Citations

AbstractBackgroundIn the management of Gram‐negative bloodstream infection (GN‐BSI), short antimicrobial courses have been increasingly demonstrated to be non‐inferior to prolonged therapy, with lower risk of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) and emergence of multi‐drug resistant (MDR) organisms. However, immunocompromised hosts were excluded from these studies. We investigated outcomes of short (≤10 days), intermediate (11–14 days), and prolonged (≥15 days) antimicrobial durations for GN‐BSI in neutropenic patients.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted on neutropenic patients with monomicrobial GN‐BSI between 2018 and 2022. The primary outcome was a composite of all‐cause mortality and microbiologic relapse within 90 days after therapy completion. The secondary outcome was a composite of 90‐day CDI and development of MDR‐GN bacteria. Cox regression analysis with propensity score (PS) adjustment was used to compare outcomes between the three groups.ResultsA total of 206 patients were classified into short (n = 67), intermediate (n = 81), or prolonged (n = 58) duration. Neutropenia was predominantly secondary to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (48%) or hematologic malignancy (35%). The primary sources of infection included intra‐abdominal (51%), vascular catheter (27%), and urinary (8%). Most patients received definitive therapy with cefepime or carbapenem. No significant difference in the primary composite endpoint was observed for intermediate versus short (PS‐adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.89; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.39–2.03) or prolonged versus short therapy (PS‐aHR 1.20; 95% CI 0.52–2.74). There was no significant difference in the secondary composite endpoint of CDI or MDR‐GN emergence.ConclusionOur data suggest that short antimicrobial courses had comparable 90‐day outcomes as intermediate and prolonged regimens for GN‐BSI among immunocompromised patients with neutropenia. image

IMPORTANCE: Initial Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory illness Universal Study (VIRUS) Registry analysis suggested that improvements in critical care processes offered the greatest modifiable opportunity to improve critically ill COVID-19 patient outcomes. OBJECTIVES: The Structured Team-based Optimal Patient-Centered Care for Virus COVID-19 ICU Collaborative was created to identify and speed implementation of best evidence based COVID-19 practices. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This 6-month project included volunteer interprofessional teams from VIRUS Registry sites, who received online training on the Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and iNjury approach, a structured and systematic method for delivering evidence based critical care. Collaborators participated in weekly 1-hour videoconference sessions on high impact topics, monthly quality improvement (QI) coaching sessions, and received extensive additional resources for asynchronous learning. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Outcomes included learner engagement, satisfaction, and number of QI projects initiated by participating teams. RESULTS: Eleven of 13 initial sites participated in the Collaborative from March 2, 2021, to September 29, 2021. A total of 67 learners participated in the Collaborative, including 23 nurses, 22 physicians, 10 pharmacists, nine respiratory therapists, and three nonclinicians. Site attendance among the 11 sites in the 25 videoconference sessions ranged between 82% and 100%, with three sites providing at least one team member for 100% of sessions. The majority reported that topics matched their scope of practice (69%) and would highly recommend the program to colleagues (77%). A total of nine QI projects were initiated across three clinical domains and focused on improving adherence to established critical care practice bundles, reducing nosocomial complications, and strengthening patient- and family-centered care in the ICU. Major factors impacting successful Collaborative engagement included an engaged interprofessional team; an established culture of engagement; opportunities to benchmark performance and accelerate institutional innovation, networking, and acclaim; and ready access to data that could be leveraged for QI purposes. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Use of a virtual platform to establish a learning collaborative to accelerate the identification, dissemination, and implementation of critical care best practices for COVID-19 is feasible. Our experience offers important lessons for future collaborative efforts focused on improving ICU processes of care.

e22537 Background: Germline and tumor next-generation sequencing (NGS) are complementary tests whose benefit in capturing patients (pts) potentially eligible for precision therapies is maximized when the tests are paired, as qualifying pathogenic variants (PVs) are missed if either test was done in isolation (Lincoln et al. 2020). Germline NGS has the additional benefit of informing prevention through surveillance and cascade testing. We highlight the benefits of a universal approach to concurrent testing in a subset of the previously reported cohort of pan-cancer pts who underwent universal germline NGS (Samadder et al. 2020). Methods: Unselected pts with solid tumors underwent an 80+ gene germline panel and 315+ gene tumor panel. Variants in genes unique to the germline or tumor panels, including microsatellite instability (MSI) and tumor mutation burden (TMB), were also evaluated. Results: 104 pts [81.7% White, non-Hispanic, 71.2% male] with 23 cancer types [28% colorectal, 13% lung, 11% prostate, 49% other] were included. Five (5%) pts had no actionable tumor alterations or germline variants identified (Table). 18 pts (17%) had 19 pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) identified, 11 (58%) of which were detected on tumor NGS (Table). 92 pts had >1 tumor alteration identified, of which 12% were confirmed as PGVs (Table). Notably, tumor NGS revealed 81 pts (78%) pts with biomarkers that would could not have been identified with germline testing alone, such as variants in genes not on germline panel (80) or MSI-high (4), or TMB-high (21) status of the tumor. Conclusions: Germline and tumor NGS are complementary tests that often detect different actionable alterations. There is value in confirming both the presence and absence of somatic variants in the germline in order to make appropriate clinical recommendations for the patient and their family members. [Table: see text]

