Citations

PURPOSE Tumor treating fields (TTFields) use alternating electric fields to disrupt cancer cell proliferation. Feasibility of TTFields therapy with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel was previously demonstrated in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. PANOVA-3 was designed to confirm safety and efficacy of TTFields in patients with unresectable locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (LA-PAC). METHODS In this global phase III trial, 571 patients with newly diagnosed LA-PAC were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m 2 and nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m 2 by intravenous infusion once a day on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle with or without TTFields. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), local PFS, pain-free survival, and overall response rate (ORR). Distant PFS was analyzed post hoc. RESULTS OS was significantly prolonged using TTFields with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel versus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (median, 16.2 months [95% CI, 15.0 to 18.0] v 14.2 months [95% CI, 12.8 to 15.4]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.82 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.99]; P = .039). PFS, local PFS, and ORR were not improved. Pain-free survival was significantly prolonged with TTFields with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (median, 15.2 months [95% CI, 10.3 to 22.8] v 9.1 months [95% CI, 7.4 to 12.7]; HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.56 to 0.97]; P = .027), as was distant PFS (median, 13.9 months [95% CI, 12.2 to 16.8] v 11.5 months [95% CI, 10.4 to 12.9]; HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.96]; P = .022). Device-related skin adverse events (AEs) were experienced by 76.3% of patients. Most device-related skin AEs were mild to moderate, with 7.7% of patients reporting a grade 3 AE. CONCLUSION This study demonstrated significant OS, pain-free survival, and distant PFS benefits for TTFields with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel versus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in patients with unresectable LA-PAC, with no additive systemic toxicity.

Objective: To assess the efficacy of trichloroacetic acid (TCA) as treatment for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 2 or 3). Methods: Retrospective study of patients with CIN 2 or greater treated with TCA from 2016 to 2022. Patients who desired future childbearing had a satisfactory colposcopy and had not received prior treatment for CIN. Patients were offered excision as initial treatment and for lesions that did not regress. TCA was discussed as an alternative, off-label treatment. Under colposcopic guidance, 85% TCA was applied to the transformation zone and distal endocervix. Patients were followed with colposcopy and cytology every 3–6 months and subsequently underwent excision or reapplication of TCA. Primary outcomes were regression and remission after a minimum of 6 months of treatment with TCA. Results: A total of 43 patients elected treatment with TCA. The mean age was 28.6 years with a median follow-up time of 12 months. The majority of patients were nonsmokers (95.3%) and White (73.9%). Pretreatment diagnosis was CIN3 and CIN2 in 32.6% and 67.4% of cases, respectively. After a median of three TCA treatments, 23.3% regression and 55.8% remission were noted for an overall cytological response rate of 79.1%. 16.3% required excision within 1 year. There were no cervical cancer diagnoses. The median time to regression and remission was 9 months and 6 months, respectively. Conclusion: In patients with high-grade CIN, treatment with TCA may have favorable short-term outcomes. TCA may represent an alternative to excision in reproductive-aged patients, though additional studies are needed with a larger cohort in a prospective manner.

1001 Background: Imlunestrant (imlu) is a next-generation, brain-penetrant, oral selective estrogen receptor degrader. The EMBER-3 trial, in patients (pts) with ER+, HER2- ABC who had disease progression on or after aromatase inhibitor-based therapy, showed significant progression free survival (PFS) improvement with imlu vs standard therapy (SOC, fulvestrant or exemestane) in pts with ESR1 mutations ( ESR1 m), and with imlunestrant+abemaciclib (imlu+abema) vs imlu in all pts, regardless of ESR1 m. Exploratory PRO analyses are presented here. Methods: EORTC QLQ-C30 was administered at baseline (BL) and every 8 weeks until treatment discontinuation. Prespecified QLQ-C30 analysis used a longitudinal mixed model for repeated measures to calculate mean change from BL in pts with BL and ≥1 post-BL score. PRO-CTCAE (diarrhea frequency) was administered weekly, reporting 0 (never) to 4 (almost constantly). PRO-CTCAE (injection site reaction [ISR]) was administered to fulvestrant recipients weekly for 2 weeks post-injection, reporting yes/no (pain, swelling, redness). Descriptive analysis was used for PRO-CTCAE. Results: In pts with ESR1 m, imlu monotherapy was associated with many improved or maintained EORTC QLQ-C30 scores, whereas scores with SOC were declined or maintained. Specifically, pts with ESR1 m on imlu had improved global health status (GHS)/quality of life (QOL) and physical function (PF) scores, while scores with SOC declined (mean change differences between treatments: 9.9 [0.1, 19.7] and 6.2 [-0.8, 13.1], respectively). These PRO findings mirror the PFS findings in this group. In the overall population, GHS/QOL scores declined similarly with imlu vs SOC (mean change differences: 0.5 [-4.7, 5.7]), while PF scores were maintained with imlu vs a slight decline with SOC (mean change difference: 2.5 [-1.1, 6.1]). Most fulvestrant recipients (72%) reported ISR at any time while on treatment, with a mean of 31% during the first week of the first 6 cycles. Imlu+abema vs imlu showed broadly similar declines in all pts, with minimal mean change differences in GHS/QOL and PF scores (0.8 [-7.4, 5.9]; -2.2 [-6.6, 2.2], respectively). Pts reported similarly low rates of “frequent” or “almost constant” diarrhea with imlu (3%) and SOC (2%) and higher rates with imlu+abema (22%). Conclusions: PROs from EMBER-3 demonstrated that patients with ESR1 m had better GHS/QOL and PF with imlu vs SOC, mirroring efficacy results. While the frequency of CTCAE defined ISRs was low, the high rate of PRO-CTCAE ISR demonstrates that this clinically relevant adverse event is underappreciated by physicians. Additionally, all pts had generally comparable GHS/QOL and PF with imlu+abema vs imlu. Overall, these results support the efficacy and safety of imlu compared to existing SOC. Clinical trial information: NCT04975308 .

Abstract Infection is increasingly recognized as a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) receiving CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy. The current study analyzed the natural history, risk factors, and outcomes of infection in 3350 patients with R/R LBCL receiving commercial CD19 CAR T-cell therapy (n = 2804 axicabtagene ciloleucel [axi-cel], n = 546 tisagenlecleucel) from December 2017 to June 2022. Infection developed in 834 patients (24.9%) within 100 days after infusion, resulting in an infection density of 0.43 per 100 patient days and a 100-day cumulative incidence of 22%. Bacterial, viral, and fungal infections were recorded in 527 (15.7%), 374 (11.2%), and 108 patients (3.2%), respectively, with corresponding infection densities of 0.23, 0.15, and 0.04 per 100 patient days. After a 24-month median follow-up, 1482 patients (44%) had died, with infection as the primary cause in 173 cases (12%). The 100-day infection-related mortality (IRM) was 1.6% (95% confidence interval, 1.2-2.0). Patients with a Karnofsky performance score of ≤80, infection history before CAR T-cell therapy, axi-cel therapy, severe cytokine release syndrome (grade ≥3), and severe immune effector cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome (grade ≥3) had increased infection risk. Infections within 100 days were an independent risk factor for inferior overall survival beyond day 100 after CD19 CAR T-cell therapy. In conclusion, study results show a significant incidence of infection and IRM in patients with R/R LBCL treated with CD19 CAR T-cell therapy. Furthermore, results identify patients at a heightened risk of infection, offering insights to guide potential interventions aimed at mitigating infection and improving patient outcomes after CAR T-cell therapy.

e12562 Background: Previous research has suggested that breast cancer (BC) diagnosed during pregnancy or the postpartum period exhibits more aggressive clinical features, possibly due to pregnancy-related hormonal changes, immune modulation, and alterations in the mammary microenvironment compared to nulligravid or women many years out from pregnancy. Emerging data have demonstrated potential worse outcomes for patients (pts) diagnosed in post-partum. This study evaluated the influence of timing of diagnosis in relation to pregnancy history and recency of childbirth on long-term outcomes in a modern cohort of young pts with early-stage BC. Methods: Pts with stage I–III BC age < 40y in the prospective Young Women’s Breast Cancer Study (YWBCS) were categorized at diagnosis as Nulligravid (no prior pregnancy), Nulliparous (prior pregnancy without live birth), Currently Pregnant, or Parous (subdivided by time since last childbirth: within 5 years [≤ 5y PP], and 5–10 years postpartum [5–10y PP]). Baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared across BC subtypes (estrogen receptor+/HER2- [ER+/HER2-], HER2+, and triple-negative BC [TNBC]). Prognostic analyses for distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) used Cox models. Results: 859 pts were included, 257 (30%) nulligravid, 50 (6%) nulliparous, 37 (4%) pregnant, and 515 (60%) parous (348 [68%] were ≤5y PP, and 167 [32%] were 5–10y PP). Median follow-up was 133 (6–209) months. Median age at diagnosis was lower in nulligravid pts (33 vs. 35–38 years); T1 tumors were most common in pts >5y PP (62%), and N0 status was highest in nulligravid pts (64%) (all p < 0.0001). Pregnant pts had higher rates of TNBC (27%), and T3 tumors (14%), N1 status, N1 (41%), and Grade 3 (81%) tumors compared to other groups (all p < 0.0001). Overall, only tumor size (T2-T4 vs T1, HR 2.03; 95% CI 1.37–3.03) and nodal status (N1 vs N0, HR 2.22; 1.48–3.34; N2/3 vs N0, HR 3.23; 1.96-5.33) were independently associated with worse DRFS; pregnancy history was not: nulligravid + nulliparous pts had no significant differences in DRFS compared to Pregnant (HR 1.46; 0.75–2.86), Parous <5y PP (HR 0.86; 0.58–1.26), and Parous 5–10y PP (HR 0.89; 0.54–1.48). Subgroup analyses by BC subtype (Table) and sensitivity analyses (excluding currently pregnant pts or separating nulligravid and nulliparous pts) demonstrated no significant associations between pregnancy history and DRFS. Conclusions: In this cohort study of very young patients with early breast cancer with contemporary treatment including management of breast cancer during pregnancy, pregnancy history and recency of pregnancy were not independent predictors of long-term disease outcomes. DRFS results by subgroup. Pregnancy Group N (%) HR (95% CI) ER+/HER2- Nulligravid + Nulliparous 173 (38.1) Ref Pregnant 16 (3.5) 0.93 (0.32–2.70) Parous ≤5y PP 177 (39.0) 0.77 (0.45–1.29) Parous 5–10y PP 88 (19.4) 0.78 (0.39–1.53) HER2+ Nulligravid + Nulliparous 77 (30.8) Ref Pregnant 11 (4.4) 3.27 (0.80–13.38) Parous ≤5y PP 113 (45.2) 1.50 (0.60–3.75) Parous 5–10y PP 49 (19.6) 1.45 (0.45–4.66) TNBC Nulligravid + Nulliparous 56 (36.8) Ref Pregnant 10 (6.6) 1.92 (0.61–6.09) Parous ≤5y PP 57 (37.5) 0.68 (0.28–1.63) Parous 5–10y PP 29 (19.1) 1.16 (0.43–3.14)

5041 Background: Prior studies suggest that chemotherapy-naïve pts with mCRPC treated with AA have a higher CV event-related hospitalization risk than those treated with ENZA. To further explore this association, this real-world, comparative causal inference study used a large US dataset to assess CV event risk in chemotherapy-naïve pts with mCRPC who initiated treatment (Tx) with ENZA or AA and provide outcome data based on history of (h/o) CV disease (CVD). Methods: Using US Medicare fee-for-service claims (Jan 2010–Dec 2022), we identified chemotherapy-naïve pts aged ≥65 years with mCRPC who initiated ENZA or AA between Sep 2014 and May 2017. The primary endpoint was a 4-point major adverse CV event (MACE-4; composite of acute myocardial infarction [AMI], stroke, unstable angina/revascularization [UA/R], and heart failure). Atrial fibrillation (AFib), venous thromboembolism (VTE), and all-cause death were also analyzed. Groups were propensity score matched (PSM) to adjust for differences in pt characteristics, assessed using standardized mean difference (SMD). Cause-specific Cox proportional hazards models were used to comparethe risk of CV outcomes between intention-to-treat cohorts, with death as a competing event. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on h/o CVD. Sensitivity analysis was performed with a MACE-5 endpoint, defined as MACE-4 or CV-related death. Results: Of 6319 pts in the total study population (ENZA: 2934; AA: 3385), 2913 PSM pts were included from each group. The ENZA and AA cohorts had similar baseline characteristics even before PSM (SMD<0.1), with a mean (standard deviation) age of 78.8 (7.3) years; 76% of pts had prior CVD. Compared with pts on ENZA, pts on AA had a significantly higher risk of experiencing MACE-4—particularly UA/R—as well as a higher risk of AFib and VTE (Table). Similar results were found in the subgroup of pts with a h/o CVD and the sensitivity analyses. Additionally, pts on AA had a higher risk of all-cause death than pts on ENZA, regardless of CVD history (h/o CVD hazard ratio [HR]: 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07–1.21, P =0.0001; no h/o CVD HR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.01–1.26, P =0.036). Conclusions: This matched analysis of US Medicare beneficiaries showed an increased risk for MACE-4, AFib, and VTE in pts with mCRPC treated with AA compared to ENZA, in the overall pt population and pts with a h/o CVD. The risk of all-cause death was higher with AA in all pts. These findings provide insights into Tx decision-making for pts with mCRPC, especially those at high risk of CV events. Outcomes HR* (95% CI) P -value MACE-4 1.12 (1.02–1.24) 0.028 AMI 1.01 (0.76–1.32) 0.987 Stroke 0.92 (0.70–1.20) 0.505 UA/R 1.13 (1.01–1.26) 0.041 Heart failure 1.19 (0.90–1.58) 0.237 AFib 1.73 (1.31–2.29) 0.0001 VTE 1.37 (1.02–1.85) 0.037 All-cause death 1.13 (1.07–1.19) 0.0001 *ENZA = reference group.

12005 Background: Young adults (YAs) diagnosed with cancer between the ages of 18 and 39 face unique psychosocial challenges and are at risk of experiencing significant emotional distress and poor health-related quality of life (HRQOL). This randomized trial evaluated the efficacy of Bright IDEAS-YA, a problem-solving skills training intervention, on reducing distress and improving HRQOL of YAs newly diagnosed with cancer. A secondary aim examined change in problem-solving ability as a potential mediator of treatment effects. Methods: A three-site randomized trial of Bright IDEAS-YA compared with enhanced usual care (EUC) enrolled YA survivors within four months of a first diagnosis of cancer. Participants were randomized 1:1 to Bright IDEAS-YA or EUC (NCT04585269). Bright IDEAS-YA is a 6-session, one-on-one intervention that teaches a systematic approach to overcome personal challenges across any life domain. EUC involved usual psychosocial care plus AYA resources. Participants completed surveys at 0 (baseline), 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, with 6 months as the primary endpoint. Validated measures included the PROMIS Depression Short Form and Anxiety Short Form (primary outcomes), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy – General (FACT-G; primary outcome), and Social Problem-Solving Inventory-Revised Short Form (SPSI-R; mediator). Efficacy was tested using linear mixed effects models, run in R, examining the group x time interaction effects. Mediation was tested using the R multiple mediation analysis. Results: 344 YA (34.2% acceptance rate, M age = 30.3 years, SD = 6.3; 63% female, 37% male, < 1% non-binary) participated (100% planned enrollment), with 86% and 81% completing surveys at 3 and 6 months, respectively. Compared to baseline, the intervention arm showed statistically significant improvements in depression, anxiety, and HRQOL relative to the control group at 6 months. The intervention arm demonstrated an average reduction of 3.2 T-score points reduction in depression (95% CI [-4.9, -1.5], p < 0.001), 2.4 T-score points in anxiety (95% CI [-4.0, -0.81], p = 0.003), and 3.4 points improvement in total FACT-G (95% CI [0.34, 6.5], p = 0.029) relative to the control. These differences reflect clinically meaningful changes per published reports. Across all three models, change in total problem-solving ability (SPSI-R) was shown to mediate treatment effects, primarily due to change in the negative problem-orientation subscale. Conclusions: Bright IDEAS-YA was efficacious in reducing symptoms of depression and anxiety and improving HRQOL compared with enhanced usual care among YAs with cancer. Improvements are attributable to increased problem-solving ability, particularly by reducing the tendency to view problems as significant threats and doubt one’s ability to successfully solve problems. Clinical trial information: NCT04585269 .

