Citations

631 Background: Adolescent and young adult (AYA) women with breast cancer who have not completed their desired childbearing pre-diagnosis may be more likely to decline adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) and/or to temporarily or permanently stop ET to pursue pregnancy. Fertility counseling and use of fertility preservation strategies (e.g., oocyte/embryo cryopreservation) might impact these decisions. Methods: In the Valuing Opinions and Insights from Cancer Experiences (VOICE) Study, we investigated whether use of fertility preservation strategies were associated with ET initiation and early discontinuation amongst AYAs with fertility concerns. Eligible females were diagnosed with stage 1–3 estrogen-receptor positive breast cancer at age 15-39 during 2013-2022 and responded to a survey in 2023-2024. Those who reported that they had not completed their desired family size or had been unsure about having completed their desired family size at the time of their cancer diagnosis were categorized as having had fertility concerns. ET initiation was defined as 2+ ET prescription fills within 18 months after diagnosis. Among ET initiators, we assessed early discontinuation (defined as lack of ET prescription fill over any 180 day period until 5 years after their first ET fill date). Due to inadequate power, we did not model the relationship between oocyte/embryo cryopreservation and ET initiation. However, we did have power to assess the association between oocyte/embryo cryopreservation and ET discontinuation using multivariable Cox regression to calculate Hazard Ratios (HR) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI). HRs for discontinuation were adjusted for age at diagnosis, stage, study site, diagnosis year, income, and children before diagnosis (yes/no). Results: Among 518 AYA breast cancer survivors, 56% (N = 290) had fertility concerns at diagnosis. Of these 290, 41% had 1+ child before diagnosis, 90% received fertility counseling, 27% froze eggs or embryos, and 10% had 1+ child after diagnosis. The majority (89%) initiated ET. Among the 32 who did not initiate ET, 7 (22%) reported that fertility concerns impacted that decision. Oocyte/embryo cryopreservation was used by 26% of ET initiators and 34% of ET non-initiators. Among the 258 ET initiators, 89 (35%) discontinued ET early. Compared to those who did not use fertility preservation strategies, patients who froze oocytes/embryos were more likely to discontinue ET (HR 1.89; 95% CI 1.18–3.05). Among those who discontinued ET, 19% had 1+ child after diagnosis (compared to 2% among those who did not discontinue ET). Conclusions: This study confirmed prior studies showing that many AYAs with breast cancer have fertility concerns, and these concerns may impact decisions about ET. In our analysis, those who cryopreserved oocytes/embryos were more likely to discontinue ET early, and a higher proportion who discontinued ET had 1+ live birth after breast cancer.

1564 Background: Adolescent and young adult (AYA) females with early-stage ER-negative and/or HER2-positive breast cancer commonly receive chemotherapy to reduce risk of recurrence. Fertility concerns, counseling, and preservation may influence chemotherapy decisions and time to chemotherapy (TTC) initiation. Methods: We surveyed AYA survivors of stage I–III premenopausal ER-negative and/or HER2-positive breast cancer treated at Kaiser Permanente Northern and Southern California (2013-2022). Fertility concerns were defined as not having completed desired family size or being unsure about having completed desired family size at diagnosis. We summarized receipt of fertility counseling, receipt of chemotherapy, and use of oocyte/embryo cryopreservation for fertility preservation (FP). Among fertility-concerned patients who received chemotherapy, TTC (days from diagnosis) was assessed separately for neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) vs for adjuvant chemotherapy (AdjC). Time to NAC was natural log–transformed and modeled with multivariable log-linear regression to estimate relative differences in TTC, adjusting for stage, study site, ER, HER2, age, and diagnosis year. Results: Of 363 respondents, 197 (54%) had fertility concerns at diagnosis; 183/197 (93%) received chemotherapy, similar to 153/166 (92%) among those without concerns (p=0.7). Of the concerned chemotherapy recipients, 45 (25%) saw a fertility specialist but did not pursue FP while 55 (30%) underwent FP. For the 112 fertility-concerned NAC recipients, FP was associated with longer TTC than no fertility specialist counseling (mean=41 vs. 30 days; adjusted ratio=1.39; 95% CI 1.15–1.69), whereas fertility specialist counseling without FP was not (mean= 31 vs. 30 days, adjusted ratio=1.04; 95% CI 0.86–1.25). For the 71 fertility-concerned AdjC recipients, TTC was similar for patients who did not see a fertility specialist (mean=63 days), those who froze oocytes/embryos (mean=65 days), and those who saw a fertility specialist but did not pursue FP (mean=69 days). Conclusions: In this AYA breast cancer cohort, there was no evidence that fertility concerns led patients to decline chemotherapy. FP was associated with a modest delay in NAC initiation (<2 weeks on average). Time to chemotherapy (TTC) among 183 AYA patients with ER− and/or HER2+ breast cancer and fertility concerns. Fertility-focused care N (n=183) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (n=112) Mean TTC, days Relative difference in TTC, adjusted ratio (95%CI) Adjuvant chemotherapy (n=71) Mean TTC, days No fertility counseling from a specialist 83 (45%) 55 (49%) 29.6 Reference 28 (39%) 62.6 Received fertility counseling from a specialist No fertility preservation 45 (25%) 28 (25%) 30.7 1.04 (0.86,1.25) 17 (24%) 68.6 Fertility preservation 55 (30%) 29 (26%) 41.2 1.39 (1.15,1.69) 26 (37%) 64.6

Abstract Viral infections are estimated to contribute to 12% to 20% of all cancers worldwide, with virus-driven malignancies disproportionately affecting low- and middle-income countries, whereas metabolic and nonviral factors predominate in high-income regions. Key oncogenic viruses that cause solid tumors include high-risk human papillomaviruses, Epstein–Barr virus, hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, Kaposi sarcoma–associated herpesvirus, and Merkel cell polyomavirus. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have revolutionized cancer therapy by boosting immune responses against tumors. Although viral infection–associated tumors often exhibit “hot” immune profiles, clinical outcomes with ICIs remain inconsistent. Some studies report improved survival in virus-associated cancers, whereas others indicate no clear benefit, which might reflect high variability in tumor microenvironments and immune responses. In this review, we aim to explore the direct and indirect contribution of different viruses to carcinogenesis in solid tumors, with a particular focus on immunotherapy effectiveness based on infection status.

Abstract Background Few studies have assessed the burden of chronic medical conditions in adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors. This study estimated the risk of these conditions among AYA survivors compared to a matched cohort without cancer. Methods This retrospective cohort study included 2‐year survivors ( n = 14,917) of 11 common AYA (15–39 years) cancers diagnosed at the integrated health care organizations of Kaiser Permanente (KP) Southern and Northern California during 2006–2020. A comparison cohort ( n = 149,164) without cancer (matched 10:1 by age, sex, calendar year, and KP site) was included. Cumulative incidence (CMI) accounting for death as a competing risk was calculated. Poisson regression estimated the incidence rate ratio (IRR) of each condition in cancer survivors versus the matched cohort, adjusting for age, sex, and race/ethnicity. Results The 5‐year CMI was highest for thyroid (17.4%), respiratory (6.6%), cardiovascular (5.0%), and liver (4.8%) diseases. At 10 years, the CMI of any condition was 39% in survivors versus 26% in the matched cohort. Survivors had a 2‐fold increased risk of being diagnosed with any medical condition (IRR, 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9–2.0) as well as two or more conditions (IRR, 2.3; 95% CI, 2.2–2.5). Risk was highest among survivors of hematologic cancers and those diagnosed with distant stage disease. Elevated risks were observed within all sociodemographic groups of this insured population. Conclusion AYAs with cancer had a higher risk of chronic medical conditions compared to those without cancer. Long‐term surveillance, risk mitigation through lifestyle modifications and effective disease management are crucial to reduce premature mortality.

PURPOSE Survivors of adolescent and young adult (AYA)-onset cancers require comprehensive cancer surveillance care. Guidelines recommend 1-4 clinician visits annually for 5 years depending on stage and disease. The goal of this study was to identify factors associated with patterns of post-treatment primary and oncology care in a large cohort of survivors of AYA-onset cancers diagnosed within an integrated health care system. METHODS Patients diagnosed with cancer between 2006 and 2020 age 15-39 years were included. Surveillance visits were identified from electronic medical records 2-5 years after diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess associations with zero oncology specialty visits. RESULTS Of 7,925 survivors, 46% were Hispanic, 6% non-Hispanic Black, 11% non-Hispanic Asian, 35% non-Hispanic White, and 65% female. One-quarter had no oncology specialty visits in the first surveillance year rising to 38% in year 5; 31% had 3+ visits in the first year, declining to 13% in year 5. Over the surveillance period, 17% did not have any oncology specialty visits and 6% had no primary care or oncology visits. Those who were male (odds ratio [OR], 1.21 [95% CI, 1.02 to 1.45]), 20-24 years at diagnosis (OR, 1.58, 95% CI, 1.27 to 1.9; v 35 to 39), or non-Hispanic Black (OR, 1.38, 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.82; v non-Hispanic White) or had high-deductible commercial or Medicaid insurance (OR, 1.35, 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.59; OR, 1.42, 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.82, respectively; v no or low deductible commercial) were more likely to be in the 0-visit group for oncology specialty care. CONCLUSION Although the majority of this cohort received either primary or oncology specialty care, our study identifies those who may need tailored outreach for follow-up care. Continued research into development and testing of interventions to improve uptake of appropriate health care for survivors of AYA-onset cancers is critical.