Yosef, Amir

In 2023, Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN, cared for over 20,000 patients with hematologic malignancies, roughly 42% of whom were rural. Patients residing in rural areas can face challenges in access to care, financial and time burdens due to treatment-related travel, and limited opportunities to participate in clinical trials. In 2021, The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society launched its IMPACT (Influential Medicine Providing Access to Clinical Trials) grant with Mayo Clinic being among its first recipients. The program provides funding to major cancer centers, in partnership with local community oncology centers, to help increase participation of patients traditionally underrepresented in clinical trials, including those who are rural, minority and/or economically disadvantaged. The award allowed significant changes to be made to clinical trial selection and facilitation models increasing access to trials within the rural setting and reducing the socioeconomic barriers noted above. This program included Rochester (IMPACT Hub) and Mayo Clinic Health System (MCHS) sites in Albert Lea, MN (65 miles to Hub), Eau Claire, WI (96 miles to hub), La Crosse, WI (73 miles to Hub), and Mankato, MN (84 miles to Hub). Methods: Two models were deployed; the full activation model where clinical trials were fully opened at MCHS sites, and the hybrid model where clinical trial participants are consented at the Hub and portions of participant care are conducted at MCHS sites. Initial barriers included limitations in clinical trials support staff, insufficient specimen processing equipment, medication storage and shipping limitations, MCHS catchment population unalignment with the Hub trials portfolio, and reduced bandwidth of providers due to patient care responsibilities. To address barriers to trial conduct, community center site champions were identified to streamline trial review and increase collaboration to better define site catchment areas, trial constraints, and site needs. A feasibility specialist was hired to support the program in trial design/implementation, barrier tracking, and to serve as a liaison between community site providers, study staff, and the program. Results: Since 2021, 20 clinical studies including 14 interventional treatment trials have been activated demonstrating 108 total patients accrued with 42 interventional accruals; 5 within the full activation model (13 accruals) and 15 in the hybrid model (29 accruals). Patients showed an average of 216 miles, with an estimated mileage cost of $142/trip based on the 2023 IRS mileage rate of $0.655/mile to the hub location. Nine of those patients traveled over 260 miles, with an estimated mileage cost of $170/visit to access clinical trials. Under the hybrid model, 8 patients transitioned portions of their care to their home city resulting in reduction of an average of 155 miles/visit, and 7 patients were able to reduce their travel time an average of 216 miles/visit. By estimating at least 10 study visits, the travel burden was reduced by 2,160 miles (4320 driving hours) and $1,420 in driving costs alone for participants. Using participant averages the 108 patients would spend a total of $15,336 in travel costs for just the initial visit, but when factoring in the 10-visit estimate, travel reduction could result in a net savings of $153,360. Based on travel data, it is estimated 11 of these patients would have required overnight accommodation using an average of $149/night hotel stay, a savings of $1,490/patient is estimated for the lifecycle of trial participation or $16,390 for the 11-patient cohort requiring accommodation. These results do not include travel companion and time off work costs. Efforts have been made to further develop the full activation model and 5 clinical trials are in activation. Data gathered from the program is being used to design strategies to reduce the administrative burden of clinical trial participation for community providers and launch screening programs. Conclusion: The Mayo Clinic LLS IMPACT program has demonstrated success in addressing barriers to opening clinical trials in the community-center setting and reduced the travel burden and financial impact to clinical trial participation in a cohort of trial participants. Centralized hub support of study activation and conduct and decentralized care to support treatment of patients in proximity of their home can be extended to other hospital systems and settings.

Abstract Background . Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) sequencing enables serial temporal sampling, which offers the possibility of following the dynamics of biomarkers and clonal evolution in Multiple Myeloma (MM) over time. The use of cfDNA in clinical practice as a molecular biomarker and for monitoring response/resistance is dependent on a comprehensive profile of matched cfDNA and tumor DNA (tDNA) samples. Here we performed Ultra-Low Pass Whole Genome Sequencing (ULP-WGS) followed by whole-exome sequencing (WES) and targeted deep sequencing of matched cfDNA/tDNA samples from MM patients. Methods. We performed next generation sequencing of matched cfDNA/tDNA samples for 63 patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed MM, SMM, or MGUS. Libraries were constructed using the Kappa Hyper kit and sequenced by ultra-low-pass whole-genome sequencing (ULP-WGS, 0.1x coverage) to quantify tumor fraction within cfDNA. WES was performed on 30 matched samples cfDNA/tDNA/germline DNA from 10 patients with more than 5% of tumor fraction. Libraries were hybridized to the Nextera Rapid Capture Exome kit (Illumina) and then sequenced on HiSeq 4000 (Illumina). Targeted deep sequencing was performed on 32 matched cfDNA/tDNA samples from 16 patients using the HaloPlex HS technology (Agilent), allowing for molecular barcoding. Libraries were constructed according to the manufacturer's instructions and sequenced on HiSeq 2500 (Illumina). Sequencing data were analyzed using the Firehose pipelines, including MuTect, ABSOLUTE, ReCapSeg, GISTIC and MutSig. Results. We first used a cost-effective approach to establish the tumor content of cfDNA in a large-scale manner by ULP-WGS. Among 63 tested samples (53 MM, 6 SMM and 4 MGUS patient samples), the tumor fraction within cfDNA ranged from 0 to 81% with a mean of 10%. About 43% of these samples had tumor fraction greater than 5% within cfDNA. To assess whether cfDNA can capture the genetic diversity of MM and inform clinical management, we performed WES of matched cfDNA/tDNA/germline DNA samples for 10 patients (mean target coverage 194x). Copy number alterations (CNAs) assessed by WES (ReCapSeg) were consistent between cfDNA and tumor DNA. Similarly, focal CNAs assessed by GISTIC were consistent between tDNA and cfDNA. We then examined the overlap of somatic single nucleotide variants (SSNVs) between WES of cfDNA and matched tDNA. We found, on average, 100% of the clonal and 96% of the subclonal (range 54-100%) SSNVs that were detected in the tumor were confirmed to be present in cfDNA. Similarly, for mutations detected in the cfDNA, we found, on average, 100% of the clonal and 99% of the subclonal (range 98-100%) SSNVs were confirmed in the tumor. To assess whether targeted deep sequencing of cfDNA could be a good proxy for tumor biopsy we used a targeted deep sequencing approach of known MM driver genes. Libraries were prepared using unique molecular barcodes to avoid duplication rates, for 32 matched cfDNA/tDNA samples from 16 patients with MM. The mean target coverage was 596x. We found similar frequencies of altered MM driver genes in both cfDNA and tDNA, including KRAS, NRAS, and TP53, indicating that cfDNA can be used for precision medicine. Conclusions. Our study demonstrates that both WES and targeted deep sequencing of cfDNA are consistently representative of tumor DNA alterations in terms of CNAs, focal CNAs and SSNVs. This approach could therefore be used to longitudinally follow clonal evolution across the course of the disease and precision medicine in patients with MM. Disclosures Palumbo: Takeda: Employment, Honoraria; Janssen Cilag: Honoraria. Kumar:Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kesios: Consultancy; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding. Roccaro:Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Honoraria. Facon:Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bristol: Consultancy; Millenium/Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy. Ghobrial:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Noxxon: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria.