Citations

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%

9021 Background: An escape room is a team-based activity in which participants collaborate to solve puzzles within a fixed time limit and escape. Prior studies demonstrate high learner satisfaction and improved teamwork and communication with medical education escape rooms. To date, no published reports describe an escape room designed specifically for hematology/oncology (hem/onc) fellows. As part of Hem/Onc Curriculum, we designed and implemented a hem/onc-focused escape room and evaluated learner satisfaction and perceived learning impact. Methods: The escape room was designed using evidence-based learning science principles (Table 1). Teams worked to solve sequential puzzles, centered on a patient case, addressing key hem/onc concepts, including transfusion medicine, peripheral blood smears, lymphoma classification, and coagulation disorders. Each solved puzzle revealed additional patient laboratory and pathology data. Successful completion required teams to diagnose the patient and select appropriate treatment. Following the activity, teams participated in a facilitator-led debrief focused on team dynamics, communication, and problem solving. Teams observed each other and shared feedback. A larger group debrief co-led by chief fellows and faculty reviewed learning objectives and key takeaways. Learner outcomes were assessed using a post-activity survey evaluating satisfaction, engagement, and impact on learning. Results: Eighteen learners participated, including 14 hem/onc fellows, 1 APP hem/onc fellow, and 3 internal medicine residents. Three of four teams escaped within 1 hour (mean completion time, 52 minutes). All participants provided positive verbal feedback. Fifteen learners completed the post-activity survey, and all respondents reported satisfaction with the activity and would recommend it for future fellows. One-word descriptors included “engaging,” “fun,” and “challenging.” Most respondents (93.3%) agreed that the activity reinforced key hem/onc concepts and improved confidence in clinical problem-solving. All learners felt the activity supported learning, and 93.3% reported that collaboration enhanced the learning experience. Participants identified team-based problem solving, clinical application, and interactive puzzles as the most effective components. Conclusions: A hem/onc escape room resulted in high learner satisfaction and reinforced hem/onc knowledge and clinical problem-solving. This feasible, fun, and innovative activity complements traditional fellowship education by leveraging adult learning principles through gamified, team-based learning and should be incorporated into training programs’ curriculum. Learning science principles applied in a hem/onc escape room. Active Learning Belonging Contrasting Cases Debriefing Deliberate Practice Elaboration Generation Listening and Sharing Reward Worked Examples

Abstract Background: Melanoma brain metastases (MBM) represent a biologically distinct and clinically aggressive subset of melanoma. Comprehensive molecular characterization focused on intracranial disease remains limited. We aimed to define the genomic landscape of MBM and compare these findings with public melanoma datasets. Methods: We retrospectively identified 166 patients with histologically confirmed MBM across Mayo Clinic tri-sites (2011-2025). Molecular testing was performed in 123 patients (74.1%). Comprehensive next-generation sequencing (NGS; ≥300-gene platforms including Tempus, FoundationOne, Caris, NeoGenomics, and MayoComplete Solid Tumor Panel) was available in 41 patients (24.7%). Intermediate-depth profiling using the MayoComplete Melanoma Panel (17 genes) was performed in 21 patients (12.7%), and a targeted 5-gene melanoma driver panel (BRAF, NRAS, KIT, GNAQ, GNA11) in 52 patients (31.3%). cfDNA-based NGS was available in 12 patients (7.2%). Genomic alterations were summarized and benchmarked against TCGA-SKCM and MSK-IMPACT datasets via cBioPortal. We considered assay heterogeneity, as Mayo panels varied in sequencing depth and CNV coverage, and hybrid-capture platforms often under-detect TERT promoter hotspots. Results: Patients had a median age of 67 years, and 63% were male. BRAF mutations occurred in 48.8% (BRAF V600E/K 41.6%; non-V600 7.2%). Additional MAPK alterations included NRAS (17.5%), KIT (5.4%), GNAQ (1.2%), and GNA11 (0.6%). In the comprehensive NGS subset, tumor-suppressor alterations included CDKN2A (17.5%), PTEN (7.8%), NF1 (9.0%), TP53 (8.4%), and TERT promoter mutations (22.9%). Median TMB was 11.55 mut/Mb (IQR 5.0-25.5). Co-alterations included BRAF+CDKN2A (7.2%), BRAF+PTEN (4.2%), NRAS+CDKN2A (4.2%), NRAS+PTEN (1.2%), and CDKN2A+PTEN (3.6%); overall, 18.1% harbored MAPK driver + tumor-suppressor co-alterations. Compared with TCGA and MSK cohorts, MBM showed similar MAPK driver frequencies but fewer MAPK + tumor-suppressor co-alterations and lower CDKN2A, PTEN, and TP53 disruption, alongside a more prevalent of TERT promoter mutations (22.9% vs 7% and 2.1%), which may partly reflect coverage differences. Conclusion: MBM exhibit a distinct genomic profile characterized by reduced tumor-suppressor loss, fewer MAPK-tumor-suppressor co-alterations, and higher prevalence of TERT promoter mutations. While assay heterogeneity limits direct cross-cohort comparisons, these patterns suggest potentially distinct biological features of intracranial melanoma and underscore the need for harmonized, MBM-specific molecular studies to guide therapeutic development. Citation Format: Dina Elantably, Joseph B. Parker, Jakob Hamilton, Ahmed Abdelhakeem, Oluwatayo Adeoye, Saivaishnavi Kamatham, Winston Tan, Arkadiusz Z. Dudek, Anastasios Dimou, Matthew S. Block, Robert McWilliams, Svetomir Markovic, Mahesh Seetharam, Roxana Dronca, Ruqin Chen. Genomic landscape of melanoma brain metastases: Real-world analysis and comparison with public melanoma cohorts [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2026; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2026 Apr 17-22; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2026;86(7 Suppl):Abstract nr 2107.

Anal squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC) is a rare malignancy of the lower gastrointestinal tract, with distant metastases typically involving the liver and lungs. Metastasis to the kidneys is uncommon, and only one prior case has been reported in the literature. Herein, we report a rare presentation of a patient with biopsy-confirmed metastatic ASCC presenting as bilateral renal lesions. We then provide a review of the literature for rare metastatic presentations of ASCC, highlighting all the cases described in the literature. Clinicians should maintain a high index of suspicion for unusual metastatic sites, perform targeted imaging and biopsy when indicated, and consider systemic therapies to optimize outcomes in rare metastatic presentations.

741 Background: IP strategies directly target the peritoneal compartment in PDAC, where systemic chemotherapy alone demonstrates poor efficacy. Approaches include HIPEC, normothermic intraperitoneal paclitaxel (NIPEC/IP-PTX) given with systemic therapy, and PIPAC. This systematic review synthesizes evidence on feasibility, perioperative safety, and clinical outcomes of IP therapy in PDAC. Methods: We conducted a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane databases for studies published through August 2025. Eligible studies included prospective or retrospective studies evaluating HIPEC, NIPEC/IP-PTX, or PIPAC with extractable safety or oncologic outcomes. Outcomes included feasibility, 30-day mortality, perioperative complications, locoregional recurrence (LRR) in the adjuvant setting, overall survival (OS) from peritoneal metastasis (PM) diagnosis or first IP therapy, conversion-to-resection, and histologic/radiologic response. Results: Sixteen studies met criteria, including 7 on HIPEC, 5 on NIPEC/IP-PTX, and 4 on PIPAC. In the adjuvant setting, 2 HIPEC studies demonstrated high feasibility (>85%), 0–5% 30-day mortality, and complication rates comparable to pancreatectomy. A randomized trial reported significantly lower LRR with adjuvant gemcitabine HIPEC. Median OS in treated arms was ~17–18 months, with 1-year OS ~63%. In the cytoreductive surgery (CRS) plus HIPEC setting for isolated peritoneal metastases, patients achieved CC-0/1 cytoreduction in most cases, with median OS ~24–41 months and 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS ranging 60–91%, 33–66%, and 39–59%, respectively. Thirty-day mortality was 0–4.3%, and major morbidity 20–43%. For NIPEC/IP-PTX, multicenter and single-institution cohorts consistently reported median OS ~14–16 months, 1-year OS ~60%, and conversion-to-resection rates of 17–24%. Ascites control and feasibility were reproducible, and device-related adverse events were generally manageable. PIPAC programs established oxaliplatin at 120 mg/m² as the recommended dose, with ~50–60% histologic regression by PRGS and disease stabilization in 50–60% after 1–2 cycles. Median OS in PDAC subsets was ~9–13 months, with low major toxicity, though early discontinuation was frequent in progressive disease. Conclusions: Intraperitoneal therapies for PDAC are feasible and show promising biologic and clinical signals. Adjuvant HIPEC reduces locoregional recurrence without excess mortality; CRS plus HIPEC can achieve multi-year survival in selected patients with isolated PM metastases; NIPEC/IP-PTX offers reproducible survival and conversion-to-resection; and PIPAC provides histologic regression with acceptable safety.

117 Background: Oxaliplatin remains a cornerstone of colorectal cancer (CRC) chemotherapy but is frequently complicated by chemotherapy-associated liver injury (CALI). This manifests as sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS), nodular regenerative hyperplasia (NRH), or porto-sinusoidal vascular disorder (PSVD). These microvascular changes lead to portal hypertension (PH), splenomegaly, and thrombocytopenia, interrupting chemotherapy delivery and compromising survivorship. Despite increasing recognition, the incidence, spectrum, and management of oxaliplatin-induced portal hypertension (OIPH) remain undefined. Methods: We systematically reviewed PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane through August 2025 for prospective and retrospective cohorts of oxaliplatin-treated CRC patients reporting OIPH incidence, pathology, radiology, or interventional management. Case reports were excluded. Outcomes included incidence, latency, complications, misdiagnosis, and interventions such as bevacizumab and partial splenic embolization (PSE). Results: Eight studies including 730 patients were analyzed. OIPH developed in ~20–30% of patients, with 2–5% progressing to clinically overt disease requiring variceal banding, Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt (TIPS), PSE, or management of liver failure. Latency to presentation was typically 4–10 years after oxaliplatin exposure. Common features included splenomegaly, thrombocytopenia, varices, and ascites. Histopathology consistently showed sinusoidal dilatation, congestion, perisinusoidal fibrosis, NRH, and microthrombi, confirming endothelial-mediated injury. Up to half of chronic cases were misclassified as metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD/NAFLD) or cryptogenic cirrhosis. Bevacizumab demonstrated consistent hepatoprotection, delaying splenic enlargement and reducing thrombocytopenia, likely via preservation of sinusoidal endothelial integrity and reduction of von Willebrand factor–mediated platelet microthrombi. Interventional radiology provided therapeutic options: in a prospective phase II study, PSE restored platelet counts >130×10⁹/L in 94% and enabled chemotherapy resumption within a median of 14 days, with no grade ≥3 adverse events. Conclusions: OIPH is an under-recognized complication of CRC chemotherapy, with latency spanning years after treatment. Splenomegaly and thrombocytopenia serve as early clinical signals, while misdiagnosis as MASLD or cirrhosis is common. Bevacizumab provides hepatoprotection, and PSE offers a safe and effective option for chemotherapy-limiting thrombocytopenia. Routine monitoring of spleen volume and platelet trends should be integrated into follow-up, and prospective validation of prophylactic and interventional strategies is urgently needed.

Background: Peritoneal metastasis represents an aggressive disease pattern in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), traditionally associated with poor survival and limited therapeutic options. Emerging intraperitoneal chemotherapy strategies—including hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), normothermic intraperitoneal paclitaxel (NIPEC/IP-PTX), and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC)—have been investigated to improve local tumor control and survival outcomes. Methods: We systematically reviewed published studies evaluating HIPEC, NIPEC/IP-PTX, and PIPAC in PDAC, including adjuvant, cytoreductive, and palliative settings. Study characteristics, feasibility, perioperative outcomes, oncologic outcomes, and risk of bias were analyzed. Results: Across modalities, intraperitoneal treatment strategies demonstrated acceptable feasibility and safety profiles in appropriately selected patients. Adjuvant HIPEC following pancreatectomy showed reduced local–regional recurrence signals in limited cohorts. CRS + HIPEC among patients with isolated peritoneal metastases yielded encouraging multi-year survival in highly selected candidates achieving complete cytoreduction. NIPEC/IP-PTX demonstrated favorable ascites control, symptom relief, and potential conversion to resection in select patients. PIPAC was primarily used in unresectable, heavily pretreated, palliative peritoneal metastasis settings, with goals centered on disease stabilization, histologic regression, and symptom control rather than curative intent. Conclusions: Intraperitoneal chemotherapy strategies in PDAC appear feasible with signals of meaningful clinical benefit in select settings. While CRS + HIPEC may benefit carefully selected metastatic patients, NIPEC/IP-PTX and PIPAC hold value primarily in symptom control and disease stabilization. Larger prospective trials are needed to define patient selection, optimize treatment protocols, and clarify survival benefit.

465 Background: Molecular testing is crucial in advancing precision medicine, enabling oncologists to tailor targeted treatment strategies for cancer patients (pts). The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and ASCO guidelines recommend comprehensive biomarker testing for pts with mPC. However, compliance can vary considerably among institutions. This study aimed to assess current practices of molecular testing in diverse healthcare settings across the state of Florida and identify opportunities for improvement to optimize outcomes for pts diagnosed with mPC. Methods: We conducted a detailed 12-question survey, distributed both electronically and in-person to evaluate the molecular testing practices of healthcare providers throughout the state. The survey assessed multiple parameters including adherence to testing, reviewing test results to guide treatment decisions, and the availability of different supportive resources in biomarker testing. This initiative was executed in partnership with the Florida Society of Clinical Oncology and industry partners. Results: A total of 40 responses were collected from 11 institutions in Florida, including 5 academic centers and 6 community-based hospitals. Notably, 22.5% of respondents reported that their institutions either do not fully comply with NCCN guidelines or lack protocols to identify eligible pts and 67.5% stated they are responsible for their own biomarker education and updates. Only 56.4% consistently review molecular testing results during disease progression to guide treatment decisions. Nearly all institutions lack clinical decision support tools in the electronic medical records (EMR) to support testing, and 82.5% receive biomarker results outside the EMR. Additionally, 38.5% lack a standard process for obtaining prior authorization for testing. Furthermore, 38.5% lack a multidisciplinary review process for genetic test results, and 76.3% reported that their biomarker testing process does not involve geneticists or genetic counselors. Conclusions: Our study identified critical gaps in adherence to biomarker testing guidelines with many practices lacking decision support tools across healthcare institutions in Florida. Potential areas for improvement include better standardization of result integration into EMR, targeted educational initiatives, and stronger multidisciplinary collaborations. The implementation of these measures aims to improve the quality of care and outcomes for pts with mPC.

e16330 Background: Sarcomatoid hepatocellular carcinoma (SHC) is a rare and aggressive variant of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), accounting for less than 2% of all primary liver cancers. Characterized by the presence of both epithelial and mesenchymal components, SHC demonstrates a high degree of cellular plasticity, often associated with epithelial-mesenchymal transition. This phenotypic heterogeneity contributes to its aggressive clinical behavior, including rapid tumor progression, early metastasis, and poor response to conventional therapies. As a result, patients diagnosed with SHC typically have a median survival of less than 12 months, significantly lower than that observed in patients with conventional HCC. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study at the Mayo Clinic Comprehensive Cancer Center, focusing on patients diagnosed with SHC between April 2017 and December 2023. The data collected included demographics, performance status, underlying risk factors, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) levels, next generation sequencing (NGS) testing, and the treatment received. Results: A total of ten patients with confirmed diagnoses of SHC were included, with median age at the time of diagnosis 63.5 years (37-77), predimonantly male (9 out of 10), and identifying white (8 out of 10). Alcoholic cirrhosis was identified as an underlying risk factor in three patients, NASH cirrhosis in two, and HCV in two patients. The majority (6 out of 10) of the patients had localized disease, with 4 patients having denovo metastatic disease with abdominal lymph node involvement. Five patients had NGS testing (Tempus, Guardant 360, and ProvsSeq523), with resultant pathogenic variants including TP53 in 3 patients, NTRK3 fusion, IDH2, EGFR, TERT, MLH1, ARIS1A, and PALB2. Four patients were treated with combined Yitrrium-90 and systemic therapy. Three patient started systemic therapy, and two patients underwent surgical resection. Systemic Therapy used included combined Atezolizumab/ Bevacizuamab, Pembrolizumab/ Lenvatinib, Gemcitabine/ Docetaxel, Gemcitabine/ Cisplatin, Cabozantinib, and pembrolizumab monotherapy. The median overall survival for this group was 11.5 months; 95% confidence interval (CI): 4.66-40.1 months. Seventy percent experienced progression, with a median progression-free survival after first line of treatment of 2.5 months; 95% CI: 1-15.3 months. Conclusions: Sarcomatoid HCC remains aggressive and difficult to treat cancer with limited overall survival. Immunotherapy based regimens have limited efficacy for this HCC variant.