Citations

AbstractPurposeRadiotherapy (RT) is associated with improved survival in atypical teratoid/rhabdoid tumor (ATRT); however, optimal RT delivery is unknown. A meta‐analysis was conducted for disseminated (M+) ATRT receiving focal or craniospinal radiation (CSI).MethodsAfter abstract screening, 25 studies (1995–2020) contained necessary patient, disease, and radiation treatment information (N = 96). All abstract, full text, and data capture were independently double‐reviewed. The corresponding author was contacted for cases of insufficient information. Response to pre‐radiation chemotherapy (N = 57) was categorized as complete response (CR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), and progressive disease (PD). Univariate and multivariate statistics were performed to investigate survival correlation. Patients with M4 disease were excluded.ResultsThe 2‐ and 4‐year overall survival (OS) was 63.8% and 45.7%, respectively, with a median follow‐up of 2 years (range 0.3–13.5). The median age was 2 years (range 0.2–19.5), and 96% received chemotherapy. On univariate analysis, gross total resection (GTR, p = .0007), pre‐radiation chemotherapy response (p < .001), and high‐dose chemotherapy with stem cell recuse (HDSCT, p = .002) correlated with survival. On multivariate analysis, pre‐radiation chemotherapy response (p = .02) and GTR (p = .012) retained survival significance as compared to a trend for HDSCT (p = .072). Comparisons of focal RT (vs. CSI) and greater than or equal to 5400 cGy primary dose were nonsignificant. Following CR or PR, a statistical trend favored focal radiation (p = .089) over CSI.ConclusionChemotherapy response prior to RT and GTR correlated with improved survival on multivariate analysis for ATRT M+ receiving RT. No benefit was observed for CSI compared to focal RT among all patients and following favorable chemotherapy response, inviting further study of focal RT for ATRT M+.

Abstract Background: Historically, less than 10% of adult patients with cancer enroll in clinical trials, however, enrollment dropped further at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Barriers to trial participation during the pandemic have not been reported. As part of the TBCRC 057 survey on the impact of the pandemic on willingness to participate in breast cancer trials, we assessed reasons for reluctance to participate in trials during the pandemic. Methods: US residents who self-reported a breast cancer diagnosis were eligible to complete the online survey 8/6/21-9/30/21. Respondents indicated whether they were current trial participants and, if not, their willingness to consider participating in a trial during the pandemic using a 5-point scale (0-not at all willing to 4-definitely willing). Respondents who were not current trial participants and who were not “definitely willing” to consider participation during the pandemic were characterized as “reluctant” and asked to select reasons for their reluctance from a checklist. Pandemic-related anxiety was assessed on an 11-point scale (0-no anxiety to 10-worst anxiety possible). Respondents indicated how the option to conduct trial activities online would affect their decision to participate in a trial (much less likely, somewhat less likely, would not affect my decision, somewhat more likely, or much more likely). In exploratory analyses, we evaluated whether pandemic-related anxiety and favorable reactions towards opportunities to conduct trial activities online were associated with reluctance to consider trial participation during the pandemic due to fear of SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Means were compared with two sample t-tests and proportions with Fisher’s exact tests. Results: Of 385 survey respondents, 185 (48%) were characterized as reluctant to consider trial participation during the pandemic. Among these 185, median age was 55 (range 25-80), 85.7% were non-Hispanic White, 48.1% had metastatic disease and 44.2% received care at academic centers. Reasons for reluctance to consider trial participation during the pandemic cited by ≥15% of the 185 reluctant respondents are shown in the Table. Respondents who selected fear of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 as a reason for their reluctance to consider participating in a trial during the pandemic had higher mean pandemic-related anxiety (7.0 vs 5.2, p&lt; 0.001). These respondents were more likely to indicate telemedicine doctor visits (p=0.01), virtual consents (p=0.001) and online study questionnaires (p=0.001) would make them somewhat or much more likely to participate in trials than respondents who did not select fear of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 as a reason for their reluctance. Conclusions: Reasons for reluctance of patients with breast cancer to consider participation in clinical trials during the pandemic are multifactorial. Although concerns about safety and efficacy remain prominent, fear of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 drives unwillingness to participate in &gt;25% of reluctant patients. Trial accrual may benefit from incorporation of electronic activities when possible. Table Citation Format: Karen L. Smith, Carolyn Mead-Harvey, Gina L. Mazza, Albert E. Holler, Eileen Shinn, Elizabeth Frank, Michelle Melisko, Cyd Eaton, Jeannine M. Salamone, Teri Pollastro, Patricia Spears, Antonio C. Wolff, Gabrielle B. Rocque. Reasons for Reduced Willingness to Participate in Clinical Trials During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Translational Breast Cancer Research Consortium (TBCRC) 057 Survey [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-08-07.

Abstract Background Ileal pouch–anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the standard restorative procedure following proctocolectomy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) who require colectomy. However, removal of the diseased colon does not eliminate the risk of pouch neoplasia. We aimed to assess the incidence of pouch neoplasia in IBD patients following IPAA. Methods All patients at a large tertiary center with International Classification of Diseases–Ninth Revision/International Classification of Diseases–Tenth Revision codes for IBD who underwent IPAA and had subsequent pouchoscopy were identified using a clinical notes search from January 1981 to February 2020. Relevant demographic, clinical, endoscopic, and histologic data were abstracted. Results In total, 1319 patients were included (43.9% women). Most had ulcerative colitis (95.2%). Out of 1319 patients, 10 (0.8%) developed neoplasia following IPAA. Neoplasia of the pouch was seen in 4 cases with neoplasia of the cuff or rectum seen in 5 cases. One patient had neoplasia of the prepouch, pouch, and cuff. Types of neoplasia included low-grade dysplasia (n = 7), high-grade dysplasia (n = 1), colorectal cancer (n = 1), and mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma (n = 1). Presence of extensive colitis, primary sclerosing cholangitis, backwash ileitis, and rectal dysplasia at the time of IPAA were significantly associated with increased risk of pouch neoplasia. Conclusions The incidence of pouch neoplasia in IBD patients who have undergone IPAA is relatively low. Extensive colitis, primary sclerosing cholangitis, and backwash ileitis prior to IPAA and rectal dysplasia at the time of IPAA raise the risk of pouch neoplasia significantly. A limited surveillance program might be appropriate for patients with IPAA even with a history of colorectal neoplasia.

Background. Physician review websites (PRWs) are increasing in usage and popularity. Our purpose is to characterize one-star reviews of orthopedic oncology surgeons to understand factors in healthcare that contribute to patient satisfaction. Methods. Orthopedic oncology surgeons were randomly selected from the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society. A search for one-star reviews was performed on Google Reviews, Healthgrades, and Vitals.com. Reviews were classified as clinical or nonclinical. Statistical analyses were performed regarding the frequency of reviews and complaints for each category. Results. Of the 7,733 reviews discovered, 908 (11.7%) were identified as one-star reviews. Of 907 usable complaints, 362 (40.8%) were clinical and 545 (59.2%) were nonclinical. The most common nonclinical complaints included bedside manner (65%) and limited time with providers (19%). The most common clinical complaints included complications (26%) and disagreements with the treatment plan (26%). There were 120 surgical and 221 nonsurgical reviews. Surgical patients had a higher rate of clinical complaints. Nonsurgical patients had a higher rate of total complaints. Conclusion. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study examining PRWs regarding orthopedic oncology surgeons. Most one-star reviews were due to nonclinical complaints from nonsurgical patients. The most common factors are bedside manner, limited time with provider, phone communication issues, and rude/unprofessional conduct.

Abstract Background: Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) patients have a risk of developing cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). Establishing predictive models for CCA in PSC is important. Methods: In a large cohort of 1,459 PSC patients seen at Mayo Clinic (1993-2020), we quantified the impact of clinical/laboratory variables on CCA development using univariate and multivariate Cox models and predicted CCA using statistical and artificial intelligence approaches. We explored plasma bile acid (BA) levels’ predictive power of CCA (subset of 300 patients, BA cohort). Results: Eight significant risk factors (false discovery rate: 20%) were identified with univariate analysis; prolonged inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) was the most important one. IBD duration, PSC duration, and total bilirubin remained significant (p<0.05) with multivariate analysis. Clinical/laboratory variables predicted CCA with cross-validated C-indexes of 0.68–0.71 at different time points of disease, significantly better compared to commonly used PSC risk scores. Lower chenodeoxycholic acid, higher conjugated fraction of lithocholic acid and hyodeoxycholic acid, and higher ratio of cholic acid to chenodeoxycholic acid were predictive of CCA. BAs predicted CCA with a cross-validated C-index of 0.66 (std: 0.11, BA cohort), similar to clinical/laboratory variables (C-index=0.64, std: 0.11, BA cohort). Combining BAs with clinical/laboratory variables leads to the best average C-index of 0.67 (std: 0.13, BA cohort). Conclusions: In a large PSC cohort, we identified clinical and laboratory risk factors for CCA development and demonstrated the first artificial intelligence based predictive models that performed significantly better than common risk scores. More predictive data modalities are needed for clinical adoption of these models.

Abstract Background Pancreatic cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer deaths worldwide. Current chemoradiation therapy suffers from normal tissue toxicity. To overcome this problem, we are proposing incorporating nanoparticles as radiosensitizers and as drug delivery vehicles into current chemoradiation regimes. Gold nanoparticles (GNPs) and Docetaxel (DTX) have shown very promising synergetic radiosensitization effects despite DTX toxicity to normal tissues. Here, we explored the effect of DTX prodrug encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles (LNPDTX−P) on GNP uptake in pancreatic cancer models in vitro and in vivo. Methods For the in vitro experiment, pancreatic cancer cell line, MIA PaCa-2, were cultured and dosed with 7.5 µg/mL of GNPs (of ~ 11 nm in diameter functionalized with PEG and RGD peptide) and with 45 nM of free DTX or equivalent dose of LNPDTX−P. For the in vivo experiment, MIA PaCa-2 were implanted subcutaneously in NRG mice and the mice were dosed with 2 mg/kg of GNPs and 6 mg/kg of DTX or equivalent dose of LNPDTX−P. GNPs content in mice and in cells were measured using Inductively Coupled Plasma–Mass Spectrometry (ICP–MS). Results The results show that LNPDTX−P treated tumour samples have no less than 191% increase in GNPs uptake compared to control samples in both in vitro and in vivo. The results also show that LNPDTX−P treated tumour samples have retained over 160% of GNPs compared to control samples in both in vitro and in vivo. No significant difference was found in GNP uptake or retention between free DTX and LNPDTX−P in tumour treated samples in vivo. Conclusions The results are very promising as LNPDTX−P have superior targeting of tumour tissues compared to free DTX due to their nano size and their ability to be functionalized. Because of their minimal toxicity to normal tissues, both GNPs and LNPDTX−P can be ideal radiosensitization candidates in radiotherapy and would produce very promising synergistic therapeutic outcome. Current radiotherapy treatments can hugely benefit from the effects of these two radiosensitizers boosting the radiation dose to the tumour while reducing the normal tissue dose. This in return will improve patient outcome and quality of life.

OBJECTIVES: To engage critical care end-users (survivors and caregivers) to describe their emotions and experiences across their recovery trajectory, and elicit their ideas and solutions for health service improvements to improve the ICU recovery experience. DESIGN: End-user engagement as part of a qualitative design using the Framework Analysis method. SETTING: The Society of Critical Care Medicine’s THRIVE international collaborative sites (follow-up clinics and peer support groups). SUBJECTS: Patients and caregivers following critical illness and identified through the collaboratives. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Eighty-six interviews were conducted. The following themes were identified: 1) Emotions and experiences of patients—“Loss of former self; Experiences of disability and adaptation”; 2) Emotions and experiences of caregivers—“Emotional impacts, adopting new roles, and caregiver burden; Influence of gender roles; Adaptation, adjustment, recalibration”; and 3) Patient and caregiver-generated solutions to improve recovery across the arc of care—“Family-targeted education; Expectation management; Rehabilitation for patients and caregivers; Peer support groups; Reconnecting with ICU post-discharge; Access to community-based supports post-discharge; Psychological support; Education of issues of ICU survivorship for health professionals; Support across recovery trajectory.” Themes were mapped to a previously published recovery framework (Timing It Right) that captures patient and caregiver experiences and their support needs across the phases of care from the event/diagnosis to adaptation post-discharge home. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and caregivers reported a range of emotions and experiences across the recovery trajectory from ICU to home. Through end-user engagement strategies many potential solutions were identified that could be implemented by health services and tested to support the delivery of higher-quality care for ICU survivors and their caregivers that extend from tertiary to primary care settings.

97 Background: In order to maintain safety, clinical trial activities have been modified during the COVID-19 pandemic. As part of the TBCRC 057 survey, we assessed how pandemic-related modifications to trial activities affect breast cancer patients’ willingness to participate in clinical trials. Methods: US residents with breast cancer were eligible to complete the online survey 8/6/21 – 9/30/21. Respondents rated whether each of 11 modifications to clinical trial activities would affect their decision to participate in a trial during or after the pandemic. Items evaluated modifications that involved changing the location of trial activities to closer to home, switching trial activities to telemedicine and making the trial schedule more flexible and convenient. Response options were “much less likely to participate”, “somewhat less likely to participate”, “would not affect my decision whether or not to participate”, “somewhat more likely to participate” and “much more likely to participate”. Current trial participants were asked to consider how modifications would affect their decision to participate in another trial. Results are reported descriptively. Results: Among 385 respondents, median age was 52 (range 25-85), 88.6% were non-Hispanic White, 52.5% had metastatic disease, 93% were receiving active treatment, 48.6% received care at an academic center and 9.6% were current trial participants. Changing location of trial activities was viewed favorably, with 70.2%, 64.6% and 54.1% of respondents indicating they would be much or somewhat more likely to participate if they could complete trial blood tests, x-ray tests or doctor visits closer to home, respectively. Similarly, the option to complete trial activities electronically was viewed favorably, with 59.6%, 58.6% and 60.9% of respondents indicating they would be much or somewhat more likely to participate if they could complete trial doctor visits, consent and questionnaires via telemedicine, respectively. With regard to modifications to make the trial schedule more flexible and convenient, respondent feedback was also favorable. 71.4%, 67.7% and 82.4% of respondents indicated that requiring study site visits no more than once per 3 weeks, widening windows for trial activities and offering home delivery of oral study medications, respectively, would make them much or somewhat more likely to participate. Finally, 30.4% and 51.7% indicated that the flexibility to opt-out of research-only blood tests and biopsies, respectively, would make them much or somewhat more likely to participate. Conclusions: Patients view modifications to trial activities implemented during the pandemic favorably. Trials should be flexible and the option to conduct study activities close to home or electronically when possible should be maintained during the pandemic and beyond.

Objectives Social determinants of health (SDoH) contribute to health outcomes. We identified SDoH that were modified by critical illness, and the effect of such modifications on recovery from critical illness. Design In-depth semistructured interviews following hospital discharge. Interview transcripts were mapped against a pre-existing social policy framework: money and work; skills and education; housing, transport and neighbourhoods; and family, friends and social connections. Setting 14 hospital sites in the USA, UK and Australia. Participants Patients and caregivers, who had been admitted to critical care from three continents. Results 86 interviews were analysed (66 patients and 20 caregivers). SDoH, both financial and non-financial in nature, could be negatively influenced by exposure to critical illness, with a direct impact on health-related outcomes at an individual level. Financial modifications included changes to employment status due to critical illness-related disability, alongside changes to income and insurance status. Negative health impacts included the inability to access essential healthcare and an increase in mental health problems. Conclusions Critical illness appears to modify SDoH for survivors and their family members, potentially impacting recovery and health. Our findings suggest that increased attention to issues such as one’s social network, economic security and access to healthcare is required following discharge from critical care.