Citations

12100 Background: The safety profiles of novel agents are mainly based on clinician-reported adverse events (AEs) from clinical trials. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) may better represent the treatment burden experienced by patients (pts) compared with clinician-reported AEs. Using data from POLARIX, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized Phase 3 international study (NCT03274492), we previously presented PRO and clinician-reported data showing similar rates of neuropathy (Trněný et al. 2022). Here, we evaluate the reporting of other common symptoms using PRO and clinician-reported data in POLARIX. Methods: POLARIX methods were previously described (Tilly et al. 2022); this analysis included all pts with PRO data. PRO and clinician-reported data described the incidence and severity of fatigue, constipation, diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting. Clinician-reported severity grading was based on the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) v4.0. PROs were collected using the European Organisation Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life-Core 30 questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), which was administered to pts at clinic visits on Day 1 of Cycles 1 (baseline), 2, 3, and 5, and end of treatment (EOT). PRO severity scores included ‘A little’, ‘Quite a bit’, and ‘Very much’. Results: Overall, 825 pts were evaluable. From baseline to EOT, PROs showed a higher incidence of symptoms compared with clinicians for fatigue (98% vs 27%), constipation (68% vs 29%), diarrhea (56% vs 26%), nausea (58% vs 40%), and vomiting (24% vs 15%). PRO severity scores of ‘Quite a bit’ or ‘Very much’ were reported in 33% of pts for fatigue, 29% for constipation, 17% for diarrhea, 19% for nausea, and 7% for vomiting. Clinicians reported Grade ≥2 symptoms in 11% of pts for fatigue, 11% for constipation, 11% for diarrhea, 14% for nausea, and 6% for vomiting. Conclusions: In POLARIX, pts reported a higher incidence and severity of symptoms compared with clinicians. Although distinct scales were used, the differences in symptom rates reported by pts and clinicians were clinically meaningful. These data may have implications for symptom management, including physician evaluation and communication of symptom expectations for pts. Reporting of symptoms by PROs should be incorporated into clinical trials as an adjunct to standard AE reporting to better characterize the patient experience. Clinical trial information: NCT03274492 . [Table: see text]

PURPOSE Polycythemia vera (PV) is characterized by JAK/STAT activation, thrombotic/hemorrhagic events, systemic symptoms, and disease transformation. In high-risk PV, ruxolitinib controls blood counts and improves symptoms. PATIENTS AND METHODS MAJIC-PV is a randomized phase II trial of ruxolitinib versus best available therapy (BAT) in patients resistant/intolerant to hydroxycarbamide (HC-INT/RES). Primary outcome was complete response (CR) within 1 year. Secondary outcomes included duration of response, event-free survival (EFS), symptom, and molecular response. RESULTS One hundred eighty patients were randomly assigned. CR was achieved in 40 (43%) patients on ruxolitinib versus 23 (26%) on BAT (odds ratio, 2.12; 90% CI, 1.25 to 3.60; P = .02). Duration of CR was superior for ruxolitinib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.38; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.61; P < .001). Symptom responses were better with ruxolitinib and durable. EFS (major thrombosis, hemorrhage, transformation, and death) was superior for patients attaining CR within 1 year (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.78; P = .01); and those on ruxolitinib (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.94; P = .03). Serial analysis of JAK2V617F variant allele fraction revealed molecular response was more frequent with ruxolitinib and was associated with improved outcomes (progression-free survival [PFS] P = .001, EFS P = .001, overall survival P = .01) and clearance of JAK2V617F stem/progenitor cells. ASXL1 mutations predicted for adverse EFS (HR, 3.02; 95% CI, 1.47 to 6.17; P = .003). The safety profile of ruxolitinib was as previously reported. CONCLUSION The MAJIC-PV study demonstrates ruxolitinib treatment benefits HC-INT/RES PV patients with superior CR, and EFS as well as molecular response; importantly also demonstrating for the first time, to our knowledge, that molecular response is linked to EFS, PFS, and OS.

684 Background: In the COSMIC-021 phase 1b study (NCT03170960) evaluating cabozantinib plus atezolizumab in advanced solid tumors, this combination therapy demonstrated encouraging clinical activity in patients with advanced non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) with a median follow-up of 13 mo (Pal. JCO 2021). Results after extended follow-up in nccRCC are presented. Methods: Patients with advanced nccRCC and ECOG PS 0/1 who had ≤1 prior VEGFR-targeting tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) were eligible. Prior treatment with TKIs targeting MET or immune checkpoint inhibitors was not allowed. Patients received cabozantinib 40 mg PO QD plus atezolizumab 1200 mg IV Q3W until unacceptable toxicity or progression; dose reductions of cabozantinib (40 mg QD to 20 mg QD, then to 20 mg QOD) were permitted to manage adverse events. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1 by the investigator; other endpoints included safety, duration of response (DOR), PFS, and OS. Results: The study enrolled 32 patients with nccRCC (2 from dose escalation phase, and 30 from expansion phase of the study): median age, 62 y; male, 81%; ECOG PS 0/1, 75%/25%; histology, papillary/chromophobe/clear cell/other, 47%/28%/3%/22%; sarcomatoid feature, 13%; IMDC risk favorable/intermediate/poor, 50%/41%/9%; ≥3 tumor sites, 56%; tumor sites, lung/kidney/bone/liver, 50%/25%/16%/16%; prior nephrectomy, 63%; prior VEGFR TKI, 22%; 0/1 lines of prior therapy (locally advanced/metastatic setting), 81%/19%. As of July 21, 2022, median follow-up was 37.2 mo (range 32.1–58.5) with 5 (16%) patients remaining on study treatment. ORR by investigator was 31% (all PRs) and disease control rate was 94% (Table); median DOR was 8.1 mo. Median PFS was 9.3 mo (95% CI 5.5–12.3), and median OS was not reached (95% CI 23.0–NE). PFS and OS estimates at 12 mo were 34% and 84%, respectively; 24-mo estimates were 6% and 70%. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 97% (grade 3/4, 53%); the most common AEs included diarrhea (69%), palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (50%), fatigue (44%), dysgeusia (41%), hypertension (31%) and nausea (31%). One grade 5 treatment-related AE of pulmonary hemorrhage occurred. Treatment-related AEs leading to discontinuation of both study treatments occurred in 13% of patients. Conclusions: Extended 3-year follow-up reinforces the encouraging clinical activity of cabozantinib plus atezolizumab in advanced nccRCC with a manageable safety profile. Clinical trial information: NCT03170960 . [Table: see text]

Background Birt-Hogg-Dubé (BHD) syndrome is a rare genetic syndrome caused by pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants in the FLCN gene. Patients with BHD syndrome have an increased risk of fibrofolliculomas, pulmonary cysts, pneumothorax and renal cell carcinoma. There is debate regarding whether colonic polyps should be added to the criteria. Previous risk estimates have mostly been based on small clinical case series. Methods A comprehensive review was conducted to identify studies that had recruited families carrying pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in FLCN . Pedigree data were requested from these studies and pooled. Segregation analysis was used to estimate the cumulative risk of each manifestation for carriers of FLCN pathogenic variants. Results Our final dataset contained 204 families that were informative for at least one manifestation of BHD (67 families informative for skin manifestations, 63 for lung, 88 for renal carcinoma and 29 for polyps). By age 70 years, male carriers of the FLCN variant have an estimated 19% (95% CI 12% to 31%) risk of renal tumours, 87% (95% CI 80% to 92%) of lung involvement and 87% (95% CI 78% to 93%) of skin lesions, while female carriers had an estimated 21% (95% CI 13% to 32%) risk of renal tumours, 82% (95% CI 73% to 88%) of lung involvement and 78% (95% CI 67% to 85%) of skin lesions. The cumulative risk of colonic polyps by age 70 years old was 21% (95% CI 8% to 45%) for male carriers and 32% (95% CI 16% to 53%) for female carriers. Conclusions These updated penetrance estimates, based on a large number of families, are important for the genetic counselling and clinical management of BHD syndrome.

AbstractPatient‐reported outcomes in AL amyloidosis have not been well‐studied. We analyzed health‐related quality of life (HRQOL) and AL amyloidosis symptoms data from the phase 3 TOURMALINE‐AL1 trial (NCT01659658) (ixazomib‐dexamethasone, n = 85; physician's choice of chemotherapy [PC], n = 83). HRQOL and symptom burden were measured with the SF‐36v2, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group Neurotoxicity subscale (FACT/GOG‐Ntx), and an amyloidosis symptom questionnaire (ASQ). Score changes during treatment were analyzed descriptively and using repeated‐measures linear mixed models; analyses were not adjusted for multiplicity. Least‐squares (LS) mean changes from baseline were significantly higher (better HRQOL) for ixazomib‐dexamethasone at several cycles for SF‐36v2 Role Physical and Vitality subscales (p < .05); no subscales demonstrated significant differences favoring PC. For FACT/GOG‐Ntx, small but significant differences in LS mean changes favored ixazomib‐dexamethasone over PC at multiple cycles for seven items and both summary scores; significant differences favored PC for one item (trouble hearing) at multiple cycles. ASQ total score trended downward (lower burden) in both arms; significant LS mean differences favored ixazomib‐dexamethasone over PC at some cycles (p < .05). Patients with relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis treated with ixazomib‐dexamethasone experienced HRQOL and symptoms that were similar to or trended better than patients treated with PC despite longer duration of therapy.

Abstract Objectives To explore current management practices for PMR by general practitioners (GPs) and rheumatologists including implications for clinical trial recruitment. Methods An English language questionnaire was constructed by a working group of rheumatologists and GPs from six countries. The questionnaire focused on: 1: Respondent characteristics; 2: Referral practices; 3: Treatment with glucocorticoids; 4: Diagnostics; 5: Comorbidities; and 6: Barriers to research. The questionnaire was distributed to rheumatologists and GPs worldwide via members of the International PMR/Giant Cell Arteritis Study Group. Results In total, 394 GPs and 937 rheumatologists responded to the survey. GPs referred a median of 25% of their suspected PMR patients for diagnosis and 50% of these were returned to their GP for management. In general, 39% of rheumatologists evaluated patients with suspected PMR &gt;2 weeks after referral, and a median of 50% of patients had started prednisolone before rheumatologist evaluation. Direct comparison of initial treatment showed that the percentage prescribing &gt;25 mg prednisolone daily for patients was 30% for GPs and 12% for rheumatologists. Diagnostic imaging was rarely used. More than half (56%) of rheumatologists experienced difficulties recruiting people with PMR to clinical trials. Conclusion This large international survey indicates that a large proportion of people with PMR are not referred for diagnosis, and that the proportion of treatment-naive patients declined with increasing time from referral to assessment. Strategies are needed to change referral and management of people with PMR, to improve clinical practice and facilitate recruitment to clinical trials.