Burdett, Kirsten B.

Introduction: MPAL is a rare and heterogenous subtype of acute leukemia characterized by a single blast population with phenotypic expression of both myeloid and lymphoid lineages (biphenotypic) or multiple co-existing lineages of blasts that satisfy criteria for both acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). MPAL presents both a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge given its rarity and resistance to traditional therapies. Data suggest ALL-directed or hybrid therapies are most effective at inducing durable remissions as a bridge to allogeneic stem cell transplantation (Allo-SCT; Lazzarotto 2023, Rasekh 2021); however, many are single-institution with limited sample sizes. Methods: A retrospective analysis at 7 US academic centers was performed. Adult patients (pts) with a confirmed diagnosis of MPAL between 2003-2023 were included. Comparisons of categorical and continuous variables utilized the Fisher exact test and Wilcoxon rank-sum or Kruskal-Wallis test as appropriate. Time-to-event outcomes were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank test. Results: A total of 79 pts with MPAL were included in this study. Median age at diagnosis was 61 years (range, 18-89); 52% were ≥ 60 years. Majority of pts were male (60%), non-Hispanic white (64%), and had an ECOG ≤ 1 (83%). Of the 50 pts with baseline CSF analysis, 5 (10%) had CNS disease. Phenotypically, the predominant blast population was biphenotypic in 68%, myeloid in 17%, and lymphoid in 15% of cases. KMT2A-rearrangement and BCR::ABL1 translocation constituted 4% and 14% of cases, respectively, and 30% of pts had complex cytogenetics. Most common mutations at baseline included RUNX1 (33%), DNMT3A (30%), FLT3-ITD (26%), TET2 (19%), WT1 (19%), NRAS (18%), TP53 (17%), and ASXL1 (14%) mutations. Of the 79 pts, 61 (77%) received intensive chemotherapy (IC), 12 (15%) received HMA-based regimens, 4 (5%) received other non-intensive regimens, and 2 (3%) transitioned to hospice prior to therapy. Among those receiving IC, 37 (61%) received ALL-directed therapies, 16 (26%) AML-directed, and 8 (13%) received hybrid regimens which included FLAG-VIPR (6/8), 7+3+vincristine (1/8), and cladrabine/low-dose cytarabine/vincristine/dexamethasone (1/8). Therapies were phenotype-discordant in 4/61 pts receiving IC; 3 myeloblast-predominant MPAL pts received ALL-directed therapy and one lymphoid-predominant pt received AML-directed therapy. Among 54 pts with predominant biphenotypic blasts, 52% received ALL-directed regimens. Of the 11 pts with BCR::ABL1 translocation, 8 (73%) received dasatinib, 2 (18%) ponatinib, and 1 (9%) received both. Only 30% of pts with FLT3-ITD mutated MPAL (5/17) received a FLT3 inhibitor. Overall, 56% of pts achieved complete remission (CR) or CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi), with a median duration of response of 16.7 months (IQR: 8.1-46.1). The rates of CR/CRi were 39%, 56%, and 75% for myeloid, biphenotypic, and lymphoid MPAL, respectively. All pts with CNS disease (5/5) cleared after induction. Thirty-seven percent of pts proceeded with Allo-SCT in first remission (23% of myeloid pts, 58% lymphoid, 35% biphenotypic). Thirty-two percent of responders (CR/CRi; 14/44) relapsed with a median time to relapse of 9.4 months (range, 0.5-42). Median overall survival (OS) for the entire cohort was 51 months (95% CI: 15-89). The 2-year OS rate was higher in pts with lymphoid-predominant phenotype (83%) compared to biphenotypic (55%) or myeloid-predominant phenotype (38%; p=0.16). Median OS was significantly longer in transplant versus non-SCT recipients (121 vs 14 months) with a 1-year OS rate of 97% vs. 59% (p<0.0001), respectively. Among pts who achieved CR/CRi, median OS significantly longer in transplant versus non-SCT recipients (121 vs 55 months, p=0.031), with a 2-year OS rate of 91% vs 75%. Conclusions In this large multi-center study, there were differences in survival based on predominant blast phenotype, with improved OS in lymphoid-predominant MPAL. Although most pts with biphenotypic-predominant MPAL received ALL-directed regimens, OS was worse in this subtype compared to lymphoid-predominant MPAL. There was significantly improved OS among Allo-SCT recipients underscoring the importance of Allo-SCT in this subtype of acute leukemia. Additional studies are needed to understand this rare and heterogenous disease.

Introduction: MDS are primarily diseases of the elderly, with median age at diagnosis of 72 years. Focused data on clinical and molecular characteristics, as well as outcomes, in younger pts under age 60 years are limited. We conducted this multicenter retrospective study to describe pt characteristics, cytogenetic and molecular profiles, treatment modalities, and outcomes in younger pts with MDS, including adolescent and young adults (AYA). Methods: The study included pts diagnosed with MDS between 2002-2023 at 7 academic centers. We compared baseline characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of AYA (18-39 years) and younger adult (YA) pts (40-59 years). Responses were assessed using the modified IWG 2006 response criteria which included complete remission (CR), marrow CR (mCR), and hematologic improvement (HI). Wilcoxon rank sum test and Fisher's exact (and Chi-square) test were used to compare pt and disease characteristics for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank test. Results: A total of 173 pts were identified (AYA, N=50; YA, N=123). Median age at diagnosis was 50 years (range, 18-59), with 51% females. Baseline characteristics are shown in Table 1. Therapy-related MDS (t-MDS) was observed in 40 pts (23%) with the remaining classified as de novo MDS (N=133; 77%). Inherited bone marrow failure syndromes were documented in 15 pts (9%), with Shwachman-Diamond Syndrome (N=4) and Fanconi anemia (N=4) being the most frequent. Using the WHO 2016 classification, the most common subtypes of MDS in both the AYA and YA cohorts were MDS with multilineage dysplasia (38% vs 19%), MDS with excess blasts-2 (MDS-EB) (24% vs 29%), and MDS-EB-1 (16% vs 20%). Similarly, using the WHO 2022 classification, the most common subtypes were MDS with low blasts (50% vs 21%), MDS with increased blasts-2 (MDS-IB-2) (24% vs 24%), and MDS-IB-1 (16% vs 18%). Stratifying pts using the IPSS-R cytogenetic (CG) risk group, the most common CG risk category identified was good CG (34% vs 52%, p=0.012). Poor/very poor CG were present in 34% and 37% of the AYA and YA groups, respectively. STAG2 and NRAS mutations occurred more frequently in the AYA pts compared to the YA group, while the YA cohort was enriched for the following mutations: TP53, DNMT3A, SF3B1, SRSF2, and TET2 (Figure 1). In the AYA population, 18 pts (38%) had very low/low, 10 (21%) intermediate, and 20 pts (42%) had high/very high risk MDS using IPSS-R. In the YA population, 32 pts (26%) had very low/low, 32 (26%) intermediate, and 57 pts (47%) had high/very high risk MDS using IPSS-R. Twenty-seven percent of pts with very low to intermediate-risk MDS using IPSS-R were upstaged to moderate high to very high-risk MDS using IPSS-M. The majority of pts (AYA: 75%; YA: 63%, p=0.5) were transfusion independent at baseline. Single-agent hypomethylating agents were the most frequently used frontline therapy, used in 17 AYA pts (34%) and 58 YA pts (48%), with more AYA pts receiving upfront allogeneic stem cell transplantation (Allo-SCT) compared to YA pts (28% vs 5%). After frontline therapy (Table 1), an additional 14 AYA (28%) and 52 YA (42%) pts received Allo-SCT. In pts with IPSS-R intermediate to very high-risk, response rates (HI+CR+mCR+mCR with HI) to frontline therapies were 46% and 54.5% in the AYA and YA groups, respectively. After median follow-up of 24 months [range, 1-218], median OS was numerically longer in the AYA versus YA group (155 vs 53 months, p=0.2). AML transformation occurred in 24% and 20% of the pts in the AYA and YA groups, respectively. Median OS was significantly longer in de novo compared to t-MDS pts (56 vs 27 months, p=0.03). Median OS among Allo-SCT compared to non-SCT pts were not reached vs 155 months ( p=0.9) in the AYA group and 53 vs 54 months ( p=0.4) in the YA group. IPSS-R (very low+low vs intermediate vs high+very high) was able to distinguish differences in OS in the YA (133 vs 53 vs 17 months, p=0.0002) and AYA (155 vs not reached vs 18 months, p=0.006) pts, with the exception of the intermediate-risk group in the AYA cohort. Conclusions: In this study, d e novoMDS was seen in the majority of younger pts with MDS (both AYA and YA). Mutations in STAG2 and NRAS were more common in the AYA pts, while YA pts had MDS more enriched for TP53, DNMT3A, TET2 and splicing mutations. This study is still ongoing with a plan to compare the abovementioned groups to older pts (≥60 years) with MDS.

