Birgin, Alisha

e13661 Background: The process of data abstraction and curation represents a significant proportion of clinical trial costs, requiring up to $30,000 per patient depending on the data complexity. Research variables such as stage, performance status (PS), and cancer disease status are typically present in the electronic health record (EHR) in free text but require abstraction for research use. Structuring these real-world data (RWD) in an exportable format utilizing minimum common oncology data elements (mCODE) could reduce the need for abstraction and the potential for erroneous transcription that has been shown to be 5.51-7.72% in a meta-analysis. We assessed the feasibility, availability, and accuracy of RWD for use across Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology sites by comparing RWD to matched electronic case report form data (CRF data) at 2 sites where EHR-integrated tools collect structured RWD for all solid tumor patients. Methods: Stage, PS, and cancer disease status (CDS) were extracted from the EHR as RWD and from eCRFs for 100 patients enrolled in National Clinical Trials Network trials across multiple disease sites from 2022 through 2025. Data from baseline and day 1 of cycles 1-4 were compared (500 encounter timepoints). Results: Stage, PS, and CDS were available from RWD more often than CRFs (85 vs 70 / 100 patients, 436 vs 416 / 500 encounters, and 345 vs 83 / 500 encounters respectively). When stage was present in both (n = 58), there were 5 mismatches (8.6%). PS had 22 mismatches (4%) and CDS had 45 mismatches (11.4%). After correcting for differences in CRF vs RWD definitions, CDS mismatches dropped to 1.2% (n = 4). Discordance between RWD and CRF data was related to differences in the timepoint of data collection (e.g., systemic staging scans completed after the initial consult), CRF data obtained from other EHR notes (e.g., oncology research nurse notes containing PS), inherent discordance between RWD and CRF data choices (e.g., responding vs complete or partial response), and failure to update EHR data capture tool fields. RWD were available 21 days (median) before CRF data. Conclusions: Our results suggest that RWD captured directly within clinical notes match CRF data, are more often present, and are available sooner. RWD could serve as a data source for trials, decreasing the need for manual curation and cost. Although some discordance exists, overall rates are low and close to the published error rate for abstraction.

Abstract Background: The prognosis of patients with MM with CNS mets is poor. E6201 is an intravenous (IV) MEK inhibitor with activity against BRAF V600-mutated MM cell lines, including MAPK resistance alteration. A previous phase I trial demonstrated activity of E6201 in BRAF V600E mutated MM with a Maximal Tolerated Dose of 320mg/m2 given IV once a week x 3 weeks q 28 days. 2/23 (8.7%) of patients had a PR, 8/23 (34.8%) had SD. Two patients with MM and brain mets achieved near-CR which led to preclinical studies that demonstrated E6201 is unaffected by P-gp and BCRP transport and achieved higher brain to blood concentration (266%).In this trial, patients with BRAF mutation + MM with brain mets, single agent E6201 given at 320mg/m2 twice weekly x 3 weeks q 28 days was determined to be safe. One patient had CNS SD and a PR in lung mets, and a second patient achieved CNS stable disease and CR in a leg melanotic lesion. The drug was well-tolerated with one reversible AE thrombocytopenia (Gr 2). The final review showed intracranial response of SD in 2/4 (50%) patients and systemic SD in 3/4 (75%) patients. Methods: We are currently accruing to the dose escalation cohort of E6201 with dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily orally (n=up to 22 evaluable patients). E6201 is administered IV at 320mg/m2 twice weekly for 3 weeks every 28 days. Patients must have stage IV melanoma with BRAF mutation with at least one active lesion in the brain. Prior local therapy is allowed if done at least 3 weeks prior to cycle 1. Participants must be on a stable dose of steroids for at least 7 days and have an ECOG <!–=2. The study allows one prior BRAF/MEK inhibitor therapy. The primary objectives are to determine the MTD of E6201 when combined with dabrafenib and the response rate of brain mets. The secondary objectives include duration of response, extracranial response, progression free survival, overall survival, and impact of BRAF mutation subtype and safety of the combination. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT05388877 References:1.Gampa G, et al. Brain distribution of a novel MEK inhibitor E6201: implications in the treatment of melanoma brain metastases. 2018. Drug Metab Dispos.2.Tibes R et al. Safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary efficacy of E6201 in patients with advanced solid tumors, including melanoma: results of a phase I study. 2018. Brit J of Cancer. 3.Babiker Gm et al, E6201, an intravenous MEK1 inhibitor, achieves an exceptional response in BRAF V600E mutated metastatic malignant melanoma with brain metastases. 2018. Inv New Drugs4.Gampa G, Kim M, Cook-Rostie N, Laramy JK, Sarkaria JN, Paradiso L, DePalatis L, Elmquist WF. Brain distribution of a novel MEK inhibitor E6201: Implications in the treatment of melanoma brain metastases. 2018. Drug Met Disp.–> Citation Format: Mahesh Seetharam, Roxana Dronca, Arkadiusz Z. Dudek, Garth Nelson, Matthew Block, Skylar Starling, Amber Baskin, Renee Bradshaw, Courtney Nelson, Kylee Andrews, Alisha Birgin, Cristina Watson, Yiyi Yan, Daruka Mahadevan, Svetomir Markovic, Tom Myers, Linda Paradiso, Hani Babiker. Phase 1 trial of MEK1 inhibitor E6201 plus dabrafenib in patients (pts) with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma (MM) with central nervous system (CNS) metastases (mets) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 2 (Late-Breaking, Clinical Trial, and Invited Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(7_Suppl):Abstract nr CT157.