Frustace, Patricia

Abstract Introduction: The Duffy null variant (genotype or phenotype) is associated with lower circulating absolute neutrophil counts (ANC) without increased risk for infection. It is found in ~66% of people identifying as Black or African American vs <1% of people of Asian or European ancestry. Many ANC reference intervals (RI) are not representative of the Duffy null population. There are no adult Duffy null WBC RI and no pediatric Duffy null ANC or WBC RI. Thus, we aimed to assess Duffy null ANC and WBC distributions as well as develop WBC and ANC RI for adults and pediatrics. Methods: Twenty-three sites across the United States collected samples with all sites excluding participants with conditions or medications that could impact ANC or WBC. Only Duffy null participants were included. Sex, race, ethnicity, age, sample collection type, practice setting, Duffy testing method, ANC, and WBC were recorded. The non-parametric method for determining lower limit of normal (LLN), upper limit of normal (ULN), and 90% confidence intervals (CI) around the limits was performed according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines. Specific ULN and LLN are not reported as these are preliminary data. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare sex and prior data; differences by age groups were assessed with Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: 316 participants 18+ years-old (y/o) were assessed of whom 62.3% (n=197) are female, 97.5% (n=308) identified as Black or African American, and 94.9% (n=300) identified as non-Hispanic. Median age was 47 y/o (IQR: 32-60.5). Median ANC was 2600/uL (IQR: 1860-3530; range: 400-7400); 28.6% (n=90) of participants had ANC <2000/uL, 13.6% (n=43) had ANC <1500/uL, and 2.5% (n=8) had <1000/uL. The 90% CI around the LLN was 810-1070/uL and 5570-7130/uL around the ULN. Consistent with prior data, there was a difference in median ANC by sex (male: 2400/uL; female: 2710/uL; p=0.02). There was no significant difference between this ANC data and previously published Duffy null ANC data (p=0.28). Median WBC was 5.4x109/L (IQR: 4.4-6.5; range: 2.10-11.64) with 4.1% (n=13) of participants with WBC <3.0x109/L. The 90% CI around the LLN is 3.68-4.30x109/L and 11.02-12.97x109/L around the ULN. 515 participants between 0-17 y/o were assessed with 51.8% (n=267) females, 94.8% (n=488) identified as Black or African American, and 94.0% (n=484) identified as non-Hispanic. Among pediatric participants, 56.8% (n=291) had ANC <2000/uL, 38.7% (n=198) had ANC <1500/uL, and 14.4% (n=74) had ANC <1000/uL. For those <1 y/o (n=29), median ANC was 950/uL (IQR: 840-1360; range: 111-3910). There are currently too few samples to predict ULN and LLN. Median WBC was 8.85x109/L (IQR: 7.03-10.16; range: 4.17-13.53). For those 1-5 y/o (n=143), median ANC was 1735/uL (IQR: 1100-2550; range: 207-5810) with a 90% CI around the LLN of 207-820/uL and 4020-5810/uL around the ULN. Median WBC was 6.72x109/L (IQR: 5.64-8.25; range: 3.68-12.97). For those 6-11 y/o (n=128), median ANC was 1590/uL (IQR: 1090-2470; range: 420-5490) with a 90% CI around the LLN of 420-910/uL and 4340-5490/uL around the ULN. Median WBC was 5.42x109/L (IQR: 4.45-6.70; range: 2.80-10.50). For those 12-17 y/o (n=215), median ANC was 2190/uL (IQR: 1460-2930; range: 204-5850) with a 90% CI around the LLN of 540-930/uL and 4350-5510/uL around the ULN. Median WBC was 5.06x109/L (IQR: 4.26-6.20; range of 2.04-9.91). There is a significant difference in ANC by age category (p<0.0001). Conclusion: This is the first report of healthy pediatric Duffy null ANC and WBC data and the first large-scale verification of adult Duffy null ANC and WBC data. Final RI are expected in September 2025. Among adults with the Duffy null phenotype, ANC LLN are likely between 810-1070/uL. Pediatric ANC LLN are likely as low as 207-820/uL (1-5 y/o), 420-910/uL (6-11 y/o), and 540-930/uL (12-17 y/o). These findings redefine “normal” as a significant proportion of healthy participants have ANC or WBC below current RI or below thresholds typically defined as disease. Limitations include heterogeneous sample populations and collection methods. Future analyses will assess differences between collection sites or methods. Ultimately, this work lays the foundation for a more scientifically sound and equitable approach to medical care by ensuring that RI accurately reflects health for the entire community. Healthcare systems are strongly encouraged to adopt Duffy null-specific ANC and WBC RI.

