Citations

Abstract Aim Major abdominal surgery (MAS) can have a diverse impact on patient’s life, including physical, emotional and socio-economic effects. At present, there is no patient reported outcome (PRO) instrument that was specifically developed for MAS population. The aim of this study was to develop a hypothesised conceptual framework of the key domains that underpin the process of recovery following major abdominal surgery in the adult population. This framework will serve as a foundation for developing a valid PRO instrument for the target population of interest. Method The development of the hypothesised conceptual framework included the following stages: 1) defining major abdominal surgery and verification of its discriminative properties, 2) systematic review of currently available PRO instruments, 3) mapping of the domains within identified PRO instruments to WHO International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) conceptual framework, 4) derivation of the hypothesised conceptual framework by linking of the ICF domains and the health-related quality of life theoretical framework. Results Fourteen PRO instruments were identified by the systematic review. The individual PRO items within each instrument collectively covered 25 ICF domains and 53 sub-domains. A hypothesised conceptual framework was derived based on the “conceptual model of health-related quality of life” and the ICF framework, applied within three principles of exposure, moderating factors and outcomes. Conclusions This study proposed a hypothesised conceptual framework for the development of PRO instruments to evaluate recovery following major abdominal surgery. However, its relevance, content validity and comprehensiveness remain to be examined in future studies.

Qualitative interviews and focus groups are commonly used methods to elicit participants’ voices in program evaluations. However, the use of these data-gathering methods can fall short of the goal; even with open-ended questions, the protocols guiding and shaping interviews and focus groups heavily reflect the evaluators’ understanding and experience of the program or intervention under consideration and its target population(s). In this paper, we describe three cases that employed a method of inquiry that is underutilized in evaluation but one that we believe holds great potential as a method to enhance interpersonal reflexivity, namely participant-generated photo-elicitation interviewing (PEI). Across three diverse settings and interventions, we readily added participant-generated PEI to our mixed methods evaluations. We found participant-generated PEI to add great value to the evaluations by complementing our other data collection methods, allowing for greater participant voice, challenging evaluators’ assumptions, enhancing dissemination efforts, and fostering our reflexivity.

Goals: Our aim was to perform a national survey of provider attitudes, practices, and knowledge regarding weight loss and MASLD medications in patients with MASLD. Background: While weight loss is a cornerstone in the management of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), FDA-approved medications for weight loss remain underutilized. Results: We conducted a survey before resmetirom approval of hepatology and gastroenterology providers practicing in 44 states. Surveys were sent to 747 providers with 304 complete responses (41%), of whom 260 (86%) work at a liver transplant center. While nearly all respondents (96%) believed that weight loss medications could benefit patients with MASLD, 77% have never/rarely prescribed them due to low comfort (81%). Among weight loss medication prescribers, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists were preferred (66%). In contrast, 63% had prescribed off-label medications for MASLD in the past 12 months, most commonly vitamin E (30%) and GLP-1 receptor agonists (25%). The top reported barriers to prescribing weight loss medications were lack of training/unfamiliarity, cost/insurance coverage, and side-effects, which may be explained by low formal obesity education and lack of knowledge (only 33% of FDA-approved medications for weight loss were correctly identified by >50% of providers). Overall, there was reasonable provider-reported adherence to the 2023 AASLD practice guidance for MASLD. Conclusions: This nationwide survey of hepatology and gastroenterology providers before resmetirom demonstrates that while off-label prescribing for MASLD was common, weight loss medication prescription rates remain very low due to low comfort possibly from insufficient education despite strong beliefs that they can benefit patients with MASLD.

