Dawson, Nancy A.

Introduction: This study evaluated patient preference of physician attire both before and after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic began. The primary outcome was patient preference of physician attire in 2017 compared to 2022 survey cohorts. Methods: An observational cross-sectional study performed at a single-site academic institution in the United States using patient survey materials. In total, 339 patients were included in the study, 161 from 2017 and 178 from 2022. Key Points: There was a statistically significant decrease in patient preference for formal attire in the clinical settings of primary care, hospital, and overall. Male patient preference for formal attire declined in primary care, emergency room, and overall; whereas female patient preference for formal attire declined in the hospital setting. For all genders, the odds ratio was statistically significantly lower in the settings of primary care clinic, hospital, and overall clinical settings. Conclusions: Patient preference for physicians wearing formal attire has decreased significantly since the COVID-19 global pandemic began.

TPS388 Background: Up to 25% of patients with advanced prostate cancer, including mCRPC, have a deleterious germline or somatic mutation in BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM or another homologous recombination (HR) DNA repair gene that can serve as a molecular marker to select those who may respond to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis). PARPis are lethal to cells with HRD, and PARPi treatment has shown preliminary evidence of an antitumor effect in patients with mCRPC who harbor a mutation in an HR DNA repair gene (Mateo et al. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:1697-708). These data provide a compelling rationale for evaluating rucaparib, a potent PARP1, PARP2 and PARP3 inhibitor, in patients with mCRPC associated with HRD. Methods: TRITON2 (NCT02952534) is a phase 2 study evaluating rucaparib 600 mg BID in patients with mCRPC. Patients with a deleterious germline or somatic BRCA1, BRCA2 or ATM mutation (per prior local test or central test during screening) will be enrolled into 1 of 2 cohorts based on the presence or absence of measurable visceral and/or nodal disease. An exploratory cohort will enroll patients with an alteration in any of 12 other prespecified HR genes (eg, RAD51C, RAD51D and PALB2), with or without measurable visceral and/or nodal disease. Patients must have progressed on androgen receptor signaling–directed therapy and 1 prior taxane-based chemotherapy for mCRPC. Patients who received prior treatment with a PARPi, mitoxantrone, cyclophosphamide or platinum-based chemotherapy are excluded. The primary endpoint is objective response rate measured using modified RECIST v1.1/PCWG3 for patients with soft-tissue disease and prostate-specific antigen response for patients with nonmeasurable disease. Secondary endpoints include duration of response, radiographic progression-free survival, overall survival, clinical benefit rate and safety. Pretreatment blood samples collected from all patients will enable development of a plasma-based companion diagnostic to select patients who may benefit from rucaparib treatment. Patients (≈160) will be enrolled at > 100 sites worldwide. Clinical trial information: NCT02952534.

LBA4500 Background: Cisplatin-based chemo is a standard 1L treatment (tx) for mUC and the only tx that prolongs OS; however, age or comorbidities render many pts ineligible, and 30-50% receive no tx. Atezo (MPDL3280A) is active and well tolerated in platinum-treated mUC, justifying testing atezo as 1L tx in cisplatin-ineligible pts. Methods: Pts were chemo naive in the metastatic setting and cisplatin ineligible (renal [GFR > 30 but < 60 mL/min]/hearing impairment, ≥ G2 peripheral neuropathy [PN] or ≥ ECOG PS2). Atezo 1200 mg was given IV q3w until PD (RECIST v1.1). Centrally assessed PD-L1 on tumor infiltrating immune cells (IC; SP142 IHC assay) was scored IC2/3, 1 or 0. The primary efficacy endpoint was confirmed ORR assessed per RECIST v1.1 (central independent review facility) using a data cutoff of Sep 14, 2015. Results: 119 efficacy/safety-evaluable pts of any PD-L1 IC had a median age of 73 y: 21% ≥ 80 y. 18% had prior systemic tx (21% [neo]adjuvant); 10% had radiotherapy. 66% had visceral mets. 71% had CrCl < 60 mL/min; 13% had hearing loss ≥ 25 dB; 6% had prior PN ≥ G2; 20% had ECOG PS2. ORR was 19% (95% CI 13-28; 5% CR), and responses occurred in all IC subgroups (Table; includes DCR/PFS/OS) and in pts with poor prognostic factors. 22/23 responses were ongoing with mDOR not reached. Median follow-up was 8.5 mo (range 0.2-14.3); median tx duration was 15 wk. Atezo was generally well tolerated. Tx-related all-G and G3-4 AEs were seen in 64% and 12% of pts, respectively. Related all-G AEs ≥ 10% included fatigue, pruritus, diarrhea. 1 G5 related AE occurred (sepsis). 3% had a G3-4 immune-mediated AE. Conclusions: Atezo has clinically meaningful activity in 1L cisplatin-ineligible mUC pts, and preliminary OS is encouraging. The durable nature of response and favorable AE profile makes this an attractive alternative to chemo. NCT02108652. Clinical trial information: NCT02108652. [Table: see text]