastatic Prostate Cancer (mPC): A Comprehensive Clinicogenomic Analysis ESMO 2026 Poster #2225 Panagiotis J. Vlachostergios, Anthony V. Serritella, Amy K. Taylor, John M. Floberg, Yingying Yu, Stamatina Fragkogianni, Kayla Viets Layng, Rana R. McKay, David F. Jarrard, Glenn Liu, Joshua M. Lang, Christos E. Kyriakopoulos [affiliations: University of Ioannina; Weill Cornell Medicine; University of Wisconsin; Tempus AI; UC San Diego; Henry Dunant Hospital Center, Athens — small text] INTRODUCTION ❑ The differences between de novo and metachronous mPC are incompletely characterized. ❑ This study compared demographic, clinical, molecular, and immunologic features between de novo and metachronous mPC. METHODS The Tempus Lens Platform was used to query the multimodal de-identified database to establish and subsequently analyze a cohort of patients diagnosed with mPC who underwent genomic profiling with xT (DNA) and xR (RNA) (n = 6,306). Patients were classified as de novo (Stage IV at diagnosis) or metachronous (Stage I–III at diagnosis with progression to Stage IV >180 days later). De Novo n = 6,171 Metachronous n = 135 ❑ Immune cell proportions were estimated from RNA using quanTIseq. ❑ Differential gene expression analyses were conducted using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests with Benjamini-Hochberg correction. ❑ Gene set enrichment analysis was conducted using the Hallmark libraries. ❑ Groups were compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests or chi-squared tests as appropriate. RESULTS Figure 1. Treatment with prostatectomy or radiation was more common in patients with metachronous disease (prostatectomy: 57% vs 5.2%, radiotherapy: 92% vs 22%, p<0.001). Figure 2. Treatment with upfront chemotherapy with ADT +/- ARPI was more common in de-novo metastatic pts (15.7% vs 8.1%, p=0.037). Figure 3. Metachronous pts were enriched for APLNR (13% vs 4.7%, p<0.001) and ZMYM3 somatic alterations (11% vs 4.8%, p<0.001), while most canonical prostate cancer drivers (e.g., TP53, PTEN, ERG) had a similar frequency between groups. [Fig 3 bar labels, de novo/metachronous %: APLNR 4.5/12.6; ZMYM3 4.7/11.1; LRP1B 9.4/14.8; FOXA1 13.9/20.0; SPOP 10.6/10.4; TP53 32.2/34.1; PTEN 25.6/26.7; ERG 36.1/39.3 — small text, verify against source] Figure 4. Metachronous pts demonstrated increased regulatory T cell and natural killer cell infiltration as estimated by quanTIseq (p<0.001). Figure 5. Inflammatory signaling (TNFα/NF-κB) and KRAS-related pathways were enriched in metachronous pts. SUMMARY ❑ Metachronous mPC is a distinct entity characterized by lower PSA at diagnosis, greater prior local therapy exposure, unique genomic alterations, and a more immunologically suppressed tumor microenvironment compared to de novo disease. ❑ Future work should investigate therapeutic vulnerabilities and differences in survival associated with metachronous vs. de novo disease. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: We thank Vanessa Nepomuceno, PhD for assistance with poster preparation. [Slide 2] Clinicogenomic Differences Between Early-Onset (EO-PCa) and Average-Onset Prostate Cancer (AO-PCa): A Large-Scale Retrospective Cohort Study ESMO 2026 Poster #2256 Christos E. Kyriakopoulos, Panagiotis J. Vlachostergios, Anthony V. Serritella, Amy K. Taylor, John M. Floberg, Yingying Yu, Stamatina Fragkogianni, Kayla Viets Layng, Rana R. McKay, David F. Jarrard, Glenn Liu, Joshua M. Lang [affiliations: UW–Madison; Henry Dunant Hospital Center, Athens; University of Ioannina; Weill Cornell; Tempus AI; UC San Diego — small text] INTRODUCTION ❑ Early-onset prostate cancer (EO-PCa) is increasingly recognized as biologically distinct, but its clinical behavior, molecular features, and outcomes relative to average-onset (AO-PCa) disease remain incompletely characterized. SUMMARY • EO-PCa exhibits distinct clinical and molecular characteristics compared to AO-PCa. • OS appears to be driven by a combination of age and tumor biology. METHODS The Tempus Lens platform was used to query the de-identified, multimodal database for patients diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer (N= 6,967) tested with Tempus xT (DNA-seq) and xR (RNA-seq). Eligible de novo metastatic patients had a sample collected within 60 days of diagnosis and were stratified by onset age (EO-PCa ≤55 years; AO-PCa >55 years). ❑ Clinicogenomic characteristics were compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests or chi-squared tests as appropriate. ❑ Real-world overall survival (rwOS) was defined as the time from sample collection to death or loss to follow up. ❑ Median rwOS (mOS) was estimated using Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves and compared using log-rank tests. Hazard ratios (HR) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. Risk set adjustment was used to account for immortal time bias. RESULTS Figure 1. Frequency of primary radiotherapy or prostatectomy treatment in EO-PCa vs. AO-PCa. Patients with EO-PCa were more likely to undergo primary treatment (radiotherapy: 37.2% vs 26.4%; prostatectomy: 18.7% vs 10.4%, p<0.001). Figure 2. Selected molecular differences between EO-PCa and AO-PCa. EO-PCa was enriched for germline BRCA2 variants (4.8% vs 2.6%, p=0.019), TMPRSS2 fusions (39.7% vs 34.7%, p=0.015), and ERG fusions (41.1% vs 36.6%, p=0.031). Somatic FOXA1 (15.4% vs 9.4%, p<0.001) and SPOP mutations (11.1% vs. 8.2%, p=0.033) were more common in AO-PCa. Figure 3. Median real-world OS for EO-PCa vs. AO-PCa. EO-PCa was associated with longer mOS in the overall cohort [42 vs 32 months, HR = 1.51 (95% CI 1.26-1.81), p<0.001] and in SPOP-alt and TP53-alt sub-cohorts. [Fig 3 bars, EO/AO months: Overall 42.0/32.0; SPOP alt 67.1/52.0; TP53 alt 33.8/25.9] Figure 4. Association of SPOP and TP53 alterations with real-world OS in AO-PCa and EO-PCa. SPOP alterations were prognostic for favorable mOS compared to wild-type (AO-PCa: 52 months vs 30.7 months, p<0.001; EO-PCa: 67.1 months vs 41.7 months, p= 0.41). TP53 alterations were prognostic for worse mOS compared to wild-type (AO-PCa: mOS 25.9 months vs 37.9 months, p<0.001; EO-PCa: mOS 33.8 vs 55.9 months, p<0.001). [Fig 4: four KM panels — A. SPOP Alterations in AO-PCa (Age >55); B. SPOP Alterations in EO-PCa (Age <=55); C. TP53 Alterations in AO-PCa (Age >55); D. TP53 Alterations in EO-PCa (Age <=55); panel p-values printed: A p = 1.79e-09, B p = 0.414, C p = 2.4e-25, D p = 0.000649 — small text] ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: We thank Vanessa Nepomuceno, PhD for assistance with poster preparation.

[Slide 1] BIOTECH NEWS [Circular illustration of a translucent human torso showing the bladder with a glowing orange tumour] FDA grants Priority Review for perioperative immunotherapeutic combination in bladder cancer NeoBiotechnologies Your Partner in Proteome Research Source: OncLive

[Slide 1] ESMO26 TOP TEN BY ONCOALERT GU ONCOLOGY [OncoAlert 360 logo - Oncology / For Colleagues / By Colleagues] WWW.ONCOALERT360.COM LBA2 | VOLGA: PERIOPERATIVE DURVALUMAB WITH OR WITHOUT TREMELIMUMAB PLUS NEOADJUVANT ENFORTUMAB VEDOTIN IN MUSCLE-INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER: RESULTS FROM THE PHASE 3 VOLGA TRIAL LBA4 | DASL-HICAP: DAROLUTAMIDE WITH ADT AND DEFINITIVE OR SALVAGE LOCOREGIONAL RADIATION THERAPY FOR LOCALISED, VERY HIGH-RISK PROSTATE CANCER: INTERIM ANALYSIS OF THE PHASE 3 DASL-HICAP TRIAL (ANZUP1801) 3586O | LITESPARK-012: FIRST-LINE PEMBROLIZUMAB + LENVATINIB + BELZUTIFAN OR MK-1308A + LENVATINIB IN ADVANCED RCC: RANDOMIZED OPEN-LABEL PHASE 3 LITESPARK-012 STUDY 3587O | LITESPARK-011: FINAL ANALYSIS OF THE PHASE 3 LITESPARK-011 STUDY: BELZUTIFAN PLUS LENVATINIB VERSUS CABOZANTINIB FOR ADVANCED RCC AFTER ANTI-PD-(L)1 THERAPY LBA56 | CAPITELLO-281: CAPIVASERTIB + ABIRATERONE VS PLACEBO + ABIRATERONE IN PATIENTS WITH PTEN-DEFICIENT METASTATIC HORMONE-SENSITIVE PROSTATE CANCER: UPDATED OVERALL SURVIVAL FROM CAPITELLO-281 3592O | AK112: EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF AK112 (IVONESCIMAB), A PD-1/VEGF BISPECIFIC ANTIBODY, AS FIRST-LINE TREATMENT FOR IMDC FAVORABLE-RISK ADVANCED RCC: RESULTS FROM A PHASE IB/II STUDY LBA53 | PROTEUS: PERIOPERATIVE APALUTAMIDE PLUS ADT WITH RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY AND PELVIC LYMPH NODE DISSECTION VS RP + PLND ALONE IN HIGH-RISK LOCALIZED OR LOCALLY ADVANCED PROSTATE CANCER: PROTEUS SUBSTUDY LBA88 | PE-PE: PERIOPERATIVE PEMBROLIZUMAB PLUS METASTASIS-DIRECTED THERAPY VERSUS MDT ALONE IN OLIGOMETASTATIC RENAL CELL CARCINOMA: THE RANDOMIZED PHASE II PE-PE TRIAL 4734O | KEYNOTE-B15: CTDNA ANALYSIS OF THE PHASE 3 KEYNOTE-B15 TRIAL: NEOADJUVANT AND ADJUVANT ENFORTUMAB VEDOTIN + PEMBROLIZUMAB FOR CISPLATIN-ELIGIBLE MUSCLE-INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER 3591RO | SWOG S2200: FIRST RESULTS OF SWOG S2200, A RANDOMIZED PHASE II STUDY COMPARING CABOZANTINIB WITH OR WITHOUT ATEZOLIZUMAB IN METASTATIC PAPILLARY RENAL CELL CARCINOMA 3588O | XMAB819: PHASE 1 RESULTS OF XMAB819, A NOVEL ENPP3 X CD3 BISPECIFIC, IN ADVANCED CLEAR CELL RENAL CELL CARCINOMA 4736O | ENERGIZE: RESULTS FROM A PHASE 3 TRIAL OF NEOADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY ALONE VS IN COMBINATION WITH NIVOLUMAB FOLLOWED BY POSTSURGICAL ADJUVANT NIVOLUMAB IN MUSCLE-INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER 4735O | KEYNOTE-866: PERIOPERATIVE PEMBROLIZUMAB OR PLACEBO + NEOADJUVANT CISPLATIN AND GEMCITABINE IN PATIENTS WITH MUSCLE-INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER: THE DOUBLE-BLIND, PHASE 3 KEYNOTE-866 STUDY Senior Faculty [headshots] Dr Morgan Clin Onc | Dr Choueiri Med Onc | Dr Gillessen Med Onc | Dr Agarwal Med Onc | Dr Zhang Med Onc | Dr Powles Med Onc | Dr Rini Med Onc | Dr Grivas Med Onc | Dr Merseburger Urologist | Dr Omlin Med Onc | Dr Apolo Med Onc | Dr Necchi Med Onc | Dr Heng Med Onc | Dr Pal Med Onc | Dr Grande Med Onc | Dr Hammers Med Onc Faculty [headshots] Dr Gandur Med Onc | Dr Membribes Med Onc | Dr Nizam Med Onc

[Slide 1] CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH ARTICLE NAVIGATION RESEARCH ARTICLE | SEPTEMBER 09 2026 Integrating NECTIN4 Amplification With Membranous Nectin-4 Expression to Develop a Scoring System for Predicting Enfortumab Vedotin Response in Urothelial Carcinoma [open access icon] Niklas Klümper; Thomas Büttner; Sebastian Rauch; Stefanie Zschäbitz; Florian Roghmann; Christian Bolenz; Fabienne Lange; Patricia Rausch; Friedemann Zengerling; Nadine Gaisa; Oliver Hahn; Constantin Schwab; Anna Scherping; Marieta Toma; Hendrik Heers; Phillipp Ivanyi; Guenter Niegisch; Camilla Marisa Grunewald; Christopher Darr; Pia Paffenholz; Richard Weiten; Susanne Füssel; Christian Thomas; Marcus Sondermann; Ulrich Sommer; Kerstin Junker; Katrin Schlack; Jozefina Casuscelli; Can Aydogdu; Dora Niedersüß-Beke; Steffen Rausch; Christoph Kuppe; Joshua Meeks; Bonnie Choy; Sarmad Sadeghi; Parkash Gill; Manuel Ritter; Johannes Brägelmann; Michael Hölzel; Arndt Hartmann; Viktor Grünwald; Jonas Saal; Markus Eckstein Check for updates + Author & Article Information Clin Cancer Res (2026) https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-26-0093 Article history

[Slide 1] [OncoAlert 360 logo] Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues ONCOALERT 4SIGHT ESMO 2026 | MADRID LITESPARK-012 First-line pembrolizumab + lenvatinib + belzutifan or MK-1308A + lenvatinib in advanced RCC TO BE PRESENTED AT #ESMO2026 BY: TONI CHOUEIRI, MD DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE [headshot of Toni Choueiri] [Madrid Metropolis building backdrop] [Slide 2] Methods DESIGN 1:1:1 randomization, open-label; 1688 adults with untreated advanced ccRCC. Data cutoff Feb 4, 2026; median follow-up 43.6 mo. TREATMENT Arm A: pembrolizumab 400 mg Q6W (≤18 cycles) + lenvatinib 20 mg QD + belzutifan 120 mg QD. Arm B: MK-1308A 25/400 mg Q6W (≤18 cycles) + lenvatinib. Control: pembrolizumab + lenvatinib. ENDPOINTS Dual primary: PFS by BICR (RECIST 1.1) and OS. Arm A vs control in all patients; Arm B vs control in IMDC intermediate/poor risk or all patients. SECONDARY ORR by BICR and safety. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Results All comparisons vs control (pembrolizumab + lenvatinib) ARM A Median PFS 20.8 vs 23.7 mo; HR 1.08 (95% CI 0.93–1.26); P=.84. Median OS 52.0 mo vs NR; HR 1.04 (95% CI 0.87–1.25); P=.66. ORR 69.1% vs 76.3%. ARM B Median PFS 20.7 vs 23.7 mo; HR 1.07 (95% CI 0.92–1.25); P=.82. Median OS NR vs NR; HR 1.12 (95% CI 0.94–1.35); P=.90. ORR 69.0% vs 76.3%. ARM B, IMDC INT/POOR Median PFS 20.5 vs 23.5 mo; HR 1.12 (95% CI 0.94–1.33); P=.90. Median OS 39.1 vs 46.2 mo; HR 1.17 (95% CI 0.96–1.42); P=.94. SAFETY All-cause AEs led to discontinuation of any drug in 51.6% (A), 51.4% (B) and 36.2% (control). All-cause grade ≥3 AEs: 87.2%, 88.7% and 84.8%. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Conclusion Neither belzutifan nor CTLA-4 blockade added to pembrolizumab + lenvatinib improved efficacy Pembrolizumab + lenvatinib remains a 1L SOC. The authors note that higher AE-related discontinuation of pembrolizumab, MK-1308A and lenvatinib in the investigational arms may have limited drug exposure and partly impacted efficacy. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 1] OncoAlert360 Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues ONCOALERT 4SIGHT ESMO 2026 | MADRID PEACE-1 Long-term overall survival with abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in the PEACE-1 phase 3 trial for de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer TO BE PRESENTED AT #ESMO2026 BY: KARIM FIZAZI, MD CENTRE OSCAR LAMBRET [headshot photo] [Slide 2] Methods DESIGN 2×2 factorial; 1:1:1:1 randomization to SOC, SOC + abiraterone, SOC + RT, or SOC + abiraterone + RT. POPULATION 1173 men with de novo mCSPC; 57% high-volume, 43% low-volume. STANDARD OF CARE ADT with or without docetaxel; 710 patients received ADT + docetaxel as SOC. FOLLOW-UP The initial analysis (median follow-up 4.4 y) showed abiraterone improved OS (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.69–0.98; p=0.030). This long-term update: median follow-up 7.7 y. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Results OS, ABIRATERONE HR 0.75 (95% CI 0.65–0.87); p=0.0001. Median OS 4.6 y (SOC), 4.6 y (SOC + RT), 5.7 y (SOC + abiraterone), 6.4 y (SOC + RT + abiraterone). DOUBLET VS TRIPLET In 710 patients on ADT + docetaxel, adding abiraterone: HR 0.68 (95% CI 0.56–0.82); median OS 4.4 vs 6.2 y; 8-year OS 27.1% vs 40.3%. HIGH VOLUME Doublet vs triplet: median OS 3.5 vs 4.6 y; HR 0.68 (95% CI 0.54–0.85); 8-year OS 20% vs 38%. LOW VOLUME Doublet vs triplet: median OS 6.2 vs 7.8 y; HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.52–1.05). Interaction test by metastatic extent p=0.56. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Conclusion Abiraterone added to SOC: major long-term OS benefit, irrespective of metastatic extent The authors state that triplet therapy with ADT + docetaxel + abiraterone is associated with almost twice as many long-term survivors in some subgroups. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 2] OncoAlert 360 · GUARD INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM 2026 · #GUARDSymposium2026 16-18 SEP Basic principles guiding a modern approach to patients with MIBC ▪ MIBC: ~25% de novo + ~20% progressing from NMIBC (implications for therapeutic attrition (impact of prior IO/ADCs exposure on subsequent strategies)1,2 ▪ The (old) pardigm of cisplatin eligibility: 50% of pts with MIBC slated to start neoadjuvant chemotherapy ▪ Expanding eligibility of neoadjuvant therapies due to IO/ADC use ▪ The growing % of chemotherapy refusals due to alternative options ▪ The evolving paradigm from exclusive neoadjuvant/adjuvant approach to a sandwich strategy (with future implications for surgery) #guardsymposium2026 X @GuardConsortium · GUARD CONSORTIUM 1. Roviello G, et al. Nat Rev Urol. 2024 Oct;21(10):580-592; 2. https://uroweb.org/guidelines/non-muscle-invasive-bladder-cancer Presented by: [Italian flag] Dr. Andrea Necchi · IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital [Slide 3] OncoAlert 360 · GUARD INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM 2026 · #GUARDSymposium2026 16-18 SEP Unmet Needs Across the Disease Spectrum [Three columns] ▪ Only one-third of patients with NMIBC receive IVS BCG according to guidelines[1] ▪ Many of those with NMIBC who are unresponsive to BCG experience recurrence or progression[2] [highlighted box] ▪ Close to half of patients with MIBC worldwide may not receive curative-intent therapy[3] ▪ Patients who have undergone RC for MIBC often have impaired HRQoL and a high risk of recurrence[4,5] ▪ More than half of patients with mUC may not receive 1L systemic treatment[6,7] ▪ Many patients with mUC who progress on 1L or 2L therapy do not receive subsequent treatment[6,7] [Bottom box] ▪ Development of effective, safe, and durable IVS treatment remains a critical unmet clinical need for patients who want to avoid RC ▪ Effective approaches post-RC are key to lowering the risk of recurrence ▪ Strategies for treatment sequencing after metastatic progression are needed ▪ Clinical trial enrollment allows for modern advances to reach patients 1L, first line; 2L, second line; BCG, bacille Calmette-Guérin; HRQoL, health-related quality of life; IVS, intravesical; MIBC, muscle-invasive bladder cancer; mUC, metastatic urothelial carcinoma; NMIBC, non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer; RC, radical cystectomy. 1. Tyson M, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37(suppl 15):e16012; 2. Shore ND, et al. Urol Oncol. 2021;39:642-663; 3. Westergren DO, et al. J Urol. 2019;202:905-912; 4. Choi H, et al. Transl Androl Urol. 2020;9:2997-3006; 5. Rouprêt M, et al. Eur Urol. 2021;79:62-79; 6. Morgans AK. Ann Oncol. 2021;32(suppl 5):704P; 7. Bilen M. Ann Oncol. 2021;32(suppl 5):701P. #guardsymposium2026 X @GuardConsortium · GUARD CONSORTIUM Presented by: [Italian flag] Dr. Andrea Necchi · IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital [Slide 4] OncoAlert 360 · GUARD INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM 2026 · #GUARDSymposium2026 16-18 SEP Conclusions ▪ Sandwich (perioperative) therapy remains the standard of care for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), supported by level 1 evidence ▪ Current data do not yet support safe de-escalation of perioperative systemic therapy whenever EVP or Durva-GC is initiated ▪ Since pCR is achieved in ~35-60% of patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy, a selected cohort of patients may forgo radical cystectomy and remain on stringent surveillance ▪ Several attemps have been/are being undertaken with the aim of removing the adjuvant or surgical component in selected patients ▪ Future strategies may focus on building from neoadjuvant EVP backbone #guardsymposium2026 X @GuardConsortium · GUARD CONSORTIUM Presented by: [Italian flag] Dr. Andrea Necchi · IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital

[Slide 1] [OncoAlert360 logo — Oncology · For Colleagues · By Colleagues] ONCOALERT 4SIGHT ESMO 2026 | MADRID KEYNOTE-866 Perioperative pembrolizumab or placebo + neoadjuvant cisplatin and gemcitabine in participants with muscle-invasive bladder cancer TO BE PRESENTED AT #ESMO2026 BY: JENS BEDKE, MD KLINIKUM STUTTGART KATHARINEN HOSPITAL [headshot of Jens Bedke; Madrid Metropolis building in background] [Slide 2] Methods DESIGN 1:1 randomization, double-blind, placebo-controlled; 907 randomized (453 vs 454). Data cutoff Jan 26, 2026; median follow-up 60.9 mo. TREATMENT Neoadjuvant pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo + gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² (d1, d8) + cisplatin 70 mg/m² (d1) Q3W × 4; RC + PLND; then adjuvant pembrolizumab or placebo Q3W × 13. POPULATION Centrally assessed cT2–T4aN0M0 or cT1–T4aN1M0 MIBC with ≥50% urothelial histology; ECOG PS 0–1; no prior systemic therapy; eligible for cisplatin-based chemotherapy and RC + PLND. ENDPOINTS Primary: investigator-assessed EFS. Key secondary: pCR by blinded central pathology review, and OS. Secondary: safety. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Results All comparisons: pembrolizumab vs placebo, each + neoadjuvant gemcitabine-cisplatin EFS Median 74.1 mo vs NR; HR 0.88 (95% CI 0.71–1.10); P=.1366. pCR & OS pCR 44.4% vs 35.8% (estimated difference 8.9%; 95% CI 2.5–15.1). Median OS NR in both arms; HR 1.00 (95% CI 0.79–1.27). Not formally tested due to the statistical design. SURGERY 91.6% (pembrolizumab) vs 87.9% (placebo) underwent surgery. SAFETY TEAEs 99.8% vs 98.7%; grade 3–5, 80.2% vs 75.1%; grade 5, 3.8% vs 4.5%. Most frequent immune-mediated AE with pembrolizumab: hypothyroidism 10.4% (grade 3–5, 0%). Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Conclusion Perioperative pembrolizumab did not significantly improve EFS in cisplatin-eligible MIBC Due to the statistical design, pCR and OS were not formally tested. The authors describe the safety profile of pembrolizumab as manageable and consistent with prior reports. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 1] [OncoAlert360 logo] OncoAlert360® Oncology For Colleagues By Colleagues ONCOALERT 4SIGHT ESMO 2026 | MADRID KEYNOTE-564 Final protocol-prespecified analysis of the phase 3 KEYNOTE-564 trial of adjuvant pembrolizumab versus placebo in clear cell renal cell carcinoma TO BE PRESENTED AT #ESMO2026 BY: TONI CHOUEIRI, MD DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE [headshot photo of presenter; Madrid building illustration; arrow] [Slide 2] Methods DESIGN 1:1 randomization to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo IV Q3W (≤17 cycles). POPULATION Adults at high risk of ccRCC recurrence after nephrectomy, with or without metastasectomy; 994 randomized (496 vs 498). ENDPOINTS Primary: investigator-assessed DFS (met at IA1). Key secondary: OS (met at IA2). FOLLOW-UP Data cutoff Feb 4, 2026; median follow-up 85.9 mo (range 76.6–103.2). Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 3] Results All comparisons: pembrolizumab vs placebo DFS 197 vs 264 events. Median NR vs 68.3 mo; HR 0.68 (95% CI 0.56–0.82); 7-yr DFS 57.2% vs 44.6%. OS 86 vs 118 events. Median NR in both arms; HR 0.70 (95% CI 0.53–0.92); 7-yr OS 82.3% vs 76.6%. RISK SUBGROUPS DFS HR: intermediate-high 0.71 (0.58–0.87); high 0.54 (0.31– 0.94); M1 NED 0.50 (0.26–0.96). OS HR: 0.66 (0.48–0.91); 0.92 (0.44–1.90); 0.54 (0.19–1.53). SARCOMATOID & SAFETY Sarcomatoid present: DFS HR 0.55 (0.33–0.92), OS HR 0.93 (0.44–1.94). Absent: DFS HR 0.71 (0.57–0.87), OS HR 0.68 (0.50–0.93). No new serious treatment-related AEs. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO. [Slide 4] Conclusion DFS and OS benefits with adjuvant pembrolizumab remained consistent at final analysis Benefits remained consistent with earlier reports for the total and key subgroup populations. The authors state the results continue to support adjuvant pembrolizumab as standard treatment for ccRCC at increased risk of recurrence. Based on publicly released #ESMO 2026 abstract. Preliminary data, not peer-reviewed. Not medical advice. © original authors/ESMO.

[Slide 1] MIBC VOLGA Sep 25, 2026 BREAKING [stamp graphic] FDA PRIORITY REVIEW AstraZeneca [logo] Perioperative Imfinzi plus neoadjuvant enfortumab vedotin granted Priority Review in the US for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer LARVOL

[Slide 1] EUROPEAN UROLOGY | LeapSpace [search bar: Search for...] BRIEF REPORT · Articles in Press, September 24, 2026 Pretreatment Tumor NECTIN4 RNA Expression Is Associated with First-line Enfortumab Vedotin Plus Pembrolizumab Efficacy in Metastatic Urothelial Cancer Byuri Angela Cho a · Curtis J. Perry b · Seong-Keun Yoo c · Jacob Mercer d · Christina Thai d · Guru Sonpavde e · Paul A. Fields d · Alan Tan d · Daniel P. Petrylak f · Matthew D. Galsky g Show less Affiliations & Notes | Article Info

[Slide 1] GU Cancer: Top Trending Abstracts on X Ahead of ESMO 2026 [Legend] ADC / IO / PARP, TKI, AKT, MTI, CYP17 inhibitor / Plasma ctDNA genomic profiling [Column headers (KOLs / AI models)] Andrea Necchi | Axel Merseburger | Karine Tawagi | Kohji Takemura | Niklas Klümper | Tom Powles | Toni Choueiri | Yuksel Urun | ChatGPT 5.6 Sol | Gemini 3.8 Flash | Claude Opus 5.5 | Grok 4.7 Date | Abstract ID | Presenter | Phase | Abstract Title | X marks Oct 23 | 4736O | Necchi | P3 | ENERGIZE: Neoadj CT alone vs in combi with nivo f/d by postsurgical adj nivo in MIBC | X: Necchi, Merseburger, Klümper, Powles, Choueiri, Urun, ChatGPT, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | 4735O | Bedke | P3 | KEYNOTE-866: Periope pembro or pbo + neoadj cis + gem in MIBC | X: Necchi, Merseburger, Klümper, Powles, Choueiri, Urun, ChatGPT, Claude, Grok Oct 24 | LBA2 | Powles | P3 | VOLGA: Periop durva ± tremelimumab + neoadj EV in MIBC | X: Merseburger, Takemura, Klümper, Choueiri, Urun, ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | 4734O | Chatzkel | P3 | KEYNOTE-B15: Neoadj-adj EV + Pembro in MIBC who are eligible for cis - ctDNA analysis | X: Tawagi, Klümper, Powles, Urun, ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Grok Oct 25 | 3587O | Heng | P3 | LITESPARK-011: Bel + len vs cabo for adv RCC after anti-PD-(L)1 therapy - Final analysis | X: Merseburger, Tawagi, Choueiri, Urun, ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | 4733O | Ullén | P3 | KEYNOTE-905: Periop Pembro or EV + pembro in pts with MIBC who are cis-ineligible - ad hoc analysis | X: Klümper, Powles, Urun, ChatGPT, Claude, Grok Oct 24 | LBA4 | Niazi | P3 | DASL-HiCaP: Darolutamide + ADT and definitive or salvage locoregional RT for loc very H-risk PC - Interim analysis | X: Merseburger, Takemura, Choueiri, Urun, Claude Oct 24 | 4737RO | De Santis | P3 | POTOMAC: Durva + BCG (I+M) for BCG-Naïve, H-Risk NMIBC: Early Recurr + CFS in pts with Papillary Only Tumours | X: Merseburger, Choueiri, Urun, Gemini, Grok Oct 24 | 2215O | Fizazi | P3 | PEACE-1: Abiraterone acetate + prednisone for de novo mCSPC - Long-term OS | X: Merseburger, Choueiri, Urun, ChatGPT Oct 25 | 3589RO | Choueiri | P3 | KEYNOTE-564: adj pembro vs pbo in ccRCC - Final protocol-prespecified analysis | X: Merseburger, Choueiri, Urun, Claude Oct 24 | 4742O | Sweis | P1 | TROPHY-U-01: SG + EV + ZIM in tx-Naive mUC - Interim Results | X: Powles, Claude, Grok Oct 23 | LBA56 | Fizazi | P3 | CAPItello-281: Capi + abi vs pbo + abi in PTEN-deficient mHSPC - Updated OS | X: Urun, ChatGPT, Gemini Oct 23 | 2222RO | Azad | P3 | TALAPRO-3: PROs in men with mCSPC and HRR gene alterations receiving TALA + ENZA vs PBO + ENZA | X: Tawagi, ChatGPT, Claude Oct 23 | 2219RO | Azad | P3 | TALAPRO-3: TALA + ENZA vs PBO + ENZA in HRR gene-mut mCSPC - Utility of ctDNA TF as a prognostic biomarker | X: Tawagi, ChatGPT, Claude Oct 25 | 3586O | Choueiri | P3 | LITESPARK-012: 1L pembro + len + bel or MK-1308A + len in adv RCC | X: Merseburger, Choueiri, Urun