Citations

Introduction: Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is associated with high mortality rate of 30-52% despite current advances in management. New cardiovascular abnormalities (CA), such as EKG or cardiac biomarker abnormalities ensue in ICH and are postulated to be due to hypothalamic injury and catecholamine surge. These CA are thought to portend a poor prognosis. Methods: We evaluated clinical studies reporting CA in ICH and assessing their effect on mortality. Studies without a control group, pediatric, and non-English literature were excluded. We extracted data on demographics, comorbidities and mortality [in-hospital (IHM), 30 day (30M) and 90 day (90M)]. CA data included EKG changes (bradycardia, atrial fibrillation, bundle branch blocks, QTc prolongation, ST-segment depression, and ST-segment elevation), biomarker elevation (troponin-T (TnT), CK-MB and BNP), and wall motion abnormalities (WMA). Unadjusted and adjusted rates for CA and pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI were calculated using Mantel-Haenszel random effects model for mortality. Results: We reviewed 453 studies, of which 26 met our inclusion criteria. Heterogeneity varied from moderate to severe depending on the outcome chosen. Of a total 5580 patients, 2796 (50.1%) had sub-arachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), 1633 ICH (29.3%) and 1151 (20.6%) both. The incidence of CA is presented in Table 1. Of these 26 studies, 19 evaluated the influence of new CA on mortality. IHM was noted in 175/566 (30.9%) and 491/2496 (19.7%) patients with and without CA, respectively. In addition, 30M and 90M were noted in 18/38 (47.4%) vs. 14/136 (10.3%) and 90/175 (51.4%) vs. 247/1139 (21.7%) patients with and without CA, respectively. CA was associated with worse IHM (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.58-2.62, p<0.001), 30M (RR 3.18, 95% CI 1.86-5.42, p<0.001) and 90M (RR 2.11, 95% CI 1.44-3.08, p<0.001) in patients with ICH compared to those who did not have CA. Conclusion: CA are common in patients with ICH and are associated with worse IHM, 30M and 90M.

Abstract Background: In MONARCH 2, abemaciclib plus fulvestrant significantly improved median progression-free survival (PFS, 16.4 vs 9.3 months, hazard ratio [HR], 0.553) and overall survival (OS, 46.7 vs 37.3 months; HR, 0.757) compared with placebo plus fulvestrant in hormone receptor-positive (HR-positive), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-negative) advanced breast cancer (ABC) patients who were endocrine therapy (ET) resistant, regardless of menopausal status. Here, we report findings in the premenopausal subgroup of the MONARCH 2 trial. Methods: The premenopausal subgroup included patients with natural menstrual bleeding who received a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist at least 4 weeks prior to study treatment start date and for the entire study duration. Of the 669 patients enrolled in the MONARCH 2 trial, 114 were premenopausal (abemaciclib plus fulvestrant, n=72; placebo plus fulvestrant, n=42), and were included in this analysis. The primary objective was investigator-assessed PFS and secondary objectives were OS, objective response rate, and safety and tolerability. Exploratory analyses included time to second disease progression (PFS2), time to chemotherapy (TTC), and chemotherapy-free survival (CFS). Results: At the primary objective cutoff (14 February, 2017), median PFS was not reached for the abemaciclib plus fulvestrant arm versus 10.52 months for the placebo plus fulvestrant arm (HR, 0.415; 95% CI, 0.246-0.698). At the pre-specified OS interim cutoff (20 June, 2019), median PFS was 28.6 months in the abemaciclib plus fulvestrant arm compared with 10.26 months in the placebo plus fulvestrant arm (HR, 0.477; 95% CI, 0.302-0.755). OS benefit was observed in the abemaciclib plus fulvestrant compared to fulvestrant alone (HR, 0.689; 95% CI, 0.379-1.252, median, not reached vs 47.3 months). Improvements were also observed for the exploratory outcomes of PFS2 (HR, 0.599), TTC (HR, 0.674), and CFS (HR, 0.642) with the addition of abemaciclib to fulvestrant. The safety profile was generally consistent with results disclosed previously. Conclusions: Results of the premenopausal subgroup in the MONARCH 2 trial were consistent with the improved clinical outcomes observed in the intent-to-treat population. The analysis provides support for the use of abemaciclib plus fulvestrant (with ovarian suppression) as an effective treatment option for premenopausal patients with HR+, HER2- ABC who are ET-resistant. Clinical trial registration: NCT02107703. Registered 08 April 2014- Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02107703

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to assess the impact of an interdisciplinary remote patient monitoring (RPM) program on clinical outcomes and acute care utilization in cancer patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional analysis following a prospective observational study performed at Mayo Clinic Cancer Center. Adult patients receiving cancer-directed therapy or in recent remission on active surveillance with polymerase chain reaction–confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between March 18 and July 31, 2020, were included. RPM was composed of in-home technology to assess symptoms and physiologic data with centralized nursing and physician oversight. RESULTS: During the study timeframe, 224 patients with cancer were diagnosed with COVID-19. Of the 187 patients (83%) initially managed in the outpatient setting, those who did not receive RPM were significantly more likely to experience hospitalization than those receiving RPM. Following balancing of patient characteristics by inverse propensity score weighting, rates of hospitalization for RPM and non-RPM patients were 2.8% and 13%, respectively, implying that the use of RPM was associated with a 78% relative risk reduction in hospital admission rate (95% CI, 54 to 102; P = .002). Furthermore, when hospitalized, these patients experienced a shorter length of stay and fewer prolonged hospitalizations, intensive care unit admissions, and deaths, although these trends did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: The use of RPM and a centralized virtual care team was associated with a reduction in hospital admission rate and lower overall acute care resource utilization among cancer patients with COVID-19.

7554 Background: Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T) are commonly administered inpatient due to concern for early onset cytokine release syndrome (CRS), especially with axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel). We report Mayo Clinic Rochester experience for hospital-based outpatient (HBO) management of patients (pts) receiving axi-cel and identify opportunities for improvement. HBO is closely integrated with inpatient practice and includes the same specialty trained clinical team. It is the first point of contact 24/7 for pts and triage evaluations. Lymphodepletion chemotherapy and CAR-T infusion is given on HBO followed by daily monitoring till day 8 and thereafter, as clinically needed until admission criteria is met. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed database of pts who received axi-cel between 1/2018 and 1/2021. After 06/2020, remote patient monitoring (RPM) tools were implemented to collect patient-reported neurologic symptoms and vital signs via bluetooth-enabled devices 4 times daily through month 1. Adverse data trends are addressed by the HBO team. Results: Among 72 recipients, 89% received their cells outpatient; 8% remained outpatient for the entire month. CRS and neurotoxicity incidence were comparable to those reported from CIBMTR. Median time to first admission was 2 days (Table). Use of bridging therapy, increased CRP and LDH were associated with early admission (≤3 days). Median time to tocilizumab, steroid, oxygen support, vasopressor was 4 days after admission. Half of HBO visits required intervention such as blood transfusions, IV medications through the first month. Nine pts had enrolled in RPM to date; with 8 having evaluable data. With 4 scheduled entries/day, a median of 1 entry/day was skipped and 2 entries/day were answered incompletely. An average of 57 additional unscheduled entries were generated per pt. Among a median of 373 (range 91-522) readings per pt over the first month, 4% (2%-20%) of the readings generated alerts. An average of 4 alerts were seen within 48 hours prior to admission. Data including additional subjects will be presented at ASCO meeting. Conclusions: We report a feasible outpatient care model for management of axi-cel recipients with safe outcomes. Clinical characteristics associated with more aggressive disease are associated with likelihood of early admission. Early RPM experience suggest use of digital tools could improve monitoring compliance and may predict evolution to symptoms requiring escalation of care.[Table: see text]

1503 Background: Patients with cancer and COVID-19 are at risk for poor clinical outcomes. An established multi-site remote patient monitoring (RPM) service was rapidly adapted to support a novel, interdisciplinary COVID-19 program for outpatient management of patients at high-risk for severe illness. The goal of this study was to assess the impact of the RPM program on clinical outcomes and acute care utilization in cancer patients diagnosed with COVID-19. Methods: This is a cross-sectional analysis following a multi-site prospective observational study performed at Mayo Clinic Cancer Center (MCCC). All adult patients with active cancer – defined as currently receiving cancer-directed therapy or in recent remission on active surveillance – and PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between March 18 and July 31, 2020 were included. RPM was comprised of in-home technology to assess symptoms and physiologic data with centralized nurse and physician oversight. Results: During the study timeframe 224 cancer patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 at MCCC. Initial management included urgent hospitalization (within 48 hours of diagnosis) in 34 patients (15%). Of the remaining 190 patients (85%) initially managed in the outpatient setting, those who did not receive RPM were significantly more likely to experience hospitalization than those receiving RPM (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.036 to 12.01, P = 0.044). Following balancing of patient characteristics by inverse propensity weighting, rates of hospital admission for RPM and non-RPM patients were 3.1% and 11% respectively, implying that RPM was associated with an 8% reduction in hospital admission rate (-0.077; 95% CI: -0.315 to -0.019, P = 0.009). Use of RPM was also associated with lower rates of prolonged hospitalization, ICU admission, and mortality, though these trends did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions: In the midst of a global pandemic associated with inpatient bed, ventilator, and PPE shortages, the RPM program provided an effective strategy for outpatient clinical management and was associated with decreased rates of hospitalization, ICU admission, and mortality in cancer patients with COVID-19. This care model enabled simultaneous opportunity to mitigate the increased risks of exposure, transmission, and resource utilization associated with conventional care.

TPS1101 Background: More than two thirds of patients with advanced breast cancer (ABC) have estrogen receptor-positive (ER+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2−) tumors. Current standard-of-care first-line treatments include an aromatase inhibitor (AI) or fulvestrant, a selective ER degrader (SERD), combined with cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors. Concurrent use of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists is recommended for men and premenopausal women with ABC. Nevertheless, almost all ABCs eventually become resistant to endocrine therapy (ET) and the disease is incurable. New therapies are needed to combat ET resistance, maintain patient quality of life (QoL), and delay the need for chemotherapy. AZD9833 (camizestrant) is an orally bioavailable, highly potent, next-generation SERD that demonstrated anti-cancer properties across a range of preclinical models, including those with ER-activating mutations (Scott et al, 2020). A phase I study (SERENA-1) has demonstrated that AZD9833 is well tolerated and has a promising antitumor profile when administered alone or in combination with palbociclib, a CDK4/6 inhibitor (Baird et al, SABCS 2020). SERENA-4 (NCT04711252) is a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, phase III trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of AZD9833 in combination with palbociclib for patients with ER+ HER2− ABC who have not received any systemic treatment in the advanced disease setting. Methods: SERENA-4 will enroll 1,342 patients with de novo or recurrent ER+ HER2– ABC who have not previously received systemic treatment for their locoregionally recurrent or metastatic disease. Patients with recurrent disease must have received adjuvant AI or tamoxifen therapy for at least 24 months without relapse. Patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive orally either (a) AZD9833 (75 mg, once daily), palbociclib (125 mg, once daily for 21 days followed by 7 days off treatment) and anastrozole-matching placebo (once daily) or (b) anastrozole (1 mg, once daily), palbociclib (same as active arm), and AZD9833-matching placebo (once daily). Premenopausal women and men will also receive LHRH agonists. The primary endpoint will be progression-free survival (PFS; up to 5 years). Secondary endpoints will include overall survival (up to 8 years), length of second PFS period, objective response, time to chemotherapy, and changes in QoL measures. Enrollment began in January 2021. Acknowledgments: We thank Rose Goodchild, PhD, of Oxford PharmaGenesis, UK, for providing medical writing assistance. Funding: The SERENA-4 trial is funded and overseen by AstraZeneca. Clinical trial information: NCT04711252 .

Background: Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever (CCHF) is a fatal acute tick-borne viral infection and a substantial emerging global public health threat. This illness has a high case fatality rate of up to 40%. The liver is one of the important target organs of the CCHF virus. Objective: The aim of this meta-analysis to evaluate the correlation between CCHF and liver injury and draw more generalized inferences about the abnormal serum markers of liver injury such as alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST) in CCHF patients. Methods: A literature search was accomplished for published eligible articles with MEDLINE/PubMed and Embase databases. All eligible observational studies and case series were included from around the world. The inclusion criteria were articles describing liver injury biomarkers AST and ALT amongst patients diagnosed with CCHF. Results: Data from 18 studies, consisting of 1238 patients with CCHF were included in this meta-analysis. The overall pooled prevalence of at least one raised liver injury biomarker was 77.95% (95% CI, I2 = 88.50%, p < 0.0001). Similarly, pooled prevalence of elevated AST and ALT was 85.92% (95% CI, I2 = 85.27%, p < 0.0001) and 64.30% (95% CI, I2 = 88.32%, p < 0.0001) respectively. Both Egger and Begg-Mazumdar’s tests detected no apparent publication bias in all three meta-analyses(p > 0.05). Conclusion: These elevated liver injury biomarkers have been identified as significant prognostic factors. Hence, Physicians must recognize and continuously monitor these biomarkers, since these aid early stratification of prognosis and the prevention of severe outcomes in infection with such a high case fatality rate.

Objectives: In practice, midodrine has been used to reduce IV vasopressor requirements and decrease ICU length of stay. However, recent publications have failed to show clinical success when midodrine was administered every 8 hours. One possible reason for the lack of clinical efficacy at this dosing interval may be the pharmacokinetic properties of midodrine that support a more frequent dosing interval. Here, we report our institutional experience with midodrine at a dosing frequency of every 6 hours. Design: Single, quaternary academic medical center, retrospective, descriptive study. Setting: Floor and ICU patients admitted to Mayo Clinic, Rochester, from May 7, 2018, to September 30, 2020. Patients: Adult patients with an order for midodrine with a dosing frequency of “every 6 hours” or “four times daily” were eligible for inclusion. Interventions: No intervention performed. All data were abstracted retrospectively from the electronic medical record. Measurements and Main Results: Forty-four unique patients were identified that met inclusion criteria. Patients were an average of 65 years and 63.6% were male. The individual doses of midodrine ranged from 5 to 20 mg. Twenty-three patients (52.3%) were receiving IV vasopressors at the time midodrine was ordered every 6 hours. Vasopressor requirements decreased from an average of 0.10 norepinephrine equivalents 24 hours prior to the every 6-hour order to 0.05 norepinephrine equivalents 24 hours after an order for midodrine every 6 hour was placed. Conclusions: Increasing the dosing frequency of midodrine to every 6 hours may optimize its pharmacokinetic profile without compromising safety. This midodrine dosing frequency should be prospectively evaluated as a primary strategy for accelerated IV vasopressor wean.

Abstract Purpose: This open-label, multicenter, phase IB/II study evaluated sapanisertib, a dual inhibitor of mTOR kinase complexes 1/2, plus exemestane or fulvestrant in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive (HR+)/HER2-negative (HER2−) advanced/metastatic breast cancer. Patients and Methods: Eligible patients had previously progressed on everolimus with exemestane/fulvestrant and received ≤3 (phase IB) or ≤1 (phase II) prior chemotherapy regimens. Patients received sapanisertib 3 to 5 mg every day (phase IB), or 4 mg every day (phase II) with exemestane 25 mg every day or fulvestrant 500 mg monthly in 28-day cycles. Phase II enrolled parallel cohorts based on prior response to everolimus. The primary objective of phase II was to evaluate antitumor activity by clinical benefit rate at 16 weeks (CBR-16). Results: Overall, 118 patients enrolled in phase IB (n = 24) and II (n = 94). Five patients in phase IB experienced dose-limiting toxicities, at sapanisertib doses of 5 mg every day (n = 4) and 4 mg every day (n = 1); sapanisertib 4 mg every day was the MTD in combination with exemestane or fulvestrant. In phase II, in everolimus-sensitive versus everolimus-resistant cohorts, CBR-16 was 45% versus 23%, and overall response rate was 8% versus 2%, respectively. The most common adverse events were nausea (52%), fatigue (47%), diarrhea (37%), and hyperglycemia (33%); rash occurred in 17% of patients. Molecular analysis suggested positive association between AKT1 mutation status and best treatment response (complete + partial response; P = 0.0262). Conclusions: Sapanisertib plus exemestane or fulvestrant was well tolerated and exhibited clinical benefit in postmenopausal women with pretreated everolimus-sensitive or everolimus-resistant breast cancer.

PURPOSEMutations in the HRAS (m HRAS) proto-oncogene occur in 4%-8% of patients with recurrent and/or metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Tipifarnib is a farnesyltransferase inhibitor that disrupts HRAS function. We evaluated the efficacy of tipifarnib in patients with R/M m HRAS HNSCC.METHODSWe enrolled 30 patients with R/M HNSCC in a single-arm, open-label phase II trial of tipifarnib for m HRAS malignancies; one additional patient was treated on an expanded access program. After an ad hoc analysis of the first 16 patients with HNSCC with m HRAS variant allele frequency (VAF) data, enrollment was limited to those with a m HRAS VAF of ≥ 20% (high VAF). The primary end point was objective response rate. Secondary end points included assessing safety and tolerability. Patients received tipifarnib 600 or 900 mg orally twice daily on days 1-7 and 15-21 of 28-day cycles.RESULTSOf the 22 patients with HNSCC with high VAF, 20 were evaluable for response at the time of data cutoff. Objective response rate for evaluable patients with high-VAF HNSCC was 55% (95% CI, 31.5 to 76.9). Median progression-free survival on tipifarnib was 5.6 months (95% CI, 3.6 to 16.4) versus 3.6 months (95% CI, 1.3 to 5.2) on last prior therapy. Median overall survival was 15.4 months (95% CI, 7.0 to 29.7). The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events among the 30 patients with HNSCC were anemia (37%) and lymphopenia (13%).CONCLUSIONTipifarnib demonstrated encouraging efficacy in patients with R/M HNSCC with HRAS mutations for whom limited therapeutic options exist ( NCT02383927 ).