Citations

TPS8113 Background: There are currently three approved approaches for patients with resectable NSCLC including neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy, adjuvant chemoimmunotherapy and perioperative treatment with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy followed by adjuvant immunotherapy. All regimens were approved after showing event-free survival (EFS) or disease-free survival (DFS) benefit with the addition of immunotherapy to chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone. Each approach has its benefits and risks. Starting immunotherapy prior to surgery may improve treatment compliance and efficacy of immunotherapy. Nevertheless, neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy may result in missing an opportunity for curative surgery and increase the complexity of tumor resection. PROSPECT-LUNG (NCT06632327) is a randomized study evaluating whether starting chemoimmunotherapy before or after surgery leads to better outcomes. Methods: This is a randomized phase 3 trial in which patients will be randomized 1:1 to surgery followed by chemoimmunotherapy (adjuvant arm) or neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant therapy (perioperative arm). Patients with histologic or cytologic confirmation of surgically resectable stage IIA-IIIB NSCLC (per AJCC 9th edition) or stage IIA to IIIB per AJCC 8 th edition up to single ipsilateral mediastinal station (N2a), ECOG PS ≤ 2 (or Karnofsky ≥ 60%), no prior treatment for NSCLC and no previous malignancy within 3 years are eligible. The dual primary endpoints are real-world event free survival (rwEFS) defined as date from randomization to date of the first of the following events: failure to undergo resection for any reason, progression prior to surgery that precludes resection, recurrence or progression at any time after surgery or death from any cause, and overall survival (OS) defined as time from randomization to death from any cause. The target accrual is 1,100 patients assuming one-sided type I error of 0.03 for OS endpoint and 0.02 for rwEFS endpoint. This sample size will enable the detection of a 3-year rwEFS improvement from 55% in the adjuvant therapy arm to 64% in the perioperative arm with an 84% power. This sample size would detect an HR of 0.73 (improvement in median OS from 8.1 to 11 years in favor of the perioperative arm, 5-year OS from 65% in the adjuvant arm to 73% in the perioperative arm, assuming exponential survival) with 83.6% power. The study has a pragmatic design with minimal data collection, reporting of adverse events that lead to discontinuation of therapy, hospitalization or death only. It allows providers to choose therapy per standard of care (FDA approved or on NCCN), includes patients with ECOG performance status 2, permits use of local laboratory testing and imaging studies and determination of recurrence/progression will be done by local treating physicians with no use of RECIST. Clinical trial information: NCT06632327 .

TPS4616 Background: Osseous metastases (OM) occur in approximately 30% patients with advanced RCC. Despite therapeutic advances, OM are associated with poor survival and risk of symptomatic skeletal events (SSEs). Cabozantinib targets multiple tyrosine kinases, including vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptors and MET (Mesenchymal-Epithelial Transition factor), which are overexpressed in OM, contributing to cabozantinib’s enhanced bone activity. Radium-223, an alpha-emitting bone-seeking radioisotope, prolongs survival in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer to the bone. Building on this therapeutic approach targeting OM, our pilot study of radium-223 with VEGF inhibition in RCC with OM has also shown safety, improvement in circulating bone turnover markers, and early efficacy (McKay et al, CCR 2018). To address the unmet need to improve SSE rates and outcomes in RCC and OM, we designed a study investigating cabozantinib with or without radium-223 in patients with RCC with OM (NCT04071223). Methods: This is an open-label, multicenter randomized phase-2 study. Key inclusion criteria include metastatic RCC of any histology with ≥1 OM, at least 1 OM without prior radiation, any number of prior therapies, and Karnofsky performance status ≥ 60%. Use of a bone protecting agent is required unless contraindicated. Patients are randomized 1:1 to cabozantinib with (Arm A) or without (Arm B) radium-223. The starting dose of cabozantinib for Arm A is 40 mg by mouth daily to be escalated to 60 mg daily after cycle 1 (1 cycle = 28 days) if no persistent grade 2 or grade ≥3 toxicity. Radium-223 is administered at a fixed dose of 1.49 microcurie/kg IV every 28 days x 6 doses. The starting dose for cabozantinib in Arm B is 60 mg daily. The primary endpoint is SSE-free survival. Secondary endpoints include safety, progression-free survival, overall survival, time to first SSE, objective response rate, time to subsequent anti-cancer therapies, quality of life (QoL) measures, and correlative analyses including liquid biopsy and tumor tissue analysis. The study is designed to have 85% power to detect an improvement in 6-month SSE-free survival rate from 65% to 78% with one-sided α = 0.05 significance. To ensure 124 evaluable patients, target accrual is 134 (67 per arm). The group-sequential design includes a safety run-in and an interim analysis for futility when 50% of the expected number of events have been observed. The safety run-in, performed in the first 12 patients randomized to combination therapy, did not demonstrate dose limiting toxicities. Final data analysis will occur when 99 events have been observed. The study was activated in July 2020 and accrual is ongoing throughout the National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN). Continued site participation and enrollment are essential to evaluate this therapeutic strategy. Clinical trial information: NCT04071223 .

7037 Background: TRANSCEND CLL 004 (NCT03331198) is a phase 1/2, open-label, nonrandomized, multicohort study in adult patients (pt) with R/R chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma with liso-cel mono and liso-cel + ibrutinib combo cohorts. Given the study design, we performed PS matching/weighting to adjust for differences in key covariates between cohorts to compare efficacy and safety. Methods: Here, PS is the probability of receiving combo given the covariates and estimated by logistic regression. Covariates were hemoglobin, LDH, number of prior therapies, platelets, prior BTKi + venetoclax exposure, R/R on prior BTKi, and bulky disease for efficacy; and ALC, bulky disease, CRP, ferritin, and number of prior therapies for safety. PS balancing methods were optimal 1:1 matching, average treatment effect for treated pts (ATT) full matching, and ATT inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Efficacy endpoints were response (CR rate, ORR) and time to event endpoints (DOR, PFS, OS). Safety endpoints were proportions of pts with any-grade (gr)/gr ≥ 3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and investigator-identified neurological events (NE). Results: Fifty-one and 88 efficacy-evaluable pts were treated at dose level 2 (100 × 10 6 CAR + T cells) in the combo and mono cohorts, respectively. Before matching/weighting on PS, odds of achieving CR and overall response were statistically significantly higher for combo (Table). DOR did not differ between cohorts. For PFS and OS, HRs were lower with combo vs mono (not statistically significant [NS]). Odds of gr ≥ 3 CRS/NE were lower with combo vs mono (NS). After matching/weighting, odds of CR (except IPTW ATT) and overall response remained statistically significantly higher in combo. HRs for PFS and OS and ORs for gr ≥ 3 CRS/NE were numerically lower with combo vs mono (NS, except IPTW ATT for PFS). HRs for DOR were less but close to HR of 1. Conclusions: The liso-cel + ibrutinib combo demonstrated a trend for better efficacy and safety vs liso-cel mono, with statistically significant differences for CR rate and ORR. Clinical trial information: NCT03331198 . Efficacy and safety outcomes: combo vs mono. No adjustment ATT optimal 1:1 IPTW - ATT CR rate, OR (95% CI) 2.07* (1.01–4.28) 2.40* (1.05–5.66) 2.00(0.89–4.61) ORR, OR (95% CI) 3.96* (1.68–10.51) 3.43* (1.33–9.71) 4.18* (1.63–11.78) DOR, HR (95% CI) 0.98(0.51–1.87) 0.88(0.43–1.78) 0.96(0.50–1.85) PFS, HR (95% CI) 0.62(0.37–1.02) 0.61(0.35–1.05) 0.59* (0.35–0.98) OS, HR (95% CI) 0.70(0.38–1.28) 0.73(0.37–1.43) 0.66(0.36–1.22) CRS, OR (95% CI) 0.63(0.26–1.56) 0.67(0.24–1.84) 0.69(0.24–1.88) Gr ≥ 3 CRS, OR (95% CI) 0.23(0.01–1.35) 0.49(0.02–5.28) 0.26(0.01–1.94) NE, OR (95% CI) 0.84(0.41–1.68) 0.92(0.40–2.08) 1.10(0.48–2.52) Gr ≥ 3 NE, OR (95% CI) 0.56(0.19–1.45) 0.58(0.16–1.89) 0.68(0.19–2.30) *Statistically significant difference at 5% level.

TPS625 Background: Approximately 50% of newly diagnosed invasive breast cancers are stage 1, with the majority being ER/PR-positive, HER2-negative. Genomic assays such as the Oncotype DX have identified patients (pts) with reduced risk of distant metastasis and without benefit from chemotherapy added to endocrine therapy (ET), freeing them from excess toxicity. Genomic assays are also recognized as prognostic for in-breast recurrence (IBR) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and could similarly allow de-escalation of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT). Reducing overtreatment is of interest to pts, providers, and payers. Methods: We hypothesize that BCS alone is non-inferior to BCS plus RT for IBR and breast preservation in women intending ET for stage 1 invasive breast cancer (ER and/or PR-positive, HER2-negative with an Oncotype DX Recurrence Score [RS] of ≤18). Stratification is by age (<60; ≥60), tumor size (≤1 cm; >1-2cm), and RS (≤11, >11-18/MammaPrint Low). Pts are randomized post-BCS to Arm 1 with breast RT using standard methods (moderate or ultra hypo- or conventional-fractionated whole breast RT with/without boost, or APBI) with ≥5 yrs of ET (tamoxifen or AI) or Arm 2 with ≥5 yrs of ET (tamoxifen or AI) alone. The specific regimen of ET in both arms is at the treating physician’s discretion. Eligible pts are stage 1: pT1 (≤2 cm), pN0, age ≥50 to <70 yrs, s/p BCS with negative margins (no ink on tumor), s/p axillary nodal staging (SNB or ALND), ER and/or PR-positive (ASCO/CAP), HER2-negative (ASCO/CAP), and Oncotype DX RS ≤18 (diagnostic core biopsy or resected specimen). A “low risk” MammaPrint is permissible if completed as part of usual care prior to screening. Primary endpoint is IBR (invasive breast cancer or DCIS). Secondary endpoints are breast conservation rate, invasive in-breast recurrence, relapse-free interval, distant disease-free survival, overall survival, patient-reported breast pain, patient-reported worry about recurrence, and adherence to ET. We assume a clinically acceptable difference in IBR of 4% at 10 yrs to judge omission of RT as non-inferior (10-yr event-free survival for RT group is 95.6% v 91.6% for the omission-of-RT group). BR007 is powered to detect non-inferiority with 80% power and a one-sided α=0.025, assuming that there would be a ramp-up in accrual in the first two years (leveling off in Yrs 3-5); 1,670 pts (835 per arm) are required for randomization. Conservative loss to follow-up is 1%/yr. Some T1a pts screened may have Oncotype DX scores >18, making them ineligible for the study. In the accrual process, 1,714 pts will be required to register to ensure that our final randomized cohort is 1,670 pts. As of 1-6-2025: 1,168/1,670 pts have been randomly assigned, and 1,294 screened. Support: U10 CA180868, -180822, UG1 CA189867. Clinical trial information: NCT04852887 .

10544 Background: Incorporation of Polygenic Risk Scores (PRS) can refine traditional breast cancer risk assessment models to provide precise estimates of breast cancer risk. However, the impact of such an integrated model on clinical decision-making related to breast cancer surveillance and preventive strategies is not fully understood. Methods: The GENRE-2 is a prospective single-arm multisite clinical trial (NCT04474834) incorporating PRS into standard breast cancer risk assessment models to determine the impact of PRS on clinical decisions on breast cancer prevention and surveillance. Women at high risk of breast cancer due to NCI-BCRAT 5-year risk of ≥ 3%, or IBIS (Tyrer-Cuzik) 10-year breast cancer risk of ≥5%, biopsy-proven high-risk breast lesion, or a pathogenic variant (PV) in ATM , BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2 or PALB2 , were enrolled from five sites in the United States. All women were invited to complete surveys on their breast surveillance and cancer prevention decisions based on pre-PRS standard risk models and post-PRS risk estimation, and further annual surveys are planned for 10 years. Results: Among 902 women enrolled in the study, 605 (median age: 52 years) received PRS results and completed a survey to date. Of those who received PRS results,195 (32.2%) were PV carriers. Among non-carriers, the median 10-year and lifetime pre-PRS IBIS-based risk was 10.0% and 28.7%, respectively. Among PV carriers, the CanRisk-based 10-year and lifetime pre-PRS risk estimates were 6.3% and 25.2% for ATM , 22.3% and 77.6% for BRCA1 , 18.5% and 77.7% for BRCA2 , 7.1% and 25.7% for CHEK2 , and 16.8% and 38.0% for PALB2 PV carriers, respectively. After the incorporation of PRS, the lifetime risk of breast cancer increased by at least 10% in 31% of non-carriers and 7.7% of PV carriers and decreased by at least 10% in 10.7% of non-carriers and 7.7% of PV carriers. The proportion of non-carriers with lifetime risk < 20% or > 40% changed from 17.3% and 22.0%, respectively, in the pre-PRS evaluation to 24.4% and 32.9%, in the post-PRS evaluation. A higher lifetime post-PRS score was associated with intent to take preventive action (surgery or endocrine agents). In non-carriers, the proportion of women with a lifetime risk < 20% with intent to take preventive action was 11%, compared to 36.8% of those with a lifetime risk > 40% (p < 0.001). Similarly, in PV carriers, the proportion of women with lifetime risk < 20% with intent to take preventive action was 20.8% compared to 41.1% of those with lifetime risk > 40% (p = 0.015). Conclusions: The GENRE-2 trial demonstrates that the incorporation of PRS into breast cancer risk assessment models in high-risk women is feasible and leads to clinically meaningful changes in breast cancer risk estimates and decision-making regarding preventive strategies. Evaluation of the implementation of breast cancer risk management strategies in study participants is ongoing and will be reported. Clinical trial information: NCT04474834 .

e15527 Background: Fruquintinib, regorafenib, and trifluridine-tipiracil (TAS-102) alone or in combination with bevacizumab (bev) are approved for use in treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) following progression on or intolerance to fluoropyrimidine-based therapy with irinotecan, oxaliplatin, and targeted agents if indicated. All three medications have established overall survival (OS) benefit when used third line or later; however, there is a paucity of literature and guideline recommendations regarding optimal sequencing of these agents. The aim of this study was to investigate OS in patients (pts) with mCRC based on the sequencing of these three “late-line” treatments. Methods: This retrospective, multi-site cohort study evaluated OS in pts with mCRC who received fruquintinib possibly sequenced with regorafenib and/or TAS-102 +/- bev between 11/01/2023 and 11/19/2024. Pts prescribed fruquintinib (N = 64) were identified utilizing SlicerDicer within EPIC. Pts were excluded from final analysis for incomplete information, non-mCRC diagnosis, or failure to initiate fruquintinib (N = 21). OS was defined as the time from initiation of first late-line therapy to death from any cause. Cox regression models were utilized for multivariable adjustment. P-values were calculated using Chi-Square for categorical variables and Kruskal-Wallis for continuous variables. Results: Forty-three pts were included in the final analysis. The median age at initiation of first late-line therapy was 56 years old. Most pts had left-sided primary tumors (60.5%) and liver metastases (79.1%). RAS and BRAF V600E mutations occurred in 65.1% and 4.7% of pts, respectively, and 83.7% of pts had received prior bev therapy. All pts were pMMR/MSI-S. TAS-102 +/- bev was the most common first late-line agent utilized (72.1%), and fruquintinib the most common second late-line agent (73%). Regorafenib was prescribed in only 12 pts (27.9%) and used primarily as a second or third late-line option. OS was not statistically different based on initial late-line therapy chosen (median OS 19.2 months for TAS-102 +/- bev and not estimable for fruquintinib and regorafenib, p = 0.058). This result was maintained on multivariate analysis after adjusting for age, liver metastases, and RAS mutation status. However, fruquintinib sequenced after TAS-102 +/- bev demonstrated improved OS (median 20.5 months) compared to fruquintinib as first or last late-line therapy (median not estimable vs. 15.8 months, p = 0.049). Conclusions: Fruquintinib sequenced after TAS-102 +/- bev may confer an OS advantage in the treatment of mCRC. However, prospective studies evaluating sequencing strategies representative of standard prescribing patterns are still needed to firmly establish optimal sequencing of fruquintinib, regorafenib, and TAS-102-based therapy.

3116 Background: Pralsetinib is an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor that selectively and potently targets oncogenic RET fusion and mutation proteins. RET fusions or mutations are present in various tumor types. We report the final results from the phase 2 portion of ARROW, a phase 1/2, open-label, multi-cohort, dose-expansion study evaluating the efficacy and safety of pralsetinib (NCT03037385) in patients with RET fusion-positive solid tumors other than non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and thyroid cancer. Methods: Eligible pts were ≥18 years of age with a pathologically documented, definitively diagnosed advanced solid tumor with an oncogenic RET fusion or mutation, had previously received standard of care appropriate for their tumor type, and were not eligible for any other study groups. Overall response rate (ORR) and safety were primary endpoints of the study. Key secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The final database lock was May 20, 2024. Results: Twenty-nine patients were enrolled with 11 different solid tumor histologies. Twenty-six (90%) received prior systemic therapy. Median age was 58 years (range 25-75); 59% were female. Twenty-eight patients were included in the efficacy analysis. ORR (by RECIST) was 46.4% (13/28); 10.7% (3/28) achieved complete response (pancreatic cancer, n=2; cancer of unknown primary, n=1) and 35.7% (10/28) achieved partial response. Median PFS was 7 months (95% CI: 3.9, 12.8). Median DOR was 11.1 months (95% CI: 5.5, 25.1). Median OS was 10.3 months (95% CI: 6.8, 25.2). Twenty-five (86%) patients experienced treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs); 19/29 (66%) reported TRAEs ≥grade 3. The most common TRAEs included increased aspartate aminotransferase (11/29; 38%), increased alanine aminotransferase (10/29; 35%), and anemia (9/29; 31%). Four (13.8%) patients experienced hypertension, and 1 (3.4%) patient had ≥grade 3 hypertension. No new safety risks were identified; AEs remained manageable with supportive care and/or dose modifications. Conclusions: In the phase 2 portion of this trial, responses were observed in many tumor types (Table). Pralsetinib demonstrated robust and durable anti-tumor activity with an ORR of 46.4%. These data validate RET fusions as a tissue-agnostic target with sensitivity to RET inhibition and activity beyond NSCLC and thyroid cancer, further supporting the promising potential of pralsetinib to address the unmet medical need in these patients. Clinical trial information: NCT03037385 . Overall response rate by tumor type. Cancer Type (patient n) ORRn (%) Pancreatic (5) 5 (100) Cancer of unknown primary (1) 1 (100) Neuroendocrine (3) 2 (67) Sarcoma (3) 2 (67) Head and neck (2) 1 (50) Small cell lung (2) 1 (50) Hepatobiliary (4) 1 (25) Colorectal (5), gastric (1), ovarian (1), thymic (1) 0

4516 Background: Ipilimumab/nivolumab (ipi/nivo) is a standard of care first-line treatment (tx) for patients (pts) with mccRCC; however, ideal timing of subsequent immunotherapy txs are not well defined. We performed an analysis of patients initially treated with ipi/nivo and subsequent cohort assignments on PDIGREE (A031704). Methods: The PDIGREE trial treated pts with IMDC intermediate/poor risk mccRCC with first-line ipi/nivo (Step 1) at NCTN sites (categorized as academic (A), academic regional (R), and community (C)). Subsequent management was based on iRECIST responses at 12 weeks: pts with complete response (CR) received 1-year nivo maintenance; pts with progressive disease (PD) received cabozantinib (cabo) monotherapy, pts with non-CR/non-PD were randomized to nivo with or without cabo (for primary endpoint of overall survival [OS], target sample size was 1175). Enrollment was held when the randomized sample target was reached. Pts with unresolved toxicity at week 22 were managed off protocol. Step 1 pt demographics, assignments into Step 2, and adverse event (AE) data are presented. Descriptive statistics were used, and cohorts were compared using a chi-square test. These data were released with DSMB approval and do not inform the primary OS endpoint (1EP). Results: From May 2019 to May 2024, 1111 pts were enrolled and treated with ipi/nivo. Pt characteristics included median age 64.0 years (range 29.0-86.0); 819 (73.7%) males; White (85.1%), Hispanic (10.4%), Black (4.2%), and American Indian/Native Hawaiian (1.3%); 849 (76.8%) intermediate risk/257 (23.2%) poor risk; 458 (41.2%) at Academic, 113 (10.2%) at Regional, and 540 (48.6%) at Community centers; and 603 (54.3%) with de novo metastases. 364 pts (33%) stopped tx in Step 1: 160 (44%) for AEs, 46 (13%) for PD/clinical PD/suspected PD, 42 (12%) withdrawals, 39 (11%) alternative txs, 37 (10%) deaths on the study, 12 (3%) other complicating disease, 8 (2%) MD decision and 19 (5%) other reasons. Of the 37 deaths, 15 (1.4%) grade 5 SAEs were reported, 6 of which were due to PD. Of 747 (67%) pts registered to Step 2 at 3 months, 9 (1.2%) achieved CR, and 141 (18.9%) pts were assigned to the PD cohort. 597 pts (80%) were randomized for the 1EP, notable with fewer pts with poor risk [(21 vs 27%, p = 0.01] and bone metastases [24.5% vs 34.2%, p = 0.0007] compared to Step 1 pts who discontinued tx. Gr 3/4 tx-related AEs in 314/1093 (29%) evaluable pts included diarrhea/colitis (8%), transaminase elevation (3%), rash (2%), adrenal insufficiency (2%), fatigue (2%), and hypophysitis (1%). Conclusions: The PDIGREE trial enrolled a representative US-based population with mccRCC. Step 1 pt characteristics and associated outcomes with induction ipi/nivo reveal new insights into the tolerability and tx response of 1L ipi/nivo. Clinical trial information: NCT03793166 .

4568 Background: The 2IR immune response score was initially developed using bulk RNA sequencing of pre-treatment tissue from ImVigor 210 and CheckMate 275 trials, however these trials enrolled patients (pts) with pure urothelial carcinoma (pUC) histology. Patients with hsUC often exhibit worse response to immune checkpoint inibitors (ICI) than patients with pUC. Here, we evaluated the 2IR score as a prognostic or predictive biomarker in real-world pts with hsUC. Methods: Specimens from pts with pUC (n = 1677) and hsUC (n = 417) were profiled at Caris Life Sciences (Phoenix, AZ) using next generation sequencing (NGS) of DNA and RNA. HsUC histologies included majority ( > 50%) squamous (n = 340), sarcomatoid (n = 51), neuroendocrine (n = 20), and micropapillary (n = 6) component. 2IR was calculated by comparative RNA expression of 10 adaptive immune genes and 39 pro-tumorigenic genes. Tumors were classified as 2IR-Low (2IR ≤ -0.5), -Mid (-0.5 < 2IR < 0), and -High (2IR ≥ 0), as previously described (Wang et al., 2022). Spearman correlation analysis was utilized to compare 2IR with tumor mutation burden (TMB), interferon score (IFN) and the tumor microenvironment (TME) cell fractions estimated using quanTIseq. Clinical outcomes included real-world overall survival (rwOS) from ICI start to last contact and time on treatment (ToT) with pembrolizumab, obtained via matched insurance claims data and calculated using Kaplan-Meier methods, while Hazard ratio (HR) was calculated by Cox proportional model. Results: For patients with hsUC, distribution of 2IR score was High 5.76%, Mid 33.3%, and Low 60.9%. Median 2IR score was significantly lower in squamous (-0.60, p < 0.0001) and sarcomatoid UC (-0.82, p < 0.0001) compared to pUC (-0.41) and significantly higher in neuroendocrine UC (-0.15, p = 0.003). Among patients with hsUC, median rwOS was significantly longer for patients with high/mid 2IR score compared to low 2IR score (25.3 [10.9-39.3] months vs. 8.7 [6.2-11.3] months; HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34 – 0.78, p = 0.0017). ToT with pembrolizumab was also significantly longer for high/mid 2IR score compared to low 2IR score (3.0 [1.4-5.5] months vs. 2.1 [1.4-3.3] months; HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.46-1.00, p = 0.0471). Similar to pUC, 2IR score in patients with squamous UC was positively associated with CD8 T cell infiltration (r = 0.39; p < 0.0001), IFN score (r = 0.41, p < 0.0001), and TMB (r = 0.20, p < 0.001) and negatively associated with M1 macrophage infiltration (r = -0.25, p < 0.0001). 2IR scores in hsUC correlated positively but not significantly with mutations in TP53 (Median: -0.59 vs -0.62, p = 0.067) and PIK3CA (Median: -0.56 vs -0.61, p = 0.172) and negatively with mutations in CDKN2A (Median: -0.67 vs -0.59, p = 0.052). Conclusions: In a real-world cohort of patients with hsUC, we show the 2IR score may be prognostic for rwOS and predictive for pembrolizumab ToT. Prospective studies are needed to further validate this biomarker for use in this population.

4558 Background: In the past 7 years, 4 immuno-oncology (IO) based combinations have been approved for mRCC. However, QOL data on these combinations are limited to trials in which collection and reporting was not standardized, which further limits cross trial comparisons. Real-world QOL data with multiple treatment regimens are needed to understand how these regimens are tolerated in practice. Methods: ODYSSEY is a multi-site, prospective observational study of 500 US pts with mRCC. Pts must have mRCC (any histology), no prior ST, and follow up at a PCORnet study site. Exclusion criteria include treatment for cancer except mRCC. The primary objective is to determine patterns of change in QOL and symptom burden of pts with mRCC. Minimally important differences (MID) are 3 points for FKSI-19 total score, 1 point for the FKSI-Disease Related Symptoms (DRS) subscale and 7 points for FACT-G. Results: As of 1/6/25, 392 pts were enrolled of whom 299 were managed with ST. Of pts on ST, 114 were treated with IO-IO, 108 with IO-TKI, 33 with IO alone, 27 with Other, and 18 with TKI alone. Median follow up for all pts is 8.8 months (IQR 2.9, 16.2). IO-IO pts are median age 64 yrs, 81% male, 84% white, 56% prior nephrectomy, 84% clear cell; IO-TKI pts median age 66 yrs, 76% male, 92% white, 43% prior nephrectomy, 66% clear cell; IMDC risk profiles are similar. IO-IO pts are more likely to be KPS 100; whereas, IO-TKI pts have a higher median number of metastatic sites and are more likely to have bone or liver metastasis. With median follow-up of 6.0 (IQR 1.8, 14.9) and 8.8 months (4.5, 17.8) in the IO-IO and IO-TKI cohorts, 17 (15%) and 21 (19%) pts had died with a median time to death of 5.4 (2.5, 6.4) and 5.7 months (4.4, 12.8), respectively. 20 (18%) and 16 (15%) pts on IO-IO and IO-TKI had discontinued therapy at a median of 3.0 (IQR 2.0, 4.0) and 6.4 months (2.4, 13.0), respectively. Rates of discontinuation for disease progression and toxicity are similar. Baseline PROs for pts on ST are shown in the Table (higher score indicates better QOL), with RCT data for reference (NA, not assessed). Conclusions: In our prospective multi-center ODYSSEY study, we demonstrate that real world pts treated with contemporary ST have worse baseline QOL than those enrolled on pivotal RCTs. One-third of IO-IO and IO-TKI pts died or discontinued therapy within 6 months of initiation. Our data on real world vs RCT differences in baseline QOL may partially explain the limitations of current IO combination regimens in practice and support development of alternative treatment approaches. Instrument, Mean (SD) ODYSSEYIO-IO(N=114) CheckMate214(N=425) ODYSSEYIO-TKI(N=108) KEYNOTE426(N=402) CheckMate9ER(N=323) CLEAR(N=351) FKSI-19 total 56.0 (12.5) 60.1 (9.8) 53.8 (11.8) NA 58.7 (10.6) NA FKSI-DRS 27.5 (6.3) 30.7 (4.5) 27.0 (5.8) 32 (4.2) 30.2 (5.2) 31.3 (4.4) FACT-G 82.4 (16.7) 82.6 (15.0) 78.5 (16.0) NA NA NA