10520 Background: PATHFINDER (NCT04241796) was a prospective, interventional return of results study that enrolled 6,662 participants (pts) from 7 US institutions to assess clinical implementation of a blood-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test. Test results for those with a cancer signal detected also included a cancer signal origin prediction designed to help guide diagnostic evaluations. We analyzed whether the diagnostic evaluations in PATHFINDER were appropriately directed by cancer signal origin predictions, assessed the residual risk of cancer after negative initial evaluation, and examined the role of whole-body imaging (WBI, defined as PET/CT or CT chest/abdomen/pelvis) in diagnostic evaluation. Methods: Analysis included pts with a cancer signal detected result from the two different versions of an MCED test evaluated in PATHFINDER. Prespecified criteria blinded to study results were used to define expected diagnostic evaluations by cancer signal origin prediction. These criteria were then used to judge concordance between cancer signal origin predictions and the diagnostic evaluation actually performed. Definitive cancer or no cancer diagnosis (cancer status at end of study [EOS]) was assessed at 12 months after enrollment (EOS). Results: 39 pts had cancer signal detected results by both test versions. Diagnostic evaluations were consistent with cancer signal origin in 30/39 (77%) cases. Diagnostic resolution was achieved in 32/39 (82%) pts after initial evaluation, while 7/39 (18%) required additional workup. 25 of the 32 (78%) pts who achieved diagnostic resolution after initial evaluation had a cancer signal origin-guided workup. Additional evaluation of the 7 pts not achieving initial diagnostic resolution was based on persistent clinical suspicion of cancer due to prior cancer history (n = 1) or abnormal/equivocal findings on initial evaluation (n = 6). Additional workup led to diagnostic resolution in all 7 cases (3 with cancer and 4 with no cancer confirmed at EOS). WBI was ordered in 27 cases, of whom 9 had a prior cancer history, 10 had non-localizing cancer signal origin (hematologic or indeterminate), and 1 had both. WBI was equivocal or had no impact on diagnostic resolution in 8/27 (30%) cases. Conclusions: Most cases resulted in diagnostic resolution after cancer signal origin-directed diagnostic workup. In pts with a cancer history and negative initial evaluations, and those with equivocal initial evaluations, there was still a risk of cancer, suggesting the need for additional evaluation. WBI was used mostly in those with a cancer history or non-localizing cancer signal origins, and had no impact on diagnosis in almost one-third of pts. Clinical trial information: NCT04241796 .

e15599 Background: Screening and removal of pre-malignant adenomas has reduced CRC incidence in adults older than 50 years (later onset CRC [LOCRC]), but EOCRC incidence has increased by 1-2% annually since the 1990s. The liver is the commonest site of CRC metastasis, and EOCRC presents with more advanced stage compared with LOCRC. Oligometastasis (OM) refers to potentially resectable CRC, and complete resection of CRC primary and OM is associated with improved survival and potential cure. Here, we examined treatment outcomes of EOCRC with synchronous liver oligometastases (sLiOM) at our institution. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of institutional electronic health records and identified 160 EOCRC patients with sLiOM treated with curative intent in the last decade. Demographics, treatment, and follow up data were recorded, and analysis for survival outcomes performed. The study protocol was exempt after review by Mayo Clinic institutional review board. Results: Of 160 patients, median age at diagnosis was 43 years. Primary tumor was in the left colorectum in 73% and right colon in 26% of patients. Metastasis was limited to the liver only in 64%, and liver metastasis was solitary in 14% of patients (table 1). Fluoropyrimidine doublet backbone (81%) was more commonly used compared to triplet (19%), with doublet + bevacizumab (41%) as the most common regimen. Hepatectomy only (59%), combined hepatectomy with ablation (32%), ablation only (5%), transarterial radioembolization (2%), and trans arterial embolization (1%) were the modalities employed for sLiOM. Of the 148 patients who underwent hepatectomy, R0 resection was achieved in 51%. After a median follow-up of 37 months, progression-free survival was 11.6 mos (95% CI 9-14mos) and median overall was 83.6 mos (95% CI 62-105mos). The median time to liver progression was 16 mos (95% CI 12-20 mos). At data cut off, 41 patients (26%) were alive and disease-free, and 60 patients (38%) were alive and disease free in the liver only. Conclusions: This multi-site, retrospective analysis of EOCRC patients demonstrates excellent survival outcomes with localized treatment of sLiOM. Median OS in this cohort compares favorably to previously reported mOS of 36 months in EOCRC patients (Arhin et al, 2021). Cure is not often achieved even after treatment of sLiOM in this cohort, suggesting aggressive disease biology and the need for improved patient selection. [Table: see text]

