Citations

11040 Background: Although women outnumber men in US medical school enrollment, women constitute < 50% of faculty in academic oncology. This study aimed to determine factors affecting women oncologists’ decisions to pursue academic versus non-academic oncology in Hematology/Oncology (HO), Pediatric Oncology (PO), Radiation Oncology (RO), and Surgical Oncology (SO), and to characterize the challenges women oncologists face. Methods: A survey was designed to collect cross-sectional data on factors affecting career choices among US women oncologists. The survey was distributed via email and social media. Data were collected anonymously and analyzed using t-tests for continuous variables and Chi-squared tests for categorical variables. Results: Six hundred sixty-seven women oncologists responded: 245 (45.3%) specialized in HO, 173 (25.9%) RO, 88 (13.2%) PO, 56 (8.4%) SO, and 48 (7.2%) other. Four-hundred twenty-two (63.2%) women identified as an academic oncologist (AO); 245 (36.8%) women identified as a non-academic oncologist (non-AO). Approximately ¼ of women oncologists reported their partner (156, 23.5%) or family (176, 26.4%) extremely or moderately impacted their decision whether to pursue academic practice. There was no difference in the timing of childbearing between AO and non-AO. AO perceived the biggest sacrifice of pursuing academics to be time with loved ones (181, 42.9%). Non-AO perceived the biggest sacrifice for AO to be pressure for academic promotion (102, 41.6%), which was the third most common response (44, 18.0%) among AO. Thirty-three (7.9%) AO and 5 (2.0%) non-AO reported feeling that they rarely or never have a sense of belonging in their work environment (p < 0.01). AO and non-AO had significantly different perceptions on how their gender impacted their ability to obtain a chosen job (p < 0.01), with 100 (23.8%) AO and 52 (21.2%) non-AO reporting a negative or somewhat negative impact, and 116 (27.6%) AO and 101 (41.2%) non-AO reporting a positive or somewhat positive impact. More than half of women surveyed (230 AO, 54.6%; 123 non-AO, 50.6%; p = 0.61) felt that they were somewhat or much less likely to be promoted compared to male colleagues. The majority of women reported they would choose the same career path again (71% of AO, 69% of non-AO); however, 92 (21.9%) of AO responded that they were likely or very likely to pursue a career outside academics in the next 5 years. Conclusions: While partners/family have a substantial impact on 1 in 4 women oncologists, this does not differ between AO and non-AO. Significantly more non-AO find their gender to have positively impacted their ability to obtain their chosen job. In contrast, a meaningful number of AO report a poor sense of belonging and perceived discrimination in obtaining jobs and being promoted; 1 in 5 are considering leaving academia. Academic oncology remains at high risk for continued gender inequality if the culture is not addressed.

8016 Background: Patients (pts) with RRMM previously exposed to immunomodulatory agents, proteasome inhibitors (PIs), and CD38 antibodies (mAbs) have poor outcomes with subsequent treatments. Ide-cel, a BCMA-directed CAR T cell therapy, showed frequent, deep, and durable responses in heavily pretreated pts with RRMM in the pivotal KarMMa trial (Munshi NC, et al. J Clin Oncol 2020;38[suppl 15]. Abstract 8503). Here, we present updated data. Methods: Pts with ≥ 3 prior regimens (including immunomodulatory agent, PI, and CD38 mAb) and refractory to their last regimen per IMWG criteria were eligible (NCT03361748). Pts received 150─450 × 106 CAR+ T cells (target dose range) after 3 days of lymphodepletion (cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 + fludarabine 30 mg/m2). Endpoints included overall response rate (ORR; primary) and complete response (CR) rate (key secondary). Additional secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: KarMMa enrolled 140 pts, and 128 received ide-cel. Pts had a median age of 61 years and a median of 6 (range, 3-16) prior regimens; 84% were triple-class refractory, and 26% were penta-class refractory (lenalidomide, pomalidomide, bortezomib, carfilzomib, and daratumumab). Most pts (88%) had bridging therapy. Median follow-up was 15.4 mo (data cutoff, 7 Apr 2020). ORR was 73% and median PFS was 8.8 mo in all treated pts; both increased with higher dose (Table). At the highest target dose (450 × 106 CAR+ T cells), the ORR was 81%, the CR rate was 39%, and the median PFS increased to 12.2 months with longer follow-up. Responses were observed in all subgroups including difficult-to-treat subsets (eg, extramedullary disease [ORR, 70%], high tumor burden [71%], and R-ISS stage III disease [48%]). OS continues to mature and the median has not been reached; the 15-month event-free rate for OS was 71%. Cytopenias (97%) and cytokine release syndrome (CRS; 84%) were the most common any-grade toxicities. CRS was mostly grade 1/2; 5 pts (4%) had grade 3, 1 had grade 4 (at 300 × 106), and 1 had grade 5 (at 300 × 106). Investigator-identified neurotoxicity was reported in 23 pts (18%); 4 pts (3%) had grade 3 and 0 had grade ≥ 4. Tocilizumab was used in 67 and 3 pts with CRS and neurotoxicity, respectively. Conclusions: Updated results from the KarMMa trial continue to demonstrate deep, durable responses with ide-cel in heavily pretreated pts with RRMM. Efficacy and safety reflect prior reports and support a favorable clinical benefit-risk profile for ide-cel across the target dose range. Clinical trial information: NCT03361748. [Table: see text]

TPS7570 Background: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common form of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), and although > 50% of pts achieve long-term remission with first-line therapy, pts with R/R disease as well as those with R/R grade 3b follicular lymphoma (FL), double-, or triple-hit high-grade lymphomas have poor long-term outcomes (Crump 2017; Kahl 2016; Jain 2012). Autologous (auto) chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy has provided additional options for pts with R/R disease, but only when leukapheresis and manufacturing prove feasible (Jacobson 2020). Allogeneic (allo) CAR-T cells were designed specifically to address these unmet needs by using healthy donor T cells to produce a readily available product and remove the need for bridging chemotherapy. We are currently investigating the safety and efficacy of CTX110, an allo anti-CD19 CAR-T cell product modified by using CRISPR/Cas9-editing to disrupt the endogenous T-cell receptor (TCR) alpha constant (TRAC) locus in order to remove TCR expression and disrupt β2-microglobulin, which eliminates major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I expression. Disruption of the TCR should significantly reduce or eliminate risks of graft-versus-host disease and elimination of MHC class I expression may increase CAR-T cell persistence by mitigating CTX110 rejection. In addition, the anti-CD19 CAR transgene construct is precisely inserted into the TRAC locus. Methods: The Phase 1 CARBON trial (NCT04035434) is an open-label, multicenter, global study evaluating the safety and efficacy of CTX110 in pts ≥18 y with R/R DLBCL NOS, double- or triple-hit DLBCL, or transformed or grade 3b FL with ≥2 prior lines of therapy or who are ineligible for/refused prior auto hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). Pts who received prior auto CAR-T or allo HSCT are excluded. Pts will receive lymphodepleting chemotherapy with fludarabine 30mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 500mg/m2 for 3 days, followed by CTX110 infusion. In part A, dose escalation will be performed using a 3+3 design. Upon completion of dose finding, the cohort will be expanded to further assess safety signals and efficacy including the primary efficacy endpoint of overall response rate. Key secondary efficacy endpoints include duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival. The trial is currently open and enrolling. Clinical trial information: NCT04035434.

TPS4596 Background: There is no standard adjuvant systemic therapy that increases overall survival (OS) over surgery alone for non-metastatic RCC. Anti-PD-1 nivolumab (nivo) improves OS in metastatic RCC and is well tolerated. In mouse models, priming the immune system prior to surgery with anti-PD-1 results in superior OS compared to adjuvant dosing. Remarkable pathologic responses have been seen with neoadjuvant PD-1 in multiple ph 2 studies in bladder, lung and breast cancers. Phase 2 neoadjuvant RCC trials of nivo show preliminary feasibility and safety with no surgical delays. PROSPER RCC seeks to improve clinical outcomes by priming the immune system with neoadjuvant nivo prior to nephrectomy followed by continued immune system engagement with adjuvant blockade in patients (pts) with high risk RCC compared to standard of care surgery alone. Methods: This global, unblinded, phase 3 National Clinical Trials Network study is accruing pts with clinical stage ≥T2 or TanyN+ RCC of any histology planned for radical or partial nephrectomy. Select oligometastatic disease is permitted if the pt can be rendered ‘no evidence of disease’ within 12 weeks of nephrectomy (≤3 metastases; no brain, bone or liver). In the investigational arm, nivo is administered 480mg IV q4 weeks with 1 dose prior to surgery followed by 9 adjuvant doses. The control arm is nephrectomy followed by standard of care surveillance. There is no placebo. Baseline tumor biopsy is required only in the nivo arm but encouraged in both. Randomized pts are stratified by clinical T stage, node positivity, and M stage. 805 pts provide 84.2% power to detect a 14.4% absolute benefit in recurrence-free survival at 5 years assuming the ASSURE historical control of ̃56% to 70% (HR = 0.70). The study is powered to evaluate a significant increase in OS (HR 0.67). Critical perioperative therapy considerations such as safety, feasibility, and quality of life metrics are integrated. PROSPER RCC embeds a wealth of translational studies to examine the contribution of the baseline immune milieu and neoadjuvant priming with anti-PD-1 on clinical outcomes. As of February 10, 2021, 704 patients have been enrolled (N = 805). Clinical trial information: NCT03055013.

TPS4593 Background: Bone metastases are prevalent in approximately 30% of pts with advanced RCC. Pts with bone metastases have a worse prognosis compared to pts without bone metastases and are at risk of symptomatic skeletal events (SSEs). Cabozantinib, a multitargeted inhibitor of multiple kinases, including vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor and MET, has improved survival in pts with metastatic RCC and has enhanced activity in bone. Ra-223, an alpha-emitting radioisotope with natural bone-seeking proclivity, has been shown to prolong survival in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer. We previously conducted a pilot study of Ra-223 with VEGF inhibition and demonstrated safety and declines in markers of bone formation and resorption with the combination (McKay et al, CCR 2018). Given that decreasing rates of SSEs and improving outcomes for pts with RCC with bone metastases are unmet needs in pts with RCC, we designed a randomized phase 2 study through the National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) investigating cabozantinib with or without Ra-223 in patients with RCC with bone metastases. Methods: This is an open-label multicenter study. Eligible pts have metastatic RCC of any histology with ≥2 metastatic bone lesions untreated with prior radiation therapy and no more than 2 prior lines of systemic therapy. Pts with non-clear cell RCC are eligible and will be capped at 20% of the total accrual goal. Pts must have a Karnofsky performance status of ≥60%, have symptomatic bone pain defined as a prior SSE or need of analgesics, and be on osteoclast-targeted therapy unless otherwise contraindicated. Pts are randomized 1:1 to cabozantinib with (Arm A) or without (Arm B) Ra-223. 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. Ra-223 is administered at a fixed dose of 1.49 microcurie/kg IV every 28 days x 6 doses. The primary endpoint is SSE-free survival. Secondary endpoints include safety, progression-free survival, overall survival, quality of life measures, and correlative analyses including liquid biopsy studies and tumor tissue analysis. The study has 90% power to detect an improvement in 6-month SSE-free survival rate from 65% to 78% with one-sided α = 0.025 significance. To ensure 191 evaluable patients, target accrual is 210 pts. This design includes a safety run-in and an interim analysis for futility when 50% of the expected number of events (72 SSE events) have been observed. Final data analysis will occur when 143 events have been observed. The study was activated in December 2019 and accrual is currently ongoing throughout the NCTN. Clinical trial information: NCT04071223.

8036 Background: Ide-cel, a BCMA-directed CAR T cell therapy, showed promising efficacy in patients (pts) with RRMM in the KarMMa study with an ORR of 73% and a CRR of 33% across target doses of 150–450 × 106 CAR+ T cells (Munshi NC, et al. J Clin Oncol 2020;38[suppl 15]. Abstract 8503). Associations of neurotoxicity (NT) with pt and disease characteristics, pt management, and impact on outcomes in the KarMMa study are reported here. Methods: Enrolled pts were triple-class exposed and refractory to their last regimen, with ide-cel given at target doses of 150, 300, or 450 × 106 CAR+ T cells after lymphodepletion (NCT03361748). Investigator-identified NT events were captured under the single preferred term of neurotoxicity and graded according to NCI CTCAE v4.03. Events were managed with corticosteroids (CS), anakinra (ANR), and tocilizumab (Toci) as needed. Results: Of 128 pts treated with ide-cel, NT was reported in 23 (18%); 12 pts (9%) had maximum grade (gr) 1 NT, 7 (5%) had gr 2, and 4 (3%) had gr 3. No gr 4 or 5 NT occurred. Most baseline characteristics were similar in pts with and without NT, including stage III disease (22% and 15%), high-risk cytogenetics (39% and 34%), and extramedullary disease (35% and 40%); exceptions were high tumor burden (65% and 48%) and sex (48% and 62% men). NT (any gr/gr 3) occurred in 0%/0%, 17%/1%, and 20%/6% of pts at doses of 150, 300, and 450 × 106 CAR+ T cells. Median time to onset was similar regardless of gr, and there were no late-onset events (Table). NT was managed with CS in 10 pts (43%), Toci in 3 (13%), and ANR in 1 (4%). Median (range) time to first use of CS was 2 d (1–6). ORR and DOR were similar in pts with and without NT (Table). All NT occurred in the proximity of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) events with the start date of NT events either overlapping with or occurring within 1 wk of the start of a CRS event. Conclusions: NT occurred early in the KarMMa study, was generally of short duration, and was mostly gr 1/2 with no gr ≥4 events. All NT was proximal to CRS. Pts with NT had a favorable ORR after ide-cel treatment. These results continue to demonstrate the durable efficacy and tolerability of ide-cel in pts with RRMM. Clinical trial information: NCT03361748. [Table: see text]

There is a need for multimodal strategies to keep research participants informed about study results. Our aim was to characterize preferences of genomic research participants from two institutions along four dimensions of general research result updates: content, timing, mechanism, and frequency. Methods: We conducted a web-based cross-sectional survey that was administered from 25 June 2018 to 5 December 2018. Results: 397 participants completed the survey, most of whom (96%) expressed a desire to receive research updates. Preferences with high endorsement included: update content (brief descriptions of major findings, descriptions of purpose and goals, and educational material); update timing (when the research is completed, when findings are reviewed, when findings are published, and when the study status changes); update mechanism (email with updates, and email newsletter); and update frequency (every three months). Hierarchical cluster analyses based on the four update preferences identified four profiles of participants with similar preference patterns. Very few participants in the largest profile were comfortable with budgeting less money for research activities so that researchers have money to set up services to send research result updates to study participants. Conclusion: Future studies may benefit from exploring preferences for research result updates, as we have in our study. In addition, this work provides evidence of a need for funders to incentivize researchers to communicate results to participants.