Paludo, Jonas

Abstract Background: In stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), survival has significantly improved with the use of novel therapies and better supportive care. Despite such trends, it has been noted that patients (pts) frequently refuse cancer treatment. Therefore, we explored the factors associated with treatment refusal in pts with stage IV NSCLC. Methods: Utilizing the National Cancer Database (NCDB), we identified all incident cases with stage IV NSCLC from 2004 to 2014. Patients who received cancer treatment outside of the reporting facility or died before receiving treatment were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine associations with treatment refusal. Results: A total of 341,993 pts were identified. On average, 5.4% of pts refused radiation therapy and 10.3% refused chemotherapy despite provider recommendations. The proportion of pts refusing radiation and chemotherapy increased over the study period from 4.2% to 7.3% and 7.9% to 15%, respectively (p<0.001 for both). In multivariable analysis, men were less likely to refuse radiation or chemotherapy compared to women (OR: 0.82, 95%CI: 0.76-0.83, p<0.001; OR: 0.84, 95%CI: 0.81-0.86, p<0.001, respectively). Factors associated with radiation therapy refusal included: Medicaid or Medicare as primary insurance (OR: 1.95, 95%CI: 1.76-2.15, p<0.001; OR: 1.25, 95%CI: 1.17-1.34, p<0.001, respectively) or a >2 Charlson Comorbidity Index (OR: 1.97, 95%CI: 1.85-2.10, p<0.001). Moreover, receiving care at an academic center (OR: 0.57, 95%CI: 0.53-0.62, p<0.001) was associated with less likelihood of refusing radiation. Regarding chemotherapy, uninsured pts (OR: 2.45, 95%CI: 2.26-2.66, p<0.001), pts with Medicaid as primary insurance (OR: 2.17, 95%CI: 2.03-2.32, p<0.001) or with a high comorbidity index (OR: 1.76, 95%CI: 1.68-1.84, p<0.001) were more likely to refuse chemotherapy. Contrary to findings from previous studies, Non-Hispanic Blacks and Hispanics were less likely to refuse chemotherapy compared to non-Hispanic whites (OR: 0.86, 95%CI: 0.82-0.91, p<0.001; OR: 0.78, 95%CI: 0.72-0.89, p<0.001). Patients receiving care at an academic center and residing in high income neighborhoods were less likely to refuse chemotherapy (OR: 0.76, 95%CI: 0.72-0.80, p<0.001; OR: 0.76, 95%CI: 0.71-0.81, p<0.001, respectively). Distance from residence to treating facility and living in a rural county did not affect treatment refusal. Conclusions: Socioeconomic factors rather than race/ethnicity appear to influence refusal of cancer treatment in pts with stage IV NSCLC in the NCDB. Assessing socioeconomic challenges should be an essential part of patients' evaluation when discussing treatment options. Citation Format: Narjust Duma, Urshila Durani, Ryan Frank, Jonas Paludo, Gustavo Westin, Yanyan Lou, Leventakos Konstantinos, Julian Molina, Ronald Go, Aaron Mansfield, Sikander Ailawadhi, Alex Adjei. Influence of sociodemographic factors on treatment decisions in lung cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 4230.

Abstract Background The treatment of metastatic melanoma has been revolutionized by developments in targeted therapy and immunotherapy. BRAF/MEK inhibitors, blockade of cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and programmed death (PD-1/L1) receptor have shown durable anti-melanoma effects. The optimal sequence strategy of targeted therapy and immunotherapy in metastatic BRAF-mutated melanoma patients (pts) is unknown and no treatment guidelines exist. Therefore, we report a single-institution experience of different treatment approaches using targeted therapy and immunotherapy and its impact on outcomes. Methods Pts with BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma treated with targeted therapy and immunotherapy from 2012 to2017 were analyzed. Six groups were identified based on treatment strategy: (1) 1st line BRAF/MEK inhibitors followed by 2nd line immunotherapy; (1.1) 1st line BRAF/MEK inhibitors followed by 2nd line immunotherapy in combination with BRAF/MEK inhibitors (triple therapy);(1.2) same as group 1 followed by triple therapy as 3rd line; (2) 1st line immunotherapy followed by 2nd line BRAF/MEK inhibitors; (2.1) 1st line immunotherapy followed by 2nd line triple therapy; (2.2) same as group2 followed by triple therapy as 3rd line. All time-to-event analysis was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and Wilcoxon test. Results Forty four pts were included. The median age at diagnosis was 49 years (range 21-73), 24 (54%) pts were females and 19 (43%) developed brain metastases during their disease course. BRAF V600 mutation was seen in all pts except in 1 pt with p.N581S mutation. The preferred 1st line targeted therapy was dabrafenib/trametinib used in 17 (94%) out of 18 pts, while ipilimumab was the preferred 1st immunotherapy used in 11 (42%) out of 26 pts. For 2nd line therapy, DT was used in 19 (90%) out of 21 pts, while pembrolizumab was used in 16 (69%) out of 23 pts. For 3rd line, DT was used in 5 (83%) out of 6 pts, while pembrolizumab was used in 6 (100%) out of 6 pts. DT was usually the first choice for patients with high burden disease or brain metastases. The most common approach strategy was immunotherapy followed by targeted therapy (group 2), the median duration of treatment was 11 and 19 weeks respectively; for pts started on targeted therapy followed by immunotherapy (group 1), the median duration of treatment was 17 and 14 weeks respectively. (Table 1) Time-to-next therapy (TTNT) following 1st line treatment was similar in pts treated with targeted therapy (median 23 weeks [95% CI: 15-31]) or immunotherapy (median 26 weeks [95% CI: 10-33], p=0.94). Following 2nd line treatment, the TTNT for pts treated with targeted therapy was 18 weeks (95% CI: 4-38), immunotherapy 18 weeks (95% CI: 13-19) and triple therapy 22 weeks (95% CI: 13-41), p=0.48. A trend towards better overall survival (OS) from frontline therapy was seen in pts who received immunotherapy (1st line) followed by targeted therapy (2nd line) (median 7 years [95% CI: 2.7-7.08]) compared to those who received targeted therapy (1st line) followed by immunotherapy (2nd line) (median 2.3 years [95% CI: 1.3-NR], p=0.09. Interestingly, patients who received salvage chemotherapy had significant longer OS in those treated initially with immunotherapy (median 7 years [95% CI: 3.2-7.08]) (n=6) compared to patients started on targeted therapy (median 2 years [95% CI: 0.6-2.4], p=0.03) (n=5). Conclusion A trend towards longer OS was seen in pts treated with 1st line immunotherapy followed by 2nd line targeted therapy with a median therapy time of 11 and 19 weeks respectively. No difference in TTNT was seen with the use immunotherapy, targeted therapy or triple therapy when used as 1st or 2nd line. The significant longer OS benefit with f 1st line immunotherapy was only seen in patients who received chemotherapy later in their treatment course. Table 1.Treatment Characteristics by GroupMedian duration of therapy in weeksGroup(n)1st line therapy(median)2nd line therapy(median)3rd line therapy(median)Totalmedian (range)Chemotherapy (n)1(n=9)Targeted therapy(17)Immunotherapy (14)N/A52 (13-134)51.1(n=7)Targeted therapy(25)Triple therapy (19)Any*(43)69 (22-118)11.2(n=2)Targeted therapy(60)Immunotherapy (16)Triple therapy (21)96 (81-111)12(n=18)Immunotherapy(11)Targeted therapy(19)Any*(24)48 (16-120)52.1(n=4)Immunotherapy(17)Triple therapy (16)Any*(9)41 (25-69)02.2(n=4)Immunotherapy(19)Targeted therapy(16)Triple therapy (19)61 (54-73)1* include any treatment regimen such as immunotherapy, targeted therapy or chemotherapy Citation Format: Jesus Vera-Aguilera, Jonas Paludo, Narjust Duma, Marcella Tschautscher, Cecilia Yu, Svetomir Markovic. A clinical insight into therapeutic sequence in advanced melanoma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR-NCI-EORTC International Conference: Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics; 2017 Oct 26-30; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Mol Cancer Ther 2018;17(1 Suppl):Abstract nr LB-A32.

