Citations

Summary Functional ex vivo assays using live tumor tissues have demonstrated strong predictive accuracy for response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) but are not scalable, requiring manual processing of large resections collected at academic centers. Here, an ex vivo live tumor fragment (LTF) platform was developed using standard-of-care biopsies from 228 patients with suspected malignancy collected across prospective, multicenter observational trials and biobanks. Hierarchical clustering of ICI-mediated changes in cytokine production identified two groups: responders and nonresponders. A binary classifier (elive index) using 8 cytokines achieved an AUC of 0.99 for cluster prediction. elive index correctly predicted clinical benefit in 93% (26/28) of patients ( P = 3.2x10 -5 ) and accurately identified 83% (10/12) of objective responders. Critically, elive responders were identified among biomarker-negative patients, highlighting the platform as a scalable approach that complements existing companion diagnostics and expands the population of patients identified to benefit from ICI therapy.

Cutaneous metastases occur in up to 20% of patients with advanced melanoma and can be difficult to manage with systemic therapy alone. Pembrolizumab is a standard therapy with limited local treatment options for cutaneous manifestations. Imiquimod has shown activity in other skin cancers but is less well studied in melanoma. We conducted a pilot trial to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and preliminary efficacy of combining topical imiquimod with intravenous pembrolizumab in patients with unresectable melanoma with cutaneous metastases. This was a single-center, open-label, non-randomized interventional study (NCT03276832). Eligible patients received pembrolizumab IV every 21 days plus topical imiquimod 5% applied Monday–Friday each cycle. The primary endpoint was objective response rate per RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, and safety. In this study, seven patients were enrolled, five were male and two females; one was Hispanic and six were non-Hispanic White. Median treatment exposure was 8 cycles. ORR was 57.1%, with 3 patients (42.9%) achieving complete response, 1 partial response, and 2 stable disease. The 7-month PFS rate was 57.1%. At study closure, 4 patients remained alive without progression, 2 were alive following progression, and 1 had died of disease. Toxicities were mostly grade 1, with fatigue and anemia most common with minimal grade 2 events. The combination of topical imiquimod and pembrolizumab was feasible, safe, and demonstrated promising antitumor activity in unresectable cutaneous melanoma. A 42.9% CR rate in this small elderly cohort supports further evaluation of local immune modulation with systemic PD-1 blockade for cutaneous melanoma.

e21607 Background: The association between timing of palliative care referral and survival outcomes in patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBM) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors remains poorly characterized. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with MBM treated with combination ipilimumab and nivolumab at Mayo 3 sites from 2016 to 2024. Palliative care referral timing relative to MBM diagnosis was categorized as early (≤56 days), late ( > 56 days), or none. Patients without referral documentation were excluded from referral-based analyses. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using Kaplan–Meier methods and compared with log-rank tests. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify factors independently associated with OS, with stepwise selection (entry p < 0.25; stay p < 0.15). Results: Among 147 patients, 139 had referral information: 33 (23.7%) early, 56 (40.3%) late, and 50 (36.0%) no referral. Median OS differed significantly by referral timing (log-rank p < 0.0001): 2.8 months (early), 7.9 months (late), and 47.8 months (no referral). Among patients with ECOG 2–3, a higher proportion had early or late referral (each 42.9%) compared with no referral (14.3%), whereas patients with ECOG 0–1 were more evenly distributed across referral groups (early 21.6%, late 40.0%, none 38.4%). In multivariable analysis of 88 patients with complete covariate data, both early (HR 4.54; p = 0.0016) and late referral (HR 2.86; p = 0.011) were independently associated with worse OS compared with no referral. Progressive disease versus objective response (HR 4.45; p = 0.0002), hemorrhagic metastases (HR 2.79; p = 0.0015), male sex (HR 2.07; p = 0.044), and increasing age (HR 1.02 per year; p = 0.032) were also associated with inferior OS. Treatment with ipilimumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 3 mg/kg showed a trend toward improved OS compared with ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus nivolumab 1 mg/kg (HR 0.48; p = 0.055). Conclusions: Timing of palliative care referral was strongly associated with overall survival in patients with MBM treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab. Although patients with ECOG 2–3 were more frequently referred early or late, ECOG category overall did not clearly differentiate referral timing groups, suggesting referral may reflect unmeasured clinical factors beyond baseline performance status. Prospective studies incorporating more granular functional and symptom measures are needed to better define the role of palliative care integration in this population. Multivariable cox model for overall survival. Variable Comparison HR P value Referral timing Early vs None 4.54 0.0016 Late vs None 2.86 0.011 Best overall response PD vs ORR 4.45 0.0002 SD vs ORR 2.16 0.098 Hemorrhagic metastases Yes vs No 2.79 0.0015 Sex Male vs Female 2.07 0.044 Age Per year increase 1.02 0.032 Regimen Ipi1+Nivo3 vs Ipi3+Nivo1 0.48 0.055

e17027 Background: Guidelines recommend active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer and definitive therapy for high-risk disease. We evaluated national patterns of risk-misaligned care and the survival consequences of undertreatment. Methods: National Cancer Database prostate cancer cases diagnosed from 2010–2022 were analyzed. Low-risk disease was defined as clinical T1–T2, Grade Group 1, and PSA < 10; overtreatment was definitive treatment vs active surveillance or no treatment. High-risk disease was defined as Grade Group ≥4, PSA ≥20, or clinical T3–T4; undertreatment was no definitive local therapy or incomplete definitive therapy. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated factors associated with misalignment. Overall survival (OS) among high-risk patients was assessed using multivariable Cox regression. Results: Among low-risk patients (N = 124,562), overtreatment occurred in 40% of cases. Overtreatment was more common among young men (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.982; p < 0.001) and less common at academic centers (aOR 0.414; p = 0.015). Compared with White men, odds of overtreatment were lower among Black men (aOR 0.946; p = 0.002) and Asian men (aOR 0.827; p < 0.001), with additional variation by education and region (all p < 0.001). Among high-risk patients (N = 318,532), undertreatment affected 27.3% of patients and was more common among older men (aOR 1.061; p < 0.001). Compared with White men, undertreatment was higher among Black men (aOR 1.479; p < 0.001) and lower among Asian patients (aOR 0.863; p < 0.001) (overall race p < 0.001). Compared with private insurance, undertreatment was higher in Medicaid (aOR 2.038; p < 0.001) and uninsured patients (aOR 2.649; p < 0.001), and slightly lower with Medicare (aOR 0.931; p < 0.001) (overall insurance p < 0.001). Multiple comorbidities were associated with higher undertreatment (≥2 vs 0: aOR 1.252; p < 0.001). Facility type was not independently associated (p = 0.490), while region remained significant (overall p < 0.001). In the survival cohort (high risk) (N = 338,919), undertreatment was associated with substantially worse OS (HR 2.745, 95% CI 2.706–2.784; p < 0.001), adjusted for age (HR 1.056; p < 0.001), race (p = 0.001), insurance (p < 0.001), comorbidity (p < 0.001), income (overall p < 0.001), education (overall p < 0.001), and facility region (overall p < 0.001). Conclusions: Low-risk overtreatment remains common nationwide and varies across patient and health-system factors. In high-risk disease, undertreatment affects over one-quarter of patients and disproportionately impacts Black men and those with Medicaid or no insurance. Undertreatment confers a nearly threefold mortality hazard (adjusted HR 2.75; p < 0.001), highlighting a major national quality gap and the urgent need for system-level interventions to ensure equitable, guideline-concordant delivery of definitive therapy.

e13611 Background: Decentralized cancer care models may reduce treatment burden for patients with advanced prostate cancer (CaP), particularly those facing mobility, transportation, of scheduling challenges. However, prospective patient-reported experience and quality-of-life data comparing home- versus clinic-based oncology care remain limited. Mayo Clinic Cancer CARE Beyond Walls (CCBW) is a patient-centered program designed to deliver selected standard-of-care cancer therapies in the home with virtual clinical oversight. This observational study evaluated patient-reported experience, feasibility, safety, and quality of life among men with advanced or metastatic CaP receiving care at home. Methods: Men with advanced/metastatic CaP receiving active standard-of-care therapy including hormone-based treatments, oral anticancer therapies, anti-bone resorptive agents, or intravenous chemotherapy who were participating in a CCBW randomized trial were enrolled into a companion observational study. After confirmation of treatment tolerance in clinic, patients received home-based care for 24 weeks (Arm A) or in-clinic care for 8 weeks followed by home-based care for 16 weeks (Arm B). Patient-reported outcomes were collected at baseline and Weeks 8, 16, and 24, using CAHPS-based measures and CCBW-specific surveys assessing overall cancer care experience, patient preference for site of care, comfort with home infusions, functional/symptom assessment and quality of life. Descriptive analyses were performed. Results: Eighteen participants were analyzed (Arm A n = 10; Arm B n = 8). Participants were medically stable, and predominantly insured by Medicare. Survey completion was 100% at baseline and 83% at all follow-up time points. At Weeks 16 and 24 when all respondents had received home-based care, 100% and 92% reported being “quite a bit” or “very much” comfortable receiving treatment at home. Communication with at-home and remote nursing teams was rated highly, and most respondents reported transition, scheduling, and equipment use easy or very easy. At Weeks 16 and 24, 45% and 40% of respondents reported improved quality of life from receiving home-based care, with no reports of worsening. No emergency department visits, hospitalizations, or urgent care visits occurred in either arm. Conclusions: In this prospective, observational study, home-based oncology care delivered through CCBW was feasible, safe, and associated with high patient satisfaction among men with advanced CaP receiving diverse systemic therapies. These findings support further evaluation and expansion of decentralized care integrating home-based treatment with virtual clinical oversight.

9558 Background: Ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus nivolumab 1 mg/kg (Ipi3+Nivo1) is the standard immunotherapy regimen for metastatic melanoma with brain metastases (MBM) but is associated with significant immune-related toxicity, particularly neurologic toxicity. Ipilimumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 3 mg/kg (Ipi1+Nivo3) has demonstrated improved tolerability in extracranial melanoma, though comparative data in MBM are limited. We compared efficacy and toxicity of these dosing strategies in a multisite real-world cohort. Methods: We retrospectively identified patients with MBM treated with ipilimumab plus nivolumab across three Mayo Clinic sites between 2016 and 2024. Patients were classified by induction dosing as Ipi1+Nivo3 or Ipi3+Nivo1. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method and compared using log-rank tests. Best overall response (BOR) and toxicity outcomes were summarized descriptively. Results: Among 147 patients (Ipi1+Nivo3 n=32; Ipi3+Nivo1 n=115), 144 were evaluable for survival. Median age was higher in the Ipi1+Nivo3 group (69.5 vs 66.0 years); males predominated in both groups (71.9% vs 61.7%), and the cohort was predominantly White (>96%). Most patients had ECOG 0–1 in both groups (84.4% in Ipi1+ Nivo3 and 90.4% in Ipi3+Nivo1). BRAF mutation status was balanced between regimens, with approximately half of patients harboring BRAF-mutant disease (51.6% vs 53.2%). Median OS was 18.5 months (95% CI, 5.7–54.7) with Ipi1+Nivo3 versus 10.6 months (95% CI, 6.5–19.1) with Ipi3+Nivo1 (log-rank p=0.25). Two-year OS was 45.9% and 35.0%, and five-year OS was 24.5% and 19.2%, respectively. Median PFS was 7.3 months (95% CI, 1.8–10.9) versus 2.8 months (95% CI, 2.1–4.4) (log-rank p=0.16). BOR was available for 138 patients; objective response rates were 35.5% and 31.8%, respectively. 3–5 adverse events occurred in 24.1% of Ipi1+Nivo3 versus 30.5% of Ipi3+Nivo1 patients. Hospitalizations were less frequent (16.7% vs 36.1%), and neurologic adverse events occurred only with Ipi3+Nivo1 (11.9% vs 0%). Conclusions: In this multisite real-world MBM cohort, Ipi1+Nivo3 demonstrated comparable efficacy, numerically longer survival, and a more favorable toxicity profile compared with standard Ipi3+Nivo1. Notably, no neurologic toxicity was observed with the Ipi1+Nivo3 regimen. These findings support further prospective evaluation of lower dose ipilimumab strategies. Response and survival outcomes. Outcome Ipi1 + Nivo3 Ipi3 + Nivo1 Complete response (CR) 2 / 31 (6.5%) 8 / 107 (7.5%) Partial response (PR) 9 / 31 (29.0%) 26 / 107 (24.3%) Objective response rate (ORR = CR+PR) 11 / 31 (35.5%) 34 / 107 (31.8%) Disease control rate (DCR = CR+PR+SD) 18 / 31 (58.1%) 51 / 107 (47.7%) Median PFS, months (95% CI) 7.3 (1.8–10.9) 2.8 (2.1–4.4) 2-year PFS 27.6% 22.3% Median OS, months (95% CI) 18.5 (5.7–54.7) 10.6 (6.5–19.1) 2-year OS 45.9% 35.0% 5-year OS 24.5% 19.2%

9551 Background: Lymphodepleting (LD) chemotherapy is required prior to tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapy, yet the depth, kinetics, and completeness of peripheral T-cell recovery in practice remain poorly defined. Using a pooled, multi-institution cohort, we characterized longitudinal CD4 and CD8 T-cell reconstitution and the prevalence of CD4 lymphopenia following TIL therapy. Methods: We conducted a retrospective multicenter study across Mayo Clinic, Moffitt Cancer Center, and Massachusetts General Hospital of patients with metastatic melanoma treated with TIL (N = 41, median follow-up 7.6 months). Absolute CD4 and CD8 T-cell counts and CD4:CD8 ratios were assessed at baseline (pre-LD), week 4, month 3, and month 6 post-TIL. Clinically significant CD4 lymphopenia was defined as CD4 < 200 cells/µL. All patients received Pneumocystis jirovecii and antiviral prophylaxis, with antibacterial and antifungal prophylaxis administered per institutional protocols. Post-TIL infections were recorded. Paired changes from baseline were evaluated using Wilcoxon signed-rank testing. Results: Median age was 65 years (range 35-79), and 68% were male. At baseline, 16 patients (39%) had CD4 counts below the institutional lower limit of normal prior to LD. Eighteen patients (44%) received bridging therapy prior to TIL and had lower baseline CD4 and CD8 counts compared with those who did not ( p < 0.05 for both); however, post-TIL CD4 and CD8 recovery trajectories did not differ between groups. CD4 counts declined sharply following LD and demonstrated incomplete and heterogeneous recovery. Median CD4 decreased from 490 cells/µL at baseline to 250 at week 4, 290 at month 3, and 220 at month 6, remaining significantly below baseline at all post-TIL timepoints ( p < 0.05). Clinically significant CD4 lymphopenia was observed in 45% (10/22) of evaluable patients at month 3 and in 50% (44%, 7/16) at month 6. In contrast, CD8 counts increased early after TIL (median 240 to 590 cells/µL at week 4; p = 0.004) and remained higher than baseline at month 6. The CD4:CD8 ratio inverted from a median of 2.02 at baseline to 0.46 at week 4 and remained below 1.0 through month 6, reflecting sustained CD4 suppression despite CD8 recovery. Post-TIL infections occurred despite widespread prophylaxis, including bacterial (13%), viral (10%), and fungal (4.9%) infections. Conclusions: In a multi-institution cohort, LD chemotherapy preceding TIL is associated with profound and prolonged CD4 T-cell suppression, persistent CD4:CD8 inversion, and a high prevalence of CD4 < 200 cells/µL through 6 months. These findings identify delayed immune reconstitution as a common and clinically relevant consequence of TIL therapy and support prospective optimization of antimicrobial prophylaxis duration, vaccination timing, and immune monitoring strategies.

2646 Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have transformed the management of many advanced cancers but identifying patients who are likely or unlikely to benefit from ICI treatment remains a critical challenge. Biomarkers, such as PD-L1, mismatch repair deficiency, and tumor mutational burden, capture only static, unidimensional features of the complex tumor microenvironment, and therefore inadequately predict response to immunotherapy in patients. In contrast, live tumor fragments (LTFs) preserve the full complexity of the tumor microenvironment and enable functional ex vivo assessments of ICI activity. Previous efforts have had limited clinical applicability because they required larger resection specimens often collected at a single academic center. Here, the predictive capability of an ex vivo platform using core needle and forceps biopsies from multiple clinical sites was assessed and compared to approved biomarkers. Methods: Patients with eligible solid tumors (where ICI has an indication, including renal, non-small cell lung, bladder, colorectal, and triple-negative breast cancer, and others) were enrolled in ongoing, prospective observational trials (NCT05478538, NCT05520099, NCT06349642). Biopsies were cut into LTFs, encapsulated in hydrogel, and treated sequentially with IgG antibody followed by ICI (αPD-[L]1 with or without αCTLA-4). Cytokine production was assessed by a multiplexed bead-based immunoassay at multiple time points during ex vivo treatment. Using receiver operating characteristic and precision recall analyses, we identified 9 predictive cytokines (including IFN-γ, granzyme B, and CXCL9/10), which were used to develop the Elephas score (ELP-score) to assess cytokine response to ex vivo ICI treatment. Results: Of 167 eligible patient specimens, 85% (n = 142) passed quality control metrics and 130 were used for model development. Hierarchical clustering of cytokine production revealed that 27% (n = 35) of patient specimens exhibited a cytokine response to ICI. In a validation set of 20 tumors, collected from patients who were subsequently treated with ICI, ELP-score positivity correctly identified 9 of 11 patients (82%) who had an objective response (PR/CR) to ICI, including 2 patients who were negative for FDA-approved standard-of-care ICI biomarkers. Furthermore, 5 of 5 patients (100%) with clinical progressive disease were correctly characterized as ELP-score negative. Conclusions: Using routine biopsy specimens, the ex vivo live tumor platform accurately identifies patients with clinical response to ICI therapy, including those incorrectly identified by conventional biomarkers. Ongoing efforts will test these findings in an additional validation set. If confirmed, the ex vivo LTF platform could enable the identification of patients likely to benefit from ICI therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT05478538 , NCT05520099 , NCT06349642 .

Localized cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) has a favorable prognosis, unlike advanced disease, especially with clinical perineural invasion (PNI), which poses substantial management challenges due to aggressivity and higher recurrence, metastasis, and mortality risks. PNI, a high-risk staging feature, has worse outcomes, particularly when clinically evident rather than incidental. Clinical PNI (cPNI) is evident by clinical symptoms (such as pain, paresthesia, or motor deficits) or radiologic findings, whereas incidental PNI (iPNI) is identified only histologically without associated symptoms or radiologic evidence. PNI remains a novel area with varying practice patterns across institutions. Improving risk stratification and tailoring multidisciplinary approaches are critical for optimizing outcomes. Our review outlines clinical practice patterns at our institution, providing insights into managing cSCC with PNI, focusing on diagnosis, imaging, staging, and emerging immunotherapies. A structured search was conducted using the terms “perineural invasion,” “cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma,” and “immunotherapy.” cPNI has a poor prognosis and requires nuanced clinical decision-making. Surgery and radiation remain central to management. Adjuvant therapy offers substantial survival benefit in cSCC with PNI, with improved disease-free and overall survival compared with surgery alone, supporting its use in appropriately selected high-risk patients. Traditional systemic therapies, including cisplatin and cetuximab, remain foundational but have shown only moderate response rates and limited durability in advanced or neurotropic cSCC. In contrast, immunotherapy—now preferred for advanced or unresectable cases—has transformed management, with programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitors showing promising results (up to 69% response rate) and disease stabilization. Neoadjuvant immunotherapy may enable tumor downstaging, improve radiation planning, and reduce surgical morbidity. Imaging for squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) with PNI aids staging and surveillance, but symptoms remain key for detecting recurrence. Our multidisciplinary approach emphasizes personalized care. Larger trials are needed to define the optimal role and sequencing of immunotherapy in this high-risk patient population.