Clovis Oncology Research Articles

(256) Sexual Function and Andrology Parameters in Men after Treatment of Anterior Urethral Strictures with the Optilume Drug Coated Balloon

Abstract Introduction The Optilume Urethral Drug Coated Balloon (DCB) is a novel endoscopic treatment for recurrent male anterior urethral strictures. An important topic of discussion with patients during counseling on treatment options includes the potential affect of treatment on sexual function and fertility. The ROBUST III study was a prospective, randomized study comparing standard of care endoscopic therapy against treatment with the Optilume DCB. Assessments included evaluation of sexual function and andrology parameters. Objective The objective was to study the potential affect of treatment with the Optilume DCB on sexual function and, for younger patients, fertility. Methods A total of 79 men were randomized to receive treatment with the Optilume DCB. Sexual function was assessed via the 15 item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire. Erectile function, orgasmic function, and overall satisfaction sub-domains were assessed at 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment in patients that were sexually active at baseline. Fifteen additional subjects were enrolled in a non-randomized pharmacokinetic sub-study that included assessments of paclitaxel concentration in semen and sperm quality parameters through 6 months post-treatment. Results Average erectile function and overall satisfaction scores improved from baseline to 12 months post-treatment, while orgasmic function was not changed (Figure). The improvement in satisfaction was statistically significant at 12 months (p=0.003). No adverse events of de novo erectile or ejaculatory dysfunction were reported. Average ejaculate sperm concentration did not change from baseline to 6 months (49 million/mL vs 46.6 million/mL, p=0.88), nor did total spermatozoa per ejaculate (107.2 million vs 104.0 million, p=0.94). Paclitaxel concentration in semen after treatment was maximal at 30 days (2.99 ng/mL) and was reduced near the limit of quantitation of the analytical method by 6 months (0.12 ng/mL). Conclusions Treatment of male anterior urethral strictures with the Optilume DCB did not appear to have an impact on sexual function as measured by the IIEF and adverse event assessments. Average sperm quality parameters did not differ from baseline to 6 months post-treatment. Low levels of paclitaxel were detected in semen after treatment but were nearly undetectable by 6 months. Disclosure Yes, this is sponsored by industry/sponsor: Urotronic Inc. Clarification Industry funding only - investigator initiated and executed study. Any of the authors act as a consultant, employee or shareholder of an industry for: Boston Sci, Coloplast, Medtronic USA Inc., PROCEPT BioRobotic Corporation, NeoTract Inc., Janssen Biotech Inc., Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc., Tolmar Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 180 Medical Inc., AbbVie Inc., Pfizer Inc., Bluewind Medical, Astellas Pharma US Inc., Antares Pharma Inc., Axonic Modulation Technologies Inc., Allergan Inc., Terumo Medical Corporation, Dendreon Pharmaceuticals llc, Blue Earth Diagnostics Limited, Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc., Olympus America Inc., Karl Storz Endoscopy-America, Clovis Oncology Inc., Dornier MedTech America Inc., Travere Therapeutics Inc., Valeant Pharmaceuticals North America LLC

LBA02-09 EMBARK: A Phase 3 Randomized Study of Enzalutamide or Placebo Plus Leuprolide Acetate and Enzalutamide Monotherapy in High-risk Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer

LBA02-09 EMBARK: A Phase 3 Randomized Study of Enzalutamide or Placebo Plus Leuprolide Acetate and Enzalutamide Monotherapy in High-risk Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer

Mathematical modeling of the early modeled CA-125 longitudinal kinetics (KELIM-PARP) as a pragmatic indicator of rucaparib efficacy in patients with recurrent ovarian carcinoma in ARIEL2 & STUDY 10.

PARP inhibitors (PARPi) have revolutionized the management of advanced ovarian carcinoma, and were investigated as forefront treatment in recurrent disease. The objective was to explore if mathematical modeling of the early longitudinal CA-125 kinetics could be used as a pragmatic indicator of the subsequent rucaparib efficacy, like it is for platinum-based chemotherapy. The datasets of ARIEL2 and Study 10 involving recurrent HGOC patients treated with rucaparib were retrospectively investigated. The same strategy as those successfully developed for platinum chemotherapy, based on CA-125 ELIMination rate constant K (KELIM™), was implemented. Individual values of rucaparib-adjusted KELIM (KELIM-PARP) were estimated based on the longitudinal CA-125 kinetics during the first 100 treatment days, and then scored as favorable (KELIM-PARP ≥1.0) or unfavorable (KELIM-PARP <1.0). The prognostic value of KELIM-PARP regarding treatment efficacy (radiological response, and progression-free survival (PFS)) was assessed using univariable/multivariable analyses, with respect to platinum-sensitivity and homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status. The data from 476 patients were assessed. The CA-125 longitudinal kinetics during the first 100-treatment days could be accurately assessed using the KELIM-PARP model. In patients with platinum-sensitive diseases, BRCA mutational status KELIM-PARP score and were associated with subsequent complete/partial radiological responses (KELIM-PARP: odds-ratio=2.81, 95% CI 1.86-4.52), and PFS (KELIM-PARP: hazard-ratio=0.67, 95% CI 0.50-0.91). The patients with BRCA-wild type cancer and favorable KELIM-PARP experienced long PFS with rucaparib regardless of HRD. In platinum-resistant disease patients, KELIM-PARP was associated with subsequent radiological response (odds-ratio=2.80, 95% CI 1.82-4.72). This proof-of-concept study confirms the early CA-125 longitudinal kinetics during rucaparib in recurrent HGOC patients are assessable by mathematical modeling, to generate individual a KELIM-PARP score associated with the subsequent efficacy. This pragmatic strategy might be useful for selecting the patients for PARPi-based combination regimens, when identifying efficacy biomarker is challenging. Further assessment of this hypothesis is warranted. The present study was supported by Clovis Oncology with a grant to academic research association.

Rucaparib or Physician’s Choice in Metastatic Prostate Cancer

BackgroundIn a phase 2 study, rucaparib, an inhibitor of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP), showed a high level of activity in patients who had metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer associated with a deleterious BRCA alteration. Data are needed to confirm and expand on the findings of the phase 2 study.MethodsIn this randomized, controlled, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients who had metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer with a BRCA1, BRCA2, or ATM alteration and who had disease progression after treatment with a second-generation androgen-receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI). We randomly assigned the patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive oral rucaparib (600 mg twice daily) or a physician’s choice control (docetaxel or a second-generation ARPI [abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide]). The primary outcome was the median duration of imaging-based progression-free survival according to independent review.ResultsOf the 4855 patients who had undergone prescreening or screening, 270 were assigned to receive rucaparib and 135 to receive a control medication (intention-to-treat population); in the two groups, 201 patients and 101 patients, respectively, had a BRCA alteration. At 62 months, the duration of imaging-based progression-free survival was significantly longer in the rucaparib group than in the control group, both in the BRCA subgroup (median, 11.2 months and 6.4 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.69) and in the intention-to-treat group (median, 10.2 months and 6.4 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.80; P<0.001 for both comparisons). In an exploratory analysis in the ATM subgroup, the median duration of imaging-based progression-free survival was 8.1 months in the rucaparib group and 6.8 months in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.52). The most frequent adverse events with rucaparib were fatigue and nausea.ConclusionsThe duration of imaging-based progression-free survival was significantly longer with rucaparib than with a control medication among patients who had metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer with a BRCA alteration. (Funded by Clovis Oncology; TRITON3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02975934.)

ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE Guidelines for the fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma.