TPS3629 Background: For patients with oligometastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), aggressive local therapy of isolated metastases, particularly in the liver, has been associated with long-term progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) primarily based on retrospective evidence. However, in patients with limited metastatic CRC that is deemed inoperable or those with additional disease outside of the liver or lungs, the role of local ablative therapies, including microwave ablation (MWA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), to render patients disease free is less clear. Further, despite the long history of treating oligometastatic CRC with local therapy, which is provider biased and not evidence based, questions remain regarding the benefit of extending the paradigm of metastatic directed therapy to patients with more extensive disease. This trial seeks to use a pragmatic multimodality approach that mirrors the current clinical dilemma. This study is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of adding total ablative therapy (TAT) of all sites of disease to standard of care systemic treatment in those with limited metastatic CRC. Methods: A022101 is a National Clinical Trials Network randomized phase III study planned to enroll 364 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic CRC (BRAF wild-type, microsatellite stable) with ≤4 sites of metastatic disease on baseline imaging. Liver-only metastatic disease is not permitted, and lesions must be amenable to any combination of surgical resection, MWA, and/or SBRT with SBRT required for at least one lesion. Patients receive first-line systemic therapy for 4-6 months and are then randomized 1:1, stratified by number of metastatic organ sites (1-2 vs. 3-4), timing of metastatic disease diagnosis (de novo vs. secondary), and presence of metastatic disease outside the liver and lungs in at least one site. Patients in Arm 1 will receive TAT which consists of treatment of all metastatic sites with SBRT ± MWA ± surgical resection followed by standard of care systemic therapy. Patients in Arm 2 will continue with standard of care systemic therapy alone. The primary endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints include event-free survival, treatment-related toxicities, and local recurrence with exploratory biomarker analyses. The study needs 346 evaluable patients combined in the 2 arms to demonstrate an improvement in OS with a hazard ratio of 0.7 to provide 80% power with a one-sided alpha of 5%. The trial utilizes a group sequential design with two interim analyses (25% and 50% of events) for futility. The trial activated in January 2023 and recruitment is ongoing. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org. U10CA180820 (ECOG-ACRIN); U10CA180868 (NRG); U10CA180888 (SWOG); Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05673148 Clinical trial information: NCT05673148 .

3580 Background: TAS-102 (FTD/TPI) is a combination of a nucleoside analogue and a thymidine phosphorylase inhibitor, and has showed activity in 5FU-resistant CRC. Nal-IRI achieves higher intra-tumor concentrations than irinotecan (Iri; 142-fold) and its major metabolite, SN-38 (9-fold). This resulted in superior anti-tumor activity compared to free Iri in multiple tumor xenografts. Furthermore, multiple clinical trials have established the activity of nal-IRI in combination with 5FU in pancreaticobiliary cancers. The combination of nal-IRI with the more potent nucleoside analogue TAS-102 may thus result in a more effective systemic therapy. We conducted this study to define the safety and efficacy of the combination of TAS-102 and nal-IRI in advanced CRC. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) on this investigator-initiated phase II study had advanced CRC and must have had disease progression on at least one prior therapy. Additional inclusion criteria - measurable disease, ECOG PS 0-1 & adequate organ function. Based on previously published dose escalation phase I data, the pts were treated at the recommended phase II dose of TAS-102 (given orally at 35mg/m2 bid on days 1-5) and nal-IRI (60mg/m2 IV on day 1) in 14-day cycles. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) = complete (CR) + partial (PR) response per RECIST v1.1. Multiple secondary endpoints included safety/tolerability, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), disease control rate (DCR) and duration of response (DoR). Results: Twenty-two pts were enrolled, of whom 20 were evaluable for response. Male - 50%; ECOG PS 1 – 75%; African Americans – 38%; median age - 58yrs (interquartile range [IQR] 49-67). Median line of prior therapy was 1 (IQR 1-2) and 13.6% (3 pts enrolled during the dose escalation phase) had received prior Iri. 47.6% received concurrent Bevacizumab. ORR was 15% (3 PR, 0 CR). 60% had stable disease (SD) as best response; DCR of 75%. mPFS - 9.7 mos (95% CI: 5.6, 14.2); mOS - 10.1 mos (95% CI: 7.3, 15.9). 12-month PFS and OS rates were 34.6% and 39.5% respectively. At a median follow up of 11.9 mos, DoR was yet to be determined and 50% of the pts had maintained response for 12 mos. Median duration of progression free among pts with SD was 7.6 mos (95% CI: 4.6, 13.2), with a 12-month survival rate of 47.7% (95% CI: 15.5%, 74.5%). Median time to response (TTR) was 4.8mos. Most common treatment related toxicities included fatigue and neutropenia (G3; 27.3% each); anemia and leucopenia (G3; 18.2% each). Other G3 AEs included febrile neutropenia, diarrhea, hypokalemia, lymphopenia and nausea (4.5% each). Conclusions: We demonstrated that the combination of TAS-102 and nal-IRI had an acceptable safety profile, and showed antitumor activity in patients with advanced CRC. Additional biomarker analyses such as survival correlation with UGT1A1 phenotype and RAS mutational status are ongoing. (NCT03368963). Clinical trial information: NCT03368963 .

3579 Background: Panitumumab (Pmab) is a recombinant monoclonal antibody that binds specifically to the human epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and it is indicated for the treatment of metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC). However, the objective response rates (ORR) for the single agent are historically about 8-11%. EGFR inhibition induces synthetic lethality with poly ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) such as Niraparib, by attenuating DNA repair pathways. Combining PARP and EGFR inhibition has the potential to confer synergistic benefit, while also ameliorating resistance mechanism to EGFRi. We conducted this study to define the safety and efficacy of the combination of Niraparib and Pmab in RAS wildtype (WT) mCRC. Methods: Patients (pts) with RAS WT mCRC who have progressed on at least one line of systemic chemotherapy were eligible for the trial. Other selected inclusion criteria were ≥18 years of age, ECOG PS 0-1 and measurable disease per RECIST 1.1. Pmab was administered at 6 mg/kg IV on days 1 & 15 of each 28-day cycle, while Niraparib was taken orally at 200mg or 300mg (based on body weight and platelet count) daily throughout the cycle. The primary endpoint was clinical benefit rate (CBR) defined as complete (CR) + partial (PR) response + stable disease (SD) per RECIST v1.1. Multiple secondary endpoints included safety/tolerability, ORR, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and duration of response (DoR). Results: A safety run-in cohort of 6 pts was initially enrolled. Following a preplanned safety analysis showing an acceptable toxicity profile, an additional 19 pts were enrolled. Of the total 25 enrolled pts, 24 were evaluable for response. Male - 50%; Whites/African Americans/Asians – 65.2%/21.7%/13%; median age – 58.5yrs. The majority had left sided tumor (92%) and the median line of prior therapy was 2 (range 1-4). CBR was 83.3% (0 CR, 6 PR, 14 SD) and ORR was 25%. mPFS – 5.6mos (95% CI: 3.7, 6.9); mOS – 20.9mos (95% CI: 9.2, NR). Six-month PFS and OS rates were 48.4% and 100% respectively. At a median follow up time of 7.5mos (95% CI: 4.2, 10.4), 3 patients remained on treatment and DoR was yet to be determined. Muco-cutaneous adverse events (AEs) of any grade included rash (58.4%), oral mucositis (20.8%), dry skin (16.7%) and paronychia (4.2%). Most common (grade > 2) treatment related AEs (TRAEs) were anemia (G3; 12.5%), dermatitis, oral mucositis, hypertension and neutropenia (G3; 4.2% each). There were no grade 4-5 TRAEs. Conclusions: The combination of Pmab and Niraparib had an acceptable safety profile, and showed considerable antitumor activity in pts with advanced RAS WT mCRC compared to historical rates. Additional biomarker analyses such as survival correlation with immune cell infiltration in paired skin biopsies and HER2/BRAF mutational status are ongoing. Funding and product (Niraparib) for the study were provided by GSK (NCT03983993). Clinical trial information: NCT03983993 .

3531 Background: Homologous recombination deficient (HRD) colorectal cancer (CRC) has improved overall survival (OS) when exposed to DNA damaging agents (DDA) oxaliplatin (OX) and irinotecan (IR). However, this OS benefit is only observed in HRD mutated CRC. Low expression of wild type (WT) BRCA1 RNA displays prolonged OS in ovarian cancer; this finding has not been investigated in CRC or outside BRCA. We investigate if low expression of WT HR genes is associated with prolonged OS in response to DDA. Methods: A total of 12,860 CRC patients tumor biopsies were analyzed by next-generation sequencing (592, NextSeq; WES, WTS NovaSeq). Patients with HRD mutations and MSI-H were excluded (N = 935). 11,925 patients were included in the analysis. A total of 11 core ( BARD1, BLM, BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, MRE11, NBN, PALB2, RAD50, RAD51, RAD51B) and 7 related ( BAP1, WRN, DNMT3A, ERCC1, FANCA, FANCF, RECQL4) HR genes were analyzed. Samples were classified by RNA expression percentiles within the studied cohort. Real world OS was extracted from insurance claims and calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates for molecularly defined cohorts from first of OX or IR to last contact. Results: OS benefit is seen in low RNA expression (bottom 10%) compared to high expression (top 10%) of all core WT HR genes except RAD51B, BARD1 and BRCA2 in response to IR. We observe a progressively longer OS with lower associated RNA expression in response to DDA. OS of nearly 7 years was observed in low expressing BRCA1 and RAD51 following IR exposure and 4.5-year OS benefit when compared to high expression of these genes. OS benefit in response to OX was less robust but significantly prolonged in BRCA1 and BRIP1 (Table). Patients harboring HRD mutations had similar OS to WT HR RNA low (bottom 10%) in response to OX (HR = 0.75; p = 0.1) and IR (HR = 0.82; p = 0.36). Conclusions: Here we report a novel subclass of CRC defined as patients with low RNA expressing WT HR genes that exhibit differential sensitivity to DDA. Significantly longer survival is noted in CRC with low expression BRCA1, RAD51 and BLM, while post-OX survival was significantly prolonged with low expression of BRCA1, BRIP1 and FANCA. Further characterization of sensitive HR genes will better predict DDA sensitivity and impact treatment sequencing. [Table: see text]

3528 Background: Tucatinib (TUC) is a highly selective HER2-directed TKI approved by the FDA in combination w/trastuzumab (Tras) for treatment (tx) of pts w/ RAS wild-type HER2+ unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) that has progressed following tx w/ fluoropyrimidine-, oxaliplatin-, and irinotecan-based chemotherapy. There are currently no established best practices for HER2 testing/interpretation in mCRC. Here we present results of central HER2 testing across multiple platforms and response to tx for MOUNTAINEER pts treated w/ TUC + Tras based on central HER2 status. Methods: MOUNTAINEER (NCT03043313) enrolled pts w/ local HER2+ mCRC using ≥1 method: IHC, ISH, and/or NGS testing; retrospective central assessment of HER2 status was performed on multiple platforms. Pts in cohorts A+B were treated w/ TUC + Tras; pts in cohort C were treated w/ TUC monotherapy. Confirmed objective response rates (cORRs) using RECIST v1.1 per BICR, DOR, and PFS were calculated for pts treated w/ TUC + Tras based on each central testing method. Results: 114 pts were enrolled in cohorts A (n = 45), B (n = 39), and C (n = 30) w/ HER2+ tumors per ≥1 local testing method. Of samples submitted for central testing for Cohorts A and B, 70 per IHC/FISH, 50 per tissue NGS, and 71 per blood NGS had evaluable results. In all cohorts, there was 81.0% (95% CI, 68.6-90.1) agreement between blood and tissue NGS, 92.6% (95% CI, 83.7-97.6) between IHC/FISH and tissue NGS, and 79.5% (95% CI, 69.2-87.6) between IHC/FISH and blood NGS. In cohorts A and B, pts w/ HER2+ tumors by central IHC/ISH had a mDOR of 16.4 months (95% CI: 10.6-25.5) and mPFS of 10.1 months (95% CI: 4.2-15.2). cORR was 41.1% to 47.7% for the 3 assays. Detailed HER2 results are presented in the Table. Conclusions: Percent agreement of HER2 status was highest w/ tissue-based platforms. Detection of HER2 amplification by ctNDA NGS is useful; however, pts w/o HER2 amplification should be confirmed w/ a tissue-based assay. HER2 status by all 3 platforms predicted tx response to TUC + Tras. cORR in IHC2+/ISH+ was numerically lower but remained clinically relevant. These data support use of the above methods to identify HER2+ mCRC patients that may benefit from TUC + Tras. Clinical trial information: NCT03043313 . [Table: see text]