Leal, Alexis D.

e20605 Background: Intravenous (IV) fosaprepitant is a potent antiemetic, commonly used in patients receiving chemotherapy. The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence of IV fosaprepitant-associated infusion site adverse events (ISAEs) among a cohort of breast cancer patients receiving doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) chemotherapy at Mayo Rochester. Methods: A retrospective review of electronic medical record (EMR) data was performed for all patients who were initiated on AC chemotherapy from January 2011 to April 2012. Data collected from the EMR included baseline demographics, antiemetic regimen, documentation of ISAEs and type of IV access (peripheral vs. central). Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation or percentages) were summarized overall and by type of IV access and initially administered antiemetic. Results: 148 patients were included, with a median age of 54 years (range 28-76). 98 patients initially received IV fosaprepitant; 44 oral aprepitant; 6 neither. 132 (89%) initially had peripheral IV access and 16 (11%) had central venous access. Overall, 33 patients (34%) experienced an IV fosaprepitant associated ISAE including: erythema (n=22), pain (n=26), swelling (n=12), infusion site hives (n=5), extravasation (n=4), deep venous thrombosis (n=3), superficial thrombosis (n=7), phlebitis/thrombophlebitis (n=5), venous discoloration (n=1), venous engorgement (n=1), venous hardening/induration (n=4) and local scarring (n=1). Only 1 patient (2%) experienced an oral aprepitant associated ISAE, which was infusion site pain. This patient had previously had a fosaprepitant associated ISAE at the same site. All experienced ISAEs occurred in patients with peripheral IV access. Conclusions: The incidence and severity of ISAEs associated with IV fosaprepitant administration among a group of patients receiving doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide chemotherapy is significant and is appreciably higher than what has been noted in other reports. The higher incidence observed is likely related to the predominance of peripheral venous access used in the studied cohort.

e17538 Background: Adherence to guideline-consistent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prophylaxis is suboptimal. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the magnitude of compliance to institutional guideline-directed antiemetic prophylaxis using a computerized physician order entry system at a single tertiary care institution. A nurse survey was also performed to evaluate how oncology practices, within a cooperative group, manage clinician orders for the prevention of CINV. Methods: The electronic medical records of 100 consecutive patients were evaluated. The primary endpoint was the incidence of compliance to provide all aspects of institutional guideline-directed antiemetic prophylaxis for acute (Day 1) and delayed (Days 2-4) CINV for patients receiving high, moderate, low, and minimally-emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC/MEC/LEC/MinEC). Noncompliance was declared if a recommended antiemetic was not prescribed per the guidelines or if additional antiemetics were prescribed. Descriptive analyses were performed on the convenience sample. Logistic regression was applied to determine the association of potential factors with noncompliance. Results: The incidence of compliance on Days 1-4 was 94%. Half of the noncompliant events occurred on Day 1 alone and involved the omission of pre-chemotherapy prochlorperazine in patients receiving LEC (3 of 6, 50%). There was a high-degree of compliance to institutional guidelines for delayed CINV (97%). Patients receiving doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide were numerically less likely to receive institutional guideline-directed antiemetic prophylaxis, compared to patients receiving other chemotherapy regimens (OR: 0.24 (0.04, 1.36), p-value: 0.05). No other factors were significantly predictive for compliance. The nurse survey demonstrated significant variability amongst the involved institutions, with regards to antiemetic prescribing practices. Conclusions: Computerized physician order entry is associated with impressive adherence to clinician prescribing practices, according to institutional guideline-directed antiemetic prophylaxis, for preventing acute and delayed CINV.

9057 Background: The incidence of CAM use among patients with cancer is higher when compared to the general population. However, there are few studies examining CAM use in NHL survivors, and limited data are available regarding beliefs in CAM. This study was conducted to examine the prevalence of CAM use in NHL, define CAM beliefs among NHL survivors, and explore differences between patients with indolent and aggressive lymphoma. Methods: Newly diagnosed lymphoma patients were prospectively enrolled within 9 months of diagnosis in the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource from 2002-2008. NHL patients who completed the 3-year post diagnosis questionnaire, which includes questions regarding CAM use and beliefs, were included in this study. Chi-squared tests and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to assess the association of CAM use with prognostic and demographic factors. Results: 719 patients were included with a median age of 63 years (range 22-92). 53% were male. Overall, 636 (89%) reported ever using CAM. 78% of patients used vitamins and 54% alternative therapies (chiropractic (36%) and massage therapy (24%)). Among CAM users, 141 (22%) believe CAM can assist the body to heal, 123 (19%) believe CAM can relieve cancer symptoms, 115 (18%) believe CAM use gives a feeling of control, 106 (17%) believe CAM can boost immunity, 24 (4%) believe CAM can cure cancer, and 35 (6%) believe CAM can prevent the spread of cancer. Female gender was associated with increased overall CAM use (p<0.0001) as well as use of vitamins (p<0.0001), herbal supplements (p=0.006) and alternative therapy (p=0.0002) specifically for cancer. Older age was also associated with increased vitamin use (p=0.005) and decreased herbal supplements use (p=0.008). There was no significant difference in overall CAM use between those with follicular lymphoma grades I-II (n=195, 91%) and non-relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (n=151, 87%), although massage therapy was utilized more often by FL survivors (29% versus 18%, p=0.005). Conclusions: CAM modalities are used by the majority of NHL survivors (89%). The assessment of CAM use and education regarding potential harms is imperative for the NHL survivor.

Abstract Background Performance status (PS) is a measurement of a patient’s functional capabilities and has been validated as a prognostic indicator in patients with cancer. This study was conducted to compare patient and physician-rated Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) PS to determine the incidence of inter-observer variability and identify determinants of PS disagreement among a cohort of patients with hematologic malignancy. Methods Newly diagnosed patients with leukemia and lymphoma were prospectively enrolled in the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) from 2002-2008. At diagnosis, patients and their physicians were asked to independently rate ECOG PS. Those who reported PS within 1 month of diagnosis were included in this analysis. Chi-squared and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to assess the association between PS disagreement and prognostic or demographic factors; Cox proportional hazards models and c-statistics were used to evaluate the association between PS and overall survival. Results 1269 patients were included with a median age of 61 years (range 18-91). Of these, 58% were male; 275 had chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), 127 had Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), and 867 had non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Overall, 829 (65%) patients and physicians rated PS the same. Age greater than 60 was a significant predictor of disagreement overall (p<0.001), as well as in CLL (p=0.014) and NHL (p=0.004), but not in HL (p=0.65). We found that across disease subtypes, the level of disagreement increased with more aggressive disease. This finding was significant in those with HL (p=0.027) and NHL (p<0.0001) as International Prognostic Score (IPS) and International Prognostic Index (IPI) increased respectively. In CLL, the trend for Rai stage was suggestive but not statistically significant (p=0.27). The incidence of disagreement was highest among patients with NHL (37%), with a higher percentage of disagreement among those with aggressive (45%) vs. non-aggressive (25%) subtypes (p<0.001). Disagreement was lower in patients with CLL (27%) and HL (33%). There were no significant associations between patient gender or education level and PS rating among subtypes or overall. Patient and physician-rated PS were both significant predictors of overall survival in univariate models and also adjusted for subtype and subtype specific risk score. The prognostic ability for PS was similar for both patient rated and physician-rated assessment overall (c-statistic=0.76 for both patient and physician rated PS) and in those with HL (c-statistic=0.85 for both patient and physician rated PS) and NHL (c-statistic=0.76 for both patient and physician rated PS). However, patient-rated PS was better for prognostication in CLL (c-statistic=0.75; p<0.0001), compared to physician-rated PS (c-statistic=0.67; p=0.002). Conclusions Patients with hematological malignancies and their physicians do not always rate PS the same, particularly in patients who are older or have more advanced or aggressive disease. These findings suggest the need for physicians to communicate with patients when determining PS, as PS is a strong predictor of survival. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

3558 Background: Anti-programmed death-1 (PD-1) antibodies have been shown to be effective in the treatment of dMMR CRC. We describe an updated analysis from a cohort of 19 patients (pts) with dMMR CRC treated with pembrolizumab. Methods: Pts were identified through review of the Mayo Clinic electronic medical record (EMR) and chemotherapy administration records from May 2015 through January 2017. All pts with dMMR CRC who received treatment with pembrolizumab were included. The EMR was reviewed to identify demographic, clinical, pathologic and treatment details. Overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS) and disease control rate (DCR = CR+PR+SD) are reported. Time to event analysis was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Nineteen pts were included in this analysis; median age at diagnosis was 48.6 years (range 25-93); 53% were female. Most primary tumors were right sided (n = 12; 63%), 6 (32%) were left sided and 1 (5%) was a tumor of unknown primary within the bowel. Twelve (63%) pts received ≥2 lines of therapy prior to pembrolizumab (range 1-4). Five pts received 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks, 11 received 200 mg/day every 3 weeks and 2 pts received 10 mg/kg (1 every 2 weeks, the other every 3 weeks). The most common alterations identified were loss of MLH1 (11/15) and PMS2 (12/15); 4 pts had germline mutations (mut) identified. KRAS mut was identified in 6/16 pts and 2 pts had BRAF mut. Three pts had MLH1 hypermethylation. Median number of cycles of pembrolizumab was 8 (range 1-35+), with 13 (68%) pts receiving ≥6 cycles. DCR at first assessment was 68%, with 5% CR, 47% PR and 16% SD. Median follow-up from diagnosis was 29 months (95% CI 18-42). Median OS was 103 months (95% CI 85-103); 12-month OS was 89%. Median OS from PD-1 therapy was 16.1 months (95% CI 16-NR); 12-month OS from PD-1 therapy was 79%. Median PFS was NR (95% CI 5-NR); 12-month PFS was 54%. At time of analysis, 9 pts remain on PD-1 therapy; 5 pts have died; 3 have received subsequent therapy. Conclusions: Anti-PD1 blockade with pembrolizumab can provide long lasting benefit in dMMR mCRC, even in heavily pretreated pts.

3554 Background: There is considerable variability in the outcomes between second line (SL) trials in mCRC. The aim of this analysis is to compare the outcomes of patients (pts) with mCRC treated either on SAFL, with protocol defined SL treatment, or DSLT. Methods: Individual pt data was available on pts with mCRC enrolled in 1 of 10 trials (7 DSLT, 3 SAFL) in the ARCAD database. Regimens included FOLFIRI, FOLFOX, and irinotecan (IRI), since pts did not receive biologic agents in SL on SAFL. For pts on a SAFL, PFS and OS were defined as time from initiation of SL treatment to second progression (SP)/death and death, respectively. Descriptive statistics and multivariable Cox models were used to assess differences in PFS and OS. Results: 5,076 pts were included; 63% were male; median age was 62. See Table for treatment details. Pts treated on SAFL had shorter OS (0.7-1.5 months (mos>) shorter) and PFS (0.6-2.6 mos shorter), compared to those treated on DSLT. These findings were statistically significant and differences in OS did not attenuate after adjustment for age, gender, and prior treatment. PFS differences in FOLFOX became insignificant after multivariable adjustment. Conclusions: There are modest differences in both PFS and OS between pts with mCRC treated on SAFL and those on DSLT, suggesting differences in these pt populations. Caution is needed when applying these data to pts, as we were unable to control for potential confounders (ECOG PS, number and sites of metastases) at initiation of SL in SAFL, which may impact outcomes. [Table: see text]

Purpose Molecular diagnostic testing has become an integral part of the evaluation of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Expanded mutational testing, such as next-generation sequencing (NGS), often identifies mutations with unclear clinical or prognostic implications. One such example is BRAF mutations that occur outside of codon 600 (non-V600 BRAF mutations). Methods We conducted this multicenter, retrospective cohort study to characterize the clinical, pathologic, and survival implications of non-V600 BRAF mutations in metastatic CRC. We pooled patients in whom non-V600 BRAF mutations were identified from NGS databases at three large molecular genetics reference laboratories. Results A total of 9,643 patients with metastatic CRC underwent NGS testing. We identified 208 patients with non-V600 BRAF mutations, which occurred in 2.2% of all patients tested and accounted for 22% of all BRAF mutations identified. Cancers with non-V600 BRAF mutations, compared with cancers with V600E BRAF (V600E BRAF) mutations, were found in patients who were significantly younger (58 v 68 years, respectively), fewer female patients (46% v 65%, respectively), and patients who had fewer high-grade tumors (13% v 64%, respectively) or right-sided primary tumors (36% v 81%, respectively). Median overall survival was significantly longer in patients with non-V600 BRAF-mutant metastatic CRC compared with those with both V600E BRAF-mutant and wild-type BRAF metastatic CRC (60.7 v 11.4 v 43.0 months, respectively; P < .001). In multivariable analysis, non-V600 BRAF mutation was independently associated with improved overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.18; P < .001). Conclusion Non-V600 BRAF mutations occur in approximately 2.2% of patients with metastatic CRC and define a clinically distinct subtype of CRC with an excellent prognosis.