Jacobs, Nisha L.

Abstract Purpose: Aromatase inhibitor (AI)–associated musculoskeletal symptoms (AIMSS) are common and frequently lead to AI discontinuation. SNPs in candidate genes have been associated with AIMSS and AI discontinuation. E1Z11 is a prospective cohort study designed to validate the association between 10 SNPs and AI discontinuation due to AIMSS. Patients and Methods: Postmenopausal women with stage I to III hormone receptor–positive breast cancer received anastrozole 1 mg daily and completed patient-reported outcome measures to assess AIMSS (Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire) at baseline, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. We estimated that 40% of participants would develop AIMSS and 25% would discontinue AI treatment within 12 months. Enrollment of 1,000 women with a fixed number per racial stratum provided 80% power to detect an effect size of 1.5 to 4. SNPs were found in ESR1 (rs2234693, rs2347868, and rs9340835), CYP19A1 (rs1062033 and rs4646), TCL1A (rs11849538, rs2369049, rs7158782, and rs7159713), and HTR2A (rs2296972). Results: Of the 970 evaluable women, 43% developed AIMSS and 12% discontinued AI therapy within 12 months. Although more Black and Asian women developed AIMSS than White women (49% vs. 39%, P = 0.017; 50% vs. 39%, P = 0.004, respectively), the AI discontinuation rates were similar across groups. None of the SNPs were significantly associated with AIMSS or AI discontinuation in the overall population or in distinct cohorts. The OR for rs2296972 (HTR2A) approached significance for developing AIMSS. Conclusions: We were unable to prospectively validate candidate SNPs previously associated with AI discontinuation due to AIMSS. Future analyses will explore additional genetic markers, patient-reported outcome predictors of AIMSS, and differences by race.

12003 Background: AIMSS are common and frequently lead to early discontinuation of adjuvant AI therapy. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in candidate genes have been associated with AIMSS and AI discontinuation. The primary objective of E1Z11 was to validate previously identified associations between 10 specific SNPs in candidate genes and AI discontinuation due to AIMSS in a community-based, racially diverse cohort. Methods: Postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive stage I-III breast cancer enrolled onto a prospective multi-site cohort study, the majority through the NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP). Participants received anastrozole 1 mg oral daily, and completed patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at baseline, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. AIMSS was defined as >20% increase in Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score over baseline occurring within 1 year of AI therapy. We projected 40% would develop AIMSS and 25% would discontinue AI treatment within 1 year, informing a planned enrollment of 1000 women with a fixed number per strata (600 Caucasian, 200 African-American [AA] & 200 Asian) to provide 80% power to detect an effect size of 1.5-4. SNPs include ESR1 (rs2234693, rs2347868, rs9340835), CYP19A1 (rs1062033, rs4646), TCL1A (rs11849538, rs2369049, rs7158782, rs7159713), and HTR2A (rs2296972). Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) was evaluated within each racial subset. SNP genotypes were coded as additive effects on the log odds ratio by coding as 0, 1 or 2 for the count of the minor allele. A Cochran-Armitage trend test was used with a 1-sided alpha of 0.0025 (Bonferroni correction for 10 tests). Results: We enrolled 999 evaluable women (616 Caucasian, 184 AA, 199 Asian). Genotyping was successful in 974 (98%). AIMSS developed in 43%, and AI therapy was discontinued in 12% within 1 year. While more AA and Asians developed AIMSS compared to Caucasians (48% vs 38%, p=0.017; 50% vs 38%, p=0.004), AI discontinuation rates were similar across racial groups. HWE was satisfied for all SNPs at the 5% alpha level, except for TCL1A/rs11849538 (p=0.002) in the AA cohort. None of the 10 SNPs were significantly associated with AI discontinuation or development of AIMSS in the overall population, or in any of the 3 cohorts. Conclusions: Although AIMSS were more common in AA and Asians, AI discontinuation rates were similar in the 3 cohorts. We were unable to prospectively validate 10 SNPs in 4 genes previously associated with AI discontinuation due to AIMSS. Future analyses will include other predictors of AIMSS, PROs, and additional genetic markers for the entire cohort and by race. Support: NCI UG1CA189828, UG1CA233196, UG1CA233277, UG1CA233320, UG1CA233178, UG1CA233160, UG1CA232760, UG1CA233341, UG1CA233329, U10CA180821, UG1CA189821, UG1CA189830, U10CA180888, UG1CA189859, UG1CA189863, UG1CA189971. Clinical trial information: NCT01824836.

Abstract Background Hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) is the most common regorafenib-induced adverse event and is in need of effective prevention and palliation. Materials and Methods The Regorafenib Dose Optimization Study (ReDOS), a four-arm, previously published trial with a 1:1:1:1 randomization scheme, was analyzed in a manner in keeping with the original protocol to assess whether clobetasol 0.05% cream (a corticosteroid) applied to the palms and soles twice per day for 8 weeks was more effective when prescribed preemptively (before the development of HFSR) versus reactively (after the development of HFSR). Patients were assessed during the first two cycles of regorafenib. Results Sixty-one patients received preemptive clobetasol, and 55 received reactive clobetasol. Groups were balanced on demographics. Over the first two cycles, no evidence of HFSR occurred in 30% with preemptive clobetasol versus 13% with reactive clobetasol (p = .03). During the first cycle, 54% and 45% of patients had no HFSR with preemptive and reactive clobetasol, respectively (p = .35). During the second cycle, 33% and 15% had no HFSR with preemptive and reactive clobetasol, respectively (p = .02). During the second cycle, rates of grade 1, 2, and 3 HFSR were 30%, 8%, and 3%, respectively, with preemptive clobetasol and 43%, 18%, and 7%, respectively, with reactive clobetasol (p = .12). Patient-reported outcomes showed HFSR compromised nearly all activities of daily living with worse quality of life in patients who received reactive versus preemptive clobetasol. No clobetasol-induced adverse events were reported. Conclusion Preemptive clobetasol might lessen regorafenib-induced hand-foot reactions compared with reactive therapy. Further confirmatory studies are needed in a larger patient cohort. Implications for Practice Regorafenib causes hand-foot skin reactions. Preemptive clobetasol, a high-potency topical corticosteroid, appears to lessen the severity of this adverse event. Although further study is needed, the favorable adverse event profile of this intervention might prompt clinicians to discuss this option with their patients.

11586 Background: Hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) is the most common regorafenib adverse event. However, no intervention has demonstrated efficacy in preventing or palliating this adverse event, short of modulating the regorafenib dose. Methods: The Regorafenib Dose Optimization Study (ReDOS) was a randomized trial ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02368886 ); here we describe an a priori secondary analysis of ReDOS with the goal of assessing whether clobetasol 0.05% cream (a potent corticosteroid) applied to the palms and soles twice per day is more effective when prescribed pre-emptively (before the development of HFSR) versus reactively (after the development of HFSR). Patients were assessed during the 1st 2 cycles of regorafenib. Results: Among 116 evaluable patients, 61 received pre-emptive clobetasol, and 55 reactive clobetasol. Baseline demographics were comparable between groups. During the 1st regorafenib cycle, 46% and 52% of patients developed HFSR with pre-emptive and reactive clobetasol, respectively (p = 0.52). However, during the 2nd cycle, 56% (of 47 total patients) and 80% (of 41 total patients), developed this toxicity with pre-emptive and reactive clobetasol, respectively (p = 0.02). Of note, during the 2nd cycle, rates of grade 1,2, and 3 HFSR were 40%, 11%, and 4% (pre-emptive) and 45%, 25%, and 10% (reactive) (p = 0.07). A sensitivity analysis to examine rates of no HFSR over all 2 regorafenib cycles showed that no HFSR occurred in 33% (of 61 total patients) with pre-emptive clobetasol versus 15% (of 55 total patients) with reactive clobetasol (p = 0.02). Patient-reported outcomes showed HFSR compromised activities of daily living, including getting dressed, preparing meals, walking, and even driving, with seemingly worse descriptive outcomes in patients who received reactive therapy. No adverse events from clobetasol were reported. Conclusions: Compared to reactive therapy, pre-emptive topical clobetasol might lessen regorafenib-induced HFSR. Clinical trial information: NCT02368886.

Abstract Background: The prognostic significance of lymphocyte counts and immune status has been carefully examined in lymphoid malignancies, but the importance of the lymphocyte count in chronic myeloid neoplasms is less clear. In a recent analysis of MDS cases associated with deletion of chromosome 5q (Holtan SG et al AmJHem 2008 Epub 12Jun), we observed that an ALC >1.2 × 109 cells/L at diagnosis is independently associated with improved survival. The prognostic value of ALC in MDS not associated with del(5q) is unknown. Methods: We reviewed the medical records of patients without del(5q) diagnosed with MDS at our institution over a 10-year period and gathered data on complete blood counts and leukocyte differentials, bone marrow findings, and clinical course. Inclusion criteria included diagnosis within 6 months prior to initial consultation at our institution and <20% marrow blasts. Patients were classified according to the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) and the WHO-classification based Prognostic Scoring System (WPSS). Results: The median age of the 503 included patients (360 M, 143 F) was 69 years (range 20–91). Median follow-up was 14 months, and 65% of patients were known to have died with an overall median survival of 36 months. Cytogenetic results as classified by the IPSS were favorable in 326 (65%) patients, intermediate in 112 (22%), and poor in 65 (13%). Both IPSS and WPSS accurately stratified patients, but the WPSS was better at identifying the lowest and highest risk patients. Survival by IPSS risk group was as follows: low-risk disease (n=95, median survival 41.8 months), intermediate-1 (n=285, 23.6 months), 106 with intermediate-2 (n=106, 14.1 months), and high-risk (n=17, 8.05 months). WPSS risk groups included very low risk (n=87; median survival 71.9 months), low risk (n=149, 28.8 months), intermediate risk (n=85, 19.3 months), high risk (n=143, 14.4 months), and very high risk (n=39, 8.8 months). In univariate analysis, factors associated with poorer survival included advanced age (p = 0.0012), higher-risk WHO subtype (p<0.0001), increased marrow blast percentage (p<0.0001), poor-risk karyotype (p<0.0001), higher IPSS score or WPSS score (p<0.0001), lower hemoglobin (p<0.0001), lower MCV (p=0.03), lower ALC (p=0.001), and lower platelets (p=0.001). Factors not associated with survival included sex and ANC. In a multivariate model including only baseline CBC parameters, hemoglobin >10 g/dL (p < 0.001), MCV >96 fl (p = 0.0493), ALC >1.2 × 109/L (p = 0.0449), and platelet count >100 × 109/L (p = 0.0046) were associated with improved survival. A high baseline ALC also maintained independent prognostic significance in a multivariate model against the IPSS (RR 0.746, 95% CI: 0.598, 0.933, p = 0.0099), and the raw WPSS score (RR 0.791, 95% CI 0.633, 0.987, p=0.037) but not the WPSS group (p=0.0794). There was no significant difference in the distribution of IPSS scores between the ALC >1.2 × 109 cells/L and the ALC ≤ 1.2 × 109 cells/L groups, although there were significantly more WPSS high risk patients in the low baseline ALC group (p = 0.0163). The creation of an ALC-modified IPSS score by adding 0.5 point for an ALC ≤ 1.2 × 109 cells/L resulted in a significant increase in median overall survival of the low risk group (41.8 months versus 66.1 months, p < 0.001, Figure 1). Conclusion: ALC is a novel and easily obtained prognostic marker in MDS that provides information complementary to existing prognostic scoring systems. Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier curves based upon IPSS (a) and the ALC-modified IPSS (b), where 0.5 point was added for an ALC ≤ 1.2 × 109 cells/L. Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier curves based upon IPSS (a) and the ALC-modified IPSS (b), where 0.5 point was added for an ALC ≤ 1.2 × 109 cells/L.

611 Background: Regorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor with survival benefit in refractory mCRC patients (pts). Toxicities such as Palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (PPES), fatigue and hypertension (HTN) have limited its use. Despite absence of supportive data, various dosing or interval scheduling have been implemented into clinical practice. Methods: A randomized phase II study of regorafenib dose-escalation (Arm A: 80 mg/day, weekly dose escalation if no significant drug-related toxicities, up to 160 mg/day) vs. standard dose (Arm B: 160 mg/day) in pts with mCRC for 21 days of a 28-day cycle. Pts were randomized 1:1:1:1 to arms A1 and B1 (Pre-emptive Clobetasol for PPES); A2 and B2 (Reactive Clobetasol). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who completed 2 cycles of treatment and initiated the 3rd in Arm A (Pooled A1 + A2) vs. Arm B (Pooled B1 + B2). Superiority for Arm A was to be declared if the one-sided p-value calculated using Fisher’s exact method was less than 0.2. Results: From June 2015 to June 2017, 123 pts were randomized with 116 (A = 54, B = 62) evaluable for the primary endpoint. Demographic data were well balanced with overall median age of 61yrs (range: 29-81), M/F (61/39%) and ECOG PS 0/1 (37/63%) and KRAS MT/WT/UNK (47/44/9%).The study met its primary endpoint with 43% of pts on Arm A initiating the 3rd vs. only 25% of pts Arm B [one-sided p-value 0.028]. Median Overall Survival (OS) was improved in Arm A vs. Arm B (9.0 mos vs. 5.9 mos; p = 0.094). Median Progression Free Survival (PFS) was 2.5 mos for Arm A vs. 2.0 mos for Arm B (p=0.553). Overall rates of grade 3/4 toxicity were more favorable for Arm A vs. Arm B (% PPES 15 vs. 16, HTN 7 vs. 15 and fatigue 13 vs. 18, respectively). Multiple QOL parameters were improved in A vs. B primarily at week 2 of the first cycle. Conclusion: A strategy with weekly dose escalation of regorafenib from 80 mg to 160 mg/day was found to be superior to a starting dose of 160 mg/day. These results establish a new standard for optimizing regorafenib dosing. Further data on outcomes of preemptive vs. reactive clobetasol strategies are undergoing analysis and will be presented later. Clinical trial information: NCT02368886.