9518 Background: Pts with resected AJCC v8 stage IIIA melanoma have been under-represented in clinical trials of adjuvant drug therapy. The benefit of adjuvant targeted and immunotherapy in this population is unclear. Methods: In this multicenter, retrospective study, pts with stage IIIA melanoma (AJCC v8) who received adjuvant pembrolizumab or nivolumab (PD1), BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy dabrafenib + trametinib (TT), or no adjuvant treatment (OBS) were included. Recurrence free survival (RFS), distant metastasis free survival (DMFS), and toxicity rates were examined. Results: 613 pts from 34 centers across Australia, Europe and USA were included. The median follow-up was 2.6 yrs (IQR, 1.6-3.4 yrs). Pt characteristics and follow-up were similar across the cohorts (Table). Completion rates of 12-month PD1 and TT therapy were 57.0% and 69.2% respectively. 1-yr RFS was 93.3% (95% CI, 90.3-96.4) in PD1, 100% in TT and 91.3% (95% CI, 88.1-94.7) in OBS cohorts. 2-yr RFS was 79.3% (95% CI, 74.1-84.8) for PD1, 100% for TT and 84.3% (95% CI, 79.9-89.0) in OBS cohorts. 2-yr DMFS was 88.4% (95% CI, 84.3-92.8) in PD1, 100% in TT and 91.1% (95% CI, 87.7-94.7) in OBS cohorts. Risk of recurrence was associated with higher breslow thickness (HR 1.73, 95% CI 1.36-2.20), higher mitotic rate (HR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.12) and neck as the site of nodal metastases (HR 2.71, 95% CI 1.45-5.06) in the overall cohort (p<0.05). Neck nodal metastases were associated with higher risk of recurrence in OBS cohort (HR 3.82, 95% CI 1.91-7.66; p<0.05) but not in the PD1 cohort. Rates of ≥ Grade 3 toxicities were 10.9% with PD1 and 20.0% with TT; discontinuation due to toxicity occurred in 25.0% and 30.0%, respectively. No new safety signals were observed. Rates of unresolved toxicity at last follow-up were 26.9% in PD1 and 7.7% in TT cohorts. Conclusions: In this large international study, adjuvant PD1 or TT did not significantly improve RFS or DMFS compared to OBS in pts with resected stage IIIA melanoma. Prognosis in stage IIIA melanoma is favourable and outcomes after adjuvant therapy in this population needs further study in prospective randomised trials. [Table: see text]

Background: Different metastatic sites have distinct response rates to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), suggesting that anatomical locations play a role in treatment response and survival. This project investigated the impact that sites of metastases present at baseline - ie. before starting treatment - have on the anatomical patterns of progression and their association with survival in patients (pts) exposed to ICI and BRAF/MEK inhibitors (BRAF/MEKi) as first line treatment. Methods: We curated the progression history of distant metastases of 568 stage IV pts; 352 pts had first line treatment with antiPD1 +/- antiCTLA4, and 216 pts had first line BRAF/MEKi. We sought to investigate the association between sites of metastases at baseline and (a) sites of progression in pts who failed first line anti-PD1 vs first line BRAF/MEKi, (b) sites of progression in pts who failed first line anti-PD1 with innate vs acquired resistance, and (c) survival of all pts, from time of first line treatment to last follow-up. Results: Using a sophisticated mathematical graph representation of anatomical disease progression, we unveiled sites of metastases at baseline that impacted where new sites of metastases developed on treatment failure. In pts with brain metastasis at baseline, pts who failed anti-PD1 had higher progression in the brain compared to BRAF/MEKi progressors (68.1% in anti-PD1 progressors vs 62.5% in BRAF/MEKi progressors). In contrast, the opposite trend was observed in the progression to the brain in pts with no brain metastasis at baseline, which was lower in anti-PD1 progressors compared to BRAF/MEKi progressors (20.6% in anti-PD1 progressors vs 32.6% in BRAF/MEKi progressors).Within pts who failed anti-PD1, pts with innate resistance (n=95) had a higher rate of progression in the brain (42.1%) compared to pts with acquired (n=36) resistance (25%). Among pts with innate resistance who had brain metastasis at baseline (n=36), 80.6% progressed in the brain. In contrast, among pts with innate resistance without brain metastasis at baseline (n=59), only 18.6% progressed to the brain.Sites of metastases at baseline also had an impact on the survival of pts. In BRAF/MEKi pts, brain metastasis at baseline was not associated with survival (log-rank p-value=0.6). In contrast, anti-PD1 pts with brain metastasis at baseline had worst survival (2-yr survival 56%) compared to pts without brain metastasis at baseline (2-yr survival 73%, log-rank p-value=0.005). Utilisation of this graph representation for the development of a time-dependent predictor of brain metastases will be presented. Further associations of metastatic sites of disease at baseline with progression and survival will be discussed. Conclusions: Different sites of metastases at baseline have a distinct effect on the progression patterns and survival of pts who received BRAF/MEKi or anti-PD1 as first line treatment. Citation Format: Ismael A. Vergara, Serigne N. Lo, Isabel Li, Alexander M. Menzies, Matteo S. Carlino, Richard A. Scolyer, Georgina V. Long, Ines Pires da Silva. Sites of metastases prior to systemic treatment influence progression patterns and survival in stage IV melanoma patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 6747.

The administration, faculty, and staff at Hostos Community College strive to improve students’ computer and information literacy skills while meeting the distinct needs of Millennials. In 2007, Hostos initiated a project to reconfigure physical spaces throughout the campus (areas in the Library, Academic Learning Center, Educational Technology Office, and Academic Computing Center) and establish a unified virtual space, creating a cross-divisional entity: the Information Learning Commons (ILC). This case discusses the formation of the ILC Committee, the group that envisions and manages physical ILC spaces’ renovation and also develops virtual spaces; the planning and implementation of physical learning commons spaces; the web applications that unify the ILC; the benefits of reducing duplication and optimizing resource utilization; Hostos current challenges with the ILC concept; and finally, the imminent expansion of virtual commons spaces. Hostos is an exemplar in how collaboration can creatively maximize resources through technology to meet students’ needs.

No abstract

No abstract