Citations

10019 Background: The reported incidence of second malignant neoplasms (SMN) in long-term survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is derived from patients treated with outdated radiation therapy (RT) techniques. We modeled the risk of SMN in pediatric patients with high-risk classic HL treated with modern mediastinal RT. Methods: In patients who received mediastinal RT on the Children’s Oncology Group study AHOD1331, we modeled the lifetime attributable risk (LAR) at 70 years of age of thyroid, lung, and breast carcinoma. This value indicates the absolute increased risk of SMN at 70 years of age due to RT, above the baseline population risk (mean baseline rates at 70 years of age are 0.7%, 3.3%, and 8.9% for thyroid, lung, and breast carcinoma, respectively, https://seer.cancer.gov/data/ ). Results: In 296 patients who received protocol-directed mediastinal RT, median age at diagnosis was 15.1 years, 55% were female, and 98% had large mediastinal adenopathy. Following 5 cycles of chemotherapy, patients received RT targeting the mediastinum based on criteria of this study; in addition, some patients received RT to other supradiaphragmatic sites that contained slowly responding lesions, including the axilla (n = 3, 1%), lung (n = 7, 2.4%), upper neck (n = 4, 1.3%), and lower neck (n = 8, 2.7%). The RT modality was proton therapy in 25.3%, photon intensity modulated RT (IMRT) in 45.6%, and photon 3-dimensional conformal RT (3D-CRT) in 27.7%. The RT prescription dose was 21 Gy in 83% and 30 Gy in 16% who had a partial metabolic response at the completion of chemotherapy. The mean (range) doses to the thyroid, lungs, and breasts were 12.8 Gy (0-30.3), 8.0 Gy (0.1-15.2), and 4.2 Gy (0.2-14.5), respectively. For the complete cohort, the mean LAR at 70 years of age of thyroid carcinoma was 0.063% and of lung carcinoma was 5.34%. For females, the mean LAR at 70 years of age of breast carcinoma was 2.92%. The Table summarizes the LAR for each SMN, stratified by RT modality. Conclusions: In patients treated with mediastinal RT on a recent multi-institutional study of pediatric HL, the predicted long-term risk of SMN is substantially lower than in historical cohorts. Clinicians should consider the toxicity associated with a current RT approach when selecting therapies and counseling patients. Clinical trial information: NCT02166463 , this is a post hoc modeling study that includes patients enrolled on this study. Mean [range] lifetime attributable risk (%) at an attained age of 70 years for thyroid, lung, and breast carcinoma. Thyroid Lung Breast (females) 3D-CRT 0.046 [0.002-0.332]N=81 5.07 [0.12-10.82]N=82 1.82 [0.67-5.98]N=46 IMRT 0.064 [0.001-0.386]N=135 6.24 [2.22-11.79]N=135 4.36 [0.66-8.43]N=76 Proton 0.086 [0-1.160]N=74 4.15 [0.94-7.77]N=75 1.45 [0.17-7.23]N=40

3553 Background: Vilastobart (XTX101) is tumor-activated, high affinity, Fc-enhanced aCTLA-4 designed to focus activity toward the tumor and minimize systemic adverse events. Fc-enhancement augments FcγR co-engagement on antigen presenting cells and has been linked with efficacy of aCTLA-4 combinations in patients (pts) with microsatellite stable (MSS) colorectal cancer (CRC) and other tumors [Fakih ASCO GI 2025]. Vilastobart was generally well-tolerated and demonstrated evidence of anti-tumor activity in pts with immunologically “cold” advanced solid tumors, both as a monotherapy and in combination with atezolizumab [Davar SITC 2024]. Methods: Phase 2 of the NCT04896697 study evaluated the initial recommended Phase 2 dose of vilastobart 100 mg Q6W in combination with atezolizumab 1200 mg Q3W in pts with MSS CRC who had at least 1 prior chemotherapy regimen in the metastatic setting, excluding pts with prior immune checkpoint inhibitors. Pts with (LM) and without liver metastasis (NLM) were eligible. Tumor biopsies were obtained before and during treatment for translational analyses. Results: As of January 13, 2025, 40 pts were dosed in Phase 2. Median age was 55 (25-82) and 70% of pts had 3 or more prior lines of therapy. Of the 24 enrolled NLM pts, 11 were response-evaluable with an available on-treatment scan as of the data cut. In these 11 pts, two confirmed and one unconfirmed partial response (PR) were reported, all accompanied by significant decreases in ctDNA and serum tumor marker CEA and with each pt ongoing on therapy, for a preliminary ORR of 27%. One additional pt (with peritoneal metastasis) had a 24% reduction in target lesions (first scan) and was ongoing on therapy. Of the 16 enrolled LM pts, 7 were response evaluable, with one stable disease and another pt reporting a mixed response with significant serum tumor marker reductions, both ongoing on therapy. Of note, one LM pt in Phase 1C dose escalation treated with vilastobart (150 mg Q6W) combination had a confirmed PR with LM resolution. Six pts (15%) reported G3+ treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), with two G4 laboratory TRAEs and no G5 TRAEs. Only three pts discontinued therapy for TRAEs. TRAEs occurring in ≥10% (all grade) or ≥5% (G3) of pts are summarized in the Table. Conclusions: The combination of vilastobart, a novel tumor-activated, Fc-enhanced a-CTLA-4, and atezolizumab demonstrated initial evidence of anti-tumor activity in late line, metastatic MSS CRC where immune checkpoint blockade has historically been relatively ineffective. Vilastobart was observed to have a differentiated safety profile distinct from systemically active a-CTLA-4, consistent with tumor-selective activation. Clinical trial information: NCT04896697 . AE term All Graden (%) Grade 3n (%) Fatigue 12 (30%) 0 Diarrhea 8 (20%) 0 Infusion related reactions 5 (13%) 0 Pyrexia 4 (10%) 0 ALT increased 4 (10%) 0 AST increased 4 (10%) 1 (3%) Colitis 2 (5%) 2 (5%)

8644 Background: RET fusions are targetable oncogenic drivers in 1-2% of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC). ARROW (NCT03037385) study results (final data lock May 20, 2024) supported the US FDA approval of pralsetinib, a highly potent, oral, selective RET inhibitor for metastatic RET -altered NSCLC. Here, we present final study results. Methods: ARROW was a phase 1/2 open-label study conducted at 84 sites in 13 countries. Phase 2 included patients with RET -fusion-positive NSCLC who received 400 mg pralsetinib once daily (QD). Initially, treatment-naïve patients were not candidates for platinum-based therapy and presented with several unfavorable prognostic factors; this requirement was removed by protocol amendment in July 2019. Primary objectives were overall response rate (ORR, per RECIST v1.1) and safety. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) are reported in the full efficacy population; the measurable disease population (MDP) was the primary analysis population for ORR and duration of response (DOR). Results: 281 patients with RET -fusion-positive NSCLC received pralsetinib 400 mg QD, with a median duration of treatment of 14.95 months (mos). Median age was 60 years; 46% were male. In the MDP (n=259), ORR was 70.3% (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 64.3, 75.8) and median DOR was 19.1 mos (95% CI: 14.5, 27.9; Table). In the efficacy population (N=281), median OS was 44.3 mos (95% CI: 30.9, 53.1) with median follow up of 47.6 mos (95% CI: 44.8, 49.2), and median PFS was 13.1 mos (95% CI: 11.4, 16.8). ORR (Table) and median PFS were markedly higher in the US (25.9 mos, n=64) vs. Asia (12.6 mos, n=122) or Europe (12.9 mos, n=95). In the safety population, 95% of patients experienced treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs); 66% experienced ≥grade 3. Common TRAEs included increased AST (n=128 [46%]), anemia (n=121 [43%]), increased ALT (n=98 [35%]), and hypertension (n=77 [27%]). 3 patients died due to TRAEs (pneumonia, n=2; interstitial lung disease and rhabdomyolysis, n=1 each). No new safety signals were identified with this update. Conclusions: Pralsetinib produced clinically meaningful and durable responses in patients with RET -fusion-positive NSCLC (regardless of prior therapies) with a manageable safety profile, confirming with this longer follow up previously published results. Clinical trial information: NCT03037385 . All MDP(n=259) Prior Platinum (n=130) Treatment-naive(n=106) ORR, % (95% CI) Overall 70.3(64.3, 75.8) 63.1(54.2, 71.4) 78.3(69.2, 85.7) US (n=58)77.6(64.7, 87.5) (n=31)64.5(45.4, 80.8) (n=19)100(82.4, 100) Europe (n=89)65.2(54.3, 75) (n=36)63.9(46.2, 79.2) (n=43)65.1(49.1, 79) Asia (n=112)70.5(61.2, 78.8) (n=63)61.9(48.8, 73.9) (n=44)81.8(67.3, 91.8) Median DOR, mos (95% CI) a (n=182)19.1(14.5, 27.9) (n=82)31.8(15.1, 40.4) (n=83)13.4(9.4, 21.7) Median DOR follow up, mos (95% CI) 46.8(42.3, 50.2) 50.3(46.9, 56.8) 42.3(37.4, 44.2) a Per FDA censoring rule.

TPS3634 Background: For patients with oligometastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), aggressive local therapy of isolated metastases, particularly in the liver, has been associated with long-term progression-free and overall survival (OS) primarily based on retrospective evidence. However, in patients with limited metastatic CRC that is deemed inoperable or those with additional disease outside of the liver or lungs, the role of local ablative therapies, including microwave ablation (MWA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), to render patients disease free is less clear. Despite the long history of treating oligometastatic CRC with local therapy, which is largely provider biased, questions remain regarding the benefit of extending the paradigm of metastatic directed therapy to patients with more extensive disease. This trial seeks to use a pragmatic multimodality approach that mirrors the current clinical dilemma. This study is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of adding total ablative therapy (TAT) of all sites of disease to standard of care systemic treatment in those with limited metastatic CRC. Methods: A022101/NRG-GI009 is a National Clinical Trials Network randomized phase III study planned to enroll 364 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic CRC (BRAF wild-type, microsatellite stable) without peritoneal metastasis or liver-only disease on baseline imaging. Patients receive first-line systemic therapy for 12-39 weeks. Patients with ≤4 sites of metastatic disease following initial systemic therapy that are amenable to any combination of surgical resection, MWA, and/or SBRT are then randomized 1:1, stratified by number of metastatic organ sites (1-2 vs. 3-4), timing of metastatic disease diagnosis (de novo vs. secondary), and presence of metastatic disease outside the liver/lungs in at least 1 site. Patients in Arm 1 will receive TAT consisting of treatment of all metastatic sites with SBRT, MWA, and/or surgical resection followed by standard of care systemic therapy. Patients in Arm 2 will continue with standard of care systemic therapy alone. The primary endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints include event-free survival, treatment-related toxicities, and local recurrence with exploratory biomarker analyses. The study needs 346 evaluable patients combined in the 2 arms to demonstrate an improvement in OS with a hazard ratio of 0.7 to provide 80% power with a one-sided alpha of 5%. The trial utilizes a group sequential design with two interim analyses (25% and 50% of events) for futility. The trial activated in January 2023 and recruitment is ongoing. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org. U10CA180820 (ECOG-ACRIN); U10CA180868 (NRG); U10CA180888 (SWOG); Clinical trial information: NCT05673148 .

1089 Background: T-DXd has become an important treatment option in mBC and other malignancies. Interstitial lung disease/pneumonitis (ILD) occurred in 10-14% of pts in the DESTINY-Breast trials (0-2% G5 ILD), and with potential lower incidence/severity in earlier line settings (Krop et al, ASCO 2023). We previously reported the Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN experience with T-DXd related ILD in mBC (Hoppenworth et al, ASCO 2024). Here, we expand the data to include patients treated at all locations of the Mayo Clinic Enterprise. Methods: We retrospectively identified pts with mBC who received ≥1 dose of T-DXd across the Mayo Clinic enterprise (Rochester, MN; Mayo Clinic Health System locations in MN/WI; Scottsdale, AZ; and Jacksonville, FL) between July 2022-December 2023. Demographic, mBC characteristics, and pulmonary clinical variables were abstracted from the clinical records. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics. Diagnosis of ILD was determined by treating clinicians, and severity was approximated to CTCAE V5 based on clinical documentation. Results: 252 pts with mBC received T-DXd during the study period. The majority were Caucasian (86%) and female (99%) with a median age of 63. 91 pts (36%) were current/formers smokers and 97 (39%) had prior pulmonary comorbidities. The majority had HER2 low (155, 62%) and HR positive (164, 65%) mBC. 35 (14%) developed any grade ILD [G1: 6 (17%), G2: 13 (37%), G3: 3 (8.6%), G4: 3 (8.6%), G5: 10 (29%)], with 15 (43%) presenting with ≥G3. 29 (83%) presented with at least 1 symptom (cough or SOB). Among those with previous pulmonary toxicity, 4 (33%) had previous pneumonitis in the ILD cohort. The median prior lines of all therapies (including endocrine therapy) were 5, with a median of 3 prior lines of chemotherapy in both the ILD (range 1-13) and non-ILD cohorts (range 1-13). Median onset to any grade ILD was 7 cycles. 20 pts (57%) received steroids for ILD. 14 (40%) had a bronchoscopy, all had a CT chest, 16 (46%) were hospitalized, 7 (20%) were intubated and 1 (3%) had a lung biopsy. Pts with G5 ILD had a median of 3 lines of chemo and a median of 8 cycles prior to onset of ILD, compared to 3 lines of chemo and a median of 7 cycles for those with G1-4 ILD. G5 pts were all Caucasian females, 5 were former smokers, 5 were non-smokers, 1 had a history of pneumonitis. T-DXd was rechallenged in 4 pts (G1-2 ILD) without ILD recurrence. Conclusions: In this retrospective case series,14% of pts treated with T-DXd experienced any grade ILD (4% G5) which is in alignment with the rate observed in the pivotal DESTINY-Breast trials, though with higher rates of G5 toxicity. Among those with ILD, increased lines of therapy were not associated with increased risk. Further research is needed to correlate risk.

