Citations

11615 Background: Deficiencies and barriers exist to delivering comprehensive and affordable cancer care. Understanding the variation in organizational commitment, existing programs, and expected outcomes for screening and management of financial distress is needed. Methods: Representatives from 17 of 27 NCCN Member Institutions (63%) completed an online survey in November 2018 conducted by the NCCN Best Practices Committee. Centers were classified based on number of unique patients seen per year, as large ( > 10,000) (76%), or small ( < 10,000) (34%). The survey focused on institutions’ screening and management practices for patient financial distress, perceived barriers in implementation, and leadership attitudes. Results: Routine screening for financial distress was reported by 77% of centers, and most used social worker assessments (94%). 56% screened patients throughout the cancer journey. Help with drug costs, meal or gas vouchers and payment plans were offered by 100% of centers. Formal pre-authorization programs and assistance with claims and denials was offered by 81%. Charity care for medical costs was provided by 100% of the large centers compared to only 33% of small centers (p = 0.03). Median number of social workers (24 vs. 3; p = 0.01) and pharmacy representatives (6 vs. 2; p = 0.02) was also different between large and small centers. 76% evaluated the impact of financial advocacy services through number of patients assisted (85%), bad debt and charity write-offs (85%) or patient satisfaction surveys (54%). 6% and 12% reported overall effectiveness of institutional practice for screening and management of financial distress as poor/ very poor respectively. Inadequate staffing and real time resources (69%), limited institutional budget (50%), lack of reimbursement (50%), and clinical time constraints (50%) were reported as potential barriers in provision of these services. 94% agreed about stronger integration of financial advocacy services into oncology practice and 84% felt that success of these services should be a quality metric. 31% of large centers vs. 100% of small centers plan to increase staffing in this area in the next 5 years. Conclusions: Majority of NCCN Member Institutions report screening and management programs for financial distress, though the actual practices and range of services vary widely. Information from this study can help centers benchmark their performance relative to similar cancer programs and identify best practices in this area.

60 Background: The activity of the anti-PD-1 antibody P in pts with advanced STS was evaluated in a prospective multicenter Phase II study conducted by the Sarcoma Alliance for Research through Collaboration (SARC). SARC028 enrolled 40 patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma. Pembro had an ORR of 19% and PFS rate at 12 weeks of 55%, suggesting clinical activity. We investigated biomarkers of response to P. Methods: The primary endpoint was Objective Response Rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and biomarkers of response in blood and tumor. Pre- and on-treatment biopsies were required and obtained from over 90% and 72% of pts respectively. Serum was obtained from all pts at baseline and at multiple time points on therapy (pre-, week 8, and every 12 weeks). Sera were examined for candidate circulating biomarkers by Affymetrix Luminex platform array, including PD-L2. To determine whether there is a statistically significant difference between different conditions, we used Mann-Whitney and two-tailed t tests. Log-rank p-values in Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were calculated using the "survival" R package. Results: Forty pts with STS were enrolled into 4 cohorts (10 each) based on histological subtype including undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS), dedifferentiated liposarcoma (LPS), synovial sarcoma (SS), and leiomyosarcoma (LMS). 4 pts with UPS, 2 pts with LPS, and one pt with SS achieved a response. Six of seven responses were durable at the time of this analysis. Circulating levels at baseline or after therapy of PD-1, PD-L1, 4-1BB, IDO, BTLA, CTLA-4, LAG-3, and TIM-3 did not correlate with outcome. However, pre-treatment and week 8 PD-L2 levels correlated best with clinical outcome: high PD-L2 levels were associated with better PFS (p=0.019) in STS. Conclusions: P has clinical activity in specific histologic subtypes of STS, namely UPS and LPS. Pre-treatment circulating PD-L2 levels correlated with progression-free survival and is a novel and promising predictor of improved clinical outcome of PD-1 therapy in STS.

Objective:Radiation therapy (RT) is the primary treatment of intracranial metastasis (ICM) from lung cancer (LC). Radiation necrosis (RN) has been reported post-RT with an incidence of 5% to 24%. We reviewed the spectrum of imaging changes in patients treated with RT for ICM from LC in an effort to identify potential risk factors for RN.Methods:We reviewed 63 patients with LC and ICM who received RT (radiosurgery [stereotactic radiosurgery] with/without whole brain radiation therapy) at our institution between 2013 and 2018. Data evaluated included demographics, tumor type, ICM burden and location, chemotherapy, surgery, and RT details as well as treatment choices and outcomes.Results:Of the 63 patients, clinical and radiographic criteria for RN were noted in 24 (38%) as early as 2 months and as late as 5 years posttreatment. Six patients required surgical resection due to refractory symptoms revealing pathology-proven RN and occasionally tumor. Patients were significantly more likely to develop RN if they had surgical resection of an ICM (45.8% vs. 20.5%,P=0.05). No differences were found in location, size, or genetic profile of lesions. In total, 80% of patients received treatment for symptoms and/or radiographic change. This was generally a combination of steroids, bevacizumab, laser interstitial thermal treatment, or surgical resection. Most patients required >1 treatment modality.Conclusions:This review of outcomes of RT for ICM in LC demonstrates a higher rate of RN than previously reported in the literature in those having had a surgical resection plus stereotactic radiosurgery. Our observation of RN as late as 5 years post-RT for ICM necessitates clinician awareness.

Abstract Introduction: The utility of patient reported symptoms and serum tryptase levels in distinguishing those with systemic mastocytosis (SM) versus mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS) versus those not meeting formal diagnostic criteria for SM or MCAS has not been systematically examined. Methods: This study was approved by our institutional review board. Patients were referred for suspected SM based on symptoms of mast cell activation, osteopenia, skin rash, etc., or had an established diagnosis of SM. All patients were given a Mastocytosis Symptom Assessment Form (MastSAF) to complete at their initial evaluation. The MastSAF is comprised of 36 symptom questions to be graded on a scale of 0 (absent) to 10 (worst imaginable), and is organized around 9 symptom clusters: gastrointestinal (8 questions), constitutional (3 questions), musculoskeletal (5 questions), cutaneous (4 questions), neuropsychological (6 questions), genitourinary (3 questions), respiratory (4 questions), angioedema (1 question), and cardiovascular (2 questions). All patients underwent bone marrow biopsy and serum tryptase level assessment. SM was diagnosed by 2008 WHO criteria. In the presence of characteristic symptoms, if clonal or abnormal mast cells were not identified, and if serum/urine mast cell mediator levels were increased, then non-SM associated, non-monoclonal MCAS was diagnosed. Results: A total 53 patients were studied. 1) SM: Of 28 patients, 13 had indolent SM (ISM), 9 aggressive SM (ASM) and 6 SM with associated hematological disease (SM-AHD) The median total symptom score was 47 (range 8-159). The median (range) for SM subgroups was: ISM 51 (9-159), ASM 55 (19-157) and SM-AHD 27 (8-131) (p=0.2). The normalized median score for individual symptom categories (total median score/no. of symptoms per category) in order of severity was cutaneous 1.9, gastrointestinal 1.8, constitutional 1.7, neuropsychological 1.3, respiratory 1.3, musculoskeletal 0.9, cardiovascular 0.3, genitourinary 0.3, and angioedema 0. Symptom severity was not significantly different among the 3 SM subgroups, except for constitutional symptoms (median score ASM 9, ISM 4, SM-AHD 2.5, p=0.02). The median (range) tryptase level was 48.4 ng/mL (8.8-282); four patients (14%) had a baseline level <20 ng/mL. The median (range) tryptase level among SM subgroups was: ISM 46.9 (8.8-225), ASM 103 (29.4-282), and SM-AHD 43.5 (28.5-233) (p=0.1). When considering patients with tryptase level ≥50 versus <50 ng/mL, symptom scores were not significantly higher in the former group with the exception of constitutional (p=0.02) and genitourinary symptoms (p=0.04). 2) MCAS: 15 patients The median total symptom score was 127 (range 2-248). The normalized median score for individual symptom categories in order of severity was neuropsychological 4.5, musculoskeletal 4.2, cutaneous 4.0, constitutional 3.3, gastrointestinal 2.1, respiratory and cardiovascular 2.0 each, genitourinary 1.7, and angioedema 1.0. The median (range) serum tryptase level at referral was 12.7 ng/mL (1.7-25.8); five patients (33%) had a baseline level >20 ng/mL. 3) Neither SM/MCAS: 10 patients The median total symptom score was 119 (range 45-177). The normalized median score for individual symptom categories in order of severity was musculoskeletal 4.2, gastrointestinal 3.6, constitutional 3.3, neuropsychological 3.3, cutaneous 3.0, cardiovascular and genitourinary 2.0 each, respiratory 1.3, and angioedema 0. The median (range) serum tryptase level at referral (n=9) was 4.8 ng/mL (2.9-6.6). 4) Comparison: MCAS vs. SM: Symptom scores were significantly higher in MCAS as compared to SM (p<0.05), except for genitourinary and respiratory symptoms, which were not significantly different. ‘Neither SM/MCAS’ vs. SM: Symptom scores (total, gastrointestinal, constitutional, musculoskeletal, cutaneous, and neuropsychological) were significantly higher in the former group (p<0.05). Other symptom scores were not significantly different. Conclusions: The spectrum and severity of patient reported symptoms was broadly similar among WHO subcategories of SM, and serum tryptase level had limited if any correlation with symptom scores. Despite the significantly higher overall symptom burden in MCAS versus SM, tryptase levels in the former group were significantly lower with values >30 ng/mL unusual. Despite overlap, the top ranked symptoms in the 3 groups were different. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Locations of gliomas may influence clinical presentations, molecular profiles, treatment options, and prognoses. Using the Mayo Clinic Arizona Cancer Center registry, we analyzed the frequency at which gliomas were identified in different regions of the brain. We evaluated molecular profiles, clinical courses and survival by anatomic location. METHODS Registry was queried to include patients with glioma over a 10-year period. Statistical analyses were used to compare demographic, genetic, and clinical characteristics among patients with gliomas in different locations. RESULTS 182 gliomas were identified. Of the tumors confined to a single lobe, there were 51 frontal (28.0%), 50 temporal (27.5%), 22 parietal (12.1%), and 7 occipital tumors (3.8%) identified. Multifocal disease was noted in 38 patients (20.9%). Tumors affecting temporal lobe were associated with reduced overall survival when compared to all other tumors (11.0 months vs. 13.0 months, log-rank p=0.0068). However, this disparity became insignificant when adjusted for tumor grade, age, and surgical approach [HR(95% CI) 1.26(0.87, 1.82), p=0.212]. Out of 82 cases tested for IDH-1, 10 were mutated (5.5%). IDH-1 mutation was present in 6 frontal, 2 temporal, 1 thalamic, and 1 multifocal tumor. Out of 21 cases tested for 1p19q deletions, 12 were co-deleted, 9 of which were frontal lobe tumors. MGMT methylation was assessed in 45 cases; 7 of 14 frontal tumors and 6 of 13 temporal tumors were methylated. ATRX loss was detected in 2/42 assessed cases. CONCLUSION Our results support the hypothesis that the anatomical locations of gliomas influence patients’ clinical courses. Tumors involving the temporal lobe were associated with poorer survival, though this association appeared to be driven by these patients’ more aggressive tumor profiles and higher risk baseline demographics. Molecular analysis was limited by low prevalence of genetic testing in the study sample, highlighting the importance of capturing this information for all gliomas.

Abstract BACKGROUND Radiation is an integral component of the multidisciplinary treatment of patients with intracranial metastasis (ICM) from melanoma. The risk of radiation necrosis (RN) post-treatment can range from 5–25%. We retrospectively evaluated pre- and post-radiation clinical and radiographical characteristics in patients with ICM from melanoma to identify potential risk factors for RN. METHODS After IRB approval, patients with ICM from melanoma who received radiation at our institution between 2013 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. We recorded demographics, intracranial metastasis (burden and location), systemic therapy, resection, stereotactic radiosurgery versus whole brain radiation, and outcomes. Brain MRI was evaluated using the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria (RANO). RESULTS A total of 27 patients were included in the study. RN was diagnosed in 14 patients (52%) at one month to three years following radiation. Cerebellar location (n=7) was significantly associated with RN (p=0.0058). Metastasis-associated hemorrhage was present in 7 patients, 6 of which developed RN (43% vs 8%, p=0.08). Surgical resection prior to radiation was performed in 9 patients, 7 of which developed RN (50% vs 15%, p=0.1). RN appeared to be less often diagnosed when ICM were treated with higher doses of radiation (24 Gy vs 20 Gy, p=0.07). Systemic treatment was administered prior to radiation in 25 patients and we found no relationship with systemic therapy type and RN. Presumed RN was treated in 12 of 14 patients (86%). Steroids or surgical resection were the primary treatment modalities, with laser ablation used in 1 case. Following treatment, improvement was noted in 3 patients radiographically and in 1 of these clinically. CONCLUSIONS This series of patients with radiotherapy-treated brain metastases from melanoma reveals cerebellar involvement, hemorrhage, and prior surgical resection as potential risk factors for radiation necrosis. Neoadjuvant systemic treatment did not appear to be a risk factor in our review.

