Idossa, D.

Abstract Introduction: An Our Practice Advisory (OPA), formerly known as Best Practice Advisory (BPA), is an electronic health record (EHR) tool. OPAs identify key parameters to alert providers of potential interventions that could enhance quality of care. Such functionality is increasingly relevant given the rapid pace of new drug approvals. Within the Mayo Clinic system, we previously identified that amongst Mayo Clinic patients (pts) meeting the MonarchE criteria, 28% of pts did not undergo a documented discussion with their provider regarding the role of adjuvant abemaciclib (Premji, SABCS 2024). Further, a Flatiron study identified that only 40% of eligible pts received abemaciclib (Sandoval, Miami Breast 2025). To address this practice gap, in 2024 we began to implement EHR clinical decision support by creating an OPA trigger for pts eligible for an adjuvant CDK 4/6 inhibitor (CDK 4/6i). Here we report on ‘action taken’ versus not for the OPA and the most common reasons for re-prompts. Methods: The Mayo Breast Disease Group designed an OPA including pts who are within 14 months of a clinical or pathologic diagnosis of high-risk early-stage breast cancer. We leveraged structured data captured in the Epic staging forms (Epic Systems) to identify pts with clinical or pathologic T-stage, N-stage, grade, ± Ki-67/ multigene signature to identify ER+/HER2- pts eligible for adjuvant ribociclib or abemaciclib based on FDA approvals. The OPA was triggered by a patient encounter in oncology when endocrine therapy (but not CDK4/6i) was on the active medication list resulting in a hard stop. The OPA gathered limited details about whether adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors were discussed and whether the provider followed a link that resulted in prescribing one—considered an indicator of action taken. In this IRB-exempt quality improvement project, we describe the responses captured in the OPA trigger utilizing Epic tools. Results: The OPA went live on 1/10/2025. Over a 5-month period post OPA initiation, we identified 517 OPA alerts among 332 unique pts. Their median age was 62.5 years, and the majority were female (97%). The median time to resolve the OPA was 17.5 seconds (range 2-567 seconds). 12.6% (65/517) of the time there was ‘action taken’ by selecting the hyperlink to potentially start a treatment plan. Providers selected the following OPA pre-set responses: ‘re-prompt in one month’ 248 (48%), ‘patient not a candidate for therapy’ 48 (9%), ‘patient declines’ 69 (13%), ‘outside oncologist will prescribe’ 36 (7%), ‘not discussed’ 44 (9%), and unknown 72 (14%). The most common free text comments among the 517 OPA alerts (summarized) included: ‘revisit in future’ 108 (21%), ‘too early’ 65 (13%), ‘patient declines’ 66 (13%), ‘outside oncologist will start’ 31 (6%), ‘not a candidate’ 26 (5%), and ‘co-morbidities’ 18 (3%). Erroneous OPA prompting occurred in 14 (3%) who previously failed a CDK4/6i due to toxicity and in 18 (3%) for pts currently on a CDK4/6i. 30 (6%) OPA comments noted that they discussed or started therapy that day. Conclusion: The OPA offered clinical decision support and ensured that clinicians considered prescribing CDK 4/6i in all pts identified as eligible, and captured deferrals. Refinements are needed to ensure appropriate timing of OPA and minimize erroneous firing. The OPA remains active and captures the reason for deferral of adjuvant CDK 4/6i prescription. This data pairs real world decision making to better understand clinically meaningful application of improved invasive disease-free survival (iDFS). Citation Format: S. Premji, P. Advani, S. Chumsri, L. Mina, J. Taraba, J. Carroll, J. Hoppenworth, E. Cathcart-Rake, T. Haddad, B. Rudder, G. Choong, D. Idossa, C. O’Sullivan, S. Yadav, K. Ruddy, P. Peethambaram, T. Hobday, M. Goetz, R. Rao, B. Ernst, F. Batalini, R. Leon-Ferre, A. Tevaarwerk, K. Giridhar. Implementing an Our Practice Advisory (OPA) to provide clinical decision support for adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors in early-stage hormone receptor positive breast cancer: The Mayo Clinic Experience [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS5-11-10.

Abstract Introduction: Metaplastic breast cancer (MpBC) represents a rare subtype, constituting <1% of all breast cancer cases. It is pathologically characterized by epithelial and mesenchymal cellular components exhibiting a basal molecular pattern, hormone receptor and HER2-negativity, and high grade. Clinically, MpBC exhibits an aggressive course with early disease progression and poor survival. Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) have been shown to penetrate the central nervous system (CNS); however, little is known about the response of ADCs in MpBC, particularly in patients with CNS disease. Here we aimed to describe features of CNS disease in a subset of patients (pts) who received an ADC for MpBC . Methods: We conducted a multi-institutional retrospective observational study of pts with advanced MpBC treated with ADCs at 4 NCI-designated cancer centers (abstract #A-345). This analysis includes a subset of this cohort with CNS metastases, with the aim of examining the incidence, characteristics, and treatment patterns. Clinical outcomes were evaluated for pts with information available, including CNS median progression-free survival (mPFS; defined from initiation of systemic therapy to time of further documented CNS progression or death) and median real world PFS (rwPFS; defined from time of treatment initiation to documented disease progression or death). Results: We identified 48 pts with MpBC who received an ADC. Among them, we identified 15 (31%) who developed CNS metastases. Of these, the majority (n=11, 73%) had triple-negative breast cancer, and 4 (27%) had HER2-positive breast cancer. The median age was 50 years (32-75 years). The median interval from the initial MpBC diagnosis to CNS metastasis was 13 months (0-54 months). Excluding those with de novo CNS disease, the median interval from time of metastatic diagnosis to development of CNS metastasis [mets] was 3 months (0-22 months). 4 (27%) pts had de-novo metastatic disease, of which 2 (50%) presented with CNS disease. 4 (27%) pts had screening CNS imaging prior to their diagnosis of CNS metastatic disease. At the time of CNS disease diagnosis, 9 (60%) pts had oligometastatic intraparenchymal CNS disease (defined as <5 CNS mets), 5 (33%) had diffuse (>5 CNS mets) CNS disease, and 1 (6%) had leptomeningeal and intraparenchymal disease. Most pts 14(93%) with CNS disease were symptomatic at time of diagnosis. One pt underwent resection, 9 (60%) underwent stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), 6 (40%) underwent whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT), and 1 pt received intrathecal chemotherapy with methotrexate. The median number of lines in the metastatic setting prior to documented CNS disease was 1 (range 0-3). The majority 13 (87%) underwent a change in systemic therapy at time of CNS disease diagnosis, with 60% changing to an ADC at the time of CNS diagnosis or progression. Among pts with progression of CNS disease warranting change in systemic therapy, the median time from first CNS event to further CNS progression was 6.5 months. Median CNS PFS was 3.5 months (range 1 -74 months) and median rwPFS was 4.4 months. For those patients who used ADCs after diagnosis of metastatic CNS diagnosis (12/15), median rwPFS was 4 months. Conclusions: Within this CNS sub-cohort study, we found that 31% of pts with MpBC developed CNS metastasis. The majority of pts had neurological symptoms at diagnosis, but most pts did not undergo routing screening for CNS disease. Given the high rate of CNS mets within a short timeframe from diagnosis with poor outcomes, CNS screening should be considered. The extremely short median CNS PFS and low median rwPFS of this cohort highlight the guarded prognosis associated with MpBC. Given the small sample size of this cohort, larger studies are warranted to validate these findings. Citation Format: S. Premji, S. Jacob, A. LeVee, S. Marion, S. Fisch, L. Huppert, J. Mortimer, D. Schmolze, A. Nayak, A. DeMichele, P. Shah, R. Leon-Ferre, D. Idossa. Central nervous system disease in patients with metaplastic breast cancer receiving antibody drug conjugates: a multi-institutional study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS1-09-07.