Bojanini, Leyla

Introduction: As therapeutic options for cancer increase at an unprecedented rate, understanding patient's awareness and attitudes is imperative to optimize their participation in shared decision making. Patient surveys are a powerful tool to gain insight into patient awareness but are cumbersome to administer on a large scale. With the advent of technology and virtual care, electronic surveys are being utilized more widely but their validity compared to approaching the patients in-person has not been established. We conducted a survey regarding awareness and preferences for clinical trials in-person and electronically and compared results systematically in a matched cohorts of patients with MM. Methods: A 52-question survey (including the domains: knowledge, trust, fear, external influence and optimism) was administered in-person to cancer patients at Mayo Clinic campuses (NCT04630431), of which patients with MM were identified for this analysis. The same survey was administered to MM patients enrolled in the online portal HealthTree® Cure Hub. Observations from the in-person and online cohorts were matched and weighted based on coarsened exact matching utilizing the “MatchIt” package based on age, gender, race, ethnicity, education, and marital status. Question responses were converted to an agreeance score scaled from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). Mean and standard deviation measurements were calculated. Weighted t-tests were conducted using these numeric scores and the matched weights. Results: Final matched cohorts included 83% (n=65) of the in-person and 69% (n=149) of the online participants. Mean age was 63.5 (± 8.5) years with 52% females for in-person vs. 65.9 (± 7.5) years and 54% females in the online participants. In-person cohort included 83% White, 14% Black and 12% Hispanic participants while online cohort had 94% White, 5% Black and 13% Hispanics/Latinos. Education level with 4-year degree or higher was reported by 66% in-person and 75% online participants. Both cohort respondents on average rated a strong likelihood of participating in a clinical trial (in-person 4.04, CI: 3.73-4.35; online 4.34, CI: 4.19-4.5). There was significant agreeance between the 2 cohorts on majority of the questionnaire domains. For basic knowledge about clinical trials, while none of the individual questions in the category were significantly different, the online group had a higher aggregate agreeance score of 3.91 vs. 3.73 for the in-person group with a significant difference of 0.18 (CI: 0.5-0.31, p=0.008). For external influence, the online group had a higher aggregate agreeance score (3.52) than the in-person group (3.15; Difference: 0.37, CI: 0.22-0.52, p<0.001), with the only question-level significant difference being for the question that regulatory agencies effectively control what is being advertised by the pharmaceutical industry (4.46 ± 0.64 vs. 3.48 ± 0.76, p<0.001). Conclusions: Online surveys are an effective tool for gaining insight into patient understanding, attitudes and awareness on a variety of topics and can be conducted efficiently on a larger scale than in-person studies, which may be more time and resource intensive. Our study provides evidence of general agreeance between a matched cohort of in-person and online survey respondents, providing validity to carefully conducted, planned online survey tools. The online cohort in our study overall had better knowledge about clinical trials and a better understanding about external influences on available clinical trial result information. These results will help boost studies to collect patient-level responses such that their beliefs and awareness can be better understood and incorporated in optimizing healthcare resource utilization.