Adult-type diffusely infiltrating gliomas, of which glioblastoma is the most common and aggressive, almost always recur after treatment and are fatal. Improved understanding of therapy-driven tumor evolution and acquired therapy resistance in gliomas is essential for improving patient outcomes, yet the majority of the models currently used in preclinical research are of therapy-naïve tumors. Here, we describe the development of therapy-resistant IDH-wildtype glioblastoma patient-derived xenografts (PDX) through orthotopic engraftment of therapy naïve PDX in athymic nude mice, and repeated in vivo exposure to the therapeutic modalities most often used in treating glioblastoma patients: radiotherapy and temozolomide chemotherapy. Post-temozolomide PDX became enriched for C>T transition mutations, acquired inactivating mutations in DNA mismatch repair genes (especially MSH6), and developed hypermutation. Such post-temozolomide PDX were resistant to additional temozolomide (median survival decrease from 80 days in parental PDX to 42 days in a temozolomide-resistant derivative). However, temozolomide-resistant PDX were sensitive to lomustine (also known as CCNU), a nitrosourea which induces tumor cell apoptosis by a different mechanism than temozolomide. These PDX models mimic changes observed in recurrent GBM in patients, including critical features of therapy-driven tumor evolution. These models can therefore serve as valuable tools for improving our understanding and treatment of recurrent glioma.

Abstract Purpose: GOG-0218, a double-blind placebo-controlled phase III trial, compared carboplatin and paclitaxel with placebo, bevacizumab followed by placebo, or bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Results demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS), but no overall survival (OS) benefit with bevacizumab. Blood samples were collected for biomarker analyses. Experimental Design: Plasma samples were analyzed via multiplex ELISA technology for seven prespecified biomarkers [IL6, Ang-2, osteopontin (OPN), stromal cell–derived factor-1 (SDF-1), VEGF-D, IL6 receptor (IL6R), and GP130]. The predictive value of each biomarker with respect to PFS and OS was assessed using a protein marker by treatment interaction term within the framework of a Cox proportional hazards model. Prognostic markers were identified using Cox models adjusted for baseline covariates. Results: Baseline samples were available from 751 patients. According to our prespecified analysis plan, IL6 was predictive of a therapeutic advantage with bevacizumab for PFS (P = 0.007) and OS (P = 0.003). IL6 and OPN were found to be negative prognostic markers for both PFS and OS (P < 0.001). Patients with high median IL6 levels (dichotomized at the median) treated with bevacizumab had longer PFS (14.2 vs. 8.7 months) and OS (39.6 vs. 33.1 months) compared with placebo. Conclusions: The inflammatory cytokine IL6 may be predictive of therapeutic benefit from bevacizumab when combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel. Aligning with results observed in patients with renal cancer treated with antiangiogenic therapies, it appears plasma IL6 may also define those patients with EOC more or less likely to benefit from the addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy.