Citations

Objectives/Goals: This study aims to evaluate the performance of a third-party artificial intelligence (AI) product in predicting diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) in a community healthcare system. We highlight a use case illustrating how clinical practice leverages AI-predicted information in unexpected yet advantageous ways and assess the AI predictions accuracy and practical application. Methods/Study Population: DRGs are crucial for hospital reimbursement under the prospective payment model. The Mayo Clinic Health System (MCHS), a network of clinics and hospitals serving a substantial rural population in Minnesota and Wisconsin, has recently adopted an AI algorithm developed by Xsolis (an AI-focused healthcare solution provider). This algorithm, a 1D convolutional neural network, predicts DRGs based on clinical documentation. To assess the accuracy of AI-generated DRG predictions for inpatient discharges, we analyzed data from 930 patients hospitalized at MCHS Mankato between March 2 and May 13, 2024. The Xsolis platform provided the top three DRG predictions for the first 48 hours of each inpatient stay. The accuracy of these predictions was then compared against the final billed DRG codes from the hospital’s records. Results/Anticipated Results: In our validation set, Xsolis achieved a top-3 DRG prediction accuracy of 71% at 24 hours and 81% at 48 hours, which is lower than the originally reported accuracy of 81.1% and 83.3%, respectively. Interestingly, discussions with clinical practice leaders revealed that the most valuable information derived from the AI predictions was the expected geometric mean length of stay (GMLOS), which Xsolis was perceived to predict accurately. In the Medicare system, each DRG is associated with an expected GMLOS, a critical factor for efficient hospital flow planning. A subsequent analysis comparing predicted GMLOS with the actual length of stay showed variances of -0.10 days on day 1 and 0.14 days on day 2, indicating a high degree of accuracy and aligning with clinical practice perceptions. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Our research underscores that clinical practice can leverage AI predictions in unexpected yet beneficial ways. While initially focused on DRG prediction, the associated GMLOS emerged as more significant. This suggests that AI algorithm validation should be tailored to specific clinical needs rather than relying solely on generalized benchmarks.

ABSTRACT Understanding lung cancer evolution can identify tools for intercepting its growth. In a landscape analysis of 1024 lung adenocarcinomas (LUAD) with deep whole-genome sequencing integrated with multiomic data, we identified 542 LUAD that displayed diverse clonal architecture. In this group, we observed an interplay between mobile elements, endogenous and exogenous mutational processes, distinct driver genes, and epidemiological features. Our results revealed divergent evolutionary trajectories based on tobacco smoking exposure, ancestry, and sex. LUAD from smokers showed an abundance of tobacco-related C:G>A:T driver mutations in KRAS plus short subclonal diversification. LUAD in never smokers showed early occurrence of copy number alterations and EGFR mutations associated with SBS5 and SBS40a mutational signatures. Tumors harboring EGFR mutations exhibited long latency, particularly in females of European-ancestry (EU_N). In EU_N, EGFR mutations preceded the occurrence of other driver genes, including TP53 and RBM10. Tumors from Asian never smokers showed a short clonal evolution and presented with heterogeneous repetitive patterns for the inferred mutational order. Importantly, we found that the mutational signature ID2 is a marker of a previously unrecognized mechanism for LUAD evolution. Tumors with ID2 showed short latency and high L1 retrotransposon activity linked to L1 promoter demethylation. These tumors exhibited an aggressive phenotype, characterized by increased genomic instability, elevated hypoxia scores, low burden of neoantigens, propensity to develop metastasis, and poor overall survival. Re-activated L1 retrotransposition-induced mutagenesis can contribute to the origin of the mutational signature ID2, including through the regulation of the transcriptional factor ZNF695 , a member of the KZFP family. The complex nature of LUAD evolution creates both challenges and opportunities for screening and treatment plans.

ABSTRACTObjectiveTo examine the outcomes of a clinical sample of young patients with restrictive eating disorders who received Family‐Based Treatment for Primary Care (FBT‐PC).MethodsParticipants were 134 youth (mean age = 15.7 years) and their caregiver(s). Participants and caregivers completed measures of eating disorder symptomatology, quality of life, and caregiver self‐efficacy.ResultsOf the 134 patients who received at least one session of FBT‐PC, 55.9% completed treatment, 20.1% were followed until they began a higher level of care, and 23.8% were non‐completers. Weekly measures for the full sample were evaluated using intention‐to‐treat analyses. Patient‐reported scores on the ED‐15 improved by −0.1 (SE = 0.02, F (1,133)= 26.4, p < 0.0001) per week, and caregivers' ratings of patient symptoms also improved by 0.85 (SE = 0.2, F (1,133)=13.1, p = 0.0003) per week. Patient's BMI percentile increased by 1.25 points per week (SE = 0.14, F (1,133) = 83.9, p < 0.0001). For patients who completed FBT‐PC, eating disorder symptoms, per patient‐ (M = −1.43, p < 0.0001) and caregiver‐report (M = −1.33 p < 0.0001) decreased significantly from baseline to end of treatment. Patient's quality of life increased significantly from baseline to end of treatment (M = 21.6, p < 0.0001) and caregivers showed significant increases in self‐efficacy (M = 3.41, p < 0.0001, d = 0.856). At the end of treatment, 62.5% of patients with complete data met criteria for full research remission, and 44.6% met criteria for full clinical remission.DiscussionFindings provide preliminary support for FBT‐PC as an effective treatment for youth with restrictive eating disorders. Additional research is needed to replicate these findings in other primary care settings and to understand the durability of treatment effects.

PURPOSE To investigate the clinical behavior of breast cancer in young BRCA carriers according to the specific BRCA gene ( BRCA1 v BRCA2 ) and the association of the timing of genetic testing (before v at diagnosis) with prognosis. METHODS This was an international, multicenter, hospital-based, retrospective cohort study that included 4,752 patients harboring germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PVs) in BRCA1 or BRCA2 , who were diagnosed with stage I-III invasive breast cancer at 40 years or younger between January 2000 and December 2020 in 78 centers worldwide (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03673306 ). RESULTS Compared with BRCA2 carriers (n = 1,683), BRCA1 carriers (n = 3,069) had more frequently hormone receptor–negative (74.4% v 15.5%) and high-grade (77.5% v 49.1%) tumors. Similar outcomes were observed in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers but with a different pattern and risk of disease-free survival events over time. Compared with patients tested for BRCA at diagnosis (ie, between 2 months before and up to 6 months after diagnosis; n = 1,671), those tested before diagnosis (ie, any time up to 2 months before diagnosis; n = 411) had smaller tumors (T1: 61.3% v 32.4%), less nodal involvement (N0: 65.9% v 50.8%), less frequently received chemotherapy (84.4% v 92.9%), and axillary dissection (37.5% v 47.4%). Patients tested before diagnosis had better overall survival (OS; unadjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.61 [95% CI, 0.40 to 0.92]); however, this result lost statistical significance after adjustment for potential confounders including tumor stage (adjusted HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.47 to 1.15]). CONCLUSION This global study provides evidence on the different clinical behavior of breast cancer in young BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Identifying a BRCA PV in healthy individuals was associated with earlier-stage breast cancer diagnosis and lower treatment burden, as well as better unadjusted OS.

773 Background: BCG-unresponsive High-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (HRNMIBC) tumours have an ominous prognosis and require effective, tolerable treatments. Uptake remains low for FDA approved agents (including systemic pembrolizumab, nogapendekin alfa inbakicept-pmln or N-803) due to toxicity concerns. We hypothesize direct intravesical administration of a PDL1 inhibitor could be effective with less systemic toxicity. However, it is unknown whether antibodies delivered via this route can reach tumor vasculature. INVEST is a phase Ib window of opportunity study investigating the safety and preliminary activity of passive instillation and direct injection of intravesical atezolizumab into the tumour/bladder wall. Methods: Eligible participants (ECOG performance status 0-2) are awaiting radical cystectomy (RC) for any stage urothelial cell carcinoma. Participants with muscle invasive bladder cancer, must be ineligible for/ refuse cisplatin based neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. Atezolizumab (600mg or 1200mg) is administered via direct injection into the tumour/bladder or by instillation into the bladder. The 3+3 design is utilised in the dose confirmation stages where participants receive either Single or Multiple (between 3 and 6) dose(s) of treatment before RC. Efficacy signals are derived from pathological complete response at RC and progression-free survival at 2 years. Primary endpoint, Dose confirmation stage: The number of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) observed from first dose of trial treatment to RC. Results: Enrolment began in May 2023. 13 participants were recruited to the single dose cohorts: 11 male, and 2 female. Age (Range; 43-86); median 70y, 9 NMIBC, 4 MIBC. 7 for direct injection (4 at 600mg and 3 at 1200mg dose) and 6 for passive instillation (3 at 600mg and 3 at 1200mg). Due to technical issues (syringe size) the first direct injection participant did not receive the full 600mg and were replaced. 12 participants received trial treatment as planned. There were no DLTs; 5 participants experienced non-trial treatment related SAEs (4 infections, 2 ileus, 2 renal impairment; 7/8 events occurred post-RC and all SAEs resolved). All participants underwent planned RC within the protocol stipulated timeline. Median time from last treatment to RC was18 days. 5 of 13 participants had downstaging of tumour in cystectomy specimen. Following independent Safety Review Committee review, recruitment is now open for the dose confirmation phase (Multiple 1200mg dose) in both treatment routes. Conclusions: Single dose atezolizumab treatment at a dose of 600mg and 1200mg in passive instillation and direct injection cohorts was well tolerated. Early efficacy data is encouraging. Multiple weekly doses of 1200mg in each treatment route are now being investigated within the INVEST trial. Clinical trial information: ISRCTN15842444 .

