Citations

PURPOSE This national study was undertaken to determine screening mammography rates among transgender and gender diverse (TGD) individuals. METHODS TGD individuals and cisgender women who qualified to receive screening mammography based on American College of Radiology guidelines were identified in the longitudinal OptumLabs Data Warehouse. The primary end point was the percentage of patients who had high rates of screening (>75% recommended screenings). Multivariable analyses were conducted in a matched population of transgender men to cisgender women to identify and adjust for factors associated with high adherence. Individuals were matched at a 1:4 ratio (transgender men: cisgender women) on age, race/ethnicity, year of enrollment in their health care plan, and duration of follow-up. RESULTS This study focused on 10,478 TGD individuals (3,778 transgender men; 1,294 transgender women; 5,406 with gender dysphoria not meeting other TGD criteria, NMOT) and 6,218,369 cisgender women. For transgender men, transgender women, individuals with gender dysphoria NMOT, and cisgender women, high mammography rates were observed in 41.1% (95% CI, 39.5 to 42.6), 7.4% (95% CI, 6.0 to 8.8), 11.9% (95% CI, 11.0 to 12.7), and 38.3% (95% CI, 38.3 to 38.4), respectively ( P < .0001). When transgender men were compared with 15,112 matched cisgender women, an age-based differential association was observed between sex and high mammography rates (interaction P = .0003); compared with cisgender women, transgender men appeared more likely to manifest high rates of screening at age 40-49 years (odds ratios [ORs], 1.38 [95% CI, 1.28 to 1.50]; P < .0001) and 50-59 years (OR, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.35 to 1.81]; P < .0001) but not in the older age groups. CONCLUSION The relatively high rates of screening mammography in cisgender women and transgender men suggest clinicians are offering mammography to individuals who are at average or high breast cancer risk, as compared with cisgender women, and not to transgender women at low risk.

142 Background: LuPSMA is a life-prolonging radioligand therapy that is widely considered to have favorable tolerability. SPPADE symptoms (Sleep disturbance, Pain, Physical dysfunction, Anxiety, Depression, low Energy) are common in prostate cancer, yet data on patient-reported outcomes with LuPSMA in real-world settings remain limited. Methods: The E2C2 study (NCT03892967) evaluates the impact of a collaborative care intervention on patient-centered outcomes and healthcare utilization. This analysis includes mCRPC patients who initiated LuPSMA at Mayo Clinic (June 2022-July 2023) and completed at least one symptom survey within 6 weeks before or 2 weeks after the first LuPSMA treatment (baseline survey). SPPADE symptoms were rated on 0-10 scales; scores of 4-6 indicate moderate and 7-10 severe burden. A composite z-score was derived by standardizing each SPPADE domain to the cohort mean and averaging z-scores across domains per patient. Patients were stratified by composite symptom burden using cohort median and upper-tertile cutoffs. Associations with PSA50 response and overall survival (OS, from start of LuPSMA) were assessed using chi-square and Kaplan-Meier methods. In a longitudinal subgroup of patients completing a baseline survey plus at least one additional PRO survey while receiving LuPSMA (≥2 surveys), scores were compared from baseline to best during-treatment using Wilcoxon and Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: Of 373 patients starting LuPSMA, 51 patients met inclusion criteria. Median age was 71 years, 31% had visceral metastases, and median baseline PSA was 42.1 ng/mL. Overall, 85% of patients reported at least one moderate symptom and 46% at least one severe symptom. The most common moderate-to-severe symptoms were low energy (58%), pain (52%), and sleep disturbance (49%). Using an upper-tertile cutoff of the composite SPPADE score, 17 patients had high and 34 had low/moderate symptom burden prior to LuPSMA. PSA50 response was achieved in 17.6% of patients with high vs 47.1% with low/moderate composite symptom scores (p = 0.08). Median OS was 9.2 vs 16.7 months for high vs low symptom groups (p = 0.15, median split). The longitudinal subgroup included 24 patients with serial ePRO assessments while on LuPSMA. Composite SPPADE scores improved from baseline to the best during-treatment assessment in both PSA50 responders (n=10) and non-responders (n=14), with median composite z-score Δ of 0.35 vs 0.20, respectively (p = 0.68). Conclusions: Among patients with mCRPC receiving LuPSMA, baseline SPPADE symptom burden was high. Though not statistically significant in this underpowered cohort, PSA response and OS were numerically inferior in those with higher baseline burden. These findings suggest that ePRO-captured symptom burden may provide prognostic and patient-centered insights beyond traditional clinical variables. Clinical trial information: NCT03892967 .

Background: To compare oncologic and postoperative outcomes in patients with scalp squamous cell carcinoma with periosteal, but not gross calvarial, involvement, treated with margin-clearing excision including either calvarial burring or periosteal excision alone. Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Single tertiary academic referral center. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed surgical cases from January 2001 to January 2025. Inclusion criteria: patients ≥18 years with biopsy-proven scalp squamous cell carcinoma involving the periosteum without cortical invasion on imaging. Management of the deep margin included either burring of the outer table or periosteal excision alone. Demographic, surgical, and oncologic outcomes were collected and analyzed descriptively. Results: Twenty patients met inclusion criteria. Median age was 70 (range 56-92), and 18 (86%) were male. Thirteen (65%) patients underwent calvarial burring, 7 (35%) underwent periosteal excision. Local recurrence occurred in 31% and 29% of the burring group and non-burring group. Disease-free survival at 2 years was 46% and 57% in the burring and non-burring group, respectively. Overall survival at 2 years was 77% and 86% in the burring and non-burring group. Three patients in the burring group had local recurrences with intracranial extension, 1 died of disease, 1 died with disease and concurrent meningitis, 1 is alive with disease recurrence currently on palliative treatment. There were 7 disease-related deaths. Conclusion: Burring did not confer a significant oncologic advantage compared to periosteal excision alone when there was no gross cortical invasion. Local recurrence in patients undergoing calvarial burring was associated with intracranial extension of disease.

Abstract Objective To investigate the ability of artificial intelligence‐enabled electrocardiogram (AI‐ECG) atrial fibrillation (AF) prediction model output and delta age, defined as AI‐estimated age minus chronological age, to predict adverse vascular outcomes in patients with migraine. Background Migraine, especially migraine with aura, is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. Using normal sinus rhythm ECG, our institution has developed AI‐ECG models that predict the probability of AF and estimate patients' age, and from that, delta age (estimated age minus actual age) has been shown to reflect cardiovascular health and physiologic aging. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study that included adult patients with migraine who had at least one digital, standard 12‐lead ECG from 2000 to 2020 at any Mayo Clinic site. The first normal sinus rhythm ECG was defined as the index ECG, and those with adverse vascular events or AF prior to, or within 3 days after, index ECG were excluded. AI‐ECG AF prediction model output and delta age were obtained from the index ECG. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of adverse vascular events that included acute myocardial infarction, acute ischemic stroke, venous thromboembolism, and death. New‐onset AF was also recorded as a secondary outcome. Results A total of 29,928 patients were included. The mean age was 44.3 ± 14.5 years, and the median follow‐up time was 54 months. During the study period, 4662 (15.6%) patients had adverse vascular events, and 1384 (4.6%) patients developed new‐onset AF. A higher AF prediction model output was associated with a higher risk of adverse vascular outcomes (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]:1.15 [95% confidence interval: 1.12 to 1.18] for every 10% increase in prediction model output), as was a larger delta age (aHR:1.16 [1.12 to 1.21] for every 10‐year increase in delta age). Moreover, AI‐ECG AF prediction model outputs of ≥1% (aHR: 1.45 [1.36 to 1.54]) and delta age ≥−1 years (aHR: 1.09 [1.02 to 1.16]) were found to be the optimal cutoffs to dichotomize patients into high‐risk and low‐risk groups for adverse vascular events. Higher AI‐ECG AF prediction model output at baseline also predicted a higher likelihood of having new‐onset AF during the study period (aHR: 1.31 [1.26 to 1.37]), and the development of new‐onset AF was associated with a higher risk of adverse vascular events (aHR: 2.43 [2.17 to 2.73]). Conclusions For patients with migraine, a higher AI‐ECG AF prediction model output and delta age are predictive of adverse vascular outcomes. A higher AF prediction model output is also predictive of future AF development. Furthermore, we identified the cutoffs for both AI‐ECG models that can distinguish patients between high‐ and low‐risk groups. Our results showed that AI‐ECG models could inform clinical practice and identify patients with migraine at risk for future adverse vascular events.

