Stadtmauer, Edward A.

Background: 24-hour urine (24HRU) assessments are a key component of International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) response criteria for multiple myeloma (MM) and are requested longitudinally in clinical trials even if not routinely used in real-world practice. Several analyses have suggested a limited role for 24HRU if serum immunofixation or free light chain (LC) testing is abnormal (Dejoie Blood 2016, Lahuerta Blood 2023). Adopting urine-free response criteria (with 24HRU removal from every level of IMWG response) may change responses in <5% of patients (Natsuhara et al, Leuk Lymph 2023) but not have been studied in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) in a larger population. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of data from the Phase 3 BMT CTN 0702 (STaMINA) trial (Stadtmauer et al, JCO 2019) studying post-autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) strategies. Only patients evaluable for Day +56 response following ASCT were included, and patients with progressive disease (PD, n=8) at this timepoint were excluded. Post-ASCT responses relative to diagnosis were calculated by two sets of criteria. First, traditional responses were calculated per IMWG criteria (Kumar et al, Lancet Onc 2016) as stable disease (SD), partial response (PR), very good PR (VGPR), or complete response (CR, including stringent CR). Second, urine-free response assessments were calculated as follows: negative 24HRU immunofixation no longer required for CR, 24HRU M-protein < 100 milligrams (mg) per day no longer required for VGPR, and no 24HRU M-protein thresholds (e.g., < 200 mg per day or > 90% reduction) required for PR. PFS was estimated (using PD by traditional IMWG criteria or death as events) using proportional hazard models. Results: Of 636 evaluable patients (84% of all BMT CTN 0702 participants), LC-only disease was noted in 18.9% (n=120). Pre-enrollment 24HRU testing at diagnosis was done in 28.9% of patients (n=184). IMWG responses were as follows: CR, 29.4% (n=187) traditional vs 29.7% (n=189) urine-free; VGPR, 37.0% (n=235) traditional vs 36.6% (n=233) urine-free; PR, 30.7% (n=195) for both; SD, 3.0% (n=19) for both. A total of 4 responses (0.6%) changed with urine-free criteria. Three patients were ‘upgraded’ (VGPR to CR, n=2, PR to VGPR, n=1) because 24HRU requirements for CR/VGPR were no longer required. One patient without a measurable serum paraprotein was ‘downgraded’ from a traditional VGPR (with negative 24HRU immunofixation) to a urine-free PR based on LC-only criteria. Among the subset of 184 patients with 24HRU electrophoresis results at diagnosis, there were no differences between traditional and urine-free IMWG responses. Median PFS and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were the same at each depth of both traditional and urine-free criteria: 63.0 months (50.8 - 71.4 months) for CR, 49.6 months (42.6 - 55.1 months) for VGPR, 44.9 months (37.2-54.8 months) for PR, and 34.4 months (14.0-51.5 months) for SD. Urine-free IMWG criteria were highly prognostic for PFS (p = 0.006, 95% CI 1.05-1.36). The achievement of urine-free CR vs urine-free ≤CR was also prognostic (p = 0.005, 95% CI 0.54 - 0.89). Urine-free VGPR vs urine-free ≤VGPR was of borderline significance (p = 0.102, 95% CI 0.66 - 1.04), with median PFS 53.8 months (48.0 - 57.6 months) vs 44.6 months (36.3 - 54.7 months) respectively. Discussion: In this secondary analysis of a Phase 3 trial, omitting 24HRU assessments from IMWG criteria changed <1% of responses and had no impact on PFS prediction at any response depth. 24HRU assessments had been performed for less than a third of patients as standard of care prior to study entry, underscoring its infrequent use outside of trials. Urine-free IMWG assessments would reduce time toxicity and discomfort for patients, particularly for those with limited dexterity. If implemented in trials, they would also simplify study logistics and lower operational costs. Outside of situations such as AL amyloidosis where 24HRU assessments remain critical or for patients with urine as their only measurable MM biomarker, our results support the removal of 24HRU assessments from future iterations of IMWG response criteria. Funding: Grants #U10HL069294 and #U24HL138660 to the BMT CTN from the NHLBI and the NCI; contributions by Celgene Corporation and Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; funding by The Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology, the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group and SWOG.

