Abstract Telemedicine has routinely been used in cancer care delivery for the past 3 years. The current state of digital health provides convenience and efficiency for both health-care professional and patient, but challenges exist in equitable access to virtual services. As increasingly newer technologies are added to telehealth platforms, it is essential to eliminate barriers to access through technical, procedural, and legislative improvements. Moving forward, implementation of new strategies can help eliminate disparities in virtual cancer care, facilitate delivery of treatment in the home, and improve real-time data collection for patient safety and clinical trial participation. The ultimate goal will be to extend high-quality survival for all patients with cancer through improved digital delivery of cancer care.
Assessment of Outcomes of Consolidation Therapy By Number of Cycles of Blinatumomab Received in Newly Diagnosed Measurable Residual Disease Negative Patients with B-Lineage Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: In the ECOG-ACRIN E1910 Randomized Phase III National
Introduction: ECOG ACRIN E1910 is a randomized phase III trial that showed that adults with newly diagnosed BCR::ABL1 negative acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) who become MRD negative (<0.01%) after induction chemo who receive blinatumomab with conventional chemotherapy (chemo) have improved survival compared with those who received chemo only (Litzow et al, Blood (2022) 140: Supplement 2, LBA-1). However, not all pts were able to receive all four planned cycles of blinatumomab in consolidation. In this report we assessed outcomes of pts in the blinatumomab arm of the trial who received all 4 cycles of blinatumomab compared to those who received 1-2 cycles. Methods: Patient between the ages of 30 and 70 with newly diagnosed BCR::ABL1 negative B-lineage ALL were enrolled and initially received 2.5 months of combination induction chemo utilizing a BFM-like regimen adapted from the E2993/UKALLXII clinical trial, with pegaspargase (after induction only for patients >=55 years of age) and addition of rituximab for CD20 positive patients. After remission induction (step 1) pts in morphologic complete remission (CR/CRi) received an intensification course of high dose methotrexate with pegaspargase for CNS prophylaxis (step 2). At the conclusion of step 2, remission and MRD status were determined centrally by 6-color flow cytometry with MRD negativity defined as <0.01%. In the primary analysis subset, MRD negative patients were randomized to receive an additional 4cycles of consolidation chemo or 2 cycles of blinatumomab at 28 mcg/day (flat dose) for 28 days each cycle followed by 3 cycles of consolidation chemo, another 4-week cycle of blinatumomab (3rd cycle of blinatumomab) followed by an additional cycle of chemo and then a 4th cycle of blinatumomab (step 3). Following completion of consolidation chemo +/- blinatumomab, pts were given 2.5 years of POMP maintenance therapy timed from the start of the intensification cycle (step 4). Estimates of OS were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Comparison of OS between treatment arms were conducted using the stratified log-rank test and Cox proportional-hazards model with age, CD20 status, rituximab use, and whether pts intend to receive HSCT or not as stratification factors. As the number of cycles needed to optimize outcome has not been studied, an unplanned landmark analysis was used to compare OS of pts in the blinatumomab arm who received all 4 cycles o those who received 1-2 cycles. Time 0 was chosen as 9 months post step 3 randomization (the time that patients were supposed to complete 4 cycles of blina). Four pts who received blinatumomab but died within 9 months post step 3 randomization were therefore excluded from this analysis. Results: The study was activated on December 17, 2013 and closed to enrollment on October 15, 2019. 772 pts were screened for the trial and 488 were enrolled on step 1 induction therapy. The median age of the pts was 51 years (range 30-70). 224 MRD negative pts were randomized, 112 pts to each arm. In the blinatumomab arm 12 pts received 1 cycle (11%), 32 pts received 2 cycles (29%), 4 pts received 3 cycles (4%) and 63 pts received 4 cycles (57%). The OS of pts who received 1-2 cycles of blinatumomab was compared to control (Figure 1) The difference was not significant (hazard ratio 0.62, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.34, p=0.22). Fig 2 compares the survival of those who received 1-2 cycles to those who received 4 cycles ( (HR: 0.39, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.16, p=0.076). Conclusion: The addition of blinatumomab to consolidation chemotherapy resulted in a significantly better overall survival compared to chemotherapy alone in pts with newly diagnosed B-lineage ALL who were MRD negative after intensification. This represents a new standard of care for pts aged 30-70 years with BCR::ABL1 negative ALL. The optimal dose and number of cycles is however unknown. In this unplanned subgroup analysis we demonstrate that a survival benefit can only be confirmed in patients who receive the intended 4 cycles of blinatumomab during consolidation. Further studies will be needed to determine if fewer cycles can provide a similar benefit.
