Administration of tarlatamab in an outpatient setting utilizing remote patient monitoring: Mayo Clinic experience.

1652 Background: Tarlatamab is a bispecific T-cell engager targeting DLL3 that has shown promise as a therapy in small cell lung cancer. Administering tarlatamab requires careful consideration of immune-related adverse events (AE), including cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). Prescribing information recommends patients to be monitored for 22-24 hours in an appropriate healthcare setting for cycle 1 (C1), days 1 and 8. At Mayo Clinic in Rochester MN (MCR), tarlatamab is initially administered in a hospital-based outpatient (HBO) setting utilizing an innovative remote patient monitoring system (RPM). In this study, we describe our RPM process and patient outcomes thus far. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed records of patients treated with tarlatamab from August through December 2024. All patients received tarlatamab in the HBO setting and were enrolled into RPM for C1, days 1–10. Patients attended daily HBO visits on days 1–3 and 8–10 of C1 and were required to stay within 30 minutes of the hospital with a 24-hour caregiver for 48 hours following infusion days in C1-2. Data on patient characteristics, frequency of RPM alerts, escalations, rate of CRS & ICANS, and need for hospitalizations were reported using descriptive metrics. Results: As part of RPM, patients are provided with a kit containing preconnected Bluetooth-enabled devices to measure vital signs (VS), including blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), temperature (T), and pulse oximetry (SpO2). The kit also includes a cellular-enabled tablet for electronic ICANS questionnaires, which upload directly into our electronic medical record system. Patients are required to log VS four times daily, monitored in real-time by a centralized virtual RPM nursing (RN) team. Embedded decision trees trigger alerts, prompting the RN team to contact patients and follow care pathways for escalations as needed. Among the 16 patients treated, the median age was 68 years, and the median ECOG PS was 1. During the 10-day RPM period, a total of 2,233 VS entries were recorded. Of these, 88% (14/16) of patients had alerts triggered, with a median of 2 alerts per patient. Alerts were mostly for out-of-range systolic BP (56%), HR (56%), and T (25%), with none for SpO2. The RN team escalated alerts in 50% (8/16) of the patients. Overall, 38% (6/16) of patients were managed entirely in the HBO setting. Among the 63% hospitalized, 56% had CRS limited to grade (G) 2, and 31% had ICANS limited to G3. Two patients were hospitalized for other indications. The mean length of stay was 2.6 days, with no ICU admissions. Conclusions: Our experience shows that frequent monitoring required with tarlatamab can be safely and effectively executed in an outpatient setting with the utilization of an RPM system. It can potentially minimize the burden of hospitalizations for patients and the healthcare system.