BACKGROUND: Myeloma occurs disproportionately in African Americans, with disparities in outcomes potentially caused by access to care, cytogenetics, and immunity. A gap in knowledge of immune function dissimilarities between African Americans and whites exists. Data for other diseases suggest innate differences in immunity and inflammatory markers, with potential implications for therapeutic monoclonal antibodies reliant on secondary immune activation for activity. METHODS: Patients receiving daratumumab or elotuzumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone were retrospectively studied with a primary endpoint of response at 2 (daratumumab) or 4 months (elotuzumab). Secondary endpoints included stable disease or better at the same points, treatment duration, time to best response, and adverse events. RESULTS: Eighty patients were included; baseline characteristics were balanced with the exception of the stage at diagnosis, which was more advanced in African Americans. No statistically significant difference in response was seen: 37.9% in whites versus 11.8% in African Americans with daratumumab (P = .090) and 60% in whites versus 44% in African Americans with elotuzumab (P = .462). There were no differences in the duration of treatment, the time to best response, or adverse events. Common potential immune-related adverse events in both arms were fatigue (39%), back pain (30%), and infusion reactions (40%). Anemia was significantly associated with a response to daratumumab (P = .02); no patients without anemia responded at 2 months, whereas 34.4% of patients with anemia did. CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference in response, duration of treatment, or time to response was seen by race, although a trend toward greater early response rates in whites was observed. In these cohorts, as in other analyses, African American patients tended to present with later stage disease. Cancer 2018;124: 4358-4365.

Daratumumab gained initial US FDA approval as fourth-line therapy among relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients who have received at least three prior lines of therapy, including a proteasome inhibitor (PI) and immunomodulatory drug (IMiD), or who are double refractory to a PI and an IMiD. Further combination trials of daratumumab led to FDA approvals in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone or lenalidomide and dexamethasone for multiple myeloma patients who have received at least one prior therapy. The most recent expansion of the FDA approval of daratumumab comes in combination with pomalidomide and dexamethasone for patients with multiple myeloma that have received ≥2 prior lines of therapy including lenalidomide and a PI. The current manuscript reviews data supporting the efficacy and safety of daratumumab in RRMM.

Background: National consensus guidelines outline recommendations for best practices in treating patients with candidemia. This study evaluated the impact of receiving care adherent to the best practice recommendations on clinical outcomes in patients with candidemia. Methods: This retrospective, multicenter study included patients with candidemia from 2010 to 2015 at 9 hospitals. The primary outcome was the composite of 30-day in-hospital mortality and 90-day candidemia recurrence. Outcomes were compared between those receiving and not receiving care adherent to the guideline recommendations. Inverse probability weights with regression adjustment were utilized to determine the average treatment effect of adherent care on the composite outcome Results: 295 patients were included with 14.2% meeting criteria for the composite outcome (11.9% mortality and 2.4% recurrence). The average treatment effect of adherent care was not significant ( P = .75). However, receiving appropriate initial antifungal treatment and central venous catheter removal were both associated with the composite (average treatment effect of −17.5%, P = .011 and −8.8%, P = .013, respectively). In patients with a source of infection other than the central line, central venous catheter removal was not associated with the composite ( P = .95). The most common reason for failure to receive appropriate initial antifungal treatment was omission of the loading dose. Conclusions: Central venous catheter removal and appropriate initial antifungal treatment were associated with a lower incidence of the composite of mortality and recurrence. Additional studies are needed to determine the optimal duration of therapy following candidemia clearance.

4022 Background: Systemic chemotherapy with a 5-FU-based regimen, such as mFOLFOX6, is the preferred first line treatment option for mCRC. Due to hematologic toxicities associated with the 5-FU bolus component, providers may choose to eliminate it empirically in patients receiving palliative therapy. This study aimed to assess the impact of empirically eliminating the 5-FU bolus and LV from first line treatment with mFOLFOX6 in mCRC. Methods: This was a retrospective chart review of patients ≥ 18 years old with mCRC receiving palliative first line mFOLFOX6 chemotherapy with (bolus) or without (non-bolus) the 5-FU bolus and LV components from January 1, 2015 through August 31, 2019 at Moffitt Cancer Center. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), disease control rate (DCR) defined as partial response and stable disease at first scan, utilization of growth factor support and safety. Results: Data analysis cutoff was December 31, 2019, with 61 patients included in the bolus arm and 72 in the non-bolus arm. Median follow-up time was 21.8 months. No difference was found in median PFS (8.12 vs. 6.64 months, p=0.787) or OS (29.36 vs. 21.6 months, p=0.395) between the bolus and non-bolus arms, respectively. Observed DCR at first scan was similar between both arms (47.3% vs. 52.7%, p=0.44). Utilization of growth factor support was significantly higher in the bolus arm (73.7% vs. 26.3%, p=0.012). Fewer grade ≥ 3 treatment-related hematologic adverse events (AE) were seen in the non-bolus arm (37.7% vs. 22.2%, p=0.058) (table). Conclusions: This is the only study to date that analyzed the impact of empirically eliminating 5-FU bolus and LV from first line palliative therapy with mFOLFOX6 in mCRC. Results showed no significant difference in median PFS or OS. Despite reduced growth factor utilization, the non-bolus arm demonstrated a favorable safety profile with less treatment-related hematologic grade ≥ 3 AE. The results of this study warrant consideration of empirically eliminating 5-FU bolus and LV from the mFOLFOX6 regimen to avoid additive toxicities without negatively impacting efficacy. [Table: see text]