Three-dimensional telomere profiling predicts risk of progression in smoldering multiple myeloma.

Smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) is a precursor stage that precedes multiple myeloma (MM). SMM is heterogenous with nearly 40% of patients progressing to MM in the first 5 years. The high rate of progression of SMM patients highlights the need for early intervention, which underscores the importance of identifying SMM patients with the highest risk of progression. Several risk stratification models showed utility in identifying high-risk SMM patients; however, these systems showed limited sensitivity. To date, identifying high-risk SMM patients remains an important clinical need. In this study, we present the 3-dimensional telomere profiling as a structural biomarker capable of stratifying SMM patients as a function of genomic instability. Quantifying telomere dysfunction using the TeloView technology showed utility in risk stratification of cancer patients, particularly hematological malignancies. In this study, we analyzed 168 SMM patients. We report an AUC in ROC analysis of 0.8 using a subset of the patients as a training dataset. We then conducted a blind validation on a different cohort and demonstrated a positive predictive value of 85% and negative predictive value of 73%, with sensitivity and specificity of 83% and 76%, respectively. We examined the correlation between the TeloView prediction and the 20-2-20 scoring system, and cytogenetic abnormalities. We report a correlation of 53% with the 20-2-20 scores and over 60% correlation with cytogenetic abnormalities. The result of this study presents the telomere profiling as an effective biomarker able to stratify SMM patients to their respective risk groups with high sensitivity and specificity.

Thromboprophylaxis in multiple myeloma: a case-based review with practical guidelines.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) poses a significant challenge in the context of multiple myeloma, with an incidence of up to 10% in newly diagnosed patients and varying frequency in the relapsed/refractory setting. Accurate VTE risk assessment and personalized thromboprophylaxis strategies are important parts of supportive care in myeloma. There are three validated risk assessment models for prediction of VTE risk in newly diagnosed myeloma-SAVED, IMPEDE-VTE, and PRISM. In this review, we delve into the practical applications of VTE risk prediction models in the context of current therapies. By emphasizing the necessity of a tailored approach, we underscore the importance of considering patient-specific, disease-specific, and treatment-specific risk factors in each clinical scenario, and using that data to complement the output from risk assessment models. We also provide a summary of currently available data on VTE thromboprophylaxis in myeloma, and highlight specific situations where direct oral anticoagulants should be strongly considered. Our objective is to fill the critical gaps in VTE prophylaxis and management through the analysis of specific patient cases and provide a practical overview for clinicians.

High-risk multiple myeloma: Redefining genetic, clinical, and functional high-risk disease in the era of molecular medicine and immunotherapy.

Multiple myeloma (MM) exhibits significant heterogeneity in its presentation, genetics, and treatment response. Despite therapeutic advances, some patients continue to relapse early (ER, <18-months) and rapidly cycle through therapies. Myriad prognostic factors have been identified and incorporated into risk stratification models; however, these produce discordant, often three-tiered outputs that fail to identify many patients destined for ER. Treatment strategies are increasingly focused on disease biology and trials enriched for high-risk (HR)MM, but consensus on the minimum required testing and a succinct, specific, and clinically meaningful definition for HRMM remains elusive. We review the risk-factors, definitions, and future directions for HRMM.

Progression-free survival as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of the research was to assess the quantitative relationship between median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) specifically among patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) based on published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: Two bibliographic databases (PubMed and Embase, 1970-2017) were systematically searched for RCTs in RRMM that reported OS and PFS, followed by an updated search of studies published between 2010 and 2022 in 3 databases (Embase, MEDLINE, and EBM Reviews, 2010-2022). The association between median PFS and median OS was assessed using the nonparametric Spearman rank and parametric Pearson correlation coefficients. Subsequently, the quantitative relationship between PFS and OS was assessed using weighted least-squares regression adjusted for covariates including age, sex, and publication year. Study arms were weighted by the number of patients in each arm. RESULTS: A total of 31 RCTs (56 treatment arms, 10,450 patients with RRMM) were included in the analysis. The average median PFS and median OS were 7.1 months (SD 5.5) and 28.1 months (SD 11.8), respectively. The Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficients between median PFS and median OS were 0.80 (P < 0.0001) and 0.79 (P < 0.0001), respectively. In individual treatment arms of RRMM trials, each 1-month increase in median PFS was associated with a 1.72-month (95% CI 1.26-2.17) increase in median OS. CONCLUSION: Analysis of the relationship between PFS and OS incorporating more recent studies in RRMM further substantiates the use of PFS to predict OS in RRMM.

