Petty, Skye Buckner

Purpose To characterize the prevalence and incidence of in‐game hand and wrist injuries in the National Basketball Association (NBA), to determine the factors associated with an equal or greater player efficiency rating (PER), and to determine the factors associated with an equal or greater true shooting percentage (TS%) 2 years after a hand and wrist injury using a large‐scale national database of NBA players. Methods Injury data from seasons 2015‐2016 to 2020‐2021, with exclusion of the 2019‐2020 because of abbreviated play due to the coronavirus disease 2019, were extracted from a public online database, Pro Sports Transactions. Injury characteristics and NBA player demographic information were assessed using descriptive statistics. Poisson logistic regression analyses were performed to identify risk factors associated with equal or increased PER and TS% 2years after injury. Results There were 214 reported hand and wrist injuries, and of these injuries, 173 (81%) were classified as structural. The most common injury types were a strain or sprain (0.63 per 1,000 game exposures), followed by fractures (0.37 per 1,000 game exposures). Older age (relative risk [RR] 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84‐0.95) and more years played in the NBA were modestly associated with relative risk of having a decreased PER at 2 years after injury. Increased weight (RR 1.02; 95% CI 1‐1.05) and increased body mass index (RR 1.14; 95% CI 1.01‐1.29) were also modestly associated with having a decreased PER and TS%, respectively at 2 years after injury. Conclusions Strains/sprains and fractures are the most common hand and wrist injuries sustained by NBA players. Regardless of dominant or nondominant hand and wrist injuries, NBA players are likely to return to baseline overall player efficiency based on PER and TS% within 2 years of injury. Clinical Relevance Our study characterizes hand and wrist injuries of NBA players and provides an understanding for these injuries on player performance at 2 years.

e16691 Background: Recent WHO classification of NET has defined high-grade well-differentiated NET (NET G3) as a distinct entity that is clinically different from neuroendocrine carcinoma. The optimal treatment for NET G3 has not been well-described. This study aims to evaluate NET G3 response to different treatment regimens. Methods: This is a retrospective study of NET G3 patients within the Mayo Clinic database (Arizona, Florida, and Minnesota). Patient demographics along with treatment responses and survival were assessed. Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1 criteria. Results: 71 patients with NET G3 were identified. Systemic treatment data was available in 30 patients who had a median age of 59.5 years at time of diagnosis. The primary tumor was most commonly pancreatic (73.3%). Ki 67 index was ≥55% in 26.7% of cases. 56.7% of cases had > 1 metastatic site. Treatment regimens included: capecitabine+temozolomide (CAPTEM) (n = 20), somatostatin analog (SSA) (n = 14), carboplatin/cisplatin+etoposide (EP) (n = 7), everolimus (n = 2), FOLFOX (n = 7), and lutetium Lu 177 DOTATATE (PRRT) (n = 10). CAPTEM was the most commonly used regimen (10 first-line, and 10 second-line) with ORR of 35%, disease control rate (DCR) of 65%, and median PFS of 9.4 months. The table summarizes the treatment data and responses rates for the various therapies used. Conclusions: Among NET G3 patients treated at Mayo Clinic, CAPTEM was found to be the most commonly used treatment with reasonable efficacy and disease control. Other treatment options include SSA, PRRT, FOLFOX, and EP. Prospective studies evaluating different treatments effects in NET G3 patients are needed to determine an optimal treatment strategy. [Table: see text]

375 Background: Combination FP with P CT have become the standard of care for advanced G/GEJ cancer. Clinical trials in conjunction with practice, have adopted induction FP and P CT for 3-4 months (mos). In other GI malignancies, induction CT followed by maintenance CT (MTC) has been shown to improve patient (pt) outcomes compared to observation, with a decrease in treatment (trmt) related toxicities with induction therapy. However a maintenance approach in G/GEJ cancer has not been investigated in clinical trials. We investigated pt outcomes with metastatic G/GEJ cancer who received continuous induction (CTX) versus induction followed by MTC. Methods: A retrospective analysis of pts with metastatic G/GEJ adenocarcinoma treated with (FP+ P)-based CT between 2007 to 2017 from three centers of a single institution was performed. Metastatic G/GEJ cancer pts who achieved at least stable disease after initial induction trmt were included. Pts were categorized into the CTX group if they received greater than 16 weeks or 8 cycles of combined CT and assigned to the MTC group if they received maintenance FP monotherapy after 8 or less cycles of combined induction CT. Data was extracted from the medical record to determine progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicities. Results: Sixty-four pts that met criteria and were evaluated, thirty-four received CTX and thirty received MTC. No significant difference in PFS (12.1 vs 8.0 mos p = .72, HR=1.10 95%CI .66-1.83) was observed between the CTX and MTC groups, additionally there was no significant difference in OS. A significant decrease in trmt related toxicities were observed, with a higher proportion of thrombocytopenia (84.8% vs 50.0% p = .004), and grade 3 neuropathy (39.4% vs 13.8% p =.024) in CTX pts (Table). Conclusions: MTC following induction FP/P CT is associated with an improved toxicity profile and appears to be effective compared to CTX in metastatic G/GEJ cancer. Prospective randomized studies confirming its potential benefits compared with continuous induction CT are warranted. [Table: see text]