Back to Authors

Choong, G. M.

Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic

Citations 4

Abstract PS5-07-20: Trial in progress: Phase 1 Study Targeting DNA Methyltransferases in Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (NCI Protocol #10546)
Leon-Ferre, R. A., Zahrieh, D. M., Advani, P. P., Giridhar, K. V., Dizona, P. J., Stover, D. G., Wang, X. , Tevaarwerk, A. J., Choong, G. M., Yasir, S., Kalari, K. R., Foldi, Julia , Parajuli, R., Hackney, Mary Helen , Chew, H. K., Wajeeha, R., Bear, H., Sharon, E., Ko, B., Shapiro, G. I., Gore, S., Pelosof, Lorraine, Wang, L., Goetz, M. P., Leon‐Ferre, Roberto A. , Zahrieh, David , Advani, P. P., Quiroga, Dionisia , Tevaarwerk, Amye J., Kalari, Krishna R. , Razaq, Wajeeha, Gore, Steven D. , Goetz, Matthew P.

Clinical Cancer Research | February 17, 2026 | Volume: 32 | Issue: 4_Supplement | Pages: PS5-07-20-PS5-07-20

10.1158/1557-3265.sabcs25-ps5-07-20 Get It

Abstract Background: DNA methyltransferase (DNMT) isoforms 1, 3A and 3B are enzymes that regulate DNA methylation, controlling gene expression, chromatin stability and genetic imprinting. We have previously shown that DNMT3A protein expression in early triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) is associated with more aggressive clinicopathologic features (higher tumor grade, tumor proliferation and frequency of nodal metastases) and worse clinical outcomes in the absence of chemotherapy (Leon-Ferre et al, SABCS 2024). Pre-clinically, we have shown that DNMT3A protein expression predicts sensitivity to DNMT inhibitors (Yu J et al., J Clin Invest 2018), and that DNMT inhibitor treatment leads to downregulation of DNMT3A, enhanced expression of immune-related pathways, and halted tumor growth, particularly in combination with immunotherapy and paclitaxel. Methods: This is a phase 1, open-label, multicenter study evaluating the safety and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of the oral DNMT inhibitor ASTX727 + paclitaxel + pembrolizumab in metastatic TNBC. ASTX727 is an oral fixed dose combination (FDC) tablet of 35 mg decitabine (active agent) and 100 mg cedazuridine (a cytidine deaminase inhibitor that prevents decitabine degradation in the bowel and liver, allowing oral delivery). The study consists of two parts: Part 1 is a dose-finding cohort, using a 3+3 design, with 5 dose levels (Table), and its primary objective is to determine the RP2D. Part 2 is an expansion cohort (n=6), with the primary objective to confirm tolerability of the regimen at the RP2D. Secondary objectives are to record the antitumor activity of the regimen, describe the AE profile, explore the association of baseline gene expression profiles with clinical benefit, and to evaluate impact of treatment on tumor and ctDNA methylation. Exploratory objectives will evaluate the association of baseline DNMT3A protein expression and antitumor activity, and the impact of treatment on the tumor and peripheral blood immune phenotype. Eligible patients are adults 18 years or older with metastatic TNBC (ER/PR ≤10%, and HER2-negative per ASCO/CAP guidelines), independent of PD-L1 expression. Patients are allowed to have received 0-3 prior lines of systemic therapy in the metastatic setting, including prior immune checkpoint inhibitors in the early and/or metastatic settings. Patients must be eligible for taxanes and have adequate organ and bone marrow function. Patients with treated brain metastases are eligible if previously treated without evidence of progression after 4 weeks. Leptomeningeal carcinomatosis is not allowed. Patients must have an ECOG performance status of ≤2 and have no gastrointestinal disorders impacting absorption of oral medications. As of June 20, 2025, the study is enrolling patients, with 10 patients dosed in the dose-finding phase. Citation Format: R. Leon-Ferre, D. M. Zahrieh, P. P. Advani, D. Quiroga, K. V. Giridhar, P. J. Dizona, D. Stover, X. Wang, A. J. Tevaarwerk, G. M. Choong, S. Yasir, K. R. Kalari, J. Foldi, R. Parajuli, M. H. Hackney, H. K. Chew, R. Wajeeha, H. Bear, E. Sharon, B. Ko, G. I. Shapiro, S. Gore, L. Pelosof, L. Wang, M. P. Goetz. Trial in progress: Phase 1 Study Targeting DNA Methyltransferases in Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (NCI Protocol #10546) [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 PS5-07-20.
Abstract PS5-11-10: 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
Premji, Sarah , Advani, Pooja , Chumsri, Saranya , Mina, Lida A. , Taraba, Jodi L. , Carroll, J., Hoppenworth, Jenna, Cathcart-Rake, E., Haddad, TC, Rudder, B., Choong, G., Idossa, D., O’Sullivan, Ciara C. , Yadav, S., Ruddy, K. J., Peethambaram, P., Hobday, T., Goetz, M. P., Rao, R., Leon-Ferre, R. A., Tevaarwerk, A., Giridhar, K. V., Taraba, Jodi L , Cathcart-Rake, Elizabeth , Rudder, B., Choong, G. M., Idossa, Damé , Yadav, S., Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Peethambaram, Prema P. , Hobday, Timothy J. , Ernst, Brenda , Batalini, Felipe , Leon‐Ferre, Roberto A. , Tevaarwerk, Amyé

Clinical Cancer Research | February 17, 2026 | Volume: 32 | Issue: 4_Supplement | Pages: PS5-11-10-PS5-11-10

10.1158/1557-3265.sabcs25-ps5-11-10 Get It

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 PS4-03-10: Assessing the impact of real-time serial circulating tumor cell results on the management of patients with metastatic breast cancer
Giridhar, K. V., Zahrieh, David M. , Hanna, Mina, Singh, A., Al‐Hattab, Eyad, Schumacher, P., Carroll, J., Hoppenworth, Jenna, Haddad, TC, Tevaarwerk, A. J., Rudder, B., Choong, G. M., Basu, S. , Leon-Ferre, R. A., O'Brien, T., Lewis, A., Snoo, F. de, Stork-Sloots, L., Kuhr, F. K., Lazaro, S., Prendergast, R., Spinner, D. S., Goetz, M. P., Carroll, J., Tevaarwerk, Amye J., Basu, S., Leon‐Ferre, Roberto A. , Snoo, Femke De , Stork‐Sloots, Lisette, Goetz, Matthew P.

Clinical Cancer Research | February 17, 2026 | Volume: 32 | Issue: 4_Supplement | Pages: PS4-03-10-PS4-03-10

10.1158/1557-3265.sabcs25-ps4-03-10 Get It

Abstract Introduction Serial assessments of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) provide independent prognostic significance for progression free survival and overall survival. A low CTC burden (<5 CTCs / 7.5mL blood) at baseline is favorable prognostically, and reduction of CTCs during treatment indicates response to treatment (Janni, CCR 2025). Despite increasing evidence supporting its clinical validity, real-time serial CTC enumeration has not been utilized broadly in clinical practice in the U.S. The ACT-MBC study is a prospective observational study to evaluate the impact of serial CTC testing on treatment decisions and response assessment (NCT05662345). Provider (physician or advanced practitioner) perception of CTC testing is measured with questionnaires at baseline (PQ1), and for each pt during the first restaging visit (PQ2), and at the end of the study (PQ3). We previously reported PQ1 results (Giridhar, SABCS 2024). Here, we report on results of PQ2. Methods ACT-MBC prospectively enrolled patients (pts) at Mayo Clinic Rochester and Mayo Clinic Health Systems sites (Mankato, Albert Lea and Eau Claire). Pts with MBC were enrolled at time of progressive disease during any line of therapy (TNBC) or ≥2nd line metastatic therapy for ER+/HER2- disease. Pts were tested for CTCs using the FDA-cleared CellSearch® assay which included enumeration and biomarker testing on CTCs for ER, HER2, and PD-L1. The treating clinician determined the regimen and timing of restaging scans. CTC testing was performed once per cycle (every 3-4 weeks) with results returned to the treating provider within 7 days. We descriptively summarized PQ2 responses from providers who had at least one on-treatment CTC result available by the first restaging visit. We report the proportion (90% CI) of providers who agreed or strongly agreed that assessing CTCs enhanced their ability to determine response to therapy and that the CTC results helped guide their decision to continue or change therapy (co-primary endpoints) while accounting for within provider correlation. Results As of June 25, 2025, 15 providers enrolled a median of 2 pts each (range: 1 to 15 pts) and completed PQ2 surveys on 40 pts. 7 providers (47%) practiced in the community setting and 4 (27%) were nurse practitioners. Most pts were female (98%), White (98%), and had ER+/HER2- MBC (80%). Baseline (C1) CTC results were elevated (≥5 CTCs) in 24 (60%) pts (CTC range 0-609). At C2 (n=39), CTC values remained undetected in 7 pts, decreased in 21 pts, increased in 8 pts, and remained unchanged in 3 pts. At PQ2 (n=40), based on clinician interpretation of radiographic findings, results showed 2.5% of pts with complete response, 20% with partial response, 25% with stable disease, 17.5% with mixed response, and 35% with progressive disease. Clinicians reported that CTC results were concordant with imaging results in 34 (85%) responses, discordant with imaging in 7.5% of responses, and unclear in the remaining 7.5% of responses. Most clinicians (82.5%) agreed or strongly agreed that assessing CTCs enhanced their ability to determine response to therapy (90% CI: 68.3%, 96.7%). Further, 70% of providers agreed or strongly agreed that the CTC results helped guide their decision to continue or change therapy (90% CI: 50.8%, 89.2%). 32.5% of the time, CTCs results influenced the timing of the first restaging scans. In 11/25 pts without progressing disease, CTC results influenced the timing of future scans. In the 7/8 pts with a mixed response at first restaging scans with decreasing CTCs, 4 remained on the same systemic therapy. Conclusions Oncologists in academic and community practice responded that serial CTC assessments enhance ability to determine response of therapy, guide decisions to continue or change treatments, and influence timing of radiographic assessments. Citation Format: K. V. Giridhar, D. Zahrieh, M. Hanna, A. Singh, E. Al-Hattab, P. Schumacher, J. Carroll, J. Hoppenworth, T. Haddad, A. Tevaarwerk, B. Rudder, G. M. Choong, S. Basu, R. A. Leon-Ferre, T. O'Brien, A. Lewis, F. de Snoo, L. Stork-Sloots, F. K. Kuhr, S. Lazaro, R. Prendergast, D. S. Spinner, M. P. Goetz. Assessing the impact of real-time serial circulating tumor cell results on the management of patients with metastatic breast cancer [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 PS4-03-10.
Mediastinal Abscess After Endobronchial Ultrasound-Guided Lymph Node Aspiration
Ward, Russell A. , Choong, G., Norton, M. Y., Temesgen, Z., Scrodin, M. Dulohery, Ward, R., Choong, G. M., Norton, M.

C36. INTERVENTIONAL PULMONOLOGY CASE REPORTS II | August 26, 2019 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: A4660-A4660

10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2019.199.1_meetingabstracts.a4660 Get It