Background Hepatosplenic T-Cell lymphoma (HSTCL) is an aggressive type of lymphoma with extremely low incidence. It has a high fatality rate with a 5-year overall survival (OS) of <10% (Am J Surg Pathol, PMID: 26872013). Although there is no therapy that has proven to produce sustained remission, recent studies suggest improvement in outcomes with allogeneic stem cell transplant (allo-SCT) (Leukemia, PMID: 25234166). Clinical characteristics and therapeutic outcomes have been previously reported; however, documentation of outcomes in minorities such as Hispanics (HI) are lacking. Given the growth of the HI population in the US it is imperative to understand the difference in outcomes and patterns of care (CA Cancer J Clin, PMID: 30285281). The present study aims to fill this gap in the literature; therefore, the present population-based study evaluates the impact of ethnicity in clinical outcomes for HSTCL. Material and Methods We retrospectively searched for cases of HSTCL recorded in the Texas Cancer Registry. Inclusion criteria included and established pathologic diagnosis of HSTCL using the International Classification of Diseases for Oncology Third Edition (ICD-O-3) code list. Patients were divided between HI and non-Hispanics (NH). Demographic, socioeconomic, clinical and survival outcomes were recorded. Statistical analysis included Fisher's Exact test, Pearson's Chi-square test, T-test or Wilcoxon test. Survival analysis was calculation in years from date of primary diagnosis to date of death or last date of follow up. Survival distributions were described with Kaplan-Meier curves, and long rank testing was used to assess significance of variation in median survival with ethnicity. All statistical testing was two-sided with a significance level of 5%. The R language [R Core Team (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria] was used throughout. Results From 2006-2016, a total of 25 patients were diagnosed with HSTCL; 23 (92%) were NH and 2 (7%) were HI [<0.0001]. The median age at diagnosis was 46 for HI and 48 for NH. It was predominantly seen in males for both HI and NH. The patients mostly self-identified as white (HI: n=2, Nh: n=16), and there were 7 (30%) NH patients that self-identified as black. For HI, one patient was in the bracket of poverty indicator of 10-19.9% and the other one was in the 20-100%; for the NH patients the bracket that prevailed was 10-19.9% [p-value 0.56]. Both HI patients had private insurance (PI); insurance status on NH patients included 7 (33.3%) with PI, 5 (23.8%) with Medicare, and 7 (33.3%) was unknown [p-value 0.64]. The majority of HI and NH patients were located in the metropolitan, non-border area. Stage at diagnosis for NH was mostly III-IV; one HI had a stage III-IV HSTCL and the other was unstaged [p-value 1.0]. From a therapeutic standpoint, the majority of HI and NH patients received chemotherapy, with 13 patients (HI: n=2, NH: n=11) receiving multiple agents as first-line therapy [p-value 0.84]. From the two groups, only 3 (13%) NH patients underwent allo-SCT [p-value 0.014]. The majority of HI and NH did not undergo radiation (Figure 1A). The median overall survival was 0.5 years in HI and 0.6 in NH. The survival probability at 2 years for HI and NH was 0.5 (CI=0.16, 1) and 0.29 (CI=0.15, 0.56) respectively; at 5 years for HI was 0.5 (CI 0.16, 1) and for NH was 0.23 (CI=0.10, 0.51) (Figure 1B). The overall survival probability at 10 years was not statistically different for HI vs NH [p-value 0.53] (Figure 1C). Conclusions Survival analysis shows that HSTCL is usually fatal with a median overall survival of less than a year, and no difference in survival probability at 10 years for both HI and NH. The majority of patients in our study were non-Hispanic white males. A significant finding was that NH patients had access to allo-SCT as opposed to the HI patients. No statistically significant difference in survival was noted depending on the insurance or poverty levels. No other demographics or sociocultural variables seemed to have an impact in outcomes. The main limitation of our study is our sample size that limits generalizability and power of our statistical analysis. Further studies using multiple cancer registries are warranted to assess the clinical characteristics and survival outcomes in HI with HSTCL. Disclosures Diaz Duque: ADCT Therapeutics: Research Funding; Molecular Templates: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Hutchinson Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Speakers Bureau.

Background: Clinical trials are critical to drug development and the formulation of evidence-based guidelines which are essential to providing crucial and often life-saving treatment to cancer patients. Clinical trial participation is very poor in the United States overall, with a dismal representation of racial minorities. While this has been a focus of several efforts focused on education, targeted enrollment etc., there is a lack of understanding of the patient's knowledge and preferences, and how that may be shaping their decision to consider participation in clinical trials. We undertook a patient-reported survey to explore these factors and understand any underlying disparities. Methods: A 15-question paper-based anonymous questionnaire addressing the cancer patient's knowledge about their disease and clinical trials, as well as factors that may shape their understanding of, or may be barriers to their participation in clinical trials was used. This was administered to adult patients with lymphoid malignancies at the Mayo Clinic in Florida. Categorical and continuous variables between white and minority respondents were compared using the Chi-square test and U Mann Whitney with a significance level of 0.05. Results: The survey was completed by 203 cancer patients. Of these, 3 patients did not report race and ethnicity and so responses from 200 patients were included in the final analysis. Of the respondents, 73% (n=146) were white and 27% (n=54) were minorities. Whites were older than minorities, although not statistically significant (median 67 vs. 61.5 yrs, p=0.06). Minority patients had lower education level with 41% having ≤high school education as compared to 16% whites (p<0.001). Majority of white patients (53%) reported their physicians as the highest ranked source of information for cancer vs. 33% minority patients (p=0.01). Other sources of information explored were internet, nurses, family/friends, books/flyers or other patients. A higher number of white patients reported treatment and its side effects to be the topic of most importance to them at the time of cancer diagnosis as compared to minorities (33% vs. 15%, p=0.01). Similarly, prognosis was more important for a higher number of whites than minorities (21% vs. 15%, p=0.03). Understanding of the diagnosis and financial impact were also explored but not found to have any significant difference. Understanding their treatment and long-term treatment plan was the most frequent knowledge gap reported by whites (81%) vs. minorities (54%, p=0.004). Minorities had several knowledge gap areas (understanding the diagnosis, treatment, side effects, long-term treatment plan, financial impact, survival) more evenly distributed. Regarding clinical trials, minorities were more likely to agree that clinical trials were of benefit for patients (42% vs. 28%, p=0.05) and that in a clinical trial the experimental drug always works better than the one it is being compared to (65% vs. 38%, p<0.001). Minority patients were less likely to agree to participating in clinical trials just based on their doctor's recommendation and judgement (83% vs. 93%, p=0.03). A higher number of minority patients felt that pharmaceutical companies have a big influence on the result of a clinical trial (83% vs. 65%, p=0.01). Fear of not benefiting from clinical trials was the reason for not participating among a higher number of whites (36% vs. 19%, p=0.02) while minorities more frequently reported fear of being a guinea pig (22% vs. 14%) and fear of financial burden (17% vs. 8%) although these were not statistically significant. Conclusions: Racial disparities exist at various aspects of cancer-related knowledge resources, gaps and needs. Minorities have more widespread knowledge gaps and depend on more resources for cancer-related knowledge, which may affect their clinical trial participation and preferences. There appears to be mistrust and misinformation guiding minority patient's understanding, leading to more widespread fears of clinical trials. Knowledge gaps and misinformation needs to be addressed in order to achieve higher participation in clinical trials in general, and among minority patients in particular. Disclosures Manochakian: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Guardant health: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novocure: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ailawadhi:Phosplatin: Research Funding; Medimmune: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria.

Introduction: Serum folate (SF), vitamin B12 (B12), and iron deficiency (def) are common causes of nutritional anemias (NA). These deficiencies are usually multifactorial, with nutritional and non-nutritional causes playing a role. SF, B12, and iron levels are usually ordered in the setting of anemia, and malnutrition with or without neurologic symptoms. Clinical evidence suggests that these def have a strong dietary component and socioeconomic status (SES). The relationship of NA and area-based SES in the US has not been studied. We aimed to determine the relationship of SES with the prevalence of NA. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of adult patients with SF, B12 and iron levels at Mayo Clinic Arizona and Florida between 2010 and 2018. Race was classified using the NIH criteria. Normal laboratory values were determined according to our lab reference and the US NHANES III. SF levels (mcg/Lt) were defined as deficient <4, normal ≥4.0, and excess ≥20. B12 levels (ng/L) as deficient <150, borderline 150-400, normal >400-900, and excess ≥900. Iron def was determined by ferritin levels (mcg/L) as low <24, normal 24-336, elevated >336 for men, low <11, normal 11-307, elevated >307 for women. Area-Level SES indicators: Median Household income (MHI), unemployment rate (UR), median gross rent month (MGRM), % uninsured, median house value (MHV), % high school; were geocoded by zip code using the 2014 American Community Survey. Demographics and clinical variables were compared between groups by chi-square test for frequency data or Kruskal Wallis rank-sum test for continuous variables. Results: 202,046 samples from 128,084 patients were analyzed. In the sample-level analysis, there were statistically significant associations between SES and SF def; all SES indicators except UR for B12 def; and no differences for iron def, except % uninsured (Table 1). There was no statistically significant interaction between race and SES for SF def and iron def. Race was a statistically significant modifier between B12 def and MHI (p<0.001), % uninsured (p=0.002), and MHV (p=0.007). Asian and Other race had an increase in odds of B12 def with increasing MHI (Asian OR=1.11 , Other OR=1.18); white race had a decrease in odds of B12 def with increasing MHI (OR=0.95 for a $10,000 increase in MHI). Conclusions: We show significant relationships between SES and NA in the US. Differences were observed between SF def and all the SES indicators without race interactions. There were significant interactions between B12 def, race and SES for pts of White, Asian and Other race. There were no differences between SES and race for iron def. These relationships confirm that NA are related to area-level SES and other social determinants of health. Research regarding the causes of these disparities on a population level are needed. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Imatinib is used to treat several haematological and solid malignancies. Cutaneous side effects could often limit the use of this medication. We present a case of a 62-year-old woman with a history of a gastrointestinal stromal tumour that developed a delayed cutaneous adverse reaction 10 days after starting imatinib 400 mg daily. She developed the same symptoms with reintroduction at a dose of 100 mg and with an alternative tyrosine kinase inhibitor, nilotinib 50 mg/day. Given that imatinib was considered her best treatment, she underwent a long induction of drug tolerance (IDT) protocol to imatinib. Patient tolerated the medication without further reactions for 6 months and had improvement of her cancer per last imaging studies. IDT should be considered in delayed hypersensitivity reactions to imatinib after a failed reintroduction of the drug or when no other equally effective agents are available.

e20036 Background: Hepatosplenic T cell lymphoma (HSTL) is a rare subtype of mature T cell lymphomas accounting for less than 1 percent of non-Hodgkin lymphomas. it has been associated with poor prognosis. It typically involves sinusoids in the spleen, liver, and bone marrow. Methods: Following IRB approval, we retrospectively evaluated patients with HSTL treated at the Mayo Clinic Cancer Center 1996-2019. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and univariate analysis to identify prognostic factors were performed. We investigated clinical characteristics and outcomes among patients with HSTL. Results: 22 patients (15 males) with median age of 45.5 years (range- 15.5-80.6) were identified. The majority of patients had B symptoms (12/22), cyotpenias (20/22), massive splenomegaly (16/22), liver involvement (13/22), and/or bone marrow involvement (14/22). Additionally, 42% tested positive for peripheral blood involvement and 8/22 (36%) were on chronic immunosuppression related to solid organ transplant (2), inflammatory bowel disease (2), and rheumatologic disorders (4). Phenotypically, the majority of patients were positive for gamma/delta (18/22), isochromosome 7q (8/13), and 4/9 (44%) tested positive for trisomy 8. Initial therapies included CHOP/CHOEP (14), ICE (2), EPOCH (1), pentostatin (1), and radiation (1). The median follow-up was 33 months (range 2,137). Progression free survival and overall survival (OS) were 9.5 months (95% CI; 1.8, 16.3) and 12 months (95% CI; 4.9, 18.5) respectively. 10/22 (45%) underwent splenectomy with one patient receiving splenectomy alone as treatment. 8/22 (36%) had stem cell transplant (SCT- 5 allogeneic and 3 autologous). Out of the 22 patients 4 (18%) were long-term survivors with 55, 74, 95, and 137 months; 3/4 had splenectomy at diagnosis and 2/4 had allogeneic SCT. The longest survivor had splenectomy only. Liver involvement was associated with worse OS; 10 months (95% CI; 1.6, 18) vs 35 months (95% CI; 4, NR), p = 0.036. Immune suppression at diagnosis was associated with worse OS; 5 months (95% CI; 1.3, 18) vs 18 months (95% CI; 9, 74), p = 0.036. A trend for better OS was seen with splenectomy and SCT. Conclusions: HSTL is a rare lymphoma with poor prognosis. Long-term survival was seen in 18% only. Liver involvement and immune suppression had a negative impact on OS. A larger cohort is needed to better evaluate the impact of different treatment options.