Citations

9029 Background: Addressing guideline concordant FP and TPP with cancer is challenging, especially for OT. SIM, a well-known education tool, has not been traditionally used to teach these topics. As part of the hematology/oncology fellowship curriculum, we designed a SIM applying LSP to bridge this educational gap. Methods: Applying LSP of contrasting cases, elaboration, feedback, generation and just-in-time telling, chief OTs and faculty designed a SIM with 3 clinical scenarios (CS) and 3 standardized pts (SP): FP for a female pt hospitalized for acute lymphoblastic leukemia tx, FP for a male pt in clinic for germ cell tumor tx, and breast cancer tx for a pregnant pt in 2 nd trimester. OT received written educational materials (WEM) and attended a lecture 1 week and 1 day pre SIM, respectively. OT were split into 2 groups; 1 started in the FP CS and 1 in the TPP CS, and then they switched. To reduce cognitive overload, each OT participated in 1 of 2 FP CS: half in the female FP CS and half in the male. Faculty and chiefs led debriefing sessions after all CS. The FP debrief ended with a special “learner as a teacher” part, where OT who attended the female CS taught those from the male CS about their topic and vice versa. The SIM concluded with "take-home" points. Pre (after having WEM) and post SIM anonymous surveys and verbal feedback assessed OT comfort, perceptions, and knowledge. Results: A 3 hour SIM with 14 OT and 5 faculty was completed successfully. SIM ended with all OT verbally sharing a learning point and positive feedback. All OT filled pre and post SIM surveys. Pre SIM, 17% reported having prior FP education, and 42% had prior TPP education. However, only 8% and 25% felt adequately prepared for FP and TPP discussions, respectively. Post SIM survey showed major improvement in comfort and knowledge about FP and TPP (see table 1). 75% of OT favored a combination of SIM and learning by teaching over other SIM formats. 83% supported having a TPP lecture before SIM. 100% reported satisfaction with FP and TPP SIM’s quality and wanted similar activities in the future. 92% were satisfied with the learner as a teacher tool. 100% felt education about FP and TPP with cancer should be part of fellowship training. Moral/cultural concerns were discussed as possible challenges in FP education. Conclusions: The application of LSP through SIM significantly increased OTs’ comfort discussing FP and TPP with cancer, and objectively enhanced their knowledge on these topics compared to after reading WEM. The SIM was largely perceived as a successful activity to educate about challenging topics and should become part of fellowship curriculum. Pre SIM % Post SIM % Comfortable addressing FP 17 92 Comfortable addressing TPP 8 100 Correct answers about female FP 63 83 Correct answers about male FP 67 94 Correct answers about TPP with cancer 68 98

Abstract Background: Second generation androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs), such as abiraterone, have demonstrated improved survival in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients, however, acquired resistance to these agents often arises. Novel and alternative therapies are needed to combat the ARSI resistant tumor. In the last two decades patient-derived xenograft (PDX) and PDX organoids have become pivotal models in anticancer drug development and biomarker discovery due to their ability to faithfully recapitulate the complex and heterogeneous tumor biology. Methods: We analyzed RNAseq data from mCRPC patients and corresponding PDX models (PROMOTE study, NCT #01953640) and employed L1000 Chem Perturbation down/up signatures database to find candidate drugs to overcome abiraterone resistance by reverse signature search. We then performed proliferation assay using 49 compounds in three PROMOTE-PDX organoid models (2 abiraterone-resistant and 1 abiraterone-sensitive) using our semi high-throughput drug screening platform. Results: Overall, we identified a total of 32 compounds with IC50<10µM in at least one of the models, among which, 5 agents are active in all three models and 5 in at least two of the models. (Table 1). Within active compounds we find selective kinase inhibitors (BRAF, JAK2, AKT, FLT3) and histone deacetylase inhibitors (belinostat and pracinostat). Particularly interesting are two drugs that are only active in the abiraterone resistant setting but not the sensitive PDX. Conclusions: In summary, we leveraged RNAseq data from mCRPC patients and PDX models and performed a high-throughput drug screen in PDX-derived organoid models to identify potential drugs that could overcome abiraterone-resistance in lethal advanced prostate cancer. These data highlight potential drug combinations or subsequent therapeutic strategies for these patients. Citation Format: Irene Marín-Goñi, Huanyao Gao, Joachim L. Petit, Shreya Indulkar, Adam M. Kase, Cassandra N. Moore, Krishna R. Kalari, Michael T. Barrett, Richard Weinshilboum, Winston Tan, John A. Copland, Liewei Wang. Overcoming resistance in mCRPC: drug discovery using PDX models and high-throughput drug screening [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 5658.

Background Novel treatment options are required in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC). Myeloid-derived suppressor cells promote a hostile tumor microenvironment and are associated with worse clinical outcomes in PROC. We evaluated the safety and preliminary efficacy of PY159, an agonist antibody to Triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells-1 (TREM1) that reprograms immunosuppressive intratumoral myeloid cells, and PY314, an antagonist antibody to Triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells-2 (TREM2) that depletes tumor-associated macrophages, as single agents and in combination with pembrolizumab in subjects with PROC. Methods PY159 and PY314 were individually evaluated in patients with PROC. Patients were treated with monotherapy (PY159 3 mg/kg or PY314 10 mg/kg), based on the recommended dose for expansion derived from the phase 1a studies. At the time of first progression, patients could continue study drug and crossover to combination therapy with pembrolizumab (200 mg) every 3 weeks at the discretion of the investigator. Disease assessment by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor version 1.1 was performed every 6 weeks. Results 17 patients were enrolled in the PY159 study (median age 67, range 22–77; median prior therapies 6, range 2–18) and 16 patients in PY314 (median age 65.5, range 49–81; median prior therapies 4, range 2–10). 7 patients in PY159 and 8 patients in PY314 crossed over to combination therapy. Safety events included the following: treatment-related adverse events occurred in 15 patients (88.2%) in PY159 and 9 patients (56.3%) in PY314. Infusion-related reactions occurred in 6 patients (35.3%) in PY159 and 3 patients (18.8%) in PY314. Immune-related adverse events occurred in 13 patients (76.5%) in PY159 (arthralgias) and 1 patient (6.3%) in PY314 (diarrhea). Serious adverse events occurred in 6 patients (36.3%) in PY159 (1 related) and 12 patients (75%) in PY314 (all unrelated). The best radiographic response in PY159 was stable disease in 8/16 patients (50%; median 16 weeks, range 9–33), and in PY314, it was stable disease in 8/16 patients (50%; median 12 weeks, range 6–36). Median PFS was 2.76 months and 2.69 months in PY159 and PY314, respectively. There were no responses in the crossover arm. Conclusions Both PY159 and PY314 were well tolerated, with an acceptable safety profile, as both single agents and in combination with pembrolizumab. Both agents warrant further investigation in heavily pretreated PROC.

537 Background: Translocation renal cell carcinoma (tRCC) is a rare renal cell carcinoma subtype found in about 1-4% of adult patients with RCC and 40% of pediatric RCC cases. Management of advanced tRCC has been guided by clear cell RCC therapy and retrospective reviews which include tRCC cohorts. Novel therapeutic strategies are needed to improve outcomes. This study assessed an individualized neoantigen vaccine with nivolumab plus cabozantinib in a patient with metastatic TFE3-tRCC. Methods: Patient was consented (IRB# 20-011945) for a single-patient investigational new drug (IND#27755). In-house neoantigen prediction bioinformatics pipeline (REAL-neo v2.0) was performed to identify and prioritize neoantigen candidates. Patient underwent lymphodepletion with cyclophosphamide followed by vaccine administration on days 1, 4, 8, 11, 20, 40, week 12, and week 20. Patient was also treated with concurrent nivolumab 480 mg every 4 weeks and cabozantinib 40 mg daily. Objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) were measured. Results: Patient was diagnosed with TFE3-tRCC and underwent nephrectomy prior to developing metastatic disease. He was treated with multiple liver surgeries, ablations, and radiation therapy without systemic therapy. This controlled his disease for 7 years before he required systemic therapy with ipilimumab plus nivolumab. After 4 cycles, imaging showed progression and was started on cabozantinib which controlled his disease for 1 year. Patient was consented for the neoantigen vaccine. Cycle 1 was administered in April 2022. Three liver lesions and 1 periportal lymph node were monitored. After 4 months of therapy, imaging showed partial response with 34% decrease in sum of target lesions. In June 2023, partial response was ongoing with a 57.4% decrease. A 2 nd vaccine series was administered in June 2023 and had stable disease until progression in June 2024 when patient held his cabozantinib for at least 4 weeks. Neoantigen combination therapy achieved a progression-free survival of 26 months and was well tolerated without significant vaccine-related adverse events. Conclusions: Individualized neoantigen vaccine plus nivolumab and cabozantinib achieved a durable partial response with prolonged progression-free survival. A randomized clinical trial is warranted to further evaluate the efficacy of this combination therapy.