Feasibility and Outcome of Post-Induction Therapy Incorporating Dasatinib for Patients with Newly Diagnosed ABL-Class Fusion B-Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ABL-class Fusion B-ALL): Children's Oncology Group AALL1131
Background: Approximately 2-3% of B-ALL patients have Philadelphia chromosome like (Ph-like) B-ALL with an ABL-class fusion ( ABL1, ABL2, PDGFRB, or CSF1R fusions), but lacking BCR::ABL1. These patients are predicted to be sensitive to ABL-class tyrosine kinase inhibitors, such as imatinib or dasatinib. Ph-like B-ALL is associated with male sex, older age, higher initial white blood cell (WBC) count, elevated end of induction (EOI) minimal residual disease (MRD), and poor outcome. The AALL1131 Dasatinib arm was designed to evaluate response to therapy following induction of patients with ABL-class fusion B-ALL, when given dasatinib continuously on a modified Berlin-Frankfurt-Münster (MBFM) backbone. Methods: Between February 2012 and March 2019, AALL1131 enrolled patients 1-30 years with newly diagnosed high risk (HR) B-ALL. AALL1131 was amended in August 2016, to include the Dasatinib arm for patients with ABL-class fusions involving ABL1, ABL2, PDGFRB, and CSF1R. Patients with Down Syndrome were not eligible for the Dasatinib arm. ABL-class fusion B-ALL patients with a predicted TKI-sensitive mutation were screened by low density array (LDA) PCR and confirmed by additional molecular testing. Following 4-drug induction, patients with HR B-ALL and ABL-class fusions received MBFM with dasatinib (60 mg/m 2, maximum 140 mg) daily from start of consolidation through end of maintenance. Dasatinib was held only for toxicity. Results: Twenty-two evaluable patients with HR B-ALL were non-randomly assigned to the Dasatinib arm. ABL-class 3' partners included ABL1 (n=4), ABL2 (n=4), PDGFRB (n=12), and CSF1R (n=2). Compared to all patients on AALL1131, patients treated on the Dasatinib arm were older (median age at diagnosis 14 versus 10 years, p=0.008), more often male (77% versus 56%, p=0.046), and had a trend towards an increased initial WBC (median WBC at diagnosis 44,000/µL versus 19,000/µL, p=0.086). Patients with ABL-class fusions had EOI MRD > 0.01% in 20 of 22 patients and available end of consolidation MRD >0.01% in 6 of 10 patients. Only 5 of 22 (22.7%) patients completed prescribed protocol therapy. Reasons for therapy discontinuation included induction failure (n=2), relapse (n=1), alternate therapy (n=1), determined to be in the patient's best interest (n=10), death (n=1), unknown (n=2). Compared to all patients on AALL1131, four-year disease-free survival was 52.5+18.1% versus 86.8+0.7% (p<0.0001) and overall survival 79.4+13.6% versus 89.2+0.4% (p<0.0001). Dasatinib was well tolerated with no unexpected treatment related toxicities. Conclusion: Patients with ABL-class fusions were more likely male, EOI MRD+, and had poorer outcomes. Seventy-seven percent of patients enrolled on the Dasatinib arm did not complete prescribed therapy. While dasatinib was well tolerated, treatment failures occurred early, indicating alternate strategies are needed.
Abstract B134: The art of science: Painting a new image of genomic research in the indigenous communities of the Southwest
Abstract Introduction: The Patient Engagement-Cancer Genome Sequencing Research Center (PE-CGS; NCI U2C CA252973) based at the University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center (UNMCCC) with partners at Mayo Clinic Comprehensive Cancer Center, the Translational Genomics Research Institute, and the Black Hills for American Indian Health Research Center are developing culturally appropriate strategies and methods to address the underrepresentation of American Indians (AIs) in genomic research. Our efforts are directed towards the implementation of tailored cancer prevention, diagnosis, and treatment strategies that reduce cancer health disparities in Tribal communities. Methods: The PE-CGS Center has three units, each tasked with specific research components to engage AI participants in participatory, clinically-meaningful genomic research: 1) the Participant Engagement Unit; 2) the Genomics Characterization Unit; and 3) the Engagement Optimization Unit (EOU). The Center also has a Tribal Advisory Committee, composed of Tribal Governors, Presidents, and tribal health advocates and experts, who provide direction on all research matters. The PE-CGS EOU uses iterative rapid-cycle research techniques to optimize engagement and shares these strategies with other units for timely implementation. To date, the EOU has developed and implemented three key efforts. First, to aid in recruiting participants for the study, the EOU tailored a series (6) of participant-facing informational materials that include artwork from a local AI artist who combined her traditional and scientific knowledge to prepare complementary imagery. Second, the EOU is currently implementing a series of semi-structured discussions to document participant perceptions on criteria including engagement, communication, and education. Lastly, the EOU implemented a survey among UNMCCC providers on their return of results processes. Results: EOU discussions are ongoing and have provided important perspectives on participant satisfaction and areas for improvement. Participants have commended study staff on their efforts to make enrollment straightforward. Participants report discussing the study with family prior to enrolling, highlighting the importance of continuing to engage with the entire community on the goals of the study. The provider return of results survey is complete (n=42/62, response rate=68%); one key finding was that providers who return somatic test results rarely provide participants with a hard copy of the results or utilize complementary materials that might enhance their explanation of the test findings. Conclusion: The EOU serves an innovative function through its rapid-cycle methods to optimize participant engagement. Although participants are generally pleased with their study participation, there are numerous opportunities for improvement. The informational materials represent a novel contribution to the field of genomic research. Efforts will continue to implement optimized processes for effective engagement of AI communities in genomic research and cancer care delivery. Citation Format: Shoshana Adler Jaffe, Kendal Jacobson, Joseph Rodman, Cindy Blair, Debra MacKenzie, Mallery Quetawki, Tamar Ginossar, V. Shane Pankratz, Andrew Sussman, Ursa Brown-Glabermen, Jeffrey Trent, Cheryl Willman, Shiraz I. Mishra. The art of science: Painting a new image of genomic research in the indigenous communities of the Southwest [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 16th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2023 Sep 29-Oct 2;Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2023;32(12 Suppl):Abstract nr B134.
Outcomes in Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults With Down Syndrome and ALL: A Report From the Children's Oncology Group
PURPOSE Patients with Down syndrome (DS) and B-ALL experience increased rates of relapse, toxicity, and death. We report results for patients with DS B-ALL enrolled on Children's Oncology Group trials between 2003 and 2019. METHODS We analyzed data for DS (n = 743) and non-DS (n = 20,067) patients age 1-30 years on four B-ALL standard-risk (SR) and high-risk trials. RESULTS Patients with DS exhibited more frequent minimal residual disease (MRD) ≥0.01% at end induction (30.8% v 21.5%; P < .001). This difference persisted at end consolidation only in National Cancer Institute (NCI) high-risk patients (34.0% v 11.7%; P < .0001). Five-year event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly poorer for DS versus non-DS patients overall (EFS, 79.2% ± 1.6% v 87.5% ± 0.3%; P < .0001; OS, 86.8% ± 1.4% v 93.6% ± 0.2%; P < .0001), and within NCI SR and high-risk subgroups. Multivariable Cox regression analysis of the DS cohort for risk factors associated with inferior EFS identified age >10 years, white blood count >50 × 103/μL, and end-induction MRD ≥0.01%, but not cytogenetics or CRLF2 overexpression. Patients with DS demonstrated higher 5-year cumulative incidence of relapse (11.5% ± 1.2% v 9.1% ± 0.2%; P = .0008), death in remission (4.9% ± 0.8% v 1.7% ± 0.1%; P < .0001), and induction death (3.4% v 0.8%; P < .0001). Mucositis, infections, and hyperglycemia were significantly more frequent in all patients with DS, while seizures were more frequent in patients with DS on high-risk trials (4.1% v 1.8%; P = .005). CONCLUSION Patients with DS-ALL exhibit an increased rate of relapse and particularly of treatment-related mortality. Novel, less-toxic therapeutic strategies are needed to improve outcomes.
