Yimer, Habte

Abstract Background: Parenteral DNA methyltransferase inhibitors (DNMTi) such as azacitidine and decitabine (DEC), including an attenuated 3-day regimen, are recommended in the NCCN Guidelines for patients (pts) with lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (LR-MDS) with clinically significant cytopenias. However, parenteral administration requires frequent clinic visits, which imposes a substantial burden on pts, particularly those requiring long-term therapy. Oral DMTIs offer more flexible dosing and maintenance of pts' autonomy. Oral DEC-cedazuridine (DEC-C) is a fixed-dose combination tablet containing DEC (35 mg) and cedazuridine (100 mg). ASTX727-03 (NCT03502668) is a randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase 1/2 clinical trial evaluating safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of various DEC-C doses and regimens in pts with LR-MDS. Phase 1 identified a 5-day regimen of DEC 10 mg/cedazuridine 100 mg as the optimized low-dose (LD) regimen. Phase 2 compares this LD regimen with the attenuated standard-dose (SD) regimen. Here, we report phase 2 results on efficacy, safety, PK, and pharmacodynamic (PD) data. Methods: Adults (aged ≥18 years) with International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) low-risk or Intermediate-1 MDS, ECOG PS 0−2, and ≥1 cytopenia or red blood cell (RBC) transfusion dependence were randomized 1:1 to receive oral DEC-C LD (10 mg x 5 days) or SD (35 mg x 3 days). The primary endpoint was hematologic response. Secondary endpoints included PK, PD (by LINE-1 demethylation), time to bone marrow blasts >5%, leukemia-free survival (LFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: As of October 31, 2024, 81 pts were treated (LD arm: n=40; SD arm: n=41) and completed a median of 8.8 months on treatment. At cutoff, 17 (42.5%) and 12 (28.6%) LD and SD pts, respectively, were still continuing the study; 9 (22.5%) and 6 (14.6%) pts respectively, had discontinued treatment due to hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Median age was 70 (LD) and 75 (SD) years; 75.0% (LD) and 68.3% (SD) had IPSS Int-1 risk MDS and 60.0% vs 41.5% had IPSS-Molecular Lower-Risk MDS (very low, low, or moderate-low). Low-risk prognostic scoring system risk distribution was similar: Category 1 (2.5% vs 4.9%), Category 2 (47.5% vs 46.3%), and Category 3 (50.0% vs 48.8%). After a median follow-up of 29.3 months, median OS was 23.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 13.0, not estimable [NE]) in the LD arm vs 26.0 months (95% CI: 19.4, 28.5) in the SD arm. Median LFS was 23.8 months (95% CI: 13.0, NE) and 25.7 months (95% CI: 17.8, 26.5), respectively. Hematologic improvement per International Working Group 2006 criteria was achieved in 27.5% (LD) and 26.8% (SD) of pts. Among RBC transfusion–dependent pts, 52.4% (LD) and 37.5% (SD) achieved ≥56-day independence and 47.6% (LD) and 20.8% (SD) achieved ≥112-day independence. Pts received a median of 10 (LD) and 9 (SD) cycles. Delayed cycles occurred in 72.5% (LD) vs 82.9% (SD) of pts; dose reductions occurred in 40.0% (LD) and 46.3% (SD) of pts. Both treatment regimens caused a decrease in blood counts, reaching a nadir before recovering in each cycle. Neutropenia was more pronounced during early cycles and was more severe in the SD arm. Blood counts across all lineages remained stable or improved through ≥12 cycles with the LD arm, suggesting a more favorable safety and tolerability profile. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 85.0% and 90.2% of pts in the LD and SD arms, respectively; treatment discontinuation due to AEs occurred in 2.5% and 17.1% of pts, respectively. Most commonly reported treatment-emergent AEs were anemia (42.5% LD, 39.0% SD), fatigue (32.5% LD, 43.9% SD), and thrombocytopenia (37.5% LD, 39.0% SD). Three deaths occurred in the trial: 2 in the LD arm, which were both unrelated to study treatment, and 1 in the SD arm (Pseudomonal bacteremia in Cycle 1), which was treatment related. Total AUC0–24 was 199 ng*h/mL in the LD arm and 465 ng*h/mL in the SD arm; AUC for all cycles of the LD arm was approximately half of the SD arm. Maximal % LINE-1 demethylation rate was lower with LD than SD, but narrowed by Cycle 3. Conclusion: LD oral DEC-C demonstrated comparable clinical benefit to SD oral DEC-C, with improved safety and tolerability, including fewer dose modifications and less severe myelosuppression. These findings support LD DEC-C as a potential optimal regimen for pts with LR-MDS. Clinical trial registration: NCT03502668

PURPOSE The combination of the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib with bendamustine-rituximab for first-line treatment of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) prolonged progression-free survival (PFS), but without improvement in overall survival (OS), likely because of toxicity. Acalabrutinib was shown to be efficacious and less toxic than ibrutinib in a head-to-head trial in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and therefore might lead to better outcomes in MCL. METHODS Patients 65 years and older with previously untreated MCL received acalabrutinib (100 mg twice daily) or placebo (until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity), plus six cycles of bendamustine (90 mg/m 2 once daily; days 1 and 2) and rituximab (375 mg/m 2 as a single dose; day 1) followed by rituximab maintenance in responding patients for 2 years. Crossover to acalabrutinib at disease progression was permitted. The primary end point was PFS per the independent review committee; overall response rate and OS were secondary end points. RESULTS In total, 598 patients were randomly assigned, with 299 in each arm. At a median follow-up of 49.8 months using the reverse Kaplan-Meier method, the median PFS was 66.4 months in the acalabrutinib arm and 49.6 months in the placebo arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.94]; P = .0160). Benefit was seen across all subgroups, including those with high-risk features. Overall response/complete response rates were 91.0%/66.6% and 88.0%/53.5% in the acalabrutinib and placebo arms, respectively. OS was not significantly different (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.65 to 1.13]; P = .27). Grade 3 or greater adverse events were reported in 88.9% and 88.2% in the acalabrutinib and placebo arms, respectively. CONCLUSION The combination of acalabrutinib with bendamustine-rituximab significantly improved PFS. Clinical benefit of acalabrutinib with bendamustine-rituximab was achieved with manageable toxicity.

There are four solid tumors with common screening options in the average-risk population aged 21 to 75 years (breast, cervical, colorectal, and, based on personalized risk assessment, prostate), but many cancers lack recommended population screening and are often detected at advanced stages when mortality is high. Blood-based multi-cancer early detection tests have the potential to improve cancer mortality through additional population screening. Reported here is a post-hoc analysis from the third Circulating Cell-free Genome Atlas substudy to examine multi-cancer early detection test performance in solid tumors with and without population screening recommendations and in hematologic malignancies. Participants with cancer in the third Circulating Cell-free Genome Atlas substudy analysis were split into three subgroups: solid screened tumors (breast, cervical, colorectal, prostate), solid unscreened tumors, and hematologic malignancies. In this post hoc analysis, sensitivity is reported for each subgroup across all ages and those aged ⩾50 years overall, by cancer, and by clinical cancer stage. Aggregate sensitivity in the solid screened, solid unscreened, and hematologic malignancy subgroups was 34%, 66%, and 55% across all cancer stages, respectively; restricting to participants aged ⩾50 years showed similar aggregate sensitivity. Aggregate sensitivity was 27%, 53%, and 60% across stages I to III, respectively. Within the solid unscreened subgroup, aggregate sensitivity was >75% in 8/18 cancers (44%) and >50% in 13/18 (72%). This multi-cancer early detection test detected cancer signals at high (>75%) sensitivity for multiple cancers without existing population screening recommendations, suggesting its potential to complement recommended screening programs. Clinical trial identifier: NCT02889978.

Abstract Introduction: Patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (RR DLBCL) who cannot tolerate or who are not eligible for autologous or chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) therapy have limited therapeutic options and suboptimal long-term outcomes. In patients who were not eligible for HSCT, the rituximab plus gemcitabine, dexamethasone and cisplatin (R-GDP) regimen (and variations using methylprednisolone or carboplatin/oxaliplatin) have shown an overall response rates (ORR) of ~50%, a complete response (CR) rate of ~25% (Gopal, Leuk Lymphoma, 2010), and a median progression-free survival (PFS) and an overall survival (OS) of 3 and 9 months, respectively (Crump, Hematol Oncol Clin N Am. 2016; Gopal Leuk Lymphoma, 2010; Ng, Br J Cancer, 2005; Sirohi, Hematology, 2007; Barton, Eur J Haematol. 2015; Moccia Leuk Lymphoma, 2017). Selinexor is an oral small molecule selective inhibitor of exportin-1 (XPO1) mediated nuclear export (SINE) compound leading to activation of tumor suppressor proteins and reduction in oncoprotein levels. It also reduces the expression of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) damage repair proteins and therefore potentiates DNA damage-based therapies leading to an increased death of cancer cells. Selinexor has synergistic effects with gemcitabine and cisplatin, and enhanced anti-lymphoma effects with dexamethasone. In the SADAL study (n=134), single-agent oral selinexor 60 mg twice weekly induced an ORR of 29% and a CR rate of 13% in patients with RR DLBCL. The response rates were consistent across various subgroups including patients <70 vs ≥70 years old, those with de novo and transformed DLBCL, and GCB and non-GCB subtypes of DLBCL. The median duration of response (DOR) was 9.3 months, and 23 months for patients who achieved CR. OS was 9.0 months. In June 2020, selinexor monotherapy was approved in the US for the treatment of adult patients with RR DLBCL, not otherwise specified, including DLBCL arising from follicular lymphoma, after at least 2 lines of systemic therapy. Selinexor in combination with R-GDP was evaluated in a Phase 1 clinical trial (SELINDA), in which patients with DLBCL received either 40 or 60 mg selinexor once or twice weekly in combination with standard dose R-GDP. The recommended phase 2 dose for further exploration was 40 or 60 mg once weekly with an ORR of 60-80%. Therefore, combining selinexor with R-GDP is expected to improve response rates, and continuation of treatment with single-agent selinexor is expected to prolong the duration of responses, improve PFS (and potentially OS) in patients with RR DLBCL. Materials and methods: XPORT-DLBCL-030 is a Phase 2/3, multicenter study. The Phase 2 portion of the study is an open-label randomized study to identify the optimal dose of selinexor (40 or 60 mg) in combination with R-GDP in patients (n=120) with RR DLBCL. Patients ≥18 years with 1-3 prior lines of therapy and ECOG performance status ≤2 who are not intended for HSCT or CAR-T therapy are randomized 1:1:1 to one of 3 treatment arms: Arm 1: selinexor 40 mg+R-GDP (S40+R-GDP); Arm 2: selinexor 60 mg+R-GDP (S60 + R-GDP); Arm 3: R-GDP. Combination treatment will be given for up to 6 cycles (21 days/cycle). After completing the SR-GDP combination therapy (EoC), patients in Arms 1 and 2 who reach at least partial response (PR), will receive weekly single-agent selinexor 60 mg (28 days/cycle) as "continuous therapy" until disease progression (PD) or unacceptable toxicity. After PD, patients will be followed up for survival. Patients in the R-GDP arm will be followed up for PD and survival. Patients who are ineligible for HSCT due to an active disease, or those who have primary refractory DLBCL, defined as no response or relapse within 6 months after ending first-line treatment, will be allowed to enroll in the study (up to 15% and 25%, respectively of all patients enrolled). The primary endpoint of the study is ORR according to the Lugano 2014 criteria. Secondary endpoints include PFS, OS, ORR-EoC, DOR and incidence and severity of adverse events. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Pinto: Takeda: Consultancy; MSD: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb-CELGENE: Honoraria. Yimer: Texas Oncology: Current Employment; Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; GSK: Speakers Bureau; Beigene: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Astrazeneca: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Speakers Bureau. Manda: Morphosys: Honoraria; Genmab: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Canales: Sanofi: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sandoz: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; iQone: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria; Eusa Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Jurczak: European Medicines Agency, Sandoz-Novartis, Janssen China R&D, BeiGene, Epizyme, Acerta, AstraZeneca: Consultancy; AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, Celtrion, Celgene, Debbiopharm, Epizyme, Incyte, Janssen, Loxo Oncology, Merck, Mei Pharma, Morphosys, Novo Nordisk, Roche, Sandoz, Takeda, TG Therapeutics, Pharmacyclics, Affirmed, Gilead Sciences, Nordic Nanovecto: Research Funding; Jagiellonian University: Ended employment in the past 24 months; Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology: Current Employment; AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Janssen, Loxo Oncology, Sandoz, Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sureda: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Other: Support for attending meetings and/or travel; Bluebird: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Mundipharma: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Support for attending meetings and/or travel, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Support for attending meetings and/or travel, Speakers Bureau. Ma: Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Ended employment in the past 24 months. Li: Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ingalls: Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Arriola: Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Arazy: Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Shah: Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Shacham: Karyopharm: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Patents & Royalties: (8999996, 9079865, 9714226, PCT/US12/048319, and I574957) on hydrazide containing nuclear transport modulators and uses, and pending patents PCT/US12/048319, 499/2012, PI20102724, and 2012000928) . Kauffman: Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Nowakowski: Celgene, NanoString Technologies, MorphoSys: Research Funding; Celgene, MorphoSys, Genentech, Selvita, Debiopharm Group, Kite/Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Background: SUMOylation, a post-translational modification analogous to ubiquitination, attaches a small, ubiquitin-like modifier (SUMO) to target proteins. SUMOylation plays a central role in the immune system by regulating type I interferon (IFN-I) expression, thereby functioning to constrain the innate immune response (Decque Nat Immunol 2016), and limit tumor immune surveillance. The SUMOylation pathway is often overexpressed in multiple myeloma (MM) and is associated with poor outcomes (Driscoll Blood 2010). TAK-981 is a first-in-class, small-molecule inhibitor of SUMO-activating enzyme, which blocks the SUMOylation cascade (Langston J Med Chem 2021) and increases IFN-I production and signaling in innate immune cells (Nakamura AACR 2019). In ex vivo assays, TAK-981 activated the IFN-I pathway, increased phagocytic activity of monocyte-derived macrophages, and increased natural killer (NK) cell cytotoxicity via IFN-I signaling (Nakamura AACR 2019). The ability of TAK-981 to promote activation of macrophages and NK cells provides a mechanistic rationale for its use in combination with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) reliant on antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity and phagocytosis; in vivo experiments have demonstrated synergistic activity between TAK-981 and rituximab, and between TAK-981 and the anti-CD38 mAbs daratumumab (dara) (Nakamura SITC 2020) or mezagitamab (meza; TAK-079; Figure 1). Patients with MM who have disease refractory to the three most effective classes of anti-myeloma therapies (proteasome inhibitors [PIs], immunomodulatory drugs [IMiDs], and anti-CD38 mAbs) have a poor prognosis, with median survival 9.2 months (Gandhi Leukemia 2019). Given the incurable nature of advanced MM and the highly complex mechanisms of resistance, continued efforts to better understand MM biology at the time of relapse and to translate this into effective treatment combinations are needed. Combination therapies that engage the immune system to treat MM may offer substantial clinical benefit. Methods: To be eligible for this multicenter, open-label, Phase 1b/2 trial (NCT04776018), patients must have failed at least 3 prior lines of anti-myeloma therapy, have MM disease that is triple-class refractory (defined as refractory/intolerant to ≥1 PI and ≥1 IMiD, and refractory to ≥1 anti-CD38 mAb), and have demonstrated disease progression on their last therapy. Prior CAR-T therapy is allowed. Patients will be assigned to TAK-981 plus subcutaneous (SC) meza (Phase 1 Part 1) or SC dara (dara and hyaluronidase-fihj; Phase 1 Part 2). The primary objectives of Phase 1b are to determine safety and tolerability, and to select the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) and schedule for TAK-981 with each mAb; secondary objectives are to evaluate preliminary antitumor activity, to characterize TAK-981 pharmacokinetics (PK), and to explore pharmacodynamic (PD) markers of TAK-981 target engagement and SUMOylation pathway inhibition. Approximately 30 patients will participate in the Phase 1b Part 1 dose escalation of TAK-981 plus meza (~15 patients per dosing schedule), and ~15 patients will participate in the Phase 1b Part 2 dose escalation of TAK-981 plus SC dara. The primary objective of Phase 2 is to evaluate the efficacy of TAK-981 at the RP2D in combination with an anti-CD38 mAb; ~36 patients will be enrolled. In Phase 1b, patients will receive TAK-981 via a 1-hour intravenous infusion either on days 1, 4, 8, 11, and 15 (twice weekly; BIW) or on days, 1, 8, 15, and 22 (weekly; QW) for 2x 28-day cycles, then 8x every other week, then monthly. Meza 600 mg SC or dara 1800 mg SC will be given 8x weekly, 8x every other week, then monthly, in a 28-day cycle (Figure 2). Treatment will continue until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (max. 24 cycles). TAK-981 dose escalation will proceed from 60 mg BIW, a dose shown to be pharmacologically active in a first-in-human, single-agent TAK-981 study (TAK-981-1002; data on file). Dose escalation will be guided by Bayesian Optimal Internal Design with Informative Prior (iBOIN) plus consideration of other safety, clinical, PK, and PD data. The iBOIN design selects the true maximum tolerated dose (if any) with high accuracy by allocating more patients to dose levels with a prior dose-limiting toxicity probability closest to the target of 0.3. This study is currently enrolling patients, with the first patient dosed in May 2021. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Lonial: AMGEN: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Boccia: BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Epizyme: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Morphosis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Yimer: Beigene: Speakers Bureau; Astrazeneca: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; GSK: Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau; Texas Oncology: Current Employment. Levy: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Morphosys: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau; Dova: Consultancy, Other: Promotional speaker; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau; Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Other: Promotional speaker; Epizyme: Consultancy, Other: Promotional speaker; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Promotional speaker; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Abonour: Takeda: Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene-BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Jensen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Mohan: Medical College of Wisconsin: Current Employment. Girnius: BMS: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Beigene: Speakers Bureau. Rosenbaum: Takeda: Honoraria; Akcea: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Nadeem: Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Berg: Takeda: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Chao: Takeda: Current Employment. Berger: Takeda Development Center Americas, Inc.: Current Employment. Nakamura: Takeda Development Center Americas, Inc.: Current Employment. Zhang: Takeda: Current Employment. Song: Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Current Employment. Ward: Takeda: Current Employment. Proscurshim: Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Current Employment, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Kumar: Novartis: Research Funding; Tenebio: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Antengene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche-Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Carsgen: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Study of the investigational agent TAK-981 in combination with daratumumab and hyaluronidase-fihj or the investigational agent mezagitamab (TAK-079).

3072 Background: The Circulating Cell-free Genome Atlas study (CCGA; NCT02889978) previously demonstrated that a blood-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test utilizing cell-free DNA (cfDNA) sequencing in combination with machine learning could detect cancer signals across multiple cancer types and predict cancer signal origin. Cancer classes were defined within the CCGA study for sensitivity reporting. Separately, cancer types defined by the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) criteria, which outline unique staging requirements and reflect a distinct combination of anatomic site, histology and other biologic features, were assigned to each cancer participant using the same source data for primary site of origin and histologic type. Here, we report CCGA ‘cancer class’ designation and AJCC ‘cancer type’ assignment within the third and final CCGA3 validation substudy to better characterize the diversity of tumors across which a cancer signal could be detected with the MCED test that is nearing clinical availability. Methods: CCGA is a prospective, multicenter, case-control, observational study with longitudinal follow-up (overall population N = 15,254). Plasma cfDNA from evaluable samples was analyzed using a targeted methylation bisulfite sequencing assay and a machine learning approach, and test performance, including sensitivity, was assessed. For sensitivity reporting, CCGA cancer classes were assigned to cancer participants using a combination of the type of primary cancer reported by the site and tumor characteristics abstracted from the site pathology reports by GRAIL pathologists. Each cancer participant also was separately assigned an AJCC cancer type based on the same source data using AJCC staging manual (8th edition) classifications. Results: A total of 4077 participants comprised the independent validation set with confirmed status (cancer: n = 2823; non-cancer: n = 1254 with non-cancer status confirmed at year-one follow-up). Sensitivity was reported for 24 cancer classes (sample sizes ranged from 10 to 524 participants), as well as an “other” cancer class (59 participants). According to AJCC classification, the MCED test was found to detect cancer signals across 50+ AJCC cancer types, including some types not present in the training set; some cancer types had limited representation. Conclusions: This MCED test that is nearing clinical availability and was evaluated in the third CCGA substudy detected cancer signals across 50+ AJCC cancer types. Reporting CCGA cancer classes and AJCC cancer types demonstrates the ability of the MCED test to detect cancer signals across a set of diverse cancer types representing a wide range of biologic characteristics, including cancer types that the classifier has not been trained on, and supports its use on a population-wide scale. Clinical trial information: NCT02889978.

3071 Background: Disparities in cancer screening and outcomes based on factors such as gender, socioeconomic status, and race/ethnicity are well documented.1 The Circulating Cell-free Genome Atlas study (CCGA; NCT02889978) was designed to develop and validate a blood-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test analyzing plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) to detect cancer signals across multiple cancer types and simultaneously predict cancer signal origin. Findings stratified by race/ethnicity from the third and final CCGA validation sub-study are reported. Methods: CCGA is a prospective, multicenter, case-control, observational study with longitudinal follow-up (overall N = 15,254). In this pre-specified exploratory analysis from the third substudy, key objectives were to evaluate test performance for cancer signal detection (specificity, overall sensitivity, and sensitivity by clinical stage) among racial/ethnic groups. Plasma cfDNA from evaluable samples was analyzed using a targeted methylation bisulfite sequencing assay and a machine learning approach. Overall, 4077 participants comprised the independent validation set with confirmed status (cancer: n = 2823; non-cancer: n = 1254). The groups stratified by race/ethnicity were White Non-Hispanic, Black Non-Hispanic, Other Non-Hispanic (including but not limited to Asian, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, American Indian, Alaska Native), Hispanic (all races), and Other/unknown. The study was not powered to detect statistical differences between groups. Results: Cancer and non-cancer groups were predominantly White (2316/2823, 82.0% and 996/1254, 79.4%, respectively). Across racial/ethnic groups, specificity for cancer signal detection was 99.6% (White Non-Hispanic: 992/996, 95% confidence interval [99.0-99.8%]), 100.0% (Black Non-Hispanic: 85/85 [95.7-100.0%]), 100.0% (Other Non-Hispanic: 33/33 [89.6-100.0%]), 98.1% (Hispanic: 101/103 [93.2-99.5%]), and 100% (Other/unknown: 37/37 [90.6-100.0%]). Despite slight differences in cancer type and staging across racial/ethnic groups, overall sensitivity for cancer signal detection among groups ranged from 43.9% to 63.0% (White Non-Hispanic: 50.5%, 1169/2316 [48.4-52.5%], Black Non-Hispanic: 53.9%, 104/193 [46.8-60.8%], Other Non-Hispanic: 43.9%, 25/57 [31.8-56.7%], Hispanic: 63.0%, 121/192 [56.0-69.5%], and Other/unknown: 52.3%, 34/65 [40.4-64.0%]). For all racial/ethnic groups, sensitivity generally increased with clinical stage (with limited exceptions at Stage IV in some groups with small sample sizes). Conclusions: The MCED test demonstrated consistent specificity and sensitivity across racial/ethnic groups, though results are limited by sample size for some groups. These findings indicate broad applicability and support clinical implementation of this MCED test on a population scale. 1. Zavela et al. Brit J Cancer 2021. Clinical trial information: NCT02889978.