Background Clonal hematopoiesis (CH) is defined by somatic mutations in hematopoietic stem cells, often conferring a selection advantage based on clonal selection pressures. CH in DNA Damage Response and Repair (DDR, e.g. TP53, PPM1D) genes are frequent in individuals exposed to chemotherapy and radiation (chemo/XRT). In metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) patients, the prevalence of CH is estimated at 57% and is increased among those with prior exposure to chemo or XRT. In these patients, the use of radiotheranostics is becoming more prevalent and are now being tested in earlier lines of therapy. We have identified an increase in DDR-somatic variants post lutetium-177-PSMA, raising concern for long term hematologic safety. Here, we evaluate the spectrum of CH and CCUS (clonal cytopenias of undetermined significance) in mPC patients, prior to receiving radioisotope therapies. Methods We performed error corrected next-generation sequencing (NGS) on peripheral blood samples from 67 mPC patients enrolled in the Prostate Cancer Medically Optimized Genome Enhanced Therapy Study (PROMOTE) study (NCT #01953640). All patients enrolled also had whole exome sequencing (WES) performed on initial metastatic biopsies and on whole blood for germline genotyping. Somatic variants with a variant allele fraction (VAF) ≥0.5% were considered as CH, using standard bioinformatic variant calling algorithms. Results The median age at NGS was 74.4 years (range, 58.4-92.3). While all patients received androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) +/- androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI), 67.2% (n=45, pelvic XRT- 35, palliative XRT- 10) received prior XRT and 3% (n=2) received prior docetaxel. No patients in this cohort received prior platinum or PARP inhibitor. Of those treated with XRT or chemo, the median time from first exposure to CH sample collection was 4.1yrs (range, 0.12-29.6) and 2.3yrs (range, 0.6-4.0), respectively. Of the 67 patients, we identified a total of 111 pathogenic variants in 59 (88.1%) patients. We compared our NGS data to the germline data and tumor for each patient (All samples obtained at the same time point; Wang et al 2018). Our analysis excluded 2 ATM variants likely to be germline, and 1 TP53 variant likely to be tumor-derived. Each patient had at least one somatic variant, with a median of 2 variants (range, 1-6The median CH VAF was 1.8% (range, 0.5-50.2) with 91.0% of alterations detected at a VAF of <10%. Specific somatic variants, presence/absence of CH, number of variants, nor VAF was associated with age, prior chemo, or XRT exposures. At time of NGS, 54% of patients were anemic (hgb <13g/dL), 7% were thrombocytopenic (platelets <135 x109), 6% were leukopenic (WBC <3 x 109), and no patients were neutropenic (ANC <1 x109). Persistent cytopenias, lasting >3months, were present in 25% (n=17) of patients; however, bone marrow biopsies (BMB) were performed only in 6% (n=4). Three (75%) of these 4 patients had mPC infiltration in the BM, and 1 (25%) had mild dysplasia not meeting criteria for MDS but meeting criteria for CCUS (CHEK2 somatic variant). At last follow-up, there were no patients formally diagnosed to have myeloid neoplasm (MN). Median overall survival (OS) from prostate cancer diagnosis was 8.6yrs (range, 1.4-28.4). With a median follow up of 2.2yrs (range 0.1-10.8) after CH testing, 3.0% (n=2) were alive, with most deaths occurring due to mPC. The presence of CH did not impact overall survival (OS), however, presence of cytopenias at the time of NGS testing was associated with worse outcomes (median OS 2.5yrs vs 1.2 yrs., p=0.025). Conclusions We define the landscape of CH mutations in mPC patients predominantly treated with ADT/ARPI and XRT, demonstrating that DNMT3A, TET2, PPM1D and ASXL1 are frequently mutated (88%) and largely subclonal (91% with VAF ≤10%). While 25% of these patients had cytopenias, with cytopenias negatively impacting survival, due to inadequate BM biopsy work up, the true prevalence of CCUS and MN could not be estimated. Given the advancement of genotoxic therapies and the high prevalence of subclonal CH in mPC, future studies investigating CH as a predictive biomarker of hematological dysfunction are much needed.

Melanoma is the deadliest form of skin cancer. The median age at diagnosis is 66. While most patients are treated with immunotherapy, the use of targeted therapy is a valid alternative for patients whose tumors harbor a BRAF or c-KIT driver mutation. These agents, while effective, come with a variety of side effects which limit their use, especially in older patients. We sought to assess the efficacy and toxicity of these agents in older melanoma patients. Melanoma patients over 65 treated with BRAF/MEK or c-KIT inhibitors were retrospectively identified, and their data were analyzed for treatment efficacy and toxicity. All data were compared using the Chi-square test for categorical comparisons and the Kruskal–Wallis method for median comparisons. One hundred and sixteen patients were identified. One hundred and six patients were treated with BRAF/MEK inhibitors. The assessed response rate (RR) was 83% and was comparable across different subgroups, including advanced line patients and those with a more aggressive disease. The median progression free survival (PFS) was 7.9 months, and the median overall survival (OS) was 15.7 months. Twenty-seven percent experienced grade 3–4 toxicity leading to a 24% treatment discontinuation rate. Another 10 patients were treated with the c-KIT inhibitor imatinib, for whom the assessed RR was 55%. The median PFS was 4.3 months, and the median OS was 22.6 months. Forty percent needed dose reductions, yet none had to stop treatment due to adverse effects. The use of targeted therapy in older patients is effective yet challenging due to toxicity. Deploying mitigation strategies can help maximizing their usefulness.

TPS2700 Background: Though immunotherapy with anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has led to improvements in clinical outcomes in patients with cancer, when used as monotherapy in the advanced setting, only 18-25% of patients respond to ICI. Notably, ICI frequently lacks anti-tumor activity in immune-cold cancers where T cell priming is missing. Recent breakthroughs in identifying personal neoantigens via a comprehensive analysis of cancer sequencing data have brought increased attention to neoantigen cancer vaccines. Personalized cancer vaccines targeting neoantigens have shown early promise. While neoantigens have recently been investigated in some cancer types, the current neoantigen prediction algorithms have often focused on the MHC class-I subtype, single nucleotide mutations (SNM), small insertions and deletions (INDEL). We recently developed an informatics workflow, REAL-neo, for the identification, quality control (QC), and prioritization of both class-I and class-II human leukocyte antigen (HLA) bound neoantigens that arise from somatic SNM, INDEL, aberrant RNA splicing, and gene fusions, generating much more potent neoantigen candidates. Furthermore, we demonstrated robust T-cell response and prolonged survival by combining ICI and cancer vaccines in preclinical models. This single-arm phase I clinical trial is in progress to assess the safety, feasibility, and immunogenicity of personalized neoantigen vaccines in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced solid cancers. Methods: The vaccine consists of up to 20 peptides (15-30 mer) comprising patient-specific neoantigens identified from tumor DNA and mRNA sequencing data using REAL-neo and delivered with GM-CSF as an adjuvant. The first cohort of three patients will be treated at dose level 1 consisting of 4 or 5 peptides at 300 mcg/peptide and GM-CSF 125 mcg per injection site in each of four limbs. After Cohort 1 is deemed safe, the study will expand to cohort 2, when patients will be enrolled at the same dose level for vaccine plus Pembrolizumab 200 mg i.v. Neoantigen vaccine will be given via subcutaneous injection on days 1, 4, 8, 15, and 21 (cohorts 1 and 2) and weeks 5 and 8 (booster dose for cohort 2 only). Cohort 1 has been completed without dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Enrollment in Cohort 2 began in January 2024. AEs are assessed according to CTCAE v5. and safety findings are reviewed by data safety medical board (DSMB). Key eligibility criteria include 1) histologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic solid malignancies and 2) cancer progression after at least one line of the standard-of-care (SOC) systemic treatment. For cohort 2, patients must be eligible to receive pembrolizumab per SOC or the treating physician’s judgment. Clinical trial information: NCT05269381 .

