Lewis, Akeem R.

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.

AbstractBackgroundAL amyloidosis is associated with acquired factor X (FX) deficiency. Experience related to its management is limited to case reports and series using prothrombin complex concentrate, fresh frozen plasma, plasma exchange, recombinant activated factor seven, and desmopressin with limited and variable efficacy. FX concentrate has not been widely used in its management.Study Design and MethodsWe report our experience with the perioperative use of FX concentrate (Coagadex) in two patients with AL amyloidosis‐associated acquired FX deficiency requiring surgery, using their individual pharmacokinetic studies to manage perioperative hemostasis. Pharmacokinetic studies involved obtaining post‐infusion FX activity at 10 min, 2, and 4 h following the administration of FX concentrate to calculate the FX half‐life.ResultsBoth patients' plasma FX activity was successfully increased to provide perioperative hemostatic support. Monitoring FX activity post‐surgery was also utilized to maintain FX activity levels to prevent post‐operative bleeding.ConclusionPharmacokinetic studies have a useful role in tailoring preoperative FX repletion in patients with AL amyloidosis associated with acquired FX deficiency.

AbstractObjectiveElevated serum chromogranin A (CGA) is associated with intrinsic or treatment‐related neuroendocrine differentiation (NED) in men with metastatic castration‐resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Fluctuations in serum CGA during treatment of mCRPC have had conflicting results. We analyzed the impact of (i) rising serum CGA and (ii) baseline CGA/PSA ratio during treatment to identify associations with abiraterone acetate (AA) therapy.MethodsBetween June 2013 and August 2015, 92 men with mCRPC were enrolled in a prospective trial with uniform serum CGA processing performed before initiating abiraterone acetate/prednisone (AA/P) and serially after 12 weeks of AA/P treatments. Serum CGA was measured using a homogenous automated immunofluorescent assay. Patients receiving proton pump inhibitors or with abnormal renal function were excluded due to possible false elevations of serum CGA (n = 21 excluded), therefore 71 patients were analyzed. All patients underwent a composite response assessment at 12‐weeks. Kaplan–Meier estimates and Cox Regression models were used to calculate the association with time‐to‐treatment failure analyses and overall survival.ResultsAn increase in chromogranin was associated with a lower risk of treatment failure (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.52, p = 0.0181). The median CGA/PSA ratio was 7.8 (2.6–16.0) and an elevated pretreatment CGA/PSA ratio above the median was associated with a lower risk of treatment failure (HR: 0.54 p value = 0.0185). An increase in CGA was not found to be associated with OS (HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.42–1.21, p = 0.207). An elevated baseline CGA/PSA ratio was not associated with OS (HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.37–1.03, p = 0.062). An increase in PSA after 12 weeks of treatment was associated with an increased risk of treatment failure (HR: 4.14, CI: 2.21–7.73, p = < 0.0001) and worse OS (HR: 2.93, CI: 1.57–4.45, p = < 0.0001).ConclusionsWe show that an increasing chromogranin on AA/P and an elevated baseline CGA/PSA in patients with mCRPC were associated with a favorable response to AA/P with no changes in survival. There may be limited clinical utility in serum CGA testing to evaluate for lethal NED as AA/P did not induce lethal NED in this cohort. This highlights that not all patients with an increasing CGA have a worse OS.