Background: B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR-) T cells, show high response rates in patients with highly refractory and heavily treated myeloma, and have become a standard treatment in this setting. The durability of these responses, however, has been limited with few long term remissions. One approach to potentially improve CAR T outcome is to direct these cells to alternative targets such as CD38 almost universally expressed on malignant plasma cells. In this open-label phase I multi-institutional study we explored the efficacy and safety of CAR2 anti-CD38 A2 CAR-T cells in patients with RRMM. Methods: The SOR-CART-MM-001 study was a multicenter, open-label, “3+3” dose-escalation, phase 1b trial of a single administration of a fully human antibody with lambda light chain generated by transduction of activated T cells with an anti-CD38 A2 CAR expressing retroviral vector. A single dose of CAR2 Anti-CD38 CAR-T cells was administered 2 days post lymphodepletion with single-agent cyclophosphamide 1.5 g/m 2. The primary endpoint was determination of the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) assessed by the occurrence of treatment-emergent dose-limiting toxicities during the 28-day treatment period in the dose-escalation phase of the study. Dosing was divided into three cohorts ranging from 1 × 10 5 cells/kg (Cohort 1) to 1 × 10 7 cells/kg (Cohort 3). Circulating CAR-T cells were measured at different timepoints post infusion. Key eligibility criteria included ≥3 lines of therapy with prior proteasome inhibitor, immunomodulatory IMID drug or daratumumab exposure, measurable and progressive MM per International Myeloma Working Group criteria and ECOG ≤ 2. Results: Between March 2018 and March 2022, 9 patients were enrolled and assigned to each of the three Cohorts. Patient demographics and baseline characteristics are described in Table 1. Hematologic toxicity was the most common treatment emergent adverse event experienced (6/9, 66.7%), all Grade 3 or Grade 4. All cytopenias recovered in 21 days in subjects treated with no more than MTD. Two subjects within Cohort 3 exhibited mild cytokine release syndrome (CRS) (Grade 1 and 2) with one of these two subjects also developing mild neurotoxicity (Grade 2). No CRS or neurotoxicity was observed at either of the lower dose levels. Two serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported: Klebsiella sepsis 60 days after treatment that recovered in 4 days after antibiotics and muscle weakness at 24 days after treatment that received within 1 day without treatment and neither were deemed related to the study medication. The first 2 patients in Cohort 3 met dose limiting toxicity (DLT) criteria after treatment due to grade 3 hematological toxicity and the next lower dose 1 x 10 6 cells/kg (Cohort 2) became the MTD. Pharmacokinetic data showed the percentage of the detectable circulating CAR-T cells in any subject at any time point was low with many showing no detectable cells. 4 deaths were reported after the end of the study period, and none were considered related to the investigated CAR-T cells (3 due to progression and one due to COVID-19). Overall, a total of 3 patients had a partial response (PR) and 3 patients had stable disease (SD) across 3 dose levels. PR constituted the best response in the study and the durations of objective clinical responses were each less than 3 months. These treatment responses are summarized in Table 2. Conclusion: This phase I trial demonstrated that CAR2 anti-CD38 A2 CAR-T cells were generally well tolerated at the Cohort 2 (MTD) dose and demonstrated objective though short responses even in patients progressing after daratumumab and belantamab mafodotin. More clinical studies are needed to optimize the efficacy and tolerability of CAR-T cell therapies for patients with RRMM. This study was completed, and no more patients will be enrolled. DART-RRMM-101 is a phase 1b, open-label, dose-escalation study ongoing to assess allogeneic Anti-CD38 A2 Dimeric Antigen Receptor T Cells in RRMM (ClinicalTrials: NCT05007418).

Background: Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells have repeatedly demonstrated capacity to induce high rates of response and durable remissions for B cell cancers. In contrast, CAR T cells for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have not yet achieved this impact. We previously demonstrated that CD123 is expressed on AML blasts at high frequency, thus making it an attractive target antigen for AML-directed CAR T cells. Methods and Results: We conducted a pilot study of CD123-directed CAR T cells (CART-123) in adults with relapsed or refractory AML. The primary objective was safety with a secondary objective of anti-leukemia efficacy. Twenty-two subjects were screened, and 20 were eligible for the trial. Fludarabine and cyclophosphamide were used for lymphodepletion (LD). Twelve subjects were infused with CART-123. There were two treatment-related deaths due to cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and infection. Four subjects (33%) achieved complete response with incomplete count recovery (CRi), three subjects had progressive disease, and five had stable disease. Of the four who achieved CRi, one subject remains alive in remission after a relapse and subsequent consolidative hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). One other subject is alive after HSCT following CART-123 failure. There was evidence of CAR T cell expansion and ten subjects (83%) experienced clinical CRS ranging from Grade I to Grade V. There was no neurotoxicity. To address the apparent paradox of high rates of CART-123 bioactivity (clinical CRS and in vivo expansion) co-occurring with low rates of response, we hypothesized that cytokines produced during CRS may undermine the anti-AML effect of CART cells. We obtained serum drawn from trial subjects at baseline (prior to LD chemotherapy) or during CRS. Serum drawn during CRS promotes primary AML survival in cell culture, while matched baseline serum from the same subjects does not. Individual cytokines secreted during CRS that signal through receptors expressed on myeloid progenitors (such as GM-CSF and Flt3 ligand) reproduced this survival advantage in primary AML blasts when tested at physiologically relevant levels. In contrast, these cytokines did not produce a pro-survival effect in primary patient B-ALL blasts. Crucially, candidate myeloid-acting cytokines, as well as serum drawn during the peak of clinical CRS, promoted resistance of AML to killing by CART-123 in vitro. Using scRNAseq of bone marrow aspirates from subjects on this clinical trial, we found that GM-CSF and FLT3L were most frequently expressed by CD4+ T cells. Exposure of primary AML samples to CRS cytokines led to upregulation of signaling (e.g. JAK/STAT5) and pro-survival pathways. In previous work in B-ALL, we showed that relative resistance to killing can translate to a functional deficit in CART-19 due to development of exhaustion in the CART cells. We similarly find that that exposure to GM-CSF reduces AML blast sensitivity to CART-123, and that the persistence of antigen leads to exhaustion in CART cells (Figure 1). Specifically, co-incubation of CART-123 cells and cytokine-exposed primary AML blasts leads to increased populations of PD-1+/CD39+/CTLA4+/LAG3+ CAR T cells, consistent with an exhaustion phenotype. Finally, we found that anti-apoptotic effects of cytokines can be prevented, and CART-123 killing of AML can be restored, via ruxolitinib blockade of JAK/STAT signaling in both in vitro and in vivo settings. Significance: Our work reveals CRS as active in undermining CART-123 lethality first by promoting survival of AML, and subsequently by exhausting CAR T cells. This is in stark contrast to its role in lymphoid malignancies and underscores biological differences in myeloid versus lymphoid neoplasms. These results highlight a need to tailor therapy to limit cytokine effects on AML blasts to improve outcomes with AML-directed CAR T cell therapy.

Abstract Introduction : Despite recent advances, MM remains incurable and new therapeutic options are needed, particularly for pts with RRMM. IBER is a novel, potent oral cereblon E3 ligase modulator (CELMoD ®) compound with enhanced tumoricidal and immune-stimulatory effects compared with immunomodulatory (IMiD ®) agents. Preclinically, IBER demonstrated marked synergy with DEX and with other standard myeloma treatments. CC-220-MM-001 (NCT02773030) is an ongoing phase 1/2 study evaluating IBER with different treatment combinations in independent cohorts of pts with RRMM; in phase 1, the recommended phase 2 dose of IBER, when given in combination with DEX, was determined at 1.6 mg (Lonial S, et al. Blood 2019;134[suppl 1]:3119). Here we report results from the dose expansion of IBER + DEX in pts with heavily pretreated, triple-class exposed (including ≥ 1 IMiD agent, ≥ 1 proteasome inhibitor [PI], and ≥ 1 anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody [mAb]) RRMM. Methods : Eligible pts had RRMM; had received ≥ 3 prior lines of therapy, including lenalidomide (LEN), pomalidomide (POM), a PI, a glucocorticoid, and an anti-CD38 mAb; had experienced disease progression within 60 days of last myeloma therapy; and were refractory to an IMiD agent, a PI, a glucocorticoid, and an anti-CD38 mAb. Pts with central nervous system involvement were not eligible. Pts who had received prior anti-BCMA therapy were excluded, but included in a supportive cohort for safety and preliminary efficacy assessment. IBER (1.6 mg) was given orally on days (D) 1-21, in combination with DEX (40 mg; 20 mg if > 75 years of age) on D1, 8, 15, and 22 of each 28-day cycle. Thrombo-embolism prophylaxis was mandatory for all pts. Primary objective was to determine efficacy expressed as overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included additional efficacy and safety assessments. Exploratory endpoints included evaluation of health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Results : As of June 2, 2021, 107 pts had received IBER + DEX. Median age was 64 (44-83) years; median time since initial diagnosis was 6.9 (1.6-24.5) years. Extramedullary plasmacytomas were present in 25.2% of pts; 29.9% of pts had high-risk cytogenetics. Median number of prior regimens was 6 (3-23). All pts were triple-class exposed; prior therapies included autologous stem cell transplantation (78.5%), PIs (100%), IMiD agents (LEN [100%] and POM [100%]), and anti-CD38 mAbs (100%); 99.1% of pts were refractory to last myeloma regimen and 97.2% of pts were triple-class refractory. Median follow-up was 7.69 (0.5-17.5) months, with a median number of 4 (1-17) cycles received and 13 (12.1%) pts continuing treatment. Main reason for discontinuation was progressive disease (69.2%). ORR was 26.2%, with 1 (0.9%) stringent complete response, 8 (7.5%) very good partial responses, and 19 (17.8%) partial responses (Table); the clinical benefit rate (≥ minimal response) was 36.4% and disease control rate (≥ stable disease) was 79.4%. Median duration of response was 7.0 (4.5-11.3) months (Table), median progression-free survival was 3.0 (2.8-3.7) months, and median overall survival was 11.2 (9.0-not reached) months. Similar response rates were observed among a cohort of pts also exposed to BCMA therapies (N = 24, Table). Grade (Gr) 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in 88 (82.2%) pts. Most frequent (≥ 20% pts) hematologic Gr 3-4 TEAEs were neutropenia (44.9%; and 4.7% febrile neutropenia), anemia (28.0%), thrombocytopenia (21.5%), and leukopenia (20.6%). Gr 3-4 infections were reported in 27.1% of pts; Gr 3-4 pneumonia and COVID-19 occurred in 10.3% and 4.7% of pts, respectively. Occurrence of other Gr 3-4 non-hematologic TEAEs was generally low, including gastrointestinal disorders (5.6%), fatigue (2.8%), rash (1.9%). Fifty-six (52.3%) pts and 20 (18.7%) had IBER dose interruptions and reductions due to TEAEs, respectively. Five (4.7%) pts discontinued due to TEAEs. No pt discontinued IBER due to neutropenia. Overall, HRQoL was maintained in these pts. Conclusions : IBER + DEX demonstrated promising efficacy in pts with heavily pretreated, triple-class exposed and refractory RRMM, as well as in pts who had previously received anti-BCMA therapy; this combination was generally well tolerated and TEAEs were manageable with dose reductions and interruptions. These results support the further development of IBER in MM, including phase 3 trials in combination regimens. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Lonial: Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; AMGEN: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Honoraria; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Popat: GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie, Takeda, Janssen, and Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES; AbbVie, BMS, Janssen, Oncopeptides, and Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen and BMS: Other: travel expenses. Hulin: Sanofi: Honoraria; Celgene/BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; abbvie: Honoraria. Jagannath: Legend Biotech: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy. Oriol: Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Richardson: Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; Regeneron: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Protocol Intelligence: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Secura Bio: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding. Weisel: Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Novartis: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Minnema: Cilag: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Alnylam: Consultancy; Celgene: Other: Travel expenses; Kite/Gilead: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy. Badros: J&J: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding. Knop: BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy. Stadtmauer: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Chen: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Nguyen: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Amin: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Kueenburg: Celgene a BMS company: Current Employment. Peluso: Celgene, a Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Current Employment. van de Donk: BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Novartis /bayer/servier: Consultancy.

Abstract Proteins in the antiapoptotic B-cell lymphoma 2 (BCL-2) family play a role in the pathophysiology of multiple myeloma (MM). Venetoclax is a highly selective, potent, oral BCL-2 inhibitor that induces apoptosis of MM cells, and its efficacy may be potentiated through combination with agents that increase BCL-2 dependency or have complementary mechanisms of action. The safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of venetoclax in combination with carfilzomib and dexamethasone (VenKd) in adults with relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) were investigated in this phase 2 dose-escalation study. Oral venetoclax (400 or 800 mg) was administered daily in combination with intravenous carfilzomib (27, 56, or 70 mg/m2) and oral dexamethasone (20 or 40 mg) in 4 dose-finding cohorts. The expansion cohort received venetoclax 800 mg, carfilzomib 70 mg/m2, and dexamethasone 40 mg. Forty-nine patients received treatment. Median prior lines of therapy was 1 (range, 1-3), and median time in the study was 27 months. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were diarrhea (65%), fatigue (47%), nausea (47%), and lymphopenia (35%). Serious adverse events occurred in 26 (53%) patients. Of 3 treatment-emergent deaths, 1 was considered treatment related. The overall response rate was 80% in all patients, 92% in patients with t(11;14) (n = 13), and 75% in patients without (n = 36). The rate of complete response or better was 41%. Median progression-free survival was 22.8 months. Treatment with VenKd was well tolerated and showed promising response rates in this RRMM patient population, with greater responses observed in patients with t(11;14). This trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02899052.

8009 Background: Measuring response among patients with multiple myeloma is essential for the care of patients. Deeper responses have been associated with better progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Serum (SIFE) and urine immunofixation are the currently used markers for biochemical documentation of CR after which marrow is tested for plasma cell clearance. Next generation flow cytometry and sequencing are used to document the presence of minimal residual disease (MRD). Mass spectrometry of blood by MALDI (Mass-Fix) is a new simple, inexpensive, sensitive, and specific means of detecting monoclonal immunoglobulins. To better test the hypothesis that Mass-Fix is superior to existing methodologies to predict for survival outcomes—especially SIFE-- samples from the STAMINA trial (NCT01109004), a trial comparing 3 transplant approaches among patients who have already received induction, were employed. Methods: Five-hundred and seventy-five patients were included. Samples from enrollment post-induction (post-I) and 1-year post enrollment (1YR) were tested when available. Four response parameters were assessed univariately: Mass-Fix, SIFE, complete response, and MRD by next generation flow cytometry. Mass spectrometry spectra were evaluated in a blinded fashion. Complete response was according to the 2006 International Myeloma Working Group criteria. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard models using stepwise regression were developed to explore the independent effect of the different response parameters on PFS and OS and interactions with other risk factors. Results: Of the 4 response measures, only MRD and Mass-Fix predicted for PFS and OS at multiple testing points on multivariate analyses (Table). Of the 4 post-I measurements, only MRD predicted for PFS; however, Mass-Fix was the only post-I measurement to predict for OS. Of all the 1-year measures, both 1YR Mass-Fix and 1YR MRD positivity predicted for inferior PFS and OS. In models including MRD and Mass-Fix, SIFE and CR were not prognostic for PFS or OS. Conclusions: Mass-Fix is a powerful means to track monoclonal proteins. The full utility of Mass-Fix was not exploited given the absence of a diagnostic sample and the fact that only serum (and not urine) was tested. Despite these limitations, it performed well at pre-induction and at 1 year. Mass-Fix provides a convenient and non-invasive means of predicting for myeloma outcomes. Clinical trial information: NCT01109004. [Table: see text]

