Kumar, Shaji

BACKGROUND Several studies have highlighted the poor outcomes observed among patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM), particularly those with triple-class refractory (TCR; refractory to at least one PI, one IMiD, and one anti-CD38 mAb) disease. The aim of this study was to describe the longitudinal changes in quality of life (QOL) and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs) among TCR MM patients in real-world clinical practice who initiate a new line-of-therapy. METHODS A prospective, multi-site observational study of patients with TCR MM was conducted through the Mayo Clinic system. Patients initiating a new post-TCR therapy (defined as the index date) were followed for a 12-month observation period during which PRO surveys were administered for the first 6 months. For patients initiating a CAR-T therapy, a survey assessment was conducted at apheresis, lymphodepletion chemotherapy, and every month after T-cell infusion until Month 6. All other patients received a survey assessment before index and then every month thereafter until Month 6. PRO measures included the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30; including the Global Health Score [GHS]), the EORTC Multiple Myeloma Questionnaire (QLQ-MY20; including the Disease Symptoms [DS] domain score), the EORTC QLQ for Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy (CIPN20), the EuroQoL-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), the Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGIS), and the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). Patient surveys were supplemented with retrospective chart reviews conducted 3 months and 12 months following the index date to obtain clinical information. Descriptive data were reported at each timepoint separately for patients who received CAR-T and non-CAR-T index therapies. The study is ongoing and this abstract reflects all patient visit data as of April 2023. RESULTS N=55 patients (60% male, 96% White, mean age 66 years) were included in this interim analysis. The median time interval between becoming TCR and the index date was 3.9 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 1.7, 15.5). Most patients had an ECOG score of 0 or 1 (53% and 38%, respectively) and were R-ISS I or II (36% and 54%, respectively); 53% of patients had high-risk cytogenetics and 20% had extramedullary disease. The median (IQR) number of prior treatment lines was 4 (4.0, 5.5). N=24 patients initiated a CAR-T therapy as their index therapy (equally split between ide-cel and cilta-cel); the remaining N=31 patients predominantly initiated a treatment regimen containing an IMiD (52%), a PI (55%), an anti-CD38 antibody (13%), or an alkylating agent (36%). Among CAR-T patients, QOL and disease-related symptoms worsened from baseline through Month 2-3 (eg, mean GHS was 65.9 at apheresis, 64.9 at lymphodepletion, and 53.3 at Month 2 [higher scores indicate better QOL]; mean DS domain score from the QLQ-MY20 was 24.1 at apheresis, 23.4 at lymphodepletion, and 33.7 at Month 2 [higher scores indicate more symptoms]; see Table 1). These decrements were followed by improvement back to baseline levels and, in some cases, improvement above baseline levels (eg, GHS was 67.9 and 65.0 at Months 4 and 5, respectively; DS was 18.3 and 17.8 at Months 4 and 5), though few patients had sufficient follow up to analyze QOL at later timepoints. Based on the PGIC, 77.8% of patients reported being “a little better” or “much better” as early as Month 1, though this number declined over time. Among non-CAR-T patients, QOL largely plateaued (GHS was 62.2 at baseline and 58.3 at Month 6), though disease symptoms improved over time (DS was 28.6 at baseline and 24.5 at Month 6; pain was 42.3 at baseline and 29.2 at Month 6). Based on the PGIC, 34.7% of patients reported being “a little better” or “much better” at Month 1, which improved to 50% by Month 6. CONCLUSIONS In this interim analysis of an ongoing prospective observational study, QOL and symptom measures generally worsened over the first few months for CAR-T patients in the real-world though improved to baseline levels and beyond at later time points. Patients did, however, directly report improvement in their disease state as early as Month 1 based on the PGIC. Non-CART patients generally showed a QOL plateau with some modest improvement in disease symptoms which was also reflected in their self-reported assessment of disease state improvement based on the PGIC.

Background: The management of multiple myeloma (MM) continues to evolve with the emergence of new classes of therapy, most recently including BCMA-targeted therapies. Considering the expanding MM treatment armamentarium, we sought to identify contemporary practice patterns among healthcare professionals (HCPs) for MM and compare them with those of experts using an online decision support tool. Methods: An online decision support tool was developed with input from 5 experts providing therapy recommendations for 192 unique patient case scenarios based on considerations including disease setting, treatment history, access to therapy, and specific comorbidities. HCP tool users entered specific patient criteria to define a case along with their intended management for that case. The tool then showed the 5 expert recommendations for that same case scenario, and users were asked if the recommendations impacted their intended approach. An analysis of expert recommendations and user-selected therapy was performed. Results: Between April 2023 and July 2023, 207 patient cases were entered by 144 participating HCPs. HCP and expert treatment recommendations were frequently discordant, regardless of treatment setting (Table). The highest concordance between HCP and expert recommendations (47%; P <.0001) was in the induction setting (n = 111). In this setting, experts were more likely to recommend quadruplet regimens compared with HCPs (62% vs 27%, respectively; P <.0001). Treatment selection concordance was lower in the maintenance (n = 17; 24%; P <.0001) and relapsed/refractory settings (n = 79; 20%; P <.0001). The lowest concordance (10%; P <.0001) between HCP and expert treatment recommendations was noted in the relapsed/refractory setting specifically among patients who were refractory to earlier lines of therapy (n = 41; P <.0001). For patients who are refractory to earlier lines of therapy, experts were more likely to recommend an anti-CD38-based combination regimen compared with HCPs (81% vs 32; P <.0001). When recommending treatment for patients with triple- or penta-refractory disease, experts were significantly more likely to recommend BCMA-targeted agents (83% vs 39%; P <.0001). For HCPs whose treatment plan did not match expert recommendations in these scenarios, 53% of respondents indicated that expert recommendations confirmed or changed their intended therapy, but 31% indicated that there were barriers to implementing those recommendations. Conclusions: These data suggest ongoing challenges with incorporating the newest therapies and combinations across the spectrum of MM into patient care, particularly multidrug regimens in the induction and maintenance settings and BCMA-targeted therapies in those with triple- or penta-refractory disease. Continued education and development of resources for HCPs, including online decision support tools, may be increasingly important as the treatment of MM continues to grow in complexity.

Myeloma is well known to have significant genetic heterogeneity among patients' tumors, affecting both progression as well as therapeutic responses. Moreover, subclonal diversity can lead to selective outgrowths that are influenced by new mutations, as well as the bone marrow microenvironment and therapeutic exposures. The ras family of genes (N -and K-) are the most common mutations (40-50% ) in myeloma. Notably, ras mutations occur among a variety of other co-existing chromosomal abnormalities. Ras mutations were found to be more commonly associated with cyclin D1 high expression (e.g., resulting from 11;14 translocations). We and others have also shown that rasmutations may not be disease-initiating but may arise during disease progression and relapse; or are subclonal events that impart selective growth advantage and emerging drug resistance. There is evidence that activating mutations (codons 12,13, 61) in K- ras may have different clinical impact than activating mutations in N- ras yet there are conflicting clinical outcomes that may be due to therapies analyzed or differences in other co-existing genetic mutations. Previous studies using transfection of genes with targeted mutations show random integration and often in multiple copies, thus, limiting interpretations. We chose to create N ras61 and K ras12 mutations by CRISPR-cas directed edits in a single endogenous ras allele in a myeloma cell line (FLAM76) that initially had two wild type alleles (and an 11;14 translocation). We then compared the impact of these edits on growth, signaling, gene expression, and drug responses. We find both the mutN ras and mutK ras edited cells have increased proliferation compared to wild type. However, we find that the N ras mutation increases MAPK signaling and downstream gene activation to a greater extent than the K rasmutation. Based on RNAseq analysis, a MAPK gene activation score was higher in mutN ras edited cells than mutK ras edited cells. Further, we see distinct gene expression patterns between mutN ras versus mutK ras edited cells (See heat map Fig) impacting distinct pathways. Notably, mutNras cells have much higher NOXA expression, increasing sensitivity to apoptosis-inducing drugs (e.g., proteasome inhibitors); and Kras induces anti-apoptotic Bcl-xL, reducing sensitivity. We have conducted a high throughput drug screen with 84 drugs, and while some drugs are active against both mutN ras and mutK ras edits (Proteasome inhibitors), we have identified drugs with differential response to K versus N ras mutations. For example, mutK ras FLAM76 cells are more resistant to proteasome inhibitors; and particularly more resistant to HSP inhibitors and HDAC inhibitors compared to wild type or mutN ras cells. In contrast, mutK ras cells are more sensitive to PikFyve and IL-12 inhibitors than mutNras or wild type cells. Gene expression analysis shows that mutKras cells result in more downregulation of apoptotic genes and higher upregulation of cell survival genes, as well as ER stress pathway genes. Our results suggest that treating myelomas containing K versus N ras activating mutations may benefit from understanding distinct pathway activations and targeting selective drug therapies. We are currently testing new pan-Ras inhibitors to determine if there are distinct responses between our N- and K- ras edited cells, and we are expanding testing to a wider panel of myeloma cell lines containing ras mutations in the context of other genetic abnormalities. Details of gene expression distinctions, pathways, and drug responses that distinguish mutN ras and mutK ras in myeloma will be presented.

Background ABBV-383 is an off-the-shelf, fully human B-cell maturation antigen (BMCA) X CD3 bispecific antibody with bivalent BCMA domain and low CD3 affinity that targets both BCMA-expressing multiple myeloma (MM) cells and CD3-expressing T cells. ABBV-383 has shown promising activity in an ongoing phase 1 study in patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory (RR) MM ( Voorhees et al. ASH 2022; Weisel et al. EHA 2023). Here, we report the safety and efficacy results from the ABBV-383 IV Q3W at 20 mg, 40 mg and 60 mg dose levels. Methods The phase 1 dose escalation (ESC) and expansion (EXP) study (NCT03933735) of ABBV-383 enrolled pts with RRMM with ≥3 prior lines of therapy (LOT), including a PI, IMiD, and an anti-CD38 mAb with no prior BCMA exposure. After exploring 14 dose levels in dose ESC, 3 dose levels were further explored in dose EXP including ABBV-383 Q3W IV 20 mg, 40 mg, and 60 mg, until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. The primary objectives were to determine safety/tolerability, PK/PD, and RP2D. The secondary objective was to evaluate clinical activity. Responses were investigator assessed per IMWG 2016 criteria and adverse events (AEs) by CTCAE v5.0. Results As of 17May2023, 220 pts were treated with ABBV-383, 73 pts in the dose ESC and 147 in the dose EXP with 32 pts at 20 mg, 55 pts at 40 mg, and 61 pts at 60 mg Q3W. Median duration of follow up was 7.1 (0.8-36.9), 12.2 (1.3-34.4) and 24.2 (0.6-33.4) months (mo) in the 20 mg, 40 mg and 60 mg dose levels with 25%, 36% and 21% pts continuing treatment (tx), respectively. Median age for all pts was 68 yrs (range, 35-92 yrs), Median prior LOT was 5 (range, 3-23), and 80% were triple-class refractory. Baseline characteristics are summarized in Table 1 by dose level. Treatment-emergent (TE) AEs were reported in 97% (78% ≥G3) of pts at 20 mg, 100% (84% ≥G3) of pts at 40 mg, and 100% (82% ≥G3) of pts at 60 mg. CRS, the most common TEAE, occurred in 50% (34% G1/13% G2/3% G3) of pts at 20 mg, 71%(45% G1/25% G2/0% ≥G3) of pts at 40 mg, and 70%(51% G1/18% G2/2% G3) of pts at 60mg. At the 3 dose levels, CRS occurring after the first dose had median time to onset of 1 day (range, 1-2) and median duration was 2 days (range, 1-10). ICANS occurred in 3% (3% G1/0% ≥G2) of pts at 20 mg, 5% (2 % G1/4% G2/0% ≥G3) of pts at 40 mg, and 5% (3% G2/2% G3) of pts at 60 mg. No G4/5 CRS or ICANS occurred. Infections occurred in 56% (25% ≥G3) of pts at 20 mg, 71% (26% ≥G3) of pts at 40 mg, and 57% (34% ≥G3) of pts at 60 mg; most frequently (≥10%) reported were upper respiratory tract infections (15%, G3/4 1%), pneumonia (14%, G3/4 12%), urinary tract infections (12%, G3/4 3%), and COVID-19 (11%, G3/4 1%). At 20 mg, 40 mg, and 60 mg, the incidence of neutropenia was 41% (25% ≥G3), 42% (31% ≥G3), and 43% (34% ≥G3); anemia 50% (25% ≥G3), 55% (31% ≥G3), and 38% (13% ≥G3); thrombocytopenia 44% (28% ≥G3), 36% (16% ≥G3) and 26% (13% ≥G3), respectively. The tx discontinuation due to AEs was 6%, 11%, 10% in 20 mg, 40 mg and 60 mg, respectively, with no single PT reported in >2 pts. Clinical responses are shown in Figure 1. The median time to ≥VGPR was 0.7mo (0.7-5.8) at 20 mg, 1.0mo (0.7-10.4) at 40 mg, and 1.4 mo (0.7-7.8) at 60 mg. The median DOR was 9.7 mo (3.5-not reached (NR)) at 20 mg, and NR at 40 mg and 60 mg. The Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimates for DOR at 12 mo was 42% at 20 mg, 70% at 40 mg, 66% at 60 mg. The mPFS was 3.8 mo (2.4-7.9) at 20mg, 13.7mo (5.0-NR) at 40 mg, and 11.2 mo (4.8-NR) at 60 mg. The KM estimates for PFS at 12 mo was 19% at 20 mg, 51% at 40 mg, 49% at 60 mg. The median OS was 21.6 mo (7.9-NR) at 20 mg, and NR at 40 mg and 60 mg. ABBV-383 at 20 mg, 40 mg, and 60 mg led to rapid and transient production of key proinflammatory cytokines (IL-6, IL8, IFN-γ, and TNF-α), and reduction of soluble BCMA levels over time that were associated with disease response. ABBV-383 also promoted T-cell activation and proliferation with upregulation of CD69 and KI67 markers on peripheral CD4 and CD8 T cells in evaluable