Thompson, Carrie A.

Abstract Background Anthracyclines (ACs) are a risk factor for heart failure (HF), but their impact on broader composite outcomes such as major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) remain less well characterized. From the Rochester Epidemiology Project, we identified patients with breast cancer or lymphoma to assess for association between AC use and MACE in these patients with > 25 years of follow-up. Methods We identified patients with cancer, with or without an AC as first-line treatment, and a control group of individuals without cancer, matched by age, sex, and cardiovascular comorbid conditions to the cancer patients. Outcomes of interest were 3-MACE (myocardial infarction, stroke, and cardiovascular death), and 4-MACE (3-MACE plus HF). Cox regression analysis was used to identify variables associated with MACE at 5, 10, and 25 years of follow-up. Results Of 812 patients with cancer, 675 had AC treatment (AC group) and 137 did not (no-AC group); the control group comprised 1,384 matched patients without cancer. The risk of 3-MACE was similar among the 3 groups at all time points. Older age, male sex, and hypertension were associated with 3-MACE. The risk of 4-MACE was similar between the control and no-AC groups; the risk was increased for the AC group vs controls at all time points. Older age, male sex, smoking history, type 2 diabetes, and hypertension were associated with 4-MACE. Conclusions Cardiovascular risk factors are the main drivers of 3-MACE and ACs increase the risk of 4-MACE given their association with HF. This underscores the importance of implementing lifestyle changes among these patients.

7075 Background: Hepatosplenic T-cell lymphoma (HSTCL) is a rare, aggressive peripheral T-cell lymphoma arising primarily from γδ T-cells. It carries a poor prognosis and resists conventional chemotherapy. Most reports on HSTCL are case-based. This study comprehensively analyzes a large cohort, evaluating treatment strategies and survival outcomes. Methods: This retrospective study included patients (pts) with pathologically confirmed HSTCL diagnosed between 2000-2024, consecutively seen at Mayo Clinic MN. Clinical, pathological, genomic, and treatment-related data were extracted when available. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize baseline characteristics. Time-to-event analyses, including Kaplan-Meier estimates, median overall survival (OS), and survival time estimates were conducted from the date of diagnosis. Results: A total of 20 patients with newly diagnosed HSTCL were included, with a median age of 57 years (range: 35-71). The cohort was predominantly male (70%) and non-Hispanic (93%). Molecular data was available for five patients, revealing abnormalities in STAT5B, MLL3 deletion, TP53, EZH2, TERT, and NF1 E291D . The median follow-up was 27.6 months (m) with a median OS of 17.6 m (95% CI: 11.2 - NA). First-line treatment was anthracycline-based in 68% of pts and non-anthracycline-based in 32%, with higher response rates in the latter group (50% vs.83%). Although non-anthracycline regimens showed a trend toward improved 3-year OS (100% vs. 29%) the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.16). Achieving a complete response to first-line therapy was also associated with a trend towards a better 3-year OS compared to refractory disease (80% vs. 50%, p = 0.17). Most pts (79%) underwent hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT), primarily allogeneic, with only one receiving autologous HSCT. First-line therapy before HSCT was evenly distributed between anthracycline (55%) and non-anthracycline (45%) regimens. HSCT recipients had significantly higher 3-year OS than non-recipients (83% vs. 33%, p = 0.017). Notably, the patient with a TP53 mutation has remained in remission for over a year post-allogeneic HSCT. Conclusions: HSTCL predominantly affects younger pts, with nearly half dying within a year. Allogeneic HSCT, rarely used in other NHL subtypes, improved survival. Non-anthracycline regimens and achieving CR trended toward better outcomes. Our study, leveraging a sizable cohort, highlights the need for targeted research and novel therapies to improve HSTCL management. Summary of survival outcomes in HSTCL. Characteristics Median OS (y) 3-Year OS (95% CI) 1.48 [0.93- NA] 46% [0.26 - 0.81] Transplant Transplant NA [NA - NA] 83% [0.58 - 1.00] No Transplant 1.02 [0.93 - NA] 33% [0.07 - 1.00] Treatment Anthracycline Based 1.02 [0.36 - NA] 29% [0.11 - 0.73] Non-Anthracycline Based 4.61 [NA- NA] 100% [1.00 - 1.00]

7052 Background: Secondary central nervous system lymphoma (SCNSL) is a rare but serious complication that occurs in 2-10% of patients (pts) with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). The CNS-International Prognostic Index (CNS-IPI) is a validated tool used to assess the risk of CNS relapse. However, with advancements in molecular profiling and treatments, the predictors of SCNSL, including the predictive ability of CNS-IPI combined with other molecular markers and treatment regimens, have become uncertain. This study evaluates new prognostic markers for CNS relapse in DLBCL, focusing on cell-of-origin (COO), gene rearrangements, and treatment types. Methods: DLBCL pts enrolled from 2002-2015 in the Mayo Clinic and University of Iowa Lymphoma Molecular Epidemiology Resource were prospectively followed for incidence of CNS relapse. Pts with primary CNS lymphoma or CNS involvement at diagnosis, and pts treated with high-dose methotrexate containing regimens were excluded. COO classification (GCB vs non-GCB) was determined using Hans algorithm and/or NanoString data. Multivariate Cox regression models estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for predictors of SCNSL. Survival analysis was performed from time of DLBCL diagnosis using Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Among 1278 newly diagnosed DLBCL pts included (median age: 63 years; 43.6% female), SCNSL occurred in 46 (3.6%) pts. Pts with SCNSL were more likely to have intermediate/high CNS-IPI scores (80.4%) than pts without SCNSL (63.9%, p=0.02). The 3 yr SCNSL incidence was 0.016 (0.008-0.0033) in low CNS-IPI vs 0.043 (0.031-0.0060) in high CNS-IPI. Those with SCNSL were significantly more likely at baseline to have non-GCB COO (56.3% vs. 36.5%, p=0.02), and advanced stage (76.1% vs. 59.9%, p=0.03) compared to those without SCNSL. The incidence of SCNSL was not influenced by MYC, BCL2, or BCL6 rearrangements, nor by treatment with R-CHOP, R-EPOCH, or other immunochemotherapy regimens. MVA showed that intermediate CNS-IPI (HR 2.32, 95% CI 1.09-4.92, p=0.029), high CNS-IPI (HR 3.59, 95% CI 1.49-8.62, p=0.004), and non-GCB COO (HR 2.19, 95% CI 1.08-4.42, p=0.0029) were independently associated with increased SCNSL risk. After a median follow-up of 12 years (IQR 9–15), overall survival (OS) was 52.1% for the cohort, with OS significantly worse for SCNSL pts (17.4% vs. 53.4%, p<0.001). Conclusions: This large cohort with extensive follow-up highlights the role of COO as an additional prognostic factor for SCNSL while reinforcing CNS-IPI’s prognostic value. Non-GCB COO pts had a higher risk of SCNSL even when adjusted by CNS-IPI risk. Despite advancements in management, SCNSL pts continue to have poor outcomes. Strategies to reduce the incidence of CNS relapse in high-risk pts require further investigation. MER CNS relapse hazard ratios (95% CI). Characteristics Hazard Ratio 95% CI P-Value CNS-IPI Group 0-1 Low Ref Ref Ref 2-3 Intermediate 2.32 1.09 - 4.92 0.029 4+ High 3.59 1.49 - 8.62 0.004 Cell of Origin* GCB Ref Ref Ref non-GCB 2.19 1.08 - 4.42 0.029 Double Hit* non-DHL Ref Ref Ref DHL 1.08 0.14 - 8.3 0.941 Not Done/Missing 1.38 0.76 - 2.51 0.297 Double Expressor* Negative Ref Ref Ref Positive 2.36 0.71 - 7.85 0.162 Not Done/Missing 1.91 0.89 - 4.08 0.097 IC Group* R-CHOP R-EPOCH Ref 1.63 Ref 0.71 - 3.74 Ref 0.249 Other IC 1.18 0.57 - 2.46 0.660 Any EN Involvement* No Ref Ref Ref Yes 0.98 0.51 - 1.88 0.946 Albumin Group* >=Normal Ref Ref Ref <Normal 1.70 0.75 - 3.85 0.201 Head & Neck Involvement* No Ref Ref Ref Yes 0.35 0.048 - 2.63 0.310 *Adjusted by CNS-IPI risk group.

Abstract Family history of hematologic malignancy (FHHM) is an established risk factor for developing lymphoma, but studies examining associations between self-reported FHHM and lymphoma prognosis during the recent treatment era are limited. Utilizing a prospective cohort study, we evaluated associations between FHHM and prognosis for common lymphoma subtypes, including diffuse large B-cell (DLBCL), follicular (FL), marginal zone (MZL), mantle cell (MCL), Hodgkin (HL), and T-cell (TCL) lymphomas. We used the Mayo Clinic component of the Molecular Epidemiology Resource, a prospective cohort study of newly diagnosed lymphoma patients enrolled from 2002 to 2015. Self-reported FHHM (HL, NHL, leukemia, or multiple myeloma) in a first-degree relative was obtained via questionnaire. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS; time from diagnosis to disease progression, initiation of second-line therapy, or all-cause death). Secondary outcomes were failure to achieve 24 months of event-free survival (EFS24; associated with aggressive disease and poor outcomes) and lymphoma-specific survival (LSS; time from diagnosis to death from lymphoma or lymphoma treatment-related complications). We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association of FHHM with OS, EFS, and LSS, and logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CI for the association with failure to achieve EFS24. All models were adjusted for sex and a lymphoma subtype specific prognostic index. The cohort consisted of 650 DLBCL, 679 FL, 291 MZL, 178 MCL, 254 HL, and 196 TCL patients. The prevalence of FHHM ranged from 9.7% in TCL to 14% in FL. FHHM was not associated with OS in any subtype, but MCL patients with FHHM showed an inferior EFS (HR=1.70, 95% CI 1.02-2.85; p=0.04). For EFS24, FHHM was associated with failure to achieve EFS24 only in FL (OR=1.57, 95% CI 0.99-2.48; p=0.05). Similarly, FHHM was associated with inferior LSS in FL patients (HR=1.98, 95% CI 1.11-3.53; p=0.02). In a treatment subgroup analysis of FL patients, the FHHM associations with failure to achieve EFS24 (OR=2.48, 95% CI 1.04-5.74; p=0.04) and inferior LSS (HR=2.68, 95% CI 1.09-6.58; p=0.03) strengthened among those treated with frontline immunochemotherapy (IC). In summary, there were no evidence of associations between FHHM and OS across lymphoma subtypes, but MCL patients with FHHM displayed inferior EFS. FL patients with FHHM were more likely to not achieve EFS24 and to ultimately die of their lymphoma or a lymphoma treatment-related complication. This finding was stronger in more aggressive FL requiring frontline IC. This novel finding would suggest that genetic or environmental factors associated with FHHM may underlie pathways that impact disease aggressiveness and early clinical failure in FL. Citation Format: George Cholack, Raphael Mwangi, Thomas M. Habermann, Verena Hinder, Rosalie Griffen, Dennis Robinson, Andrew L. Feldman, Thomas E. Witzig, Stephen M. Ansell, Brian K. Link, Yucai Wang, Carrie A. Thompson, Susan L. Slager, Matthew Maurer, Anne J. Novak, James R. Cerhan. Family history of hematologic malignancy and prognosis across lymphoma subtypes: Novel association with poor outcomes in follicular lymphoma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2025 Apr 25-30; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(8_Suppl_1):Abstract nr 7344.

Abstract Background: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is clinically heterogeneous, and gene expression profiling has identified at least two biologically distinct DLBCL subtypes defined by their cell of origin (COO): germinal center B cell (GCB) and activate B cell (ABC) or non-GCB. We evaluated a variety of putative DLBCL risk factors for etiologic heterogeneity by the COO in a clinic-based study of newly diagnosed DLBCL cases (N = 638) and frequency-matched controls (N = 2,253). Methods: The COO was determined on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor tissue, with DLBCL classified as GCB (N = 283), non-GCB (N = 188), or undetermined/missing (N = 167; mainly because of lack of tissue). Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: We identified heterogeneity by the COO for low socioeconomic status (SES), which was only associated with non-GCB DLBCL (OR = 1.88 for low vs. average SES; 95% CI, 1.08–3.27); alcohol use, which was only associated with GCB DLBCL (OR = 0.48 for former drinkers; 95% CI, 0.29–0.80 and OR = 0.47 for current drinkers; 95% CI, 0.32–0.71); and borderline heterogeneity for the regular use of regular/extra-strength aspirin, which was only associated with non-GCB DLBCL (OR = 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16–0.85). In contrast, there was no significant heterogeneity by the COO for family history, medical history, or other lifestyle factors. Conclusions: Although requiring confirmation, most risk factors for DLBCL did not show etiologic heterogeneity by the COO, with some notable exceptions including alcohol use, SES, and perhaps regular use of regular/extra-strength aspirin showing associations. Impact: Mechanistically, these findings suggest that most of the DLBCL risk factors evaluated here influence lymphomagenesis prior to differentiation into COO subtypes, with selected factors acting later.

PURPOSE Emoji are digital images or icons used to express an idea or emotion in electronic communication. The purpose of this study was to develop and evaluate the psychometric properties of two patient-reported scales that incorporate emoji. METHODS The Emoji Response Scale developed for this study has two parts: the Emoji-Ordinal and Emoji-Mood scales. A pilot study was designed to validate the ordinal nature of the Emoji-Ordinal Scale. Twenty patients were shown all possible pairs of five emoji and asked to select the most positive from each pair. The psychometric ordering was assessed using Coombs unfolding and Thurstone scaling. A separate pilot study was designed to determine which emoji to include in the Emoji-Mood Scale. Ten common feelings experienced by patients with cancer were chosen by the study team. Patients and providers were asked to select the one emoji that best represented each feeling from the selection. The most commonly selected emotions and representative emoji were chosen for the Emoji-Mood Scale. In a randomized study of 294 patients, Spearman correlations, Wilcoxon tests, and Bland-Altman analyses determined the construct validity of the scales compared with Linear Analog Scale Assessments (LASA) and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores. RESULTS Ninety-five percent of patients selected the same ordering among the ordinal emoji, and Thurstone scaling confirmed the ordinal nature of the response scale. The construct validity of the scales was high with correlations between the Emoji-Ordinal Scale and the LASA scale of 0.70 for emotional well-being, 0.72 for physical well-being, 0.74 for overall quality of life, and –0.81 for fatigue. Emoji-Mood Scale ratings were strongly related to PROMIS global mental, global physical, fatigue, anxiety, sleep disturbance, and social activity scales ( P < .0001). CONCLUSION This study provides evidence that scales incorporating emoji are valid for collecting patient-reported outcomes.

PURPOSE Lymphomas are a heterogeneous group of diseases that develop in individuals of all ages and have variable prognoses. Improved survival resulting from therapy advances has led to the emergence of diverse late effects. Although several (US)–based organizations have developed survivorship guidelines, the distinct features of lymphoma subtypes and diverse therapies used raise concerns regarding their applicability to lymphoma survivors. We compared survivorship recommendations (outside primary disease monitoring) between US clinical guidelines. METHODS We extracted information from 17 guidelines from five US-based organizations: ASCO (n = 11), American Cancer Society (n = 1), Children's Oncology Group (n = 1), Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (n = 1), and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (n = 3). Guidelines were evaluated to determine whether they offer recommendations on physical effects , psychosocial and quality of life ( QOL ), and health promotion and prevention . Comparisons were focused on second primary malignancy, cardiovascular complications, and vaccination. RESULTS Survivorship recommendations on physical effects and psychosocial and QOL mainly differ in the timing and approaches for screening. Vaccination recommendations were primarily derived from other cancer populations. Identified research gaps were a lack of understanding of the risk of late effects across lymphoma subtypes, the role of social determinants of health in survivorship, and the lack of a survivorship care model that integrates lymphoma subtypes and treatment exposures. CONCLUSION This study raises awareness about the complexity and challenges of managing survivors under the umbrella diagnosis of lymphoma. The inconsistency and incompleteness of existing guidelines may lead to suboptimal survivorship care. We propose expert-based research priorities to address gaps and unmet needs to help develop risk-based follow-up recommendations to optimize survivorship care for lymphoma survivors.

Introduction: Patients with non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL), especially adolescents and young adults, can face late effects from treatment, including decreased fertility. Due to time constraints prior to treatment initiation and sometimes financial limitations, implementing fertility counseling and referral-based guideline care remains challenging. We aim to understand the occurrence and predictors of fertility counseling and preservation in patients with NHL in the Lymphoma Epidemiology of Outcomes (LEO) cohort study. Methods: The LEO cohort prospectively enrolled newly diagnosed patients with NHL from 2015-2020 at 8 academic medical centers in the US. Clinical. Treatment data were abstracted from medical records, pathology was reviewed and classified by a LEO pathologist, and participants completed a self-administered questionnaire. Participants were then prospectively followed to identify outcomes and collect additional patient reported data, including a survivorship questionnaire at follow-up 3 years (FU3) after diagnosis that included items on fertility counseling and preservation. The questionnaire contained two fertility questions analyzed: whether healthcare providers discussed the impact of lymphoma treatment on fertility, and whether providers discussed the process of fertility preservation. This analysis was based on participants aged 18-50 years at enrollment and who completed the fertility questions at FU3. Women who had undergone natural or procedural menopause and men who had undergone vasectomy pre-treatment were excluded. We estimated the association of demographic and clinical factors with fertility preservation using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) from univariate and multivariable logistic regression models. Results: Seventy-seven patients were included in the analysis: 36 females (46%) and 41 males (53%). The median age of diagnosis was 40 years (IQR 30-45), and 36 (47%) participants were in the age 18-39-year category. Participant self-identified race/ethnicity was 69% non-Hispanic White, 22% Hispanic, 4% Black and 3% Asian. Sixty (78%) patients were treated with alkylators, 12 (15.6%) with non-alkylators, and 5 (6.5%) with radiation. Fifty-five (71%) of the patients were classified as having aggressive lymphoma, with follicular, extranodal marginal zone, primary cutaneous follicle center, and nodal marginal zone B-cell lymphoma defined as indolent and remaining subtypes aggressive. Around 6% of female patients underwent fertility preservation after lymphoma diagnosis, compared to 12.2% of male patients. All the patients who had undergone fertility preservation after lymphoma diagnosis were in the 18-39-year age group. On univariate analysis, females were more likely to have undergone fertility toxicity and preservation discussions compared to males, with 72% of females and 59% of males recalling a discussion regarding fertility (OR 1.8, 95% CI 0.7-4.9, p=0.21). Those age 18-39 were significantly more likely to have undergone fertility discussion compared to those aged 40-50 (OR 10.2, 95% CI 3.3-39.2, p&lt;0.001). Patients treated with alkylating therapy were significantly more likely to undergo fertility discussion when compared to those on non-alkylating therapy (OR 9.0, 95% CI 2.3-45.5, p&lt;0.01). In addition, 75% of those with aggressive lymphoma compared to 41% of patients with indolent lymphoma had fertility discussion (OR 4.2, 95% CI 1.5-12.4, p=0.01). White patients were significantly less likely than Hispanic, Black and Asian patients to have fertility discussion (OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.04-0.6, p&lt;0.01). In the multivariable analysis, alkylating therapy (OR 8.9, 95% CI 1.6-66.7) and age 18-39 years (OR 10.9, 95% CI 2.9-55.3) remained significant predictors of fertility discussion; White race was also trending towards significance (OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.04-1.0, p=0.08). Aggressive lymphoma subtype was not a significant predictor of fertility discussion. Conclusions: In this cohort of lymphoma survivors 3 years post-diagnosis, we found that Hispanic patients, those diagnosed at a younger age and exposed to alkylating chemotherapy agents were significantly more likely to undergo discussions regarding the effects of lymphoma treatment on fertility. Our study highlights the importance of all cancer patients of childbearing age having the opportunity to address fertility concerns during clinic visits.