7519 Background: Acalabrutinib, a highly selective, potent, covalent Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor, has a 24% overall response rate (ORR) as a single agent in R/R DLBCL. Pem targets PD-1, an immune checkpoint that limits anticancer responses. Pem showed responses in patients (pts) with Richter transformation who failed ibrutinib and can augment acalabrutinib activity in vitro. This study assessed acalabrutinib + Pem in R/R DLBCL. Methods: Pts with DLBCL, ≥1 prior chemoimmunotherapy and no prior allogeneic transplant received acalabrutinib 100 mg PO BID until progressive disease (PD) + Pem 200 mg/kg IV Q3W up to 2 y. Germinal center B-cell (GCB) vs non-GCB subtype was assessed by immunohistochemistry. Primary endpoint was safety. Results: Sixty-one pts (30 GCB; 31 non-GCB) were accrued, with a median age (range) of 67 y (30-85) and a median of 3 (1-8) prior therapies; 1 pt had prior autologous transplant. The most common Gr 3/4 adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia (15%) and anemia (11%). Gr 5 AEs were respiratory failure (n=3), sepsis, septic shock and abdominal abscess (n=1 each). All Gr atrial fibrillation was 5% (n=3), and major hemorrhage (≥ Gr 3) was 11% (4 gastrointestinal, 1 pulmonary, 1 epistaxis, 1 hematuria). Gr 3/4 immune-mediated events were elevated alanine aminotransferase (n=4), pneumonitis (n=2) and colitis (n=1). The ORR was 26% (Table) and was similar in GCB (27%) and non-GCB (26%) tumors. The median time on study was 5.2 mo (0.4-30.4+). Acalabrutinib/Pem discontinuations were due to PD (62%/56%) and AEs (15%/26%). As of June 2018, 10 pts remain on study; 6 on active therapy and 7 without PD. Conclusions: Acalabrutinib + Pem was well tolerated, with meaningful activity and some exceptional responders (>24 mo) in these R/R DLBCL pts. Randomized trials of the combination vs single agent are needed. Clinical trial information: NCT02362035. [Table: see text]

Abstract Introduction DLBCL is the most common lymphoid neoplasm in adults (Swerdlow 2016). While durable CRs are achieved in approximately 70% of patients (pts) with frontline RCHOP therapy (Pfreundschuh 2008), pts with high-risk features often experience disease resistance or relapse. In Part 1 of an ongoing study, pts with high-intermediate or high risk DLBCL by international prognostic index (IPI) scores, regardless of CD30 expression by IHC, were treated with 1.2 or 1.8 mg/kg brentuximab vedotin (BV) combined with RCHOP. After 3 of the first 10 pts treated at 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHOP developed Grade 3 peripheral neuropathy (per Standardized MedDRA Query [SMQ]), all pts enrolled subsequently received treatment with 1.2 mg/kg BV+RCHOP. Following completion of enrollment in Part 1, the protocol was amended to enroll a non-randomized portion of the study (Part 2) evaluating the safety and efficacy of 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHP (Yasenchak 2015), followed by an open-label, randomized portion comparing BV+RCHP to RCHOP (Part 3). Initial results from Part 2 and updated results from Part 1 are reported here. Methods For Part 2 of the study, pts with CD30-expressing high-intermediate and high-risk DLBCL were treated with up to 6 cycles of 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHP (NCT01925612). Key inclusion criteria were CD30 expression by IHC performed by a local pathology lab and standard IPI scores of 3-5 or age-adjusted IPI (aaIPI) scores of 2-3 (high-intermediate/high risk). CD30 expression was confirmed by a central pathology lab, although CD30 expression by local pathology lab was required for eligibility. Disease response was evaluated with PET/CT per Cheson 2007. Results At the time of analysis for this ongoing study, 11 pts in Part 2 were treated with BV+RCHP (7 male, 4 female; 22-78 yrs). Of these pts, 9 had high-intermediate risk (IPI 3, aaIPI 2) and 2 had high risk disease (IPI 4-5, aaIPI 3), 6 had Stage IV disease, and 6 had an ECOG score of 2. At the end of treatment, the overall response rate was 91% (9 CR, 1 PR); 1 pt had PD after Cycle 4. The most frequent (>20%) treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were alopecia and nausea (73% each); fatigue (64%); constipation and peripheral sensory neuropathy (55% each); neutropenia and throat irritation (36% each); and chills, diarrhea, headache, and stomatitis (27% each). Grade 3 or 4 AEs occurred in 8 pts and 5 pts had serious AEs, which included febrile neutropenia, bacteremia, nausea, pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, and vomiting. Peripheral sensory neuropathy occurred in 6 pts and all were Grade 1 or 2 events; no peripheral motor neuropathy AEs were reported. No AEs were fatal or led to discontinuation. One pt discontinued treatment after Cycle 4 due to disease progression. For the first 51 pts in Part 1, the progression-free survival (PFS) at 18 months for pts with CD30 expression (25 pts) or without detectable CD30 expression (24 pts) by IHC was 79% (95% CI: 57%, 91%) versus 58% (95% CI: 36%, 75%), respectively. Overall survival for pts was 92% (95% CI: 71%, 98%) versus 71% (95% CI: 48%, 85%), respectively. Ten pts had pre-existing peripheral neuropathy (per SMQ) at study entry. Treatment-emergent peripheral neuropathy (per SMQ) was observed in 75% of pts (38/51) who received BV+RCHOP; 55% of these pts (21/38) had resolution of all or some peripheral neuropathy events. Conclusions 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHP is active as frontline treatment in CD30-expressing, high-intermediate/high risk DLBCL. When combined with RCHP, 1.8 mg/kg BV appears to be well-tolerated. The PFS and OS for pts with CD30-expression who received BV+RCHOP appear promising. The study is currently ongoing in pts with CD30-expressing high-intermediate/high risk DLBCL to assess the safety and activity of 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHP versus standard RCHOP. Disclosures Halwani: Bristol Myers-Squibb: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Miragen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Amgen: Research Funding. Yasenchak:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Farber:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Burke:Pfizer: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Other: Travel Expenses; Millenium: Consultancy. Fayad:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Holkova:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Knapp:Insys Therapeutics, Inc.: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding. Kolibaba:Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; janssen: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding. Patel-Donnelly:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Yimer:Ariad Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Biotheranostics: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Equity Ownership; Kite Pharma: Equity Ownership; Clovis Oncology: Equity Ownership; Juno Therpeutics: Equity Ownership; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Smith:Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Levy:Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Seetharam:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Belada:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Brooks:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Kingsley:Gilead: Equity Ownership; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Equity Ownership. Wagner-Johnston:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Ruffner:Forma Therapeutics: Consultancy; Sydnax: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Employment, Equity Ownership; Array Biopharma: Employment; Medivation: Employment. Bartlett:Gilead: Consultancy.