pts. Conclusions ABBV-383 showed a manageable safety profile at dosages of 20 mg, 40 mg, and 60 mg IV Q3W, with low incidence of TEAEs leading to discontinuation. Also, extended Q3W dosing interval with no step-up dosing schedule of ABBV-383 may provide enhanced convenience. However, 20 mg yielded numerically lower responses when compared to 40 mg and 60 mg. At 40 mg and 60 mg, ABBV-383 monotherapy yielded deep and durable responses with mPFS of 13.7 mo and 11.2 mo, and 12-month DOR of 70% and 66% (mDOR NR in pts with ≥CR), respectively. These results in heavily pretreated RRMM pts support further clinical evaluation.

Background: Waldenström Macroglobulinemia (WM) is an indolent lymphoma with heterogeneous outcomes. The recently developed, Revised International Prognostic Scoring System for WM (rIPSS-WM) did not examine the prognostic impact of MYD88L265P, a somatic alteration present in most patients with WM. Moreover, rIPSS-WM could only be partially validated in an external cohort. Here, we report the performance of rIPSS-WM and propose a refined prognostic model with external validation. Methods: We reviewed medical records of treatment-naïve patients with active WM consecutively seen at Mayo Clinic, Rochester (MCR) between 01/01/1996 and 12/31/2017. We applied the rIPSS-WM model in patients with data available for all required parameters, including age, serum beta-2 microglobulin (β2M), serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and serum albumin at diagnosis to assess the prognostic utility of this model. We then identified the dichotomized clinical and laboratory parameters prognostic for overall survival (OS) by univariate analyses (UVA) in our cohort. The significant parameters were analyzed to independently predict OS in a multivariable analysis (MVA) and to create a prognostic model, which was subsequently validated in an independent multi-institutional cohort. Results: We identified 889 patients with active WM at MCR, with a median follow-up of 8.2 [95% confidence interval (CI): 7.5-9] years. The estimated median OS for this cohort was 10.6 (95%CI: 9.7-11.4) years. Patients with available data in this cohort for the validation of rIPSS-WM (n=241) were risk stratified into very low (n=46), low (n=64), intermediate (n=58), high (n=46) and very-high risk groups (n=27) per rIPSS-WM, with the respective 5-year OS rates of 96%, 76%, 72%, 77% and 32%, demonstrating overlapping survival curves for the low, intermediate and the high-risk groups. Because rIPSS-WM could not be validated, we used the data from the MCR cohort and identified age at diagnosis of active WM, LDH >upper limit of normal (ULN), β2M >3µg/mL and albumin <3.5g/dL as statistically significant prognostic markers for OS on UVA. Notably, the presence of MYD88 L265P did not impact OS [median 11.4 years (95%CI: 10.1-not reached (NR) for MYD88 L265P genotype (n=231) versus 10 years (95% CI: 8.1-NR) for MYD88 WT genotype (n=65); p=0.33]. On MVA, LDH >ULN (HR 2.34), serum albumin <3.5 g/dL (HR 1.5) and age groups 65-75 years (HR 1.4) and >75 years (HR 2.6) were independently prognostic. Based on comparable HRs, we assigned a score of 1 point each to serum albumin <3.5 g/dL and age group 66-75 years and similarly, 2 points each for age >75 years and serum LDH >ULN per their impact on OS. Patients with the composite scores of 0, 1 and 2 were categorized as low risk, low- intermediate risk and intermediate risk, respectively. Due to similar OS for the scores of 3 to 5, these were combined to form the high-risk group of our proposed model: Modified Staging System for WM (MSS-WM). The median OS was 14.6 years [95%CI: 9.1 years-NR] for low-risk (score 0, n=71, 21%), 11.2 years (95% CI: 9.1-15.2 years) for low-intermediate risk (score 1, n=110, 32%), 8.1 years (95% CI: 6.4-12.2) for intermediate risk (score 2, n=81, 24%) and 5.5 years (95 % CI: 3.9-11 years) for the high-risk group (score ≥3, n=79, 23%); p<0.0001. In this derivation cohort, the 5-year OS rate was 93%, 82%, 69% and 55% and 10-year OS rate was 60%, 53%, 45% and 30% for the