186 Background: The optimal sequence strategy of BRAF/MEK inhibitors, anti-PD- 1/PDL-1 and anti-CTLA-4 in metastatic BRAF-mutated melanoma patients (pts) is unknown and no treatment guidelines exist. Therefore, we report a single-institution experience of different treatment approaches using targeted therapy (TT) and immunotherapy and its impact on outcomes. Methods: BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma pts treated with TT and immunotherapy from 2012 to2017 were analyzed. Six groups were identified based on treatment strategy. All time-to-event analyses were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and Wilcoxon test. Results: Forty-four pts were identified. The median age at diagnosis was 49 years (range 21-73), 54% pts were females and 43% developed brain metastases during disease course. The most common approach strategy was immunotherapy followed by TT, the median duration of treatment was 11 and 19 weeks, respectively. Time-to-next therapy (TTNT) following 1st line treatment was similar in pts treated with TT (median 23 weeks [95% CI: 15-31]) or immunotherapy (median 26 weeks [95% CI: 10-33], p = 0.94). A trend towards better overall survival (OS) was seen in pts who received immunotherapy followed by TT (p = 0.09); patients who received salvage chemotherapy (carboplatin/paclitaxel) had significantly longer OS (median 7 years [95% CI: 3.2-7.08]) ( p = 0.03). Conclusions: No differences in TTNT were seen with immunotherapy, TT or combined (triple therapy) when used as 1st or 2nd line. The significant longer OS benefit with 1st line immunotherapy was only seen in patients who received chemotherapy later in their treatment course. [Table: see text]

Purpose: Many cancer clinical trials lack appropriate representation of specific patient populations, limiting their generalizability. Therefore, we determined the representation of ethnic minorities and women in cancer clinical trials. Methods: Enrollment data from all therapeutic trials reported as completed in ClinicalTrials.gov from 2003 to 2016 were analyzed. We calculated enrollment fractions (EFs) for each group, defined as the number of enrollees divided by the 2013 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database cancer prevalence. Results: Of 1,012 clinical trials, 310 (31%) reported ethnicity with a total of 55,689 enrollees. Participation varied significantly across ethnic groups. Non-Hispanic whites were more likely to be enrolled in clinical trials (EF, 1.2%) than African Americans (EF, 0.7%; P < .001) and Hispanics (EF, 0.4%; P < .001). A decrease in African American (6% v 9.2%) and Hispanic (2.6% v 3.1%) enrollment was observed when compared with historical data from 1996 to 2002. Younger patients (age younger than 65 years) were more likely to be enrolled in clinical trials than the elderly (64% v 36%; P < .001). Low recruitment of female patients was observed in clinical trials for melanoma (35%), lung cancer (39%), and pancreatic cancer (40%). Conclusion: We observed a decrease in recruitment of minorities over the past 14 years compared with historical data. African Americans, Hispanics, and women were less likely to be enrolled in cancer clinical trials. Future trials should take extra measures to recruit participants that adequately represent the US cancer population.

AbstractWaldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) is an immunoglobulin M‐associated lymphoma, with majority of cases demonstrating MYD88 locus alteration, most commonly, MYD88L265P. Owing to low prevalence of the wild‐type (WT) MYD88 genotype in WM, clinically relevant data in this patient population are sparse, with one study showing nearly a 10‐fold increased risk of mortality in this subgroup compared to patients with MYD88L265P mutation. We studied a large cohort of patients with MYD88L265P and MYD88WT WM, evaluated at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, between 1995 and 2016, to specifically assess the impact of these genotypes on clinical course. Of 557 patients, MYD88L265P mutation status, as determined by allele‐specific polymerase chain reaction, was known in 219, and 174 (79%) of those exhibited MYD88L265P, 157 of 174 patients had active disease. Of 45 (21%) patients with MYD88WT genotype, 44 had active disease. The estimated median follow‐up was 7.0 years; median overall survival was 10.2 years (95% CI: 8.4‐16.5) for MYD88L265P versus 13.9 years (95% CI: 6.4‐29.3) for the MYD88WT (P = 0.86). The time‐to‐next therapy from frontline treatment and the presenting features were similar in the two patient populations. For patients with smoldering WM at diagnosis, the median time‐to‐progression to active disease was 2.8 years (95% CI: 2.2‐3.8) in the MYD88L265P cohort and 1.9 years (95% CI: 0.7‐3.1) in the MYD88WT cohort (P = 0.21). The frequency of transformation to high‐grade lymphoma, or the development of therapy‐elated myelodysplastic syndrome was higher in the MYD88WT cohort (16% versus 4% in the MYD88L265P, P = 0.009). In conclusion, MYD88L265P mutation does not appear to be a determinant of outcome, and its presence may not be a disease‐defining feature in WM. Our findings warrant external validation, preferably through prospective studies.