Citations

Background: Spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. The development of venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, is correlated with negative outcomes following ICH. Due to the risk of hematoma expansion associated with the use of VTE chemoprophylaxis, there remains significant debate about the optimal timing for its initiation following ICH. We analyzed the risk of early chemoprophylaxis on hematoma expansion following ICH. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients presenting with spontaneous ICH at single institution between 2011 and 2018. The rate of hematoma expansion was compared between patients that received early chemoprophylaxis (on admission) and those that received conventional chemoprophylaxis (>24 h). Results: Data for 235 patients were available for analysis. Eleven patients (7.5%) in the early prophylaxis cohort and seven patients (8.0%) in the conventional prophylaxis cohort developed VTE (P = 0.9). Hematoma expansion also did not differ significantly (early 19%, conventional 23%, P = 0.5). Conclusion: The use of early chemoprophylaxis against venous thromboembolic events following ICH appears safe in our patient population without increasing the risk of hematoma expansion. Given the increased risk of poor outcome in the setting of VTE, early VTE chemoprophylaxis should be considered in patients who present with ICH. Larger, prospective, and randomized studies are necessary to better elucidate the risk of early chemoprophylaxis and potential reduction in venous thromboembolic events.

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]

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.

4086 Background: Pemigatinib (PEMI), a potent, selective, oral FGFR1-3 inhibitor, has shown efficacy and safety in patients (pts) with CCA and FGFR2 rearrangements/fusions in FIGHT-202 (NCT02924376; objective response rate [ORR], 35.5%; duration of response [DOR], 7.2 months [mo]). Overall survival (OS: 21.1 mo) was not mature in the primary report (Abou-Alfa. Lancet Oncol 2020; cutoff: Mar 22, 2019); herein we report matured efficacy and safety data from FIGHT-202 (cutoff: Apr 7, 2020). Methods: Pts (≥18 y) with known FGF/FGFR alterations and progression after ≥1 prior therapy had FGFR2 rearrangements/fusions (cohort A), other FGF/FGFR alterations (B), or no FGF/FGFR alterations (C). Pts received PEMI 13.5 mg QD (21-d cycle; 2 wks on, 1 wk off) until progression or toxicity. Primary endpoint: independent, centrally confirmed ORR (cohort A); secondary endpoints: ORR (cohorts B, C; cohorts A and B combined); DOR, disease control rate (DCR), progression free survival (PFS), OS, and safety. A post-hoc analysis in cohort A evaluated mOS in responders (pts with complete response [CR] or partial response [PR]) vs non-responders (pts with progressive disease [PD] or stable disease (SD]). Results: At cutoff, 147 pts were enrolled (cohort A, n=108; B, n=20; C, n=17; FGF/FGFR status undetermined, n=2); median follow-up was 30.4 (range, 4.9–38.7) mo and median treatment duration was 5.9 (0.2–36.5) mo. In cohort A, 9.3% of pts remained on therapy at cutoff; in cohorts B and C, all pts had discontinued. Pts discontinued mainly for PD (67.6%, 75%, and 64.7% in cohorts A, B, and C respectively). Independent, centrally confirmed ORR was 37.0%; mOS was 17.5 mo (95% CI, 14.4-22.9) in cohort A (Table 1). mOS for responders (n=40) vs non-responders (n=68) was 30.1 (95% CI, 21.5-NE) mo vs 13.7 (9.6-16.1) mo. Overall, most common all-cause treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were hyperphosphatemia (58.5%; grade ≥3, 0%), alopecia (49.7%; 0%), diarrhea (46.9%; 3.4%), fatigue (43.5%; 5.4%), nausea (41.5%; 2%), and dysgeusia (40.8%; 0%); 10.2%, 13.6% and 42.2% of pts discontinued, had dose reduction, and treatment interruption due to TEAEs, respectively. Conclusions: These results reinforce the primary data, showing continued, durable responses and sustained tolerability in pts receiving PEMI for CCA harboring FGFR2 rearrangements/fusions. Notably, the matured OS is longer than historical data; OS for responders was more than twice as long vs for non-responders. Clinical trial information: NCT02924376. [Table: see text]