Elantably, Dina

TPS1679 Background: Cancer care in the United States remains highly centralized, imposing substantial time, caregiver, and financial burdens on patients, particularly those residing in rural and medically underserved regions. While international experience supports the feasibility of home-based cancer therapy delivery, prospective U.S. clinical trial data are limited. The Cancer CARE Beyond Walls (CCBW) program was developed to address these gaps through a decentralized cancer care model integrating virtual oversight, remote monitoring, mobile clinical services, and community-based nursing partners. The study evaluates the feasibility, safety, and patient-centered impact of delivering cancer-directed therapy in patients’ homes or near-home mobile units in the Florida Panhandle, a region characterized by long travel distances to tertiary centers and limited oncology infrastructure. Methods: This is a phase 2, single-arm clinical trial evaluating the delivery of standard-of-care cancer-directed therapy outside of traditional infusion centers. Eligible adult patients (ECOG 0–3) with histologically confirmed malignancies receiving guideline-supported or FDA-approved systemic cancer therapy must demonstrate tolerability of at least one prior in-clinic treatment cycle. Following registration, patients transition to home-based or near-home mobile unit administration for a minimum of 12 weeks, with an option to continue up to 24 weeks. Care delivery is coordinated through a virtual command center providing real-time virtual oversight, remote monitoring, and escalation pathways. Treatment administration is performed by trained local home health nurses, medication shipping, and digital interaction with the electronic health record. A fully equipped mobile unit extends access to rural areas not covered by home health agencies. The primary endpoint is patient preference for treatment location at week 12. Secondary endpoints include safety, avoidable acute care utilization, patient-reported function and global health/quality of life, patient-reported symptoms, and satisfaction with care. Exploratory endpoints assess travel burden, patient perceptions of caregiver experience, and patient perceptions of home versus mobile unit care. Enrollment of 27 patients will provide 80% power to reject a 50% null rate (2-sided exact test, α=0.10), assuming 75% prefer decentralized care or express no preference. This investigator-initiated trial is open to accrual and is supported by a grant from the Florida Cancer Innovation Fund. Clinical trial information: NCT07285044 .

e21607 Background: The association between timing of palliative care referral and survival outcomes in patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBM) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors remains poorly characterized. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with MBM treated with combination ipilimumab and nivolumab at Mayo 3 sites from 2016 to 2024. Palliative care referral timing relative to MBM diagnosis was categorized as early (≤56 days), late ( > 56 days), or none. Patients without referral documentation were excluded from referral-based analyses. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using Kaplan–Meier methods and compared with log-rank tests. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify factors independently associated with OS, with stepwise selection (entry p < 0.25; stay p < 0.15). Results: Among 147 patients, 139 had referral information: 33 (23.7%) early, 56 (40.3%) late, and 50 (36.0%) no referral. Median OS differed significantly by referral timing (log-rank p < 0.0001): 2.8 months (early), 7.9 months (late), and 47.8 months (no referral). Among patients with ECOG 2–3, a higher proportion had early or late referral (each 42.9%) compared with no referral (14.3%), whereas patients with ECOG 0–1 were more evenly distributed across referral groups (early 21.6%, late 40.0%, none 38.4%). In multivariable analysis of 88 patients with complete covariate data, both early (HR 4.54; p = 0.0016) and late referral (HR 2.86; p = 0.011) were independently associated with worse OS compared with no referral. Progressive disease versus objective response (HR 4.45; p = 0.0002), hemorrhagic metastases (HR 2.79; p = 0.0015), male sex (HR 2.07; p = 0.044), and increasing age (HR 1.02 per year; p = 0.032) were also associated with inferior OS. Treatment with ipilimumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 3 mg/kg showed a trend toward improved OS compared with ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus nivolumab 1 mg/kg (HR 0.48; p = 0.055). Conclusions: Timing of palliative care referral was strongly associated with overall survival in patients with MBM treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab. Although patients with ECOG 2–3 were more frequently referred early or late, ECOG category overall did not clearly differentiate referral timing groups, suggesting referral may reflect unmeasured clinical factors beyond baseline performance status. Prospective studies incorporating more granular functional and symptom measures are needed to better define the role of palliative care integration in this population. Multivariable cox model for overall survival. Variable Comparison HR P value Referral timing Early vs None 4.54 0.0016 Late vs None 2.86 0.011 Best overall response PD vs ORR 4.45 0.0002 SD vs ORR 2.16 0.098 Hemorrhagic metastases Yes vs No 2.79 0.0015 Sex Male vs Female 2.07 0.044 Age Per year increase 1.02 0.032 Regimen Ipi1+Nivo3 vs Ipi3+Nivo1 0.48 0.055

e20595 Background: Circadian regulation of immune function has been proposed as a modifier of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) efficacy, with retrospective studies suggesting improved outcomes with earlier infusion timing. Whether these findings translate to routine oncology practice, where ICIs are administered across multiple lines, frequently combined with chemotherapy, and subject to treatment interruptions, remains uncertain. We evaluated the association between ICI infusion timing and overall survival (OS) in a real-world cohort of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: A retrospective cohort study included adults with NSCLC who received at least one line of ICI therapy at a community oncology center between January 2018 and December 2024. Infusion timing was defined at the patient level as morning-only ( < 1300 hours), evening-only (≥1300 hours), or mixed timing, reflecting receipt of infusions exclusively in different time-of-day categories across treatment lines. OS was measured from diagnosis to death or last follow-up. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models were used. Multivariable analyses adjusted for stage, ECOG performance status, body mass index, and premature ICI discontinuation. Line of therapy was excluded due to collinearity with mixed-timing classification and risk of immortal time bias. Results: A total of 127 patients were included (morning-only n = 77; mixed timing n = 36; evening-only n = 14). Staging data were available for 99.2%, and 94 deaths occurred. Median OS was 495 days for morning-only, 850 days for mixed timing, and 388 days for evening-only patients. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no statistically significant OS differences across groups. In sensitivity analysis excluding patients with mixed infusion timing, morning-only and evening-only groups demonstrated overlapping survival curves, with no evidence of a time-of-day–specific survival advantage. In univariate analysis, mixed timing was associated with a borderline reduction in mortality compared with morning-only infusions (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.39-1.00), while evening-only timing was not (HR 1.63, 95% CI 0.85-3.16). In multivariate analysis restricted to stage III-IV disease, infusion timing was not independently associated with OS. ECOG performance status, premature ICI discontinuation and advanced staging were the strongest predictors of mortality. Conclusions: In this real-world NSCLC cohort, ICI infusion timing was not independently associated with overall survival after adjustment for patient fitness and treatment continuity. These findings suggest that in pragmatic settings, clinical factors may outweigh subtle chronotherapy effects reported in more selected populations.

e16435 Background: Peritoneal metastasis in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is historically associated with a dismal prognosis and limited response to systemic therapy alone. The role of locoregional therapy remains controversial. This study evaluated the survival impact and safety of HIPEC, with or without cytoreductive surgery (CRS), compared to standard-of-care systemic therapy in patients with peritoneal metastatic PDAC. Methods: We conducted a comparative analysis of 130 patients with peritoneal metastatic PDAC, comprising a study cohort treated with HIPEC (n = 33) and a control group treated with systemic chemotherapy alone (Non-HIPEC, n = 97). HIPEC patients received induction chemotherapy (predominantly FOLFIRINOX) followed by HIPEC ± CRS. Co-primary endpoints included 12 months survival, and 6 months progression free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints evaluated Overall Survival (OS ), safety of CRS, and impact of germline mutation status on survival. Study was approved under IRB protocol 25-008762. Results: The 12-month OS rate was significantly higher in the HIPEC group compared to the chemotherapy-only control group (100% vs. 52.6%, P < 0.001). The 6-month PFS rate in the HIPEC group was 63.0% vs. 47.94 in-only control group (P < 0.001). For secondary endpoints, the HIPEC group demonstrated a significantly longer median OS of 33.0 months vs. 17.0 months for controls (P < 0.001). Within the HIPEC cohort, the addition of CRS (n = 25) significantly improved outcomes compared to HIPEC alone (n = 8): median OS improved from 21.5 to 36.0 months (P = 0.03). Germline testing was performed in 61% of HIPEC patients and 48% of controls, identifying pathogenic mutations in 25% and 17%, respectively. Identified pathogenic mutations in both groups included ATM (n = 4), MUTYH (n = 2), BRCA2 (n = 1), CHEK2 (n = 1), PALB2 (n = 1), and KIT (n = 1). In the control group, specific mutations drove divergent outcomes; ATM median OS: 23.5 months vs. MUTYH : 8.0 months (P = 0.04). Conversely, in the HIPEC+CRS cohort, survival was excellent regardless of genetic profile: mutation carriers achieved a median OS of 33.0 months compared to 31.0 months in wild-type patients (P = 0.85). Despite a 34.8% postoperative complication rate in the HIPEC group, there was no perioperative mortality. Conclusions: In selected patients with peritoneal metastatic PDAC, HIPEC provides a substantial survival advantage over systemic therapy alone, achieving a 100% 12-month survival rate and more than doubling the median overall survival. Importantly, germline mutation status did not preclude survival benefit, with mutation carriers deriving equal efficacy from the multimodal approach. These findings support HIPEC+CRS as a highly effective strategy that may overcome adverse biologic drivers.

