Citations

Purpose To define expert consensus on whether and how lateral extra‐articular procedures (LEAPs) should accompany anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction to optimize outcomes in ACL‐deficient knees. Methods Fifty‐five knee surgeons from 17 countries on 5 continents completed a 3‐round modified Delphi process. Twenty‐one statements on patient selection for combined ACL reconstruction (ACLR) + LEAPs were graded on 5‐point Likert scales; ≥75% “agree/strongly agree” signified consensus. Strength of recommendation was ranked, and statements failing the threshold were revised or discarded after discussion. Results One statement achieved unanimous agreement (100%): it is strongly recommended to add a LEAP for active patients ≤25 years receiving hamstring‐autograft ACLR to reduce graft failure. Strong consensus (≥90%) supported LEAPs in primary ACLR when grade 3 pivot shift (97.9%), knee hyperextension (97.9%), skeletally immature status (79.5%), revision ACLR (91.5%), return to pivoting sports (93.2%), active patients ≤25 years using nonhamstring grafts (90.7%), grade 3 Lachman test (90%), and when multiple relative risk factors coexist (statement 36, 97.1%). Consensus (75%‐89.9%) favored LEAPs for chronic symptomatic ACL deficiency (86.1%), posterior tibial slope >12° (85.7%), and a history of contralateral ACL injury (88.9%). Eight statements did not reach consensus regarding small‐diameter autografts, female athletes, imaging signs of anterolateral injury (e.g., Segond fracture, lateral femoral‐notch sign), and concomitant meniscal procedures. One statement on LEAPs with primary ACL repair was withdrawn because the project focused on reconstruction. Conclusions International experts strongly recommend adding a LEAP in young active patients undergoing hamstring‐autograft ACLR and in cases of high‐grade rotational or anterior laxity, knee hyperextension, revision surgery, or returning to pivoting sports. Unresolved issues include small graft size, female athletes, imaging findings of rotational instability, and concurrent meniscal procedures, highlighting priorities for future research. Level of Evidence Level V, expert opinion.

Background Facial synkinesis is characterized by involuntary co-contraction of facial muscles during voluntary movements, impairing both function and aesthetics following facial paralysis. It affects approximately 21% of individuals following Bell's palsy, with symptoms such as involuntary eye closure when smiling. While the pathophysiology remains unclear, therapeutic options range from conservative approaches like botulinum toxin to surgical interventions. A bibliometric analysis offers insights into research trends, key contributors, and knowledge gaps in this field. Materials & Methods A systematic search was conducted in the Scopus database up to July 2024, identifying 100 most-cited articles on facial synkinesis. Articles were categorized as basic science (BSc), clinical (CL), or review articles, with additional data extracted on study focus, journal type, citation metrics, and authorship. Statistical analyses included Pearson's χ2 and Wilcoxon rank sum tests. Results The articles spanned 1952–2020, with the highest publication frequency in 2017. Clinical studies constituted 76%, focusing on conservative treatments (35%), diagnostics (28%), and surgical interventions (19%). Plastic surgery and ENT journals accounted for 76% of publications. The most-cited article, published in neurology (1975), investigated electrophysiologic diagnostics. Citation metrics revealed a mean citation count of 38.3 and a median publication year of 2010. The 50 newer articles demonstrated a trend toward surgical management of synkinesis. Conclusions This bibliometric analysis highlights the evolution of research on facial synkinesis, emphasizing the predominance of clinical studies, focus on conservative treatments and gaps in basic science research. Further research is needed to fill knowledge gaps to improve outcomes for affected patients.

PURPOSE Continued improvement in outcomes is needed for advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC). Methods Alliance A091802 is a randomized phase II trial of avelumab (800 mg IV once every 2 weeks) plus cetuximab (500 mg/m 2 IV once every 2 weeks) versus avelumab alone once every 2 weeks for up to 2 years. Cetuximab was given for 1 year in the avelumab + cetuximab arm. Crossover at progression to avelumab + cetuximab was allowed. Randomization was 1:1, stratified by PD-L1 and HIV status. Patients had distant metastatic or unresectable locally advanced cSCC, were anti–PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibody–naive, had no previous cetuximab in the advanced setting, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and could be HIV+ (CD4 >200, viral load <200). Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia, immunosuppression, or active autoimmune diseases were excluded. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS; null hypothesis: median = 12 months v alternative hypothesis: 21 months or a 75% improvement, power of 80% with one-sided alpha .2, n = 57, 37 PFS events required). Secondary end points were overall survival, objective response rates (ORRs), clinical benefit rate, and toxicity. RESULTS Sixty patients were enrolled; 57 patients were evaluable. The median age was 72 years, all were HIV–; 75.4% was PD-L1+, 84.2% had head/neck origin, 47.4% had distant metastasis, and there were no differences in baseline characteristics by arm. Avelumab + cetuximab significantly improved PFS versus avelumab (median, 11.1 [7.6-not reached (NR)] v 3.0 months [2.7-13.6] hazard ratio, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.23 to 0.97], P = .018). Avelumab patients who crossed over (n = 9) to combination had a median PFS after crossover of 11.3 months (5.8-NR). The confirmed ORR was 27.6% with avelumab + cetuximab and 21.4% with avelumab. Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 48.3% and 21.5% of patients with avelumab + cetuximab (most common: rash [20.7%], infusion reaction [20.7%]) and avelumab, respectively. CONCLUSION Avelumab + cetuximab significantly improved PFS versus avelumab alone in patients with advanced cSCC. Alliance A091802 supports a larger confirmatory study with the combination of cetuximab and PD-1:PD-(L)1 blockade.

6002 Background: There is a need for continued improvement in outcomes with systemic therapy for advanced cSCC. Pre-clinical data suggest immunologic synergy between IgG1 mAb therapy targeting EGFR and PD-1:PD-(L)1 blockade. Methods: Alliance A091802 is a randomized phase II trial of avelumab (AV) (800 mg) plus cetuximab (C) (500 mg/m2) vs. AV alone every 2 weeks for up to 2 years (yrs). C was given for 1 yr in the AV+C arm. Crossover at progression to AV+C was allowed in the AV arm. Randomization was 1:1 and stratified by PD-L1 [+(>1%) vs. -] and HIV status (+ vs. -). Eligible patients (pts) had distant metastatic or unresectable locally advanced cSCC, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mAb naive, no prior cetuximab in the advanced setting, ECOG PS 0-2, HIV+ if CD4 >200 and VL <200. Pts with CLL, immunosuppression, or active autoimmune diseases were excluded. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) (Ho: Median=12 mo vs Ha: 21 mo or a 75% improvement, power of 80% with one-sided alpha 0.2, n=57, 37 PFS events required). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), confirmed response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate, and toxicity. After 31/37 events, an early unplanned analysis (along with sensitivity analyses) was performed because it became apparent that 37 events would not be reached. These results were submitted to the Alliance Data and Safety Monitoring Board, which recommended releasing the data. Data cutoff was 1/16/25. Results: 60 pts were enrolled between 2019-2023; 57 pts were evaluable. Median age was 72 yrs (41‒93), 96.5% were white, 91.2% male, all HIV-; 75.4% PD-L1+. 84.2% were head/neck origin, 47.1% had distant metastasis, and there were no differences in baseline characteristics by arm. AV+C significantly improved PFS compared to AV [median 11.1 months (mo) (7.6‒not reached (NR)) vs. 4.8 mo (2.8‒NR) hazard ratio (HR) 0.53 95% CI (0.26‒1.09), one-sided p=0.041]. The median OS of AV+C vs. AV was NR (25.2‒NR) vs. 35.8 mo (18.6‒NR) HR 0.77 (0.33‒1.78) p=0.267. ORR was 31.0% in the AV+C arm and 21.4% in the AV arm. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) of any grade (G) occurred in 93% and 78.6%, respectively, and were G>3 in 48.3% and 21.5% of pts in the AV+C [most common G3 TRAEs were rash (20.7%) and infusion-related reaction (20.7%)] and AV arms, respectively. There were no G5 events. Outcomes after crossover and by PD-L1 status will be presented subsequently. Conclusions: Avelumab plus cetuximab significantly improved PFS vs. avelumab alone in advanced cSCC pts, without unexpected toxicity. Alliance A091802 supports a larger confirmatory study with combination cetuximab and PD-1:PD-(L)1 blockade. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171; U10CA180868 (NRG Oncology); U10CA180888 (SWOG); https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . EMD Serono CrossRef Funder ID: 10.13039/100004755. Clinical trial information: NCT03944941 .

e23020 Background: Precision medicine studies must overcome the challenges of identifying patients with uncommon molecular targets and small cohort sizes for correlative studies. BASECAMP-1 (NCT04981119) is a prescreening study that uses a single assay to address both problems by: 1) efficiently screening potentially eligible patients for subsequent clinical trials of Tmod logic-gated chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR T) therapies; and 2) providing a large dataset available for translational studies. Methods: Initially, patients were identified for BASECAMP-1 by consenting and genotyping all potentially eligible patients for human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-A*02 heterozygosity. To improve screening efficiency, we co-developed a patient-matching program with Tempus AI, Inc (Tempus), in which Tempus informs the principal investigators of next-generation sequenced (NGS) patients with HLA-A*02 heterozygosity within their health system who may be eligible for BASECAMP-1. Patients are screened using the Tempus xT platform, which uses genomic and RNA sequencing (RNAseq) analyses to determine gene mutations and expression. Enrolled patients with colorectal (CRC), non-small cell lung, ovarian (OVCA), and pancreatic cancers (PANC) were analyzed for tumor purity, mutation distribution, HLA-A*02 loss of heterozygosity (LOH) status, and RNAseq to validate the data available for future clinical analyses. Results: As of January 3, 2025, 80 participants have been enrolled in BASECAMP-1. Through individual screening methods, 1684 patients were screened at 13 study sites, of which 30 patients had tumor-specific HLA-A*02 LOH and were enrolled (~1 eligible patient identified per 56 screened). The patient-matching program identified 282 patients with HLA-A*02 LOH at 12 sites; of these, 50 consented to the BASECAMP-1 study (~1 patient enrolled per 6 identified), demonstrating higher efficiency than the individual patient screening method. Correlative data from xT were available for 360 patients with germline HLA-A*02 and provided insights into mutational distribution and target expression. LOH status was not associated with tumor-specific differences in missense mutational distribution. RNAseq data demonstrated higher CEACAM5 expression in CRC and higher MSLN in PANC and OVCA vs other tumor types, while EGFR was consistently expressed with reduced variance across tumor types, confirming these as potential target antigens for Tmod CAR T interventional trials EVEREST-1, EVEREST-2, and DENALI-1. Conclusions: Identification and enrollment of HLA-A*02 LOH patients into BASECAMP-1 for logic-gated CAR T therapeutic studies were accelerated by the patient matching program. Concurrent xT analysis provides opportunities to augment analyses from robust propensity-matched comparisons, response correlation studies, and other translational discovery. Clinical trial information: NCT04981119 .

1652 Background: Tarlatamab is a bispecific T-cell engager targeting DLL3 that has shown promise as a therapy in small cell lung cancer. Administering tarlatamab requires careful consideration of immune-related adverse events (AE), including cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). Prescribing information recommends patients to be monitored for 22-24 hours in an appropriate healthcare setting for cycle 1 (C1), days 1 and 8. At Mayo Clinic in Rochester MN (MCR), tarlatamab is initially administered in a hospital-based outpatient (HBO) setting utilizing an innovative remote patient monitoring system (RPM). In this study, we describe our RPM process and patient outcomes thus far. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed records of patients treated with tarlatamab from August through December 2024. All patients received tarlatamab in the HBO setting and were enrolled into RPM for C1, days 1–10. Patients attended daily HBO visits on days 1–3 and 8–10 of C1 and were required to stay within 30 minutes of the hospital with a 24-hour caregiver for 48 hours following infusion days in C1-2. Data on patient characteristics, frequency of RPM alerts, escalations, rate of CRS & ICANS, and need for hospitalizations were reported using descriptive metrics. Results: As part of RPM, patients are provided with a kit containing preconnected Bluetooth-enabled devices to measure vital signs (VS), including blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), temperature (T), and pulse oximetry (SpO2). The kit also includes a cellular-enabled tablet for electronic ICANS questionnaires, which upload directly into our electronic medical record system. Patients are required to log VS four times daily, monitored in real-time by a centralized virtual RPM nursing (RN) team. Embedded decision trees trigger alerts, prompting the RN team to contact patients and follow care pathways for escalations as needed. Among the 16 patients treated, the median age was 68 years, and the median ECOG PS was 1. During the 10-day RPM period, a total of 2,233 VS entries were recorded. Of these, 88% (14/16) of patients had alerts triggered, with a median of 2 alerts per patient. Alerts were mostly for out-of-range systolic BP (56%), HR (56%), and T (25%), with none for SpO2. The RN team escalated alerts in 50% (8/16) of the patients. Overall, 38% (6/16) of patients were managed entirely in the HBO setting. Among the 63% hospitalized, 56% had CRS limited to grade (G) 2, and 31% had ICANS limited to G3. Two patients were hospitalized for other indications. The mean length of stay was 2.6 days, with no ICU admissions. Conclusions: Our experience shows that frequent monitoring required with tarlatamab can be safely and effectively executed in an outpatient setting with the utilization of an RPM system. It can potentially minimize the burden of hospitalizations for patients and the healthcare system.

3040 Background: EVEREST-2 is a first-in-human, phase 1/2 trial to assess the safety and efficacy of A2B694, an autologous, logic-gated Tmod CAR T therapy targeted to MSLN, which is normally expressed in the mesothelium and can be upregulated in many solid tumors. A2B694 is designed to overcome challenges of on-target, off-tumor toxicity that have limited other MSLN-targeted approaches by combining a CAR-activating receptor targeting MSLN with a blocker CAR that recognizes HLA-A*02, to distinguish between normal and tumor cells (Tokatlian, et al. J Immunother Cancer. 2022). Methods: Adults with recurrent unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic cancers with MSLN expression who have progressed after standard-of-care therapy are eligible for EVEREST-2. Enrollment to EVEREST-2 and collection of T-cells occurs through the ongoing prescreening study BASECAMP-1 (NCT04981119). When clinically appropriate, A2B694 is manufactured from cryopreserved T cells, and patients undergo lymphodepletion before A2B694 infusion. The dose-escalation phase is evaluating the safety and tolerability of A2B694 to identify the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). Dose escalation was started at 1x10 8 Tmod positive cells (dose level [DL] 1) and will increase up to 14x10 8 in combination with low-dose IL-2 (DL 5). The dose-expansion phase will confirm RP2D and collect biomarker data to further characterize A2B694. Results: As of January 15, 2025, 5 participants (median age: 60 years; range, 50-84) have enrolled on EVEREST-2 and received A2B694 at DLs 1-2; participants had ovarian cancer (n = 3), pancreatic cancer (n = 1), and non-small cell lung cancer (n = 1) and had received a median of 4 prior lines of therapy (range, 1-7). Lymphodepleting chemotherapy was well tolerated with no significant cytopenias observed. The most common adverse events were lymphopenia (7 [14.6%]) and decreased appetite (6 [12.5%]). There were no dose-limiting toxicities, cytokine release syndrome, nor related neurotoxicity. One participant was admitted to the hospital for decreased appetite. No long-term toxicities have been noted up to 7.5 months post-infusion. Of the participants who have received A2B694, 5 were efficacy evaluable at DLs 1-2. A2B694 was detected post-infusion in the peripheral blood in all patients. Additionally, A2B694 was detected in an abdominal tumor biopsy from a patient with pancreatic cancer 42 days post-infusion. Conclusions: The logic-gated approach was successful at reducing toxicity seen with prior MSLN-targeted CAR T therapies, and A2B694 showed successful CAR T expansion and tumor infiltration. The maximum tolerated dose has not been reached, and results from the dose-escalation phase continue to determine the RP2D. Clinical trial information: NCT06051695 .

e16408 Background: A2B530 is a logic-gated CEA-targeting Tmod CAR T therapy being evaluated in the EVEREST-1 (NCT05736731) phase 1/2 study. Tmod CAR T therapy addresses challenges of on-target, off-tumor toxicity that have limited application of CAR T therapy to solid tumors (Tabernero, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2017); through use of a CEA-targeted CAR-activating receptor combined with a blocking receptor recognizing HLA-A*02, A2B530 can distinguish between tumor and normal cells (Sandberg, et al. Sci Transl Med. 2022). Methods: Patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors expressing CEA and tumor-associated HLA-A*02 LOH are enrolled through the ongoing prescreening study BASECAMP-1 (NCT04981119). Eligible patients undergo leukapheresis and, when clinically appropriate, A2B530 is manufactured for the EVEREST-1 study. Patients undergo lymphodepletion before A2B530 infusion. The phase 1 dose escalation will evaluate safety, tolerability, manufacturing feasibility, and biomarkers starting at 1x10 8 Tmod positive cells (dose level [DL] 1) up to 6x10 8 cells and higher doses of lymphodepleting chemotherapy (LDC; DL 5). After the recommended phase 2 dose has been established, dose expansion will confirm safety and activity. Results: As of January 15, 2025, 14 total participants were enrolled on EVEREST-1 and had received A2B530 infusion at DLs 1-5, 4 (29%) with pancreatic (PANC) and 10 (71%) with colorectal cancer. Median age was 57 years (range, 34-76), with a median of 2 prior lines of therapy (range, 1-6). LDC was well tolerated: neutropenia nadired at days 7-10, with recovery in all patients, and no significant episodes of prolonged cytopenia. There were no dose-limiting toxicities, grade > 3 serious adverse events (AEs), or episodes of related neurotoxicity. Most gastrointestinal AEs occurred early and were grade 1 or 2. One patient in DL 2 (2x10 8 cells) experienced possible grade 2 cytokine release syndrome (CRS), which started on day 15 and resolved with supportive therapy within 2 days; later the CRS diagnosis was confounded by a positive blood culture from the participant’s central line. The low rate of CRS is consistent with the low levels of serum cytokines measured up to 28 days post-infusion. Central response assessment has been completed for the 6 participants in DLs 1-2, with a partial response observed in 1 of 3 (33%) of participants with PANC. Peak expansion shows a possible dose response. Conclusions: Treatment with A2B530 was well tolerated, showing potential clinical efficacy and a potential dose response, although these are initial results. Maximum tolerated dose has not been reached, and dose escalation continues to determine the optimal phase 2 dosing of this treatment regimen. Clinical trial information: NCT05736731 .

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 .