Cook, Joselle

AbstractVenetoclax and hypomethylating agent (HMA) combination therapy is FDA‐approved for elderly or unfit acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients unable to withstand intensive chemotherapy. The primary objective of the current study was to impart our institutional experience with the above regimen, outlining response, survival outcomes, and its determinants amongst 86 treatment‐ naïve and relapsed/refractory AML patients. A total of 44 treatment‐naïve AML patients, median age 73.5 years, enriched with secondary, therapy related and ELN adverse risk disease (n = 27) were studied. The CR/CRi rates of 50% (22 of 44 patients) were superior to 23% in a matched AML cohort treated with HMA alone (P = .005). Response rates were similar with TP53, FLT3, NPM1 and IDH mutations (P = .31). Moreover, CEPBA mutations (P = .03) and neutropenia (P = .05) emerged as predictors of complete response. Survivalwas prolonged in patients achieving CR/CRi (17 vs 3 months without CR/CRi, P < .001; conversely adverse ELN risk portended inferior survival. Amongst 42 relapsed/refractory AML patients, half received ≥2 prior therapies excluding transplant, and 15 (35.7%) had received HMA. A group of 14 patients (33.3%) attained CR/CRi; age > 65 years, AML with myelodysplasia, JAK2, DNMT3A, and BCOR mutations predicted complete response. Survival distinctions were based on CR/CRi (median survival 15 vs 3 months with/without CR/CRi; P < .001), and TP53 mutation status (P = .04). In summary, we corroborate existing reports demonstrating superior response and prolonged survival with venetoclax and HMA in treatment ‐naïve and relapsed/refractory AML patients regardless of genotype. Additionally, we identify unique predictors of response to therapy which require validation.

10503 Background: Gender bias can be reinforced through the use of gender-subordinating language and differences in the forms of address. We examined how professional titles were used during speakers’ introductions at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting. Methods: A retrospective observational study of video-archived speaker introductions at the 2017 and 2018 ASCO annual meetings was conducted. Data were extracted by mixed-gender coders. Professional address was defined as professional title followed by full name or last name. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to identify factors associated with the form of address. Results: 2511 videos were reviewed and 812 met inclusion criteria. Regarding speakers’ characteristics, 530 (65%) were non-Hispanic white (NHW), 743 (92%) held a MD or MD-PhD degree, and 484 (60%) were an associate or full professor. Female speakers were less likely to receive a professional address compared to male speakers (61% vs. 81%, p < 0.001). Female speakers were more likely to be introduced by first name only (17% vs. 3%, p < 0.001). Males were less likely to use a professional address when introducing female speakers compared to male speakers (53% vs. 80%, p < 0.01). No gender differences in professional address were observed for female introducers (p = 0.13). Male introducers were more likely to address female speakers by first name only compared to female introducers (24% vs. 7%, p < 0.01). In a multivariable regression including gender, race, degree, and academic rank, male speakers were more likely to receive a professional address compared to female speakers (OR: 2.67, 95%CI: 1.81-3.94, p < 0.01). Black speakers of both genders were less likely to receive a professional address compared to NHW (OR: 0.10, 95%CI: 0.01-0.53, p < 0.01). Female gender was a predictor for a non-professional form of address (first name only) (OR: 9.50, 95%CI: 4.38-20.62, p < 0.01). Conclusions: When introduced by men, female speakers were less likely to receive a professional address and more likely to be introduced by first name only compared to male speakers. Selective use of forms of address may strengthen gender bias; more research is needed to explore the causes of this disparity and its influence.

PURPOSE In a professional setting, the introduction of female speakers without their professional title may have an impact on the public’s perception of the female speaker. We examined how professional titles were used during speakers’ introductions at the ASCO Annual Meeting. METHODS We conducted a retrospective, observational study of video-archived speaker introductions at the 2017 and 2018 ASCO Annual Meetings. A “professional address” was defined as the professional title followed by the speaker’s full name or last name. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to identify factors associated with the form of address. RESULTS Of 2,511 videos reviewed, 781 met inclusion criteria. Female speakers were addressed less often by their professional title compared with male speakers (62% v 81%; P < .001). Males were less likely to use a professional address when introducing female speakers compared with females when introducing male speakers (53% v 80%; P < .01). When women performed speaker introductions, no gender differences in professional address were observed (75% v 82%; P = .13). Female speakers were more likely to be introduced by first name only (17% v 3%; P < .001). Male introducers were more likely to address female speakers by first name only compared with female introducers (24% v 7%; P < .01). In a multivariable regression including gender, degree, academic rank, and geographic location of the speaker’s institution, male speakers were more likely to receive a professional address compared with female speakers (odds ratio, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.71 to 3.47; P < .01). CONCLUSION When introduced by men, female speakers were less likely to receive a professional address and more likely to be introduced by first name only compared with their male peers.