Search

PURPOSE Palbociclib is a cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor approved for advanced breast cancer. In the adjuvant setting, the potential value of adding palbociclib to endocrine therapy for hormone receptor–positive breast cancer has not been confirmed. PATIENTS AND METHODS In the prospective, randomized, phase III PALLAS trial, patients with hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative early breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive 2 years of palbociclib (125 mg orally once daily, days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle) with adjuvant endocrine therapy or adjuvant endocrine therapy alone (for at least 5 years). The primary end point of the study was invasive disease-free survival (iDFS); secondary end points were invasive breast cancer–free survival, distant recurrence-free survival, locoregional cancer-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS Among 5,796 patients enrolled at 406 centers in 21 countries worldwide over 3 years, 5,761 were included in the intention-to-treat population. At the final protocol-defined analysis, at a median follow-up of 31 months, iDFS events occurred in 253 of 2,884 (8.8%) patients who received palbociclib plus endocrine therapy and in 263 of 2,877 (9.1%) patients who received endocrine therapy alone, with similar results between the two treatment groups (iDFS at 4 years: 84.2% v 84.5%; hazard ratio, 0.96; CI, 0.81 to 1.14; P = .65). No significant differences were observed for secondary time-to-event end points, and subgroup analyses did not show any differences by subgroup. There were no new safety signals for palbociclib in this trial. CONCLUSION At this final analysis of the PALLAS trial, the addition of adjuvant palbociclib to standard endocrine therapy did not improve outcomes over endocrine therapy alone in patients with early hormone receptor–positive breast cancer.

180 Background: Financial toxicity affects 20% of cancer survivors and is associated with decreased treatment adherence and poor clinical outcomes. No large-scale programs have been implemented to mitigate financial toxicity among patients undergoing cancer treatment. We evaluated the effect of monthly patient-reported financial toxicity screening as part of a larger digital monitoring intervention. Methods: PRO-TECT (AFT-39) is a cluster-randomized trial of patients undergoing systemic therapy for metastatic cancer. Practices were randomized 1:1 to digital symptom monitoring with patient-reported outcomes (“PRO practices”) or usual care (“control practices”). Digital monitoring consisted of between-visit online or automated telephone patient surveys containing symptom, functioning, and financial toxicity screening questions for up to one year, with automated alerts sent to practice nurses for concerning survey scores. Clinical team actions in response to alerts were not mandated. The primary outcome of this analysis was development or worsening of financial difficulties, assessed via the EORTC QLQ-C30 (“Has your physical condition or medical treatment caused you financial difficulties?”), at any time compared to baseline. A randomly selected subset of patients and nurses were interviewed about their experiences with the intervention. Results: 1,191 patients were enrolled (593 PRO; 598 control) at 52 US community oncology practices. Overall, 30.2% of patients treated at practices that received the intervention developed, or experienced worsening of, financial difficulties, compared to 39.0% of patients treated at control practices (p = 0.01). Patients and nurses interviewed stated that financial toxicity screening identified patients for financial counseling who otherwise would be reluctant to seek, or unaware of the availability of, assistance. Conclusions: Screening for financial toxicity as part of routine digital patient monitoring with PROs reduces the development, or worsening, of financial difficulties among patients undergoing systemic cancer therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT03249090.

TPS607 Background: There are currently limited treatment options for patients with HR+ EBC who have discontinued adjuvant treatment with aromatase inhibitors (AIs) due to treatment-related toxicity. Amcenestrant is an optimized oral selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD) with potent dual activity which antagonizes and degrades the ER resulting in inhibition of the ER signalling pathway. Preliminary clinical evidence from the phase 1/2 AMEERA-1 trial has demonstrated meaningful antitumour activity and a favourable safety profile of amcenestrant in the treatment of HR+ advanced breast cancer (Linden HM, Campone M, Bardia A, et al: Abstract PD8-08: A phase 1/2 study of SAR439859, an oral selective estrogen receptor (ER) degrader (SERD), as monotherapy and in combination with other anti-cancer therapies in postmenopausal women with ER-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC): AMEERA-1. SABCS 2020 PD8-08). Methods: AMEERA-6 is a prospective, randomized, international, double-blind, double-dummy, phase 3 study. 3738 patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive either amcenestrant 200 mg daily or tamoxifen 20 mg daily. Eligible patients are pre-or postmenopausal women or men with HR+ EBC (stage IIB-III) who have received at least 6 months of adjuvant AIs (at least 3 months in the adjuvant setting if they have received prior neoadjuvant AI therapy) and discontinued them within 30 months of initiation due to treatment-related toxicity. Participants will be centrally assessed to have ER+ and/or PgR+ (≥10% positive stained cells) status by immunohistochemistry assay. Prior use of adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors are allowed. Patients are eligible irrespective of HER2 status; for patients with HER2-positive disease adjuvant anti-HER2 treatment and chemotherapy must be completed prior to randomization. Stratification factors include: duration of AI therapy, HER2 status, prior chemotherapy, prior CDK4/6 inhibitors, geographic region, and menopausal status. Planned treatment duration is 5 years. Patients will be followed-up for 10 years from randomization. The primary endpoint is invasive breast cancer-free survival (IBCFS). Invasive disease-free survival is a key secondary endpoint, while other secondary endpoints include distant relapse-free survival (RFS), locoregional RFS, overall survival, breast-cancer specific survival, safety, patient reported outcomes and pharmacokinetics. Adherence to treatment is an exploratory endpoint. AMEERA-6 opened for recruitment in January 2022. Clinical trial information: NCT05128773.

8504 Background: The CALGB 30610 trial demonstrated that 70Gy QD TRT was not associated with a superior overall survival compared to standard BID 45Gy TRT in limited stage small cell lung cancer. Since both arms appeared to provide similar clinical benefit, other factors such as quality of life may help oncologists decide on the best treatment approach for their patients. The present analysis was conducted to compare patients’ quality of life between these regimens in terms of their physical symptoms, physical functioning and psychological state. Methods: In the CALGB 30610 planned sub-study CALGB 70702, patients were administered the FACT-L, FACT Trial Outcome Index-Lung Cancer (FACT-L TOI), FACT-Esophageal Cancer Eating and Swallowing Indices, ECOG Acute Esophagitis Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the EQ-5D at baseline and a single item assessing difficulty swallowing at baseline, 3, 5, 7, 12, 26, and 52 weeks after starting radiation therapy. Patients were also asked to assess treatment inconvenience at these time points. The primary endpoints of CALGB 70702 were FACT-L TOI and FACT eating and swallowing subscales at 12 weeks. Mean changes from baseline were compared between arms using general linear mixed models. Results: 417 patients consented to participate in the patient-reported outcomes substudy. The completion rate of the questionnaires was 87% at baseline and 71% at week 52. The FACT-L total score mean worsening was significantly less in the QD arm compared to the BID arm at week 3 (-1.0 vs -7.0; P=.003), and marginally less at week 5 (-5.3 vs -11.0; P=.06). The FACT-L TOI mean worsening was significantly less in the QD arm than in the BID arm at week 3 (-2.9 vs -7.6; P=.003) and greater at week 12 (-7.6 vs -2.8; P=.03). The QD arm also had a lesser EQ-5D index mean worsening at 3 weeks (-0.04 vs 0.03; P=.002). Mean increase in the acute esophagitis score (1.06 vs 2.89; P

518 Background: Body Mass Index (BMI) impacts breast cancer risk and prognosis. Conflicting results have been published regarding BMI as a predictive factor for endocrine therapy benefit. CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) in combination with endocrine treatment (ET) are standard-of-care treatments for metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. In contrast to cytotoxic chemotherapy, CDK4/6i are given at a fixed dose irrespective of BMI or weight. The PALLAS trial compared the combination of the CDK4/6i palbociclib and adjuvant ET to ET alone in the early breast cancer setting. This analysis investigates the impact of BMI on the efficacy and the side effect profile of palbociclib (P) in the PALLAS trial. Methods: In this pre-planned analysis, patients (pts) enrolled in PALLAS were categorized according to BMI as underweight (BMI 2), normal weight (BMI 18.5-24.9 kg/m2), overweight (BMI 25-29.9 kg/m2) and obese (³30 kg/m2), respectively. Adverse event differences were assessed with Chi-squared tests. Time to early discontinuation of P was analyzed with Fine and Gray competing risk models. Cox models were used to investigate the association between BMI category and time to invasive disease-free survival (iDFS). Results: Of a total of 5698 pts included in this analysis, 68 (1.2%) were underweight, 2082 (36.5%) normal weight, 1818 (31.9%) overweight and 1730 (30.4%) obese at baseline. Significantly different rates of all grade neutropenia were observed in normal weight, overweight and obese pts with regard to total (88.5%, 85.7% and 74.7%), as well as grade 3 (64.1%, 62.0% and 43.9%) and grade 4 neutropenia (7.0%, 3.6% and 2.0%), respectively. The lower frequency and severity of neutropenia observed in overweight and obese pts was associated with a significant lower treatment discontinuation rate over time when compared to normal weight patients (overweight vs normal weight: HR 0.73 CI 0.63-0.84, p

