Search

PURPOSE: Precision oncology promises improved outcomes but the cost-effectiveness and accessibility of targeted therapies is debatable. We report price change patterns from 2015 to 2019 for several oral anticancer medications for common solid tumor malignancies. METHODS: We collected provider utilization and payment data from the public Medicare Part D database and extracted drug price information for commonly prescribed targeted oral anticancer agents for lung, breast, and prostate cancer. We then calculated median Pearson correlation coefficient values for various drugs (containing more than two data points) within each therapeutic class. We also calculated compound annual growth rates (CAGRs) for medication costs within each class and compared them with the consumer price index (CPI). RESULTS: Our study included six epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRi; one generic), five anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors (ALKi), two B-Raf inhibitors (BRAFi), three hormonal agents (one generic), three cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i), two poly-ADP-ribose inhibitors (PARPi), and seven antiandrogen agents (two generic). The median (range) Pearson correlation coefficient values for cost of drugs within each therapeutic class were 0.967 (0.915-0.978) for EGFRi, 0.981 (0.966-0.989) for ALKi, 0.996 for BRAFi, 0.994 (0.992-0.999) for CDK4/6i, 0.855 for PARPi, and 0.442 (–0.522 to 0.962) for antiandrogens. Therapies with two or fewer data points (generic erlotinib, dacomitinib, abiraterone, apalutamide, and darolutamide) were excluded. The median CAGRs in costs over the 5-year period were 4.56% (EGFRi), 6.40% (ALKi), 2.58% (BRAFi), 5.48% (hormonal agents), 5.21% (CDK4/6i), 27.29% (PARPi), and 34.8% (antiandrogens). The CPI over 5 years was 2.26%/year, and the average inflation rate was 1.90%/year. CONCLUSION: The median CAGR in costs for modern oral precision-driven cancer therapeutic classes mostly outpaced CPI and the average inflation. Increase in cost within the same class should be weighed against incremental clinical benefit for the patients to ensure that rising costs do not limit access to targeted therapies.

OBJECTIVE: Informal family caregivers provide critical support for patients receiving chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy. However, caregivers' experiences are largely unstudied. This study examined quality of life (QOL; physical functioning, pain, fatigue, anxiety, and depression), caregiving burden, and treatment-related distress in caregivers in the first 6 months after CAR T-cell therapy, when caregivers were expected to be most involved in providing care. Relationships between patients' clinical course and caregiver outcomes were also explored. METHODS: Caregivers completed measures examining QOL and burden before patients' CAR T-cell therapy and at days 90 and 180. Treatment-related distress was assessed at days 90 and 180. Patients' clinical variables were extracted from medical charts. Change in outcomes was assessed using means and 99% confidence intervals. Association of change in outcomes with patient clinical variables was assessed with backward elimination analysis. RESULTS: A total of 99 caregivers (mean age 59, 73% female) provided data. Regarding QOL, pain was significantly higher than population norms at baseline but improved by day 180 (p < .01). Conversely, anxiety worsened over time (p < .01). Caregiver burden and treatment-related distress did not change over time. Worsening caregiver depression by day 180 was associated with lower patient baseline performance status (p < .01). Worse caregiver treatment-related distress at day 180 was associated with lower performance status, intensive care unit admission, and lack of disease response at day 90 (ps < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Some CAR T-cell therapy caregivers experience pain, anxiety, and burden, which may be associated patients' health status. Further research is warranted regarding the experience of CAR T-cell therapy caregivers.

Summary The activity of KRAS inhibitors against brain metastases is relatively unexplored. The recent work on preclinical models and preliminary data from the ongoing KRYSTAL-1 phase Ib clinical trial support the potential of adagrasib (MRTX849) to penetrate the central nervous system and provide control of KRASG12C brain metastases. See related article by Sabari et al., p. 3318

Multiple myeloma (MM) is an incurable plasma cell neoplasm. In this study, we aimed to analyze the impact of time to initiation of systemic therapy for MM on overall survival (OS).We identified cases diagnosed with MM from the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2013.A total of 38,178 MM patients were included in the analysis. The median time to systemic therapy in our cohort was 17 days (range 0-120). The median OS for patients who initiated therapy 30-days after diagnosis was longer than those who received it ≤ 7 days (46 vs. 27-month, p 0.001). On multivariable analysis, patients who received treatment ≤ 7 days from diagnosis had worse mortality compared with those receiving treatment 30 days (HR 1.5; 95% CI 1.4-1.6).In our study, time to initiation of systemic therapy was an independent prognostic factor in MM. Similar to other lymphoid malignancies, this metric may be a surrogate for high-risk disease in MM, and future trials may need to investigate time-to-treatment as a factor to allow enrollment of potentially sick patients.

Key Points VTE developed in 11% of lymphoma patients after CAR T-cell therapy and was managed safely with anticoagulation. Coagulation abnormalities after CAR T-cell therapy occur but do not commonly lead to bleeding events.

Gastric cancer is the sixth most common cancer and is known to be the fifth-leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally in 2018. Systemic therapy remains the only curative option in advanced gastric carcinoma with the primary goal of improving the Health-related Quality of Life (HRQoL) (including palliation of symptoms such as dysphagia) and prolonging overall survival. Recently, ramucirumab is approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (US-FDA) as a second-line agent either as monotherapy or in combination with paclitaxel in advanced or metastatic gastric and gastro-esophageal junction adenocarcinoma patients who have progressed on prior treatment with fluoropyrimidine or platinum containing chemotherapy. HRQoL is a subjective term that typically constitutes four components - psychological, social, occupational and physical well being. This has been evaluated as secondary endpoint in the pivotal Phase III trials with ramucirumab. HRQoL measurement can potentially provide additional information for clinical decision making beyond that of traditional medical outcomes. The present work is primarily focused on discussing HRQoL in gastric cancer patients and the impact of ramucirumab on the HRQoL in the patients with advanced gastric cancer. We also summarized the studies that evaluated the benefits of systemic therapies on HRQoL in advanced gastric cancer.

Anemia is a major complication of chronic kidney disease (CKD) that leads to many symptoms of this disease and worsens cardiovascular health. Treatment of this condition was revolutionized three decades ago by the commercial availability of recombinant human erythropoietin which held the promise of completely eliminating the need for red blood cell transfusion (RBCT). Despite specific therapy now available for anemia in CKD, clinical data accumulated in the last 2 decades suggests that there is a continued need for RBCT, which, we surmise, is due to underutilization of Erythropoietin Stimulating Agents (ESA) or clinical settings such as active bleed, bone marrow resistance such as myelofibrosis or infections where ESAs are ineffective. The purpose of this narrative review is to highlight the adverse effects and summarize the current patterns of RBCT use in all stages of CKD while elaborating on the clinical characteristics of patients that increases their risks of transfusion exposure. We discuss, briefly, salient features of the pathophysiology of anemia in CKD and its contemporary therapies while presenting our perspectives on how to optimize transfusion strategies without compromising patient safety.

BACKGROUND Prior studies in oncology have shown that a higher annual facility patient volume is associated with reduced mortality. Because classic Hodgkin lymphoma is uncommon but highly curable, this study used the National Cancer Database (2003-2014) to analyze whether such a relationship exists for this disease. METHODS The facilities were classified by quartiles, and random intercepts were used to account for clustering of patients within facilities. A Cox regression model was used to determine the volume-outcome relationship. RESULTS There were 47,633 patients with classic Hodgkin lymphoma treated at 1310 facilities. The first quartile (Q1), which included 58.4% of the facilities, treated 3 or fewer patients per year, whereas the fourth quartile (Q4), which included 5.9% of the facilities, treated more than 9 patients per year. Compared with the patients treated at Q4 facilities, those treated at lower quartile facilities had a higher risk of death (hazard ratio for the third quartile [HR], 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-1.29; HR for the second quartile, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.19-1.38; HR for Q1, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.2-1.39) after adjustments for all other factors (P

Background: The advent of targeted therapies and immunomodulatory agents has revolutionized the management of advanced cutaneous malignant melanoma (MMel) by prolonging overall survival. This study evaluated the therapeutic and survival disparities among patients with advanced MMel based on hospital volume using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Methods: A retrospective analysis using regression models and Kaplan-Meier estimates was performed from the data obtained from the NCDB on patients with MMel diagnosed in 2004 through 2015. Results: A total of 40,676 patients with MMel were treated at 1,260 facilities. Multivariable analysis showed that facility volume was an independent predictor of overall survival (PPConclusions: Patients with advanced-stage MMel treated at high-volume facilities had significantly improved survival and were more likely to receive chemotherapy and immunotherapy.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver cancer with a dismal prognosis, especially when diagnosed at advanced stages. Surgical resection of the primary lesion, liver-directed therapies, and orthotropic liver transplantation are employed in localized disease depending upon the clinical status, underlying liver function, the size, and location of the liver lesions. Systemic therapy plays a critical role in the management of advanced HCC. Sorafenib had remained as the only United States Food and Drug Administration (US-FDA)-approved systemic therapeutic agent for approximately a decade since its approval in 2007, until the advent of immunotherapy and a better understanding of HCC molecular pathogenesis changed the landscape of advanced HCC management. Lenvatinib was approved as an alternative first-line agent, whereas regorafenib, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, ramucirumab, and cabozantinib were approved as second-line agents for HCC patients who could not tolerate or whose disease progressed on sorafenib. Nivolumab and pembrolizumab are the two immunotherapeutic agents that were conditionally approved by the US-FDA based on the encouraging results in Phase I/II trials. This review discusses the potential role of immunotherapy in advanced HCC with a special focus on nivolumab.

125 Background: The advent of immunotherapy (IO) has led to significant improvement in outcomes for patients (pts) with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (adv NSCLC). The rate of crossovers and receipt of post-protocol IO in pivotal trials leading to FDA approvals of IO in NSCLC has not been systematically evaluated. Here, we evaluate crossover rates and post protocol therapies for pts with adv NSCLC across multiple first-line (1L) IO monotherapy and chemotherapy/IO (chemo/IO) combination trials. Methods: We utilized the publicly available data from pivotal clinical trials leading to approvals of IO or chemo/IO regimens in 1L treatment of adv NSCLC. We extracted data on outcomes, rate of crossover from control arm to IO, proportion of pts in control arm receiving IO and the start dates of these clinical trials. The primary outcomes were the rates of crossover and the proportion of patients in control arms who received post-control IO. Results: The study included 4 trials with IO monotherapy and 12 trials with chemo/IO combinations in 1L adv NSCLC. The primary endpoints for these trials were PFS (25%), OS (19%), and both PFS and OS (56%). The crossover rate from control arm to experimental arm (with IO) ranged from 0-74% in IO monotherapy trials and 0-49% in chemo/IO trials. Two IO monotherapy trials and five chemo/IO trials did not allow crossover; among them, 3 trials had a PFS/OS co-primary endpoint, while others had OS as primary endpoint. Ten of 16 trials provided explicit information on use of subsequent post-protocol therapies in their publications. Among the two IO monotherapy trials which did not allow crossover, post-protocol IO was administered in only 20-30% of patients. Among the six chemo/IO trials with information on post-protocol therapies, 30%-59% patients on the control arm subsequently received some form of IO on progression. Nine of 12 trials started accrual after 10/2015, when nivolumab was approved in the United States as second-line (2L) therapy for adv NSCLC regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression. Conclusions: Despite the highly significant OS benefit from 2L IO, which was the standard of care (SOC) in the United States, the rates of crossover and post-protocol IO administration was distressingly low in 1L IO monotherapy and chemo/IO trials for 1L adv NSCLC. This low rate of 2L treatment with IO may have been due to limited global availability prior to widespread regulatory approval during the conduct of these trials. There is an increased need for consistency in reporting of crossover treatment and post-protocol treatments to allow adequate assessment of the true 1L benefit with IO. Control arms in pivotal trials require scrutiny to ensure confirmation with SOC to provide access to optimal treatments for patients and prevent magnification of observed benefits in experimental arms. The difficulty lies in the global conduct of large randomized clinical trials with differing regulatory approvals.

150 Background: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) comprise less than 5% of all pancreatic tumors and 7% of all neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). There has been considerable progress in understanding the biology of pNETs and numerous therapeutic options emerged, especially with the collaboration of various specialties in the multidisciplinary setting. In this this study, we sought to analyze the association of facility volume, treatment modalities offered, and different risk adjusted outcomes in pNETs. Methods: We extracted data from National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) that covers 70% of all newly diagnosed cancer cases in the U.S and Puerto Rico. Patients with pNETs diagnosed between 2004 & 2017 were included and classified into tertiles based on hospital volume. Volume–outcome relationship was determined by using Cox regression adjusting for patient demographics, comorbidities, tumor characteristics, insurance type and therapy received. Kaplan Meier estimates of OS were compared with log-rank test. The primary predictor of interest was the facility volume defined as number of pNETs treated/year. A total of 7202 patients with pathologically confirmed pNETS were treated at 840 facilities. The median annual facility volume was 5patients/year. Facilities were classified into (T:mean cases/year) T1: < 3; T2:4-8; T3:≥9 cases/year. Results: A total of 7202 pNET patients were treated at 840 facilities. The median annual facility volume was 5 patients/year. Facilities were classified into (T: mean cases/year) T1: 9cases/year) had significantly higher OS and were more likely to receive surgical resection along with lymph node dissection and R0 resection. There was a 45% increased risk of death in patients treated at low volume centers (< 3/year) as compared to high-volume centers (> 9/year). While OS difference was noticed in all stages, the difference was more pronounced in stage IV disease demonstrating the importance of multi-disciplinary approach in pNETs management and incorporating such quality measures in low-volume facilities.[Table: see text]

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are a heterogeneous group of epithelial neoplasms with predominantly neural and endocrine differentiation that have the ability to produce peptide hormones and other biologically active substances. The histologic characterization of NETs based on differentiation and grading is crucial to determining prognosis and treatment. Surgery still offers the best chance of cure for patients with NETs, and tumor resection is the preferred approach when possible. For locally advanced or metastatic disease, approaches to treatment can vary widely depending on the extent of disease and goals of therapy. A better understanding of the biology of NETs acquired over the last decade has facilitated the development of targeted therapies, such as everolimus and a variety of tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Furthermore, the field of theranostics has led to dramatic improvements in our diagnostic and treatment abilities. Chemotherapy has a role in the treatment of NETs, evidenced by the benefit shown with the combination of temozolomide and capecitabine to treat pancreatic NETs. Somatostatin analogues are a mainstay of treatment because they reduce secretory products and have antiproliferative effects on NET cells. In this work, we aim to review the landscape for the diagnosis and treatment of well-differentiated NETs.

This report describes the rationale, purpose and design of A011801 (CompassHER2 RD), an ongoing prospective, multicenter, Phase III randomized trial. Eligible patients in the United States (US) and Canada with high-risk (defined as ER-negative and/or node-positive) HER2-positive (HER2+) residual disease (RD) after a predefined course of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and HER2-directed treatment are randomized 1:1 to adjuvant T-DM1 and placebo, versus T-DM1 and tucatinib. Patients have also received adjuvant radiotherapy and/or endocrine therapy, if indicated per standard of care guidelines. The primary objective of the trial is to determine if the invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) with T-DM1 plus tucatinib is superior to iDFS with T-DM1 plus placebo; other outcomes of interest include overall survival (OS), breast cancer-free survival (BCFS), distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS), brain metastases-free survival (BMFS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Correlative biomarker, quality of life (QoL) and pharmacokinetic (PK) end points are also evaluated.Lay abstract In this research study (A011801; CompassHER2 RD), patients with early stage HER2-positive breast cancer who already received treatment with chemotherapy and anti-HER2 targeted therapies followed by surgery are mainly enrolled. If cancer is still present in the breast and/or lymph nodes at the time of surgery, there is a higher risk of a recurrence in the future, and enrollment on A011801 is an option. Usually, if there is tumor remaining after chemotherapy and anti-HER2 targeted therapies, the main treatment is the use of an FDA-approved intravenous drug called T-DM1. Additional treatment may also include radiotherapy and/or medications to block the activity of estrogen. The usual treatment approach reduces the likelihood of breast cancer recurring in the future. This study has been performed to answer the following question: Is the combination of T-DM1 and a newer drug tucatinib better than usual treatment with T-DM1 alone at preventing cancer from returning? Study participants will receive treatment with T-DM1 and placebo (a pill that looks like the study drug but contains no medication) or T-DM1 and tucatinib, for up to 14 cycles, unless their breast cancer returns or the side effects become too severe. Research bloods are taken on study along with standard blood work, and we also request a stored tumor sample from the original biopsy and from the breast cancer surgery for research purposes. Optional Quality of Life Questionnaires are also included in the trial. After the study, participants finish T-DM1 and placebo, or T-DM1 and tucatinib, and their doctor will continue to follow their condition with clinic visits every 6 months for 10 years and watch for side effects and for signs of breast cancer recurring.

BACKGROUND: Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy can lead to durable responses in patients with relapsed/refractory hematologic malignancies. Immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) and cytokine release syndrome (CRS) are common and may place patients at risk for longer-term cognitive impairment. OBJECTIVE: This study examined changes in cognition in the first year after CD19-directed CAR-T-cell therapy for lymphoma, as well as CAR T-cell therapy-specific risk-factors (e.g., ICANS, CRS) and non-specific risk factors (e.g., baseline quality of life, frailty) for worsening cognition. STUDY DESIGN: Patients’ perceived cognition was assessed at baseline and at days 90 and 360. Clinical variables were abstracted from medical records. Piecewise mixed models were used to examine acute change (i.e., within 90 days) and longer-term change (i.e., from 90 days to 360 days) in cognition as well as to explore risk factors for worsening cognition. RESULTS: Among 118 participants (mean age 61, 59% male), mean levels of perceived cognition did not change from baseline to day 90 (p values>0.05) but worsened from day 90 to day 360 in global cognition and in the domains of memory, language, organization, and divided attention (p values0.05). Other putative risk factors were not associated with acute or longer-term changes in perceived cognition (p values>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: CAR T-cell therapy recipients reported delayed deterioration in several cognitive domains, although changes were small. These findings may be useful when educating future patients on what to expect when receiving CAR T-cell therapy.

PURPOSE: The benefit of routine pre-emptive screening for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infections in patients with cancer before cancer-directed therapies is unclear. Herein, we characterize the outcomes of a cohort of patients with cancer who were diagnosed with COVID-19 by routine screening (RS) in comparison with those diagnosed on the basis of clinical suspicion or exposure history (nonroutine screening [NRS]). METHODS: A multisite prospective observational study was conducted at three major and five satellite campuses of the Mayo Clinic Cancer Center between March 18 and July 31, 2020. The primary outcome was COVID-19–related hospital admission. Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit admissions and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Five thousand four hundred fifty-two patients underwent RS in the outpatient setting only, and 44 (0.81%) were diagnosed with COVID-19. RS detected 19 additional patients from the scheduled inpatient admissions for surgical or interventional procedures or inpatient chemotherapy. One hundred sixty-one patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 on the basis of NRS. COVID-19–related hospitalization rate (17.5% v 26.7%; P = .14), intensive care unit admission (1.6% v 5.6%; P = .19), and mortality (4.8% v 3.7%; P = .72) were not significantly different between the RS and NRS groups. In the multivariable analysis, age ≥ 60 years (odds ratio, 4.4; P = .023) and an absolute lymphocyte count ≤ 1.4 × 109/L (odds ratio, 9.2; P = .002) were independent predictors of COVID-19–related hospital admission. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 positivity rate was low on the basis of RS. Comparing the hospital admission and mortality outcomes with the NRS cohort, there were no significant differences. The value of routine pre-emptive screening of asymptomatic patients with cancer for COVID-19 remains low.

Simple Summary FGFR inhibitors evolved as therapeutic options in cholangiocarcinoma and urothelial malignancies. Given the implications of FGFR pathway in various physiological functions, FGFR inhibitors are known to cause unique toxicities. In this review, we summarized the physiology of FGF/FGFR signaling and briefly discussed the possible mechanisms that could lead to FGFR inhibitor resistance and side effects. In addition, we proposed treatment guidelines for the management of FGFR-inhibitor-associated toxicities. Abstract Fibroblast Growth Factor receptor (FGFR) pathway aberrations have been implicated in approximately 7% of the malignancies. As our knowledge of FGFR aberrations in cancer continues to evolve, FGFR inhibitors emerged as potential targeted therapeutic agents. The promising results of pemigatinib and infigratinib in advanced unresectable cholangiocarcinoma harboring FGFR2 fusions or rearrangement, and erdafitinib in metastatic urothelial carcinoma with FGFR2 and FGFR3 genetic aberrations, lead to their accelerated approval by the United States (USA) FDA. Along with these agents, many phase II/III clinical trials are currently evaluating the use of derazantinib, infigratinib, and futibatinib either alone or in combination with immunotherapy. Despite the encouraging results seen with FGFR inhibitors, resistance mechanisms and side effect profile may limit their clinical utility. A better understanding of the unique FGFR-inhibitor-related toxicities would invariably help us in the prevention and effective management of FGFR-inhibitor-induced adverse events thereby enhancing their clinical benefit. Herein, we summarized the physiology of FGF/FGFR signaling and briefly discussed the possible mechanisms that could lead to FGFR inhibitor resistance and side effects. In addition, we proposed treatment guidelines for the management of FGFR-inhibitor-associated toxicities. This work would invariably help practicing oncologists to effectively manage the unique toxicities of FGFR inhibitors.

