Wolfe, Eric

167 Background: Previous studies have reported high TILs are a favorable prognostic factor in stage II CC. However, whether the impact of TILs on overall survival (OS) differs among pts who did or did not receive ADJ is still to be determined. We assessed the prognostic value of CD3+ TILs in pts with stage II CC according to whether they received ADJ or not (no-ADJ). Methods: Pts treated with curative surgery for stage II CC (2002-2013) were identified through the Santa Maria alle Scotte Hospital database. CD3+ TILs at the invasive front, center of tumor, and stroma, were determined by immunohistochemistry and manually quantified as the rate of TILs/total tissue areas. High TILs (H-TILs) was defined as > 20%. Pts were classified as high or low TILs (L-TILs) and ADJ or no-ADJ. Cox models were used to assess OS with hazard ratio estimates (95% CI). Results: Of the 678 pts included (356 deaths), 137 (20%) received ADJ while 541 (80%) did not. ADJ comprised fluoropyrimidine +/- oxaliplatin. Median follow-up was 8.5 years. The distributions of the 4 groups were: 16% (L-TIL/ADJ), 64% (L-TIL/no-ADJ), 5% (H-TIL/ADJ), 15% (H-TIL/no-ADJ). Compared to H-TILs/no-ADJ, ADJ pts had a significantly longer OS (P < .0001) regardless of the TILS rate while L-TILs/no ADJ had significantly shorter OS and higher risk of death (HR = 1.41; 95% CI, 1.06-1.88; P < .0001) [See table]. On multivariable analysis, adjusting for perforation, obstruction, T-stage, grade, < 12 lymph nodes resected, lymphovascular and perineural invasion, the adverse prognostic impact of L-TILs (vs H-TILs) in no-ADJ pts was confirmed (HR = 1.36; 95% CI 1.02, 1.82; P = .0373). Conclusions: Low CD3+ TILs rate was independently associated with shorter OS in stage II CC pts who did not receive ADJ, but was not prognostic among pts who had ADJ. These data suggest a potentially different impact of TILs in chemo-treated vs -untreated stage II CC which could affect clinical decision making. [Table: see text]

Background: Combinations of alkylating agents with proteasome inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy in newly diagnosed and relapsed multiple myeloma (MM), with melphalan or cyclophosphamide combinations being some of the commonly used regimens for initial treatment of MM. Ixazomib (Ixa) is an oral proteasome inhibitor that is approved for use in combination with lenalidomide for patients with relapsed MM. We examined if Ixa can be effectively combined with cyclophosphamide (Ctx) in order to develop a less expensive, all oral regimen for patients with relapsed MM. Patients and Methods: Patients with relapsed MM, who were proteasome inhibitor naïve OR have received less than 6 cycles of therapy with bortezomib and had a better than PR with no progression at the time of discontinuation, were enrolled. The primary objective was to determine overall response rate (ORR). Treatment consisted of Ixa 4mg PO days 1, 8, 15; Ctx 300 mg/m2 PO days 1, 8, 15, 22 and dexamethasone (Dex) 40 mg PO weekly in a 28-day cycle. Overall, 37 patients were accrued; data on 33 eligible patients were available for analysis as of July 18, 2019. Results: The median age was 71 (48-89), 61% were male and the median duration from diagnosis was 46 months (mos). Median number of prior lines of therapy was 4 (range 1-5), 76%, 42% and 67% respectively had a prior IMiD, proteasome inhibitor or stem cell transplant, respectively. At data cutoff, 22 (67%) had progressed, 4 (12%) had died and the median follow up of those alive was 21.3 mos. Fourteen patients are still receiving treatment, with median of 8.5 cycles. Most common reason for treatment discontinuation was disease progression (10 pts; 53%). The ORR was 60% including 6% CR and 24% VGPR. The median event free survival was 11.3 mos (95%CI: 9.0 - 26.8). Overall, 401 cycles have been administered across the study, with dose modifications/ hold required for Ixa, Ctx, and Dex in 9 (27%), 14 (42%), and 22 (67%) patients respectively, the most common reason being hematologic toxicity. A grade 3 or higher adverse event at least possibly attributed to the study drugs was seen in 77% of patients, hematologic in 67% and non-hematologic in 30%. (Table 1) The most commonly observed hematologic toxicities included thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, lymphopenia and anemia; for non-hematologic was nausea, diarrhea, peripheral neuropathy toxicity and fatigue. Conclusions: The combination of Ixa, Ctx and Dex (ICd) offers a convenient, all oral regimen for treatment of relapsed disease not refractory to proteasome inhibitors. The regimen has good efficacy in this group f heavily pretreated patients, with an acceptable toxicity profile. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:Ionis: Honoraria; Spectrum: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Prothena: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria. Ailawadhi:Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Bergsagel:Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Ionis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Fonseca:AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, Celgene, Kite, Janssen, Juno, Merck, Pharmacylics, Sanofi, Takeda: Other: Consultant/Advisor; Prognosticatin of MM based on Genetic Categorization by FISH: Patents & Royalties; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Other: Scientific Advisory Board. Dingli:alexion: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Kapoor:Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Cellectar: Consultancy; Janssen: Research Funding. Chanan-Khan:AbbVie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic: Employment; Ascentage: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding. Larsen:Janssen Oncology: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Russell:Imanis: Equity Ownership. Stewart:Roche: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Ionis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Ono: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding.

Abstract BACKGROUND Treatment options and prognosis are limited for patients with high grade glioma (pwHGG), underscoring the importance of patient and caregiver understanding to prioritize goals of care and quality of life (QOL). Although addressed by multiple providers, patients and caregivers may experience discordance in understanding the prognosis. This may be related to patient/caregiver perception, cognitive decline as a result of the tumor and/or treatment, or failure by the clinician to clearly articulate this information under emotional circumstances. AIMS: To evaluate the longitudinal perception of prognosis of patients compared to their caregivers and their providers during the adjuvant treatment of newly diagnosed HGG. METHODS After IRB approval, 16 pwHGG, their caregivers and their providers reported an overall survival estimate at each monthly visit during adjuvant treatment, as part of a larger survey. Options included “weeks,” “weeks to several months,” “several months to years,” “indefinite number of years”, or “I do not wish to answer.” RESULTS Seven of the sixteen patient/caregiver clusters have completed the appropriate duration of the study with the remaining completing in November. The perception of the patient differs from the caregiver at almost each visit. Regardless of the counseling provided by provider, the perception of both tends to change at each visit and can vary from dismal to overtly optimistic. There does not appear to be discrepancy between the neuro-oncology and palliative care provider’s perception of prognosis. CONCLUSION Newly diagnosed pwHGG and caregivers vary in their perception of prognosis, deviating not only from each other but also differing at each visit throughout the course of their illness. The providers’ perception appeared to remain consistent but often varied from that of the patient and caregiver. Providers need to be aware that prognostic understanding appears to fluctuate throughout the course of illness and cannot be clarified via a single discussion.

Abstract BACKGROUND Early involvement of palliative care (PC) in patients with metastatic cancer has been associated with improved quality of life (QOL). Patients with high grade glioma (pwHGG) and their caregivers have unique needs such that similar results are anticipated in this population but cannot be extrapolated. Recognizing that pwHGG often require a caregiver early in the course of disease, this patient population also experiences significant personal and caregiver distress that has been given limited attention and resources. AIM: To assess the feasibility of implementation of a novel patient reported outcomes (PRO) quality of life (QOL) tool administered by smart device in routine office visit (OV) and early integration of palliative care (PC) for pwHGG and their caregivers to improve QOL for both. DESIGN: Prospective, single-center cluster-randomized pilot conducted for 6 months during completion of adjuvant therapy for newly diagnosed high grade glioma. After informed consent was obtained, 15 pwHGG and their caregivers were randomized to: routine OV with basic QOL survey; OV with PROQOL; or PC consultation, in addition to OV with PROQOL. RESULTS Two elderly patients with declining performance status transitioned to hospice after initial visit, and one moved out of state prior to adjuvant visits. Thus far 5/15 patients/caregivers have successfully completed the pilot with the 6 remaining participants due to complete in November 2019. DISCUSSION The PROQOL appears to be easily integrated into OV without significant patient, caregiver, or provider burden. Providers confirmed utility in prioritizing symptoms and concerns. Thus far, it appears that patients (and caregivers) appeared to benefit from the PROQOL and PC support as evidenced by longitudinal improvement in QOL scores over the control group. CONCLUSIONS A unique PROQOL tool and early PC can be easily integrated into practice, and may improve the QOL of pwHGG and their caregivers.

Abstract Background Hot flashes (HFs) negatively affect quality of life among perimenopausal and postmenopausal women. This study investigated the efficacy of oxybutynin vs placebo in decreasing HFs. Methods In this randomized, multicenter, double-blind study, women with and without breast cancer with 28 or more HFs per week, lasting longer than 30 days, who were not candidates for estrogen-based therapy, were assigned to oral oxybutynin (2.5 mg twice a day or 5 mg twice a day) or placebo for 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was the intrapatient change from baseline in weekly HF score between each oxybutynin dose and placebo using a repeated-measures mixed model. Secondary endpoints included changes in weekly HF frequency, HF-related daily interference scale questionnaires, and self-reported symptoms. Results We enrolled 150 women. Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Mean (SD) age was 57 (8.2) years. Two-thirds (65%) were taking tamoxifen or an aromatase inhibitor. Patients on both oxybutynin doses reported greater reductions in the weekly HF score (5 mg twice a day: −16.9 [SD 15.6], 2.5 mg twice a day: −10.6 [SD 7.7]), placebo −5.7 (SD 10.2); P &lt; .005 for both oxybutynin doses vs placebo), HF frequency (5 mg twice a day: −7.5 [SD 6.6], 2.5 mg twice a day: −4.8 [SD 3.2], placebo: −2.6 [SD 4.3]; P &lt; .003 for both oxybutynin doses vs placebo), and improvement in most HF-related daily interference scale measures and in overall quality of life. Patients on both oxybutynin arms reported more side effects than patients on placebo, particularly dry mouth, difficulty urinating, and abdominal pain. Most side effects were grade 1 or 2. There were no differences in study discontinuation because of adverse effects. Conclusion Oxybutynin is an effective and relatively well-tolerated treatment option for women with HFs.

Abstract Background: The combination of a proteasome inhibitor (PI), an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD), and dexamethasone is the current standard induction therapy for myeloma. Daratumumab, a monoclonal antibody directed against CD38, is highly effective in treating myeloma and improves response rates and progression free survival (PFS) when added to PI or IMiD. Ixazomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (IRd) is an effective, all oral, induction regimen that has been studied in phase 2 and 3 trials. We designed this trial to examine the feasibility and efficacy of adding daratumumab to the IRd regimen. Patients and Methods: Patients with previously untreated MM, with measurable disease and adequate organ function were enrolled irrespective of their transplant eligibility. The primary objective was to determine the rate of complete response to the IRD-Dara combination in patients with NDMM. Treatment consisted of Ixazomib 4mg days 1, 8, 15; lenalidomide 25 mg days 1-21, dexamethasone 40 mg, weekly and daratumumab 16 mg/kg, weekly for two cycles, every other week during cycles 3-6 and then every 4 weeks after that. Overall, 40 patients were accrued; data on 38 patients were available for analysis as of July 02, 2018 (Table 1). Results: The median age was 62 (41-81); 52.6% female. All patients were alive and progression free at last assessment with a median follow up of 5.2 (2.0-12.9) months (median 5 cycles, range 2-13). One patient had gone off for alternate therapy. Responses were rapid with 90% partial response or better (32% VGPR) after 2 cycles, and 100% PR or better (50% VGPR) for 32 patients who have completed 4 cycles. The overall best confirmed response rate among the 38 patients was 95% including 11% CR and 47% VGPR. Overall, 231 cycles have been administered across the study, with dose modifications/ hold required for ixazomib, lenalidomide, daratumumab and dexamethasone in 3 (8%), 11 (29%), 2 (5%), and 8 (21%) patients respectively, the most common reasons being hematologic and skin rash. A grade 3 or higher adverse event at least possibly attributed to the study drugs was seen in 42% of patients, hematologic in 37% and non-hematologic in 11% (Figure). 11 patients have so far proceeded to stem cell collection, all have collected adequate numbers of stem cells for one or two intended transplants(median CD34+ collected 8.4 million/kg; range 3.8-12.3). Updated results with additional 6 months of follow up and MRD testing will be presented at the meeting. Conclusion: This represents the first reported results of this combination for treatment of newly diagnosed myeloma. The early results from the use of IRd-Dara in newly diagnosed myeloma suggests excellent efficacy with rapid responses that deepen quickly over the initial cycles of therapy. The regimen was well tolerated with limited dose modifications and no discontinuation for toxicity and no influence on the ability to collect stem cells. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Kumar: Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Gertz:Prothena: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Medscape: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy.

e23078 Background: There are limited patient (pt) reported outcome data regarding CDDP neurotoxicity. Methods: CDDP-induced peripheral neuropathy was evaluated in pts with testicular cancer planning to receive CDDP (20 mg/m2/d for 5 days) for ≥ 3 cycles. Neurotoxicity was assessed with the EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 tool before each CDDP cycle and every 2-4 months after, out to 18 months. We compared these data to our studies evaluating pts receiving doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC), paclitaxel and oxaliplatin. The total score of the EORTC QLQ-CIPN20, each of the three subscale scores and each individual item was computed following the standard scoring algorithm and converted to a 0-100 scale. Descriptive statistics and graphical plots were utilized. Results: 54 pts receiving CDDP (mean age 33 years) and 18 pts receiving AC were evaluated. Following completion of CDDP, neuropathy symptoms (sensory neuropathy score and numbness/tingling in toes/feet) worsened for about 6 months (consistent with the so-called “coasting phenomena”), similar to what had previously been seen with oxaliplatin (but different than what had been seen with paclitaxel). For CDDP pts, during therapy, numbness and tingling in fingers/hands were more prominent, than the same symptoms in the toes/feet. After therapy was completed, numbness, and tingling became more prominent in toes/feet, but improved in the fingers/hands. After stopping therapy, shooting/burning pain did not worsen in upper or lower extremities. During therapy, CDDP pts had less problems than had previously been seen with oxaliplatin or paclitaxel, maybe because of the younger ages of the CDDP pts. With AC, all of the CIPN-20 sensory neuropathy scores were better than was seen in the pts receiving CDDP and also in pts receiving paclitaxel and oxaliplatin in previous evaluations. Conclusions: CDDP-induced neuropathy is more similar to oxaliplatin-induced neuropathy than paclitaxel-induced neuropathy. AC chemotherapy pts do not have substantial changes in CIPN 20 scores, consistent with the CIPN 20 instrument being a measure of chemotherapy-induced neuropathy, as opposed to more general chemotherapy-induced toxicities. Clinical trial information: NCT02677727.