Abstract In 2003, the Institute of Medicine noted the need to improve workforce diversity. The American Society of Hematology (ASH) responded by developing the Minority Recruitment Initiative (MRI) to recruit diverse physicians/scientists into hematology. We evaluated the outcomes of the program. From 2004 to 2022, there were 405 awardees. Compared with national estimates, MRI awardees were less likely to discontinue their degree programs. MRI graduate student awardees had 0% attrition (97.5% confidence interval [CI], 10.6), whereas the national minority graduate student attrition was 36%. Medical student awardees had 2.2% (95% CI, 0.61-5.6) attrition, compared with the minority medical school attrition of 5.6%. Awardees were more likely than expected to pursue hematology-oncology (5.7% minority national estimate) because 14.4% (95% CI, 8.1-23.0) of medical student awardees and 88.5% (95% CI, 70.0-97.6) of early career awardees remain in the field. ASH has developed a successful program, but continued efforts are needed to advance equity in hematology.

Abstract Background The National Institutes of Health define African Americans or Blacks, American Indians, Alaska Natives, Hispanics or Latinos, Native Hawaiians, and other Pacific Islanders as being underrepresented in medicine. A number of studies have demonstrated that improving diversity of such underrepresented demographics within the medical profession improves patient outcomes, medical education and reduces health disparities in patients from vulnerable racial or socioeconomic groups. Despite this recognition, significant underrepresentation of various racial, ethnic, and sexual identities still exists within nearly all medical specialties. Aims The purpose of this study was to a gain a greater understanding of the current state of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts among U.S. hematology and medical oncology fellowship training programs. We explored the perspectives of adult and pediatric fellowship program directors regarding current recruitment strategies and suggestions for improvement to help mitigate the effects of implicit and explicit bias. Here, we present an interim analysis of the data using descriptive statistics. Methods: We convened a multi-institutional collaboration of fellowship program directors, teaching faculty, and staff members of the American Society of Hematology to develop a survey examining perceptions of DEI efforts among hematology and medical oncology fellowship program directors. The survey was pilot tested in a small group of program directors representing 6 different academic programs (5 adult, 1 pediatric). The final online survey was distributed via email to 224 fellowship program directors at U.S. adult and pediatric hematology and medical oncology fellowship programs. The survey included 29 questions regarding perspectives on bias within the fellowship selection process, current DEI initiatives, and current faculty and fellow demographics. Survey respondents were asked to rate the importance of numerous factors in determining which applicants to invite utilizing a scale of 0-10, with 0 and 10 representing lowest and highest importance, respectively. To measure program director perceptions of certain applicant groups, survey respondents were asked to rate applicant demographics as being advantaged/disadvantaged based on survey options ranging from 0-5, with 0 and 5 representing very disadvantaged and very advantaged, respectively. Results: At interim analysis, 41 of 224 program directors completed the survey for an interim response rate of 21%, including 25 adult program directors and 16 pediatric program directors, with representation from university and community programs. Of the program directors surveyed, 28 (68%) reported having access to a dedicated diversity committee or DEI policies in place to improve recruitment of underrepresented applicants. In determining which applicants to invite, respondents placed highest value on the applicant's program director letter (mean score ± standard deviation: 7.44±1.93), caliber of the applicant's residency program (7.28±2.06) and letters of recommendations (7.15±2.23). Survey respondents viewed white and male applicants as representing the most advantaged demographic group, while LGBTQI, age>40, and U.S. citizen and non-citizen international medical graduates were the most disadvantaged (Table 1). Suggestions regarding improving DEI in the fellowship selection process included implementing bias training, identifying potentially disadvantaged applicants in ERAS, increasing faculty diversity, and pairing underrepresented applicants with interviewers based on applicant preference. Conclusion: While the majority of hematology and medical oncology fellowship program directors report having DEI programs or policies to improve recruitment of underrepresented applicants, perceptions of advantaged/disadvantaged groups may extend beyond demographics traditionally viewed as being underrepresented in medicine. As our survey is ongoing, we plan to reanalyze our data when the survey has been finalized with a higher response rate utilizing multivariable regression to identify themes that may further improve DEI efforts within the fellowship selection process. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures LaCasce: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company.: Other: Data Safetly and Monitoring. Murphy: North American Thrombosis Foundation: Honoraria. Naik: Rigel: Research Funding. Podoltsev: Pfizer: Honoraria; Blueprint Medicines: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; PharmaEssentia: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squib: Honoraria; CTI BioPharma: Honoraria.