Ulaner, Gary A.

Summary Histiocytic neoplasms are diverse clonal haematopoietic disorders, and clinical disease is mediated by tumorous infiltration as well as uncontrolled systemic inflammation. Individual subtypes include Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH), Rosai–Dorfman–Destombes disease (RDD) and Erdheim–Chester disease (ECD), and these have been characterized with respect to clinical phenotypes, driver mutations and treatment paradigms. Less is known about patients with mixed histiocytic neoplasms (MXH), that is two or more coexisting disorders. This international collaboration examined patients with biopsy‐proven MXH with respect to component disease subtypes, oncogenic driver mutations and responses to conventional (chemotherapeutic or immunosuppressive) versus targeted (BRAF or MEK inhibitor) therapies. Twenty‐seven patients were studied with ECD/LCH (19/27), ECD/RDD (6/27), RDD/LCH (1/27) and ECD/RDD/LCH (1/27). Mutations previously undescribed in MXH were identified, including KRAS, MAP2K2, MAPK3, non‐V600‐BRAF, RAF1 and a BICD2‐BRAF fusion. A repeated‐measure generalized estimating equation demonstrated that targeted treatment was statistically significantly (1) more likely to result in a complete response (CR), partial response (PR) or stable disease (SD) (odds ratio [OR]: 17.34, 95% CI: 2.19–137.00, p = 0.007), and (2) less likely to result in progression (OR: 0.08, 95% CI: 0.03–0.23, p < 0.0001). Histiocytic neoplasms represent an entity with underappreciated clinical and molecular diversity, poor responsiveness to conventional therapy and exquisite sensitivity to targeted therapy.

Abstract Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD) and Rosai-Dorfman disease (RDD) are rare non-Langerhans cell histiocytoses (non-LCHs), for which therapeutic options are limited. MAPK pathway activation through BRAFV600E mutation or other genomic alterations is a histiocytosis hallmark and correlates with a favorable response to BRAF inhibitors and the MEK inhibitor cobimetinib. However, there has been no systematic evaluation of alternative MEK inhibitors. To assess the efficacy and safety of the MEK inhibitor trametinib, we retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of 26 adult patients (17 with ECD, 5 with ECD/RDD, 3 with RDD, and 1 with ECD/LCH) treated with orally administered trametinib at 4 major US care centers. The most common treatment-related toxicity was rash (27% of patients). In most patients, the disease was effectively managed at low doses (0.5-1.0 mg trametinib daily). The response rate of the 17 evaluable patients was 71% (73% [8/11] without a detectable BRAFV600E achieving response). At a median follow-up of 23 months, treatment effects were durable, with a median time-to-treatment failure of 37 months, whereas the median progression-free and overall survival were not reached (at 3 years, 90.1% of patients were alive). Most patients harbored mutations in BRAF (either classic BRAFV600E or other BRAF alterations) or alterations in other genes involved in the MAPK pathway, eg, MAP2K, NF1, GNAS, or RAS. Most patients required lower than standard doses of trametinib but were responsive to lower doses. Our data suggest that the MEK inhibitor trametinib is an effective treatment for ECD and RDD, including those without the BRAFV600E mutation.

AbstractThe development of novel agents has transformed the treatment paradigm for multiple myeloma, with minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity now achievable across the entire disease spectrum. Bone marrow–based technologies to assess MRD, including approaches using next-generation flow and next-generation sequencing, have provided real-time clinical tools for the sensitive detection and monitoring of MRD in patients with multiple myeloma. Complementary liquid biopsy–based assays are now quickly progressing with some, such as mass spectrometry methods, being very close to clinical use, while others utilizing nucleic acid–based technologies are still developing and will prove important to further our understanding of the biology of MRD. On the regulatory front, multiple retrospective individual patient and clinical trial level meta-analyses have already shown and will continue to assess the potential of MRD as a surrogate for patient outcome. Given all this progress, it is not surprising that a number of clinicians are now considering using MRD to inform real-world clinical care of patients across the spectrum from smoldering myeloma to relapsed refractory multiple myeloma, with each disease setting presenting key challenges and questions that will need to be addressed through clinical trials. The pace of advances in targeted and immune therapies in multiple myeloma is unprecedented, and novel MRD-driven biomarker strategies are essential to accelerate innovative clinical trials leading to regulatory approval of novel treatments and continued improvement in patient outcomes.