Citations

e13660 Background: We previously showed success with collection of structured data elements within the electronic health record using the minimum common oncology data elements (henceforth, mCODE tool) supported by soft-stop close visit validation (CVV) and staff support interventions in a limited cohort. Since the additional interventions are resource-intensive and difficult to apply across an entire department, we therefore implemented a department-wide roll-out supported by the least resource-intensive interventions while monitoring uptake. Methods: The mCODE tool collects five data elements: stage, disease status, performance status, intent of treatment, and intent to change therapy. The Department of Oncology providers received education on the mCODE tool and were asked to implement use at a faculty meeting; soft-stop CVV was enabled at that time. The percentage of data captured for each data element was collected from the notes of providers who did not participate in prior pilots for the 4 months post-implementation. mCODE tool usage was defined as entry of at least one data element except stage (as stage has long been a structured data element in Epic, can be entered independently of the mCODE tool, and many providers were entering stage prior to mCODE tool introduction). Results: 86 MDs and 20 APPs for a total of 106 providers were included, resulting in 14,973 visits and 8,745 unique patients. 73.6% of providers (n =78) utilized the mCODE tool. Of those who utilized the tool, median overall data capture across the four data elements was 24.0%. 22.6% of providers (n =24) achieved > 80% overall data capture and 32.1% (n =34) had over 50% overall data capture despite minimal intervention. 75.6% of MDs (n = 65) utilized the tool with a median data capture of 16.3% compared to 65% of APPs (n = 13) with a median data capture of 90.3%. Rates of data capture for individual data elements were similar. Conclusions: Use of soft-stop CVV appears to drive utilization of the mCODE tool but is insufficient to promote > 80% data capture for most providers without more intervention. Supportive interventions such as individualized assistance with incorporation into existing templates and directed communication from leadership remain necessary to promote use of structured data elements and will be implemented in sequence to understand how we achieve the target data capture ( > 80%) at scale.

Abstract Posaconazole delayed-release (DR) tablets are labelled as ‘do not crush’ medications. Despite this designation, emerging research demonstrates successful attainment of therapeutic serum concentrations, suggesting that they may be pharmacokinetically superior to the immediate-release (IR) suspension when given via enteric feeding tube (EFT). While crushed posaconazole DR tablets may be better suited than the IR suspension to attain therapeutic serum concentrations, several practical factors must be considered, including lack of dose equivalency between crushed DR tablets for EFT administration and DR tablets swallowed whole and the risk of EFT occlusion. This article summarizes the current evidence on posaconazole serum concentrations with crushed DR tablets administered via EFT, explores risks of this practice and provides mitigation strategies for application in the clinical setting, including proposed dosing and administration practices.

9510 Background: Although acute toxicities associated with adoptive cellular therapy using lifileucel are well described and largely occur within the first 2 weeks of treatment, adverse events beyond this early window remain incompletely characterized. We sought to characterize treatment-related adverse events (AEs) with emphasis on those starting or persisting ≥2 weeks after lifileucel infusion. Methods: We conducted a retrospective multicenter study across three centers (Moffitt Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, and Mayo Clinic). Patients with advanced melanoma treated with lifileucel were included. The primary endpoint was incidence and characterization of AEs occurring or persisting ≥2 weeks after standard of care lifileucel infusion. Results: Among 79 patients (median follow-up 11 months [95% CI, 9.6–15]), median age was 63 years (range 30–79), 59% were male (n = 47), 41% were female (n = 32), and ECOG PS was 0–1 in 98%. Patients received a median of 5 IL-2 doses (range 0–6). Of 79 patients, 78 experienced treatment-related adverse events that either persisted or occurred >2 weeks after cell infusion. A total of 308 delayed treatment-related adverse events were identified; 96 were new events (31%) and 212 (69%) were continued toxicities that started < 2 weeks after cell infusion. Lymphopenia was the most common delayed or persistent toxicity, occurring in a majority of patients (n = 68/79, 86%). Treatment-associated anemia (n = 59/79, 75%), fatigue (n = 56/79, 71%) and thrombocytopenia (n = 24/79, 30%) were also common. Viral infections occurred in 9.0% (n = 7), including CMV/EBV viremia (n = 1) and respiratory or gastrointestinal viral infections (metapneumovirus, parainfluenza, SARS-CoV-2, and norovirus). Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) occurred in 2 patients (n = 2/79, 3%) and was fatal in both cases. No other toxicity related deaths were noted. Autoimmune toxicities directly attributable to TIL included vitiligo in 9% (n = 7; median onset 41 days), uveitis in 5% (n = 4; median onset 26 days), and sensorineural hearing loss in 1% (n = 1; onset 28 days). All patients underwent TIL infusion in the inpatient setting; a total of 14 of 79 patients (18%) were re-admitted after discharge due to treatment-related toxicity (median time from infusion 19 days). Conclusions: In this multicenter real-world cohort, toxicities persisting beyond two weeks were largely driven by lymphodepleting chemotherapy–associated immunosuppression and cytopenias. These findings highlight the importance of structured post-discharge monitoring and support ongoing efforts to de-intensify lymphodepleting chemotherapy to improve safety while maintaining clinical benefit.

5069 Background: Inhibition of androgen receptor (AR)-signaling results in increases in double-strand DNA breaks and genomic instability. PARP inhibitors (PARPi) are a standard treatment option for patients (pts) with homologous recombination repair mutations (HRRm). Combinations of PARPi and AR pathway inhibitors (ARPI) are associated with synthetic lethality in multiple pre-clinical studies. Clinical trials have suggested potential benefits with co-targeting PARPi and ARPI in pts with and without HRRm. Methods: Alliance A031902 compared radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS) as co-primary endpoints with enzalutamide and rucaparib (Enz/Ruca) versus enzalutamide plus placebo (Enz/Plac) for pts with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) regardless of BRCA/HRRm status. This trial was conducted by the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology in 36 centers in the US. Target sample size was 1,002 patients. Eligibility required mCRPC with or without measurable metastatic disease and was agnostic regarding HRRm status. The trial was discontinued in 10/2023 due to changes in the treatment landscape for this pt population. Results: Between 10/21 and 4/23, 61 pts were randomized to Enz/Ruca (n=30) or Enz/Plac (n=31). Known BRCA1/2 or PALB2 mutations were present in 1 pt (3.3%) in the Enz/Ruca arm and 1 pt (3.2%) in the Enz/Plac arm; wildtype in 14 (46.7%) vs 15 (48.4%), and unknown in 15 (50%) vs 15 (48.4%), respectively. Three patients (11.5%) in the Enz/Ruca arm discontinued due to an adverse event (AE) vs 0 in the Enz/Plac arm. Among response-evaluable pts, 7/26 (27%) in the Enz/Ruca arm discontinued due to disease progression vs 10/31 (33%) in the Enz/Plac arm. Most common grade 3+ AEs were anemia (33% vs 3%) and hypertension (17% vs 10%) in the Enz/Ruca arm and Enz/Plac arm, respectively. All 61 pts were evaluable for response assessment. PSA declines ≥50% and ≥90% were observed in 79% vs 45% and 60% vs 43% of pts receiving Enz/Ruca versus Enz/Plac, respectively. Median PFS in the Enz/Ruca vs Enz/Plac arms was 17.1 vs 14.2 mos, respectively (HR 1.13 [95% CI: 0.42-3.01], p=0.81), median rPFS (inclusive of unequivocal clinical progression) was 17.1 vs 11.7 mos ( HR 0.72; 95% CI: 0.31-1.67, p = 0.44), and median OS was not reached vs 27.0 mos (HR 0.65; 95% CI: 0.29-1.45, p=0.29). Conclusions: In this prematurely terminated phase III study, Enz/Ruca was generally well tolerated, with the safety profile consistent with prior PARPi/ARPI combinations. Efficacy outcomes for rPFS and OS are inconclusive due to limited sample size. Definitive conclusions regarding the clinical benefit of this combination cannot be determined from this study. Clinical trial information: NCT04455750 .

5054 Background: Rucaparib significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) versus physician’s choice of docetaxel or an androgen-receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) (abiraterone or enzalutamide) in men with BRCA mutations who were chemotherapy-naïve in the mCRPC setting and had received one prior ARPI in the phase 3 TRITON3 trial (NCT02975934). This post-hoc analysis evaluated whether the timing of prior ARPI therapy impacted the efficacy of rucaparib. Methods: Patients were randomized 2:1 to rucaparib (600 mg BID) or physician’s choice of docetaxel or ARPI, after progression on 1 prior second-generation ARPI in any setting. The primary endpoint was rPFS. Outcomes were analyzed according to whether patients received the prior ARPI in the metastatic castration sensitive (mCSPC) or castration resistant (mCRPC) setting. Data cutoff was August 25, 2022. Results: Of the 302 BRCA1/2 patients, 68 received prior ARPI in the mCSPC setting (42 rucaparib; 26 physician’s choice) and 234 in the mCRPC setting (159 rucaparib; 75 physician’s choice). Baseline characteristics were generally similar. Prior treatments in the mCSPC and mCRPC groups, respectively, included abiraterone (73.5% vs 53.0%), enzalutamide (29.4% vs 48.3%), and docetaxel (17.6% vs 24.8%). Median rPFS favored rucaparib over physician’s choice in both groups (mCSPC: 13.6 vs 8.2 months; HR 0.60 [95% CI, 0.32–1.15]; mCRPC: 11.2 vs 5.8 months; HR 0.43 [95% CI, 0.30–0.61]). Median OS was similar between treatments in both settings (mCSPC: 23.2 vs 21.7 months; HR 0.81 [95% CI, 0.47–1.41]; mCRPC: 23.2 vs 21.0 months; HR 0.91 [95% CI, 0.66–1.25]). Treatment-related adverse events occurred at comparable rates (89.6% vs 86.1%). Conclusions: Rucaparib demonstrated efficacy in patients with BRCA-mutated mCRPC, regardless of whether prior ARPI was administered in the mCSPC or mCRPC setting. Clinical trial information: NCT02975934 .

5005 Background: Androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) may have distinct central nervous system (CNS) penetration and differential effects on cognition or quality of life (QOL). AFT-47, “ARACOG” is a prospective, randomized open-label phase 2 trial comparing objective and patient-reported cognitive and QOL outcomes between patients with metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) or non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) treated with darolutamide (DAR) or enzalutamide (ENZ). Methods: Between 8/17/2021 and 3/11/2025, 111 pts were enrolled and randomized 1:1 to treatment with ENZ or DAR. CANTAB, a validated computer-based platform evaluating 5 cognitive domains (PALFAM-memory recall, SWM- spatial working memory, SSP-short-term visual memory, working memory, RVP-rapid visual processing, and OTSMCC- executive function), was performed at baseline, 12, 24, and 48 weeks. Crossover (Xover) was allowed at 12 or 24 weeks for significant pre-specified decline in cognitive testing or patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), or for CNS-associated adverse events, including falls. The primary endpoint was the percent change in the maximally changed cognitive domain (MCCD) from baseline to 24 weeks and was compared between groups with the Wilcoxon rank sum statistic. Patients crossing over prior to 24 weeks were evaluated at the time of Xover and analyzed with their randomized arm. Secondary endpoints included comparison of Xover rates. Results: Among 111 pts, 55 received DAR and 56 received ENZ; median age was 71, 83% White. 95 pts (48 DAR, 47 ENZ) were evaluable for the primary endpoint. Baseline CANTAB was similar between groups. Median cognitive change in MCCD between baseline and 24 weeks was -15.8% and -36.1% for the DAR and ENZ pts, respectively (p = 0.009) (Table). Individual cognitive domains suggest possible learning effect (increased scores) for DAR and are stable or show mild decline for ENZ treated patients at 24 weeks. 32 DAR (58%) and 33 ENZ (59%) participants were eligible for Xover by 24 weeks, and 23 pts crossed over by 24 weeks. All Xover was pts randomized to ENZ (crossed to DAR), with the most common causes being decline in objective (N = 14) or subjective (N = 11) cognitive testing. Conclusions: In this US randomized trial comparing DAR to ENZ, the primary endpoint of differential cognitive effects was met. ENZ showed significantly greater cognitive score decline than DAR at 24 weeks in the MCCD after treatment initiation. Learning effect was seen with DAR but not ENZ. Longer term follow-up of cognitive change and PROM analyses are ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT04335682 . Percent change in maximally changed cognitive domain by treatment. DAR (N=48) ENZ (N=47) Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test Result CANTAB domain PALFAM SWM Degree of change -15.8 (-38.8, -2.6) -36.1 (-59.3, -16.7) P=0.009

4213 Background: Elraglusib (9-ING-41), a glycogen synthase kinase-3β (GSK-3β) inhibitor, has multimodal antitumor activity. In the international, open-label, randomized phase 2 1801 Part 3B study, elraglusib plus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GnP) was evaluated in previously untreated metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC), with patients randomized 2:1 to weekly elraglusib/GnP or GnP alone. Primary endpoints were median overall survival (mOS) and 1-year survival. The GnP control arm demonstrated shorter mOS than contemporary randomized trials (7.2 months vs 9.2 months in NAPOLI-3 and 9.7 months in PASS-01), driven by higher early mortality (0–2 months: 23.1% vs 10.1% in NAPOLI-3). Given balanced randomization, similar early mortality was inferred in the elraglusib/GnP arm, prompting post-hoc analyses to contextualize efficacy and identify factors associated with early death. Methods: Efficacy and safety were summarized descriptively. Time-to-event endpoints were analyzed using Kaplan–Meier estimates, log-rank testing, and Cox proportional hazards models. Response rates were compared using the Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test. Post-hoc subgroup, sensitivity, and machine-learning–based multivariate analyses explored clinical, demographic, and biomarker correlates of survival and early mortality. Results: In the full randomized population (elraglusib/GnP n=155; GnP n=78), elraglusib/GnP improved mOS by 2.9 months versus GnP (10.1 vs 7.2 months; HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.46–0.84; p=0.01), with 1-year survival rates of 44.1% versus 22.3%. Among patients receiving ≥1 full treatment cycle, mOS was 12.5 months with elraglusib/GnP and 8.5 months with GnP, comparable to contemporary registrational trials. Across multiple post-hoc sensitivity analyses—including evaluable patients, those matched to NAPOLI-3 baseline tumor burden, patients treated in the EU (early mortality 4%), and those achieving ≥20% CA19-9 decline within the first 1–2 cycles—elraglusib/GnP consistently demonstrated a ≥4-month OS advantage. Early death was associated with low baseline albumin (<3 g/dL), high CA19-9 (>800 U/mL), high tumor burden, and KRAS, TP53, and CDKN2A co-mutations. Conclusions: The elevated early mortality in the GnP control arm reflects enrollment of a heterogeneous, real-world mPDAC population with less restrictive eligibility than recent registrational trials. Post-hoc analyses identify key clinical and molecular drivers of early death and confirm a consistent survival benefit with elraglusib/GnP. These hypothesis-generating findings directly inform eligibility criteria, stratification, and endpoint assumptions for the planned phase 3 trial. Clinical trial information: NCT03678883 .

3109 Background: Poly(ADP-ribose) glycohydrolase (PARG) is an enzyme that catalyzes the removal of poly-ADP-ribose (PAR) chains from proteins during DNA damage repair. PARG inhibition leads to selective cell death in tumors with underlying replication fork defects, including BRCAm tumors, through a mechanism distinct from PARP inhibition. ETX-19477 is an oral, potent, and selective PARG inhibitor that shows robust preclinical activity in mouse models of ovarian, breast, and gastric cancers. Methods: ERADIC8 is an open-label, multicenter, Phase 1/2 study, consisting of two parts, dose escalation and dose expansion. A Bayesian Optimal Interval Design was used to enroll patients (pts) into dose escalation cohorts, with enrichment for pts with BRCAm high grade serous ovarian (HGSOC) and breast cancers. The primary objective is to assess safety/tolerability of ETX-19477 and define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended Phase 2 dose(s). Secondary and exploratory objectives include pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary anti-tumor activity per RECIST v1.1. ETX-19477 is given orally once or twice daily in 21-day cycles. Results: As of Jan 6 2026, 45 pts were enrolled into the study across 11 dose levels (range: 80-750 mg QD, 190-350 mg BID). Tumor types included ovarian (n=24, BRCAm: 18), breast (n=8, BRCAm: 7), endometrial (n=6, BRCAm: 0), colorectal (CRC, n=3, BRCAm: 1), and other (n=4, BRCAm: 0) cancers. Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs; any grade) occurring in >20% of pts were nausea (53%), vomiting (38%), and fatigue (24%). The only Gr3 TRAE occurring in >5% of pts was neutropenia (16%). There was one Gr4 TRAE of neutropenia in 1 pt (2%) and no Gr5 TRAEs. ETX-19477 exposure is dose proportional, and the BID regimen achieves >85% PARG inhibition throughout the dosing interval in a blood-based PAR accumulation pharmacodynamic assay. As of the data cutoff, dose escalation is ongoing at 350 mg BID (MTD has not been defined) and dose expansion is ongoing at 200-300 mg BID. Among BRCAm, HGSOC pts enrolled at BID dose levels, there were 7 evaluable pts with a median of 4 prior lines of therapy (range 2–11): 2 pts achieved a partial response (PR, 29%) and 3 pts achieved stable disease (SD, 43%). Both pts with PRs were platinum-resistant and received prior PARP inhibitor treatment. 1 pt with BRCAm CRC remains on active therapy (250 mg BID) with SD for 7 months. Conclusions: ETX-19477 was well tolerated and showed anti-tumor activity in heavily pretreated pts with BRCAm, platinum-resistant HGSOC during dose escalation. These findings provide the first clinical proof-of-concept of PARG inhibition in HGSOC. ETX-19477 is being further evaluated in the dose expansion phase of the study. Clinical trial information: NCT06395519 .

1617 Background: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly evaluated for oncology decision support, yet guideline concordance and hallucinations remain variable across cancer types and tasks. Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) may improve safety by constraining the evidence base used during generation. Prior oncology LLM studies report discordance with guideline-based care, but few describe a reproducible health-system “vetting mechanism” that couples guideline-only retrieval with clinician-scored safety rubrics across multiple oncology domains. Methods: We assembled 316 de-identified oncology cases in a tumor-board template: medical oncology (breast, GI, GU, leukemia; n=216), gynecologic oncology (n=50), and neuro-oncology/CNS metastatic cancer (n=50). Each case was run on three systems: baseline GPT-4 (O1), NCCN-guideline anchored RAG (O2; guideline-constrained retrieval), and a literature-anchored system (OpenEvidence; O3). Oncologists independently scored outputs using a modified Generative Performance Score (mGPS; −1 to +1) combining guideline concordance with hallucination penalties; readability/rationality was scored on a 1–5 Likert scale. Inter-rater reliability was assessed (κ =.63). This workflow was designed as a pre-deployment model credentialing step for health-system governance (source policy → case bank → clinician-scored acceptance criteria). Results: Across all 316 cases (case-averaged), O2 achieved the highest mean total mGPS (0.75) compared with O1 (0.43) and O3 (0.59). In the medical oncology cohort (n=216), O2 outperformed O1 and O3 (mean mGPS 0.72 vs 0.35 and 0.54), with higher guideline concordance (0.85 vs 0.68 and 0.75) and lower hallucination penalties (−0.09 vs −0.25 and −0.19); readability was also highest for O2 (4.17 vs 3.22 and 3.86). In gynecologic oncology (n=50), O2 again performed best (mGPS 0.827) relative to O3 (0.697) and O1 (0.647). In the CNS cohort (n=50), mean composite mGPS favored O2 (0.82) over O3 (0.68) and O1 (0.55), while readability remained stable across models (3.55–3.73). Severe hallucination/unsafe recommendation rate: O1 [26%], O2 [5%], O3 [17%] (pre-specified definition; e.g., major fabricated citation or guideline-discordant harmful recommendation). Conclusions: In a 316-case, multi-domain clinician-scored evaluation, limiting retrieval to oncology guideline sources improved safety-aligned performance relative to unconstrained generation or literature-only anchoring. A guideline-constrained RAG configuration paired with clinician-scored rubrics and tail-risk reporting can serve as a practical health-system vetting mechanism for governance, re-validation, and change control of LLM decision support, including in resource-limited settings where reliable guideline-consistent recommendations are essential.

12007 Background: YAs with cancer, defined as those diagnosed prior to the age of 40, may experience greater symptom burden compared to those diagnosed at older ages. We evaluated the impact of an ePROM-triggered, CC-based, supportive care intervention on symptom burden in YAs with cancer. Methods: The Enhanced, Electronic Health Record-facilitated Cancer Symptom Control (E2C2) trial was a cluster-randomized, pragmatic trial (NCT03892967) that enrolled oncology patients seen at Mayo Clinic Rochester and within the Mayo Clinic Health System (sites in Minnesota and Wisconsin) between March 2019 and January 2023. Patients routinely reported the severity of six SPPADE symptoms (Sleep deficit, Pain, Physical function impairment, Anxiety, Depression, and Energy deficit/fatigue) on 11-point numerical rating scales. Symptom severity was classified as none to mild (0-3), moderate (4-6), or severe (7-10). Those with moderate or severe symptoms were offered symptom management education, while those with severe symptoms were also offered the option to work virtually with a symptom care manager. In this post hoc analysis, we examined the effects of the intervention on change in symptom scores among YAs and time to improvement to a mild/moderate level in those with at least one severe symptom. Results: Among 40,659 patients who responded to at least one survey, 2,598 were YAs and 38,061 were adults ≥ 40 years. Among YAs, 10.7%, 24.3%, and 65.1% were 18-24 years, 25-31 years, and 32-39 years, respectively. A greater proportion of YA patients were female (61.5% vs 57.0%), of a non-white race (12.4% vs 5.3%), living in an urban setting (65.7% vs 55.1%), single (36.4% vs 9.6%), on non-government insurance (78.1% vs 36.6%), employed (72.6% vs 37.4%), and had a Bachelor’s degree or greater (37.8% vs 28.3%, p < 0.001 for all). Fewer YA patients had metastatic disease compared to older patients (24.2% vs 35.2%, p < 0.001). Compared to a pre-intervention baseline, the mean change in symptom score for YA patients following the intervention demonstrated improvements in anxiety (-0.195) and depression (-0.168, p < 0.0001 for both), while physical function impairment worsened over the intervention period (0.101, p = 0.014). Compared to adults ≥ 40 years, YAs experienced greater intervention effects for management of depression ( p < 0.001), fatigue ( p = 0.01), pain ( p < 0.0001), and physical function impairment ( p < 0.0001). Among YAs with a severe symptom during the intervention period, median time to improvement to a mild/moderate level was longer for anxiety compared to those ≥ 40 years (3.5 vs 2.7 months, p = 0.009). Conclusions: Routine ePROM surveillance, coupled with CC-based symptom management, led to improvements in anxiety and depression among YAs with cancer, although, time to improvement was longer for anxiety compared to adults ≥ 40 years.