Tevaarwerk, Amyé

Physician burnout is prevalent and contributes to the high number of physicians choosing to leave clinical practice. The field of hematology-oncology (HO) poses unique challenges for trainees and staff physicians who have to deliver bad news, manage complicated psychosocial situations, deal with the limited ability to prolong life, and juggle multiple time-sensitive demands from coworkers, patients, and families. Furthermore, they often face the death of their patients, along with its emotional toll on patients’ families and the physicians themselves. Burnout in HO is prevalent and increasing, with many physicians reporting in several studies that they plan to reduce working hours and/or retire early. The demand for hematologists and oncologists is rapidly rising, but in the setting of a worsening HO workforce shortage and an increasing number of patients with cancer. Therefore, it is imperative to develop strategies to mitigate or address burnout in HO physicians to improve well-being and prevent attrition. Herein, we describe risk factors and causes of physician burnout in HO trainees and practicing physicians in the United States, with a focus on institutional and individual strategies to address this issue. We also provide recommendations to address the burnout epidemic from the HO standpoint.

431 Background: The National Adult and Influenza Immunization Summit (NAIIS) promoted clinical subspecialist efforts toward vaccination assessment and recommendation as one strategy to increase adult vaccination rates. Problem Statement: Between August 1, 2022, and May 31, 2023, 0% (n=0/100) of patients seen in medical oncology at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN) and receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer had a documented comprehensive vaccination status assessment by breast medical oncology staff. Aim Statements: (1) To increase the rate of comprehensive vaccination status assessment performed by breast medical oncology staff from 0% to 75% of patients receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer by September 2024. (2) To increase the rate of documented vaccination recommendation for patients who were not up to date with recommended vaccinations from 0% to 50% by September 2024. Methods: We deployed multiple interventions including physician and nurse education; development of patient education materials; and a standard operating procedure (SOP) for vaccination status assessment, vaccination recommendation, and vaccine-related documentation. Our SOP utilized an Epic SmartPhrase with following elements: (1) SmartLink that autopopulated overdue vaccinations, (2) hidden tip text permitting the use to hyperlink to Health Maintenance, (3) SmartLists that captured nurse actions (e.g., provided education) and encounter outcomes (e.g., patient endorsed plans to receive vaccinations), and (4) scripting for immunization education. Results: Multi-faceted interventions were associated with an improvement in the documented rate of comprehensive vaccination status assessment from 0% (n=0/100) to 82.8% (n=101/122). Most patients (77.2%, n=78/101) were not up to date with recommended vaccinations. Recommendations for appropriate vaccinations were made for 80.8% (n=63/78) of patients who were not up to date. Only 19.2% (n=15/78) of patients who were not up to date endorsed intention to receive missing/recommended vaccines. Counterbalance: Nurses were able to assess vaccination status and make appropriate recommendations in less than 5 minutes per patient. There was no difference in nurse-reported workflow burden related to vaccination status assessment, recommendation, or documentation after intervention. Conclusions: This quality project aligned our breast medical oncology practice with vaccination-related care promoted by NAIIS. We increased rates of vaccination status assessment and vaccination recommendations without impacting nurse-reported workflow burden. Medical subspecialty clinic engagement in vaccination efforts is feasible.

426 Background: Testing for DPYD gene variations prior to administration of fluoropyrimidines ([FP] e.g. 5-FU or capecitabine) can determine if patients are at risk of significant toxicity and may benefit from dose reduction or elimination of chemotherapy. Barriers to testing include lack of recommendations in US guidelines for routine DPYD testing, absence of insurance coverage, and limitations in provider support. We designed an electronic health record (EHR)-based intervention to support shared decision-making (SDM) between providers and patients regarding DPYD testing. Methods: We built an EHR alert identifying all patients initiating FP without DPYD testing. The alert fired to remind providers upon signing FP. Clinical decision support (CDS) was included in the alert to help with DPYD testing selection along with an educational note template containing the incidence of DPYD deficiency, rationale for testing, test costs, and turnaround time. Interactions with the EHR were recorded to determine why providers declined ordering pharmacogenomic testing. Testing rates and results for patients initiating FP were collected from the EHR. Finally, providers were surveyed to determine the impact of the alert on conversations with patients as well as the utility of the embedded CDS and educational note template. Results: Within the first 8 months after alert activation, 34 patients completed DPYD testing of 444 starting FP (testing rate of 7.7%) vs the baseline testing rate in the 3 months prior to alert go-live of 6.8% (p = 0.86 via chi-squared analysis, two-tailed). Of the 34 patients, 5 were intermediate DPYD metabolizers. Reasons for alert dismissal per provider selection were: “Patient already tolerated prior fluoropyrimidines” (15.7%), “Patient declines” (12.9%), “Will order separately” (5.7%), “Not discussed as not appropriate” (5.3%), and “Not discussed, deferred” (60.4%). Thirty-nine providers (n = 77 eligible) responded to the survey; 22 prescribed FP in their practice and had encountered the alert. 21 (95.5%) of these reported the alert was “Very Useful” or “Somewhat Useful” and 18 (81.8%) used the DPYD testing options available in the alert. Sixteen (72.7%) discussed DPYD testing more frequently with patients as a result of the alert. Barriers to DPYD testing were “Concerned about the impact of lowering FP dosing” and “Lack of knowledge about DPYD testing”, while “Cost of DPYD testing” was scored lowest. Conclusions: Utilizing an EHR alert with embedded CDS had a positive impact on provider awareness and led to more discussions regarding DPYD pharmacogenomic testing with patients in line with current FDA recommendations. Limitations in provider knowledge regarding DPYD testing and concerns about lowering chemotherapy doses posed barriers to ordering testing. Further interventions including additional education are required.

The NCCN Guidelines for Survivorship include screening, evaluation, and treatment recommendations for common physical and psychosocial problems resulting from adult-onset cancer and its treatment and provide a framework for coordination of survivorship care. They also include recommendations to help cancer survivors enhance their wellness and maintain a healthy lifestyle. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel’s current recommendations and recent updates regarding physical activity, nutrition, and weight management for cancer survivors.

e13551 Background: The landscape of cancer care is evolving rapidly. In 2023, there were 83 new FDA oncology approvals, and 145 interventional treatment (tx) studies opened across Mayo Clinic. We are exploring novel precision outreach approaches utilizing an LLM-integrated chatbot application to “ping” patients (pts) with specific clinical or genomic characteristics about newly available drugs or clinical trials. As novel outreach methods are considered, we surveyed a patient (pt) support group to understand communication preferences and awareness of adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors in tx of breast cancer (BC). Methods: On October 7, 2024, we administered a cross-sectional survey to 41 members of the Breast Cancer Support Network (BCSN) in Rochester, MN as a part of an IRB exempt quality improvement project. Leaders of the BCSN shared information to all participants, noting that the survey’s intent was to represent the pt voice and participation was voluntary. Anonymous survey data were collected with descriptive results reported. Results: 34/41 participants in the BCSN shared demographic information. The majority (83%) were > 50 years of age. 47% reported stage I BC, 12% stage II, 6% stage III, and 35% were unsure of their stage. Most participants (26/34, 76%) reported that their BC was hormone receptor positive (HR+), 2 HER-2 positive, and 6 unsure of their BC receptor status. 24/26 (92%) of pts with HR+ BC were taking or planning to start adjuvant endocrine therapy. 10/34 (29%) were aware that adjuvant CDK 4/6 inhibitors were approved. Of these 10 participants, 2 learned of it from online health resources, 6 from their clinician, 1 from social media, and 1 from a support group. The majority (66%) were unsure if they qualified for these drugs. Regarding receipt of information on new drug approvals/tx options, the highest ranked communication preference was to receive this information in person at an upcoming visit (ranked 1st by 50% of participants), followed by EHR-based message (28%), email (10%), phone call (6%), letter (4%), or an interactive chatbot (0%). Most respondents noted that communication from their healthcare provider was very important (30/37, 81%), with others stating that this was somewhat important (5/37, 14%) or neutral (2/37, 5%). Most noted that receiving information about tx options via video or visual aid before a visit would be very helpful (33/41, 80%). When asked about follow up after learning of a new drug approval, 17/32 (53%) of pts preferred an appointment, 9/32 (28%) a phone call, 3/32 (9%) a decision aid tool, and 3/32 (9%) a questionnaire to assess their understanding. Conclusions: Providing personalized, timely communication about new FDA approved tx options is important for BC survivors and critical for improving care delivery. While technological solutions could broaden awareness, this requires balancing pt preferences for direct communication with clinicians.

529 Background: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is commonly administered to patients (pts) with estrogen receptor alpha (ER) negative (immunohistochemistry [IHC] 0%) and ER-low (IHC 1-10%) breast cancer (BC). For pts without pathological complete response (pCR), ER expression may differ between baseline and residual BC following NAC. We previously demonstrated adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) omission in ER-low early-stage BC was associated with significantly worse overall survival (OS); however, this effect was restricted to pts with residual BC following NAC and those with higher baseline ER levels (IHC 6-10%) (Choong et al., ASCO 2024). Here, we assessed how often ER was expressed in residual invasive BC for pts treated with NAC for ER-negative and ER-low BC. Methods: Weidentified pts with pre-treatment (tx) ER-negative and ER-low (regardless of HER2 expression) stage I-III BC treated with NAC who underwent BC surgery at Mayo Clinic Rochester between 2009 and 2023. ER IHC was performed in a CAP/CLIA laboratory. We evaluated ER expression in residual invasive BC for pts without pCR. The percent of pts with a post-tx change in ER status was estimated and reported with 95% Wilson confidence intervals. Results: 955 pts (838 [88%] pre-tx ER-negative; 117 [12%] pre-tx ER-low) met inclusion criteria, of whom 69% had HER2-negative and 31% HER2-positive BC. The median age at diagnosis was 52 (range: 24-86). 496 (52%) had residual BC. Residual BC was more common in HER2-negative versus (vs) positive tumors (56% vs 42%, p < 0.001) but did not differ significantly by ER status (ER-negative 51% vs ER-low 57%, p = 0.22). Of those with residual BC, 277/496 (56%) had ER re-testing. Rates of ER re-testing did not vary for pre-tx ER-negative vs -low (57% vs 51%, p = 0.37) but were significantly lower for HER2-positive vs HER2-negative tumors (39% vs 62%, p < 0.001). Among those with post-tx testing, 31/277 (11%, 95% CI: 8-15%) had an increase in ER expression from pretreatment levels (defined as ER IHC < 1% to either 1-10% or > 10%; or ER IHC 1-10% to > 10%). In these 31 pts, the original NAC was for either TNBC (21/31; 68%) or HER2+ BC (10/31; 32%). In pts with pre-tx ER-negative BC, 27/243 (11%, 95% CI: 8-16%) had ER expression in the residual BC including 14/243 (6%, 95% CI: 3-9%) with ER > 10% and 13/243 (5%, 95% CI: 3-9%) with ER 1-10%. For pts with baseline ER-low BC, 4/34 (12%, 95% CI: 5-27%) had ER > 10% in the residual BC. Among the 31 pts where ER increased following NAC, 21/31 (68%) received adjuvant ET, including 17/18 if ER was > 10% in the residual disease and 4/13 in those with ER 1-10%. Conclusions: In pts treated with NAC for ER-negative or ER-low BC not achieving pCR, we identified higher ER expression in the residual breast cancer in > 10% of pts. Given that omission of ET in ER-low BC with residual cancer following NAC is associated with worse survival, repeat biomarker testing should be considered in those without pCR, and ET individualized according to ER expression.

1530 Background: Regular breast cancer screening reduces mortality. The American College of Radiology (ACR) recommends annual screening mammography for asymptomatic, average risk 1) transgender and gender diverse (TGD) men (individuals assigned female sex at birth but identify as men) age 40+ and with residual breast tissue and 2) TGD women (individuals assigned male sex at birth but identify as women) age 40+ and on gender-affirming hormone therapy for 5+ years. This nationwide study investigated screening mammography in TGD individuals. Methods: Four cohorts were identified with complex algorithms of medical and pharmacy data in the OptumLabs Data Warehouse, a longitudinal, administrative insurance claims database that includes patients with commercial insurance and Medicare Advantage: 1) TGD men, 2) TGD women, 3) individuals with gender dysphoria not meeting other TGD criteria (NMOT), and 4) cisgender women -- all of whom met ACR screening criteria. The primary endpoint was the percentage of individuals with high adherence, defined as completing >75% of recommended screenings; comparisons were made across the cohorts (Chi-square test). Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare adherence between TGD men and cisgender women with adjustment for demographics and with 1:4 matching (on race/ethnicity, age group, year of healthcare plan enrollment, and duration of follow-up). Results: 10,478 TGD individuals (3,778 TGD men; 1,294 TGD women; and 5,406 with gender dysphoria NMOT) and 6,218,369 cisgender women were identified. For TGD men, TGD women, individuals with gender dysphoria NMOT, and cisgender women, high adherence was observed in 41.1% (95% confidence interval (CI): 39.5, 42.6%); 7.4% (95% CI: 6.0, 8.8%); 11.9% (95% CI: 11.0, 12.7%); and 38.3% (95% CI: 38.3, 38.4%), respectively, p < 0.0001. No screening ever in these same populations was observed in 23.6% (95% CI: 22.2, 24.9%); 81.3% (95% CI: 79.2, 83.4%), 72.8% (95% CI: 71.6, 74%), and 35.9% (95% CI: 35.8, 35.9%), respectively, p < 0.0001. When TGD men were matched and compared to 15,112 cisgender women, a differential association was observed between gender and high adherence by age group (p < 0.0001); compared to cisgender women, the likelihood of high adherence in TGD men ages 40-49 (n = 2,472), 50-59 (n = 852), 60-69 (n = 320), and 70+ (n = 134) were as follows: odds ratios (OR‘s): 1.38 (95% CI: 1.28, 1.50), p < 0.0001; 1.57 (95% CI: 1.35, 1.81), p < 0.0001; 0.812 (95% CI: 0.619, 1.065), p = 0.1316; and 1.277 (95% CI 0.835, 1.951), p = 0.2595, respectively. Conclusions: This study found that TGD men manifest relatively high adherence to screening mammography, whereas TGD women and individuals with gender dysphoria NMOT manifest low adherence. Future research should focus on improving breast cancer screening in these underserved populations.

e13718 Background: Oncology has evolved in the cyber era of medicine. The 21 st Century Cures Act mandated patient access to medical data (tests, provider notes) via patient portals connected to EHRs in order to facilitate patient engagement. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic rapidly transformed patients’ interactions with portals by increasing reliance on telehealth and portal messaging. This shift has been well-documented in primary care, and emerging research suggests similar trends in oncology. More information is needed regarding how this has evolved post-pandemic. We present single academic institution real-world data (RWD) describing ongoing changes in patient messages and telephone calls in oncology. Methods: We quantified the changes (2019-2024) within oncology at Mayo Clinic Rochester campus including all care team, provider, nursing, and pharmacist visits, patient portal medical advice requests, patient calls, and messages sent to patients per year using Epic's SlicerDicer™ tool. Results: Patient visits/year dipped (-0.2%) from 2019 to 2020, but increased steadily from 2021 forward (Table 1). Patient portal advice requests increased significantly faster (Table 1); from 2019 to 2024, visits /year increased by 40%, while the number of advice requests increased by 131%. Patient calls/year increased more modestly (64%), while the number of messages sent to patients increased by 163% over this time. Conclusions: The transparency allowed by the Cures Act coupled with the impact of the pandemic has empowered patients to engage in their oncology care more proactively through the EHR. Patient-initiated portal messaging is increasing, with messages sent to patients from the oncology department similarly rising. Patient call volumes are also growing despite EHR messaging. Further research is necessary to better understand patterns of EHR use in oncology and explore ways to reduce clinician burnout that may arise from responding to this increased communication volume, as well as to understand the impact on patient satisfaction and outcomes. Changes in patient volume compared to patient calls and EHR messaging over time. Year Total Patient Visits Change in Patient Visits from Prior Year (%) Total Patient Medical Advice Messages Change in Patient Medical Advice Message Volume from Prior Year (%) Total Patient Calls Change in Patient Call Volume from Prior Year (%) Messages Sent to Patients Change in Patient Messages Sent to Patients from Prior Year (%) 2019 62,440 n/a 173,177 n/a 195,143 n/a 99,974 n/a 2020 61,959 -0.7 218,976 +26.5 240,833 +23.4 135,044 +35.1 2021 70,950 +14.5 276,561 +26.3 267,395 +11.0 165,293 +22.4 2022 74,961 +5.7 325,580 +17.7 263,732 -1.4 206,043 +24.7 2023 80,672 +7.6 349,756 +7.4 274,446 +4.0 214,257 +4.0 2024 87,605 +8.6 399,740 +14.3 319,963 +16.6 263,271 +22.9

Abstract Objective Data extraction from the published literature is the most laborious step in conducting living systematic reviews (LSRs). We aim to build a generalizable, automated data extraction workflow leveraging large language models (LLMs) that mimics the real-world 2-reviewer process. Materials and Methods A dataset of 10 trials (22 publications) from a published LSR was used, focusing on 23 variables related to trial, population, and outcomes data. The dataset was split into prompt development (n = 5) and held-out test sets (n = 17). GPT-4-turbo and Claude-3-Opus were used for data extraction. Responses from the 2 LLMs were considered concordant if they were the same for a given variable. The discordant responses from each LLM were provided to the other LLM for cross-critique. Accuracy, ie, the total number of correct responses divided by the total number of responses, was computed to assess performance. Results In the prompt development set, 110 (96%) responses were concordant, achieving an accuracy of 0.99 against the gold standard. In the test set, 342 (87%) responses were concordant. The accuracy of the concordant responses was 0.94. The accuracy of the discordant responses was 0.41 for GPT-4-turbo and 0.50 for Claude-3-Opus. Of the 49 discordant responses, 25 (51%) became concordant after cross-critique, increasing accuracy to 0.76. Discussion Concordant responses by the LLMs are likely to be accurate. In instances of discordant responses, cross-critique can further increase the accuracy. Conclusion Large language models, when simulated in a collaborative, 2-reviewer workflow, can extract data with reasonable performance, enabling truly “living” systematic reviews.