How should fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma be performed? Forty-eight recommendations were formulated on fertility-sparing treatment of patients with endometrial carcinoma. The standard surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma consisting of total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy drastically affects the quality of life of patients and creates a challenge for clinicians. Recent evidence-based guidelines of the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO), the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) and the European Society of Pathology (ESP) provide comprehensive guidelines on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment in endometrial carcinoma in a multidisciplinary setting. While addressing also work-up for fertility preservation treatments and the management and follow-up for fertility preservation, it was considered relevant to further extend the guidance on fertility-sparing treatment. A collaboration was set up between the ESGO, the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), aiming to develop clinically relevant and evidence-based guidelines focusing on key aspects of fertility-sparing treatment in order to improve the quality of care for women with endometrial carcinoma across Europe and worldwide. ESGO/ESHRE/ESGE nominated an international multidisciplinary development group consisting of practising clinicians and researchers who have demonstrated leadership and expertise in the care and research of endometrial carcinoma (11 experts across Europe). To ensure that the guidelines are evidence-based, the literature published since 2016, identified from a systematic search was reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgement was based on the professional experience and consensus of the development group. The guidelines are thus based on the best available evidence and expert agreement. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 95 independent international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives. The multidisciplinary development group formulated 48 recommendations in four sections; patient selection, tumour clinicopathological characteristics, treatment and special issues. Of the 48 recommendations, none could be based on level I evidence and only 16 could be based on level II evidence, implicating that 66% of the recommendations are supported only by observational data, professional experience and consensus of the development group. These recommendations provide guidance to professionals caring for women with endometrial carcinoma, including but not limited to professionals in the field of gynaecological oncology, onco-fertility, reproductive surgery, endoscopy, conservative surgery and histopathology, and will help towards a holistic and multidisciplinary approach for this challenging clinical scenario. All costs relating to the development process were covered from ESGO, ESHRE and ESGE funds. There was no external funding of the development process or manuscript production. G.S. has reported grants from MSD Italia S.r.l., advisory boards for Storz, Bayer, Astrazeneca, Metronic, TESARO Bio Italy S.r.l and Johnson & Johnson, and honoraria for lectures from Clovis Oncology Italy S.r.l. M.G. has reported advisory boards for Gedeon Richter and Merck. The other authors have reported no conflicts of interest. This document represents the views of ESHRE, ESGO and ESGE which are the result of consensus between the relevant stakeholders and where relevant based on the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. The recommendations should be used for informational and educational purposes. They should not be interpreted as setting a standard of care, or be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care nor exclusive of other methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. They do not replace the need for application of clinical judgement to each individual presentation, nor variations based on locality and facility type.

The AACR Journals: Advancing Progress Toward the AACR's 115-Year Mission.

The AACR Journals: Advancing Progress Toward the AACR's 115-Year Mission.

The AACR Journals: Advancing Progress Toward the AACR's 115-Year Mission.

The AACR Journals: Advancing Progress Toward the AACR's 115-Year Mission.

The AACR Journals: Advancing Progress Toward the AACR's 115-Year Mission.

The AACR Journals: Advancing Progress Toward the AACR's 115-Year Mission.

3 Oral - Matching adjusted indirect comparison of PFS & OS comparing ribociclib + letrozole vs palbociclib + letrozole as first-line treatment of HR+/HER2− ABC: Analysis based on updated PFS & final OS results of MONALEESA-2 & PALOMA-2

3 Oral - Matching adjusted indirect comparison of PFS & OS comparing ribociclib + letrozole vs palbociclib + letrozole as first-line treatment of HR+/HER2− ABC: Analysis based on updated PFS & final OS results of MONALEESA-2 & PALOMA-2

The AACR Journals: Advancing Progress Toward the AACR's 115-Year Mission.

The AACR Journals: Advancing Progress Toward the AACR's 115-Year Mission.

The AACR Journals: Advancing Progress Toward the AACR's 115-Year Mission.

The AACR Journals: Advancing Progress Toward the AACR's 115-Year Mission.