9558 Background: Ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus nivolumab 1 mg/kg (Ipi3+Nivo1) is the standard immunotherapy regimen for metastatic melanoma with brain metastases (MBM) but is associated with significant immune-related toxicity, particularly neurologic toxicity. Ipilimumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 3 mg/kg (Ipi1+Nivo3) has demonstrated improved tolerability in extracranial melanoma, though comparative data in MBM are limited. We compared efficacy and toxicity of these dosing strategies in a multisite real-world cohort. Methods: We retrospectively identified patients with MBM treated with ipilimumab plus nivolumab across three Mayo Clinic sites between 2016 and 2024. Patients were classified by induction dosing as Ipi1+Nivo3 or Ipi3+Nivo1. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method and compared using log-rank tests. Best overall response (BOR) and toxicity outcomes were summarized descriptively. Results: Among 147 patients (Ipi1+Nivo3 n=32; Ipi3+Nivo1 n=115), 144 were evaluable for survival. Median age was higher in the Ipi1+Nivo3 group (69.5 vs 66.0 years); males predominated in both groups (71.9% vs 61.7%), and the cohort was predominantly White (>96%). Most patients had ECOG 0–1 in both groups (84.4% in Ipi1+ Nivo3 and 90.4% in Ipi3+Nivo1). BRAF mutation status was balanced between regimens, with approximately half of patients harboring BRAF-mutant disease (51.6% vs 53.2%). Median OS was 18.5 months (95% CI, 5.7–54.7) with Ipi1+Nivo3 versus 10.6 months (95% CI, 6.5–19.1) with Ipi3+Nivo1 (log-rank p=0.25). Two-year OS was 45.9% and 35.0%, and five-year OS was 24.5% and 19.2%, respectively. Median PFS was 7.3 months (95% CI, 1.8–10.9) versus 2.8 months (95% CI, 2.1–4.4) (log-rank p=0.16). BOR was available for 138 patients; objective response rates were 35.5% and 31.8%, respectively. 3–5 adverse events occurred in 24.1% of Ipi1+Nivo3 versus 30.5% of Ipi3+Nivo1 patients. Hospitalizations were less frequent (16.7% vs 36.1%), and neurologic adverse events occurred only with Ipi3+Nivo1 (11.9% vs 0%). Conclusions: In this multisite real-world MBM cohort, Ipi1+Nivo3 demonstrated comparable efficacy, numerically longer survival, and a more favorable toxicity profile compared with standard Ipi3+Nivo1. Notably, no neurologic toxicity was observed with the Ipi1+Nivo3 regimen. These findings support further prospective evaluation of lower dose ipilimumab strategies. Response and survival outcomes. Outcome Ipi1 + Nivo3 Ipi3 + Nivo1 Complete response (CR) 2 / 31 (6.5%) 8 / 107 (7.5%) Partial response (PR) 9 / 31 (29.0%) 26 / 107 (24.3%) Objective response rate (ORR = CR+PR) 11 / 31 (35.5%) 34 / 107 (31.8%) Disease control rate (DCR = CR+PR+SD) 18 / 31 (58.1%) 51 / 107 (47.7%) Median PFS, months (95% CI) 7.3 (1.8–10.9) 2.8 (2.1–4.4) 2-year PFS 27.6% 22.3% Median OS, months (95% CI) 18.5 (5.7–54.7) 10.6 (6.5–19.1) 2-year OS 45.9% 35.0% 5-year OS 24.5% 19.2%

9021 Background: An escape room is a team-based activity in which participants collaborate to solve puzzles within a fixed time limit and escape. Prior studies demonstrate high learner satisfaction and improved teamwork and communication with medical education escape rooms. To date, no published reports describe an escape room designed specifically for hematology/oncology (hem/onc) fellows. As part of Hem/Onc Curriculum, we designed and implemented a hem/onc-focused escape room and evaluated learner satisfaction and perceived learning impact. Methods: The escape room was designed using evidence-based learning science principles (Table 1). Teams worked to solve sequential puzzles, centered on a patient case, addressing key hem/onc concepts, including transfusion medicine, peripheral blood smears, lymphoma classification, and coagulation disorders. Each solved puzzle revealed additional patient laboratory and pathology data. Successful completion required teams to diagnose the patient and select appropriate treatment. Following the activity, teams participated in a facilitator-led debrief focused on team dynamics, communication, and problem solving. Teams observed each other and shared feedback. A larger group debrief co-led by chief fellows and faculty reviewed learning objectives and key takeaways. Learner outcomes were assessed using a post-activity survey evaluating satisfaction, engagement, and impact on learning. Results: Eighteen learners participated, including 14 hem/onc fellows, 1 APP hem/onc fellow, and 3 internal medicine residents. Three of four teams escaped within 1 hour (mean completion time, 52 minutes). All participants provided positive verbal feedback. Fifteen learners completed the post-activity survey, and all respondents reported satisfaction with the activity and would recommend it for future fellows. One-word descriptors included “engaging,” “fun,” and “challenging.” Most respondents (93.3%) agreed that the activity reinforced key hem/onc concepts and improved confidence in clinical problem-solving. All learners felt the activity supported learning, and 93.3% reported that collaboration enhanced the learning experience. Participants identified team-based problem solving, clinical application, and interactive puzzles as the most effective components. Conclusions: A hem/onc escape room resulted in high learner satisfaction and reinforced hem/onc knowledge and clinical problem-solving. This feasible, fun, and innovative activity complements traditional fellowship education by leveraging adult learning principles through gamified, team-based learning and should be incorporated into training programs’ curriculum. Learning science principles applied in a hem/onc escape room. Active Learning Belonging Contrasting Cases Debriefing Deliberate Practice Elaboration Generation Listening and Sharing Reward Worked Examples

1615 Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized lung cancer treatment but cause adverse events, including immune-related colitis (ir-colitis). Accurate identification of ir-colitis is critical for improving patient outcomes and clinical research. However, current methods relying on ICD codes have substantial limitations: non-specific categories that fail to capture the cases or distinguish cases from infectious or ischemic etiologies, as well as incomplete coding that leads to missed cases. Large language models (LLMs), with advanced natural language understanding capabilities, offer a scalable approach for automated phenotyping using unstructured clinical notes. We aimed to develop and evaluate an LLM-based approach for identifying ir-colitis in patients with lung cancer receiving ICIs and compare it with ICD code based method. Methods: We identified 5,278 lung cancer patients with ICI administration at Mayo Clinic (2012-2025). To investigate ir-colitis occurrence within two years after ICI initiation, patients were stratified into three ICD-based cohorts: (1) IR-Colitis, with clinician-assigned ir-colitis-specific diagnosis codes; (2) Non-IR Colitis, with colitis diagnosis codes excluding ir-colitis; and (3) No-Colitis, absent of any colitis-related codes. We used three open-source LLMs to process clinical notes : Llama4, MedGemma, and Qwen. Prompts were designed to extract both gold standard evidence (explicit ir-colitis terminology, such as "immune-mediated colitis" and "checkpoint inhibitor colitis") and supportive evidence (such as pathology and lab results). Results: Llama4 demonstrated superior accuracy among three LLMs in manual evaluation and was thus selected for all cohort analyses. Among ICD-based IR-Colitis patients (n = 339), 82.0% had confirmatory evidence while 18% lacked evidence, suggesting potential false-positive coding. In the Non-IR Colitis cohort (n = 297), LLM-based extraction identified 43.8% patients in fact had ir-colitis, demonstrating substantial misclassification. In the No-colitis cohort (n = 4,642, random sample of 996 for analysis), the LLM identified 10.7% with documented ir-colitis, revealing substantial missing by administrative coding. Conclusions: LLM-based phenotyping demonstrates superior sensitivity for identifying ir-colitis compared to ICD codes alone, successfully uncovering cases missed by administrative coding. This scalable approach enables more comprehensive case identification for immunotherapy safety research and clinical surveillance. ICD-Based Cohorts LLM-Identified ir-Colitis Gold Standard Evidence Supportive Evidence Any Evidence ir-Colitis (n = 339) 277/339 (81.7%) 275/339 (81.1%) 278/339 (82.0%) Non-ir-Colitis (n = 297) 129/297 (43.4%) 126/297 (42.4%) 130/297 (43.8%) No Colitis (n = 996) 106/996 (10.6%) 104/996 (10.4%) 107/996 (10.7%)

Background: In the last decade, a surge of advancements in and approvals of immunotherapies has revolutionized the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Even as an increasing number of immune checkpoint inhibitors and antibody–drug conjugates gained FDA approval for the remarkable response and durable remission they imparted to some patients, persistent challenges of primary and acquired resistance, imperfect predictive biomarkers, and toxicity remain. Methods: This review identifies and summarizes the most significant emerging clinical data being reported for immunotherapies in NSCLC. Results: We found that the most recent clinical trials are centered on antibody–drug conjugates, bispecific and multispecific antibodies, cellular therapies, and immunocytokines, while other ongoing trials continue to explore new monoclonal antibodies as well as a variety of immunotherapy modalities. Conclusions: Immunotherapy in NSCLC remains an area of rapid advancement, with the potential for further improvements in safety and efficacy as monotherapy and in multimodal approaches.

Abstract Background: Early-onset gastrointestinal (GI) cancers are increasing globally, yet the genomic basis for age-related differences across multiple tumor types remains poorly defined. We leveraged AACR Project GENIE v18.0 (N≈34,000 GI tumors) to characterize molecular distinctions by age in colorectal, pancreatic, small bowel, and anal cancers with sufficient early-onset representation. Methods: Clinical and genomic data were extracted and tumors classified into early-onset (&lt;50 years) and late-onset (≥50 years). Mutation frequencies were compared by cancer type and age group, focusing on recurrent drivers, DNA repair, Wnt signaling, RAS/MAPK, chromatin remodeling genes, and targetable alterations. Results: Early-onset colorectal cancer (N=5,724) showed increased Wnt/β-catenin pathway alterations: APC (+4.9%), TCF7L2 (+4.1%), and TP53 (+5.0%), while late-onset tumors (N=15,807) were enriched for BRAF (−5.4%), RNF43 (−1.9%), and GNAS (−1.1%), indicating divergent tumorigenic pathways. Early-onset pancreatic cancer (N=890) exhibited significantly lower frequencies of canonical drivers—KRAS (−24.7%), TP53 (−15.6%), CDKN2A (−6.9%), SMAD4 (−6.0%)—with enrichment of MEN1 (+3.5%), TSC2 (+3.0%), ATRX (+2.0%), DAXX (+1.9%), and CTNNB1 (+2.4%), consistent with fusion-driven, hereditary, and chromatin remodeling biology. Small bowel cancer (N=99) in early-onset patients demonstrated enrichment in DNA damage response and MAPK/RAS genes including BRCA2 (+7.2%), NF1 (+7.4%), FBXW7 (+8.8%), FLT4 (+6.5%), ARAF (+6.4%), and ALK (+5.1%), whereas late-onset tumors (N=538) were enriched for KDR (−5.1%) and MGA (−5.2%). Early-onset anal cancer (N=62) showed elevated MGA (+7.8%), WHSC1/NSD2 (+6.9%), PBRM1 (+6.2%), FANCA (+5.2%), ERCC5 (+6.2%), and MSH6 (+5.9%), highlighting chromatin remodeling and DNA repair pathways potentially related to HPV biology; late-onset tumors (N=464) had enrichment in ATM (−5.6%), PTEN (−5.5%), STK11 (−5.2%), APC (−5.2%), and KMT2C (−5.0%), reflecting age-associated genomic instability. Conclusions: This pan-GI age-stratified analysis reveals distinctive oncogenic programs in early-onset GI cancers characterized by Wnt/TP53-driven colorectal, fusion- and chromatin remodeling-driven pancreatic, DNA damage response/MAPK-driven small bowel, and chromatin-immune DDR signatures in anal cancers. These findings underscore the need for age-tailored precision oncology and support routine genomic profiling in early-onset GI malignancies to identify targetable alterations enriched in younger patients. Citation: AACR Project GENIE Consortium. AACR Project GENIE: Powering Precision Medicine Through an International Consortium. Cancer Discov. 2017;7(8):818-831. (Data: GENIE Release 18.0-public)Acknowledgement: AACR and Project GENIE registry Citation Format: Ahmed Abdelhakeem, Nency Ganatra, Dina Elantably, Tayo Adeoye, Nayef H. Abdel-Razeq, Mosalem M. Osama, Hani M. Babiker. Distinct age associated genomic landscapes in colorectal, pancreatic, small bowel, and anal cancers: A pan gastrointestinal analysis of 34,000 tumors from AACR Project GENIE v18.0 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2026; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2026 Apr 17-22; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2026;86(7 Suppl):Abstract nr 4105.

Abstract Background: PARP inhibitors are restricted to a subset of BRCA-associated cancers, but homologous recombination repair (HRR) deficiency signifies a broader genomic vulnerability that may extend therapeutic opportunities across diverse malignancies. We utilized AACR Project GENIE v18.0-public to define the pan-cancer prevalence of HRR gene alterations. Methods: Somatic mutation and clinical sample data from GENIE v18.0-public were analyzed. HRR genes included BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM, CHEK2, PALB2, RAD51B/C/D, RAD51L1, BARD1, BRIP1, and core FANC genes. HRR alteration rates were calculated by tumor type using unique samples; only de-identified aggregate results are reported. Results: Among 101,240 tumors, HRR gene alterations were frequent in multiple non-BRCA-associated cancers. Highest rates were seen in sialoblastoma (100%), large cell medulloblastoma (50%), malignant glomus tumor (50%), lung cancer (46.0%), infantile fibrosarcoma (42.9%), liver (40%), kidney (40%), non-melanoma skin (36.9%), colorectal (36.6%), melanocytoma (34.2%), biliary tract (33.3%), bladder (31.5%), and ovarian/fallopian tube (30.2%). Notably, lung, bladder, hepatobiliary, renal, gastrointestinal, and some sarcoma subtypes showed HRR mutation prevalence equal or higher than current PARP indications, yet lack FDA approval. Conclusions: HRR alterations are widespread across solid tumors, often surpassing rates in cancers eligible for PARP treatment. These findings support expanding tumor-agnostic HRR genomic testing beyond BRCA-linked malignancies and warrant prospective trials of PARP inhibitors in HRR-enriched tumor types such as lung, bladder, hepatobiliary, renal, gastrointestinal, and pediatric/rare cancers. Impact: Large-scale genomic profiling from AACR Project GENIE demonstrates that HRR gene alterations are common across diverse solid tumors, with prevalence in multiple cancer types surpassing those currently eligible for PARP inhibitor therapy. These findings support broad implementation of HRR genomic testing in routine molecular diagnostics and provide a rationale for expanding PARP inhibitor use beyond BRCA-associated malignancies. The data justify prospective tumor-agnostic clinical trials of PARP inhibitors in HRR-enriched cancers such as lung, bladder, hepatobiliary, renal, gastrointestinal, and select pediatric and rare tumors; this could transform therapeutic decision-making and accelerate development of synthetic lethality-based targeted therapies Citation: AACR Project GENIE Consortium. Cancer Discov. 2017;7(8):818-831 Acknowledgement: AACR and Project GENIE Citation Format: Ahmed Abdelhakeem, Nency Ganatra, Dina Elantably, Tayo Adeoye, Nayef H. Abdel-Razeq, Osama M. Mosalem, Hani M. Babiker. Pan cancer enrichment of homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations in 101,240 tumor samples from AACR Project GENIE: Implications for tumor-agnostic PARP inhibitor expansion [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2026; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2026 Apr 17-22; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2026;86(7 Suppl):Abstract nr 4106.