Abstract Objective Breast implant augmentation is the most common cosmetic surgical procedure performed in the United States. The purpose of this study was to determine if patients with breast augmentation surgery are aware of the effect of breast implants on the mammographic detection of cancer. Methods An institutional review board exempt patient awareness survey was distributed at a single breast imaging facility to women undergoing screening mammography. Comparative statistical analyses were performed between patients with and without breast implants. Results The respondents were divided into three groups: no prior breast surgery (74%; 524/711), breast surgery with implants (21%; 152/711), and breast surgery without implants (5%; 35/711). Patients with breast implants were more aware that implants decrease the amount of breast tissue seen on a mammogram (75%; 105/141) and that implants result in the need for more mammogram views (70%; 103/147), as compared with patients with no surgery (46%; 221/484 and 31%; 147/478, respectively) (P &lt; 0.001). More women with breast implants reported learning from breast imaging staff rather than from their surgeon that implants decrease the amount of breast tissue seen on a mammogram (46%; 49/106 vs. 38%; 40/106). Of 137 respondents, 35% (n = 48) reported that the effect of implants on their mammogram was discussed preoperatively. Of those who did not recall a preoperative discussion, 42% (16/38) indicated this knowledge would have factored into their decision to get breast implants. Conclusion This study highlights an opportunity for providers to engage in more education and shared decision-making with patients considering breast augmentation surgery to ensure preoperative counseling includes discussion of the effect of implants on mammography.

Abstract Background: Myelofibrosis (MF) is a bone marrow disorder characterized by anemia, splenomegaly and constitutional symptoms. There has been substantial work documenting quality of life (QoL) in patients with MF, however, very little data about patients following allogeneic stem cell transplant (alloSCT) for MF. Many patients decline alloSCT due to concerns secondary to QoL. Methods: Medical facts and patient reported outcomes (PRO) measures were collected within a month prior to transplant, at day 30, 100 and 1 year post alloSCT. PRO measures include Brief Fatigue Inventory, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Marrow Transplant (FACT-BMT), global assessment of change and the Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Symptom Assessment Form (MPN-SAF). The group was measured as a whole, and the patients in the upper quartile of MPN-TSS (the aggregate score of the 10 core items of the MPN-SAF) were also considered. Results: Fifty patients were enrolled on this study, 47 who proceeded with transplant. The median age of the patients was 63, ranging from 35-74. The majority of the patients were male (29, 66%), and Caucasian (43 (96%)). Most patients had primary MF (26, 59%), 9 patients had post-PV MF, and 9 patients had post-ET MF. Twenty patients had DIPSS Intermediate 2 risk disease, and 16 had DIPSS high risk disease. Twenty-six (51%) had a matched unrelated donor, 12 (30%) had a matched related donor and 5 (12%) had a mismatched unrelated donor. The majority of the patients had RIC regimens (35, 88%). At baseline the mean MPN-TSS was 27.7 (out of possible 100), and at day 30, day 100 and 1 year it was 24.6, 32.0, and 25.0, which reflected no significant change between the time points. Interestingly, all the MPN specific symptoms (including fevers, night sweats, pruritis, abdominal pain) had a significant improvement at least one time point following alloSCT. Patients in the highest quartile based on baseline TSS score (12 patients with scores at baseline greater than or equal to 37), had significant improvement in TSS score at day 100, headache at day 30, insomnia at day 100, night sweats at day 100, itching at day 100 and overall QOL at day 100. With regards to the FACT BMT, as would be expected, there was a significant decline in the FACT BMT total score, as well as trial outcome index (TOI) at day 30, but a return to close to baseline by one year. In the global assessment of change, on day 30, 11 (27.5%) of patients reported feeling a little/moderately/very much better overall quality of life since their transplant and 27 (67.5%) felt a little/moderately/very much worse quality of life. At day 100, 11 (31.4%) reported better quality of life and 20 (57%) reported worsening since transplant. By one year, 17 (60.7%) reported feeling better and 7 (25%) reported worsening. These findings did not appear to have a correlation with presence or absence of graft versus host disease. We were unable to assess the impact of conditioning as the majority of the patients had RIC conditioning. Discussion/ Conclusions: Our study evaluated the quality of life in patients with myelofibrosis who have undergone bone marrow transplantation. We have shown that there is very little change in symptom burden over the first year following transplant in general; however, significant improvement was observed in MF specific symptoms, and in patients who had a high symptom burden at baseline. By one year 61% felt that their QoL was better than it was prior to transplant. Our findings suggest that many of the patients do not experience a significant decline in QoL at 1 year after alloSCT, and actually report that their QoL improves. Further investigation is required to validate these findings. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Palmer: Novartis: Research Funding. Dueck:Phytogine: Employment; Pfizer: Honoraria; Bayer: Employment. Mesa:Novartis: Consultancy; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; UT Health San Antonio - Mays Cancer Center: Employment; Pfizer: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding.