Citations

Abstract Background: While there are abundant data on the surgical management of BC after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), there is less guidance regarding surgical management of BC after NET, particularly with respect to lymph node (LN) surgery. While pathologic complete response (pCR) is common with NAC, it is a rare event with NET. In this analysis we assess the surgeons’ approach in the context of NET. Methods: The ALTERNATE trial is a phase III study that randomized postmenopausal patients (pts) with clinical stage II/III ER+ HER2- BC to receive neoadjuvant anastrozole (A), fulvestrant (F), or both for 6 mos. before surgery. The primary objective was to determine if neoadjuvant F or A+F increases the rate of pCR or ypT1-2N0/N1mic/Ki67 <2.7% residual disease over A alone. Breast surgery was per standard of care. Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) with or without axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) was required to determine preoperative endocrine prognostic index PEPI score and residual cancer burden (RCB). Surgeons were required to indicate if the patient would be eligible for breast- conserving surgery (BCS) prior to NET. Patient accrual occurred from 2014-2018. The surgical outcomes are reported for the entire group. Results: Among the 3 treatment arms, 933 patients completed 6 cycles of NET. The clinical T stage at diagnosis was 73.6% T2, 22.6% T3and 3.8% T4. Initial tumor size was assessed by mammogram and ultrasound. Primary tumor histology was ductal in 64.8% and lobular in 25.4%.568 pts (60.9%) were clinically node negative (cN0), 36.2% cN1, 2.6% cN2 with 0.3% cN3. LNs were palpable in 25.2%. 383 had LN needle biopsy pre NET, of which 80.9% were positive. The surgeons’ initial impression of the patient’s eligibility for BCS was 74% while 0.6% were considered inoperable.75.5% of pts had post-NET imaging performed. Of those with tumor size recorded, 52.9% were T1 or not visible. Overall, 69.9% of the 933 patients had BCS. Of those 330 pts without post-NET imaging or who had post-NET imaging without a size noted, 64.8% underwent BCS. For pts undergoing BCS, 80.2% required only one surgery for margin clearance. Of the 690 pts deemed eligible for BCS pre NET, 79% had BCS. Of the 240 pts deemed ineligible for BCS pre-NET, 43.8% had BCS. Of the pre-NET cT2 tumors, 79% had BCS while only 45.5% of T3 tumors and 37.1% of T4 tumors had BCS. On surgical pathology, 474 (50.8%) pts were LN+ compared to pre-NET cN+ 39.1% and needle biopsy-proven 33.2%. For pts with pN0, 93.3% had SLNB alone. 6.7 % of pN0 had ALND alone or SLNB+ALND. For those with pN1-3 , 36.3% had SLN only; 37.3% SLN+ ALND; 26.4% ALND alone. Only 0.8% of the patients had no ALND or SLNB performed. Pts undergoing BCS were more likely to have SLNB alone for a +SLN compared to mastectomy pts (62.9% vs. 37.6%; chi-square p<0.0001). For pts with pre-NET +LN on needle biopsy, only 26.8% underwent SLNB alone, while 37.4% underwent ALND alone. Of the 204 LN-positive pts having SLNB alone, 55.9% had only 1 + LN and 27% had only 2+ LNs. For pN+ pts who underwent SLNB +ALND, 42.1% had 1-2 + LNs. Conclusion: With NET, 69.9% of pts achieved BCS, including 43.8% deemed ineligible pre-NET. Given the low rate of pCR to NET, there should not be the expectation of pCR in +LNs. Based on the procedures performed in pts with +SLNs, it appears that surgeons were applying ACOSOG Z0011 criteria for pts having BCS, but were less likely to omit ALND for +LN in pts having mastectomy. The finding of only 1-2 +LNs in many of the LN+ pts suggests that omission of ALND may be a reasonable approach post-NET. Longer follow-up is required to assess local-regional recurrence. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org. Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT01953588 Citation Format: A. M. Leitch, T. Dockter, V. suman, A. Weiss, G. W. Unzeitig, J. Guenther, S. Sanati, K. Vij, J. Hoog, A. Caudle, A. Tiersten, M. Mita, W. Razaq, T. J. Hieken, Y. Wang, M. Rimawi, M. J. Ellis, E. Winer, K. K. Hunt, A. H. Partridge, L. A. Carey. Surgical outcomes in the ALTERNATE trial (Alliance A011106) -a randomized phase 3 neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) trial in postmenopausal women with clinical stage II/III estrogen receptor positive (ER+) and HER2 negative (HER2-) breast cancer (BC) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr RF1-02.

Abstract Background: Endocrine therapy (ET) with aromatase inhibitors (AIs) plus ovarian function suppression (OFS) is a standard endocrine strategy for premenopausal women with ER+/HER2- breast cancer. However, poor tolerability to AI+OFS limits its use, leaving tamoxifen as the only alternative. Prospective studies demonstrated that premenopausal women treated with neoadjuvant ET whose tumors exhibit Ki-67 ≤ 10% following 4 weeks of therapy achieve 5-year distant disease-free survival > 96%. Problematically, only 41% of patients reach this threshold with tamoxifen compared to 78% with AI+OFS (Nitz JCO 2022). (Z)-endoxifen (ENDX) is a potent selective estrogen receptor modulator that dually targets ERα and PKCβ1. At plasma concentrations of 3-5 ng/mL, it inhibits ERα; at ≥ 500 ng/mL, it targets PKCβ1, leading to AKT suppression. The EVANGELINE trial aims to examine endocrine sensitivity in terms of Week 4 Ki-67 in premenopausal women whose baseline Ki-67 > 10%, and objective response rate after 24 weeks of ENDX + goserelin in premenopausal women with baseline Ki-67≤ 10%. Methods: EVANGELINE (NCT05607004) is a multicenter, open-label, Phase 2 study comprised of three parts. Eligible patients are premenopausal women with Stage IIA/IIB ER+/HER2- breast cancer. • Part 1 (PK Run-in): assessed 40mg vs 80mg ENDX (+/- OFS) in 22 patients. • Part 2: patients with baseline Ki-67 >10% were randomized to 40 mg ENDX + goserelin or exemestane + goserelin for 6 months with the primary objective being 4-week ESD rate. Patients with a baseline Ki-67 ≤10% were assigned to a single-arm cohort of 40 mg ENDX monotherapy (no OFS) to evaluate the 24-week endocrine sensitivity disease rate. • Part 3 (replaces Part 2): all patients are treated with ENDX 40mg daily + goserelin every 28 days. A two stage Phase II design was chosen to assess outcomes as follows: Part 3a: Up to 45 patients with baseline Ki-67> 10% to assess Week 4 Ki-67≤ 10% rate is at least 65%. If 9 or more of these patients have a Week 4 Ki-67>10%, enrollment will be stopped due to futility. Otherwise, enrollment will continue. Part 3b: Up to 20 patients enrolled with baseline Ki-67≤ 10% to assess Week 24 objective response rate. Ki-67 levels are determined by central laboratory and images are centrally reviewed. Secondary objectives include safety, tolerability, surgical outcomes, and biomarker analysis using paired biopsies (baseline, week 4) and surgical specimens. Results: The PK run-in (completed Fall 2024) enrolled 22 patients and assessed ENDX doses (40 mg daily vs 80 mg daily (+/-OFS)). The Week 4 Ki-67 ≤ 10% rate with ENDX was 86% and did not differ according to dose. Early safety, PK, efficacy and compliance data supported the selection of 40 mg ENDX daily as the optimal dose. Enrollment in Part 2 began in May 2025. Part 3 will replace Part 2 with simplification of the trial design. Conclusions: EVANGELINE is the first trial to evaluate (Z)-endoxifen + OFS as neoadjuvant therapy in premenopausal ER+/HER2- breast cancer. By targeting both ER and PKC pathways, ENDX may offer a well-tolerated alternative to AI-based regimens and expand endocrine therapy options for this population. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05607004 Citation Format: M. P. Goetz, V. J. Suman, C. Lopez, H. Erickson, L. Beaulieu, S. S. Hammer, L. Mina, R. Leon-Ferre, K. N. Hunt, M. Piltin, A. Degnim, J. N. Ingle, J. C. Boughey, B. A. Sarah, J. M. Reid, M. Schellenberg, J. R. Hawse, P. Advani, K. Giridhar, F. Batalini, D. Flora, J. M. Jones, N. A. Bagegni, J. Jakub, V. Abramson, V. Dabak, W. J. Irvin, E. Sima, K. Seema, S. C. Quay. A Phase 2 Trial of (Z)-endoxifen + Goserelin as Neoadjuvant Treatment for Premenopausal Women with ER+, HER2-, Breast Cancer (EVANGELINE) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS5-12-16.

Abstract Introduction: An Our Practice Advisory (OPA), formerly known as Best Practice Advisory (BPA), is an electronic health record (EHR) tool. OPAs identify key parameters to alert providers of potential interventions that could enhance quality of care. Such functionality is increasingly relevant given the rapid pace of new drug approvals. Within the Mayo Clinic system, we previously identified that amongst Mayo Clinic patients (pts) meeting the MonarchE criteria, 28% of pts did not undergo a documented discussion with their provider regarding the role of adjuvant abemaciclib (Premji, SABCS 2024). Further, a Flatiron study identified that only 40% of eligible pts received abemaciclib (Sandoval, Miami Breast 2025). To address this practice gap, in 2024 we began to implement EHR clinical decision support by creating an OPA trigger for pts eligible for an adjuvant CDK 4/6 inhibitor (CDK 4/6i). Here we report on ‘action taken’ versus not for the OPA and the most common reasons for re-prompts. Methods: The Mayo Breast Disease Group designed an OPA including pts who are within 14 months of a clinical or pathologic diagnosis of high-risk early-stage breast cancer. We leveraged structured data captured in the Epic staging forms (Epic Systems) to identify pts with clinical or pathologic T-stage, N-stage, grade, ± Ki-67/ multigene signature to identify ER+/HER2- pts eligible for adjuvant ribociclib or abemaciclib based on FDA approvals. The OPA was triggered by a patient encounter in oncology when endocrine therapy (but not CDK4/6i) was on the active medication list resulting in a hard stop. The OPA gathered limited details about whether adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors were discussed and whether the provider followed a link that resulted in prescribing one—considered an indicator of action taken. In this IRB-exempt quality improvement project, we describe the responses captured in the OPA trigger utilizing Epic tools. Results: The OPA went live on 1/10/2025. Over a 5-month period post OPA initiation, we identified 517 OPA alerts among 332 unique pts. Their median age was 62.5 years, and the majority were female (97%). The median time to resolve the OPA was 17.5 seconds (range 2-567 seconds). 12.6% (65/517) of the time there was ‘action taken’ by selecting the hyperlink to potentially start a treatment plan. Providers selected the following OPA pre-set responses: ‘re-prompt in one month’ 248 (48%), ‘patient not a candidate for therapy’ 48 (9%), ‘patient declines’ 69 (13%), ‘outside oncologist will prescribe’ 36 (7%), ‘not discussed’ 44 (9%), and unknown 72 (14%). The most common free text comments among the 517 OPA alerts (summarized) included: ‘revisit in future’ 108 (21%), ‘too early’ 65 (13%), ‘patient declines’ 66 (13%), ‘outside oncologist will start’ 31 (6%), ‘not a candidate’ 26 (5%), and ‘co-morbidities’ 18 (3%). Erroneous OPA prompting occurred in 14 (3%) who previously failed a CDK4/6i due to toxicity and in 18 (3%) for pts currently on a CDK4/6i. 30 (6%) OPA comments noted that they discussed or started therapy that day. Conclusion: The OPA offered clinical decision support and ensured that clinicians considered prescribing CDK 4/6i in all pts identified as eligible, and captured deferrals. Refinements are needed to ensure appropriate timing of OPA and minimize erroneous firing. The OPA remains active and captures the reason for deferral of adjuvant CDK 4/6i prescription. This data pairs real world decision making to better understand clinically meaningful application of improved invasive disease-free survival (iDFS). Citation Format: S. Premji, P. Advani, S. Chumsri, L. Mina, J. Taraba, J. Carroll, J. Hoppenworth, E. Cathcart-Rake, T. Haddad, B. Rudder, G. Choong, D. Idossa, C. O’Sullivan, S. Yadav, K. Ruddy, P. Peethambaram, T. Hobday, M. Goetz, R. Rao, B. Ernst, F. Batalini, R. Leon-Ferre, A. Tevaarwerk, K. Giridhar. Implementing an Our Practice Advisory (OPA) to provide clinical decision support for adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors in early-stage hormone receptor positive breast cancer: The Mayo Clinic Experience [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS5-11-10.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of joint preparation and patient factors on outcomes and complications in patients treated acutely with hindfoot fusion nails for ankle and pilon fractures. METHODS: Design: Retrospective chart review. Setting: Thirteen US trauma centers and 2 UK trauma centers. Patient Selection Criteria: Ankle and pilon fractures (AO-OTA types A-C) from 2010 to 2020 acutely treated definitively with hindfoot fusion nail were reviewed. Patients at least 18 years old and with minimum 6 months follow-up or earlier diagnosis of complication were included. Exclusion criteria included nonambulatory at baseline, prior internal fixation that failed and underwent revision, and prior tibiotalar or subtalar arthrodesis. Outcome Measurements and Comparisons: The primary outcome was final postoperative ambulatory status. Secondary outcomes were infectious and fracture-related complications. RESULTS: One hundred forty-nine patients (75 men; 74 women; age 20–99; median 63 years) were treated for ankle (104) or pilon (45; 8A, 13B, 24C) fractures. Eighty-five patients (44%) had open fractures and 55 (37%) had diabetes. Thirty-six patients (24%) had joint preparation at the time of surgery. Forty-five (30%) were made weight bearing as tolerated postoperatively; the median time to mobilize was 1.5 days (0–210) and to full weight bearing was 35 days (0–1462). Fifty-seven patients (85%) returned to their preinjury ambulatory status, which was not affected by joint preparation (50% vs. 59%, P = 0.327). Joint preparation led to higher articular fusion rates (94% vs. 24%; P = 0.001) and fewer hardware removals (19% vs. 42%, P = 0.013), but trended toward a higher fracture nonunion rate (19% vs. 8%, P = 0.053). Forty-five patients (30%) had infectious complications, 60 (40%) had a fracture-related complication, and 67 (45%) had additional procedures. Open fractures did not lead to any differences in superficial or deep infection. Insulin-dependent diabetes was associated with higher rates of infectious complications (31% vs. 15%, P = 0.028) and amputation (17% vs. 4%, P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: Hindfoot fusion nails for acute ankle and pilon injuries had high complication rates. More complications occurred in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes. While 95% regained ambulation, only 57% returned to preoperative status. Joint preparation led to higher rates of articular fusion (94% vs. 24%, P < 0.001) but not fracture union (81% vs. 66%, P = 0.106). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Abstract Introduction: Recruitment for rare disease studies is challenging due to small eligible populations. Traditional clinical research management systems often lack tools to track recruitment contacts prior to enrollment. The NET-PRO study, focused on neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), implemented a participation monitoring system to enhance recruitment efficiency and representativeness. Methods: NET-PRO is a multicenter cohort study of 2538 adults diagnosed with gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) or lung NETs between January 2018 and September 2024. Recruitment occurred from January 2022 to February 2025 across 14 U.S. medical centers. Sites used flexible recruitment methods (email, mail, phone, in-clinic) and tracked contacts using REDCap-based tools. Participant characteristics were analyzed by enrollment mode (online or mail) and recruitment difficulty (number of contacts required prior to enrollment) using standardized mean differences, chi-square tests, and ANOVA. Results: Of 9279 contacted patients, 2675 consented (28.8%) and 2538 enrolled (27.4%). Most enrolled online (83.2%), while 16.8% enrolled by mail. Mail respondents were older, had lower education and income, and more comorbidities. Among those enrolled, recruitment difficulty was associated with older age, lower education and income, but not comorbidity. Over half of the most difficult-to-recruit participants enrolled online. Contact methods varied by attempt, with email dominating early contacts and phone/mail used more in later attempts. Conclusions: A participation monitoring tool supported flexible, multimodal recruitment and improved sample representativeness in a rare cancer study. Tracking recruitment contacts enabled adaptive strategies and may reduce bias in observational research by enabling better outreach to harder-to-reach populations.

ABSTRACT Background One in five emergency department (ED) visits is by older adults aged 65+ years. Clinical practice guidelines are needed to optimize patient care by translating the best available evidence into actionable recommendations to guide person‐centered management for this medically complex and growing patient population. Our objective was to understand contributors' experiences and share best practices to inform other guideline working groups. Methods We conducted a qualitative study based on thematic analysis with an interpretivist paradigm in June–July 2025, using semi‐structured interviews of Geriatric Emergency Department (GED) Guidelines 2.0 contributors to understand their experiences. Interviews were transcribed, independently reviewed by team members, and reflexively coded to identify themes. Results We interviewed 18 participants. Four main themes emerged: (1) motivations for participation, (2) varying opportunities to be involved, (3) personal benefits, and (4) challenges for improvement. Participants contrasted the strengths of shared learning and development with the burdens of organization and coordination. Conclusion Contributors to the GED Guidelines 2.0 reported a positive experience. They joined because they wanted to contribute to better care of older patients and to achieve personal and professional goals. Many cited that their roles aligned with their strengths and expertise. They also gained skills and knowledge on systematic reviews and benefited from networking. Future groups planning a similar process should consider having multiple levels of leadership, experts in systematic reviews, regular reminders, and creative incentives to improve the process and foster improved networking opportunities within their disciplines.

Abstract Patients at risk for progression from myeloid precursor states (idiopathic cytopenia of undetermined significance [ICUS] and clonal cytopenia of undetermined significance [CCUS]) to myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) are not well defined. Epidemiologic risk factors, clonal changes for MDS development, and evolution from one MDS state to another were available in the MDS Natural History Study (NHS), a prospective cohort enrolled at diverse US sites. Extensive clinical data and biospecimens were collected at baseline and follow-up. A total of 1177 (56%) individuals with MDS or MDS-related precursor conditions (ICUS/idiopathic dysplasia of undetermined significance [IDUS], CCUS, and MDS/myeloproliferative neoplasm overlap) were enrolled and diagnosed in the MDS NHS. The median age was 74 years, with 89% aged ≥60 years, and most were male patients. Median follow-up time was 1.6 years and was similar among ICUS/IDUS, CCUS, and MDS. During follow-up period, 68% of participants terminated the study, 35% died, and 38% had disease progression. Using a refined clinical definition of progression, the greatest proportion of progression was observed among higher-risk-MDS (116 [73%]), followed by lower-risk-MDS (170 [52%]); fewer progression events were observed among participants with CCUS (65 [22%]) and ICUS/IDUS (46 [17%]). Predictors of progression are delineated, including female sex, higher quantity of mutations, the presence of TP53 mutation, and poor/very poor cytogenetic score. Based on these prospective data, guidelines for clinical management including monitoring and surveillance are outlined. The MDS NHS provides real-world data to illustrate how clinical and genotypic differences inform the classification, disease course, and approach to therapy, with informed monitoring guidelines for patients. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02775383.

BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread adoption of minimally invasive surgery in the US, disparities in its use persist. One unexplored contributor is geographic access to robotic surgical systems. This study evaluates the geospatial association between: (1) Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) and open surgery rates, (2) availability of robotic systems and open surgery, and (3) open surgery rates in demographically similar areas with differing robotic access. STUDY DESIGN: Data from 6 sources were linked at the ZIP Code Tabulation Area (ZCTA) level to identify hospitals and to extract procedure modality, presence of robotic systems, and area characteristics. Regression analysis assessed the association between SVI and open surgery rates. Open rates were then compared between hospitals with and without robotic systems. Propensity score matching was used to compare open rates across matched ZCTAs by robotic access and SVI levels. RESULTS: Higher social vulnerability was associated with increased open surgery rates (estimate = 0.20; p < 0.01), with rates ranging from 18.3% in low-vulnerability areas to 32.7% in high-vulnerability areas. Among 3,446 eligible ZCTAs, 57% had at least 1 robotic system. ZCTAs without robotic systems had higher open surgery rates (42.9 vs 19.4 per 100 procedures; relative rate = 2.21; p < 0.01). This association remained significant after matching (relative rate = 1.66; p < 0.01), for the low-mid- and high-SVI strata, and 3 of the 5 procedures examined. CONCLUSIONS: When correcting for geographic variation, the availability of robotic surgery was associated with a decrease in open surgery rates.

Three-dimensional (3D) anatomic modeling derived from high-resolution medical imaging, such as computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), has been increasingly adopted in preclinical testing and device development. This white paper describes a cardiac-specific workflow that integrates 3D printing and silicone molding for support device development and procedural simulation. Patient-derived computed tomography angiography data were segmented using FDA-cleared medical modeling software to isolate the left ventricular anatomy and were further processed in computer-aided design (CAD) to ensure accurate physiological wall thickness and structural fidelity. Material jetting 3D printing was performed on a Stratasys J750 using material distributions designed to mimic the mechanical properties of myocardium, thereby approximating myocardial compliance. In parallel, stereolithography apparatus molds were designed from the left ventricle CAD model to cast transparent, pliable left ventricular models in Sorta-Clear™ 18 silicone. The 3D-printed models preserved intricate morphological detail and were suitable for mechanical manipulation and device deployment studies, whereas silicone models offered tunable mechanical properties, transparency for visualization, and durability for repeated use. Together, these complementary modalities provided rapid manufacturing capability and application-relevant physical representation. Case-specific parameters, strengths, and limitations of both models in enhancing patient care and device testing are highlighted, with relevance to heart failure applications. Current knowledge gaps, workflow and integration challenges, and future opportunities are identified, positioning this work as a reference framework for continued innovation in anatomic modeling. Within the collaborative framework of Mayo Clinic’s Anatomic Modeling Unit and Simulation Center, this integrated modeling workflow demonstrates the value of multidisciplinary collaboration between engineers and clinicians. Clinically, these patient-specific left ventricular models may enable pre-procedural device sizing and positioning and may support simulation of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) deployment while identifying possible anatomic constraints prior to intervention. This workflow has direct applicability in advanced heart failure patients undergoing MCS support, such as the Impella axillary MCS device or the durable LVAD, with potential to reduce procedural uncertainty while reducing complications and improving peri-procedural outcomes. Additionally, these models also serve as high-accuracy educational tools, enabling trainees and multidisciplinary care teams to visualize and possibly rehearse procedural steps while gaining hands-on experience in a risk-free environment.

Chest CTs done for unrelated reasons have the potential to reveal unsuspected abnormalities and provide complementary information to help direct appropriate management. By thoroughly understanding the diagnostic role and limitations of CT in assessing ventricular size and morphology as well as myocardial attenuation, enhancement, and thickness, radiologists will be better equipped to differentiate between normal and abnormal findings and provide precise, clinically appropriate recommendations.