No abstract

6510 Background: Most COVID-19 (C19) vaccine trials excluded patients with active cancer. Here, we report our real-world patient-reported and clinical outcomes of BNT162b2 mRNA C19 vaccine in patients with cancer. Methods: Our institutional Data-Driven Determinants for COVID-19 Oncology Discovery Effort (D3CODE) follows a longitudinal observational cohort of pts w cancer getting C19 vaccine. Pts complete a validated PRO tool, MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI, 13 core, 6 interference plus 17 items of symptoms from prior vaccine trials) pre-dose 1, then daily x 6d, then weekly, then on day of dose 2, then daily x 6d, then weekly x 3w. Demographics, cancer variables, prior immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), C19 status pre- & post-vaccine are aggregated via Syntropy platform: Palantir Foundry. Primary outcome is incidence of PRO symptoms bw dose 1 & 2 across AYA 15-39y, mid-age 40-64y & senior 65y+ cohorts. Secondary outcomes include PRO symptom incidence post-dose 2, post-vaccine change in cancer symptoms, post-vaccine symptom severity based on prior ICI, and confirmed C19 > 7 days post-dose 2. First planned 8-wk interim analysis is reported here. Results: 6388 pts w cancer (4973 w mets) received a BNT162b2 vaccine dose (4811 both doses, 1577 received one & await dose 2). Overall, median age 64y (range 16-95y); 382 AYAs, 2927 mid-age, 3079 seniors (65-70y n = 1158, 70-79y n = 1521, 80-89y n = 378, 90y+ n = 22). 4099 (64%) are White, 823 (13%) AA, 791 (12%) Hispanic, 441 (7%) Asians. Primary cancers: breast (1397), GU (821), heme (775), thoracic/HN (745), and CRC (385). Prior to dose 1, 1862 had no prior systemic tx while 4526 pts did including 3243 who had only non-IO tx (chemo, targeted tx), 1,283 had immunotherapy including 857 who had ICIs prior to dose 1. Patient-reported symptoms after C19 Vaccine: Of 6388 pts, 4714 (74% response rate, median age 67y, range 16-95y) completed 16485 PRO surveys. After 2 doses, seniors reported lower mean scores vs mid-age or AYAs on 22 of 36 symptoms including injection site pain, palpitations, itch, rash, malaise, fevers/chills, arthralgia, myalgia, headache, pain, fatigue, nausea, disturbed sleep, distress (p < 0.05). Pts w prior ICIs had higher severity of itch, rash (p < 0.05) from baseline after both dose 1 & 2 vs pts without systemic tx. Post dose 1, pts with prior ICI had higher increase in fatigue, malaise, itch, rash, myalgia, anorexia from their baseline vs pts without systemic tx (p < 0.05). C19 Outcomes: Of 6388 pts, 616 had a C19 test at any time post-dose 1: 23 (0.36%) tested positive of whom 20 (0.3%) were between dose 1 & 2; two (0.031%) were within 7 days post-dose 2, and one patient (0.016%) tested positive 16 days after dose 2, requiring admission. Conclusions: This real-world observational cohort demonstrates post-vaccine symptom burden and outcomes in patients with cancer. Second interim analysis is planned at 16 weeks.

Background Symptom expression in SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) may affect patients already symptomatic with cancer. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can describe symptom burden during the acute and postacute stages of COVID-19 and support risk stratification for levels of care. At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, our purpose was to rapidly develop, launch through an electronic patient portal, and provide initial validation for a PRO measure of COVID-19 symptom burden in patients with cancer. Methods We conducted a CDC/WHO web-based scan for COVID-19 symptoms and a relevance review of symptoms by an expert panel of clinicians treating cancer patients with COVID-19 to create a provisional MD Anderson Symptom Inventory for COVID-19 (MDASI-COVID). English-speaking adults with cancer who tested positive for COVID-19 participated in the psychometric testing phase. Patients completed longitudinal assessments of the MDASI-COVID and the EuroQOL 5 Dimensions 5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) utility index and visual analog scale, which were presented through an electronic health record patient portal. To test the validity of the MDASI-COVID to distinguish between known groups of patients, we hypothesized that patients hospitalized, including having a hospitalization extended, for COVID-19 versus those not hospitalized would experience higher symptom burden. Correlation of mean symptom severity and interference scores with relevant EQ-5D-5L scores tested concurrent validity. The reliability of the MDASI-COVID was evaluated by calculating Cronbach alpha coefficients and test-retest reliability was evaluated by calculating Pearson correlation coefficients between the initial assessment and a second assessment no more than 14 days later. Results The web-based scan found 31 COVID-19-related symptoms; rankings of a 14-clinician expert panel reduced this list to 11 COVID-specific items to be added to the core MDASI. Time from literature scan start in March 2020 to instrument launch in May 2020 was 2 months. Psychometric analysis established the MDASI-COVID’s reliability, known-group validity, and concurrent validity. Conclusions We were able to rapidly develop and electronically launch a PRO measure of COVID-19 symptom burden in patients with cancer. Additional research is needed to confirm the content domain and predictive validity of the MDASI-COVID and define the symptom burden trajectory of COVID-19.

1513 Background: PRO-based remote symptom monitoring favorably impacts quality of life, healthcare utilization, and overall survival in patients (pts) with cancer. However remote PRO completion rates outside of a clinical trial remained widely varied. With the wide adoption of telehealth in cancer care during the pandemic, telehealth’s impact on health behaviors such adherence w remote PROs is not fully characterized. To that end, we investigated PRO completion patterns in routine cancer care, pre- and during the pandemic. Methods: We queried a prospectively maintained institutional database of all PROs remotely delivered to pts at our institution from 1/1/18 to 12/31/21. Pts were divided into 2 time cohorts (“pre-pandemic” 1/1/18 to 3/31/20, “during pandemic” 4/1/20 to 12/31/21) and 3 age cohorts (AYA 15-39y, midage 40-64y, older adults 65y+). We calculated descriptive statistics and compared (t-test, ANOVA) between time and age cohorts and independent variables. Results: Overall 93,875 unique patients over 4 years received 1+ remote PROs as a part of their routine cancer care. PRO response rate increased from 35% prepandemic (12011 of 34742 pts responding) to 67% during pandemic (p <0.00001). To understand patient-level response patterns, we selected one representative global health PRO tool used widely across clinics in our institution and analyzed completion in a representative month over 4 years, 2 before (Oct ’18, ‘19) and 2 mid-pandemic (Oct ’20, ‘21). Overall 2738 pts (median age 60y, range 17-94y; 290 AYA 15-39y, 1444 midage 40-64y, 1004 older adults 65y+) were sent 3249 PROs during these 4m, 1378 PROs to 1075 pts in 2 pre-pandemic months & 1871 to 1663 pts in 2 mid-pandemic months. Overall, PRO response rate increased from 52% pre-pandemic to 81% during, non-responders dropping from 48% to 19%, and response rate without any reminder from the team increasing from 13% pre-pandemic to 79% during. Across all 3 age cohorts, overall PRO response rates increased (AYA up 21%, midage up 27%, seniors up 35%, p 0.012), PRO non-response rate decreased (AYA by 21%, midage by 27%, seniors by 35%, p 0.01), and PRO response rate without reminders from clinic team increased significantly (AYA, by 71%, midage by 78%, senior by 61%, p <0.00001). When further analyzing by visit type during pandemic, the improvements in overall PRO response rates are driven almost exclusively by telehealth where in-person PRO completion decreased by 19% (pre-pandemic 52%, during 33%) while pts who had an upcoming virtual visit had 94% PRO response rate (p < 0.00001). Conclusions: Substantially higher adherence with PRO-based remote symptom monitoring was seen during the pandemic with virtual visits accounting substantially for this broad adherence and the highest increases seen in older adults, highlighting the implications of telehealth on cancer care.

271 Background: Patient reported outcomes (PRO) can be valuable clinical tools to embed the voice of patients into the clinical experience. The use of PROs in the context of cancer survivorship is relatively under-explored. Methods: Disease-specific modules of the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) PRO were integrated into the electronic health record (EHR), and distributed 3-7 days prior to survivorship clinic visits through the patients’ EHR portal. Patients with virtual visits were called 24 hours prior, instructed how to video link, and how to complete the MDASI PRO. For patients who completed the PRO electronically, results were reviewed during clinic visit. High symptom alerts (> = 7) for four key symptoms were established and triggered an automatic message to care teams for review. Results: From Sept 1, 2020 – August 31, 2021, 2,196 PRO surveys were sent to patients with 1,268 submitting results (57.74%) (see Table). Within specific clinics, the submission rates varied greatly between in-person and virtual appointments (33% vs. 83%). Submission rates varied by clinics, with responses ranging from 28.57% - 73.59%. Clinics with higher overall rates had a higher proportion of virtual visits. Conclusions: Electronic distribution of PROs can be successfully integrated into long term survivorship clinic visits. Virtual visits had overall much higher PRO response rates, due to pre-visit workflows which encouraged the completion of PROs. We conclude that patient education and real time support is needed to facilitate patients’ completion of PRO surveys through the electronic portal.[Table: see text]