Patel, Ansy

e17027 Background: Guidelines recommend active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer and definitive therapy for high-risk disease. We evaluated national patterns of risk-misaligned care and the survival consequences of undertreatment. Methods: National Cancer Database prostate cancer cases diagnosed from 2010–2022 were analyzed. Low-risk disease was defined as clinical T1–T2, Grade Group 1, and PSA < 10; overtreatment was definitive treatment vs active surveillance or no treatment. High-risk disease was defined as Grade Group ≥4, PSA ≥20, or clinical T3–T4; undertreatment was no definitive local therapy or incomplete definitive therapy. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated factors associated with misalignment. Overall survival (OS) among high-risk patients was assessed using multivariable Cox regression. Results: Among low-risk patients (N = 124,562), overtreatment occurred in 40% of cases. Overtreatment was more common among young men (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.982; p < 0.001) and less common at academic centers (aOR 0.414; p = 0.015). Compared with White men, odds of overtreatment were lower among Black men (aOR 0.946; p = 0.002) and Asian men (aOR 0.827; p < 0.001), with additional variation by education and region (all p < 0.001). Among high-risk patients (N = 318,532), undertreatment affected 27.3% of patients and was more common among older men (aOR 1.061; p < 0.001). Compared with White men, undertreatment was higher among Black men (aOR 1.479; p < 0.001) and lower among Asian patients (aOR 0.863; p < 0.001) (overall race p < 0.001). Compared with private insurance, undertreatment was higher in Medicaid (aOR 2.038; p < 0.001) and uninsured patients (aOR 2.649; p < 0.001), and slightly lower with Medicare (aOR 0.931; p < 0.001) (overall insurance p < 0.001). Multiple comorbidities were associated with higher undertreatment (≥2 vs 0: aOR 1.252; p < 0.001). Facility type was not independently associated (p = 0.490), while region remained significant (overall p < 0.001). In the survival cohort (high risk) (N = 338,919), undertreatment was associated with substantially worse OS (HR 2.745, 95% CI 2.706–2.784; p < 0.001), adjusted for age (HR 1.056; p < 0.001), race (p = 0.001), insurance (p < 0.001), comorbidity (p < 0.001), income (overall p < 0.001), education (overall p < 0.001), and facility region (overall p < 0.001). Conclusions: Low-risk overtreatment remains common nationwide and varies across patient and health-system factors. In high-risk disease, undertreatment affects over one-quarter of patients and disproportionately impacts Black men and those with Medicaid or no insurance. Undertreatment confers a nearly threefold mortality hazard (adjusted HR 2.75; p < 0.001), highlighting a major national quality gap and the urgent need for system-level interventions to ensure equitable, guideline-concordant delivery of definitive therapy.

e16586 Background: Guideline-discordant care disproportionately affects racial minorities, uninsured, and underinsured patients, yet prior studies lack quantification of absolute survival time lost. We evaluated equity-adjusted survival penalties from non-adherence to guideline-concordant therapy in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). Methods: From the National Cancer Database, we identified patients with non metastatic muscle invasive bladder cancer (cT2 to T4a, N0 or N1, M0). Overall survival was defined from diagnosis to death or last contact. Guideline-concordant therapy was defined as radical cystectomy (± perioperative systemic therapy) or trimodality therapy (definitive bladder radiotherapy with chemotherapy); all other patterns were classified as discordant. Of 55,873 eligible patients, 28,025 received concordant therapy (27,401 cystectomy; 524 trimodality therapy) and 27,848 received discordant careInverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance demographic, socioeconomic, facility, tumor, and temporal covariates. We analyzed survival using weighted Kaplan-Meier and Cox models censored at 36 and 60 months. Equity-adjusted survival penalties were calculated as the difference between observed survival and counterfactual survival predicted from concordant-only models. Restricted mean survival time losses were extrapolated to years lost per 1,000 patients. Results: Guideline concordance was associated with significantly improved survival (36-month HR 0.64; 60-month HR 0.68; both p < 0.01). Among concordant modalities, radical cystectomy conferred an early survival advantage over trimodality therapy at 36 months (HR 0.23; p < 0.05) which dissipated by 60 months (HR 0.53; p > 0.05). Survival penalties were most severe for vulnerable populations. At 36 months, uninsured patients incurred a 0.90-month survival penalty (75.0 life-years lost per 1,000 patients). By 60 months, penalties widened: uninsured patients lost 1.94 months (161.7 life-years/1,000), Filipino patients lost 1.53 months (127.0/1,000), Medicaid beneficiaries lost 0.97 months (80.8/1,000), and patients at community cancer programs lost 0.21 months (54.1/1,000). Conclusions: In this national cohort of 55,873 patients, guideline concordance reduced the propensity-weighted risk of death by 32% to 36% at 3 and 5 years. However, non-adherence results in substantial absolute survival losses for marginalized groups. By quantifying these "survival penalties," we demonstrate that targeting the factors underlying discordance offers a direct opportunity to reduce inequities and achieve measurable population-level survival gains in MIBC.

7041 Background: CD20×CD3 bispecific antibodies and CD19-directed CAR T-cell therapies are increasingly used in relapsed/refractory DLBCL. CAR T therapy is associated with higher rates of CRS,ICANS, and cytopenias, whereas bispecific antibodies are often perceived as less toxic and more outpatient-friendly. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the TriNetX Global Collaborative Network. Adult patients with DLBCL treated with bispecific antibodies (glofitamab, epcoritamab) were compared with those receiving commercial CAR T-cell therapy (tisa, liso, axi). Propensity score matching was performed on demographics, comorbidities, baseline laboratory values, and corticosteroid exposure, yielding 468 patients per cohort. Outcomes included CRS, ICANS, severe neutropenia (ANC <500/µL), and thrombocytopenia (platelets <50×10³/µL), as well as hospitalization and ICU admission at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Overall survival (OS) was assessed using Kaplan–Meier analysis with log-rank testing. Results: After matching, CAR T therapy was associated with significantly higher immune-mediated toxicity. CRS occurred more frequently with CAR T at 1 month (37.4% vs 22.4%), 3 months (39.3% vs 27.6%), 6 months (40.6% vs 28.8%), and 12 months (41.2% vs 29.7%) (all p<0.001). ICANS was also more common with CAR T across all timepoints (1 month: 10.5% vs 4.9%; 12 months: 12.6% vs 7.5%). Severe neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were markedly more frequent in the CAR T cohort, with neutropenia affecting 66.7% vs 12.8% at 1 month and 71.6% vs 32.7% at 12 months (all p<0.001). Despite higher toxicity, healthcare utilization was comparable. Hospitalization rates were similar between groups at 1 and 3 months (61.8% vs 66.7% and 67.1% vs 75.9%), and ICU admission rates did not differ meaningfully at any timepoint. Importantly, overall survival consistently favored CAR T therapy. Survival differences emerged early and persisted over time, with lower mortality in the CAR T cohort at 1 month (2.1% vs 9.0%), 3 months (7.7% vs 18.6%), 6 months (15.8% vs 26.7%), and 12 months (26.5% vs 35.3%), corresponding to significantly improved OS by log-rank testing at all timepoints (p<0.001). Conclusions: In this large, real-world, propensity-matched analysis of relapsed/refractory DLBCL, CAR T-cell therapy was associated with substantially higher rates of CRS, ICANS, and severe cytopenias compared with bispecific antibodies. However, these toxicities did not translate into higher hospitalization or ICU utilization. Despite a less favorable early toxicity profile, CAR T therapy conferred a consistent and clinically meaningful survival advantage from early to late follow-up. Early toxicity alone should not preclude CAR T referral in appropriate candidates, underscoring the need for optimized patient selection, sequencing strategies, and supportive care.

590 Background: The landmark FAST-Forward trial demonstrated that ultra-hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation with 26 Gy in 5 fractions over 1 week was non-inferior to 40 Gy in 15 fractions for local control (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.38–1.16), with similar normal tissue effects at 5 years. In response, major international guidelines incorporated 26 Gy in 5 fractions as a standard approach or recommended option for selected patients. Despite robust randomized evidence and guideline endorsement, U.S. real-world adoption patterns and equity of uptake across patient populations remain incompletely characterized. This study evaluated national trends in 5-fraction breast radiotherapy and sociodemographic differences from 2020 to 2023. Methods: The National Cancer Database radiotherapy fractionation fields were used to identify radiotherapy (RT) courses with evaluable fraction counts, and a binary indicator for 5-fraction RT (yes/no) was created. Temporal trends by diagnosis year (2020–2023) were assessed, and associations between 5-fraction RT and sociodemographic factors (primary insurance, urban or rural status, neighborhood income quartile, and race) were examined using chi-square testing. Results: Among 536,783 RT courses with complete data from 2020 to 2023, use of 5-fraction RT increased substantially over time: 4.3% in 2020, 8.1% in 2021, 12.7% in 2022, and 17.4% in 2023, resulting in an overall adoption rate of 10.7% (p < 0.001). In the subset eligible for fractionation (5, 15–16, 25–28 fractions; N = 31,448), 5-fraction RT accounted for 11.7% and differed significantly by insurance type (p < 0.001): Medicare 17.4%, Private 7.6%, Medicaid 5.9%, and Uninsured 6.9%. Geographic variation was notable (p < 0.001), ranging from 7.3% in mid-size metropolitan areas (250,000–1 million population) to 17.7%–18.1% in more remote or non-adjacent areas; large metropolitan areas (≥1 million) had 12.8% uptake. Neighborhood income showed a gradient (p < 0.001): 10.1% in the lowest quartile compared to 12.5% in the highest. Race was also associated with uptake (p < 0.001), with lower use among Black patients compared to White patients (9.4% vs 12.2%). Conclusions: In routine U.S. practice, adoption of 5-fraction breast RT increased rapidly from 2020 to 2023, with the most pronounced growth after 2021, reflecting the swift translation of trial evidence into clinical practice. However, uptake varies by insurance, geography, income, and race, indicating that diffusion is not uniform. Given the potential benefits of ultra-hypofractionation in reducing treatment burden and supporting timely completion, targeted implementation strategies, such as provider education, reimbursement alignment, and facility-level operational support, may be necessary to ensure equitable access as 5-fraction regimens become more widely adopted and potentially become the standard of care.