Scheckel, Caleb

Objective The purpose of this review was to examine new evidence since the authors' 2019 guidelines for cervical cancer (CC) screening in non-HIV immunocompromised persons and to provide updated recommendations based on literature review and expert opinion. In addition, human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine efficacy in these populations was reviewed. Methods A literature search was performed similar to the authors' previous publication but was conducted through March 2023. Risk of CC, squamous intraepithelial lesions, and HPV infection in those living with solid organ transplant (SOT), end-stage renal disease (ESRD), hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT), and autoimmune diseases (AID), specifically systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) with addition of multiple sclerosis (MS) were researched. This update also summarizes data available on newer disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) including monoclonal antibodies (MABs). The authors then made recommendations for HPV vaccine administration, and screening using either general population guidelines or increased surveillance, the latter based on following current recommendations for women living with HIV. Additionally, the literature search included antibody response to HPV vaccines and recommendations for their administration for these same conditions. Results Based on the reviewed risks, evidence continued to support those persons living with SOT, ESRD, HSCT, and SLE, whether on immunosuppressant therapy or not, had an increased risk of HPV, squamous intraepithelial lesions, and CC whereas there was weak evidence that those persons with IBD, RA, and MS not on immunosuppressants were at risk. Data on persons using DMT/MAB were conflicting. Data showed that patients on certain immunosuppressants had lower antibody titers following HPV vaccination. There were no studies on HPV vaccine efficacy. Conclusions Following US Center for Disease Control and Prevention HIV Cervical cancer screening (CCS) guidelines is recommended for the following: SOT, ESRD, HSCT, and SLE whether on immunosuppressants or not, and IBD, RA, and MS on immunosuppressants. Shared decision-making about increased surveillance for IBD and RA not on immunosuppressants and persons on any DMT or MAB is reasonable based on conflicting data. Human papillomavirus vaccination should not change the recommendations for increased CC surveillance. A 3-dose series of the HPV vaccine is recommended for all age-eligible patients starting at 9 years of age, with catch-up to 26 years of age. Vaccination from age 27 up to age 45 years per Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices guidelines should be considered in shared decision-making. When possible, HPV vaccine series should be initiated and completed before SOT or initiation of DMT/MAB. For HSCT, the vaccine series should be readministered along with other childhood vaccines.

e19533 Background: Pneumocystis pneumonia (PJP) is a catastrophic infection seen in the context of low CD4 counts. Brentuximab vedotin (BV) is a drug antibody conjugate targeting CD30 and is used to treat patients with Hodgkin’s lymphoma (HL) and T-cell lymphoma (TCL). PJP prophylaxis is not currently recommended for patients receiving BV-based treatment despite co-expression of CD30 on CD4 cells. The frequency of PJP following BV remains poorly defined. Methods: We evaluated patients who received BV between January 1, 2011 and October 31, 2021 at Mayo Clinic for the development of PJP. Patient demographics and clinical characteristics including underlying disease, chemotherapy regimen, absolute lymphocyte count (ALC), and steroid exposure were collected. Patients who developed PJP more than 3 months after their last BV exposure were excluded. Results: Of 402 BV recipients identified, 63 received PJP prophylaxis and were omitted. Fourteen of the 339 (4.1%) not on prophylaxis developed PJP following BV. Those infected had a median age of 61 (22-87), 71% were male. The most common diagnoses were HL, TCL, and primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma at rates of 57%, 21%, and 14% respectively. Therapy regimens included BV monotherapy, BV-CHP, and BV-AVD at rates of 43%, 21%, and 14% respectively. BV represented median 2nd line of therapy (1-10) and patients received median of 3 doses (1-10) prior to PJP diagnosis. Patients with PJP had median ALC of 620 (370-3500). 71.4% (10/14) had an ALC less than 750 and among those with ALC greater than 1000, 75% (3/4) had underlying diagnosis of HL. Three patients had CD4 count measured at time of PJP diagnosis with median value of 157 (5-175). 57.1% (8/14) had no steroid exposure beyond the treatment regimen. 14.3% (2/14) were on chronic doses of 5mg prednisone for autoimmune conditions. Short bursts of steroids (prednisone 40 mg) prior to PJP were seen in 21.4% (3/14) with median exposure of 8 days (7-10). One patient had prolonged steroid exposure but was weaned off 17 days prior to PJP diagnosis. 71.4% were older than 50 years at time of PJP. Conclusions: We observed rates of PJP above the commonly accepted threshold of 3.5% for recommending prophylaxis. Among patients with an ALC greater than 1000, 75% had HL raising the question of a qualitative defect in immunity. Close ALC monitoring is recommended for patients receiving BV with a low threshold to institute PJP prophylaxis, especially amongst those older than 50 or with a diagnosis of HL.[Table: see text]

6552 Background: Significant amounts of expensive oncology drugs are discarded resulting in waste and financial consequences for patients. Beginning in 2023, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) will require drug manufacturers to refund Medicare for any single-use drugs where greater than 10% of the drug is wasted. We explored potential IIJA-associated savings through assessment of patterns in spending for discarded oncology agents between 2017-2020. Methods: We utilized the Medicare Part B Discarded Drug Units database from 2017-2020. Using J codes, we extracted spending and reimbursement data for discarded medications for antineoplastic and classical hematology therapies. The primary outcome was identification of therapies with high percentage of waste and the economic impact of retroactive application of the IIJA for discarded therapies. Results: Medicare Part B utilization data was extracted for a median 77 (64-152) oncologic therapies per year with median reimbursement for discarded treatments of $590 M ($566-616). From 2017-2020, bortezomib, romiplostim, and nab-paclitaxel were consistently among the top 5 therapies by value of wasted product. Pembrolizumab waste by value declined significantly after 2017 following transition to fixed dosing. In 2020, the top 5 therapies by value of wasted product were bortezomib, nab-paclitaxel, trastuzumab, romiplostim, and cabazitaxel with a value of $278 M. In 2020, the agents with the highest percentage of wasted product were bortezomib (27%), cabazitaxel (28%), decitabine (23%), topotecan (23%), and azacitidine (22%) with a collective discarded value of $160 M. Notably, these agents have weight-based dosing and single-use vials. Based upon the average number of drug claims per recipient and volume of product discarded, eliminating drug waste would allow an additional 6564 patients to receive treatment with discarded bortezomib. The number of additionally treated patients for the other top 5 agents: cabazitaxel (1216), decitabine (1509), topotecan (291), and azacitidine (2682). Retroactive application of IIJA policy would have impacted a median 20 (12-26) oncology agents resulting in median annual cost savings of $153 M (142-157) and the median annual spending on wasted oncology therapies would decline to $440 M (410-466). Conclusions: The IIJA would have yielded a median annual savings of $153 M in Medicare spending if applied retroactively. Given a 10% waste cutoff, a limited number of agents would be targeted by this legislation. In our study, we observe that drugs associated with weight-based dosing and single-use drug vials account for most drug waste. Strategies to minimize discarded units (through storage of unused product, approval of multi-dose vial formulations, or fixed-dose therapies) could yield substantial savings while enabling health equity in collaboration with communities with difficult access to these drugs.

PURPOSE: Precision oncology promises improved outcomes but the cost-effectiveness and accessibility of targeted therapies is debatable. We report price change patterns from 2015 to 2019 for several oral anticancer medications for common solid tumor malignancies. METHODS: We collected provider utilization and payment data from the public Medicare Part D database and extracted drug price information for commonly prescribed targeted oral anticancer agents for lung, breast, and prostate cancer. We then calculated median Pearson correlation coefficient values for various drugs (containing more than two data points) within each therapeutic class. We also calculated compound annual growth rates (CAGRs) for medication costs within each class and compared them with the consumer price index (CPI). RESULTS: Our study included six epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRi; one generic), five anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors (ALKi), two B-Raf inhibitors (BRAFi), three hormonal agents (one generic), three cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i), two poly-ADP-ribose inhibitors (PARPi), and seven antiandrogen agents (two generic). The median (range) Pearson correlation coefficient values for cost of drugs within each therapeutic class were 0.967 (0.915-0.978) for EGFRi, 0.981 (0.966-0.989) for ALKi, 0.996 for BRAFi, 0.994 (0.992-0.999) for CDK4/6i, 0.855 for PARPi, and 0.442 (–0.522 to 0.962) for antiandrogens. Therapies with two or fewer data points (generic erlotinib, dacomitinib, abiraterone, apalutamide, and darolutamide) were excluded. The median CAGRs in costs over the 5-year period were 4.56% (EGFRi), 6.40% (ALKi), 2.58% (BRAFi), 5.48% (hormonal agents), 5.21% (CDK4/6i), 27.29% (PARPi), and 34.8% (antiandrogens). The CPI over 5 years was 2.26%/year, and the average inflation rate was 1.90%/year. CONCLUSION: The median CAGR in costs for modern oral precision-driven cancer therapeutic classes mostly outpaced CPI and the average inflation. Increase in cost within the same class should be weighed against incremental clinical benefit for the patients to ensure that rising costs do not limit access to targeted therapies.

Abstract Background: Despite the promise of targeted agents in hematology, the high price of cancer therapies is a rapidly evolving problem. Until now, the increase in price of targeted anti-cancer treatments used in common hematological malignancies has not been evaluated. Here, we report patterns in price changes from 2015-2019 for multiple in-class anticancer medications for common hematologic malignancies. Methods: We utilized the publicly available Medicare Part D provider utilization and payment database from 2015 to 2019. We extracted drug prices (using generic names) for commonly used targeted anticancer agents for acute myeloid leukemia, chronic myeloid leukemia, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, B-cell lymphomas, and multiple myeloma. The primary outcome was the correlation of average change in Medicare spending per dosage unit among the multiple brand-name medications within each class available. We additionally calculated compound annual growth rates (CAGRs) [i.e. mean annual growth rates over a specified period of time] for medication costs within each class, and compared it with the consumer price index (CPI) (a measure of the average change over time in the prices of consumer items) and inflation rate. Agents without in-class competitor were excluded. CPI and inflation rates came from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Results: The study included 6 BCR-ABL inhibitors (1 generic), 2 BTK inhibitors, 2 IDH inhibitors, 2 FLT3 inhibitors, 3 IMIDs, 3 PI, 2 PI3K inhibitors, and 5 anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies. The median (range) Pearson correlation coefficient values for drugs within each class were -0.155 (-0.984-0.992) for BCR-ABLi, -0.362 for BTKi, 0.234 (0.215-0.999) for IMIDs, 0.899 (-0.034-0.988) for PIs, and 0.954 (0.847-0.999) for anti-CD20 antibodies. The median correlation coefficient for BCR-ABLi was 0.751 if generic imatinib was excluded. The correlation coefficient between 2 nd and 3 rd generation IMIDs was 0.999. Non-generic BCR-ABLi and anti-CD20 antibodies showed strong linear association in price increase between two drugs within the same class. Due to drug novelty, coefficient could not be calculated for therapies with 2 or fewer data points (midostaurin, gilteritinib, enasidenib, ivosidenib, idelalisib, duvelisib). There was no significant correlation between expenditure for BTKi, PIs, and IMIDs. The median CAGRs in costs over this 5-year period were: were 6.29% for BCR-ABLi, 18.36% for BTKi, 2.69% for IDHi, 4.23% for FLT3i, 10.63% for IMIDs, 5.11% for PIs, 5.79% for PI3Ki, and 5.85% for anti-CD20s. The median CAGR in costs for modern precision-driven cancer therapeutic classes outpaced CPI (2.26%/year), and the average inflation rate (1.90%/year). Conclusions: Increase in cost within the same class should be weighed against incremental clinical benefit for the patients. For non-generic BCR-ABLi and anti-CD20 antibodies, despite there being several agents, the rise in drug expenditures correlated closely, calling into question the true value of within-class competition. There is an urgent need for drug pricing reform given the average expenditure of Medicare part D, and ultimately out-of-pocket costs for our patients with cancer continues to trend upwards. Increased advocacy efforts are needed to ensure precision therapeutics remains an attainable and sustainable goal. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

AbstractLangerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) is a histiocytic neoplasm that can involve the lungs as single system (LCH‐SSL) or multisystem disease (LCH‐MSL). The role of full‐body radiographic staging to determine whether patients have LCH‐SSL or LCH‐MSL is unclear. Long‐term outcomes of LCH‐SSL versus LCH‐MSL and multisystem without lung involvement (LCH‐MSNL) are unknown. A retrospective study of adult LCH patients seen at our center from January 2000 to 2020 was performed. In Part 1, we addressed utility of whole‐body staging imaging among those presenting with isolated pulmonary signs or symptoms. Staging was defined as fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography‐computed tomography (CT) or whole‐body CT obtained within 3 months of diagnosis. In Part 2, we examined the frequency of developing extra‐pulmonary disease over time and mortality in patients with LCH‐SSL. In Part 3, we compared the overall survival of LCH‐SSL, LCH‐MSL, and LCH‐MSNL. Part 1: 240 patients with LCH were identified. A total of 112 (47%) had pulmonary signs or symptoms at presentation. Thirty‐four (30%) underwent radiographic staging and only one showed evidence of extra‐pulmonary disease. Part 2: 108 (45%) were LCH‐SSL. Median follow‐up duration of 4.5 years (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.9–6.0). None developed extra‐pulmonary disease. Part 3: 5‐year survival: 94% (95% CI: 84%–98%) for LCH‐SSL, 78% (95% CI: 59%–90%) for LCH‐MSL, and 75% (95% CI: 53%–89%) for LCH‐MSNL. LCH patients presenting with isolated pulmonary signs or symptoms rarely have extra‐pulmonary involvement at the time of diagnosis and generally do not develop extra‐pulmonary progression. LCH‐SSL has the best overall survival, while LCH‐MSL and LCH‐MSNL have similar clinical outcomes.

7 Background: Despite the promise of precision oncology, the cost-effectiveness of targeted treatments is debated. Until now, the increase in price of oral targeted anti-cancer treatments used in common malignancies has not been evaluated. Here, we report patterns in price changes from 2015-2019 for multiple oral anti-cancer medications for common solid tumor malignancies. Methods: We utilized the publicly available Medicare Part D provider utilization and payment database from 2015 to 2019. We extracted drug prices (using generic names) for commonly used targeted oral anticancer agents for lung, breast, and prostate cancer. The primary outcome was the correlation of average change in Medicare spending per dosage unit among the multiple brand-name medications within each class available. We additionally calculated compound annual growth rates (CAGRs) [i.e. mean annual growth rates over a specified period of time] for medication costs within each class, and compared it with the consumer price index (a measure of the average change over time in the prices of consumer items). Results: The study included 6 EGFR inhibitors (1 generic), 5 ALK inhibitors, 2 BRAF inhibitors, 3 hormonal agents (1 generic), 3 CDK4/6 inhibitors, 2 PARP inhibitors, and 7 anti-androgen agents (2 generic). The median (range) Pearson correlation coefficient values for drugs within each class were 0.967 (0.915-0.978) for EGFRi, 0.981 (0.966-0.989) for ALKi, 0.996 for BRAFi, 0.994 (0.992-0.999) for CDK4/6i, 0.855 for PARPi, and 0.442 (-0.522-0.962) for anti-androgens. Except for anti-androgens, all other drug classes showed strong linear association in price increase between two drugs within the same-class. A coefficient could not be calculated for therapies with 2 or fewer data points ( i.e., generic erlotinib, dacomitinib, generic abiraterone, apalutamide, and darolutamide). There was no significant correlation between expenditure for anti-estrogen agents. The median (range) CAGRs in costs over this 5-year period were: were 4.56% for EGFRi, 6.40% for ALKi, 2.58% for BRAFi, 5.48% for hormonal agents, 5.21% for CDK4/6i, 27.29% for PARPi, and 34.8% for anti-androgen agents. Conclusions: The median CAGR in costs for modern oral precision driven cancer therapeutic classes mostly outpaced CPI (2.26%/year), and the average inflation rate (1.90%/year). Increase in cost within the same class should be weighed against incremental clinical benefit for the patients. For most classes despite there being multiple agents, the rise in drug expenditures correlated closely, calling into question the true value of within class competition. There is an urgent need for drug pricing reform given the average expenditure of Medicare part D, and ultimately out of pocket costs for our patients with cancer continues to trend upwards. Increased advocacy efforts are needed to ensure precision therapeutics remains an attainable and sustainable goal.

6539 Background: The impact of insurance status on survival in diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the most common aggressive lymphoma, has not been evaluated after the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The aim of this study is to compare overall survival (OS) in patients across insurance status groups and in the periods before and after the ACA. Methods: Adult patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL were identified from the National Cancer Database. The analysis was restricted to patients 64 years of age or younger as most patients 65 years or older are eligible for Medicare under the ACA. The 2004-2017 period was chosen to represent the immunochemotherapy era preceding and following the ACA. Logistic regression was used to explore associations between abstracted variables and insurance status groups. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model were used for survival analysis. Results: 93,692 adults (age < 64 years) with newly diagnosed DLBCL and known insurance status were identified (41.3% female, median age 54 years [range: 18 – 64], 81.8% White and 12.1% Black). 7,211 (7.7%) patients were uninsured, 64,744 (69.1%) had private insurance, 11,936 (12.7%) had Medicaid, and 9,801 (10.5%) had Medicare. When compared to insured patients (private insurance, Medicaid or Medicare), uninsured patients were more likely to have a median household outcome of < $38,000 [OR 1.93 (95% CI 1.79-2.07)], less likely to receive chemotherapy [OR 0.69 (0.64-0.77)], more likely to be male [OR 1.14 (1.07-1.21)], more likely to be non-White [OR 1.30 (1.20-1.40], and more likely to present with stage III or IV disease [OR 1.24 (1.16-1.32)]. Uninsured patients had an inferior OS [HR 1.21 (95% CI 1.15-1.27)] when compared to insured patients after adjustment for baseline comorbidity (Charlson-Deyo score ≥2), advanced stage, treatment with chemotherapy, and sociodemographic factors including sex, age, race, household income, facility type (academic/community), and location (urban/rural). With a median follow-up time of 14.8 years (95% CI 14.6-not reached), median OS was lower in uninsured patients [13.4 years (12.3-not reached) vs 14.8 years (14.7-not reached); p < 0.0001]. Despite the lack of major changes in DLBCL therapies, a diagnosis after the implementation of the ACA (in 2010 or later) was associated with a superior OS when compared with the outcomes of patients diagnosed in 2010 or earlier [HR 0.93 (95% CI 0.90-0.95)]. Similarly, five-year OS was superior in the insured group [HR 0.93 (95% CI 0.89-0.96)]. Conclusions: Uninsured patients with DLBCL and < 64 years old had inferior OS when compared with insured patients, and uninsured status emerged as an independent risk factor for inferior OS. Our data highlight the independent effect of insurance disparities - a potential indicator of variations in access to health care - on survival in DLBCL.

Background: National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines are the most comprehensive and widely used standard for clinical care in malignant hematology by clinicians and payers in the US. The level of scientific evidence in NCCN guidelines for malignant hematological conditions has not been recently investigated. We describe the distribution of categories of evidence and consensus (EC) among the 10 most common hematologic malignancies with regard to recommendations for staging, initial and salvage therapy, and surveillance. Methods: NCCN uses a system of guideline development distinct from other major professional organizations. The NCCN definitions for EC are: category I, high level of evidence such as randomized controlled trials with uniform consensus; category IIA, lower level of evidence with uniform consensus; category IIB, lower level of evidence without a uniform consensus but with no major disagreement; and category III, any level of evidence but with major disagreement. We compared our results with previously published results from 2011 guidelines. Results: Total recommendations increased by 16.6% from 1160 (2011) to 1353 (2020). Of the 1353 recommendations, Category 1, 2A, 2B and 3 EC were 5%, 91%, 4%, 1% while in 2011 they were 3%, 93%, 4% and 0% respectively. Recommendations with category 1 EC were found in all guidelines, except for Burkitt's Lymphoma. 6.3% of therapeutic recommendations were category 1 EC with the majority (56.4%) pertaining to initial therapy. Guidelines with highest proportions of therapeutic recommendations with category 1 EC were Multiple Myeloma (12.4%), CLL/SLL (6.9%) and AML (5.6%). Between 2011 and 2020, the proportion of category I recommendations increased significantly only in Follicular lymphoma and CLL/SLL. No category 1 EC recommendations existed in staging or surveillance. Conclusion: Recommendations issued in the 2020 NCCN guidelines are largely developed from lower levels of evidence but with uniform expert opinion. Despite the major advances in hematology in the past decade, this is largely unchanged. Our study underscores the urgent need and available opportunities to expand the current evidence base in malignant hematological disorders which forms the platform for clinical practice guidelines. Figure Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.