Objectives: This practice parameter was revised collaboratively by the American College of Radiology (ACR), and American Radium Society (ARS). Image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) uses various imaging modalities to maximize the accuracy and precision of radiation treatment delivery. Methods: This practice parameter was developed according to the process described under the heading The Process for Developing ACR Practice Parameters and Technical Standards on the ACR website (https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Practice-Parameters-and-Technical-Standards) by the Committee on Practice Parameters–Radiation Oncology of the ACR Commission on Radiation Oncology in collaboration with the ARS. Results: This practice parameter for IGRT addresses qualifications and responsibilities of personnel, clinical IGRT implementation, documentation, quality control and improvement, safety, and patient education. Since the publication of the ACR–ASTRO Practice Parameter in 2019, there is now more clarity as to what criteria and parameters need to be documented in the medical record, a better appreciation of the large amount of imaging data, how to interpret such data, as well as the complex interactions of multiple systems in the implementation of IGRT. Conclusions: This practice parameter assists practitioners in the clinical use of IGRT. IGRT should complement and be used in combination with other quality assurance processes. IGRT is a rapidly evolving field, and practitioners should have a thorough understanding of its strengths and potential limitations.

Abstract Objective This study was undertaken to evaluate the response to second treatments for infantile epileptic spasms syndrome (IESS). Methods Infants aged 2–24 months with IESS were prospectively enrolled in the National Infantile Spasms Cohort study at 21 pediatric epilepsy centers in the United States from 2012 to 2018. We analyzed data from infants who initially received standard treatment (hormonal therapy [adrenocorticotropic hormone, high‐dose prednisolone] or vigabatrin), had continued or recurring epileptic spasms, and received a second treatment. We excluded those with tuberous sclerosis. Treatment groups included hormonal therapy followed by vigabatrin (reference), hormonal‐to‐hormonal, hormonal‐to‐nonstandard, vigabatrin‐to‐hormonal, and vigabatrin‐to‐nonstandard. Nonstandard treatments included other antiseizure medications and dietary therapy. Treatment groups were tested for differences in 3‐month clinical remission using a binary logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs). Results There were 153 infants with IESS who received second treatments. The highest rates of 3‐month remission were among infants in the hormonal‐to‐vigabatrin (22/65, 34%) and vigabatrin‐to‐hormonal (9/26, 35%) groups, followed by vigabatrin‐to‐nonstandard (3/10, 30%), hormonal‐to‐hormonal (4/22, 18%), and hormonal‐to‐nonstandard (1/30, 3.3%). Compared to the hormonal‐to‐vigabatrin group (reference), fewer infants had remission in the hormonal‐to‐nonstandard group (OR = .07, 95% confidence interval [CI] = .01–.53), and there was a trend toward fewer infants in the hormonal‐to‐hormonal group (OR = .43, 95% CI = .13–1.4, p = .17). Following initial hormonal treatment, the number needed to treat was three infants for one additional infant to have remission when treated with vigabatrin compared to nonstandard therapy as the second treatment. Significance This updated analysis with an expanded sample size provided power for additional subgroup analysis. Overall response rates were low, and at best only one third had remission after second treatment. Results support a clinical strategy of switching mechanism of action when selecting a second medication for epileptic spasms (i.e., use vigabatrin after hormonal therapy, or hormonal therapy after vigabatrin). Our findings also support the use of standard over nonstandard therapies.

Objectives To compare electrical stimulation and speech perception in vestibular schwannoma (VS) patients across treatment modalities and standard cochlear implant (CI) patients. Study Design Retrospective review. Setting Tertiary academic center. Patients Sixty-seven CI ears consisting of 23 standard CI controls and 44 VS patients with ipsilateral CI. VS patients were separated by treatment modality: 24 microsurgical resection, 15 radiation therapy, and 5 observation. Eleven VS patients with CI did not receive auditory sensation from electrical stimulation. Interventions VS microsurgical resection, radiation therapy, and observation. Main Outcome Measures Threshold (T-levels), comfort (C-levels), consonant-nucleus-consonant (CNC) word score, and AzBio sentence recognition scores. Results Patients who underwent microsurgical resection required significantly higher (p < 0.001) T-levels and C-levels compared with the standard CI group. Stimulation levels in the VS radiation therapy and observation groups were higher but not significantly different compared with standard CI controls. Overall rate of CI nonstimulation across all VS patients was 25%: 38% for microsurgery and 13% for radiation. Average CNC score for microsurgery group was 18% compared with 44% for radiation, 55% for observation, and 68.5% for standard CI controls. CNC word and AzBio scores were significantly lower (p < 0.001) for the microsurgery group compared with standard CI group. Conclusions Resection may negatively affect auditory nerve function, leading to higher stimulation levels, increased risk of nonstimulation, and poorer postoperative CI speech outcomes compared with observation or radiosurgery. When medically appropriate, nonsurgical VS management may be used to allow for optimization of CI programming and postoperative hearing outcomes.