e13551 Background: The landscape of cancer care is evolving rapidly. In 2023, there were 83 new FDA oncology approvals, and 145 interventional treatment (tx) studies opened across Mayo Clinic. We are exploring novel precision outreach approaches utilizing an LLM-integrated chatbot application to “ping” patients (pts) with specific clinical or genomic characteristics about newly available drugs or clinical trials. As novel outreach methods are considered, we surveyed a patient (pt) support group to understand communication preferences and awareness of adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors in tx of breast cancer (BC). Methods: On October 7, 2024, we administered a cross-sectional survey to 41 members of the Breast Cancer Support Network (BCSN) in Rochester, MN as a part of an IRB exempt quality improvement project. Leaders of the BCSN shared information to all participants, noting that the survey’s intent was to represent the pt voice and participation was voluntary. Anonymous survey data were collected with descriptive results reported. Results: 34/41 participants in the BCSN shared demographic information. The majority (83%) were > 50 years of age. 47% reported stage I BC, 12% stage II, 6% stage III, and 35% were unsure of their stage. Most participants (26/34, 76%) reported that their BC was hormone receptor positive (HR+), 2 HER-2 positive, and 6 unsure of their BC receptor status. 24/26 (92%) of pts with HR+ BC were taking or planning to start adjuvant endocrine therapy. 10/34 (29%) were aware that adjuvant CDK 4/6 inhibitors were approved. Of these 10 participants, 2 learned of it from online health resources, 6 from their clinician, 1 from social media, and 1 from a support group. The majority (66%) were unsure if they qualified for these drugs. Regarding receipt of information on new drug approvals/tx options, the highest ranked communication preference was to receive this information in person at an upcoming visit (ranked 1st by 50% of participants), followed by EHR-based message (28%), email (10%), phone call (6%), letter (4%), or an interactive chatbot (0%). Most respondents noted that communication from their healthcare provider was very important (30/37, 81%), with others stating that this was somewhat important (5/37, 14%) or neutral (2/37, 5%). Most noted that receiving information about tx options via video or visual aid before a visit would be very helpful (33/41, 80%). When asked about follow up after learning of a new drug approval, 17/32 (53%) of pts preferred an appointment, 9/32 (28%) a phone call, 3/32 (9%) a decision aid tool, and 3/32 (9%) a questionnaire to assess their understanding. Conclusions: Providing personalized, timely communication about new FDA approved tx options is important for BC survivors and critical for improving care delivery. While technological solutions could broaden awareness, this requires balancing pt preferences for direct communication with clinicians.

529 Background: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is commonly administered to patients (pts) with estrogen receptor alpha (ER) negative (immunohistochemistry [IHC] 0%) and ER-low (IHC 1-10%) breast cancer (BC). For pts without pathological complete response (pCR), ER expression may differ between baseline and residual BC following NAC. We previously demonstrated adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) omission in ER-low early-stage BC was associated with significantly worse overall survival (OS); however, this effect was restricted to pts with residual BC following NAC and those with higher baseline ER levels (IHC 6-10%) (Choong et al., ASCO 2024). Here, we assessed how often ER was expressed in residual invasive BC for pts treated with NAC for ER-negative and ER-low BC. Methods: Weidentified pts with pre-treatment (tx) ER-negative and ER-low (regardless of HER2 expression) stage I-III BC treated with NAC who underwent BC surgery at Mayo Clinic Rochester between 2009 and 2023. ER IHC was performed in a CAP/CLIA laboratory. We evaluated ER expression in residual invasive BC for pts without pCR. The percent of pts with a post-tx change in ER status was estimated and reported with 95% Wilson confidence intervals. Results: 955 pts (838 [88%] pre-tx ER-negative; 117 [12%] pre-tx ER-low) met inclusion criteria, of whom 69% had HER2-negative and 31% HER2-positive BC. The median age at diagnosis was 52 (range: 24-86). 496 (52%) had residual BC. Residual BC was more common in HER2-negative versus (vs) positive tumors (56% vs 42%, p < 0.001) but did not differ significantly by ER status (ER-negative 51% vs ER-low 57%, p = 0.22). Of those with residual BC, 277/496 (56%) had ER re-testing. Rates of ER re-testing did not vary for pre-tx ER-negative vs -low (57% vs 51%, p = 0.37) but were significantly lower for HER2-positive vs HER2-negative tumors (39% vs 62%, p < 0.001). Among those with post-tx testing, 31/277 (11%, 95% CI: 8-15%) had an increase in ER expression from pretreatment levels (defined as ER IHC < 1% to either 1-10% or > 10%; or ER IHC 1-10% to > 10%). In these 31 pts, the original NAC was for either TNBC (21/31; 68%) or HER2+ BC (10/31; 32%). In pts with pre-tx ER-negative BC, 27/243 (11%, 95% CI: 8-16%) had ER expression in the residual BC including 14/243 (6%, 95% CI: 3-9%) with ER > 10% and 13/243 (5%, 95% CI: 3-9%) with ER 1-10%. For pts with baseline ER-low BC, 4/34 (12%, 95% CI: 5-27%) had ER > 10% in the residual BC. Among the 31 pts where ER increased following NAC, 21/31 (68%) received adjuvant ET, including 17/18 if ER was > 10% in the residual disease and 4/13 in those with ER 1-10%. Conclusions: In pts treated with NAC for ER-negative or ER-low BC not achieving pCR, we identified higher ER expression in the residual breast cancer in > 10% of pts. Given that omission of ET in ER-low BC with residual cancer following NAC is associated with worse survival, repeat biomarker testing should be considered in those without pCR, and ET individualized according to ER expression.

548 Background: TNBC is associated with higher risk of recurrence and poorer survival rates than other breast cancer subtypes. For node-positive TNBC or tumors larger than 0.5 cm, chemotherapy is generally recommended. For stage I TNBC, the benefit from chemotherapy, the optimal regimen, and whether to administer it in the neoadjuvant versus adjuvant setting remain controversial. Here, we report the treatment patterns and clinical outcomes of patients with stage I TNBC treated at Mayo Clinic. Methods: Using the Mayo Clinic Tumor Registry data, we identified patients with stage I TNBC treated between 2010 and 2021. We used the pathologic tumor (T) category for patients treated with upfront surgery and the clinical T category for patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. We used the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test to compare recurrence-free survival (RFS) according to treatment groups, measured from the day of surgery. RFS was reported at a median follow-up of 3.9, 6.2, and 7.3 years for patients who received chemotherapy neoadjuvantly, adjuvantly, and surgery alone with no chemotherapy, respectively. Results: A total of 602 patients with Stage I TNBC were included, with a median age of 62 years. 290 (48%) underwent upfront surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (pT1a: 2%, pT1b: 25%, pT1c: 74%), 127 (21%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery (cT1a: 2%, cT1b: 11%, cT1c: 87%), and 185 (31%) underwent primary surgery without any chemotherapy (pT1mi/T1a: 33%, pT1b: 32%, pT1c: 35%). Most patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy received anthracycline/cyclophosphamide + taxane (70%), while most patients treated in the adjuvant setting received a non-anthracycline containing regimen (60%). The 5-year RFS was 96% (95% CI: 93-100%) for patients who received chemotherapy neoadjuvantly, 95% (95% CI: 92-98%) for those who received chemotherapy adjuvantly, and 85% (95% CI: 80-91%) for those treated with surgery alone and no chemotherapy ( P < 0.0001). 71 (56%) of the 127 patients who received neoadjuvant therapy achieved a pCR, with only 1 RFS event (at 14 months) in that group, compared to 4 RFS events among those not achieving pCR (at 12, 20, 28 and 75 months, respectively). Among patients not receiving chemotherapy (either adjuvantly or neoadjuvantly), the 5-year RFS rates were 94% for pT1mi/T1a, 92% for pT1b and 72% for pT1c (T1mi/a/b vs T1c, P = 0.009). Conclusions: In this large cohort of stage I TNBC, patients who received chemotherapy (adjuvantly or neoadjuvantly) had better 5-year RFS compared with those treated with locoregional therapy only. Among patients receiving chemotherapy, 5-year RFS was nearly identical regardless of whether chemotherapy was administered before or after surgery. Interestingly, patients undergoing upfront surgery were more likely to receive an anthracycline-sparing chemotherapy regimen.