TPS4616 Background: Osseous metastases (OM) occur in approximately 30% patients with advanced RCC. Despite therapeutic advances, OM are associated with poor survival and risk of symptomatic skeletal events (SSEs). Cabozantinib targets multiple tyrosine kinases, including vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptors and MET (Mesenchymal-Epithelial Transition factor), which are overexpressed in OM, contributing to cabozantinib’s enhanced bone activity. Radium-223, an alpha-emitting bone-seeking radioisotope, prolongs survival in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer to the bone. Building on this therapeutic approach targeting OM, our pilot study of radium-223 with VEGF inhibition in RCC with OM has also shown safety, improvement in circulating bone turnover markers, and early efficacy (McKay et al, CCR 2018). To address the unmet need to improve SSE rates and outcomes in RCC and OM, we designed a study investigating cabozantinib with or without radium-223 in patients with RCC with OM (NCT04071223). Methods: This is an open-label, multicenter randomized phase-2 study. Key inclusion criteria include metastatic RCC of any histology with ≥1 OM, at least 1 OM without prior radiation, any number of prior therapies, and Karnofsky performance status ≥ 60%. Use of a bone protecting agent is required unless contraindicated. Patients are randomized 1:1 to cabozantinib with (Arm A) or without (Arm B) radium-223. The 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. Radium-223 is administered at a fixed dose of 1.49 microcurie/kg IV every 28 days x 6 doses. The starting dose for cabozantinib in Arm B is 60 mg daily. The primary endpoint is SSE-free survival. Secondary endpoints include safety, progression-free survival, overall survival, time to first SSE, objective response rate, time to subsequent anti-cancer therapies, quality of life (QoL) measures, and correlative analyses including liquid biopsy and tumor tissue analysis. The study is designed to have 85% power to detect an improvement in 6-month SSE-free survival rate from 65% to 78% with one-sided α = 0.05 significance. To ensure 124 evaluable patients, target accrual is 134 (67 per arm). The group-sequential design includes a safety run-in and an interim analysis for futility when 50% of the expected number of events have been observed. The safety run-in, performed in the first 12 patients randomized to combination therapy, did not demonstrate dose limiting toxicities. Final data analysis will occur when 99 events have been observed. The study was activated in July 2020 and accrual is ongoing throughout the National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN). Continued site participation and enrollment are essential to evaluate this therapeutic strategy. Clinical trial information: NCT04071223 .

10582 Background: Breast cancer is the most common cancer in young women, with an increasing incidence over the past two decades. This study aims to evaluate the characteristics of young-onset breast cancers among patients aged ≤50 and compare tumor characteristics by germline mutation carrier status. Methods: Patients with breast cancer diagnosis ≤50 years old and evaluated across the Mayo Clinic enterprise between 2000 and 2024 were identified through the prospective Mayo Clinic Breast Cancer Study and the institutional tumor registry. Demographics, tumor characteristics, and clinical outcomes were obtained and described using summary statistics. Germline pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant (PV) carrier status for 5 established breast cancer predisposition genes (BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM, CHEK2 and PALB2) was available in a subset of unselected patients who consented to participation in sequencing studies at Mayo Clinic. Clinical characteristics were compared between PV carriers in each gene and non-carriers utilizing Chi-square test. All tests were two-sided and p-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Among 8,462 patients (8435 women, 27 men) with breast cancer diagnosis at age ≤50 in the study, the median age of diagnosis of breast cancer was 44 years (range 18 – 49). At diagnosis, 84% had invasive disease, 43% of the tumors were high-grade, 15.8% had triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), more than two-thirds (67.5%) presented with stage I or II breast cancer, and 3.7% had bilateral breast cancer. Among the 2,527 patients who consented to germline sequencing, 10.1% were found to be carriers of PVs; these included BRCA1 (3.3%), BRCA2 (2.7%), CHEK2 (2.3%), ATM (1.3%), and PALB2 (0.6%). Compared to non-carriers, a significant enrichment (p<0.05) of invasive breast cancer (92.6% vs. 83.3%) and high grade tumors (61.7% vs. 31.4%) were noted in BRCA1 PV carriers, and of bilateral breast cancer (13.4% vs. 3.8%) and high grade tumors (46.4% vs. 31.4%) in BRCA2 PV carriers. After exclusion of in-situ disease, proportion of TNBC was observed to be significantly higher in BRCA1 (61.3%), BRCA2 (15.5%) and PALB2 (30.7%) PV carriers compared to non-carriers (11.2%), whereas >90% of ATM or CHEK2 PV carriers had ER+ breast cancer and none had TNBC. A significant difference in stage at presentation was not observed by germline PV carrier status. Conclusions: The high frequency (>10%) of PVs in young-onset breast cancer underscores the importance for genetic testing in this population. The observed differences in breast cancer phenotypes based on germline PV carrier status among young-women may have significant implications for clinical outcomes and needs to be further explored.

10587 Background: The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and NCCN recommend germline testing for patients (pts) with biliary tract cancers (BTC), particularly those diagnosed at a young age. Prior studies estimate that approximately 15% of pts with BTC harbor pathogenic germline alterations. Germline testing can identify hereditary cancer syndromes, guide targeted therapy, and inform family counseling. This study aimed to further characterize and describe the prevalence of pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) in patients with young-onset BTC (YO-BTC). Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of medical records for pts diagnosed with YO-BTC (ages 18–55) across all Mayo Clinic tri-sites from January 2014 to October 2024. Data collected included results from germline DNA sequencing, tumor genetic testing, demographics, history of other malignancies, and family history of cancer. The primary outcome was the identification of pathogenic germline mutations associated with cancer predisposition. Results: Among 239 pts with YO-BTC, the median age at diagnosis was 43 years (range 19–55), with 62% female and 65.2% identifying as white. Clinical germline testing (e.g., Invitae, Ambry, Myriad) was performed in 123 pts (51.5%), revealing PGVs in 15 pts (12.1%), variants of uncertain significance (VUS) in 30 pts (24.3%), and likely benign variants in 4 pts (3.2%). Among those with PGVs, DNA repair mutations were the most common findings (10/15), including ATM (4), CHEK2 (2), BRCA2 (2), BAP1 (1), and PALB2 (1). One pt had a Lynch syndrome-associated mutation (MSH6), and four had mutations in other cancer-related genes (MUTYH, HOXB13, RMRP, and PIK3CA). Tumor genomic profiling (via CARIS, TEMPUS, or FoundationOne) was performed in 9 pts with PGVs, detecting the variant in 4 (44%), while liquid biopsy (Guardant) identified the PGV in 4 of 6 cases (66.6%).The majority of PGV carriers had advanced BTC (14/15), with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma being the most prevalent (11/15), while 4 had extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Additionally, most PGV carriers had a first- or second-degree relative with a prior history of malignancy (14/15), and 3 pts had a second malignancy. Of the 15 pts with PGVs, 4 had BTC associated with primary sclerosing cholangitis. Conclusions: In this large institutional series of YO-BTC, PGVs were identified in 12.1% of pts, demonstrating a significant yield from germline testing in this population. Notably, tissue and liquid biopsies demonstrated different detection rates for PGVs, underscoring the variability in PGVs reporting across platforms. Germline testing through CLIA-approved methods should remain the standard of care. DNA repair pathway mutations, particularly ATM, CHEK2, and BRCA2, were the most frequently identified PGVs, highlighting their role in the pathogenesis of YO-BTC and their potential to guide treatment decisions.