Introduction Craniofacial hyperplasia is a disorder where the face and head do not fully develop. This leads to difficulties in airway management in those undergoing general anesthesia (GA), requiring consideration in anesthetic planning with GA and intubation versus approaches with regional/spinal anesthesia. Case Presentation A 54-year-old male (45 kg, 172.7 cm) presented for a penile implant insertion for severe erectile dysfunction following radical prostatectomy. He was classified as ASA physical status class III. Management and Outcomes Pertinent medical history included craniofacial hypoplasia from childhood surgical interventions and radiation for sinus cancer (rhabdomyosarcoma), moderate mitral regurgitation, mild tricuspid regurgitation, pulmonary hypertension, recurrent esophageal strictures, and anemia. Spinal anesthesia was selected over GA. Airway complications were avoided, and cardiopulmonary stability was preserved while maintaining adequate analgesic coverage. Conclusion Craniofacial hypoplasia patients require individualized anesthesia planning that anticipates complications. Spinal anesthesia can be used in these patients to avoid airway and hemodynamic complications.

Abstract Background: Two years of adjuvant abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy is approved and guideline-recommended in patients (pts) with HR+, HER2-, node-positive, early breast cancer (EBC) at high risk of recurrence. In initial real-world studies, the high rate (&gt;85%) of treatment (tx) persistence beyond 3 months suggests that adjuvant abemaciclib is well-tolerated in routine clinical practice.1,2 Dose reductions were associated with higher persistence in prior studies and clinical trial data have shown that efficacy of abemaciclib was maintained with dose reductions. This study describes 6-month tx persistence and dosing patterns in pts with HR+, HER2-, node-positive EBC initiating abemaciclib 150 mg twice daily (BID). Methods: Retrospective data were accessed from the US de-identified Flatiron Health Research Database. Adults with HR+, HER2-, node-positive, EBC, who initiated abemaciclib 150 mg BID from Jan 2022-Jun 2024 were eligible and further characterized by ≥1 vs no dose reduction. Data cut-off was Dec 2024. Persistence rate was the proportion of pts on abemaciclib &gt;6 months, allowing for ≤60-day medication gap within this period. Time to dose modifications and reasons for discontinuation (DC) were summarized. Subgroup analyses were conducted in pts confirmed as meeting the monarchE high-risk criteria (N2, N3, or N1 plus Grade 3 and/or tumor &gt;5 cm). All analyses were descriptive. Results: Of 1063 eligible pts, median age was 56 years (IQR 47, 65). Most had N1 (48%) or N2 (34%) disease. Median follow-up was 17.5 months (IQR 11, 25). Tx persistence at 6 months was 75%. DC was mostly due to adverse events (AEs; 19%) and &lt;1% due to recurrence. Approximately 50% of pts had ≥1 dose reduction. Persistence was 85% in pts with ≥1 dose reduction and 64% in pts with no dose reductions. 70% of pts who DC’d by 6 months did not have a dose reduction. Median time from start of abemaciclib to first dose change and/or hold was 49 days (IQR 23, 111). During the first 30 days of tx and Days 31-90, DCs due to AEs were lower in pts with dose reductions vs pts with no dose reductions (Table). Persistence and use of dose reductions were similar in pts confirmed as meeting the monarchE high-risk criteria. Conclusion: In US clinical practice, a majority (75%) who initiated adjuvant abemaciclib continued abemaciclib beyond 6 months. Tx persistence was higher among pts with dose reductions relative to those with no dose reductions, and rates of early DCs due to AEs were low in pts with dose reductions. Given that dose reductions in monarchE were not associated with reduced efficacy, these additional real-world data support the use of early dose modifications to improve tolerability and tx persistence for adjuvant abemaciclib in pts with high risk of recurrence. Citation Format: H. Soliman, S. Dent, A. Liepa, V. Stefaniak, M. Huang, T. Sugihara, K. Moreira, K. Hudson, M. Goetz. Treatment Persistence and Dose Modifications in US Patients with HR+, HER2-, Node-Positive, Early Breast Cancer Treated with Adjuvant Abemaciclib [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS5-05-09.

Abstract Background: Advances in oncology, particularly the adoption of immunotherapies and antibody-drug conjugates, are transforming the nature and frequency of adverse events (AEs). These AEs come with both short and long-term symptoms that significantly impact patient quality of life. Monitoring for early onset of symptoms could optimize personalized therapy, maximizing potential efficacy while mitigating toxicity. It is also possible that some toxicities are directly associated with drug sensitivity. We sought to identify symptoms associated with pathologic complete response (pCR) using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in early-stage high-risk breast cancer patients. Methods: Our study population included 288 stage II/III high-risk breast cancer patients enrolled on the I-SPY2 trial from 2021-2024, who received IO and ADC neoadjuvant therapies ± standard paclitaxel. pCR was defined as tumor absent in breast and nodes at surgery following neoadjuvant treatment. Patients (n = 288) were sent electronic PROs. 33 patient-reported AEs were measured using NCI's Patient Reported Outcomes - Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). Each symptom was evaluated using severity, frequency, and interference on a Likert Scale. Presence of early PRO symptoms (cycles 1-3 of treatment) were categorized (at least one of moderate or greater), and odds ratios were computed with pCR as outcome. To assess whether higher grade AEs were enriched in patients that achieved a pCR, we also performed the Wilcoxan Rank Sum test using maximum (worst) symptom severity. Breast tumor volume was measured by MRI at baseline and again at cycle 3 (∼day 21 from treatment start). Functional tumor volume (FTV) was computed from MR images by using enhancement thresholds. and percent change from baseline (ΔFTV) was calculated. Reduction in FTV was defined as a positive change. The Benjamini-Hochberg method was used to adjust for multiple hypothesis testing. Results: Of 288 patients included in our analysis (median age = 48 years, range = 20-78, pCR rate = 29%), 203 (70.5%) were White, 17 (5.9%) were Asian, 33 (11.5%) were Black or African American, and 35 (12.2%) were Hispanic and 89% were administered immunotherapy, 11% ADC. The pCR rate was 29%. PRO analysis revealed that patients that had moderate to severe muscle pain (27% vs 10% OR = 3.15, P &lt; 0.05), joint pain (22% vs 8% OR = 3.23, P &lt; 0.05), headache (27% vs 12.5% OR = 2.59, P &lt; 0.05), or mouth/throat sores (16% vs 5% OR = 3.56, p &lt; 0.05) within weeks 1-3 had higher odds of achieving a pCR. Maximum severity between weeks 1-3 was associated with pCR. Patients that achieved a PCR had higher grade muscle pain (P &lt; 0.05), heart rates of palpitations (P &lt; 0.05), and significantly lower grade numbness and tingling (p = 0.002). Additionally, of the symptoms assessed, frequency, interference, and severity of arm or leg swelling was significantly correlated with reduction in tumor volume (FTV) during weeks 1-3 treatment (Bonferroni corrected P&lt;0.01). Beyond 6 weeks, associations were weak or insignificant. Conclusion: Our study utilizes a computational framework that defined sentinel symptoms such as muscle and joint pain, mouth/throat sores, headache, and swelling, as early as weeks 1-3 that were associated with a favorable tumor response. This may suggest an early immune reaction in patients that eventually respond favorably to treatment, and prioritization to continue these patients on treatment may be warranted. Our work can help provide earlier proactive monitoring to mitigate toxicities, to enhance treatment response, and a potential symptom-based early understanding to personalize treatment efficacy. Citation Format: A. Basu, S. Umashankar, C. Yau, K. J. Ruddy, A. H. Blaes, D. M. Wolf, A. DeMichele, J. Perlmutter, D. Yee, A. B. Olshen, L. J. van't Veer, R. A. Shatsky, C. Isaacs, R. Nanda, H. S. Rugo, M. E. Melisko, N. Hylton, L. J. Esserman, D. L. Hershman, I-SPY Trial Investigators and Patient Advocates.. Early Adverse Symptoms Predict Response to Treatment Among Patients in the I-SPY Trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr RF1-04.

Abstract Introduction: An Our Practice Advisory (OPA), formerly known as Best Practice Advisory (BPA), is an electronic health record (EHR) tool. OPAs identify key parameters to alert providers of potential interventions that could enhance quality of care. Such functionality is increasingly relevant given the rapid pace of new drug approvals. Within the Mayo Clinic system, we previously identified that amongst Mayo Clinic patients (pts) meeting the MonarchE criteria, 28% of pts did not undergo a documented discussion with their provider regarding the role of adjuvant abemaciclib (Premji, SABCS 2024). Further, a Flatiron study identified that only 40% of eligible pts received abemaciclib (Sandoval, Miami Breast 2025). To address this practice gap, in 2024 we began to implement EHR clinical decision support by creating an OPA trigger for pts eligible for an adjuvant CDK 4/6 inhibitor (CDK 4/6i). Here we report on ‘action taken’ versus not for the OPA and the most common reasons for re-prompts. Methods: The Mayo Breast Disease Group designed an OPA including pts who are within 14 months of a clinical or pathologic diagnosis of high-risk early-stage breast cancer. We leveraged structured data captured in the Epic staging forms (Epic Systems) to identify pts with clinical or pathologic T-stage, N-stage, grade, ± Ki-67/ multigene signature to identify ER+/HER2- pts eligible for adjuvant ribociclib or abemaciclib based on FDA approvals. The OPA was triggered by a patient encounter in oncology when endocrine therapy (but not CDK4/6i) was on the active medication list resulting in a hard stop. The OPA gathered limited details about whether adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors were discussed and whether the provider followed a link that resulted in prescribing one—considered an indicator of action taken. In this IRB-exempt quality improvement project, we describe the responses captured in the OPA trigger utilizing Epic tools. Results: The OPA went live on 1/10/2025. Over a 5-month period post OPA initiation, we identified 517 OPA alerts among 332 unique pts. Their median age was 62.5 years, and the majority were female (97%). The median time to resolve the OPA was 17.5 seconds (range 2-567 seconds). 12.6% (65/517) of the time there was ‘action taken’ by selecting the hyperlink to potentially start a treatment plan. Providers selected the following OPA pre-set responses: ‘re-prompt in one month’ 248 (48%), ‘patient not a candidate for therapy’ 48 (9%), ‘patient declines’ 69 (13%), ‘outside oncologist will prescribe’ 36 (7%), ‘not discussed’ 44 (9%), and unknown 72 (14%). The most common free text comments among the 517 OPA alerts (summarized) included: ‘revisit in future’ 108 (21%), ‘too early’ 65 (13%), ‘patient declines’ 66 (13%), ‘outside oncologist will start’ 31 (6%), ‘not a candidate’ 26 (5%), and ‘co-morbidities’ 18 (3%). Erroneous OPA prompting occurred in 14 (3%) who previously failed a CDK4/6i due to toxicity and in 18 (3%) for pts currently on a CDK4/6i. 30 (6%) OPA comments noted that they discussed or started therapy that day. Conclusion: The OPA offered clinical decision support and ensured that clinicians considered prescribing CDK 4/6i in all pts identified as eligible, and captured deferrals. Refinements are needed to ensure appropriate timing of OPA and minimize erroneous firing. The OPA remains active and captures the reason for deferral of adjuvant CDK 4/6i prescription. This data pairs real world decision making to better understand clinically meaningful application of improved invasive disease-free survival (iDFS). Citation Format: S. Premji, P. Advani, S. Chumsri, L. Mina, J. Taraba, J. Carroll, J. Hoppenworth, E. Cathcart-Rake, T. Haddad, B. Rudder, G. Choong, D. Idossa, C. O’Sullivan, S. Yadav, K. Ruddy, P. Peethambaram, T. Hobday, M. Goetz, R. Rao, B. Ernst, F. Batalini, R. Leon-Ferre, A. Tevaarwerk, K. Giridhar. Implementing an Our Practice Advisory (OPA) to provide clinical decision support for adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors in early-stage hormone receptor positive breast cancer: The Mayo Clinic Experience [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS5-11-10.