Oct 25 | 3591RO | Maughan | P2 | PAPMET2: Cabo ± atezo in mPRCC - First results | X: Merseburger, Choueiri, Urun Oct 24 | LBA53 | Briganti | P3 | PROTEUS: Periope APA + ADT with RP + PLND vs RP + PLND alone in H-risk LPC/LAPC | X: Merseburger, Urun Oct 24 | 4749O | Tiancheng Liu | P2 | WUTSUP-02: Neoadj Tislelizumab + Disitamab Vedotin for UTUC - Mid-term Results | X: Powles, Grok Oct 23 | 1209RO | Hui Han | P2 | NCT06415318: Neoadj toripalimab + CT for LA penile squamous cell carcinoma | X: Tawagi Oct 23 | 2221RO | Khalaf | P2 | PLUDO: Patient Reported QoL for Doc vs Lutetium177-617-PSMA (LuP) for mCRPC | X: Tawagi Oct 23 | 2220RO | Mehra | – | PROMPT: Plasma ctDNA as standalone or adjunct to tumour tissue for HRR and PI3K/AKT genotyping in mCRPC | X: Tawagi Oct 23 | 2217RO | Von Amsberg | P1/2 | KEYNOTE-365: Pembro + carbo + etoposide CT or CT alone for NEPC - Updated results from cohort I | X: Tawagi Oct 24 | 4740RO | Maroto | P1/2 | KEYNOTE-869: EV ± Pembro as 1L tx for cis-ineligible LA/mUC - Long-Term Follow-up Analysis from Cohorts DE/A and K | X: Powles Oct 24 | 4739RO | Bian | P2 | SKB264-II-06: Sac-TMT + Pembro for LA/mUC | X: Powles Oct 24 | 4748RO | Yang | P2 | NCT05723991: Neoadj Disitamab Vedotin + Gem in MIBC pts with HER2 2 3+ Interim Prognostic Outcomes | X: Tawagi Format and methodology credit: Dr. Mike Thompson [LARVOL logo]

[Slide 1] #ESMO2026 Jonathan Chatzkel, MD Presents: ctDNA analysis of the Phase 3 KEYNOTE-B15 trial: neoadjuvant and adjuvant (neoadj-adj) enfortumab vedotin (EV) + pembrolizumab (pembro) for participants (pts) with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) who are eligible for cisplatin Fri., Oct. 23 1:30 to 3:00 p.m. CEST Bilboa Auditorium - Hall 3 MOFFITT CANCER CENTER MOFFITT AT ESMO 2026 [headshot of presenter]

[Slide 1] FDA Grants Priority Review to Durvalumab + Enfortumab Vedotin in Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer OncoDaily [background: globe over stock-ticker/candlestick chart graphic]

[Slide 1] OncoDaily EVOLUTE Enfortumab Vedotin in Older Adults With Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma [illustration: older man in suit at the entrance of a circular maze with a tumour-cell sphere at its centre]

[Slide 2] ONCOASSIST® 02 Real-World Access to and Adoption of Novel mCRPC Therapies @ONCOASSIST ONCOASSIST.COM

[Slide 2] RAPID ORAL PRESENTATIONS • Distinguishing clonal hematopoiesis (CH) from tumor homologous recombination repair (HRR) alterations in liquid biopsy: Implications for PARP inhibitor (PARPi) use in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) [Foundation Medicine logo mark, bottom right; decorative glass-bauble background] [Slide 3] RAPID ORAL PRESENTATIONS • Utility of ctDNA tumor fraction (TF) as a prognostic biomarker in TALAPRO-3: Phase 3 study of talazoparib (TALA) + enzalutamide (ENZA) vs placebo (PBO) + ENZA in patients (pts) with homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene–mutated metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) [Foundation Medicine logo mark, bottom right; decorative glass-bauble background]

[Slide 1] touchONCOLOGY [logo] " ESMO is always a highlight of the oncology calendar, bringing together the latest science, fresh perspectives and the experts shaping the future of cancer care. In genitourinary oncology, I am particularly looking forward to addressing key questions in perioperative and curative-intent treatment across muscle-invasive bladder cancer and high-risk localised prostate cancer. The real value of this meeting lies in turning scientific progress into better clinical decisions and, ultimately, better outcomes for our patients. [headshot photo] Prof Axel S Merseburger Editor-in-Chief, touchONCOLOGY ESMO 2026 MADRID, SPAIN 23-27 OCTOBER 2026