low, low-intermediate, intermediate, and high-risk cohort, respectively ( Figure 1A). We also validated MSS-WM using competing risk analysis (p=0.001) and in the cohort of rituximab treated patients (p<0.0001). We then used data from an independent series of 335 treatment-naïve symptomatic patients from academic institutions (n=5) across the US and Europe for external validation of the MSS-WM model. The median follow-up for the validation cohort was 6.3 years (95% CI: 5.5-7.2 years). The 5-year OS was 93%, 90%, 75% and 57% and the estimated 10-year OS was 91%, 80%, 64% and 35% for the low risk (n= 86, 26%), low-intermediate (n=107, 32%), intermediate (n=86, 26%) and high-risk (n=59, 18%) cohorts, respectively (p<0.0001, Figure 1B). Conclusions: Our proposed model, MSS-WM, is a simple, clinically useful, externally validated model that reliably risk stratifies previously untreated patients with active WM into four groups that have distinct outcomes based on the composite scores derived from the patients' age, serum albumin and serum LDH at diagnosis.

Introduction Newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) patients often share tumor genetic abnormalities associated with a high risk of progression and poor survival. We hypothesized that single-cell transcriptomic characterization of the tumor immune microenvironment (TIME) may be combined with tumor-based risk stratification to uncover novel disease biology mechanisms associated with clinical outcomes and improve risk stratification. Methods We performed single-cell RNA sequencing of 361 CD138 negative sorted bone marrow mononuclear cells (BMMCs) samples from 263 MM patients enrolled at time of diagnosis in the Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation CoMMpass study (NCT01454297). Specimens were analyzed at baseline (n=263) across a network of five collaborating academic research centers following assay harmonization. Genetic factors that determine risk were defined as one or more of the following gain- or loss-of-function events derived from baseline genomic sequencing data: del17p14, translocations of the Ig locus with the MAF/A/B or WHSC1/MMSET/NSD2 loci, and gain of chromosome 1q21. Statistical modeling strategies were used to assess single-cell populations or RNA signatures associations with known risk factors or disease progression (FDR<0.05). Results The study generated high-quality single-cell profiles of 731,643 cells from 123 high-risk and 107 standard-risk MM patients based on genetics. Based on distinct transcriptome profiles, BMMCs formed 106 clusters corresponding to 5 major compartments: NK and T cells, B cells, erythrocytes, myeloid cells, and plasma cells. Our preliminary differential abundance analysis comparing high- vs standard-risk patients at baseline uncovered significant differences in the TIME associated with genetic risk. The high-risk group was identified as enriched in effector CD8+, and CD4+ T cells. In contrast, the high-risk group exhibited depletion of naive CD8+ and interferon-associated CD4+ and CD8+ T as compared to the standard-risk group. Within subclusters in the T and NK cells compartment, a higher cytotoxicity signature was observed in high-risk patients, characterized by the expression of granzymes and perforin. Finally, our preliminary survival and progression analysis associated a higher frequency of IDO1-expressing macrophages in worst progression patients, while better outcomes were associated with CD8+ T and B cells expressing androgen response and IL6/STAT3/EMT programs, respectively. Conclusions Current approaches for risk stratification are based on bulk measurements of tumor's genetic or epigenetics features, which do not capture the diversity and dynamics of the TIME. Through single-cell transcriptomics, we were able to capture, in high granularity, the TIME and correlate specific immune cell populations and phenotypes with relapse risk and poor prognostic outcomes. These results suggest that immune subpopulations may be an essential novel aspect for improving current risk stratification models.

Introduction While chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy has transformed the management of hematologic malignancies, it requires frequent monitoring for acute toxicities, almost universally achieved through mandatory hospitalizations, therefore utilizing a significant amount of healthcare resources. At Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN, our standard practice is administering CAR-T cell therapy in the outpatient setting through a multi-disciplinary hospital-based outpatient (HBO) unit and remote patient monitoring (RPM) program. Our CAR-T RPM program consists of in-home, electronic health record-integrated technology to monitor vital signs and neurologic symptoms for 30 days post CAR-T infusion. Here we report the healthcare utilization outcomes of CAR-T patients managed in the outpatient setting enrolled in the RPM program. Methods Patients undergoing FDA-approved CAR-T cell treatment in the outpatient setting and participating in the CAR-T RPM program at Mayo Clinic Rochester were included in this IRB-approved study. Patient characteristics, healthcare utilization metrics, inpatient interventions, and patient satisfaction data regarding the RPM program were reviewed. Length of stay (LOS) includes any hospitalizations for which the admission date falls within the RPM monitoring period (CAR-T cell infusion to day +30), even if the hospitalization continued past day +30. Results A total of 123 patients participated in the CAR-T RPM program and underwent treatment in the outpatient setting. Median age at CAR-T infusion was 63 years (range 22 - 83), and most patients were male (n=78, 63%). Non-Hodgkin lymphoma was the most common diagnosis (n=74, 60%), followed by multiple myeloma (n=47, 38%), ALL (n=1, 1%) and other (n=1, 1%). During the PRM monitoring period, 19 (16%) patients were managed entirely in the outpatient setting. The remaining 104 (84%) patients required at least one hospitalization, with most patients (n=70, 57%) hospitalized only once [26 (21%) patients were hospitalized twice, and 7 (6%) patients were hospitalized 3 times, and 1 (1%) patient hospitalized 4 times during the monitoring period]. When considering the first hospitalization post CAR-T infusion, the median LOS was 6 days (range 2 - 47). When considering all hospitalizations post CAR-T, the median LOS was 8 days (range 2 - 47). Only 7 (6%) patients required an ICU stay, with a mean ICU stay of 0.2 days (standard deviation 0.9). Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) was noted in 92 (75%) of patients at a median of 3 days (range 0 - 18) post CAR-T infusion. All patients with CRS received tocilizumab, at a median of 4 days post CAR-T infusion. Steroids for CRS were administered in 63 (68%) of these patients. Neurotoxicity was reported in 45 (37%) patients at a median of 7 days (range 1 - 19) post CAR-T infusion. During the RPM monitoring period, patients were seen in our HBO unit with a median of 18 outpatient visits (range 4 - 30). Patient survey data, obtained at the end of the RPM monitoring period, were available from 37 patients. The majority of patients felt that the RPM program helped them feel comfortable managing their health at home, were able to reach a team member, and receive an appropriate response promptly. The majority of patients felt comfortable using the RPM equipment and interacting with providers virtually. Overall, 83% of patients were satisfied with the RPM program and 6% were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied. When asked about the reason for disappointment, technical difficulties/issues with the devices were the themes mentioned by the few patients (11%) who were unsatisfied with the RPM program. Conclusion: Despite the complexities and frequent monitoring associated with CAR-T cell therapy, outpatient CAR-T cell treatment is a feasible model of care. As the standard practice at our institution, the CAR-T RPM program was part of the management of nearly all patients undergoing an FDA-approved CAR-T product in the outpatient setting. RPM in the acute setting post CAR-T infusion is a well-received practice initiative by the majority of patients, including a high level of comfort utilizing the RPM equipment and virtual interaction with the RPM providers.

Background: Patients (pts) receiving FDA-approved chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy or Bispecific antibody Teclistamab (Tec) are commonly managed in the inpatient setting given the common adverse events such as cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome ICANS. We have previously reported that hospital-based outpatient (HBO) management of pts receiving CAR-T is feasible and safe (Bansal et al, ASH2022). In 2023, HBO management at our institution began incorporating home health visits and management of grade 1 CRS in outpatient setting for select pts receiving standard of care (SOC) CAR-T. Here, we report outcomes of our updated practice. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed medical records and remote monitoring data of adult pts who received SOC CAR-T or Tec between 10/2020 and 7/2023 at Mayo Clinic, Rochester under an IRB approved protocol. Results: In 3/2023, pts deemed to be low risk for severe CRS (fever onset >= 3 days from infusion, CRP<100) received HBO management for grade 1 CRS, including outpatient administration of tocilizumab. If CRS improved or resolved, outpatient monitoring was continued. If CRS persisted within the observation period on HBO, pts were admitted. Recurrent CRS after the first episode were all managed inpatient. Nine pts met these criteria for HBO CRS management and their outcomes were compared to those who received initial inpatient (INPT) CRS management (INPT, n=17) during the same timeframe, as well as the outcome of 164 pts who had CRS management INPT prior to our practice change (Table 1). Two-third of the pts with initial management of CRS outpatient did not require hospitalization. Median time to hospitalization trended later than those managed inpatient at the onset of CRS. The duration of hospitalization was comparable for all pts admitted between initial HBO and INPT CRS management. However with fewer admissions in the initial CRS HBO group, the average hospitalization days (LOS) per patient treated for that group was lower compared to initial INPT CRS management. Data on additional pts will be presented at ASH. In 1/2023, pts on RPM with no ongoing CRS symptoms, no language barriers, and no compliance concerns received home health visits during weeks 3 and 4 post CAR-T infusion in place of clinic visits on HBO. Home health visit team communicated with HBO staff to review assessment and plan. Changes in HBO utilization will be presented. Finally, 24 pts received 223 Tec infusions on HBO. Median age was 66 years, 15 (61%) were males, 9 (38%) had high risk cytogenetics. The median prior lines of therapy was 5. Among these pts, 220/223 (99%) doses were performed on HBO and 204/220 (93%) infusions never required admission for management. Twenty pts enrolled in RPM (Figure 1). An average of 2 alerts were generated per patient during the 2 week period and median time from infusion to alert was 1.5 days. Majority of alerts were resolved over a phone call and only 13/114 (11%) alerts required a physician visit/hospital admission. Of the 16 Tec infusions resulting in admission, 4/16 (25%) required re-admission resulting in a total of 20 hospitalizations. Admissions mostly occurred during step-up dosing (18/20; 90%). Most common reason for first admission was fever (13/16, 85%) and median time to admission was 1 day from infusion. Median LOS was 1.5 days (range, 0-12). In terms of CRS, majority were Grade 1 (12/13, 93%) which were managed with steroids (dexamethasone/ prednisone) alone. One patient had CRS grade 4 event, in the setting of concurrent decompensation during dialysis, and was treated with steroids, tocilizumab, vasopressor, CRRT, thoracentesis, intubation and mechanical ventilation. The rate of second CRS event after management of first CRS with steroid (dexamethasone/ prednisone) was 15% (2/13). These second CRS episodes also resolved with steroid alone. Data on additional pts receiving Tec will be presented at ASH. Conclusion: Our data showed that additional advances in outpatient practice, including initial outpatient management of CRS and outpatient administration of Tec step up dosing are feasible, safe and reduce hospital resource utilization.

Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is characterized by somatic mutations involving cancer-associated genes. The MyDRUG trial was initiated to explore the efficacy of specific molecularly-targeted therapies in combination with a standard triplet combination in MM. Methods: MyDRUG (NCT03732703) is a genomically-guided umbrella trial for patients with functional high-risk MM, defined as early relapse following primary therapy (3 years for transplant with maintenance, 18 months without), with specific genetic abnormalities. Patients with no actionable mutation or mutations with allelic burden below 30% were randomly assigned to one of the “non-actionable” arms. Here we present the data for the Y3 arm which combines selinexor (60mg po days 1,8,15), ixazomib (4mg po days 1,8,15), pomalidomide (3mg po days 1-21) and dexamethasone (40mg po weekly) (Seli-IPD), given on a 28-day cycle. The primary objective of the Y3 sub-protocol was to evaluate the overall response rate (ORR) according to the International Myeloma Working Group consensus criteria. Secondary objectives included assessment of adverse events (AEs). Results: 17 patients were enrolled into the Y3 arm. The average age was 62 (51-79), 65% were male with a median of 29 months since initial diagnosis and a median of 2 prior lines of therapy. The ORR (> PR) was 52.9% with a clinical benefit rate (> MR) of 58.8%. The median progression free survival was 10.2 months ( 95% CI: 3.9; 12.9) with a median overall survival which has not yet been reached; with all 17 patients still alive at the current data cutoff. No dose-limiting toxicities were seen. Eight patients (47.1%) experienced a serious AE with 2 patients (11.8%) experiencing an AE leading to treatment discontinuation. Two patients (11.8%) required dose reductions. The most common non-hematologic AEs were fatigue, nausea and constipation; all of which were grade 1 and 2. Conclusions: In this platform study of patients with relapsed, functionally high-risk MM, patients who received Seli-IPd exhibited significant efficacy and a manageable AE profile. Furthermore, this provides an all-oral option for patients wishing to minimize their office visits and parenteral therapy administrations.

Background: Dex is a key component of induction regimens for NDMM despite common toxicities including insomnia and anxiety. The E4A03 randomized trial (Rajkumar, Lancet Oncol 2010) demonstrated that dex dosed at 40 mg weekly outperformed higher-intensity dex and established this regimen as the standard of care for NDMM. In standard practice as well as clinical trials, however, dex doses are often reduced to 20 mg weekly or lower (if not stopped entirely) among older patients or among patients experiencing toxicities. As a first step toward establishing the equipoise of planned dex dose reductions in NDMM, we investigated outcomes with patients from two previous SWOG trials to understand the impact of dex dose reductions on post-induction outcomes. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of data from two completed NDMM studies, S0777 (comparing VRd vs Rd) and S1211 (comparing Elo-VRd vs VRd). For this secondary analysis, we analyzed the subset of patients who completed all eight 3-week cycles of induction (or six 4-week cycles in the S0777 Rd arm). As shown in Figure 1A, we defined DEX fullDose as patients for whom the starting dex dose (either 40 mg once per week or 20 mg on Days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12 of 21-day cycles) did not change during induction. In contrast, DEX lowered was defined as patients for whom the end-of-induction dex dose and/or frequency were lower than their starting values. As an exploratory analysis, we also compared PFS and OS between the DEX fullDose (no changes to dex strength during induction) and DEX veryLow (dex dosing reduced ≥50% during induction) subgroups. All analyses were landmarked from the end of induction, defined as 24 weeks from registration, to account for the time-dependent nature of dex treatment received. Survival curves were based on the Kaplan-Meier method and comparisons were made using the log-rank test. Results: Of 541 evaluable patients ( n = 441 from S0777, n = 100 from S1211), dex was reduced during induction in 76% ( n = 410). Compared to DEX fullDose patients, DEX lowered patients were more likely to be anemic (37% vs 26%, p = 0.02) but had similar distributions of age ≥70 (24% of DEX lowered vs 26% of DEX fullDose), Performance Status > 1 (15% vs 12%), ISS stage 3 disease (33% vs 27%), ≥ 60% bone marrow plasma cell burden (37% vs 31%), M-spike > 3 g/dL (48% vs 48%) platelets < 150,000 cells/mm 3 (18% vs 14%), baseline LDH ≥ 190 U/L (36% vs 41%), and baseline CRP ≥ 8 mg/L (27% vs 30%). PFS (Figure 1B) was comparable between DEX lowered (median 36 months, 95% CI 29 to 39 months) and DEX fullDose (median 33 months, 95% CI 24 to 48 months) with p = 0.90. Similarly, OS (Figure 1C) was comparable between DEX lowered [median 77 months, 95% CI 68 months to not reached (NR)] and DEX fullDose (median 92 months, 95% CI 65 months to NR) with p = 0.93. In the DEX veryLow subgroup with ≥50% reduction in dex dosing during induction, median PFS was 39 months (95% CI 34 to 50 months) and median OS was NR (95% CI NR to NR). As shown in Figure 1D and Figure 1E, PFS and OS were comparable between these patients and DEX fullDose patients. Discussion: To our knowledge, this is the first analysis of dex dosing strength in NDMM since E4A03. In two separate randomized trials, over half of patients required dex reductions below a starting dose of ~40 mg weekly. Dex dose reductions during induction had no impact on post-induction PFS and OS, even in the subset of patients who required significant dose reductions. Limitations of our post hoc analysis include heterogeneity between dex dosing schedules and lack of cytogenetic data for all patients. We could not discern specifically why dex was lowered, and it is possible that dex might have been lowered disproportionately commonly in patients who had achieved early responses and thus independently did better. Regardless, these results strongly suggest that maintaining dex 40 mg weekly for the entirety of NDMM induction may be unnecessary in the modern era. Cooperative efforts to study a planned dex de-escalation protocol (i.e., once no longer needed for symptom management or as a pre-medication) alongside patient-reported outcome assessments of symptom burden are being planned. Funding: NIH/NCI/NCTN grants U10CA180888, U10CA180819, U10CA180821, U10CA180820; and in part by Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (now part of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company), and by Celgene.