Allen‐Rhoades, Wendy

345 Background: Pediatric febrile neutropenia (PFN) requires emergent evaluation due to risk of invasive bacterial infection. In the management of PFN, there are varying, accepted definitions for fever requiring emergency evaluation and neutropenia requiring admission. Problem statement: From September 1, 2022 - May 31, 2023, 15.1% (n = 11/73) of emergency department (ED) visits and 17.1% (n = 6/35) of admissions for PFN at Mayo Clinic Rochester may be considered unnecessary due to patients not meeting updated clinical criteria. Aim: Decrease unnecessary ED visits and hospitalizations for PFN by 50% from 15.1% to 7.5% (for ED visits) and from 17.1% to 8.6% (for hospitalizations) by 02/29/2024 without adversely impacting mortality from invasive bacterial infection. Methods: We used the DMAIC framework for process improvement. Interventions included (1) adoption of a higher fever definition for PFN, (2) adoption of a risk-stratified neutropenia definition for hospital admission, (3) provided electronic fever plans with definitions to all families, (4) re-iterated that parents call on-call provider with any concern for fever, (5) educated pediatric oncology staff on definition and management of fevers in pediatric oncology patients, and (6) educated pediatric emergency department staff on definition and management of fevers in pediatric oncology patients. Interventions were tested with rapid tests of change. Relevant clinical characteristics, variables, and outcomes for all patients from pediatric oncology were tracked for all encounters of pediatric oncology patients presenting to the ED for acute illnesses. Results: At baseline,15.1% (n = 11/73) of ED visits for PFN were considered unnecessary due to patients not meeting clinical criteria for emergency evaluation. Post-interventions, unnecessary ED visits for PFN had decreased to 3.4% (n = 1/32). At baseline, 17.1% (n = 6/35) of hospitalizations were considered unnecessary due to patients not meeting clinical criteria for admission. Post-interventions, 7.7% (n = 2/26) of hospitalizations were considered unnecessary. There were no patient deaths from invasive bacterial infection among this cohort at baseline or after interventions. Conclusions: Multiple interventions including adoption of a higher, accepted fever threshold and risk stratified neutropenia definition for PFN was associated with a reduction of unnecessary ED visits and hospitalizations for PFN without an increase in mortality from invasive bacterial infection. The projected medical expense savings of approximately $144,000-$210,000 per year.

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.

This cross-sectional study analyzes patient-reported outcome findings from the Enhanced, Electronic Health Record–Facilitated Cancer Symptom Control (E2C2) trial to investigate level of symptom burden in adolescents and young adults with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Children continue to undergo right hemicolectomy (RHC) for neuroendocrine tumors (NET) of the appendix based on adult guidelines. Appendectomy alone is recommended for the pediatric population; however, there are no data on safety of this approach in the setting of positive margins. This study aimed to determine the association between tumor characteristics and survival in a national cohort, hypothesizing that survival would be excellent despite high-risk features including positive margins on appendectomy. STUDY DESIGN: Patients 18 years of age or younger with NET of the appendix were identified in the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2022 using ICD-O-3 codes. Characteristics of patients who underwent definitive appendectomy vs RHC were compared using chi-square tests. Five-year survival was determined for appendectomy patients with and without high-risk size, margin, and lymph node (LN) features. RESULTS: Of 1,339 patients, 1,156 (86%) underwent appendectomy and 183 (14%) RHC. Median age in both groups was 15 (13 to 17) years. Patients who underwent RHC had larger tumors (24% vs 4%, greater than 2 cm, p < 0.001), more lymphovascular invasion (31% vs 10%, p < 0.001), and were more likely to undergo LN assessment (82% vs 10%, p < 0.001) with a higher LN positivity rate (31% vs 16%, p = 0.006). There was no difference in margins status (p = 0.76). The 5- and 10-year survival was excellent regardless of tumor characteristics for patients overall (99.9% and 99.4%, respectively) and for those who underwent definitive appendectomy (99.9% and 99.2%). CONCLUSIONS: These data further support appendectomy as definitive management for children with appendiceal NET. Additional resection does not confer a survival benefit even in the setting of positive margins.

Objective: Pediatric patients with non-rhabdomyosarcoma soft tissue sarcoma (NRSTS) undergo aggressive multimodality treatment. This single institutional analysis of outcomes in this group explored factors associated with local control and survival. Methods: Patients ≤18 years old diagnosed with NRSTS between 10/1990-11/2021 who received radiotherapy (RT) were retrospectively identified. Overall Survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) analyses were performed using Kaplan Meier methods. Cumulative incidence of local and distant failure were estimated. Univariate analysis was performed. Results: Fifty-one pediatric patients with NRSTS were included. Extremity tumors were most common (33/51, 65%), with 80% T1 or T2 (AJCC 8 th ) and 90% non-metastatic. Surgery in 49/51 (96%) resulted in 32 (65%) R0 resections. All received RT (median EQD2 50 Gy, range 42.4-76.9), with brachytherapy or intraoperative (IORT) boosts in 21 cases (41%) (mean EQD2 24.5 Gy). Thirty-four (66.7%) received chemotherapy. With 5.7 years median follow up, 5-year OS and DFS were 70.7% and 67.9%, respectively. Positive margins were significantly associated with worse OS on univariate analysis. Two-year local failure incidence for EBRT was 18.1% and 5.3% for EBRT+boost (HR 3.67, p=0.24). Among 6 observed local failures, 5 occurred after EBRT alone, 3 of which had positive margins. Among the EBRT+boost group, 2 had positive margins, neither with local recurrence. Conclusion: Multimodality treatment of pediatric NRSTS results in 5-year OS and DFS around 70%. R0 resection is essential to optimize outcomes in this population. Although incidence of R1 resections has declined in the modern era, IORT/brachytherapy boost may have a role in selected patients at high-risk for local recurrence.

ABSTRACTAccurate staging of nodal involvement in pediatric sarcoma patients is important to determine correct systemic and local therapy, with the goal to reduce subsequent recurrences. However, differences in lymph node staging strategies, definitions, and treatment protocols between the Children's Oncology Group (COG), European paediatric Soft tissue sarcoma Study Group (EpSSG), and the Cooperative Weichteilsarkom Studiengruppe (CWS) complicate comparisons. In this article, we aim to establish internationally recognized recommendations for lymph node assessment and treatment of children and adolescents diagnosed with rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) and non‐rhabdomyosarcoma soft tissue sarcoma (NRSTS) according to the Consensus Conference Standard Operating Procedure methodology.

Accurate staging of nodal involvement in pediatric sarcoma patients is important to determine correct systemic and local therapy, with the goal to reduce subsequent recurrences. However, differences in lymph node staging strategies, definitions, and treatment protocols between the Children’s Oncology Group (COG), European Pediatric Soft Tissue Sarcoma Study Group (EpSSG), and the Cooperative Weichteil Sarkom Studiengruppe (CWS), complicate comparisons. In this article we try to establish internationally recognized recommendations for lymph node assessment and treatment of children and adolescents diagnosed with RMS and NRSTS according to the Consensus Conference Standard Operating Procedure methodology.

12065 Background: Incidence of cancer, including colorectal, breast, pancreas, kidney, and uterine cancer, is increasing in younger populations. Adolescents and young adults (AYA, defined as age 15-39) with cancer face unique challenges. This study aimed to characterize how symptom burden differs between AYA and non-AYA (aged 40+) patients with cancer. Methods: We performed a subgroup analysis of the E2C2 study, a cluster-randomized, pragmatic trial examining the effectiveness of routine symptom assessment and guideline-based management on patient-centered and healthcare utilization metrics during and following cancer treatment. Six symptoms [Sleep disturbance, Pain, Physical function impairment, Anxiety, Depression, and Energy deficit/fatigue (SPPADE)] were evaluated using 11-point numerical rating scales (NRS). Symptom severity was classified as mild (0-3), moderate (4-6), or severe (7-10). We conducted a subgroup analysis of symptom burden among AYA patients (defined as age 18-39 in this study), using their first-reported NRS scores. Results: The E2C2 cohort included 2,598 AYA patients and 38,061 non-AYA patients who completed >1 SPPADE NRS on at least one survey. AYA patients were more likely than non-AYA patients to report severe anxiety ( p<0.0001) and depression ( p<0.0001) (Table). Non-AYA patients were more likely to report severe pain ( p=0.02179), fatigue ( p=0.0022), and physical function limitations ( p<0.0001). Sociodemographic differences were also noted. A higher proportion of AYA patients held a bachelor’s degree or higher (38% vs 28%), were employed (73% vs 37%), and lived in an urban setting (67% vs 56%), compared to non-AYA patients. Non-AYA patients were more likely to have government insurance (63% vs 21%) and to be married (72% vs 59%). Conclusions: AYA patients with cancer were more likely to report severe depression and anxiety compared to their counterparts age 40 and above, underscoring the need for targeted and tailored psycho-oncology care for this population. [Table: see text]