TPS5107 Background: Despite a growing number of treatment options for first line mCRPC, approximately 40% of patients (pts) have radiographic progression within the first year. Androgen receptor (AR) signaling inhibition increases genomic instability with double-strand DNA breaks & co-inhibition of AR & PARP induces synthetic lethality in multiple preclinical models. Homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene aberrations do not appear to be necessary for this synergy as demonstrated in a ph 3 clinical trial of abiraterone & olaparib where this combination improved radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) in HRR-wild-type pts compared with abiraterone alone. A ph 1b trial has since shown that enzalutamide plus rucaparib has acceptable safety profile & no significant drug-drug interactions (S-DDI). Methods: CASPAR/A031902 (NCT04455750) is a ph 3 study in which 984 pts will be randomized 1:1 to enzalutamide plus rucaparib or placebo. HRR gene aberration is not required for enrollment. All pts will undergo next-generation targeted-exome sequencing from archival tumor tissue (new biopsy only required if no archival tissue available). Treatment will be continued until disease progression & crossover is not allowed. Key eligibility criteria are age ≥ 18 years, ECOG PS 0-2, biopsy-proven prostate adenocarcinoma, progressive (PSA or radiographic) disease per Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 guidelines, measurable or nonmeasurable disease per RECIST 1.1, no prior treatment for mCRPC (prior docetaxel, abiraterone, darolutamide, or apalutamide in non-mCRPC setting is allowed), no significant uncontrolled comorbidity, & no medications with S-DDI with enzalutamide/rucaparib. Hierarchical co-primary endpoints are rPFS & overall survival (OS). The OS analysis will be undertaken as a primary endpoint if the rPFS endpoint is met. For a one-sided logrank test with a type 1 error rate equal to 0.025, the study has 90% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.71 in rPFS (median rPFS of 15 & 21 months in control & combination arms, respectively) & 80% power to detect an HR of 0.80 in OS (median OS of 32 & 40 months, respectively). Key secondary endpoints are rPFS & OS in pts with vs without pathogenic BRCA1, BRCA2, or PALB2 alterations; & differences in adverse events & quality of life (QOL) outcomes between the treatment arms. QOL assessments include Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Prostate (FACT-P), Brief Pain Inventory Short Form (BPI-SF) & EQ-5D-5L. A key correlative endpoint is the sensitivity of ctDNA-based testing for alterations in HRR genes. Enrollment to CASPAR began in July 2021 & the study is available for participation to all US-NCTN sites with a projected enrollment of 3 years. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171; U10CA180888. Clinical trial information: NCT04455750.

e19078 Background: Patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN), including polycythemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET), and myelofibrosis (MF), experience chronic disease-related symptoms. Surveying these patients while incorporating the MPN-Symptom Assessment Form (SAF) gains valuable insight. Independent surveys evaluating symptoms among MPN patients have seen disproportionate participation among females compared to males (upwards of 4:1). Though the general MPN patient population is roughly gender balanced, epidemiological studies show the occurrence of MPN types differ between men and women (MPN [%male]: PV [65%], ET [33%], MF [50%]. Mehta, et al. Leuk & Lymph 2014). In-clinic evaluations and international MPN surveys of disease-related symptoms suggest women report higher symptom burden on average compared to men, despite MPN type [Emanuel, et al. JCO 2012. Geyer, et al. Haematol 2017]. Further, a recent study across cancer trials showed women had a 34% increased risk of reporting severe symptoms [Unger, et al. JCO 2022]. This study aimed to evaluate gender imbalance in survey participation among MPN patient surveys and investigate its potential to overestimate symptom burden if gender is ignored. Methods: Five anonymous web-based surveys were used to assess the impact of disproportionate gender participation. The MPN-10 assessing the 10 most clinically meaningful SAF items was present in these surveys and generated the Total Symptom Score (TSS). Survey responses with no self-reported gender or ≥5 missing MPN-10 symptoms were excluded. Raking weights based on expected MPN population were applied at the survey- and MPN type-level. Relative bias of mean TSS was calculated to evaluate over- and underestimation due to this participation imbalance. Relative bias

TPS194 Background: Despite a growing number of treatment options for first line mCRPC, approximately 40% of patients (pts) have radiographic progression within the first year. Androgen receptor (AR) signaling inhibition increases genomic instability with double-strand DNA breaks & co-inhibition of AR & PARP induces synthetic lethality in multiple preclinical models. Homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene aberrations do not appear to be necessary for this synergy as demonstrated in a ph 2 clinical trial of abiraterone & olaparib where this combination improved radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) in HRR-wild-type pts compared with abiraterone alone. A ph 1b trial has since shown that enzalutamide plus rucaparib has acceptable safety profile & no significant drug-drug interactions (S-DDI). Methods: CASPAR/A031902 (NCT04455750) is a ph 3 study in which 984 pts will be randomized 1:1 to enzalutamide plus rucaparib or placebo. HRR gene aberration is not required for enrollment. All pts will undergo next-generation targeted-exome sequencing from archival tumor tissue (new biopsy only required if no archival tissue available). Treatment will be continued until disease progression & crossover is not allowed. Key eligibility criteria are age ≥ 18 years, ECOG PS 0-2, biopsy-proven prostate adenocarcinoma, progressive (PSA or radiographic) disease per Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 guidelines, measurable or nonmeasurable disease per RECIST 1.1, no prior treatment for mCRPC (prior docetaxel, abiraterone, darolutamide, or apalutamide in non-mCRPC setting is allowed), no significant uncontrolled comorbidity, & no medications with S-DDI with enzalutamide/rucaparib. Hierarchical co-primary endpoints are rPFS & overall survival (OS). The OS analysis will be undertaken as a primary endpoint if the rPFS endpoint is met. For a one-sided logrank test with a type 1 error rate equal to 0.025, the study has 90% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.71 in rPFS (median rPFS of 15 & 21 months in control & combination arms, respectively) & 80% power to detect an HR of 0.80 in OS (median OS of 32 & 40 months, respectively). Key secondary endpoints are rPFS & OS in pts with vs without pathogenic BRCA1, BRCA2, or PALB2 alterations; & differences in adverse events & quality of life (QOL) outcomes between the treatment arms. QOL assessments include Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Prostate (FACT-P), Brief Pain Inventory Short Form (BPI-SF) & EQ-5D-5L. A key correlative endpoint is the sensitivity of ctDNA-based testing for alterations in HRR genes. Enrollment to CASPAR began in July 2021 & the study is available for participation to all US-NCTN sites with a projected enrollment of 3 years. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171; U10CA180888; Clovis Oncology; http://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org Clinical trial information: NCT04455750.

349527 Background: Symptoms are common during cancer care but often go undetected. Digital systems that elicit patient-reported outcomes (PRO) surveys may detect symptoms early and prompt clinicians to intervene, thereby alleviating suffering and averting complications. Methods: In a cluster-randomized trial, U.S.-based community oncology practices were randomized 1:1 to digital symptom monitoring with PRO surveys, or to usual care control. Patients receiving systemic treatment for metastatic cancer were eligible. At PRO practices, participants were invited to complete a weekly survey via web or automated telephone system for up to one year, including questions about nine common symptoms, performance status, and falls. Severe or worsening symptoms triggered electronic alerts to care team nurses, and reports showing longitudinal symptom data were available to oncologists at visits. Pre-specified secondary outcomes included impact on physical function, symptom control, and health-related quality of life (HRQL). The primary outcome of survival is not yet mature. Results: At 52 practices, 1,191 patients were eligible and enrolled (593 PRO; 598 control). Clinically meaningful benefits were experienced in physical function by 13.8% more patients with PRO versus control (P=0.009); symptom control by 16.1% (P=0.003); and HRQL by 13.4% (P=0.006). Mean changes from baseline were superior with PRO versus control for physical function (mean difference 2.47, 95% CI 0.41-4.53; P=0.02), symptom control (2.56, 0.95-4.17; P=0.002), and HRQL (2.43, 0.90-3.96; P=0.002). Patients completed 20,565/22,486 (91.5%) of expected weekly PRO surveys. Conclusions: Digital symptom monitoring during cancer treatment confers clinical benefits. Clinical trial information: NCT03249090.

2500 Background: Oncolytic virotherapy is a novel immunomodulatory therapeutic approach for relapsed refractory hematologic malignancies. The Indiana strain of Vesicular Stomatitis Virus was engineered to encode interferon beta (IFNβ) and sodium iodine symporter (NIS) to produce VSV-IFNβ-NIS. Virally encoded IFNβ serves as an index of viral proliferation and enhances host anti-tumor immunity. NIS was inserted to noninvasively assess viral biodistribution using SPECT/PET imaging. We present the results of the phase 1 clinical trial NCT03017820 of systemic administration of VSV-IFNβ-NIS among patients (pts) with relapsed refractory Multiple Myeloma (MM), T cell Lymphoma (TCL) and Acute myeloid Leukemia (AML). Methods: VSV-IFNβ-NIS was administered at 5x109 TCID50 (50% tissue culture infectious dose) dose level 1 to dose level 4, 1.7x1011 TCID50. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose of VSV-IFNβ-NIS as a single agent. Secondary objectives were determination of safety profile and preliminary efficacy of VSV-IFNβ-NIS. Correlative objectives included monitoring viremia and virus shedding. Adverse events (AEs) are reported based on CTCAE V4; cytokine release syndrome (CRS) grading was based on Lee (Blood 2014) criteria. Results: 15 pts received VSV-IFNβ-NIS: MM (7), TCL(7) and AML(1); 3 pts were treated at each dose level (DL) 1 through 3 (respectively 0.05, 0.17, and 0.5 x 1011 TCID50), & 6 pts were treated at dose level 4 (1.7x1011 TCID50). There were no dose limiting toxicities. The most frequent grades 3 & 4 AEs were hematologic: lymphopenia (46.6 & 26.6%), neutropenia (13.3% & 6.7%). CRS grades 1 (6.7%) and 2 (46.6%) were the non-hematologic AEs of note; mostly at DL 4. Only 1 pt required transient pressor support. Responses were seen in pts with T cell lymphoma. At DL2, there was a partial response (PR) lasting 3 months in a pt, post 12 prior lines of therapy. At DL4 there was a 6 month PR in a pt with PTCL and another pt with cutaneous relapse of PTCL who enjoys an ongoing CR, more than 1 year post VSV infusion; both pts received 5 prior lines of therapy. Viremia was detected in all pts at the end of infusion only up to 72 hrs post infusion; no infectious virus was recovered in buccal swabs or urine. Neutralizing anti-VSV antibodies were present by day 29. IFN levels were detectable within 30 mins of infusion, peaking between 4 & 48 hrs. TCL pts mounted higher hIFNβ levels within 48 hrs; the pt with CR mounted peak hIFNβ response of 18213.3pg/ml at 48 hrs post infusion, 15-fold higher than any other pt. Conclusions: VSV-IFNβ-NIS can be safely administered by IV infusion among heavily pretreated pts with hematologic malignancies. VSV-IFNβ-NIS as a single agent appears to be most effective at DL4 among patients with TCL, with an ongoing CR in a patient at DL4 more than 1 year post administration. Future trials of combination strategies with immune-modulatory drugs are currently being planned. Clinical trial information: NCT03017820.

Background Lapatinib (L) plus trastuzumab (T) improves outcomes for metastatic human epidermal growth factor 2–positive breast cancer and increases the pathologic complete response in the neoadjuvant setting, but their role as adjuvant therapy remains uncertain. Methods In the Adjuvant Lapatinib and/or Trastuzumab Treatment Optimization trial, patients with centrally confirmed human epidermal growth factor 2–positive early breast cancer were randomly assigned to 1 year of adjuvant therapy with T, L, their sequence (T→L), or their combination (L+T). The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS), with 850 events required for 80% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.8 for L+T versus T. Results Between June 2007 and July 2011, 8,381 patients were enrolled. In 2011, due to futility to demonstrate noninferiority of L versus T, the L arm was closed, and patients free of disease were offered adjuvant T. A protocol modification required P ≤ .025 for the two remaining pairwise comparisons. At a protocol-specified analysis with a median follow-up of 4.5 years, a 16% reduction in the DFS hazard rate was observed with L+T compared with T (555 DFS events; HR, 0.84; 97.5% CI, 0.70 to 1.02; P = .048), and a 4% reduction was observed with T→L compared with T (HR, 0.96; 97.5% CI, 0.80 to 1.15; P = .61). L-treated patients experienced more diarrhea, cutaneous rash, and hepatic toxicity compared with T-treated patients. The incidence of cardiac toxicity was low in all treatment arms. Conclusion Adjuvant treatment that includes L did not significantly improve DFS compared with T alone and added toxicity. One year of adjuvant T remains standard of care.

151 Background: Decision aids (DAs) for prostate cancer treatment can improve knowledge and reduce decisional conflict, but the relative effect of pre-visit and within-visit DAs is not known, and effect sizes for minority populations has not been estimated. Methods: We conducted a 3-arm, patient-level-RCT in specialty urology and radiation oncology practices in Ohio, South Dakota, and Alaska, test the effect of pre-consultation and with-in consultation decision aids on patient knowledge immediately after specialty consultation compared to usual care. We used linear regression to estimate effects of each intervention arm, including the respective standard error, two-sided 95% confidence interval, and two-sided P value for testing the study’s hypotheses. Results: 103 patients were recruited and randomized to receive either the pre-visit decision aid, within-visit decision aid, or neither decision aids (usual care). In 2017 and 20018, we accrued similar numbers of men to pre-consultation aid (n = 37), during-consultation aid (n = 33) and usual care arms, respectively (n = 33). The median (range) age in years was 64 [49, 81]; 67.6% were White, 15.7% were Black or African American, 16.7% were American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1% were not reported. 47.6%, 45.6%, and 6.8% had a baseline clinical stage of T1, T2, and T3, respectively. The median [range] prostate specific antigen (PSA) was 8.0 [2.4, 53.7]. There were no clinically notable imbalances. We obtained usable data on 102 of the 103 patient-participants. The pre-visit decision aid arm showed a mean knowledge effect of 0.694 (0.636, 0.753). The within-visit decision arm showed a very similar mean knowledge effect of 0.686 (0.625, 0.748). The usual care arm showed a mean knowledge effect of 0.644 (0.582,0.705). The linear regression model showed, that, compared with usual care, neither intervention effect achieved statistical significance in the primary analysis (p = 0.24, 0.330, for pre-visit and within-visit, respectively). Conclusions: Modest knowledge gains of pre-visit and during-visit decision aids for prostate cancer treatment were not statistically significant. Clinical trial information: NCT03182998 .

e19112 Background: We sought to study the longitudinal QOL, financial burden and perception of care (PoC) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) or lymphoma (LYM) enrolled on CTs vs. those receiving standard care (Non-CT). Methods: QOL was evaluated using the FACT-G questionnaire (baseline, 1, 2, 3, 6 & 12 months). Financial burden was evaluated using 10 questions adapted from the MEPS survey and PoC was evaluated using 6 questions adapted from the CAHPS survey (baseline, 3, 6 & 12 months). Results: 35 (28%) of 123 enrolled patients were treated on CTs. Demographics, QOL and financial burden are shown in the Table. Baseline QOL scores were similar in CT vs non-CT groups. Age, gender and self-reported performance status were significantly associated with baseline QOL, while lines of therapy & cancer type were not. There were no significant differences in change in QOL vs. baseline in patients treated on CTs vs. non-CTs at 1, 2, 3, 6 and 12 months from baseline, including the total FACT-G score and the subdomains of functional, physical, emotional and social well-being. Within each group, there was a decline in QOL over the first 3 months, specifically physical WB, which gradually returned to baseline. Baseline answers to financial burden questions were similar, except patients on CTs reported less need for taking extended time-off from work (22% vs. 46%, p = 0.02). The only statistically significant difference in individual Qs over 1 year was ‘worry about having to pay large medical bills’ at the 6-month timepoint (CT: 0%, non-CT: 52%, p = 0.01). Using a composite score from 4 MEPS questions, financial burden over time was lower in the CT group, though the differences were not statistically significant. There were no significant differences in PoC at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months in the two groups based on answers to each of the six questions adapted from the CAHPS survey. Conclusions: Over 1 year, patients on CTs experienced a similar QOL and perceived their care to be similar as non-CT patients. Financial burden was lower in the CT group, though differences were not statistically significant. [Table: see text]