4574 Background: Mutations of COMPASS-related proteins KMT2D, KMT2C, and KDM6A are observed in 66% of advanced urothelial carcinomas (UC). In vivo, the administration of tazemetostat, an enzymatic EZH2 inhibitor (EZH2i), reduced tumor burden and enhanced the immune response in animal models of UC. We hypothesized that tazemetostat might improve response to immunotherapy in advanced UC. Methods: ETCTN 10183 (NCT03854474) is a multicenter pilot study evaluating the safety and efficacy of tazemetostat 800 mg BID+ pembrolizumab 200 mg given every three weeks for up to two years in patients (pts) with platinum-refractory (Arm A) or cisplatin/chemo-ineligible advanced UC (Arm B). The primary objective was to identify the recommended phase two dose (RP2D) of tazemetostat in combination with pembrolizumab. Secondary objectives included safety, response rate, and progression-free survival. Translational objectives included determining tumor mutational burden in COMPASS-related genes, tumor subtyping, TCR clonality, T cell infiltration, and PDL-1 expression. Results: There were no dose-limiting toxicities in the safety lead-in phase (n=6 pts), and the RP2D for tazemetostat was established at 800 mg BID. Baseline characteristics for Arm A N=12, Arm B N=13: 72% males; 96% white, 4% Black; 88% ECOG PS 0-1; 88% had bladder primary, 20% Stage III, 72% stage IV; 80% had visceral or bone metastases. The median number of cycles was 5 in Arm A (range 1-35) and 4 in Arm B (range 2-12). Treatment related G3/4 adverse events (AEs) were observed in 8 patients, most common were anemia and lymphopenia (n=2 each). Treatment related G1/2 AEs included nausea (n=6); skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (n=3); anemia, lymphopenia, and thrombocytopenia (n=2 each). Among evaluable patients (n=10 in each arm), partial response rate was: Arm A 30%, Arm B 20%; stable disease: Arm A 30%, Arm B 30%; and progressive disease: Arm A 30%, Arm B 20%. 8 pts were on study treatment for ≥ 9 cycles (5 in Arm A, 3 in Arm B). All pts are off protocol treatment. Median progression-free survival was 3.06 (95% CI: 1.38-7.75) months for Arm A and 3.02 (95%CI: 2.4-5.65) for Arm B. Conclusions: Tazemetostat 800 mg BID and pembrolizumab combination is feasible and well-tolerated in patients with advanced UC. In this pilot study, improvement in efficacy relative to historical controls of pembrolizumab alone appears to be modest. Response in tumors with COMPASS-related mutations and EZH2 activity will be evaluated. Clinical trial information: NCT03854474 .

TPS5108 Background: Penile cancer is a devastating malignancy that affects just over 2000 patients per year in the United States and approximately 40,000 worldwide. Metastatic or unresectable penile cancer is rapidly fatal in most cases and there are few effective systemic therapy options.1 There is an urgent need for alternatives to chemotherapy such as immunotherapy or targeted therapy. Enfortumab vedotin (EV) is an antibody-drug conjugate targeting nectin-4 protein on the tumor cell surface and having efficacy in treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma.2 Recent studies have demonstrated frequent and strong expression of nectin-4 in penile squamous cell carcinoma (PSCC).3,4 In this setting, Mayo Clinic is leading a phase II trial of EV for advanced PSCC, currently in progress. Methods: This single arm, open-label, two-stage, phase II trial evaluates best overall response rate (BRR) to EV in patients with PSCC regional lymph node involvement or distant metastatic (M1) disease. Participants may have had any prior systemic therapy or be treatment naïve. Previously untreated patients must be ineligible for or have refused surgery or radiotherapy, have N2-N3 disease and are ineligible for or have refused neoadjuvant chemotherapy, or have clinical evidence of M1 disease. Participants will receive treatment with EV until disease progression, withdrawal, death, or limiting toxicity. Participants will receive EV 1.25 mg/kg intravenous on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle, with tumor assessment performed at 8-week intervals. The primary endpoint is the combined BRR of partial and complete responses (whether confirmed or unconfirmed) according to RECIST 1.1. Secondary endpoints are confirmed response rate, duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival, adverse events, and BRR in HPV related and unrelated subgroups. Stage 1 will consist of 15 participants, and if there are 2 or more responses will proceed to Stage 2 with an additional 10 participants. The trial opened to enrollment in December 2023, and is active at Mayo Clinic sites in Minnesota, Arizona, and Florida. Clinical trial information: Funding and drug supplied by Astellas Pharma Global Development, Inc./Seagen Inc. NCT06104618. 1. Chahoud J, et al., Curr Opin Urol. 2022 Jan 1;32(1):8-16. 2. Powles T, et al. N Engl J Med. 2021 Mar 25;384(12):1125-1135. 3. Tekin B, et al. Hum Pathol. 2023 Dec;142:42-50. 4. Grass GD, et al. Eur Urol Open Sci. 2023 Jan 10;49:1-5. Clinical trial information: NCT06104618 .

e23270 Background: Melanoma is the most lethal form of skin cancer which have seen drastic improvement in patient survival over the last decade. BRAF is the most common driver mutation in melanoma, seen in ≈50% of all patients (≈30% of patients > 65). The use of BRAF & MEK inhibitors yields high response rates, though it is limited by toxicity and development of acquired resistance. Acknowledging these limitations, we aimed at assessing the efficacy and toxicity of these agents in melanoma patients > 65. Methods: We identified electronic medical records of all melanoma patients > 65 that were treated with BRAF & MEK inhibitors at our institution over the years 2017-2023. Data was retrospectively collected including demographics, disease characteristics, treatment given, response patterns and toxicity. Results: 106 patients were identified. The median age was 71 (65-89), 55% were males. The median follow up was 28.9 months. 32 (30%) patients were treated at first line, 58 (55%) at second line and 16 (15%) at third line. 88 (83%) evaluable patients received treatment for unresectable/metastatic disease of which 84% had an objective response (60% partial response, 24% complete response). Response rate (RR) was 82%, 85% and 87% for first, second and third line respectively. RR was 86% for patients with an increased serum lactate dehydrogenase. 33% of patients had active central nervous system (CNS) metastases at treatment initiation, for whom the systemic RR was 80% and the CNS RR was 39%. The median progression free survival (PFS) was 7.9 months, with a PFS of 6, 8.3 and 13.4 months for first, second and third line respectively. The median PFS was 5.7 months for patients with active CNS disease. The median overall survival (OS) from treatment initiation was 15.7 months (12.5, 14.5, 31.9 for first, second & third line respectively). The median OS for patients with CNS disease was 9.8 months. 16 patients were treated in the adjuvant setting, of which 6 (37%) finished treatment as planned, 3 stopped due to disease progression (19%) and 6 stopped due to toxicity (37%). 88% of patients experienced adverse events (AEs) of any grade, with 27% having grade 3-4 toxicity. There were no grade 5 toxicities reported. 36% of patients experienced one AE, while 52% experienced two or more. 21% of patients stopped treatment due to toxicity, 28% needed a dose reduction and 20% changed to different BRAF/MEK inhibitors. 10% of patients needed systemic corticosteroids to treat AEs. The most common toxicities seen were fever (30%), fatigue (30%), skin rash (22%), elevated liver function tests (20%), arthralgia/myalgia (15%), nausea (14%) and diarrhea (11%). 7% had decrease in cardiac ejection fraction with one grade 3 leading to treatment discontinuation. Conclusions: Treatment with BRAF & MEK inhibitors is challenging in older patients, with a high prevalence of toxicity leading to treatment modifications and discontinuation. Efficacy seems to be the same as in the general population.