Lou, Yanyan

TPS1657 Background: Cancer treatments are traditionally administered in clinical settings, which can isolate patients from their familiar environments and exacerbate physical, psychosocial, and financial burdens. Travel requirements further amplify these challenges, particularly for underserved populations. Studies indicate that patients prefer receiving care at home, and international models have demonstrated the safety of home-delivered chemotherapy since the 1990s; however, no U.S. clinical trial data exists. In response, Mayo Clinic has developed the Cancer CARE (Connected Access and Remote Expertise) Beyond Walls (CCBW) program, a distributed cancer care delivery model that expands access to quality cancer care by bringing it to the home environment, providing in-home cancer treatment, lab testing, telemedicine, and community paramedic support. This trial evaluates the safety, acceptability, and impact of home-based subcutaneous (SC) nivolumab (Nivo) administration compared to in-clinic treatment within the CCBW initiative. Methods: This open-label, single-arm trial evaluates the impact of SC Nivo administration location—home versus infusion center—on patient reported cancer care experience, patient-preferred treatment location, acceptability, safety, and patient-reported outcomes. Eligible adult patients (ECOG 0-1) receiving IV Nivo for an FDA-approved indication and residing within 75 miles of Mayo Clinic Florida will transition to SC Nivo, receiving two initial in-clinic cycles. If tolerated without injection reactions, four cycles will be administered at home before resuming in-clinic treatment. Exclusion criteria include concurrent investigational/standard treatments or contraindications to immunotherapy. Fifty patients will be enrolled, with an estimated 75% (n=38) providing cancer care ratings after 8 weeks in-clinic and 8 weeks at-home, offering 85% power to detect a mean difference in ratings of 0.50 standard deviations. The primary endpoint is within-patient change in cancer care rating (0–10 scale, CAHPS Cancer Care Survey) comparing 8 weeks of in-clinic vs. at-home care. Secondary endpoints include patient-preferred treatment location, comfort with home injections, safety (grade 3+ adverse events), function (EORTC QLQ-F17), symptoms (PRO-CTCAE), side effect impact (GP5), and healthcare utilization (ER visits, hospitalizations). Cost will be assessed as a tertiary endpoint. The trial has FDA approval (IND #170079), Mayo Clinic IRB approval (#23009663), and ClinicalTrials.gov registration (NCT06265285). Enrollment began in April 2024, with an expected accrual period of 24 months. To date, 10 patients have been enrolled, and final analysis is expected 2.5 years after trial activation. Clinical trial information: NCT06265285 .

e16610 Background: Adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) is a rare malignancy with an incidence of 1-2 per million per year. The optimal treatment remains unclear as does the benefit of chemotherapy (chemo) in patients (pts) with resectable ACC. Methods: The SEER database (2000–2021) was used to identify ACC pts > 18 years. Variables of interest included age, race, household income, rural-urban classification, stage, chemo, radiation therapy (RT), and surgery. Statistical analyses were conducted using ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis, and Kaplan-Meier methods to compare survival outcomes according to variables of interest. Results: Of the 2,598 pts identified, 1,564 (60%) were female. The majority of pts (85%) were white, followed by black (9%). Most pts (87%) resided in metropolitan areas. Pts with localized, regional, or distant metastatic disease comprised 25%, 17% and 36% of the group, respectively. 40% of pts underwent radical or total surgical removal of the primary site disease while 9%, 2%, and 1% underwent partial surgical removal, excision, or debulking surgery, respectively, and 30% did not undergo surgery. 34% of pts received chemo and 8% received RT. The median overall survival (mOS) for the entire cohort was 15 months (m) (95% CI: 14–17 m). No significant differences in OS were observed among pts of different races or household incomes. Distant metastatic disease was significantly associated with worse mortality when compared with regional or localized diseases (mOS: 5 m vs. 20 m vs 60.6 m, respectively, p < 0.001). Surgical intervention of any kind was associated with longer survival when compared to those who did not undergo surgery (18 m vs. 3 m, HR 0.33, p < 0.0001). Among the 971 pts with distant metastatic disease, pts who received chemo had a superior mOS compared to those who did not receive chemo or with unknown chemo status (8 m vs. 2 m, p < 0.0001). This OS advantage remained significant even after excluding pts who underwent surgery (5 m vs. 2 m, p < 0.0001). While chemo was also associated with longer mOS (29 m vs. 27 m, p < 0.0001) in localized disease, this survival advantage was not present in pts with localized disease managed with surgery (27 m vs. 27 m, p = 0.061). Although chemo was associated with numerically longer mOS in pts with regional disease, the difference was not significant. Conclusions: ACC with distant metastatic disease carries a poor prognosis yet demonstrates superior survival in pts who receive chemo. Surgery is associated with better survival outcomes, but there is no additive benefit from chemo in those with localized disease managed with surgical resection.

e20141 Background: TET are rare and challenging entities in clinical practice. Prospective trials in thymoma and thymic carcinoma (TC) are scarce. Limited number of small trials investigated the role of ICI in TET, and showed some clinical efficacy, but also with immune related adverse events (irAE). Guidelines list ICI as a treatment option in the 2 nd line, although no FDA approval was granted. Aside from the small trials, there is limited real world data about the efficacy and toxicity of ICI in TET. Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of the medical records of all patients (pts) with TET who were treated with ICI between 3/25/2011 and 11/30/2024 at 5 Mayo Clinic sites. We collected data about baseline characteristics, diagnosis, irAE, and outcomes. Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate median progression free survival (mPFS), and hazard ratio (HR) with Cox proportional hazards regression. Results: 30 pts were included, 28 diagnosed with TC, and 2 with malignant thymoma. 70% of pts were male. Median age at time of diagnosis was 61 years (range: 15 to 82), and median ECOG at the time of diagnosis was 0. 29 pts received Pembrolizumab, and one received Durvalumab. Prior to ICI, 86.67% of patients received chemotherapy. 70% of pts discontinued ICI use, 60% due to progression, and 10% due to irAE. Overall response rate (ORR) was 23.33%, with 3.33% complete response, and 20% partial response. Disease control rate (DCR) was 63.33%. The mPFS was 10.13 months. At the time of analysis 60% of pts were still alive. 40% of patients had irAE. While the two patients with thymoma experienced irAE, only 33.33% of those with TC had these events. 26.67% of pts had thyroiditis. Pancreatitis, pneumonitis, dermatitis, and encephalitis each occurred in 3.33% of pts. The median time to irAE onset was 75 days. 25% of irAE were grade 1, 66.67% grade 2, 0% grade 3, and 8.33% grade 4, represented by the case of encephalitis. Resolution of irAE occurred in 33.33% of cases. When stratified according to the occurrence of irAE, the mPFS was the same in both groups, with or without irAE, being 10.13 months, HR=0.99 (95% CI 0.39 – 2.54). Conclusions: In this real-world cohort of pts with TET, efficacy of ICI matched what has been previously reported, with similar ORR and DCR, but with longer mPFS. However, irAE incidence was higher, but with less grade 3/4 events. Differently than what has been suggested in other diseases, irAE occurrence did not correlate with better outcomes. These results validate the role of ICI in the treatment of TET, especially TC. Nonetheless, improving patient selection, and developing other therapeutic strategies, including combinations of ICI and other drugs, for these malignancies remain essential. Importantly, the high incidence of irAE indicates that future investigations must also focus on safety of interventions and supportive care in TET.

Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the most common type of lung cancer, with nearly half of all patients diagnosed at an advanced stage. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) harness the host immune system to combat malignant cells. ICIs, which target programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), programmed cell death 1 (PD-1), and cytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte-4 (CTLA-4), have transformed the treatment landscape for advanced NSCLC. While a subset of patients experiences a long-term durable response, most patients will develop disease progression. New drugs targeting novel pathways are being tested in clinical trials to improve the efficacy of immunotherapy and overcome resistance patterns. This review aims to summarize the currently available ICIs for advanced NSCLC and describe emerging immunotherapies with recently published data from phase I/II clinical trials.

The emergence of immunotherapy has ushered in a new era in the management of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Various immune check point inhibitors have demonstrated significant benefit in the management of locally advanced NSCLC that are treated with either surgery or concurrent chemoradiation. We provide a comprehensive and up-to-date review of data from key studies, discuss the challenging clinical issue regarding the timing and duration of immunotherapy in patients undergoing surgery, and highlight the unmet needs and future directions of immunotherapy in NSCLC.

Abstract Systematic multiomic analysis has revealed ancestry-dependent molecular alterations, but their impact on the efficacy of anticancer treatment is yet largely unknown. In this study, we analyzed clinical trials from ClinicalTrials.gov and found that only 8,779/102,721 (8.5%) oncology clinical trials posted information on enrollment by race/ethnicity. The underrepresentation of non-White populations suggests that it remains challenging to determine differences in the efficacy of antitumor treatments among different racial groups. Through a comprehensive analysis of clinically actionable genes, imputed drug responses, and immune features, we identified potential differences in treatment responses to targeted therapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy between different ancestral populations. Further analysis of multiple independent cohorts confirmed some of our key findings. Such potential ancestral effects are also identified in response to emerging new treatments like chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy and proteolysis-targeting chimeras. These findings are made publicly available in a comprehensive web portal, Ancestral Differences of Efficacy in Cancers (https://hanlaboratory.com/ADEC), to facilitate their further investigation. Significance: Our study charts a global landscape of ancestry-associated differences in therapeutic efficacy, highlighting the importance of considering ancestry in anticancer therapies.

e20588 Background: MET exon 14 skipping mutations are seen in about 3% of patients (pts) with NSCLC, with 2 FDA approved METi for pts with stage IV NSCLC harboring it. Besides the original clinical trials, there is a paucity of real-world data about their outcomes, and adverse events (AE). Our aim was to compare and analyze the utilization of capmatinib (cap) and tepotinib (tep) in this population. Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of the electronic medical records of all pts with stage IV NSCLC treated with METi between the date of FDA-accelerated approval of these drugs, 5/6/20 for cap and 2/3/21 for tep, and 12/1/23. All pts were treated at the Mayo Clinic Health System. We collected data about baseline characteristics, diagnosis, AE, and outcomes. Chi-squared test was used to compare the frequency of AE, while Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate median progression free survival (mPFS). Results: A total of 49 pts were treated with METi. Cap was used in 45 pts, 14 received tep, and 10 pts received both, with tep following cap. In the cap group, median age of diagnosis was 74 years (y), 42.22% were male, and the median number of previous lines of therapy (mPLT) was 0. In the tep group, median age of diagnosis was 72 y, 21.43% were male, and the mPLT was 2. Median ECOG at the time of diagnosis was 1 in both groups. There was no statistically significant difference between AE in both groups. Peripheral edema occurred in 75.56% pts who received cap, and in 64.29% with tep (p = 0.41). Pneumonitis happened in 4.44% with cap, and 7.14% with tep (p = 0.69). Creatinine elevation was seen in 37.78% with cap, while 42.86% with tep (p = 0.73), grade 3 elevation was seen in 5.88% and 16.67% respectively. Abnormality in liver function tests occurred in 35.56% of pts in the cap group, and 28.57% in the tep group (p = 0.63), grade 3/4 abnormality occurred in 31.25% and 0% respectively. Finally, pancreatic enzymes elevation was seen in 33.33% of patients in each group (p = 0.67), with none being grade 3/4. Cap was discontinued in 20% of pts due to AE, while it happened in 28.57% of pts with tep. Dose reduction happened in 64.44% of pts who received cap, and 42.86% who received tep. The mPFS was 12.03 months (m) in the cap group, and 8.94 m in the tep group, which was not statistically significant (p = 0.18). Similarly, the mPFS in those treated with tep following cap was 8.94 m. Conclusions: We performed the first real-word comparison between cap and tep. The results demonstrated similar outcomes with both drugs, and no significant differences in AE, suggesting these agents can be employed equivalently. Importantly, rates of therapy discontinuation and dose reduction were high with both, indicating the importance of closely monitoring these pts. The retrospective nature and small sample size are initial limitations that can be overcome with future multi-centric prospective studies.

TPS2700 Background: Though immunotherapy with anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has led to improvements in clinical outcomes in patients with cancer, when used as monotherapy in the advanced setting, only 18-25% of patients respond to ICI. Notably, ICI frequently lacks anti-tumor activity in immune-cold cancers where T cell priming is missing. Recent breakthroughs in identifying personal neoantigens via a comprehensive analysis of cancer sequencing data have brought increased attention to neoantigen cancer vaccines. Personalized cancer vaccines targeting neoantigens have shown early promise. While neoantigens have recently been investigated in some cancer types, the current neoantigen prediction algorithms have often focused on the MHC class-I subtype, single nucleotide mutations (SNM), small insertions and deletions (INDEL). We recently developed an informatics workflow, REAL-neo, for the identification, quality control (QC), and prioritization of both class-I and class-II human leukocyte antigen (HLA) bound neoantigens that arise from somatic SNM, INDEL, aberrant RNA splicing, and gene fusions, generating much more potent neoantigen candidates. Furthermore, we demonstrated robust T-cell response and prolonged survival by combining ICI and cancer vaccines in preclinical models. This single-arm phase I clinical trial is in progress to assess the safety, feasibility, and immunogenicity of personalized neoantigen vaccines in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced solid cancers. Methods: The vaccine consists of up to 20 peptides (15-30 mer) comprising patient-specific neoantigens identified from tumor DNA and mRNA sequencing data using REAL-neo and delivered with GM-CSF as an adjuvant. The first cohort of three patients will be treated at dose level 1 consisting of 4 or 5 peptides at 300 mcg/peptide and GM-CSF 125 mcg per injection site in each of four limbs. After Cohort 1 is deemed safe, the study will expand to cohort 2, when patients will be enrolled at the same dose level for vaccine plus Pembrolizumab 200 mg i.v. Neoantigen vaccine will be given via subcutaneous injection on days 1, 4, 8, 15, and 21 (cohorts 1 and 2) and weeks 5 and 8 (booster dose for cohort 2 only). Cohort 1 has been completed without dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Enrollment in Cohort 2 began in January 2024. AEs are assessed according to CTCAE v5. and safety findings are reviewed by data safety medical board (DSMB). Key eligibility criteria include 1) histologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic solid malignancies and 2) cancer progression after at least one line of the standard-of-care (SOC) systemic treatment. For cohort 2, patients must be eligible to receive pembrolizumab per SOC or the treating physician’s judgment. Clinical trial information: NCT05269381 .

Genomic mutations impact non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) biology. The influence of sex and age on the distribution of these alterations is unclear. We analyzed circulating-tumor DNA from individuals with advanced NSCLC from March 2018 to October 2020. EGFR, KRAS, ALK, ROS1, BRAF, NTRK, ERBB2, RET, MET, PIK3CA, STK11, and TP53 alterations were assessed. We evaluated the differences by sex and age (<70 and ≥70) using Fisher’s exact test. Of the 34,277 samples, 30,790 (89.83%) had a detectable mutation and 19,923 (58.12%) had an alteration of interest. The median age of the ctDNA positive population was 69 (18–102), 16,756 (54.42%) were female, and 28,835 (93.65%) had adenocarcinoma. Females had more alterations in all the assessed EGFR mutations, KRAS G12C, and ERBB2 ex20 ins. Males had higher numbers of MET amp and alterations in STK11 and TP53. Patients <70 years were more likely to have alterations in EGFR exon 19 del/exon 20 ins/T790M, KRAS G12C/D, ALK, ROS1, BRAF V600E, ERBB2 Ex20ins, MET amp, STK11, and TP53. Individuals ≥70 years were more likely to have alterations in EGFR L861Q, MET exon 14 skipping, and PIK3CA. We provided evidence of sex- and age-associated differences in the distribution of genomic alterations in individuals with advanced NSCLC.