1016 Background: The ph III EMBRACE trial of E vs physician’s choice of tx led to FDA approval of E as ≥3rd-line tx for MBC pts with prior exposure to anthracyclines/taxanes. The ph III BOLD 301 trial of E vs capecitabine in advanced BC treated with anthracyclines/taxanes showed a nonsignificant trend to improved median OS for all pts; pre-planned analysis by HER2 status revealed a nominally significant benefit for HER2- pts. Methods: RU011201I is an investigator initiated ph III trial with 1:1 randomization to E (1.4 mg/m2 D1,8 q21days) vs P (90 mg/m2 D1,8,15 q28days) within strata defined by (neo)adjuvant taxanes (yes/no), HR status (+/-), and line of tx (1st/2nd). Pts had measurable or non-measurable disease by RECIST v1.1; new or progressive mets; peripheral neuropathy (PN) gr3 mos were allowed. (Neo)adjuvant taxanes were allowed if >12 mos between tx completion and disease recurrence. Radiographic studies occur q12wks. Survival data are collected q12wks after the Off-Tx Visit. Pts reported side effects weekly; post-baseline symptomatic AE rates worse than baseline were compared between arms using Fisher’s exact tests. We report clinical outcomes and the primary objective related to PRO-CTCAE use. Results: 201 pts enrolled 3/2014 - 5/2018 with 33.8 mos median f/u; 3 are on tx as of 2/20/20 (1E, 2P). Pt characteristics were the same between E vs P: median age 62 yrs (range 27-85); 42% prior taxane; 78% ER+; 70% starting 1st line tx. Baseline lesion distribution was similar except for lung mets (37E, 53P). No difference was seen between E vs P in PFS (5.7 vs 5.9 mos; P=0.72), OS (18.1 vs 16.4 mos; P=0.75), TTF (5.3 vs 4.9 mos; P=0.82), DOR (10.8 vs 12.3 mos; P=0.84), or number of metastatic events (55 vs 54). 37E and 36P pts required ≥1 dose reduction. Hematologic toxicities ≥ gr 3 were higher with E (40 vs 22%). PN events were similar: 56 vs 58 total, 4 vs 7 motor, 52 vs 51 sensory. Median duration of PN and median time to 1st PN event were 74 vs 140 and 56 vs 41 days. Worsened numbness/tingling severity and other pt-reported AE rates were similar, but worsened numbness/tingling interference (63% vs 78%, P=0.04) and vomiting frequency (35% vs 57%, P=0.005) were lower with E. Conclusions: Clinical outcomes were equivalent with E vs P as 1st/2nd line tx for HER2- advanced BC. The nature and severity of PN were similar between arms, but time of onset, duration, and interference with daily living favor E. E may be a suitable treatment option in this setting. Clinical trial information: NCT02037529 .

e24176 Background: Decision aids for prostate cancer treatment can improve knowledge, but the relative effect of pre-consultation and within-consultation DAs is not known. Methods: We conducted a parallel design, 2-by-2 factorial, 4-arm, cluster-RCT in urology practices affiliated with the NCI’s Alliance research base. We compared patient knowledge immediately after consultation (%12-item% correct) intervention arms compared to usual care. We used mixed effects regression modeling to assess effect of interventions on knowledge adjusting for site-clustering, race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic White; Other), age (years), clinical stage (T1-3), PSA, and Gleason score. Results: 15 of 21 randomized centers accrued 158 pts from Nov 2017 to June 2019. The arm delivering both DAs (n = 3 sites) recruited 25 pts. The pre-consultation DA arm (n = 4 sites) recruited 39 pts. The within-consultation DA arm (n = 4 sites) recruited 44 pts. The no DA arm (n = 4 sites) accrued 50 pts. Overall, mean age was 64; 54% were AA; 73% had T1 stage; median Gleason = 7; and median PSA = 7. The combined DAs group, followed by pre-consultation reported higher median knowledge (75% and 67%, respectively). The within-consultation and no DA arms both reported median knowledge scores (58%). Within arm, inter-site standard deviations in mean knowledge scores ranged from 0.164 in in the pre-consultation arm to 0.232 in the usual care arm. Neither pre-consultation nor within-consultation DAs had statistically significant effects (p = .15 and p = .99, respectively). Pre-specified adjusted difference [97.5% CIs], comparing the pre-consultation DA and the within-consultation DA with the control was 9.4% [-7.3%, 26.2%] and -0.4% [-16.9%, 16.1%], respectively. Intra-cluster correlation (ICC) coefficient was high (.24). No interaction effects were identified (p = .98). A post-hoc analysis comparing any DA vs usual care found a mean adjusted difference [95% CI] of 5.6% [-8.5%, 19.8%] (p = 0.40), 63.9% for any DA and 58.3% for usual care. Conclusions: Possible knowledge gains associated with some DAs for early prostate cancer were obscured by larger-than-expected intra-cluster correlation effects associated with the primary outcome. How interventions were used was not measured. Support:UG1CA189823; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org ; R01 MD008934-06. Clinical trial information: NCT03103321 .

7018 Background: Standard reporting of symptomatic adverse events (AEs) in oncology relies on clinicians to rate patient (pt) experience using CTCAE; each symptom is represented by a single graded item. To capture direct pt experience, NCI developed PRO-CTCAE to supplement CTCAE. In PRO-CTCAE, the pt answers up to 3 questions per AE about a symptom’s frequency, severity and interference with daily activities. To align PRO-CTCAE with CTCAE, we developed an algorithm for mapping sets of questions for an AE to a single composite numerical grade. Methods: We used a 5-step process. (1) All 187 possible PRO-CTCAE score permutations were presented to clinical investigators to subjectively map permutations to single numerical grades (range 0-3). (2) Permutations with < 75% agreement were presented to investigator committees at a National Clinical Trials Network meeting to gain majority consensus via anonymous voting. (3) The resulting algorithm was refined via graphical and tabular approaches to assure directional consistency. (4) Validity, reliability and sensitivity were assessed in a national study dataset. (5) Accuracy for delineating AEs between study arms was measured in 2 phase III clinical trials (Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology A091105 and Exelixis COMET-2). Results: (1) 12/187 score permutations had < 75% initial agreement. (2) Majority consensus was reached for all permutations. (3) 5 mappings were adjusted to assure directional consistency. (4) Composite grades for 46/59 (78%) AEs were higher in pts with ECOG performance status 2-4 vs 0-1 (median effect size 0.23 [range -0.49-0.73]; 32/59 effect size ≥0.2; 25/59 p< 0.05), similar to when conducting analysis on individual unmapped items. The test-retest reliability for 24 selected composite grades ranged from 0.57-0.96 (median intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] 0.77) with 18/24 (75%) grades having ICC ≥0.7. Median (range) standardized response means in pts reporting worsening, no change, and improvement were 0.20 (0.03-0.34), -0.06 (-0.20-0.03) and -0.12 (-0.32-0.06). (5) Pattern, directionality and statistical significance of between-arm differences in both trials were preserved with composite grades as compared to individual unmapped items. Conclusions: A composite grading algorithm for PRO-CTCAE was rigorously developed and validated. PRO-CTCAE composite grades may be useful in analyses to provide a single metric for each pt-reported AE for trial and real-world reporting. Support: UG1CA189823; U01CA233046; HHSN261200800043C; Bayer (A091105); https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org .

7044 Background: There is growing interest to implement electronic patient-reported outcomes in oncology practices for symptom monitoring. It is not well known what nurse, physician, and patient impressions of benefits, acceptability, and challenges are in routine care use. Methods: PRO-TECT is an ongoing U.S. national trial including 26 community oncology practices across 15 states that implemented PRO symptom monitoring [NCT03249090]. Patients complete weekly PROs between visits, nurses receive alerts for severe/worsening symptoms, and oncologists review PROs at office visits. Interviews were conducted with 147 stakeholders including nurses (N = 46), oncologists (N = 27), data managers (N = 15), and patients (N = 59). Each stakeholder group had different interview guides with overlapping topics to explore experiences with the PRO system. Interviews lasted 15-60 minutes, were digitally recorded, transcribed, and entered into a qualitative analysis software program. A codebook was developed from the research questions, interview guides, and discussions with the project team. Standardized coding methods were applied, with transcripts double coded for thematic analysis. Feedback surveys were also completed by nurses (N = 57), oncologists (N = 38), and patients (N = 435). Results: Key benefits perceived across stakeholder groups included increased patient self-awareness of symptoms; improved direct communication of patients with care teams; more open and honest conveying of symptom experiences; ability to track symptoms over time; and increased involvement of patients in their own care. Most stakeholders felt PRO symptom monitoring had a positive impact on quality of care delivery, and believed benefits of PROs outweighed necessary staff efforts. Challenges included additional work by nurses to review and respond to alerts, staff turnover requiring retraining, and limited time of oncologists. In the survey, 39/56 (70%) nurses felt the PRO system improved quality of care; 27/33 (82%) oncologists noted PROs were useful for team discussions and care delivery; and 320/434 (74%) patients agreed that weekly PRO reporting improved discussions with their care team. Conclusions: Clinicians and patients perceived weekly PRO symptom monitoring between visits to be valuable despite added staff effort. Results of additional analyses are forthcoming. Clinical trial information: NCT03249090 .

Purpose To develop a genomic signature that predicts benefit from trastuzumab in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive breast cancer. Patients and Methods DASL technology was used to quantify mRNA in samples from 1,282 patients enrolled onto the Combination Chemotherapy With or Without Trastuzumab in Treating Women With Breast Cancer (North Central Cancer Treatment Group N9831 [NCCTG-N9831]) adjuvant trastuzumab trial. Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs), adjusted for significant clinicopathologic risk factors, were used to determine the association of each gene with relapse-free survival (RFS) for 433 patients who received chemotherapy alone (arm A) and 849 patients who received chemotherapy plus trastuzumab (arms B and C). Network and pathway analyses were used to identify key biologic processes linked to RFS. The signature was built by using a voting scheme. Results Network and functional ontology analyses suggested that increased RFS was linked to a subset of immune function genes. A voting scheme model was used to define immune gene enrichment based on the expression of any nine or more of 14 immune function genes at or above the 0.40 quantile for the population. This model was used to identify immune gene–enriched tumors in arm A and arms B and C. Immune gene enrichment was linked to increased RFS in arms B and C (HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.55; P < .001), whereas arm B and C patients who did not exhibit immune gene enrichment did not benefit from trastuzumab (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.28; P = .53). Enriched immune function gene expression as defined by our predictive signature was not associated with increased RFS in arm A (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.37; P = .64). Conclusion Increased expression of a subset of immune function genes may provide a means of predicting benefit from adjuvant trastuzumab.

6594 Background: Given the significant short-term adverse effects of CAR-T cell therapy, it is important to evaluate its impact on QOL of patients in addition to efficacy, compared with established forms of cellular therapy like SCT. Methods: QOL was evaluated prospectively in patients undergoing CAR-T therapy, autoSCT & alloSCT for hematologic malignancies. QOL was assessed with FACT-G at baseline, 2 weeks and monthly for 6 months thereafter. Functional well-being (FWB), physical WB (PWB) emotional WB (EWB) & social WB (SWB) and change over time were compared across groups. Results: 45 patients were recruited (CAR-T: 10; Auto SCT: 22; Allo SCT: 13) with follow up for 2 weeks & 1 month available for 23 &15 patients, respectively (Table). There was no statistically significant difference in baseline total QOL scores (p=0.13), though scores were lower in the alloSCT group (85,84,68). EWB &FWB were numerically higher in the CAR-T group, followed by autoSCT group. At 2 weeks, overall QOL decreased by only 2 points in CAR-T group vs. 22 & 18 points in auto & alloSCT groups (p=0.09). Change in PWB vs. baseline was less pronounced in the CAR-T group (-1, -9, -13, p=0.03). At 1 month, overall QOL was 6 points lower than baseline in CAR-T group vs. 3 and 14 points lower in auto & alloSCT groups, respectively (p=0.34). Importantly, PWB had at least returned to baseline in the CAR-T group. Conclusions: Preliminary data show that patients undergoing CAR-T cell therapy do not experience a more significant decline in QOL compared with auto & allo SCT, and may experience fewer physical side effects in the short-term. Accrual & follow-up are ongoing. [Table: see text]

6531 Background: This survey of Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry (TAPUR) Study physicians examined use, attitudes, and perception of tumor genomic testing (TGT), defined as any DNA test performed on tumor specimen/plasma. TAPUR is a multibasket study of marketed agents targeting tumor genomics. Methods: 333 physicians at 54 TAPUR sites were surveyed (2016-2017). Survey domains included use of TGT, barriers to ordering TGT, and genomic confidence. Surveys included 3 scenarios for TGT ordering 1) pretreated advanced cancer patients (pts) without options, 2) newly diagnosed, untreated, metastatic pts and 3) early stage/potentially curable pts with standard options. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Results: 112 physicians responded (33%). The table displays demographics and genomic confidence. Respondents reported a median of 25% of their pts had TGT in past 12 months for trials/routine care (range 0-85%). Barriers to testing included access to tumor specimen (86%), insurance coverage (67%), concerns that results will not be actionable (55%), and test issues (wait time, unsure which test/lab to use, test accuracy) (54%). TGT was ordered most often for scenario 1 (96%) and 2 pts (70%). Few respondents (32%) would order testing in scenario 3. Of those who reported testing for scenarios 1 & 2, most told pts that results could inform treatment/prognosis/trials (97%) or may be uninformative (84%). In all scenarios, pt expectations of TGT results were discussed prior to testing. A minority reported frequently telling pts in advance that results could inform heritable cancer susceptibility (37%). Conclusions: Confidence in using TGT was high. TGT was performed most for pts with advanced cancer and few options. Availability of specimens was largest barrier reported, indicating the importance of blood-based tests. Few respondents discussed implications of germline findings in advance, despite growing evidence of germline findings in somatic testing. [Table: see text]

11553 Background: Little is known about the toxicity of trastuzumab (T) or of trastuzumab + lapatinib (T + L), approved in the advanced setting, in older pts. We have performed a sub-analysis of the Adjuvant Lapatinib and/or Trastuzumab Treatment Optimisation (ALTTO) trial focused on treatment completion and toxicity of T and T+L in older pts (aged ≥65 years (yr)). Methods: The ALTTO trial (NCT00490139, NCCTG N063D) randomised 8381 pts with early HER2+ BC into 4 arms and we included the T and T+L arms in our analysis. Eligible pts for our study were those having received at least one dose of assigned treatment. Treatment completion was evaluated through the rate of temporary treatment interruptions (TTI), permanent treatment discontinuations (PTD) and lapatinib dose reductions (LDR). Toxicity was evaluated via a selected set of adverse events of interest (AEIs). Risk factors for TTI, PTD, LDR and AEIs were assessed, including comorbidities and polypharmacy at baseline (defined as use 5 or more co-medications) and AEIs during treatment. Results: A total of 430 pts≥65-year-old were identified for this sub-analysis, out of a total of 4190 pts with a median age of 68 yrs (range 65-80). Older pts were more likely to have comorbidities (70% vs 38%). Treatment completion was worse among older pts in the T+L arm but not in the T arm (Table). AEIs were more common in the T+L arm in all patients, with older patients having higher AEI rates (78.04% in older vs 63.38% in younger), particularly diarrhea (60.75% vs 38.0%). Identified risk factors (multivariate) for worse treatment completion in the T and T+ L arms included concomitant use of chemotherapy and the occurrence of grade 3 adverse events, among others. Conclusions: T + L has worse treatment completion and is more toxic in older patients, while T was well tolerated. Identifiable risk factors at baseline and during the course of treatment could be used to aid in regimen selection and management for both T and T + L in their respective indications. Support: UG1CA189823, Novartis;https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org. [Table: see text]

e15169 Background: In metastatic colorectal cancer with deficient DNA mismatch repair (dMMR), anti-PD-1 antibody monotherapy produced high tumor response rates and extended progression-free survival compared to lack of benefit for cancers with proficient MMR. In an ongoing phase III randomized trial, we will determine if the addition of the anti-PD-L1 antibody, atezolizumab (Genentech), to adjuvant FOLFOX can improve patient disease-free survival (DFS) vs FOLFOX alone in patients with stage III colon cancers with dMMR. By blocking the PD-1/PD-L1 interaction, atezolizumab may activate T cells, thereby, restoring their ability to detect and attack tumor cells. Limited data suggest that FOLFOX may increase intratumoral cytotoxic CD8+ T cells that could serve as ‘immune priming'. Methods: Patients with curatively resected stage III colon carcinomas with evidence of dMMR are randomized to modified FOLFOX6 for 6 months (12 cycles) alone (control arm) or combined with atezolizumab (840 mg IV q2 wk) with continuation of the antibody as monotherapy for an additional 6 months (total duration of 12 months) [experimental arm]. Patients will be stratified by T, N stage and tumor sidedness. Local testing for MMR proteins is allowed. Atezolizumab must begin by/with cycle 2. One cycle of FOLFOX is allowed pre-registration. The targeted accrual goal of 700 patients and 165 disease-free survival (DFS) events will provide 90% power to detect an effect size expressed as hazard ratio of 0.6 for the primary endpoint of DFS at two-sided alpha of 0.05. Interim analyses are planned at 50% and 75% of events. Secondary endpoints include overall survival, treatment tolerability, and quality of life. Results: This study is being conducted by the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology, was approved by NCI CTEP and activated in 09/2017. The study is actively accruing and, as of 02/11/2019, 152 patients are enrolled. We are actively exploring an international collaboration. Conclusions: This is a current clinical trial in progress. Clinical trial information: NCT02912559.

6511 Background: Conventional adverse event (AE) analysis (ToxC) focuses on incidence of grade (gr) 3+ toxicities, and fails to capture AE time profile. Novel metrics that reflect chronic low gr and overall AE burden are needed. We applied the Toxicity over Time (ToxT) approach to ECOG-ACRIN 2408 to depict time-dependent toxicity of lenalidomide (L) with rituximab maintenance (MR) in follicular lymphoma (FL), and we developed a novel summary metric of symptomatic AE burden, the maximum gr over time (MGOT). Methods: In E2408, high risk FL patients (pts) were randomized (1:2:2) to: A) bendamustine-rituxumab (BR) x 6 then MR x 2 years (yrs) vs B) BR-bortezomib x 6 then MR x 2 yrs vs C) BR x 6 then MR x 2 yrs + L x 1 yr (MRL). Analysis included 3 laboratory and 5 symptomatic AEs of highest incidence during maintenance on arms A and C. Treatment-related AEs of any gr were analyzed by ToxC and ToxT. Repeated measures, time-to-event (TTE) and area under the curve (AUC) analyses capture trends over time in ToxT. MGOT combines the 5 symptomatic AEs. Results: 104 randomized pts (30 MR, 74 MRL) were included. For the laboratory AEs, by ToxC, neutropenia incidence was significantly higher in MRL (84%) than MR (47%, p < .001). ToxT additionally shows neutropenia does not worsen over time (10/14/20% gr 1/2/3+ at c1, 6/21/12% gr 1/2/3+ at c12). For the symptomatic AEs, ToxC indicates 2% gr 3+ GI AEs. However, gr 1-2 GI AEs are more common on MRL (59%) than MR (26%, p < .001). ToxT AUC captures a higher burden of GI AEs over time on MRL(2.8) vs MR(1.4, p = .002). TTE depicts sooner GI AE onset in MRL (10% vs 0% gr 2+ GI by day 50, p = 0.03). Bar charts of incidence and grade by cycle illustrate this improves over time (34/7/4% gr 1/2/3+ at c1, 13/0/0% gr 1/2/3+ at c12). ToxT MGOT analyses demonstrate earlier time to gr 2+ symptomatic AE on MRL vs MR (63% vs 31% by day 50, p < .001) and suggest that overall AE burden over time is higher for patients on MRL(AUC 18.2) than MR(11.8, p < .001). Conclusions: ToxT depicts AE time profile and can guide AE interventions. Summary metrics suggest that symptomatic AEs occur earlier and their burden over time is higher on MRL. We are implementing ToxT in patient-reported AE data to better characterize pt tolerability.

158 Background: There is limited research on methods for alerting clinicians to concerning patient-reported outcome (PRO) responses and how often PROs trigger alerts to nurses during cancer care. Methods: In two randomized trials, adults with advanced cancer receiving chemotherapy were enrolled. Participants were randomized to usual care vs. weekly PROs completed between visits (with automated feedback to nurses). PRO responses in the intervention arm triggered automated email alerts to nurses for frequent, severe, or worsening symptoms in the last 7 days. Alert thresholds for PROs were chosen a priori but were unique to each study. The “Symptom Tracking and Reporting” (STAR) trial was conducted at one academic medical center. The “PROs to Enhance Cancer Treatment” (PRO-TECT [AFT-39]) cluster-randomized trial is being conducted in > 30 community practices. Results: In STAR, 766 patients participated (58% female, 38% ages ≥65, 17% minority, 28% ≤high school). 441 participants were randomized to the intervention arm, where 1,431/84,212 items (2%) triggered a concerning symptom alert, during 1,070/8,498 weeks (13%). Frequent alerts were for fatigue (62%), pain (32%), and appetite (16%). In PRO-TECT (AFT-39), 300 patients have been enrolled (58% female, 49% ages ≥65, 8% minority, 47% ≤high school) out of 1,000. 146 participants have been randomized to the intervention arm, where 1,422/24,739 items (6%) triggered an alert, during 824/2249 weeks (37%). Common alerts were for pain (48%), physical function (35%), and diarrhea (15%). PRO-TECT provided clinical decision support with alerts. Conclusions: In two randomized trials in advanced cancer, PROs collected during care delivery enabled tailored treatment based on issues identified on PROs. Pain, physical function, appetite, and diarrhea commonly triggered alerts for concerning symptoms. Early PRO-TECT results are showing a trend for higher weekly alert rates for concerning symptoms (37% vs. 13% in STAR), which may indicate that the PRO intervention will be even more effective in community practices. Results assist in addressing logistical considerations for implementing PROs into routine care. Clinical trial information: NCT03249090.

Purpose We examined associations between tumor characteristics (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 [HER2] protein expression, HER2 gene and chromosome 17 copy number, hormone receptor status) and disease-free survival (DFS) of patients in the N9831 adjuvant trastuzumab trial. Patients and Methods All patients (N = 1,888) underwent chemotherapy with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide, followed by weekly paclitaxel with or without concurrent trastuzumab. HER2 status was determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) at a central laboratory, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. Patients with conflicting local positive HER2 expression results but normal central laboratory testing were included in the analyses (n = 103). Results Patients with HER2-positive tumors (IHC 3+, FISH HER2/centromere 17 ratio ≥ 2.0, or both) benefited from trastuzumab, with hazard ratios (HRs) of 0.46, 0.49, and 0.45, respectively (all P < .0001). Patients with HER2-amplified tumors with polysomic (p17) or normal (n17) chromosome 17 copy number also benefited from trastuzumab, with HRs of 0.52 and 0.37, respectively (P < .006). Patients who received chemotherapy alone and had HER2-amplified and p17 tumors had a longer DFS than those who had n17 (78% v 68%; P = .04), irrespective of hormone receptor status or tumor grade. Patients with HER2-normal tumors by central testing (n = 103) seemed to benefit from trastuzumab, but the difference was not statistically significant (HR, 0.51; P = .14). Patients with hormone receptor–positive or –negative tumors benefited from the addition of trastuzumab, with HRs of 0.42 (P = .005) and 0.60 (P = .0001), respectively. Conclusion These results confirm that IHC or FISH HER2 testing is appropriate for patient selection for adjuvant trastuzumab therapy. Trastuzumab benefit seemed independent of HER2/centromere 17 ratio and chromosome 17 copy number.

11500Background: DT is a rare cancer of connective tissue affecting young patients (pts), arising in any location, with a wide natural histories. DT is locally infiltrative and may cause pain, loss of mobility, bowel obstruction and visceral organ compromise. Death is rare. There is no standard of care (SoC), but surgery, observation and systemic therapies are used. S is an oral drug inhibiting VEGFR2/PDGFRB/RAF, showing activity in DT in case series. Methods: We conducted an international prospective study to evaluate efficacy of S (400 mg qd) in unresectable progressive (PD) or symptomatic DT. Pts were randomized 2:1 (S:P) and crossover to S upon RECIST 1.1 PD. Stratification: pain-level and disease site. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). 75 pts yielded 90% power (1-sided α = 0.025, 1 interim analysis) to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.4 (favoring S), assuming 6 month (mo) median (md) PFS for P and 15 mo for S, requiring 52 PFS events. Other endpoints: response rates (RR); toxicity ...

6500Background: In a previous interim analysis, we found a 7-month median overall survival (OS) benefit (p = 0.002) associated with web-based monitoring to detect recurrence in lung cancer patients...

6580Background: Given the many chronically administered agents now used in cancer therapy, there is pressing need to elucidate safety and tolerability of therapy over time. Conventional methods of ...

e19031Background: The myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) are a rare hematologic malignancy with significant symptom burden. Disease-related registries can be a useful and important tool for rare d...

10067Background: Obesity is associated with worse outcomes in hormone receptor-positive (HR+) EBC. However, the association between obesity and prognosis in HER2+ EBC remains unclear. We aimed to d...

TPS532 Background: Recent studies have shown that FGFR2 fusions may represent recurrent (prevalence ~10-15% in larger cohorts) driver events amenable to therapeutic targeting in patients with advanced, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Methods: This single arm pilot study (NCT02265341) is being conducted at 3 centers (Mayo Clinic Arizona, Mayo Clinic Florida and Mayo Clinic Rochester; enrollment initiated December 2014). Next-generation sequencing based assays and a FISH-break apart assay are used to identify tumors with FGFR2 fusions. Patients must additionally have histologically/cytologically confirmed cholangiocarcinoma, ECOG performance score 0-2, measurable disease, preserved hematologic/renal and hepatic function and absence of cardiac events/stroke in the preceding 6 months. Ponatinib is administered at 45 mg once daily. Patients will be treated until disease progression, intolerable toxicity or patient decision to not pursue further therapy. The primary objective of the study is to estimate the clinical benefit rate (defined as composite of partial response rate, complete response rate and stable disease rate ≥ 4 months; as defined by RECIST criteria v1.1). Secondary endpoints include estimation of progression-free survival, overall survival, CA19-9 response rate (defined as > 50% reduction from baseline) and evaluation of the overall adverse event profile of ponatinib in this patient population. Translational objectives include serial circulating DNA (ct-DNA) monitoring, target knockdown assessments in tumor tissue (p-FGFR2, p-FRS2, p-Akt and p-ERK) and evaluation of mechanisms of resistance through comparison of baseline and progression biopsy samples using multi-platform sequencing (exome, RNA-Seq and methyl-Seq). Additionally, quality of life assessments will be evaluated using EORTC-QLQ-C30 and BIL21 tools. A total of 30 patients will be enrolled into the study (12 of 30 patients have been enrolled). The trial is designed using an underlying assumption of clinical benefit rate (CBR) of 5% with significance level of 0.15 and 80% power to detect a 20% CBR. Clinical trial information: NCT02265341.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are often the primary end point in symptom management trials. The scientific field of PROs is evolving, as evidenced by the US Food and Drug Administration's February 2007 release of a draft guidance for using PROs in effectiveness claims for drug labeling. This article presents issues encountered during use of PROs in National Cancer Institute–sponsored symptom management trials. Selected trials are presented that exemplify the challenges often seen in symptom management trials, and solutions are described. The examples presented include defining the appropriate end point, selecting and validating assessments, and answering the research questions through statistical analysis and interpretation. Progress has been made in addressing some of the unique challenges of PRO-based symptom management research. Many challenges still remain, but a foundational body of work now exists for more consistent and rigorous application of PROs into symptom management trials. There remains a need for more research in several methodologic aspects of design, analysis, and interpretation of symptom management trials.

LBA2 Background: We previously reported significant benefits in quality of life, patient satisfaction, and emergency room utilization outcomes from a large single-center randomized controlled trial comparing web-based symptom monitoring with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) vs. usual care in patients receiving chemotherapy for metastatic solid tumors (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00578006). We now present overall survival results from this trial. Methods: Patients receiving routine outpatient chemotherapy for metastatic solid tumors at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center were randomly assigned to self-report 12 common symptoms via tablet computers (“PRO intervention”), or to usual care. Treating physicians received symptom printouts at visits and nurses received email alerts when participants reported severe or worsening symptoms. Overall survival was tabulated based on medical records and Social Security Death Index data, estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and compared between arms using a log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards regression adjusting for age, sex, race, education level, and cancer type. Results: Between September 2007 and January 2011, 766 patients were randomized, with median age 61 (range 26-91), 86% white, 58% female, and 22% with less than high school education. Cancer types included genitourinary (32% of patients), gynecologic (23%), breast (19%), and lung cancer (26%). Survival results were assessed in June 2016 after a median follow up of 7 years and 517/766 (67%) of participants had died. Median overall survival in the PRO intervention arm was 5 months longer than the control arm (31.2 vs. 26.0 months, p = 0.03). In the multivariable model, results remained statistically significant with a hazard ratio of 0.832 (p = 0.04; 95% CI; 0.696, 0.995). Conclusions: Systematic symptom monitoring during outpatient chemotherapy using web-based patient-reported outcomes confers overall survival benefits. These single-center results are being further evaluated in a national multicenter implementation trial. Clinical trial information: NCT00578006.

TPS3630 Background: In metastatic colorectal cancer with deficient DNA mismatch repair (MMR), anti-PD-1 antibody monotherapy produced high tumor response rates and extended progression-free survival compared to lack of benefit for proficient MMR tumors (Le, M, et al, NEJM 2016). We propose a phase III randomized trial to determine if the addition of the anti-PD-L1 antibody, atezolizumab (Genentech™), to adjuvant FOLFOX can improve patient disease-free survival (DFS) vs FOLFOX alone in patients with stage III colon cancers with dMMR or microsatellite instability (MSI). By blocking the PD-1/PD-L1 interaction, atezolizumab may activate T cells, thereby, restoring their ability to detect and attack tumor cells. Limited data suggest that FOLFOX may increase intratumoral cytotoxic CD8+ T cells that may serve as ‘immune priming.’ Methods: Patients with curatively resected stage III colon carcinomas with evidence of dMMR or MSI will be randomized to modified FOLFOX6 for 6 months (12 cycles) alone or combined with atezolizumab (840 mg IV q2 wk) continued as monotherapy for an additional 6 months (total duration of 12 months). Patients will be stratified by T, N stage and tumor sidedness. Local testing for MSI or MMR proteins is allowed. Atezolizumab must begin by/with cycle 2. The targeted accrual goal of 700 patients provides 90% power to detect an effect size expressed as hazard ratio of 0.6 for the primary endpoint DFS at two-sided alpha of 0.05. Interim analyses are planned at 50% and 75% of events. Secondary endpoints include overall survival, treatment tolerability, and quality of life. This study will be conducted by the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology. The protocol has been approved by NCI CTEP and is expected to be activated in mid 2017. Clinical trial information: NCT02912559.

e21704 Background: Patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) have difficult symptom burden (i.e. fatigue, pruritus, night sweats) not resolved by current medical therapies including jak inhibitor therapy. We hypothesize that on-line (at home) yoga might alleviate MPN symptoms and complement medical therapy. Methods: MPN patients, recruited by social media, were asked to complete 60 min/week of online yoga (designed for MPN patients) for 12 weeks and completed online self-report surveys (weeks 0,7,12 and 16) on participation (Qualtrics), disease features, and symptom burden (MPN Symptom Assessment Form; NIH PROMIS measures of pain, anxiety, depression, sleep, and sexual function). Results: Two hundred and forty-four MPN patients completed the eligibility survey, 134 were eligible, 55 completed the informed consent, and 38 MPN patients completed the 12-week intervention. The majority of participants were diagnosed with either PV (n = 16) or ET (n = 16), with MF being less common (n = 6). Approximately 37% (n = 14) of study participants averaged ≥60 min/week of yoga (i.e., demand). Yoga participation averaged 50.8±36.2 min/week. Overall, 68% of participants were satisfied with online yoga and 75% felt that is was helpful for coping with MPN-related symptoms (i.e., acceptability, practicality). Additionally, 75% of participants felt safe from injury while participating in online yoga. Only one adverse event was reported (irritated enlarged spleen). From week 0 to week 12 (n = 38), there were significant improvements in total symptom burden (effect size [ES] in standard deviation units = -0.36, p = 0.004), anxiety (ES = -0.67, p = 0.002), depression (ES = -0.41, p = 0.049), sleep (ES = -0.58, p < 0.001), and fatigue (ES = -0.33, p = 0.04). These improvements remained significant at follow-up week 16 (n = 28) for all outcome measures with a trend for maintained fatigue improvement (ES = -0.34, p = 0.06) (see Table 1). There were no significant differences in outcomes between those that averaged < 60 min/week of yoga compared to those that averaged ≥60 min/week of yoga. Conclusions: A 12-week online yoga intervention is feasible (i.e., accepted, practical) for MPN patients and merits a randomized trial as complementary therapy.

e18122Background: We previously reported that patient subjective perception of their oncology clinical trial experience was influenced by factors beyond their treatment outcome (Chauhan, ASCO, 2012...

TPS629Background: Receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy + trastuzumab is particularly important for pts with HER2+ breast cancers because of the significantly improved outcomes that trastuzumab-based chemotherapy regimens provide. However, many older pts do not receive HER2-directed therapy. T-DM1 has a favorable toxicity profile and proven efficacy in advanced disease, and is a promising therapy option for treating older pts. Methods: In this phase II, single-arm, multicenter, open-label protocol at 15 U.S. ACCRU centers, we will administer adjuvant T-DM1 to pts aged ≥ 65. T-DM1 will be administered at 3.6 mg/kg IV every 21 days for one year. Longitudinal geriatric assessments (GA), biomarkers of aging, and patient-reported outcomes (PRO-CTCAE) will be collected. Specific Aims: The primary endpoint is 5-year invasive disease-free survival (IDFS). Secondary endpoints include overall survival, toxicity, and site of first recurrence. Correlative endpoints include associations of toxicity and clinical endpoints w...

9520 Background: Reporting of clinician-based toxicity assessment via the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) commonly does not distinguish between symptoms already present at BL...

6504 Background: CALGB/SWOG 80405, a phase III trial, found that adding either bevacizumab or cetuximab to standard first-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) resulted in simil...

632 Background: Crosstalk between the insulin-like growth factor (IGF) and HER2 pathways in multiple preclinical models suggest a mechanism of resistance to HER2-targeted therapy. Cixutumumab (CIX,...

509 Background: Some 20-25% of patients with HER2+ disease relapse after adjuvant trastuzumab (H). We used a genomic approach to define biological processes that predict benefit from H. Methods: Wh...

6630 Background: How can a clinician combine survival and toxicity data to interpet treatment benefit? Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) attempts to account for both the quality and quantity of l...

647 Background: The Adjuvant Lapatinib and/or Trastuzumab Treatment Optimisation (ALTTO; NCT00490139) study was an international randomized open-label phase III study of 2 targeted therapies for HE...

LBA4 Background: Lapatinib (L) is a HER1-HER2 tyrosine kinase inhibitor. The Adjuvant Lapatinib and/or Trastuzumab Treatment Optimisation (ALTTO) Trial is a randomised, phase III trial comparing 3 oral L-containing regimens with T, each given for 1 year. Methods: From June 2007 to July 2011, 8381 patients (pts) were randomised from 946 sites in 44 countries to receive either L+T, T→L, L, or T. Anti-HER2 therapy was initiated after completing all chemotherapy (N=4613), concurrently with a taxane following anthracycline (N=3337), or concurrently with a non-anthracycline, platinum-containing regimen (N=431). The L arm was closed in Aug 2011 for futility and is not presented. The primary endpoint is invasive disease-free survival (DFS). L+T vs. T is tested for superiority and T→L vs. T is tested for non-inferiority at 1.11 margin. P≤0.025 is required for statistical significance. 850 DFS events in the L+T vs. T comparison would provide 80% power to detect a true hazard ratio (HR) of 0.80 with experiment-wide alpha=0.05. The current analysis was planned to occur either after observing these 850 events or at 4.5 yrs median follow up (MFU). Results: Pt and disease characteristics were well balanced. 40% were node-negative and 57% were hormone receptor positive. Only 555 DFS events for the L+T vs. T comparison were observed at 4.5 years MFU. HR for DFS was 0.84 (97.5% CI, 0.70-1.02; P=0.048; 4-yr DFS%=88% vs. 86%) for L+T vs. T and 0.93 (97.5% CI, 0.76-1.13; non-inferiority P=0.044; 4-yr DFS%=87% vs. 86%) for T→L vs. T. Diarrhoea (75% vs. 20%), rash (55% vs. 20%) and hepatobiliary (23% vs. 16%) adverse events were more frequent in L+T vs. T. Primary cardiac endpoints were infrequent (

1095 Background: Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has been accepted as a risk reducing procedure and for treatment of select breast cancers. The purpose of this study was to detail the types of post...

We thank Magne et al for their thoughtful comments. The issue of cardiac toxicity from trastuzumab used in combination with radiation therapy (RT) for breast cancer remains an important one as women continue to be treated with both of these modalities. We emphasized in our work the need for longer follow-up in these patients treated with both trastuzumab and RT to determine whether our findings of lack of increased cardiac toxicity remain true over a greater length of time. Often cardiac manifestations of RT may not manifest until a decade or more after therapy. We performed two analyses to date evaluating cardiac toxicity acutely up to 14 months after commencement of RT, including the current analysis with a median follow-up of 3.7 years. Future analysis of is planned in the future given the known possibility of late occurrences of cardiac toxicity from RT in breast cancer treatment. Long-term monitoring of ejection fraction and of clinical events for at least 10 additional years from study entry is planned. We agree that great attention must be given to RT planning parameters relative to all critical normal structures that pose a risk for adverse events. In our trial, RT treatment planning details were not collected. Therefore, we are unable to comment on the cardiac volume irradiated in these patients. When our study was developed more than a decade ago, some RT techniques for internal mammary irradiation were known to be associated with greater coincident irradiation of the heart and with cardiac mortality. We were in uncharted territory at that time, so our approach was to prohibit irradiation of the internal mammary nodes in order to minimize the volume of heart irradiated as a safety precaution. More recently, some studies do suggest that patients treated in the older RT era experienced excess cardiac morbidity compared with those treated with more modern techniques where the irradiated cardiac volume is reduced. The use of more modern radiation treatment planning techniques, including three-dimensional computed tomography– based tools, has aided in cardiac sparing in breast cancer therapy. However, additional assessment of these more modern RT techniques, including those used in combination with newer systemic chemotherapeutic agents, is needed to assess the incidence of long-term development of cardiac issues. Despite the lack of longer-term information, we maintain that our recent study provides some assurance that the concurrent administration of RT and trastuzumab is associated with a safety profile that supports its use in contemporary practice. It is imperative that long-term analysis is conducted, and we, indeed, value the need for additional follow-up.

137 Background: Diabetes has been associated with an increased risk of mortality among patients with many types of cancers. Methods: We performed a case-control study of 109 breast cancer patients to determine the impact of diabetes on disease recurrence and survival. These 109 patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer during 2007-2011 with diabetes were identified from the institutional Cancer Registry and matched to 109 breast cancer patients without diabetes according to age, race/ethnicity and year of diagnosis. Statistical tests included paired t-tests, McNemar’s tests, and stratified Cox regression. Results: The median ages of those with and without diabetes were 68 years, and 91% in both groups were white (both matched). Patients with and without diabetes were not significantly different in terms of tumor grade, cancer stage, estrogen or progesterone receptor status, HER2 neu status, marital and employment status, smoking use, use of adjuvant chemotherapy, and steroid treatment (all P >.4). Patients with diabetes reported less use of alcohol (50% vs 64%, P=.04), and had greater BMI (79% overweight/obese vs 58%, P= .002). Survival analysis demonstrated no differences in survival from initial breast cancer diagnosis (HR=1.25, 95% CI 0.49-3.17) with median follow-up of 2.2 years (range 0.1-4.9), and no differences in recurrence-free survival (HR=1.00, 95% CI 0.14-7.10) though very few deaths and recurrences were observed. Within the diabetes group, 96 (88%) had type 2 diabetes and 97/106 (92%, 3 unknown) had diabetes pre-existing to cancer diagnosis. Initial diabetes therapy included diet (33, 30%), oral therapy (48, 44%), insulin (21, 19%), or oral+insulin (6, 6%). 7 patients required a change in diabetes therapy within 1 year of cancer diagnosis with 3 patients starting insulin. 32/70 (46%) with available lab data had 1 or more A1C >/=7 within 1 year of cancer diagnosis. Conclusions: In this retrospective, carefully matched case-control study, we developed a comprehensive profile of the patient population with newly diagnosed breast cancer and diabetes. Diabetes did not appear to impact mortality or recurrence-free survival based on descriptive estimates in this small breast cancer cohort.

e16065 Background: Estrogens, in addition to androgen may contribute to the progression of prostate cancer.The combination of bicalutamide, a non-steroidal anti-androgen, and raloxifene, a selective estrogen receptor modulator, has a synergistic effect on cell death of prostate cancer cell lines such as DU145 and PC3. We investigated the safety of combined treatment of bicalutamide and raloxifene on quality of life in patients affected by hormone-resistant prostate cancer. Methods: Eligibility requirements included metastatic hormone-resistant prostate cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients received the combination of bicalutamide, 50 mg, and raloxifene, 60 mg, daily in 28 day cycles for a maximum of 6 cycles. The primary endpoint was to describe the adverse event profile of combined treatment with bicalutamide and raloxifene. The secondary endpoint was to describe the quality of life of patients receiving the combination. Adverse events were graded by the investigator using the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 and the quality of life was assessed by the patient using aLinear Analog Scale Assessment (scale of 0-100). Serum levels of estradiol and testosterone were monitored during treatment. Results: Eighteen evaluable patients were included in the statistical analysis after an initial run-in safety cohort of six patients. Two patients completed 6 cycles per protocol, the remaining sixteen patients were taken off protocol after disease progression. Patients completed a median of 2 cycles. There were no grade 4 events and grade 3 adverse events consisted of hypertension (5.6%) and back pain (5.6%). Erectile dysfunction (grade 1) was the most common adverse event (77.8%). Patient assessment of quality of life (mental, physical, social, emotional, spiritual) did not reveal any statistically different changes after 2 cycles of treatment. An analysis of testosterone and estradiol levels will be reported. Conclusions: We conclude that combination of bicalutamide and raloxifene is well-tolerated. The combination of androgen and estrogen receptor blockade warrants further study for efficacy in hormone-resistant prostate cancer. Clinical trial information: NCT01050842.

6587 Background: Recently the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the CTCAE was developed to augment clinically graded adverse events with information reported directly by patients on clinical trials (Basch, 2009). The validation and potential application of PRO-CTCAE in phase I clinical trials are of great interest as toxicity is the primary endpoint. Methods: Selected PRO-CTCAE items (21 items measuring 12 symptomatic adverse events) corresponding to the major adverse events required to be graded clinically were collected in an ongoing phase I clinical trial of weekly cilengitide and paclitaxel in patients with advanced solid malignancies (NCT01276496). PRO-CTCAE was administered in a paper booklet by a clinical research associate prior to treatment on days 1, 8 and 15 of their regular visits. These PRO-CTCAE items were summarized descriptively in comparison to clinician-assessed CTCAE ver 4.0 (NCI, 2009) during the first cycle. As a pilot study to assess feasibility of PRO-CTCAE in phase I trials, PRO-CTCAE was not intended for determination of dose-limiting toxicity. Results: Twelve patients were accrued to two separate doses of cilengitide and paclitaxel. The median age was 56 (range 36—67) and half of patients were female. All patients had an ECOG performance score