AACR Cancer Centers Alliance: Fostering Collaboration and Innovation to Advance Lifesaving Scientific Discoveries for Patients
Summary: Basic and clinical cancer research discoveries stemming from the nation's cancer centers have markedly improved outcomes for many cancer patients. Despite this forward momentum in our progress against this complex disease, cancer in all its forms remains a major public health challenge that touches the lives of nearly every American, either directly or indirectly. The newly formed AACR Cancer Centers Alliance will accelerate the pace of discovery by providing an ongoing mechanism for transferring new knowledge, sharing resources, developing national demonstration projects, and driving innovation that impacts cancer science, cancer care delivery, and science and health policy.
AACR Cancer Centers Alliance: Fostering Collaboration and Innovation to Advance Lifesaving Scientific Discoveries for Patients
Abstract Basic and clinical cancer research discoveries stemming from the nation's cancer centers have markedly improved outcomes for many cancer patients. Despite this forward momentum in our progress against this complex disease, cancer in all its forms remains a major public health challenge that touches the lives of nearly every American, either directly or indirectly. The newly formed AACR Cancer Centers Alliance will accelerate the pace of discovery by providing an ongoing mechanism for transferring new knowledge, sharing resources, developing national demonstration projects, and driving innovation that impacts cancer science, cancer care delivery, and science and health policy.
AACR Cancer Centers Alliance: Fostering Collaboration and Innovation to Advance Lifesaving Scientific Discoveries for Patients
Abstract Basic and clinical cancer research discoveries stemming from the nation's cancer centers have markedly improved outcomes for many cancer patients. Despite this forward momentum in our progress against this complex disease, cancer in all its forms remains a major public health challenge that touches the lives of nearly every American, either directly or indirectly. The newly formed AACR Cancer Centers Alliance will accelerate the pace of discovery by providing an ongoing mechanism for transferring new knowledge, sharing resources, developing national demonstration projects, and driving innovation that impacts cancer science, cancer care delivery, and science and health policy.
AACR Cancer Centers Alliance: Fostering Collaboration and Innovation to Advance Lifesaving Scientific Discoveries for Patients
Abstract Basic and clinical cancer research discoveries stemming from the nation's cancer centers have markedly improved outcomes for many cancer patients. Despite this forward momentum in our progress against this complex disease, cancer in all its forms remains a major public health challenge that touches the lives of nearly every American, either directly or indirectly. The newly formed AACR Cancer Centers Alliance will accelerate the pace of discovery by providing an ongoing mechanism for transferring new knowledge, sharing resources, developing national demonstration projects, and driving innovation that impacts cancer science, cancer care delivery, and science and health policy.
AACR Cancer Centers Alliance: Fostering Collaboration and Innovation to Advance Lifesaving Scientific Discoveries for Patients
Abstract Basic and clinical cancer research discoveries stemming from the nation's cancer centers have markedly improved outcomes for many cancer patients. Despite this forward momentum in our progress against this complex disease, cancer in all its forms remains a major public health challenge that touches the lives of nearly every American, either directly or indirectly. The newly formed AACR Cancer Centers Alliance will accelerate the pace of discovery by providing an ongoing mechanism for transferring new knowledge, sharing resources, developing national demonstration projects, and driving innovation that impacts cancer science, cancer care delivery, and science and health policy.