Background: Clinicopathological features and the outcomes of patients with fibrolamellar hepatocellular carcinoma (FLHCC) are not clearly defined. Methods: Data were collected by retrospective chart review on 42 patients with FLHCC treated between 1990 and 2017 at Mayo Clinic. Results: Of 42 patients (median age at diagnosis 22 years), 10 patients (23.8%) had stage I disease and 32 patients (76.2%) had stage II to IVB disease. All 10 patients with stage I disease and 21 of 32 patients with stage II–IVB disease underwent resection at presentation. In stage I patient group, 6 patients experienced recurrence with a median time to recurrence of 30.5 months and a 5-year overall survival (OS) of 86%. Patients with stage II to IVB disease who underwent resection (n=21) upfront had a median OS of 32.5 months and 5-year OS of 44%. In the upfront surgery group, 71% of patients experienced recurrence. The median OS of patients with unresectable disease (n=11) was 10 months. Four out of nine patients treated with sorafenib had stable disease and one patient with programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expressing tumor had a near complete response after 2 months of therapy with nivolumab. Conclusions: In FLHCC, surgical resection was associated with prolonged OS; although most patients had a disease recurrence regardless of disease stage and resection margin status. The response to kinase inhibitor, sorafenib, was variable. In select cases, therapy with a checkpoint inhibitor may provide a viable treatment option.

Background: There is significant heterogeneity in the treatment of stage IIIA non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study evaluated the therapeutic and survival disparities in patients with stage IIIA NSCLC based on the facility volume using the National Cancer Database. Methods: Patients with stage IIIA NSCLC diagnosed from 2004 through 2015 were included. Facilities were classified by tertiles based on mean patients treated per year, with low-volume facilities treating ≤8 patients, intermediate-volume treating 9 to 14 patients, and high-volume treating ≥15 patients. Cox multivariate analysis was used to determine the volume–outcome relationship. Results: Analysis included 83,673 patients treated at 1,319 facilities. Compared with patients treated at low-volume facilities, those treated at high-volume centers were more likely to be treated with surgical (25% vs 18%) and trimodality (12% vs 9%) therapies. In multivariate analysis, facility volume was independently associated with all-cause mortality (PPConclusions: Patients treated for stage IIIA NSCLC at high-volume facilities were more likely to receive surgical and trimodality therapies and had a significant improvement in survival.

Biosimilar filgrastims are primarily indicated for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia prevention. They are less expensive formulations of branded filgrastim, and biosimilar filgrastim was the first biosimilar oncology drug administered in European Union (EU) countries, Japan, and the U.S. Fourteen biosimilar filgrastims have been marketed in EU countries, Japan, the U.S., and Canada since 2008, 2012, 2015, and 2016, respectively. We reviewed experiences and policies for biosimilar filgrastim markets in EU countries and Japan, where uptake has been rapid, and in the U.S. and Canada, where experience is rapidly emerging. U.S. regulations for designating biosimilar interchangeability are under development, and such regulations have not been developed in most other countries. Pharmaceutical substitution is allowed for new filgrastim starts in some EU countries and in Canada, but not Japan and the U.S. In EU countries, biosimilar adoption is facilitated with favorable hospital tender offers. U.S. adoption is reportedly 24%, while the second filgrastim biosimilar is priced 30% lower than branded filgrastim and 20% lower than the first biosimilar filgrastim approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Utilization is about 60% in EU countries, where biosimilar filgrastim is marketed at a 30%–40% discount. In Japan, biosimilar filgrastim utilization is 45%, primarily because of 35% discounts negotiated by Central Insurance and hospital-only markets. Overall, biosimilar filgrastim adoption barriers are small in many EU countries and Japan and are diminishing in Canada in the U.S. Policies facilitating improved U.S. adoption of biosimilar filgrastim, based on positive experiences in EU countries and Japan, including favorable insurance coverage; larger price discount relative to reference filgrastim pricing; closing of the “rebate trap” with transparent pricing information; formal educational efforts of patients, physicians, caregivers, and providers; and allowance of pharmaceutical substitution of biosimilar versus reference filgrastim, should be considered. Implications for Practice We reviewed experiences and policies for biosimilar filgrastims in Europe, Japan, Canada, and the U.S. Postmarketing harmonization of regulatory policies for biosimilar filgrastims has not occurred. Acceptance of biosimilar filgrastims for branded filgrastim, increasing in the U.S. and in Canada, is commonplace in Japan and Europe. In the U.S., some factors, accepted in Europe or Japan, could improve uptake, including acceptance of biosimilars as safe and effective; larger cost savings, decreasing “rebate traps” where pharmaceutical benefit managers support branded filgrastim, decreased use of patent litigation/challenges, and allowing pharmacists to routinely substitute biosimilar for branded filgrastim.

BACKGROUND: Androgens were shown to play a key role in the growth and progression of pancreatic cancer. We evaluated the safety and tolerability of the combination of enzalutamide, a novel androgen receptor (AR) antagonist with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel as a first-line treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We used the standard 3 + 3 dose escalation design with cohort expansion to evaluate 2 dose levels of enzalutamide: 80 mg and 160 mg/day orally (phase 1a) in combination with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel in metastatic pancreatic cancer patients. In the expansion phase (phase 1b), AR+ was a pre-requisite criterion. We also evaluated the full pharmacokinetic (PK) profile for nab-paclitaxel and enzalutamide. RESULTS: We enrolled 24 patients, 12 patients in phase 1a and 12 patients in phase 1b. The median age was 68 (range, 32–84) years. No DLTs were observed. Grade 3/4 treatment related adverse events included neutropenia (44%), anemia (40%), leukopenia (24%), nausea and vomiting (20%), diarrhea (16%), infections (12%), thrombocytopenia (8%), thromboembolic event (8%), hypertension (8%), hypokalemia (8%), hyponatremia (8%), and ALT elevation (8%). Median overall survival and progression-free survival was 9.73 [95%CI:9.73–13.5] and 7.53 (95%CI:6.05–12.8) months, respectively. PK analysis suggests that the combination therapy does not impact the kinetics of either drug evaluated. Enzalutamide reached steady-state levels between day 22 and 29 and the mean half-life of nab-paclitaxel was 19.6 ± 4.7 h. CONCLUSIONS: Enzalutamide 160 mg daily in combination with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel can be safely administered with no unexpected toxicities. We also noticed preliminary signals of efficacy with this combination.

Aspirin and statin drugs have been associated with reduced risk of several gastrointestinal cancers, but their association with gallbladder cancer (GBC) has not been well established. We evaluated the association of aspirin and statins with the risk of GBC. Patients with GBC managed at Mayo Clinic between 2000 and 2019 were matched 1:2 with a general patient pool by age and sex. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess associations between GBC and aspirin or statin use. The analysis included 795 cases and 1590 controls, with a median age of 67 years. Aspirin or statin use alone or in combination was higher in controls (p &lt, 0.001). Univariate analysis showed that the use of aspirin [odds ratio (OR): 0.11, 95%CI: 0.08–0.15] or statins (OR: 0.29, 95%CI: 0.20–0.40) and their combined use (OR: 0.18, 95%CI: 0.13–0.24) was associated with lower risk of GBC. Multivariable analysis revealed that aspirin (OR: 0.12, 95%CI: 0.09–0.16) and combined statins and aspirin (OR: 0.46, 95%CI: 0.31–0.67) were associated with lower risk of GBC. Aspirin alone or in combination with statins is associated with a strongly reduced risk of GBC. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these results and to elucidate their mechanisms.

248 Background: Esophageal carcinoma is the 6th most common cause of death worldwide. While squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) was the most common among the histologic subtypes in the 20th century, recent reports have demonstrated an increased incidence of adenocarcinoma in both Eastern and Western world. With this changing paradigm of esophageal carcinoma, it is important to estimate the future burden of esophageal carcinoma by histology, age, sex, and race, that could help plan prevention, control, and treatment strategies for this cancer. Methods: We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) 14 registries to obtain incidence data from 2000 to 2016. We applied age-period-cohort models to estimate future esophageal carcinoma incidence rates and the estimated disease burden by multiplying incidence forecasts by corresponding US Census population projections. Results: Our estimate suggests that the incidence (per 100,000 persons) of esophageal adenocarcinoma is increasing in people within the age group of 40-65 years. Our prediction showed that the incidence will increase from 2.12 in 2021 to 2.82 in 2030 (3.2% per year, 95% CI –2.3% to 9.1%, p=0.26). Notably, we noticed a similar marginal increase in incidence among Asians, Black, and Whites in the 40-65 years age group (3.1%, 3.2%, and 4.2%, per year, respectively). White males aged >65 years had the highest incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (17.34 in 2021), and incidence decreased 1.3% per year. We noticed a marginally decreased incidence in Black male (-1.1% per year, p=0.71) and Asian male (-3.9% per year, p=0.17) population aged >65 years. Interestingly, we found a decrease in the incidence of SCC in the current age groups 40-65 (-2.7% per year, p=0.31) and >65 years (-4.6% per year, p=0.081). We observed that Asians had the greatest decrease in incidence (-4.3% per year) as compared to that of Blacks (-4.2% per year) and Whites (-2.9% per year), although there was no statistically significant difference in the annual decrease among races. Conclusions: In our study of esophageal cancer, we predict an increased incidence of adenocarcinoma histology subtype in the younger age group (40-65 years) while the SCC subtype will have a decreased trend. Strategies to prevention esophageal adenocarcinoma, including dietary changes, should preferentially target patients

Immunotherapy with a checkpoint inhibitor has revolutionized the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Replacing cytotoxic chemotherapy in some settings, immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors enables many patients to live longer with much fewer side effects. Nonetheless, immunotherapy alone only works for about one-fifth of unselected patients and despite the durability of response, treatment will eventually fail. There are several important cofactors within the tumor microenvironment which can contribute to the efficacy of immunotherapy. These include T-cells, chemokines, and antigen presentations. Preliminary research has shown that these cofactors can be altered by epigenetic modulation. Specifically, hypomethylating agents or histone deacetylase inhibitors can lead to changes in the compositions and characteristics within the tumor microenvironment in a way that enhances the efficacy of checkpoint inhibitor. In recent clinical trials of combined immuno-epigenetic therapy, tumor responses were observed among patients who were previously resistant or refractory to immunotherapy. Furthermore, biological correlative studies also confirmed the mechanism of action of these agents, especially among patients who derived benefit. Nonetheless, at present, the efficacy in terms of tumor response seems modest and side effects, though mostly not serious, can result in treatment interruption or interfere with the quality of life.

Limited data are available regarding the incidence, survival patterns, and long-term outcomes of natural killer (NK)/T-cell neoplasms in the United States.We performed a retrospective study of patients with NK/T-cell neoplasms diagnosed from 2001 to 2014 using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program database. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the overall survival difference among the subgroups. Multivariate analyses were used to determine the factors affecting survival.For the 797 patients with NK/T-cell lymphoma, nasal type, the median age at diagnosis was 53 years, and males tended to be younger at diagnosis (P .0001). The incidence of the disease increased from 0.4 in 2001 to 0.8 in 2014 per 1,000,000 individuals. The incidence was significantly greater in Hispanic patients compared with that in non-Hispanic patients (rate ratio, 3.03; P = .0001). The median overall survival was 20 months (range, 2-73 months) and varied significantly according to the primary site (P .0001) and the disease stage at diagnosis (P .0001). NK/T-cell lymphoma patients had an increased risk of acute myeloid leukemia (standardized incidence ratio, 18.77; 95% confidence interval, 2.27-67.81). For the 105 NK/T-cell leukemia patients, the median age at diagnosis was 58 years (range, 4-95 years). The overall incidence of the disease was 0.09 per 1,000,000 individuals and was significantly greater in males (rate ratio, 0.41; P .0001). Unlike NK/T-cell lymphoma, no racial disparities were found in the incidence. The median overall survival was 17 months (range, 0-36 months).The incidence of NK/T-cell lymphoma, nasal type, in the United States has at least doubled in the past decade, with the greatest predilection among Hispanics. Patients with NK/T-cell lymphoma might have an increased risk of the subsequent development of acute myeloid leukemia.

Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the rectum is a rare form of gastrointestinal malignancy. The current knowledge on the natural history is primarily derived from case series.Using the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB), we determined the prognostic factors and overall survival (OS) outcomes of rectal SCC reported to NCDB between 2004 and 2015. Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used to perform OS analysis. Propensity matched analysis was undertaken to compare the OS outcomes between rectal and anal SCC.Of the 3405 cases included in our analysis, 67% were female. Median age at diagnosis was 61 years and did not differ by sex. In stages I-III, patients who received definitive chemoradiation only (108 months) had a better median OS as compared to surgery alone (76 months) (p = 0.012). On multivariate analysis, age60 years, female sex, and receipt of chemoradiation with or without surgery were independent predictors of better OS in stage I-III disease. Administration of chemoradiation was associated with better OS in stage IV disease. On propensity matched analysis comparing outcomes to anal SCC, OS of rectal SCC was inferior (79 months) to anal SCC (113 months) (p 0.001), no such difference in OS was noted in the cohorts that received surgery plus post-surgical chemoradiation (p = 0.12).Outcomes of rectal SCC were dependent upon age, sex, comorbidity score, and therapy received. Chemoradiation alone or in combination with surgery was associated with a better median OS in patients with stages I-III.

Context Adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) is rare; knowledge about prognostic factors and survival outcomes is limited. Objective To describe predictors of survival and overall survival (OS) outcomes. Design and Patients Retrospective analysis of data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) from 2004 to 2015 on 3185 patients with pathologically confirmed ACC. Main Outcome Measures Baseline description, survival outcomes, and predictors of survival were evaluated in patients with ACC. Results Median age at ACC diagnosis was 55 (range: 18 to 90) years; did not differ significantly by sex or stage of the disease at diagnosis. On multivariate analysis, increasing age, higher Charlson-Deyo comorbidity index score, high tumor grade, and no surgical therapy (all P < 0.0001); and stage IV disease (P = 0.002) and lymphadenectomy during surgery (P = 0.02) were associated with poor prognosis. Patients with stage I-III disease treated with surgical resection had significantly better median OS (63 vs 8 months; P < 0.001). In stage IV disease, better median OS occurred in patients treated with surgery (19 vs 6 months; P < 0.001), and postsurgical radiation (29 vs 10 months; P < 0.001) or chemotherapy (22 vs 13 months; P = 0.004). Conclusion OS varied with increasing age, higher comorbidity index, grade, and stage of ACC at presentation. There was improved survival with surgical resection of primary tumor, irrespective of disease stage; postsurgical chemotherapy or radiation was of benefit only in stage IV disease.

The role of locoregional treatment (LRT) remains controversial in de novo stage IV breast cancer (BC). We sought to analyze the role of LRT and prognostic factors of overall survival (OS) in de novo stage IV BC patients treated with LRT utilizing the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB). The objective of the current study is to create and internally validate a prognostic scoring model to predict the long-term OS for de novo stage IV BC patients treated with LRT. We included de novo stage IV BC patients reported to NCDB between 2004 and 2015. Patients were divided into LRT and no-LRT subsets. We randomized LRT subset to training and validation cohorts. In the training cohort, a seventeen-point prognostic scoring system was developed based on the hazard ratios calculated using Cox-proportional method. We stratified both training and validation cohorts into two “groups” [group 1 (0–7 points) and group 2 (7–17 points)]. Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank test were used to compare OS between the two groups. Our prognostic score was validated internally by comparing the OS between the respective groups in both the training and validation cohorts. Among 67,978 patients, LRT subset (21,200) had better median OS as compared to that of no-LRT (45 vs. 24 months; p

Introduction: Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy can lead to durable responses in patients with relapsed/refractory hematologic malignancies. Immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) occurs in up to 64% of patients. There is concern that ICANS places patients at risk for longer-term cognitive impairment. This study examined changes in patients' perceived cognition from prior to CAR T-cell therapy to days 90 and 360 in patients diagnosed with non-Hodgkins lymphoma, as well as CAR T-cell therapy-specific risk factors (e.g., ICANS, cytokine release syndrome [CRS]) and non-specific risk factors (e.g., age, education) associated with changes in cognition. Methods: Patients' perceived cognition was assessed at baseline and at days 90 and 360 with the Everyday Cognition Questionnaire (ECog), that provides scores for global cognition (which includes subscales for memory, language, visuospatial abilities, planning, organization, divided attention), and satisfaction with cognition. Quality of life was scored using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29. Frailty was examined with the hand grip strength test. Cognitive reserve was examined with the Weschler Test of Adult Reading. Clinical variables were extracted from medical records. Demographic variables were self-reported by participants. Percentages of patients reporting clinically significant worsening, clinically significant improvement, and unchanged cognition over time were calculated. Piecewise mixed models were used to examine average change in perceived cognition from baseline to day 90 and from day 90 to day 360, as well as to explore potential risk factors of average change in global cognition. Risk factors included demographic (i.e., age, education) and clinical factors (i.e., grade>2 CRS, grade>2 ICANS, disease response at days 90 and 360, baseline grip strength, baseline cognitive reserve) as well as baseline quality of life variables (i.e., fatigue, physical function, pain, depression, anxiety). Results: A total of 118 participants provided data (mean age 61, 59% male, 86% diagnosed with large B-cell lymphomas, 87% received axicabtagene ciloleucel). At day 90, relative to baseline, 17% of participants reported worsened global cognition, 10% improved global cognition, and 73% no change in global cognition (Figure 1). At day 360, relative to baseline, 28% reported worsened global cognition, 11% improved global cognition, and 61% no change in global cognition (Figure 1). Piecewise mixed models indicated that from baseline to day 90, there were no changes on average in global cognition or in any cognitive domain (ps>.05). In contrast, from day 90 to 360, participants reported, on average, worsened global cognition (p=.01), language (p=.04), visuospatial abilities (p=.04), divided attention (p=.03) and satisfaction with cognition (p=.01). At baseline, greater fatigue, anxiety and depression were associated with worse concurrent perceived cognition (p.05). Post-hoc analyses indicated no differences in cognition by disease status at day 360 (ps>.05). Conclusions: Results suggest that perceived cognition worsens on average beyond day 90, with patients reporting worse baseline physical functioning being at risk of worse perceived cognition by day 90. Results should be incorporated when preparing patients about what to expect when receiving CAR T-cell therapy. Further research is needed regarding objective neurocognitive performance after CAR T-cell therapy. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Barata: Grifols: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company; Almirall: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Gonzalez: SureMed Compliance Equity: Consultancy; Elly Health, Inc.: Consultancy. Kirtane: Oncternal Therapeutics: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company; Seattle Genetics: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company; Myovant Sciences: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company; Veru: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Jain: Kite/Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Mokhtari: Kite: Consultancy. Chavez: ADC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Epizyme: Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Speakers Bureau; Kite/Gilead: Consultancy; Adaptive: Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy. Lazaryan: Kadmon: Consultancy; Avrobio: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Humanigen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shah: Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Expenses; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: Expenses; Amgen: Consultancy; Precision Biosciences: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Expenses, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics/Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Expenses; Acrotech/Spectrum: Honoraria; BeiGene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Servier Genetics: Other; Bristol-Myers Squibb/Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Expenses; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy. Locke: Gerson Lehrman Group: Consultancy; Emerging Therapy Solutions: Consultancy; EcoR1: Consultancy; Cowen: Consultancy; Umoja: Consultancy, Other; Wugen: Consultancy, Other; Takeda: Consultancy, Other; Novartis: Consultancy, Other, Research Funding; Legend Biotech: Consultancy, Other; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role, Research Funding; Iovance Biotherapeutics: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; GammaDelta Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Cellular Biomedicine Group: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Calibr: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role; Allogene Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Role, Research Funding; Moffitt Cancer Center: Patents & Royalties: field of cellular immunotherapy. Jim: Kite pharma: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy; Janssen Scientific Affairs: Consultancy; RedHill Biopharma: Consultancy.

Introduction: Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is an uncommon hematological malignancy with an estimated incidence of 1 per 100,000 persons per year in the United States and represents only about 5% of all non-Hodgkin lymphomas. Several studies have shown that treatment at academic centers and a higher hospital case volume are associated with improved outcomes for uncommon hematological malignancies, probably due to increased provider expertise and access to novel therapies. Treatment of MCL can be complex given the heterogenous nature of the disease and a frequent need for autologous stem cell transplantation in eligible patients. However, the impact of treatment at an academic center and facility patient volume on the survival of patients with MCL has not been well studied in large cohorts. In this study, we utilized the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to investigate the impact of treatment at an academic center and treatment facility volume on the overall survival (OS) of patients with MCL. Methods: The NCDB was used to identify adult patients (≥ 18 years) with newly diagnosed MCL from 2004 through 2017. For facility patient volume analysis, patients were divided into groups based on the average number of new MCL patients seen annually: Tercile 1 [T1] (1-3 patients/year), Tercile 2 [T2] (4-5 patients/year) and Tercile 3 [T3] (≥6 patients/year). Treating centers were divided into Academic and Non-academic using the NCDB definitions. Academic centers were defined as centers that accessions more than 500 newly diagnosed cancer cases per year, participate in postgraduate medical education in at least four program areas including internal medicine and surgery and participates in cancer-related clinical trials. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox hazards proportional model. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 25. Results: We identified 22,752 patients with MCL during the study period. 9,484 (42%) patients were treated at academic centers and 13,070 (57%) were treated at non-academic centers. In terms of facility patient volume 10,948 patients (48%) were in the T1 group, 4,637 (20%) were in the T2 group and 7,166 (31%) were in the T3 group. No significant differences were found in baseline demographics (age, gender, race/ethnicity, comorbidity scores), socioeconomical variables (insurance type, median income, area of residence) and disease-related factors (B-symptoms, Ann Arbor stage) between patients treated academic vs nonacademic centers, or between patients in T1 vs T2 vs T3 groups. Notably, compared to lower volume facilities, T3 facilities were more likely to be academic centers (T3: 81% vs T2: 42% vs T1: 16%, p After a median follow-up of 3.4 years, the median overall survival (OS) was 5.6 years for the entire cohort. The median OS was inferior for patients treated at lower volume facilities (4.1 years for T1, 5.1 years for T2 and 9.0 years for T3, p Conclusion: Patients with MCL treated at academic and higher volume facilities had a higher OS compared to patients treated at non-academic and lower volume facilities.. Additional research is needed to fully understand the mechanisms behind these differences. Patients with MCL may benefit from an early referral to academic and high-volume centers. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Munoz: Merck: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics/Abbvie, Bayer, Gilead/Kite Pharma, Pfizer, Janssen, Juno/Celgene, BMS, Kyowa, Alexion, Beigene, Fosunkite, Innovent, Seattle Genetics, Debiopharm, Karyopharm, Genmab, ADC Therapeutics, Epizyme, Beigene, Servier: Consultancy; Gilead/Kite Pharma, Kyowa, Bayer, Pharmacyclics/Janssen, Seattle Genetics, Acrotech/Aurobindo, Beigene, Verastem, AstraZeneca, Celgene/BMS, Genentech/Roche.: Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Physicians' Education Resource: Honoraria; Gilead/Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Kyowa: Honoraria; Bayer: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; OncView: Honoraria; Targeted Oncology: Honoraria. Paludo: Karyopharm: Research Funding. Habermann: Seagen: Other: Data Monitoring Committee; Incyte: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Tess Therapeutics: Other: Data Monitoring Committee; Morphosys: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Loxo Oncology: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Eli Lilly & Co.,: Other: Scientific Advisor. Nowakowski: Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Zai Labolatory: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy; Nanostrings: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy; Kymera Therapeutics: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Ryvu Therapeutics: Consultancy; Kyte Pharma: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Selvita: Consultancy; Curis: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Bantham Pharmaceutical: Consultancy. Wang: Novartis: Research Funding; LOXO Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MorphoSys: Research Funding; InnoCare: Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

7 Background: Despite the promise of precision oncology, the cost-effectiveness of targeted treatments is debated. Until now, the increase in price of oral targeted anti-cancer treatments used in common malignancies has not been evaluated. Here, we report patterns in price changes from 2015-2019 for multiple oral anti-cancer medications for common solid tumor malignancies. Methods: We utilized the publicly available Medicare Part D provider utilization and payment database from 2015 to 2019. We extracted drug prices (using generic names) for commonly used targeted oral anticancer agents for lung, breast, and prostate cancer. The primary outcome was the correlation of average change in Medicare spending per dosage unit among the multiple brand-name medications within each class available. We additionally calculated compound annual growth rates (CAGRs) [i.e. mean annual growth rates over a specified period of time] for medication costs within each class, and compared it with the consumer price index (a measure of the average change over time in the prices of consumer items). Results: The study included 6 EGFR inhibitors (1 generic), 5 ALK inhibitors, 2 BRAF inhibitors, 3 hormonal agents (1 generic), 3 CDK4/6 inhibitors, 2 PARP inhibitors, and 7 anti-androgen agents (2 generic). The median (range) Pearson correlation coefficient values for drugs within each class were 0.967 (0.915-0.978) for EGFRi, 0.981 (0.966-0.989) for ALKi, 0.996 for BRAFi, 0.994 (0.992-0.999) for CDK4/6i, 0.855 for PARPi, and 0.442 (-0.522-0.962) for anti-androgens. Except for anti-androgens, all other drug classes showed strong linear association in price increase between two drugs within the same-class. A coefficient could not be calculated for therapies with 2 or fewer data points ( i.e., generic erlotinib, dacomitinib, generic abiraterone, apalutamide, and darolutamide). There was no significant correlation between expenditure for anti-estrogen agents. The median (range) CAGRs in costs over this 5-year period were: were 4.56% for EGFRi, 6.40% for ALKi, 2.58% for BRAFi, 5.48% for hormonal agents, 5.21% for CDK4/6i, 27.29% for PARPi, and 34.8% for anti-androgen agents. Conclusions: The median CAGR in costs for modern oral precision driven cancer therapeutic classes mostly outpaced CPI (2.26%/year), and the average inflation rate (1.90%/year). Increase in cost within the same class should be weighed against incremental clinical benefit for the patients. For most classes despite there being multiple agents, the rise in drug expenditures correlated closely, calling into question the true value of within class competition. There is an urgent need for drug pricing reform given the average expenditure of Medicare part D, and ultimately out of pocket costs for our patients with cancer continues to trend upwards. Increased advocacy efforts are needed to ensure precision therapeutics remains an attainable and sustainable goal.

Recently, there have been considerable advancements in cancer therapies thereby prolonging the life of cancer survivors. However, these recent advancements present new challenges in the management of bone disease in cancer survivors. Bone acts as a fertile soil for cancer seeding and bone health is often compromised because of increased inflammatory cytokines in cancer, direct cancer metastasis and toxic effects of anti-cancer therapies. This effect is more pronounced in elderly population who already have compromised bone mineral density leading to increased skeletal related events and bone pain. Timely diagnosis and effective interventions are essential for reducing bone-related morbidity in cancer survivors. Also, a complex interdependence exists between cancer related bone disease and tumor growth, creating a vicious circle of extensive bone destruction and cancer progression. Hence, maintenance of bone health and integrity plays a pivotal role in comprehensive cancer care. The bone-targeted treatments have been shown to preserve bone health, and modify the course of the underlying cancer. Management of long-term bone health requires a broad knowledge base that both endocrinologists, oncologists and other care team members should be aware of. The manuscript highlights the skeletal effects of cancer, adjuvant therapies used for hormone-responsive cancers, chemotherapy induced bone loss and steps for accurate diagnosis and management of bone disease in cancer survivors by bridging the gaps in the comprehensive cancer care.

Background Hypofibrinogenemia can occur after Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy and is sometimes associated with cytokine release syndrome. Hypofibrinogenemia is associated with increased risk of bleeding as well as thrombosis. Limited literature exists on the incidence, complications and management of hypofibrinogenemia after CAR T-cell therapy. Methods We analyzed medical records on 148 patients who received CD19-directed CAR T-cell therapy for large B-cell lymphomas between 05/2015 and 09/2019. All patients who had at least one serum fibrinogen level measured in the first 30 days after CAR T-cell infusion were included in the analysis. All patients with serum fibrinogen Results Out of 148 patients, 35 had at least one serum fibrinogen level measured in the first 30 days after CAR T-cell infusion. Nadir serum fibrinogen was Conclusions This study describes in detail, hypofibrinogenemia seen in patients treated with CD19-directed CAR T-cell therapy in lymphoma. None of the patients experienced a major bleeding or thrombotic event with low serum fibrinogen level. These descriptive data may be used by clinicians to inform their management of hypofibrinogenemia seen in CAR T-cell patients.

Background In patients with lymphoma, third space fluid accumulations may develop or worsen during cytokine release syndrome (CRS) associated with chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy. Pre-existing symptomatic pleural effusions were excluded by the ZUMA-1 trial of axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) for large B cell lymphoma (LBCL) and variants. The optimal management of effusions that develop before or after axi-cel infusion in LBCL is unknown. Methods We performed a single center retrospective study evaluating 148 patients receiving CD19 CAR T-cell therapy for LBCL between 05/2015 and 09/2019. We identified all patients who developed pleural, pericardial and peritoneal effusions before (pre-CAR-T) or during the first 30 days after CAR T-cell infusion (post-CAR-T). Clinically relevant effusions were considered symptomatic based upon physician documentation. Results Total effusions and symptomatic effusions were noted in 24% (36/148) and 18% (27/148) of patients, respectively. Among 27 patients with symptomatic effusions, 59% (16/27) were pre-CAR-T effusions, 52% (14/27) persisted after day 30, and 44% (12/27) were malignant effusions. Overall, 67% of symptomatic effusions (18/27) were managed with diuretics, 44% (12/27) with a therapeutic thoracentesis or paracentesis and 33% (9/27) were observed with only supplemental oxygen provided. Six patients required pleural or abdominal catheters with a median indwelling duration of 54 (range, 29, 202) days, although 2 of these patients passed away with these indwelling catheters. Among symptomatic effusions developing only post-CAR-T (n=11), time to onset of effusion was median of 5 (range, 2-11) days and none of these patients required interventional drainage. Table 1 differentiates between effusions based on whether they were present (n = 19) or not (n = 17) prior to CAR T cell infusion. Conclusions Nearly half of all effusions diagnosed in patients receiving CAR T cell therapy develop after infusion but most can be medically managed. Patients with pre-CAR-T effusions may require procedural drainage or indwelling catheters, as these effusions may persist beyond the acute CRS period.

CA19-9 elevation has shown to be associated with poor prognosis in extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECCA). However, the role of CA19-9 in staging of ECCA has not been evaluated. We hypothesized that CA19-9 elevation is a marker of aggressive biology in ECCA and that inclusion of CA19-9 in the staging system may improve overall survival (OS) discrimination.Patients with ECCA whose CA19-9 levels, irrespective of surgical status, were reported to the National Cancer Database (2004-2015) were included. The patients were classified based on their CA19-9 levels and a new staging system was proposed. Net reclassification improvement (NRI) model was used to assess the predictive improvement in the proposed survival model as compared to AJCC-TNM staging.Of the 2100 patients included in the study, 626 (32%) and 1474 (68%) had normal and elevated CA19-9 levels (38 U/ml), respectively. Median OS was lower among patients with elevated CA19-9 level compared to those with CA19-9 level ≤38 U/ml (8.5 vs 16 months, p 0.01). On multivariate analysis, CA19-9 elevation independently predicted poor prognosis [HR:1.72 (1.46-2.02); p 0.01] with similar impact as node-positivity, positive resection margins and non-receipt of chemotherapy. We developed a new staging system by incorporating CA19-9 into the 7th edition AJCC TNM staging system. NRI of 46% (95%CI: 39-57%) indicates that the new staging system is substantially effective at re-classifying events at 12 months as compared to AJCC 7th edition.Elevated CA19-9 was found to be an independent risk factor for mortality in ECCA and its inclusion in the proposed staging system improved OS discrimination.

Current staging systems for gallbladder cancer (GBC) are primarily based on surgical pathology and therefore are not relevant for unresectable patients and those undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Patients with a confirmed diagnosis of GBC managed at a tertiary referral center (2000-2016) were included. Independent predictors of overall survival (OS) were identified using multivariable analysis (MVA). A combination of these variables was then assessed to identify a set of factors that provided maximal accuracy in predicting OS, and a nomogram and a new staging system were created based on these factors. Harrell's C-statistic was calculated to evaluate the predictive accuracy of the nomogram and staging system.A total of 528 patients were included in the final analysis. On MVA, factors predictive of poor OS were older age, ECOG performance status, hemoglobin level9 g/dL, presence of metastases, and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) level200 U/L. A nomogram and a 4-tier staging system predictive of OS were created using age at diagnosis, ECOG status, tumor size, presence or absence of metastasis, and ALP level. The C-statistic for this novel staging system was 0.71 compared with 0.69 for the TNM staging system (P=.08). In patients who did not undergo surgery, the C-statistics of the novel and TNM staging systems were 0.60 and 0.51, respectively (P.001).We created a novel, clinically based staging system for GBC based on nonoperative information at the time of diagnosis that was superior to the TNM staging system in predicting OS in patients who did not undergo surgery, and that performed on par with TNM staging in surgical patients.

Cholangiocarcinoma is the most common aggressive biliary tract malignancy with dismal prognosis. Though surgical resection of the primary tumors yields better prognosis, majority of patients present at advanced, inoperable stages rendering systemic therapy as the only option. A significant progress has been made in understanding the cholangiocarcinoma tumorigenesis and molecular markers over the last decade, which opens doors to precision medicine in this dismal cancer. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas are most likely to harbor mutations in isocitrate dehydrogenase genes (IDH1, IDH2), fibroblast growth factor receptors (FGFR1, FGFR2, FGFR3), Eph receptor 2 (EPHA2), and BAP1 (gene involved in chromatin remodeling) genes, whereas ARID1B, ELF3, PBRM1, cAMP dependent protein kinase (PRKACA, and PRKACB) genetic mutations were implicated more commonly in distal and perihilar subtypes. Genomic studies have shown that FGFR2 aberrations are implicated in approximately 15% of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas, which make FGFR2 aberrations (Achilles heel) as potential novel targets in the management of cholangiocarcinoma. The current review comprehensively focuses on the role of FGFR2 inhibition either alone or in combination with other targeted therapy that act on down-stream and alternate kinase pathways in cholangiocarcinoma.

Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of pancreas is rare entity with poorly defined prognostic factors and therapeutic outcomes. We sought to determine the overall survival (OS) and prognostic factors of patients with pancreatic SCC using National Cancer Database (NCDB) (2004-15).Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used to perform OS analysis. Propensity-matched analysis was used to compare the OS of pancreatic SCC and adenocarcinoma.Of the 515 cases included in our analysis, 46% were female. Approximately half of the cohort (48%) received chemotherapy or radiation therapy or both. Twenty six percent (33/125) of stage I and II disease (localized disease), 11% (8/72) of stage III, and 2% (6/318) of stage IV disease underwent surgical resection of the primary tumor. Median OS for the entire cohort was 4 months and was significantly higher in patients who underwent surgical resection of the primary tumor (17 vs 4 months, p 0.001). In localized disease, adjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with improved OS in early stage disease (20 vs 24 months, p = 0.60). Stage IV patients treated with chemotherapy had a better OS than those without (5 vs 2 months, p 0.0001). Propensity matched analysis demonstrated no significant differences in median OS between pancreatic adenocarcinoma (4.8 months) and SCC (4 months, p = 0.09).Pancreatic SCC had a diverse OS that varied significantly according to increasing age (70 years) and stage of the disease at presentation (p 0.01). Surgical resection of primary tumor was associated with longer OS in stages I-II, whereas chemotherapy was associated with longer OS in stage IV disease.