Introduction: IBER is an oral, potent novel cereblon E3 ligase modulator (CELMoD) agent with marked synergistic tumoricidal and immune-stimulatory effects in combination with BORT or DARA in preclinical models. CC-220-MM-001 is a phase 1/2 study evaluating dose escalations of IBER with different treatment combinations in independent cohorts, in patients (pts) with RRMM (NCT02773030); the IBER + DEX cohort showed a favorable safety profile with promising efficacy and a selected IBER RP2D of 1.6 mg 21/28 days (D). Here, we present results from the IBER + DARA + DEX (IberDd) and IBER + BORT + DEX (IberVd) cohorts. Methods: Eligible pts had received ≥ 2 prior regimens in the IberDd cohort, and ≥ 1 prior regimen in the IberVd cohort, containing at least lenalidomide or pomalidomide, and a proteasome inhibitor (PI), and had experienced disease progression on or within 60 days of last MM therapy. Escalating doses of IBER were given orally, in the IberDd cohort on D1-21, with DARA (16 mg/kg) on D1, D8, D15, and D22 (cycles [C]1-2), D1 and D15 (C3-6), and D1 (C ≥ 7), of each 28-day cycle; in the IberVd cohort, on D1-14, with BORT (1.3 mg/m2) on D1, D4, D8, and D11 (C1-8), and on D1 and D8 (C ≥ 9), of each 21-day cycle. In both cohorts DEX was given weekly. Primary objectives were to evaluate MTD, RP2D, and safety separately for each cohort; a key secondary objective was preliminary assessment of efficacy. Immune profiling was evaluated by flow cytometry from pt peripheral blood at C1D1, C2D15, C4D1, and C4D15. Results: As of June 18, 2020, 19 pts had received IberDd and 21 pts IberVd. Baseline characteristics for the 2 independent cohorts are shown in the table. All pts were refractory to their last prior regimen, and exposure to prior regimens was heterogeneous. IBER doses ranged from 1.0 to 1.6 mg; the MTD/RP2D has not been reached in either cohort. Median follow-up was 5 (0-14) and 3 (0-11) months, 10 (53%) and 13 (62%) pts continue on treatment, median cycles received was 5 (1-14) and 4.5 (1-17), with IberDd and IberVd, respectively. Grade (Gr) 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in 14 (78%) pts with IberDd, and in 13 (65%) pts with IberVd. Most frequent Gr 3-4 TEAEs of interest included neutropenia (50%), leukopenia (22%), and anemia (22%) with IberDd; and neutropenia (20%) and thrombocytopenia (20%) with IberVd. In both cohorts, neutropenia was managed with G-CSF. One pt (IberDd; 1.2 mg dose) had Gr 4 neutropenic sepsis. Occurrence of Gr 3-4 non-hematological TEAEs was low in both cohorts. One pt had Gr 2 infusion-related reaction with IberDd, and 3 pts had Gr 1-2 peripheral neuropathy with IberVd. Six (33%) and 4 (20%) pts had IBER dose reductions with IberDd and IberVd, respectively. In the IberDd cohort, with 12/19 (63%) DARA-refractory pts and 11 (58%) quad-class-refractory pts, the overall response rate (ORR) was 35% across all dosing groups (2 very good partial responses [VGPRs], 4 partial responses [PRs]); the clinical benefit rate (CBR) was 47% and disease control rate (DCR) was 88%. In the IberVd cohort, with 16/21 (76%) PI-refractory pts, 9 (43%) BORT-refractory pts, and 10 (48%) quad-class refractory pts, ORR was 50% (1 complete response, 3 VGPRs, 6 PRs); CBR was 65% and DCR was 85%. Responses with IberDd and IberVd were observed irrespective of DARA- and BORT-refractoriness, respectively. Median time to response was 4.1 (4.1-12.0) and 4.9 (3.0-13.1) weeks, in the IberDd and IberVd cohorts, respectively; median duration of response was not reached in both cohorts. Immune profiling showed dose-dependent decreases in B cells and increases in activated and differentiated T cells, in both cohorts. Except for reductions in CD38+ T cells in pts receiving IberDd, these observations were similar in pts treated with IBER + DEX. Conclusions: IberDd and IberVd showed a favorable tolerability profile in heavily pretreated RRMM pts, with promising clinical activity, even among pts refractory to the last prior regimen and previously exposed to IMiD agents, PIs, and CD38 antibodies. Immune-profiling data confirm that IBER + DEX was pharmacodynamically active in triplet combination and not augmented by the addition of DARA or BORT. The study is ongoing with continued enrollment at the 1.6 mg dose level for both cohorts. Updated results, including the MTD/RP2D, will be presented at the meeting. These results support the further development of IBER-based regimens in MM; phase 3 trials are planned to further evaluate these combinations. Disclosures van de Donk: Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ferrer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Popat:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company). Larsen:Janssen Oncology: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Minnema:Servier: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Other: travel support, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy. Jagannath:BMS, Janssen, Karyopharm, Legend Biotech, Sanofi, Takeda: Consultancy. Oriol:Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Zonder:Prothena: Consultancy; Intellia: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees; Celgene: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees; Oncopeptide: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees; Alnylam: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Personal fees; Caelum: Consultancy; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees. Richardson:Celgene/BMS, Oncopeptides, Takeda, Karyopharm: Research Funding. Rodriguez-Otero:Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Medscape: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Honoraria. Badros:Amgen: Consultancy; University of Maryland: Current Employment. Stadtmauer:Sanofi: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding. Bringhen:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Siegel:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celulatiry: Consultancy; Karyopharma: Consultancy, Honoraria. Gamberi:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Gironella Mesa:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Sonneveld:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Skyline Dx: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy. Nguyen:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Di Micco:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Sorrell:Children's Oncology Group: Other: Non-member; Previous Study Chair AAML08B1; Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Chen:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Amatangelo:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Kueenburg:Celgene International Sàrl, a Bristol Myers Squibb Company, Boudry, Switzerland: Current Employment. Lonial:Onyx: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Personal fees; Genentech: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Personal fees; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Personal fees; Abbvie: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; JUNO Therapeutics: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Personal fees.

Abstract The primary cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) is an infection. Therefore, there is great concern about susceptibility to the outcome of COVID-19–infected patients with MM. This retrospective study describes the baseline characteristics and outcome data of COVID-19 infection in 650 patients with plasma cell disorders, collected by the International Myeloma Society to understand the initial challenges faced by myeloma patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Analyses were performed for hospitalized MM patients. Among hospitalized patients, the median age was 69 years, and nearly all patients (96%) had MM. Approximately 36% were recently diagnosed (2019-2020), and 54% of patients were receiving first-line therapy. Thirty-three percent of patients have died, with significant geographic variability, ranging from 27% to 57% of hospitalized patients. Univariate analysis identified age, International Staging System stage 3 (ISS3), high-risk disease, renal disease, suboptimal myeloma control (active or progressive disease), and 1 or more comorbidities as risk factors for higher rates of death. Neither history of transplant, including within a year of COVID-19 diagnosis, nor other anti-MM treatments were associated with outcomes. Multivariate analysis found that only age, high-risk MM, renal disease, and suboptimal MM control remained independent predictors of adverse outcome with COVID-19 infection. The management of MM in the era of COVID-19 requires careful consideration of patient- and disease-related factors to decrease the risk of acquiring COVID-19 infection, while not compromising disease control through appropriate MM treatment. This study provides initial data to develop recommendations for the management of MM patients with COVID-19 infection.

BackgroundExtracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) is an immunomodulatory cellular therapy which has been shown to induce a tolerogenic state in patients with acute and chronic graft‐vs‐host disease. ECOG‐ACRIN explored the activity of ECP as a part of a reduced intensity conditioning regimen in two multicenter trials in patients with MDS (E1902) and lymphomas (E1402). While both studies closed before completing accrual, we report results in 23 patients (17 MDS and 6 lymphoma).Study Design and MethodsPatients received 2 days of ECP followed by pentostatin 4 mg/m2 /day for two consecutive days, followed by 600 cGy of total body irradiation prior to stem cell infusion. Immunosuppression for aGVHD was infusional cyclosporine A or tacrolimus and methotrexate on day +1, +3, with mycophenolate mofetil starting on day 100 for chronic GVHD prophylaxis.ResultsAll patients engrafted, with median time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment of 15‐18 days and 10‐18 days respectively. Grade 3 or 4 aGVHD occurred in 13% and chronic extensive GVHD in 30%.ConclusionsThese studies demonstrate that ECP/pentostatin/TBI is well tolerated and associated with adequate engraftment of neutrophils and platelets in patients with lymphomas and MDS.