e13890 Background: Many oncology practices have reported continued use of telemedicine since onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the future sustainability of telemedicine within oncology practices remains unclear, particularly because federal policies that enabled adoption in response to the public health emergency (PHE) have not been made permanent. Understanding similarities and differences in telemedicine utilization at high-volume oncology centers is crucial for shaping evidence-based policy that enables equitable access to oncology care across varying geographies. Methods: This is a cross-sectional, year-over-year, retrospective cohort analysis of trends in telemedicine utilization across all medical oncology clinical appointments conducted among adult patients (age >18) from January 2019 to December 2023 at Stanford Medicine Cancer Center (SM) – comprising multiple campuses in the California Bay Area – and the Mayo Clinic Comprehensive Cancer Center (MC) – a multiregional cancer practice with tertiary referral campuses in Minnesota, Florida, and Arizona, as well as community-based clinics throughout the Upper Midwest. Results: Both institutions exhibited a similar trend in telemedicine adoption over time. This was characterized by an initial surge in utilization following the PHE declaration in March 2020, followed by sustained utilization rates from 2021 to 2023. However, telemedicine use as a proportion of the overall practice differed significantly between institutions. At SM, the rate of telemedicine visits as a proportion of overall clinical practice was 60.3% (49,136/ 81,502) in 2021, 59.9% (52,247/ 87,215) in 2022, and 57.2% (55,007/ 96,163) in 2023. At MC, the proportion of telemedicine utilization was 12.8% in 2021 (23,873/186,086), 14.7% in 2022 (28,985/196,777), and 14.0% in 2023 (30,208/215,941). Deployment in the setting of new versus return visits also differed between institutions. In 2023, telemedicine accounted for 53.7% (6,440/11,998) of new and 57.7% (48,567/84,165) of return visits at SM, compared to 15.5% (3,359/21,728) and 13.8% (26,849/194,213) at MC. Additionally, while video visits were the predominant modality used to conduct telemedicine visits at both institutions from 2021 onward, in 2023 phone visits still made up 17.9% (5,394/30,208) of all telemedicine visits at MC, compared to just 5.4% (2,990/55,007) at SM. Conclusions: Stanford Medicine and Mayo Clinic exhibited a pattern of initial growth of telemedicine adoption in 2020, followed by sustained utilization from 2021-2023. We observed unique differences in the overall proportion, visit type deployment, and modality of telemedicine utilization between institutions. However, this study confirms telemedicine visits have remained a fixture of medical oncology care for many patients at these institutions since the COVID-19 pandemic.

5060 Background: Rucaparib significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) in men with BRCA-mutated chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) vs a control arm of physician’s choice of therapy (docetaxel or androgen-receptor pathway inhibitor [ARPI] therapy: abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide) in the randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase 3 TRITON3 (NCT02975934) study. Herein, we conducted an analysis to determine the impact of germline vs somatic mutation status on the efficacy of rucaparib. Methods: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive rucaparib 600 mg BID or physician’s choice of docetaxel or ARPI following progression while on 1 prior second-generation ARPI in any setting. The primary endpoint was rPFS. Color Health did genetic testing. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported for the BRCA subgroup. Results: In the rucaparib arm, 201/270 patients had BRCA mutations, and in the physician’s choice arm, 101/135 patients had BRCA mutations. Of patients with BRCA mutations: in the rucaparib arm, 80/201 (40%) were germline and 116/201 (58%) were somatic with 5/201 (2%) BRCA mutation status unknown, while in the physician’s choice arm, 39/101 (39%) were germline and 48/101 (48%) were somatic with 14/101 (14%) BRCA mutation status unknown. rPFS was significantly improved with rucaparib treatment vs physician’s choice in both the germline and somatic mutation groups (germline: HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.32–0.84]; somatic: HR, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.25–0.59]). Incidence rates of TEAEs were similar overall between patients with germline and somatic BRCA mutations in both arms. Conclusions: Rucaparib improves progression-free survival for patients with mCRPC with either germline or somatic BRCA mutations with a manageable safety profile. These data support the use of rucaparib as a beneficial treatment option for patients with BRCA-mutated mCRPC with germline or somatic mutations. Clinical trial information: NCT02975934 .