Adjusted Indirect Treatment Comparison of Progression-Free Survival with D-Rd and VRd Based on MAIA and SWOG S0777 Individual Patient-Level Data.

INTRODUCTION: Daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (D-Rd) and bortezomib plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (VRd) are commonly used treatment combinations for transplant-ineligible (TIE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). D-Rd and VRd demonstrated superior efficacy relative to lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) in the MAIA and SWOG S0777 trials, respectively, but have not been compared directly in a head-to-head trial. Naïve comparisons of efficacy across the two trials may be biased because MAIA enrolled only TIE patients (median age 73 years), whereas SWOG S0777 enrolled both TIE patients and transplant-eligible patients who chose to defer/refuse frontline stem cell transplantation (median age 63 years). The present study compared progression-free survival (PFS) in TIE patients with NDMM treated with D-Rd versus VRd based on an adjusted indirect treatment comparison (ITC) that leveraged individual patient-level data from MAIA and SWOG S0777. METHODS: Harmonized inclusion/exclusion criteria (including age ≥ 65 years as a proxy for transplant ineligibility) and propensity-score weighting were used to balance the trial populations on measured baseline characteristics. After differences in trial populations were adjusted for, an anchored ITC was performed wherein within-trial PFS hazard ratios (HRs) for D-Rd versus Rd and VRd versus Rd were estimated and used to make indirect inference about PFS for D-Rd versus VRd. RESULTS: PFS HRs were 0.52 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41-0.67) for D-Rd versus Rd based on MAIA data, 0.88 (95% CI 0.63-1.23) for VRd versus Rd based on SWOG S0777 data, and 0.59 (95% CI 0.39-0.90) for the Rd-anchored ITC of D-Rd versus VRd. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses produced results consistent with the primary results. CONCLUSION: This anchored ITC demonstrated a greater PFS benefit for D-Rd versus VRd in TIE patients with NDMM. In the absence of head-to-head trials comparing D-Rd and VRd, the present trial may help inform treatment selection in this patient population.

Multiple drug combinations can be used to treat patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) who are not eligible for a stem cell transplant. Two of these combinations­daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (D-Rd) and bortezomib plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (VRd)­have each been studied in clinical trials (MAIA and SWOG S0777) against the combination of lenalidomide plus dexamethasone (Rd), but D-Rd and VRd have not been compared directly in a head-to-head clinical trial. Our study used data from the MAIA and SWOG S0777 trials to indirectly compare outcomes observed with D-Rd and VRd. For this indirect comparison between D-Rd and VRd, we first made adjustments to the patient populations of each trial to make them more similar to each other; this helped to make sure any differences we saw in treatment outcomes between D-Rd and VRd would not be because of differences in the characteristics of the patients who participated in the trials. After we made these adjustments to the patient populations of each trial, both D-Rd and VRd lowered the risk of disease progression or death compared with Rd alone. However, when indirectly compared in our study, D-Rd lowered the risk of disease progression or death by 41% compared with VRd. As data directly comparing treatment outcomes for D-Rd and VRd are not available, this indirect comparison can contribute to the information used to make treatment decisions for patients with NDMM who are not eligible for a stem cell transplant.

Patient-Reported Adverse Events and Early Treatment Discontinuation Among Patients With Multiple Myeloma.

Importance: There is substantial interest in capturing cancer treatment tolerability from the patient's perspective using patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Objective: To examine whether a PRO question, item 5 from the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General General Physical Wellbeing Scale (GP5), was associated with early treatment discontinuation (ETD) due to adverse events. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective survey study was conducted from February to April 2023. Among participants in the ECOG-ACRIN E1A11 trial (a phase 3, parallel design trial conducted between 2013 and 2019), patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma were randomized to receive bortezomib (VRd) or carfilzomib (KRd) plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone as induction therapy. The GP5 item was administered at baseline (pretreatment) and at 1 month, 2.8 months, and 5.5 months postbaseline. Eligible participants included patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma treated at community oncology practices or academic medical centers in the US. Exposures: GP5 response options were "very much," "quite a bit," "somewhat," "a little bit," and "not at all." Responses at each assessment while undergoing treatment (1 month, 2.8 months, and 5.5 months) were categorized as high adverse event bother (ie, "very much," and "quite a bit") and low adverse event bother (ie, "somewhat," "a little bit," or "not at all"). In addition, change from baseline to each assessment while undergoing treatment was calculated and categorized as worsening by 1 response category and 2 or more response categories. Main Outcome and Measure: ETD due to adverse events (yes vs no) was analyzed using logistic regression adjusting for treatment group, performance status, gender, race, and disease stage. Results: Of the 1087 participants in the original trial, 1058 (mean [SD] age 64 [9] years; 531 receiving VrD [50.2%]; 527 receiving KRd [49.8%]) responded to item GP5 and were included in the secondary analysis. A small proportion (142 patients [13.4%]) discontinued treatment early due to AEs. For those with high adverse-effect bother, GP5 while undergoing treatment was associated with ETD at 1 month (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.20; 95% CI, 1.25-3.89), 2.8 months (aOR, 3.41; 95% CI, 2.01-5.80), and 5.5 months (aOR, 4.66; 95% CI, 1.69-12.83). Worsening by 2 or more response categories on the GP5 was associated with ETD at 2.8 months (aOR, 3.02; 95% CI, 1.64-5.54) and 5.5 months (aOR, 5.49; 95% CI, 1.45-20.76). Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study of the E1A11 trial, worse GP5 response was associated with ETD. These findings suggest that simple assessment of adverse-effect bother while receiving treatment is an efficient way to indicate treatment tolerability and ETD risk.

Outcomes of patients with multiple myeloma refractory to standard dose vs low dose lenalidomide.

Refractoriness to lenalidomide is an important factor determining the choice of therapy at first relapse in multiple myeloma (MM). It remains debatable if resistance to lenalidomide varies among MM refractory to standard doses vs low dose maintenance doses. In this study, we assessed the outcomes with subsequent therapies in patients with MM refractory to standard dose vs low dose lenalidomide. We retrospectively reviewed all patients with MM at our institution who received first line therapy with lenalidomide containing regimens, and assessed progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival for these patients for second line therapy, and with lenalidomide retreatment. For second line therapy, we found no difference in the PFS between standard dose refractory and low dose refractory groups (median PFS 14 months vs 14 months, p = 0.95), while the PFS for both these groups was inferior to the not refractory group (median PFS 30 months, p < 0.001 for both pairs). Similar trends were seen among these groups on lenalidomide retreatment, and on multivariable analysis. These data suggest that refractoriness to lenalidomide is not dose dependent, and definition of lenalidomide refractoriness should not depend on the dose of lenalidomide to which the disease was considered refractory.

Adjusting for subsequent therapies in the TOURMALINE-MM1 study shows clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival with addition of ixazomib to lenalidomide and dexamethasone.

TOURMALINE-MM1, the only blinded randomized study in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM; ≥1 prior therapy) in the last 10 years, investigated ixazomib+lenalidomide+dexamethasone (IRd) versus lenalidomide+dexamethasone (Rd). Final overall survival (OS) data were based on a median follow-up of 85 months. In RRMM trials where patients have had 1-3 relapses after initial treatment, a high proportion receive subsequent therapy. Application of salvage therapies in blinded trials and newer modes of therapy can increasingly complicate the interpretation of OS. This analysis explores the impact of subsequent therapies on OS outcomes in TOURMALINE-MM1. The inverse probability of censoring weights (IPCW) method, marginal structural model (MSM), and rank preserving structural failure time model (RPSFTM) were utilized to adjust for confounding on OS, introduced by subsequent therapies. Analyses were conducted for the intentto-treat (ITT) population and ≥2 prior lines subgroup. Unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for IRd versus Rd was 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.78-1.13) in the ITT population. After adjusting for the impact of subsequent therapies by the RPSFTM method, estimated HR for IRd versus Rd in the ITT population was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.74-1.07). Adjusting with IPCW and MSM methods also showed an improvement in HR, favoring IRd. IRd may be particularly beneficial in patients with ≥2 prior lines of therapy (IPCW and MSM HR=0.52, 95% CI: 0.30-0.88; RPSFTM HR=0.68, 95% CI: 0.51-0.91). These analyses highlight the growing challenge of demonstrating OS benefit in multiple myeloma patients and the importance of assessing confounding introduced by subsequent therapies when interpreting OS.

Round Table Discussion on Optimal Clinical Trial Design in Precursor Multiple Myeloma.

SUMMARY: While the current approach to precursor hematologic conditions is to "watch and wait," this may change with the development of therapies that are safe and extend survival or delay the onset of symptomatic disease. The goal of future therapies in precursor hematologic conditions is to improve survival and prevent or delay the development of symptomatic disease while maximizing safety. Clinical trial considerations in this field include identifying an appropriate at-risk population, safety assessments, dose selection, primary and secondary trial endpoints including surrogate endpoints, control arms, and quality-of-life metrics, all of which may enable more precise benefit-risk assessment.

BCMA-directed therapy, new treatments in the myeloma toolbox, and how to use them.

To address the dearth of therapeutic options available for relapsed-refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), attention has shifted to immunotherapeutic strategies, with most products in development targeting the B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA). BCMA is a transmembrane receptor of the tumor necrosis factor receptor superfamily, essential for plasma cell survival and minimally expressed on non-hematopoietic tissues; it represents an ideal therapeutic target. Three categories of BCMA-directed therapies exist, with distinct strengths and weaknesses. Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are immediately available with modest single-agent efficacy in RRMM, but deliverability is hampered by corneal toxicity. CAR T-cells are the most effective class but face significant logistical and financial barriers. Bispecific antibodies offer superior efficacy and tolerability compared to ADCs, but prolonged exposure causes significant cumulative infectious risk. In this review, we will examine the role of BCMA in MM biology, the approved and emerging therapies targeting this antigen, and how these agents can be optimally sequenced.

An Open-Label Phase I Study of Metformin and Nelfinavir in Combination With Bortezomib in Patients With Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: In preclinical models, combining a GLUT4 inhibitor with an oxidative phosphorylation inhibitor shows synergistic therapeutic potential against multiple myeloma (MM). Thus, this study evaluated the safety and tolerability of repurposing metformin, a complex I inhibitor, and nelfinavir, a GLUT4 inhibitor, in combination with bortezomib for the treatment of relapsed/refractory MM that had progressed on all standard of care therapies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This trial utilized a 3 + 3 dose escalation design with 3 dose levels planned for up to a maximum of 6 (21-day) cycles. Metformin and nelfinavir were administered for 14 of 21 days, and subQ bortezomib was administered to a portion of patients on days 1, 8, and 15. The primary objective was to determine the maximal tolerated dose, and the secondary objective was to evaluate the safety and overall response rate (ORR) of this combination. RESULTS: Nine patients were accrued with a median age of 65 (range: 42-81) and received a median of 7 prior lines of therapy (Range: 5-12). The first 3 patients received only metformin (500 mg BID) and nelfinavir (1250 mg BID) at the first dose level, with 1 patient experiencing an unconfirmed minimal response (MR) in the first cycle, 1 experiencing progressive disease after 1 cycle of treatment and 1 patient going off treatment prior to assessing response but with signs of progressive disease. Given the limited therapeutic activity, the upfront addition of bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2) was utilized for the subsequent 6 patients accrued. Three of these 6 patients went off study due to progressive disease, 1 patient achieved an unconfirmed partial response after 1 cycle of treatment but reported progressive disease in the subsequent cycle, 1 patient went off study to enter hospice, and the remaining patient experienced stable disease (SD) after receiving 6 cycles of clinical trial treatment. The study was closed before accrual to the next dose level was started. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of this repurposed drug combination in this very difficult-to-treat population of relapsed and refractory MM. This was an overall negative study with no ORR observed. Fortunately, 1 patient experienced an SD response, allowing this combination to stabilize their disease until another novel therapy on a clinical trial was available.

Waldenström Macroglobulinemia/Lymphoplasmacytic Lymphoma, Version 2.2024, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

The treatment of Waldenström macroglobulinemia/lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma (WM/LPL) has evolved to include several new options. The NCCN Guidelines for WM/LPL provide a framework on which to base decisions regarding diagnosis, treatment, assessment of response to treatment, and follow-up of both newly diagnosed and previously treated WM/LPL.

Mode of progression in smoldering multiple myeloma: a study of 406 patients.

The approach to patients with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) varies among clinicians; while some advocate early intervention, others reserve treatment at progression to multiple myeloma (MM). We aimed to describe the myeloma-defining events (MDEs) and clinical presentations leading to MM diagnosis among SMM patients seen at our institution. We included 406 patients diagnosed with SMM between 2013-2022, seen at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. The 2018 Mayo 20/2/20 criteria were used for risk stratification. Median follow-up was 3.9 years. Among high-risk patients who did not receive treatment in the SMM phase (n = 71), 51 progressed by last follow-up; the MDEs included: bone lesions (37%), anemia (35%), hypercalcemia (8%), and renal failure (6%); 24% met MM criteria based on marrow plasmacytosis (≥60%) and/or free light chain ratio (>100); 45% had clinically significant MDEs (hypercalcemia, renal insufficiency, and/or bone lesions). MM diagnosis was made based on surveillance labs/imaging(45%), testing obtained due to provider suspicion for progression (14%), bone pain (20%), and hospitalization/ED presentations due to MM complications/symptoms (4%). The presentation was undocumented in 14%. A high proportion (45%) of patients with high-risk SMM on active surveillance develop end-organ damage at progression. About a quarter of patients who progress to MM are not diagnosed based on routine interval surveillance testing.

New Therapies on the Horizon for Relapsed Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

Despite improved treatments, most patients with multiple myeloma (MM) will experience relapse. Several novel agents have demonstrated activity and tolerability in early phase clinical trials. Venetoclax is a B-cell lymphoma 2 (Bcl-2) inhibitor with activity in patients with t(11;14) and/or Bcl-2 expression. Iberdomide and mezigdomide are cereblon E3 ligase modulators with higher potency, immunomodulatory, and antiproliferative activity compared with lenalidomide and pomalidomide. They have shown promising activity in heavily pretreated patients. Modakafusp alfa is an immunocytokine that targets interferons to CD38+ cells. It has demonstrated single agent activity in relapsed/refractory MM in the phase 1 setting.

Venetoclax in biomarker-selected multiple myeloma patients: Impact of exposure on clinical efficacy and safety.

Venetoclax, a potent BCL-2 inhibitor, is currently under development for treatment of t(11;14) Multiple myeloma (MM). The objective of this research was to investigate the exposure-response relationships of venetoclax for a phase 1/2 study evaluating venetoclax monotherapy or in combination with dexamethasone in relapsed or refractory MM. A total of 117 patients receiving venetoclax at 300, 600, 800, 900, or 1200 mg were included in the analysis. The impact of venetoclax exposures on efficacy (objective response rate [ORR], progression-free survival [PFS] and overall survival [OS]) as well as safety (treatment-emergent adverse effects (grade ≥3) of neutropenia, infection, and any grade of serious treatment-emergent adverse effects) was evaluated. In the t(11;14)-positive subpopulation, venetoclax exposure relationships to PFS and OS indicated a trend of longer PFS and OS with higher exposures. Moreover, logistic regression analyses for clinical response (ORR and ≥VGPR rate) demonstrated a statistically significant (p < 0.05) relationship with exposure. Evaluation of the exposure-safety relationships demonstrated a lack of a relationship between venetoclax exposures (AUCavg ) and grade ≥3 infections, grade ≥3 neutropenia, grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events or any grade serious treatment-emergent adverse events. These findings support further study of venetoclax at 800 mg QD dose in combination with dexamethasone in the t(11;14)-positive patient population where increased efficacy was observed without an increase in safety events.Clinical Trial: NCT01794520 registered 20 February 2013.

Superior detection rate of plasma cell FISH using FACS-FISH.

OBJECTIVES: Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for plasma cell neoplasms (PCNs) requires plasma cell (PC) identification or purification strategies to optimize results. We compared the efficacy of cytoplasmic immunoglobulin FISH (cIg-FISH) and fluorescence-activated cell sorting FISH (FACS-FISH) in a clinical laboratory setting. METHODS: The FISH analysis results of 14,855 samples from individuals with a suspected PCN subjected to cytogenetic evaluation between 2019 and 2022 with cIg-FISH (n = 6917) or FACS-FISH (n = 7938) testing were analyzed. RESULTS: Fluorescence-activated cell sorting-FISH increased the detection rate of abnormalities in comparison with cIg-FISH, with abnormal results documented in 54% vs 50% of cases, respectively (P < .001). It improved the detection of IGH::CCND1 (P < .001), IGH::MAF (P < .001), IGH::MAFB (P < .001), other IGH rearrangements (P < .001), and gains/amplifications of 1q (P < .001), whereas the detection rates of IGH::FGFR3 fusions (P = .3), loss of 17p (P = .3), and other abnormalities, including hyperdiploidy (P = .5), were similar. Insufficient PC yield for FISH analysis was decreased between cIg-FISH and FACS-FISH (22% and 3% respectively, P < .001). Flow cytometry allowed establishment of ploidy status in 91% of cases. In addition, FACS-FISH decreased analysis times, workload efforts, and operating costs. CONCLUSIONS: Fluorescence-activated cell sorting-FISH is an efficient PC purification strategy that affords significant improvement in diagnostic yield and decreases workflow requirements in comparison with cIg-FISH.

The effect of neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage on smoking status, quit attempts, and receipt of cessation support among adults with cancer: Results from nine ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group trials.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco use is associated with adverse outcomes among patients diagnosed with cancer. Socioeconomic determinants influence access and utilization of tobacco treatment; little is known about the relationship between neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage (NSD) and tobacco assessment, assistance, and cessation among patients diagnosed with cancer. METHODS: A modified Cancer Patient Tobacco Use Questionnaire (C-TUQ) was administered to patients enrolled in nine ECOG-ACRIN clinical trials. We examined associations of NSD with (1) smoking status, (2) receiving tobacco cessation assessment and support, and (3) cessation behaviors. NSD was classified by tertiles of the Area Deprivation Index. Associations between NSD and tobacco variables were evaluated using logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 740 patients completing the C-TUQ were 70% male, 94% White, 3% Hispanic, mean age 58.8 years. Cancer diagnoses included leukemia 263 (36%), lymphoma 141 (19%), prostate 131 (18%), breast 79 (11%), melanoma 69 (9%), myeloma 53 (7%), and head and neck 4 (0.5%). A total of 402 (54%) never smoked, 257 (35%) had formerly smoked, and 81 (11%) were currently smoking. Patients in high disadvantaged neighborhoods were approximately four times more likely to report current smoking (odds ratio [OR], 3.57; 95% CI, 1.69-7.54; p = .0009), and more likely to report being asked about smoking (OR, 4.24; 95% CI, 1.64-10.98; p = .0029), but less likely to report receiving counseling (OR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02-0.58; p = .0086) versus those in the least disadvantaged neighborhoods. CONCLUSIONS: Greater neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage was associated with smoking but less cessation support. Increased cessation support in cancer care is needed, particularly for patients from disadvantaged neighborhoods.