Citations

Abstract Jagim, AR, Camic, CL, Askow, A, Luedke, J, Erickson, J, Kerksick, CM, Jones, MT, and Oliver, JM. Sex differences in resting metabolic rate among athletes. J Strength Cond Res 33(11): 3008–3014, 2019—The purpose of this study was to compare differences in resting metabolic rate (RMR) between sexes in Division III National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) collegiate athletes and to identify predictors of RMR. Sixty-eight male (M) (age: 20.1 ± 1.5 years; height: 181.8 ± 5.9 cm; body mass (BM): 93.7 ± 16.3 kg; and body fat%: 16.3 ± 8.6%) and 48 female (F) athletes (age: 19.4 ± 1.3 years; height: 166.5 ± 6.0 cm; BM: 63.4 ± 12.7 kg; and body fat%: 21.5 ± 6.3%) participated in a single day of testing, which included determination of RMR using indirect calorimetry and air displacement plethysmography to measure fat mass and fat-free mass (FFM). An independent-samples t -test was used to compare differences in body composition and RMR between sexes, and regression analysis was used to identify predictors of RMR. Men had a significantly higher absolute RMR (M: 2,481 ± 209 vs. F: 1,553 ± 193 kcals·d −1 ; p < 0.001), but when adjusted for BM (M: 25.6 ± 8.3 vs. F: 25.9 ± 2.5 kcals·kg −1 BM per day; p = 0.82) and FFM (M: 31.1 ± 10.6 vs. F: 33.6 ± 3.8 kcals·kg −1 FFM per day; p = 0.12), these differences became nonsignificant. Regression analysis indicated that BM in both men (β = 0.73) and women (β = 0.88) was the strongest predictor of RMR. The results of the current study indicate minimal differences in RMR between sexes among athletic populations when adjusted for BM and FFM. In the current group of athletes, BM seems to account for the largest variability in RMR.

e21079 Background: Increased emphasis is being placed on patient centered outcomes. There is little existing literature on the patient population's prioritization of outcomes in skin cancer care. A PCORI-supported Patient Outcomes Summit was organized to address this. Methods: Patients were recruited from patient support groups, solicitation of ASDS member practices, as well as personal recruitment of patients from the practices of the investigators. A one-day Patient Outcome Summit was convened in Arlington, VA in August 2016. Patients attendees were given orientation to existing outcomes for skin cancer as well as the Delphi process. They then participated in a two round Delphi process by run non-physician facilitators (AB and EA). Group discussion was used to solicit outcomes for inclusion in the rating rounds. Outcomes were then rated anonymously on a 1 (lowest relevance) to 9 (highest relevance) scale. Patients were then able to view the anonymous feedback of the group and rerate the items as they deemed fit based on the group feedback. Results: 21 patients participated in the Delphi process (5 men and 21 women). 10 were melanoma and 11 were non-melanoma patients. 56 treatment related outcomes and themes were identified. The ten most highly rated themes are shown in the table. Conclusions: The first ever skin cancer patient outcome summit was convened to address the lack of patient-centered data in the skin cancer literature and guide measure development. Some traditional outcomes (recurrence) were identifiend. However, the majority of the themes rated most important by the patient attendees center around inclusion of the patient in the decision making process and the physician-patient communication. Increased emphasis and education in these domains may drive increased patient satisfaction in skin cancer care. [Table: see text]

7516 Background: PCNSL is a diffuse large B cell lymphoma confined to the CNS. Pomalidomide (POM) is a novel immunomodulatory agent with excellent CNS penetration (~40%) based on CNS PK analysis in rats and pre-clinical therapeutic activity against CNS lymphoma. Methods: A Phase I clinical trial was undertaken to determine the maximal tolerated dose (MTD) of POM, safety profile and overall response rate (ORR). Treatment consists of POM daily for 21 days every 28 days in combination with dexamethasone 40 mg PO weekly for two cycles followed by POM alone in subsequent cycles until progression or intolerance. 4 dose escalation levels of POM (3mg, 5mg, 7mg, and 10 mg) were planned. Thromboprophylaxis with oral anticoagulant or aspirin was required. MTD determination has been completed and expansion of the MTD cohort is ongoing. Therapeutic responses were evaluated per the international PCNSL collaborative group (IPCG) criteria after 2 cycles of treatment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (#NCT01722305). Results: 21 of 25 patients accrued were eligible for assessment. The MTD was determined to be 5 mg qd for 21 days every 28 days. Two DLTs were seen at dose level 3 (Grade 3 dyspnea and grade 4 thrombocytopenia). One DLT was seen in the expanded MTD cohort (Grade 4 neutropenia and lymphocytopenia). ORR for the study (9/21) was 43% (95% CI- 22%, 66%) with 4 CR, 1 CRu and 4 PR. 3 responders completed 2, 4, and 6 cycles before progression. 6 responders have completed 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, and 32 cycles and remain on treatment. ORR for the MTD dose level was (5/12) 42% (95% CI- 15%, 72%) with 3 CR and 2 PR. 2 patients had stable disease (SD). Pseudo-progression was seen in 1 patient. Overall, grade 3/4 toxicity was hematologic (neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia) in 38.1% and non-hematologic in 33.3% (fatigue, pneumonia, sepsis, syncope, dyspnea, hypoxia, respiratory failure and maculo-papular rash). Percent CSF/blood ratio of POM was determined to be 19% in 1 patient. Conclusions: Pomalidomide treatment is feasible with therapeutic activity against relapsed/refractory PCNSL and should be further developed. Clinical trial information: NCT01722305.

502 Background: Pre-specified 5-year analyses of the phase III Adjuvant Lapatinib and/or Trastuzumab Treatment Optimisation (ALTTO) Trial defined in Amendments 11&12. Methods: From June 2007 to July 2011, 8381 patients (pts) were randomised from 946 sites in 44 countries to receive either L+T, T→L, L, or T. In 2011, due to futility the L arm was closed and is not included in this analysis. The primary end point is disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary objectives include treatment comparisons with respect to overall survival (OS), time to recurrence (TTR), time to distant recurrence (TDR), cardiac and overall safety and tolerability. Primary analysis results of the study were published in JCO 2015 34:1034-1042. This updated analysis occurs at a 6.9 yrs median follow up (MFU). Results: All patients have reached 5-years of follow-up. 705 DFS events for L+T vs T have been observed. HR for DFS was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.74-1.00; 6-yr DFS%=85% vs 82%) for L+T vs T and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.81-1.08; 6-yr DFS%=84% vs 82%) for T→L vs. T. The 6-year OS was 93%, 92%, and 91% for L+T, T→L, and T, respectively. HR for OS was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.70-1.06) for L+T vs. T and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.71-1.08) for T→L vs. T. DFS differences for L+T vs. T were slightly higher for the hormone-receptor(ER)-negative [HR 0.80 (95% CI, 0.64-1.00; 6-yr DFS%=84% vs. 80%)] and the sequential chemotherapy [HR 0.83 (95% CI, 0.69-1.00; 6-yr DFS%=83% vs.79%)] subgroups. There were no differences in sites of first DFS events according to treatment arm for CNS, loco-regional, or distant recurrences. There were more AEs related to study treatment (L+T 93% vs T 64%). The incidence of primary cardiac end points was low: 1% for L+T, 0.5% for T→L and 0.9% for T. Conclusions: The HRs for this updated analysis are similar to those from the Primary Analysis and the event rate remains lower than anticipated (705 vs 850 planned). Cardiac toxicity remains low. This analysis suggests that HER2+/ER- tumors may have a different biology than HER2+/ER+ and may benefit more from dual HER2 blockade. Long-term follow up continues. Clinical trial information: NCT00490139.

Abstract Background In the phase III CORRECT trial, regorafenib significantly improved survival in treatment-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The CONSIGN study was designed to further characterize regorafenib safety and allow patients access to regorafenib before market authorization. Methods This prospective, single-arm study enrolled patients in 25 countries at 186 sites. Patients with treatment-refractory mCRC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) ≤1 received regorafenib 160 mg once daily for the first 3 weeks of each 4-week cycle. The primary endpoint was safety. Progression-free survival (PFS) per investigator assessment was the only efficacy evaluation. Results In total, 2,872 patients were assigned to treatment and 2,864 were treated. Median age was 62 years, ECOG PS 0/1 was 47%/53%, and 74% had received at least three prior regimens for metastatic disease. Median treatment duration was three cycles. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) led to dose reduction in 46% of patients. Regorafenib-related TEAEs led to treatment discontinuation in 9%. Grade 5 regorafenib-related TEAEs occurred in &lt;1%. The most common grade ≥3 regorafenib-related TEAEs were hypertension (15%), hand–foot skin reaction (14%), fatigue (13%), diarrhea (5%), and hypophosphatemia (5%). Treatment-emergent grade 3–4 laboratory toxicities included alanine aminotransferase (6%), aspartate aminotransferase (7%), and bilirubin (13%). Ongoing monitoring identified one nonfatal case of regorafenib-related severe drug-induced liver injury per DILI Working Group criteria. Median PFS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 2.7 months (2.6–2.7). Conclusion In CONSIGN, the frequency and severity of TEAEs were consistent with the known safety profile of regorafenib. PFS was similar to reports of phase III trials. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01538680. Implications for Practice Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who fail treatment with standard therapies, including chemotherapy and monoclonal antibodies targeting vascular endothelial growth factor or epidermal growth factor receptor, have few treatment options. The multikinase inhibitor regorafenib was shown to improve survival in patients with treatment-refractory mCRC in the phase III CORRECT (N = 760) and CONCUR (N = 204) trials. However, safety data on regorafenib for mCRC in a larger number of patients were not available. The CONSIGN trial, carried out prospectively in more than 2,800 patients across 25 countries, confirmed the safety profile of regorafenib from the phase III trials and reinforced the importance of using treatment modifications to manage adverse events.