309 Background: Standard of care (SOC) treatment options for HR-PCa include RT with long-term androgen deprivation (LT-ADT) or RP with selective use of post-operative RT +/- androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The optimal treatment approach has been assessed in retrospective population-based and multi-center comparisons, which have yielded mixed results with substantial bias. Therefore, we conducted an emulated randomized comparison of RT vs RP in HR-PCa leveraging patients enrolled in RCTs. Methods: We searched Medline for RCTs in HR-PCa with a SOC arm of an RT- or RP-based regimen. Inclusion required similar experimental treatment and contemporaneous enrollment in the same country to reduce bias. This identified 2 trials, NRG/RTOG 0521 (RT+LT-ADT +/- 6 cycles docetaxel [doce]), and CALGB 90203 (RP +/- neoadjuvant 6 cycles doce and ADT). Due to inherent difference in the biochemical recurrence criteria after RT vs RP, we chose inverse probability of treatment weighted (IPTW) cumulative incidence of distant metastasis (DM) as the primary endpoint, considering deaths as competing events. Death after DM was measured to create a harmonized metric of deaths likely attributed to PCa. To assess potential residual selection bias, death without DM to capture non-cancer associated deaths was analyzed. Results: Overall, 1290 patients (RT n=557, RP n=733) were included, with similar median follow-up of 6.4 years. Prior to IPTW, RP patients were significantly younger with lower baseline PSA compared to RT patients. Adjuvant (18%) and salvage therapy (44%) was used in RP cohort. Cumulative incidence of DM was significantly lower in patients who underwent RT compared to RP (8-year DM: 16% vs 23%; p=0.01; subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] 0.48 [95%CI 0.34-0.69], p<0.001). 8-year rates of death after DM were 10% vs 8% (p=0.72) in the RP and RT patients, respectively. RT patients had significantly greater risk of death without DM (HR 2.09 [1.01-4.34], p=0.048) with early differences measured. On a cross-arm comparison, 8-year cumulative incidence of DM when comparing SOC RT+LT-ADT group versus the doce+ADT+RP group was 18% vs 21%, respectively (sHR 0.75 [0.45-1.24], p=0.26). Conclusions: HR-PCa patients enrolled on RCTs had significantly lower incidence of DM with an RT-based strategy compared to an RP-based approach. Longer follow-up is needed to assess deaths attributed to PCa. Despite the strengths of the comparison (use of cooperative group RCT data, contemporaneous enrollment in the same country, patients fit enough for chemotherapy, and IPTW adjustments) there appears to be residual unmeasured bias, as expected, based on greater early deaths without DM in the RT arm. Utilization of post-operative radiotherapy and ADT+Doce may mitigate differences between RP and SOC RT+LT-ADT.

387 Background: Level 1 evidence supports treatment of high-risk and node positive PCa using 4-9 weeks of radiotherapy (RT) combined with 18-36 months of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with or without abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP). While effective, some cancers recur, and this prolonged treatment is associated with inconvenience and variable morbidity. We aimed to determine whether the biological synergy of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) with a 6-month combination of ADT, AAP, and the PARP inhibitor niraparib, could enable a shorter intensified, yet safe and effective, therapeutic alternative. Methods: ASCLEPIuS (NCT04194554) is a multicenter investigator-initiated phase I/II trial in high-risk or node positive, homologous recombination unselected, PCa. Patients received 6 months of ADT, AAP, niraparib and SBRT to the prostate (37.5-40 Gy) +/- pelvic lymph nodes (25 Gy). Focal prostate/nodal boosting was permitted. The phase I primary endpoint was the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of niraparib using the time-to-event continuous reassessment method (3 dose levels: 100 mg and 200 mg held during SBRT, or 200 mg concurrent with SBRT). Dose limiting toxicities (DLT) were any persistent grade 4+ hematologic toxicity or any grade 3+ rectal/urinary toxicity at least possibly related to treatment as assessed by CTCAE v5.0. Patient reported quality of life (QOL) was assessed with the EPIC-26 short form. Linear mixed models were used to compare scores over time. Results: Accrual began in Nov. 2020 with a transition from phase I to phase II in May 2023 after enrolling 54 men. Median follow-up of the phase I cohort is 12.1 months (IQR 9.4-18.9), 80% (n=43) had Grade Group 4-5, median PSA was 17 ng/mL (range, 1-73), 15% (n=8) had cN+ disease, and 76% (n=41) received nodal RT. There were 0 DLTs to date, no grade 3+ rectal or urinary toxicities, and 5 serious adverse events at least possibly attributable to study treatment (anemia, non-rectal gastrointestinal, syncope, infection, musculoskeletal). The most common grade 3 toxicities were hypertension (n = 11, 21%) and leukopenia (n=6, 11%). Transient dose reductions or holds of AAP or niraparib occurred in 10 and 11 patients, respectively. There were no statistically significant declines in patient reported urinary QOL at 6- or 12-months post-treatment compared to baseline (all p >0.15). A transient decline in bowel QOL at 6-months occurred (p<0.01), which improved by 12-months (p=0.16). Conclusions: Our phase I findings support the short-term safety and tolerability of the combination of SBRT to the prostate and nodes, ADT, AAP, and niraparib at an MTD of 200 mg in men with high-risk or node positive PCa. Our trial completed phase II enrollment in May 2024, and longer-term safety, efficacy, and genomic correlations will be presented in the future. Clinical trial information: NCT04194554 .