6061 Background: PDS0101 is a T cell stimulating immunotherapy (therapeutic vaccine) targeting HPV16. The combination of PDS0101 + pembrolizumab (5 cycles) has shown durable clinical responses in HPV-positive recurrent/metastatic HNSCC. MC200710 is a window of opportunity study in patients with HPV-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (HPV+ OPSCC). This prospective phase II trial utilized 2 cycles of neoadjuvant PDS0101 aloneor in combination with pembrolizumab prior to surgical resection or chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Herein, we report the initial results, including primary endpoint of ctDNA response. Methods: Between June 2022 and September 2024, 20 patients (10 per Arm) with locally advanced HPV+ OPSCC were enrolled in a sequential alternating design. Arm A received 2 cycles of PDS0101 and Arm B received 2 cycles of PDS0101 and pembrolizumab with all patients undergoing subsequent surgery or CRT. Assessments were done at baseline, post cycle 1, and post cycle 2 (prior to surgery or CRT). The coprimary endpoint of ctDNA response was defined as a ≥50% decline in ctDNA post cycle 2 compared to baseline as quantified using NavDx (TTMV fragments/mL). Radiologic objective response rate (ORR) was assessed as per RECIST 1.1. Toxicity through the neoadjuvant period was assessed using CTCAE criteria and recurrence rates following surgery or CRT are reported. Results: Patients were similar between arms: male 90%, median age 61 years, cT1/T2 70%, cN1 65%, and no smoking history 65%. All patients completed both cycles of therapy with 13 (65%) undergoing primary operative management and 7 CRT (35%). The most common toxicity was injection site reaction 85% grade 1, 15% grade 2, 0% grade 3, consistent with prior studies. One patient experienced grade 2 pneumonitis during the neoadjuvant window (Arm B). There was one grade 3 toxicity (5%) possibly attributable to study intervention with one patient experiencing transient hepatitis requiring hospitalization (Arm A). Zero of 10 patients in Arm A had a ≥50% decline in ctDNA from baseline while 5 of 10 patients (50%) met this primary endpoint in ARM B (p=0.03). After Cycle 2, based on RECIST 1.1, no Arm A patients had a partial response (PR), with 7 having stable disease (SD); Arm B had 2 patients with PR and 8 with SD. With median follow up of 6 months, 2 patients in Arm A recurred and 0 patients in Arm B. Conclusions: The combination of PDS0101 and pembrolizumab met the trial’s primary endpoint of ctDNA response and shows promise for further evaluation. ctDNA can be used to assess early response and future studies could use ctDNA to adapt neoadjuvant therapy. Based on these findings, a neoadjuvant dose optimization study in HPV16+ oropharyngeal carcinoma is warranted and evaluation of PDS0101 and pembrolizumab in comparison to pembrolizumab alone. Clinical trial information: NCT05232851 .

TPS5130 Background: Patients with prostate cancer and deleterious HRRa have poorer prognosis but derive benefit from poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibition. However, prevalence of HRRa and response to PARP inhibition are less well defined in racial/ethnic minorities. We designed the HARMONY trial to evaluate the efficacy of N/AA/P in HL and NHB patients with mHSPC and deleterious HRRa. Methods: This multicenter, open label, phase II study is open through the Hoosier Cancer Research Network in the United States. The trial enrolls patients who self-identify as HL or NHB and have mHSPC with HRRa including BRCA 1/2, BRIP1, CHEK2, FANCA, PALB2, RAD51B, and/or RAD54L. Eligible patients will have hormone sensitive, treatment naïve or minimally treated prostate cancer (i.e., bicalutamide ≤ 45 days, androgen deprivation therapy [ADT] ± AA plus P ≤ 45 days allowed). Prostate cancer variants, other therapy in mHSPC setting, or symptomatic brain metastases are exclusionary. Enrolled patients will receive 24 weeks (w) of ADT plus N/AA dual action tablet (DAT) plus P, followed by an adaptive approach based on prostate specific antigen (PSA) response. Subjects in Arm A (PSA > 4.0 ng/mL at 24 w) can continue ADT/N/AA/P for max 2 years or stop N and escalate therapy to ADT/AA/P plus 6 cycles of docetaxel followed by standard of care (SOC) therapy. Subjects in Arm B (PSA ≤ 4.0 ng/mL at 24 w) will continue ADT/N/AA/P for a total of 12 months. At 12 months in Arm B, subjects with PSA ≥ 0.2 ng/mL will continue ADT/N/AA/P for max 2 years, and subjects achieving PSA < 0.2 ng/mL have the option to continue ADT/N/AA/P for max 2 years or discontinue all therapy with the option to start SOC treatment at disease progression. PSA decline to < 0.2 ng/mL at 24w (primary endpoint) will be evaluated for each racial/ethnicity group against a historic rate of 50%. Thirty patients per racial/ethnic cohort will give 80% power at 0.1 significance to determine noninferiority with a no-inferiority margin of 0.185. Estimating 5% drop out, 64 patients will be enrolled (n=32 HL and n=32 NHB). Key secondary/exploratory endpoints include PSA reduction ≥ 90%, overall response rate, PSA/radiographic progression free survival, overall survival, time to subsequent anti-cancer therapy, quality of life and safety. Key genomic correlatives will be evaluated. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT06392841. Study support of drug and funding: Janssen Scientific Affairs LLC. Clinical trial information: NCT06392841 .

5069 Background: Ra-223 improves the overall survival in patients with mCRPC to the bone. We assessed the safety of standard-of-care Ra-223 in combination with peposertib, a DNA-dependent protein kinase inhibitor, with or without avelumab, an anti-PD-L1 antibody. Methods: Patients with mCRPC and two or more skeletal metastases identified by bone scintigraphy with or without lymph node metastases up to 3 cm in size, but no visceral metastases, were eligible. Progression after progression after at least one androgen receptor pathway inhibitor or taxane was required. Phase 1 consisted of a two-step sequential safety lead-in using a 3+3 design. Step 1 combined 6 standard cycles of Ra-223 (55 kBq/kg), with increasing doses of peposertib: 50, 100, and 200 mg PO bid on days 3-26 of each cycle. Step 2 combined Ra-223 with the maximum tolerated dose of peposertib and added standard avelumab 800 mg IV every 14 days, starting at cycle 2 of Ra-223. Results: A total of 9 patients participated in Step 1, where the maximum tolerated peposertib dose of 200 mg PO bid with Ra-223 was deemed tolerable. A total of 6 patients participated in Step 2 and the combination of Ra-223, peposertib at 200 mg PO bid, and standard avelumab was deemed tolerable. Of the 15 patients in Phase 1, none experienced grade 4 or higher treatment-related toxicities, while 7 experienced grade 3 toxicities, including neutropenia (1), anemia (1), cardiac chest pain (1), fall (1), maculopapular rash (2), and lymphopenia (2). The median (Q1, Q3) PSA velocity from the beginning to the end of treatment was lower for Step 2 versus Step 1: 2.1 (-0.1, 4.6) versus 23.5 (18.6, 77.1) ng/mL/month (p = 0.0067). OS and PFS were calculated with the limitation that the Phase 1 was non-randomized. Median OS was not reached for Step 2, as only 1 of 6 patients had died, versus 15.2 months for Step 1, where 8 out of 9 patients had died (p = 0.0537). The patient who died in Step 2 discontinued therapy prematurely after 3 cycles due to progression and survived 15.2 months (the 5 alive completed all 6 cycles). The median radiographic PFS was 7 months for Step 2 versus 12.7 months for Step 1 (p = 0.8910). Conclusions: The combination of Ra-223 and peposertib, with or without avelumab was well tolerated. The triplet combination showed the most promising results at this early evaluation. We continue to accrue in the randomized Phase II portion of the trial. Clinical trial information: NCT04071236 .