Basu, Arnab

4568 Background: The 2IR immune response score was initially developed using bulk RNA sequencing of pre-treatment tissue from ImVigor 210 and CheckMate 275 trials, however these trials enrolled patients (pts) with pure urothelial carcinoma (pUC) histology. Patients with hsUC often exhibit worse response to immune checkpoint inibitors (ICI) than patients with pUC. Here, we evaluated the 2IR score as a prognostic or predictive biomarker in real-world pts with hsUC. Methods: Specimens from pts with pUC (n = 1677) and hsUC (n = 417) were profiled at Caris Life Sciences (Phoenix, AZ) using next generation sequencing (NGS) of DNA and RNA. HsUC histologies included majority ( > 50%) squamous (n = 340), sarcomatoid (n = 51), neuroendocrine (n = 20), and micropapillary (n = 6) component. 2IR was calculated by comparative RNA expression of 10 adaptive immune genes and 39 pro-tumorigenic genes. Tumors were classified as 2IR-Low (2IR ≤ -0.5), -Mid (-0.5 < 2IR < 0), and -High (2IR ≥ 0), as previously described (Wang et al., 2022). Spearman correlation analysis was utilized to compare 2IR with tumor mutation burden (TMB), interferon score (IFN) and the tumor microenvironment (TME) cell fractions estimated using quanTIseq. Clinical outcomes included real-world overall survival (rwOS) from ICI start to last contact and time on treatment (ToT) with pembrolizumab, obtained via matched insurance claims data and calculated using Kaplan-Meier methods, while Hazard ratio (HR) was calculated by Cox proportional model. Results: For patients with hsUC, distribution of 2IR score was High 5.76%, Mid 33.3%, and Low 60.9%. Median 2IR score was significantly lower in squamous (-0.60, p < 0.0001) and sarcomatoid UC (-0.82, p < 0.0001) compared to pUC (-0.41) and significantly higher in neuroendocrine UC (-0.15, p = 0.003). Among patients with hsUC, median rwOS was significantly longer for patients with high/mid 2IR score compared to low 2IR score (25.3 [10.9-39.3] months vs. 8.7 [6.2-11.3] months; HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34 – 0.78, p = 0.0017). ToT with pembrolizumab was also significantly longer for high/mid 2IR score compared to low 2IR score (3.0 [1.4-5.5] months vs. 2.1 [1.4-3.3] months; HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.46-1.00, p = 0.0471). Similar to pUC, 2IR score in patients with squamous UC was positively associated with CD8 T cell infiltration (r = 0.39; p < 0.0001), IFN score (r = 0.41, p < 0.0001), and TMB (r = 0.20, p < 0.001) and negatively associated with M1 macrophage infiltration (r = -0.25, p < 0.0001). 2IR scores in hsUC correlated positively but not significantly with mutations in TP53 (Median: -0.59 vs -0.62, p = 0.067) and PIK3CA (Median: -0.56 vs -0.61, p = 0.172) and negatively with mutations in CDKN2A (Median: -0.67 vs -0.59, p = 0.052). Conclusions: In a real-world cohort of patients with hsUC, we show the 2IR score may be prognostic for rwOS and predictive for pembrolizumab ToT. Prospective studies are needed to further validate this biomarker for use in this population.

ASCO Guidelines provide recommendations with comprehensive review and analyses of the relevant literature for each recommendation, following the guideline development process as outlined in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Clinical Practice Guidelines and other guidance (“Guidance”) provided by ASCO is not a comprehensive or definitive guide to treatment options. It is intended for voluntary use by clinicians and should be used in conjunction with independent professional judgment. Guidance may not be applicable to all patients, interventions, diseases or stages of diseases. Guidance is based on review and analysis of relevant literature, and is not intended as a statement of the standard of care. ASCO does not endorse third-party drugs, devices, services, or therapies and assumes no responsibility for any harm arising from or related to the use of this information. See complete disclaimer in Appendix 1 and 2 (online only) for more . PURPOSE To provide evidence-based recommendations for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). METHODS An Expert Panel including patient representation completed a systematic review of the evidence and made recommendations. RESULTS Depending upon prior treatment received, androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs: enzalutamide, abiraterone with prednisone), poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi), chemotherapeutic agents (docetaxel, cabazitaxel), radiopharmaceuticals (radium 223, 177 Lu-prostate-specific membrane antigen [PSMA]-617), and sipuleucel-T have demonstrated an overall survival (OS) benefit for patients with mCRPC. For patients with BRCA1 / 2 alterations who did not receive prior ARPI, the combination of PARPi and ARPI (talazoparib + enzalutamide, olaparib and/or niraparib + abiraterone) has shown clinical benefit. For patients with BRCA1 / 2 alterations who received prior ARPI or ARPI followed by docetaxel, olaparib showed OS benefit. In select patients with microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient, pembrolizumab showed clinical efficacy. RECOMMENDATIONS Prior systemic therapy for castration-sensitive prostate cancer will determine subsequent therapy used for mCRPC. Continue androgen-deprivation therapy for patients with mCRPC indefinitely. Early adoption of somatic genetic testing and palliative care is recommended. Patients with mCRPC and bony metastases should receive a bone-protective agent. The panel recommends the combination of ARPI with PARPi in patients with BRCA1 / 2 alterations who did not receive prior ARPI. For patients who received prior ARPI, the panel recommends docetaxel chemotherapy. The panel recommends 177 Lu-PSMA-617 or cabazitaxel chemotherapy for patients who receive prior ARPI and docetaxel chemotherapy. For patients with BRCA1 / 2 alterations who received prior ARPI, the panel recommends PARPi monotherapy. Radium 223 is recommended for patients with symptomatic bone–only disease. Evidence for optimal sequencing for mCRPC regimens is lacking. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/genitourinary-cancer-guidelines .

PURPOSE International medical graduates (IMGs) are an essential component of the oncology workforce in the United States, comprising a third of all practicing oncologists and almost half of hematology/oncology fellows. In this article, we discuss the contributions of IMGs in the US oncology workforce, review unique challenges faced by IMGs, and propose potential solutions to overcome these challenges. METHODS ASCO's IMG Community of Practice was established with the mission to connect, mentor, guide, raise awareness, and overcome the challenges unique to IMGs interested in pursuing medical oncology in the United States. The content of this article is based on discussions at the IMG Community of Practice meetings at ASCO's 2023 and 2024 Annual Meetings. RESULTS IMGs bring an inherent diversity of thought and experience to the oncology workforce. They provide high-quality, culture- and language-concordant care to a diverse population of patients with cancer. However, IMGs in oncology face significant hardships throughout their careers, including visa-related restrictions, psychosocial and cultural struggles, as well as differential treatment while applying for residency and fellowship training, and early career positions. Greater awareness of these challenges among the members of the hematology/oncology community, along with institutional and individual efforts to support IMGs, is warranted. CONCLUSION We encourage oncology professionals and institutions to join our efforts in recognizing the unique paths of IMGs and providing support and advocacy to maximize the potential of IMGs in the US oncology workforce.