149P Clinical outcomes in ER+ breast cancer patients with recurrence score 26-30-guided therapy: Real-world data

149P Clinical outcomes in ER+ breast cancer patients with recurrence score 26-30-guided therapy: Real-world data

31P Survival outcomes in BRCA pathogenetic mutated, variant of unknown significance, and wild type ovarian cancer patients treated with PARP inhibitors

31P Survival outcomes in BRCA pathogenetic mutated, variant of unknown significance, and wild type ovarian cancer patients treated with PARP inhibitors

45TiP A randomized, molecular driven phase II trial of carboplatin-paclitaxel-bev vs carboplatin-paclitaxel-bev-rucaparib vs carboplatin-paclitaxel-rucaparib, selected according to HRD status, in patients with advanced ovarian cancer

45TiP A randomized, molecular driven phase II trial of carboplatin-paclitaxel-bev vs carboplatin-paclitaxel-bev-rucaparib vs carboplatin-paclitaxel-rucaparib, selected according to HRD status, in patients with advanced ovarian cancer

Alliance A031902 (CASPAR): A randomized, phase (ph) 3 trial of enzalutamide with rucaparib/placebo as novel therapy in first-line metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

TPS194 Background: Despite a growing number of treatment options for first line mCRPC, approximately 40% of patients (pts) have radiographic progression within the first year. Androgen receptor (AR) signaling inhibition increases genomic instability with double-strand DNA breaks &amp; co-inhibition of AR &amp; PARP induces synthetic lethality in multiple preclinical models. Homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene aberrations do not appear to be necessary for this synergy as demonstrated in a ph 2 clinical trial of abiraterone &amp; olaparib where this combination improved radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) in HRR-wild-type pts compared with abiraterone alone. A ph 1b trial has since shown that enzalutamide plus rucaparib has acceptable safety profile &amp; no significant drug-drug interactions (S-DDI). Methods: CASPAR/A031902 (NCT04455750) is a ph 3 study in which 984 pts will be randomized 1:1 to enzalutamide plus rucaparib or placebo. HRR gene aberration is not required for enrollment. All pts will undergo next-generation targeted-exome sequencing from archival tumor tissue (new biopsy only required if no archival tissue available). Treatment will be continued until disease progression &amp; crossover is not allowed. Key eligibility criteria are age ≥ 18 years, ECOG PS 0-2, biopsy-proven prostate adenocarcinoma, progressive (PSA or radiographic) disease per Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 guidelines, measurable or nonmeasurable disease per RECIST 1.1, no prior treatment for mCRPC (prior docetaxel, abiraterone, darolutamide, or apalutamide in non-mCRPC setting is allowed), no significant uncontrolled comorbidity, &amp; no medications with S-DDI with enzalutamide/rucaparib. Hierarchical co-primary endpoints are rPFS &amp; overall survival (OS). The OS analysis will be undertaken as a primary endpoint if the rPFS endpoint is met. For a one-sided logrank test with a type 1 error rate equal to 0.025, the study has 90% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.71 in rPFS (median rPFS of 15 &amp; 21 months in control &amp; combination arms, respectively) &amp; 80% power to detect an HR of 0.80 in OS (median OS of 32 &amp; 40 months, respectively). Key secondary endpoints are rPFS &amp; OS in pts with vs without pathogenic BRCA1, BRCA2, or PALB2 alterations; &amp; differences in adverse events &amp; quality of life (QOL) outcomes between the treatment arms. QOL assessments include Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Prostate (FACT-P), Brief Pain Inventory Short Form (BPI-SF) &amp; EQ-5D-5L. A key correlative endpoint is the sensitivity of ctDNA-based testing for alterations in HRR genes. Enrollment to CASPAR began in July 2021 &amp; the study is available for participation to all US-NCTN sites with a projected enrollment of 3 years. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171; U10CA180888; Clovis Oncology; http://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org Clinical trial information: NCT04455750.

741. Ehrlichia chaffeensis Induced Hemophgocytic lymphohistiocytosis: A Descriptive Case Series

BackgroundHemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) secondary to tick borne illnesses is rarely reported. Clinical signs and symptoms of tick borne illnesses and HLH might overlap with fever, cytopenias and increased liver enzymes being common. We describe findings from case series of ehrlichiosis induced HLH. MethodsWe reviewed patients with ICD-10 codes corresponding to a diagnosis of HLH or macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) at University of University of Kentucky Medical Center between January 2008 and April 2020. Inpatients who were >18 years of age without known immune compromise were included. 4 cases with confirmed underlying ehrlichiosis were identified at our institution. We searched PubMed for English-language articles containing the terms “ Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis “ and “infection” or “tick borne” or “Ehrlichia”. Data on patient demographics, clinical signs and symptoms, laboratory data such as ferritin, platelet count, Il-2, NK cell activity, and outcomes were collected. ResultsWe identified 16 cases of ehrlichiosis (1 had a coinfection with Rocky Mountain Spotted fever). Eleven out of 6 (68%) were male, median age was 58. All patients were febrile and thrombocytopenic on presentation and 8/14 (57%) were neutropenic. All had elevated ferritin (mean 36187 ng/mL, range 860 – more than 100000). CNS involvement was reported in 4 patients with a positive CSF Ehrlichia chaffensis PCR. All patients met at least 5 2004-HLH defining criteria and 10/14 (71%) patients had evidence of hemophagocytosis on bone marrow biopsy (table 1). Fourteen out of 15 (93%) patients received doxycycline and 9/15 (60%) received steroids +/- etoposide. Mortality for Ehrlichia induced HLH was 12.5%, significantly lower than that reported for all secondary HLH mortality (45%).ConclusionThis review highlights the importance of considering Ehrilichiosis as a cause of HLH in endemic areas particularly as clinical signs and symptoms of the 2 entities overlap. While overall mortality rate due to HLH is elevated, Ehrlichia induced HLH seems to have a much favorable prognosis with prompt institution antimicrobial treatment. Additional prognostic factors that correlate with a more severe course dictate need for immunosuppressive treatment need to be further elucidated.Disclosures Gerhard Hildebrandt, MD, Bayer, Scotts-Miracle, Charlottes Webb CWBHF, Almmune Therapeutics Inc AIMT, Medical PPTYS TR Inc. MPW, Caretrust Reit Inc CTRE, ANGI Homeservices Inc (Shareholder)Bristil-Myers Squibb/Medarex, Crispr therapeutics, IDEXX Laboratories, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, Vertex (Shareholder)Falk Foundation, Incyte, Takeda (Other Financial or Material Support, Travel, Accommodations, Expenses)Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Incyte, Morphosys, Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics (Consultant)Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Pharmacyclics, Incyte, AstraZeneca (Grant/Research Support)Novartis, Insys Therapeutics, Abbvie, GW Pharmaceuticals, Cardinal Health, Clovis Oncology, Cellectis, CVS Health, Celgene, Bluebird Bio (Shareholder)

Coastal: A Phase 3 Study of the PI3Kδ Inhibitor Zandelisib with Rituximab (R) Versus Immunochemotherapy in Patients with Relapsed Indolent Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma (iNHL)

Coastal: A Phase 3 Study of the PI3Kδ Inhibitor Zandelisib with Rituximab (R) Versus Immunochemotherapy in Patients with Relapsed Indolent Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma (iNHL)

Patient-Reported Outcomes in a Phase 3, Randomized, Open-Label Study Evaluating the Efficacy of Axicabtagene Ciloleucel (Axi-Cel) Versus Standard of Care Therapy in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Large B-Cell Lymphoma (ZUMA-7)

Patient-Reported Outcomes in a Phase 3, Randomized, Open-Label Study Evaluating the Efficacy of Axicabtagene Ciloleucel (Axi-Cel) Versus Standard of Care Therapy in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Large B-Cell Lymphoma (ZUMA-7)

Efficacy and Safety of Parsaclisib in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Follicular Lymphoma: Primary Analysis from a Phase 2 Study (CITADEL-203)

Efficacy and Safety of Parsaclisib in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Follicular Lymphoma: Primary Analysis from a Phase 2 Study (CITADEL-203)

Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma: A Cost Evaluation Study of Management and Surveillance, and Review of the Recent USA and UK Guidelines

IntroductionBreast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is a T-cell lymphoma associated with textured breast implants, recently recognized by the revised WHO Classification. Recommended management for BIA-ALCL involves a multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach with breast surgery, haemato-oncology, pathology, radiology and oncoplastic input. Definitive management for the 'effusion-only' subset is surgical implant and capsule removal; systemic therapy is reserved for 'mass-forming' and 'advanced-disease' cohorts. Overall prognosis is excellent with the vast majority achieving remission.Although the diagnostic and treatment paradigm is established, post treatment surveillance and follow-up guidance varies widely (globally); over-utilisation of imaging tests compromises the patient pathway, impacts limited health-care resources and is associated financial burdens on patients and providers. Recently, newly published consensus guidelines (UK MHRA and USA NCCN clarify follow-up and surveillance imaging (Table 1).The aim of this study was to review our BIA-ALCL specialist centre institutional practise; to quantify the direct economic cost (EC) of imaging surveillance and indirect EC of outpatient clinic (OPC) assessment compared EC if recent guidelines were followed. The secondary aim is to highlight and raise awareness of the latest international guidance to promote the standardisation of practise.MethodsA retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained patient database between July 2015 to October 2019 was conducted, with Institutional Review Board Approval. Data collection included patient demographics, tumour subset, treatment, clinical and imaging surveillance. Follow-up and imaging undertaken for symptomatic concerns / non-BIA-ALCL related pathology was excluded. Imaging costs were calculated using UK NHS tariffs.ResultsEleven patients were treated for BIA-ALCL during the study period, with a median age of 49 at diagnosis (range 30-82years). Patients were diagnosed with: effusion-only (n=7), effusion and mass (n=2), mass-only (n=2) subtypes, at a median time of eleven years from implant insertion (IQR 8-12). All patients underwent explantation and en-bloc capsulectomy, with 1 patient required neo-adjuvant (CHOP, Brentuximab) and 1 adjuvant (CHOP) therapy (CHOP. Surveillance with imaging and OPC detected no disease recurrence to date (overall median follow-up 38 months, IQR 12-47). Post treatment episodes of surveillance imaging or follow-up related to patient symptoms were excluded.8 patients underwent surveillance imaging at our institute (Table 2). Total cost of imaging was £10,396 ($14,396) with a median cost of £1,953 ($2,705) per patient [IQR £526-2029 ($728-2,810)].7 patients had completed at least 24 months follow-up since surgery during the study period (Table 3), with 3 patients having not yet completed their follow-up period of two years. Of those with completed follow-up, the median OPC follow-up per patient was 48 months (IQR 38-52), median number of OPC was 7 (IQR 6-11) and the median cost of clinic review was £982 (IQR 804-1395). The surplus cost per patient compared with recommended follow-up was £118 ($164) [IQR £0-531 ($0-738)].ConclusionsOur data shows the variable BIA-ALCL surveillance practise pattern and the associated additional direct and indirect EC of unnecessary asymptomatic surveillance imaging, with an excessive number of follow-up OPC and period of clinical follow-up after complete remission. With no recurrence detected in our patient cohort to date, this data supports the new UK and updated USA NCCN Guidelines (extrapolated from data in other NHLs, and analogous to principles of the ASH Choosing Wisely Campaign) that routine post-treatment surveillance imaging should not be performed in BIA-ALCL patients. Routine asymptomatic post-treatment surveillance imaging is clinically unnecessary and potentially leads to a 'Cascade Effect' of further tests, with increased radiation exposure, excess costs and impact on limited health-care resources. We also support open-access follow-up for patients in remission, to reduce unnecessary follow up appointments. With UK and USA guidelines now available for BIA-ALCL, we support training and education of health-care professionals, global consensus guidelines and a registry, for this rare however increasingly recognised new entity. [Display omitted] DisclosuresIyengar: Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: conference support, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: conference support, Speakers Bureau; Beigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Other: conference support; Janssen: Other: conference support, Speakers Bureau. Nicholson: Pfizer: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Other: Conference fees, Speakers Bureau; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Conference fees. El-Sharkawi: Kyowa Kirin: Other: Ad boards; Beigene: Other: Ad boards; ASTEX: Other: Ad boards; Novartis: Other: Travel Support; Takeda: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Ad boards; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Other: Ad boards; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: Travel Support, Ad boards. Tasoulis: BMJ: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cunningham: Roche: Research Funding; Clovis Oncology: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; OVIBIO: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; 4SC: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding.