INTRODUCTION:For many people, mobile applications are pivotal to their daily lives. With a constantly increasing number of applications, the utilization of mobile health (mHealth) has augmented various aspects of clinical care outside of traditional clinical appointments, such as patient communication and monitoring. Despite these advancements, widespread adoption of these applications by cancer patients remains limited. This study aims to evaluate radiation oncology patients' access to technology resources and evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on willingness to engage in mHealth. METHODS:A survey-based study was conducted among 318 adult radiation oncology clinic patients between 2019 and 2022. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were utilized to identify factors associated with willingness to utilize mHealth. RESULTS:On multivariate analysis, factors that impacted patients' willingness to utilize mHealth include age>65 (OR 0.32; p=0.001), new patient status (OR 2.15; p=0.020), annual income>50K (OR 2.16; p=0.032), and smartphone ownership (OR 4.07; p=0.000). The post-COVID cohort showed an increased willingness to utilize mHealth compared to the pre-COVID cohort (OR 1.91; p=0.016). Lastly, a Technology Barrier Score (TBScore) was introduced to identify and quantify barriers that were associated with the reluctance to widespread adoption of mHealth. CONCLUSION:Age, income, patient status, and smartphone ownership impacted radiation oncology patients' willingness to utilize mHealth to report and track symptoms. Significant barriers include technology literacy and time commitment. The TBScore can serve as a valuable tool in identifying patients who may require additional support in the utilization of mHealth.
Paleoplacer gold deposits represent a significant source of global gold production. The Castelo de Sonhos deposit in Brazil is a promising candidate for development and contribution to the paleoplacer proportion of gold production. Mineralization in the deposit is associated with metamorphosed conglomeratic units. This study applies machine vision methods to RGB drill-core imagery to identify and quantify the characteristics of large clasts (pebble to cobble-sized) within these units. Using this workflow, we demonstrate that gold-bearing material is preferentially found in specific ranges of clast geometry criteria, corresponding to an optimal depositional environment, offering a scalable and internally consistent support for manual logging. This approach enables rapid assessment of mineralization potential to support drilling decisions, and in the production environment, would enable rapid and robust material sorting, lowering costs associated with siliceous cobble-rich ore. These findings highlight the value of machine vision methods integrated with geochemical data and interpretation to enhance both exploration and operational efficiencies.
3039 Background: Rina-S is an investigational antibody-drug conjugate targeting folate receptor alpha with a novel hydrophilic protease-cleavable linker and a topoisomerase I inhibitor, exatecan payload. Patients (pts) with advanced endometrial cancer (EC) who progress after programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-(L)1] inhibitor plus chemotherapy have very poor prognoses and limited, ineffective treatment options (objective response rate [ORR] < 16% and median progression-free survival < 5 months with single-agent chemotherapy); thus, there is urgent need for novel therapies. In the dose escalation cohort, single-agent Rina-S showed preliminary anti-tumor activity in pts with heavily pretreated EC. Here we first report results for single-agent Rina-S in pts with heavily pretreated EC from dose expansion cohort B2 of the phase 1/2 GCT1184-01 study (NCT05579366). Methods: Pts with metastatic or unresectable EC who received prior platinum-based chemotherapy and a PD-(L)1 inhibitor received either Rina-S 100 mg/m 2 or 120 mg/m 2 every 3 weeks after initial enrollment with 120 mg/m 2 only. The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability of Rina-S. Secondary endpoints included ORR and disease control rate (DCR). Results: As of data cutoff November 22, 2024, 64 pts with heavily pretreated EC (median 3 prior lines [range 1-8]) received Rina-S 100 mg/m 2 (n = 22) or 120 mg/m 2 (n = 42) for a median treatment duration of 15.9 weeks. Most pts had ECOG PS 1 (64.1%), approximately half (46.9%) were aged ≥70 years, and 48.4% had received prior radiotherapy. Pts primarily had endometrioid carcinoma (45.3%) followed by serous carcinoma (26.6%). The most common (> 25%) treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were similar across doses and were primarily cytopenias and grade 1-2 gastrointestinal events (nausea, vomiting, decreased appetite). Grade 3-4 cytopenia included neutropenia (48.4%), anemia (35.9%) and thrombocytopenia (21.9%). TEAEs led to Rina-S dose reductions in 15.6% of pts and discontinuation of Rina-S in 3.1% of pts; 37.5% of pts had serious TEAEs. There was 1 related (assessed by investigator) grade 5 TEAE at 120 mg/m 2 confounded by comorbidities; no fatal TEAEs occurred at 100 mg/m 2 . No signals of ocular toxicity, neuropathy, or interstitial lung disease were observed. In efficacy-evaluable pts (median follow-up: 18.7 weeks), the unconfirmed ORR was 50%, including 2 complete responses, with Rina-S 100 mg/m 2 (n = 22) and 45.5% with 120 mg/m 2 (n = 33). DCR was 100% and 81.8% with 100 mg/m 2 and 120 mg/m 2 , respectively. Responses were ongoing for 9 of 11 (81.8%) and 12 of 15 (80.0%) responders with 100 mg/m 2 and 120 mg/m 2 , respectively. Conclusions: Rina-S showed encouraging anti-tumor activity in pts with heavily pretreated EC and had a manageable safety profile consistent with previous reports. Further evaluation of single-agent Rina-S in pts with advanced EC is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT05579366 .
576 Background: Inherited or germline BRCA mutations are found in about 1 in 400 people around the world and carry significant implications for cancer risk, therapeutic and preventive strategies. When somatic BRCA1/2 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants are detected, guidelines recommend confirmatory germline testing due to implications for targeted treatment, family counseling, and cancer risk management. Nonetheless, evidence suggests that germline testing is underutilized in practice, even among patients meeting testing guidelines. Methods: This retrospective observational cohort study used electronic health record data from 11 practices in The US Oncology Network participating in the Genetic Risk Evaluation and Testing program to examine patterns of germline testing. Patients with somatic pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes in solid tumors identified between 1 November 2021 and 1 November 2023 were included in the study. Patients were followed through 1 April 2024. The timing of germline testing (date of test order) relative to the date of somatic testing result was determined. Results: Among 526 patients identified with somatic BRCA1/2 mutations across 15 solid tumor cancer types, 289 (55%) also had germline testing. For most cancers, germline testing preceded somatic testing. These were generally cancers associated with hereditary BRCA mutation, including breast, ovarian, other gynecological cancers, and prostate cancer. Cancers for which germline testing was observed to be done after the somatic test results included non-small cell lung cancer, bladder, and esophageal cancers. Conclusions: Germline testing for BRCA1/2 is not performed consistently, particularly in cancers not traditionally linked to hereditary syndromes. Overall, almost half of patients with a known somatic BRCA mutation did not receive germline testing. This testing gap represents a missed opportunity for personalized therapy and familial risk assessment. Enhancing awareness and adherence to genetic testing guidelines in community oncology can improve cancer prevention, treatment decision-making, and care equity. Germline testing patterns for select solid tumor types in patients with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation on somatic profiling. Overall (N=526) Breast Cancer (n=102) Ovarian Cancer (n=71) Non Small Cell Lung Cancer (n=71) Colon Cancer (n=51) Prostate Cancer (n=35) Bladder Cancer (n=19) Esophageal Cancer (n=18) Patients with a germline test, n (%) 289 (54.94%) 72 (70.59%) 61 (85.92%) 14 (19.72%) 21 (41.18%) 24 (68.57%) 8 (42.11%) 4(22.22%) Median days between germline test order and documented somatic test result* -74 -585 -221 16 -27 -14 19 10
