Nath, Rajneesh

Patients in the liso-cel plus ibrutinib cohort of the phase 1/2, open-label TRANSCEND CLL 004 study had relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) and received liso-cel (50×106 [dose level (DL)1] or 100×106 [DL2] chimeric antigen receptor-positive T cells) with concurrent ibrutinib from enrollment through 90 days after liso-cel infusion or longer per investigator discretion. Primary end point was complete response/remission (CR)/CR with incomplete marrow recovery (CRi) by investigator assessment. Among 56 patients who received ibrutinib plus liso-cel (DL1, n=5; DL2, n=51), median (range) age was 64.5 years (44‒77), 98% had high-risk cytogenetics, 55% had progression on Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor and venetoclax failure, and median (range) number of prior therapies was 5 (1‒13). Median (range) follow-up was 24.8 months (3.1‒51.8). At DL2, CR/CRi rate was 45% (95% confidence interval [CI], 31‒60) and overall response rate was 86% (95% CI, 74‒94). Median (95% CI) duration of response was not reached (NR; 28.7‒NR) for patients with CR/CRi and 41.4 months (23.3‒NR) for all responders. Median (95% CI) progression-free survival was 31.4 months (20.1‒NR). In DL1+DL2, most common grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) were neutropenia (52%) and anemia (41%). Cytokine release syndrome was reported in 80% of patients (grade 3, 4%; no grade 4/5), and neurological events in 41% (grade 3/4, 11%; no grade 5). Ibrutinib-related TEAEs were reported in 68% of patients (grade 3/4, 43%; no grade 5). Liso-cel plus ibrutinib demonstrated notable efficacy in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL/SLL with predictable and manageable safety. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03331198; NCT03435796.

7037 Background: TRANSCEND CLL 004 (NCT03331198) is a phase 1/2, open-label, nonrandomized, multicohort study in adult patients (pt) with R/R chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma with liso-cel mono and liso-cel + ibrutinib combo cohorts. Given the study design, we performed PS matching/weighting to adjust for differences in key covariates between cohorts to compare efficacy and safety. Methods: Here, PS is the probability of receiving combo given the covariates and estimated by logistic regression. Covariates were hemoglobin, LDH, number of prior therapies, platelets, prior BTKi + venetoclax exposure, R/R on prior BTKi, and bulky disease for efficacy; and ALC, bulky disease, CRP, ferritin, and number of prior therapies for safety. PS balancing methods were optimal 1:1 matching, average treatment effect for treated pts (ATT) full matching, and ATT inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Efficacy endpoints were response (CR rate, ORR) and time to event endpoints (DOR, PFS, OS). Safety endpoints were proportions of pts with any-grade (gr)/gr ≥ 3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and investigator-identified neurological events (NE). Results: Fifty-one and 88 efficacy-evaluable pts were treated at dose level 2 (100 × 10 6 CAR + T cells) in the combo and mono cohorts, respectively. Before matching/weighting on PS, odds of achieving CR and overall response were statistically significantly higher for combo (Table). DOR did not differ between cohorts. For PFS and OS, HRs were lower with combo vs mono (not statistically significant [NS]). Odds of gr ≥ 3 CRS/NE were lower with combo vs mono (NS). After matching/weighting, odds of CR (except IPTW ATT) and overall response remained statistically significantly higher in combo. HRs for PFS and OS and ORs for gr ≥ 3 CRS/NE were numerically lower with combo vs mono (NS, except IPTW ATT for PFS). HRs for DOR were less but close to HR of 1. Conclusions: The liso-cel + ibrutinib combo demonstrated a trend for better efficacy and safety vs liso-cel mono, with statistically significant differences for CR rate and ORR. Clinical trial information: NCT03331198 . Efficacy and safety outcomes: combo vs mono. No adjustment ATT optimal 1:1 IPTW - ATT CR rate, OR (95% CI) 2.07* (1.01–4.28) 2.40* (1.05–5.66) 2.00(0.89–4.61) ORR, OR (95% CI) 3.96* (1.68–10.51) 3.43* (1.33–9.71) 4.18* (1.63–11.78) DOR, HR (95% CI) 0.98(0.51–1.87) 0.88(0.43–1.78) 0.96(0.50–1.85) PFS, HR (95% CI) 0.62(0.37–1.02) 0.61(0.35–1.05) 0.59* (0.35–0.98) OS, HR (95% CI) 0.70(0.38–1.28) 0.73(0.37–1.43) 0.66(0.36–1.22) CRS, OR (95% CI) 0.63(0.26–1.56) 0.67(0.24–1.84) 0.69(0.24–1.88) Gr ≥ 3 CRS, OR (95% CI) 0.23(0.01–1.35) 0.49(0.02–5.28) 0.26(0.01–1.94) NE, OR (95% CI) 0.84(0.41–1.68) 0.92(0.40–2.08) 1.10(0.48–2.52) Gr ≥ 3 NE, OR (95% CI) 0.56(0.19–1.45) 0.58(0.16–1.89) 0.68(0.19–2.30) *Statistically significant difference at 5% level.

ABSTRACTAlthough recent studies have demonstrated the efficacy of chimeric antigen receptor T‐cell (CAR‐T) therapy in relapsed large B‐cell lymphoma (LBCL) with MYC rearrangement (R‐MYC), the data comparing CAR‐T to autologous hematopoietic cell transplant (auto‐HCT) in such patients who achieve a complete or partial response (CR/PR) after salvage therapies are limited. We compared the clinical outcomes of patients with R‐MYC LBCL (including double and triple hit lymphomas) who underwent CAR‐T or auto‐HCT after achieving a CR/PR with salvage therapies using the Center for International Blood & Marrow Transplant Research registry. Among the 252 patients (auto‐HCT = 98, CAR‐T = 154), relative to auto‐HCT, CAR‐T was associated with significantly lower overall survival (OS) (Hazard Ratio [HR] 2.09, 95% CI 1.38–3.15, p < 0.001) on multivariate analysis. There were no differences in progression‐free survival (PFS) (HR 1.21, 95% CI 0.81–1.8 p = 0.36), risk of relapse (HR 1.1, 95% CI 0.71–1.69 p = 0.68), nonrelapse mortality (NRM) (HR 1.74, 95% CI 0.64–4.7 p = 0.28) while the post‐relapse survival was longer in auto‐HCT relative to CAR‐T (HR 1.93, 95% CI 1.21–3.06 p = 0.01). On propensity score matched analysis accounting for differences in characteristics across the two cohorts, we detected no significant differences in OS (HR 1.72, 95% CI 0.92–3.21 p = 0.09), PFS (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.64–1.68 p = 0.88), NRM (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.35–4.2 p = 0.76), relapse (HR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.54–1.6 p = 0.8) and post‐relapse survival (HR 2.25, 95% CI 0.98–5.17, p = 0.06). These data, although retrospective, support consideration for auto‐HCT in patients with R‐MYC LBCL who achieve a CR/PR after salvage therapies, particularly in regions with no or limited access to CAR‐T.

PURPOSE Off-the-shelf, allogeneic CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell products may improve access to treatment versus autologous ones. We report the phase I experience of the allogeneic CD19 CAR T-cell product cemacabtagene ansegedleucel (cema-cel) and its predecessor, ALLO-501, in CD19 CAR T-naïve patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (R/R LBCL). METHODS In the ALPHA2/ALPHA studies, the safety and efficacy of allogeneic CD19 CAR T cells were evaluated in CD19 CAR T treatment-naïve patients with R/R LBCL. Patients received healthy donor-derived, human leukocyte antigen–unmatched cema-cel/ALLO-501 following a 3-day lymphodepletion regimen of fludarabine (30 mg/m 2 once daily), cyclophosphamide (300 or 500 mg/m 2 once daily), and escalating doses of the anti-CD52 monoclonal antibody, ALLO-647. RESULTS As of September 26, 2024, 33 CD19 CAR T-naïve patients with LBCL (median age, 66 years; median number of previous therapies, 3) received allogeneic CAR T cells. CAR T-cell expansion was observed following infusion, with persistence observed up to 4 months. The overall and complete response (CR) rates were 58% and 42%, respectively; the median duration of response in patients with a CR was 23.1 months. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were hematologic toxicities. No cases of graft-versus-host disease, immune effector cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome, or grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome were reported. CONCLUSION Allogeneic CD19 CAR T cells demonstrated promising overall and durable CR rates with a manageable safety profile in CD19 CAR T-naïve patients with R/R LBCL, supporting additional evaluation of cema-cel in patients with LBCL.

Background: In TRANSCEND CLL 004 (NCT03331198),monotherapy with liso-cel, an autologous, CD19-directed CAR T cell product (100 × 106 CAR+ T cells [dose level (DL) 2]), resulted in 43% ORR and 18% CR/CR with incomplete marrow recovery (CRi) rate per IRC in pts with third-line or later R/R CLL/SLL who had PD on Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi) and failed venetoclax (Siddiqi T, et al. Lancet 2023). Ibr + other CAR T cell therapies has shown high ORR and reduced cytokine release syndrome (CRS) severity in pts with R/R CLL/SLL. In the phase 1 dose-escalation ibr combination cohort, DL2 was the recommended dose of liso-cel for expansion (Wierda WG, et al. Blood 2020). Here, we report results of liso-cel + ibr in pts with R/R CLL/SLL from TRANSCEND CLL 004. Methods: Eligible pts ≥ 18 y of age with CLL/SLL had ≥ 1 of the following: 1) receiving BTKi with PD at entry, 2) high-risk disease and &lt; CR after ≥ 6 mo on BTKi, 3) BTK/PLCγ2 mutation ± ibr PD, 4) prior BTKi with no contraindications to ibr, and 5) (per amendment) PD on BTKi and received prior venetoclax. At enrollment, pts started or continued ibr (420 mg daily or less for toxicity) through leukapheresis and for up to 90 d (or longer per investigator [inv]) after liso-cel (target dose of 50 × 106 CAR+ T cells [DL1] or DL2). Response was per inv by 2018 iwCLL criteria. Primary endpoint was CR/CRi rate at DL2; secondary endpoints included safety, ORR, duration of response (DOR), duration of CR/CRi (DOCR), time to response, time to CR/CRi, PFS, OS, and undetectable MRD (uMRD) rate in blood. Cellular kinetics was exploratory. Efficacy analyses were at DL2 and safety at DL1 + DL2. Treatment-emergent AEs (TEAE) occurred the latter of ≤ 90 days after liso-cel or ≤ 30 days of ibr completion. Liso-cel-treated pts who completed or withdrew from study could enroll in a separate long-term follow-up (LTFU) study (NCT03435796) for safety and OS ≤ 15 y after liso-cel. Results: A total of 65 pts underwent leukapheresis; 56 received ibr + liso-cel (DL1, n = 5; DL2, n = 51). At data cutoff (01/12/2024), 28 of 56 (50%) pts had discontinued the study, 11 (20%) completed the study, and 17 (30%) were ongoing; 5 of 28 (18%) eligible pts enrolled in LTFU. Median (IQR) on-study follow-up (including LTFU) was 24.8 mo (14.2-34.6). Median (range) age was 65 y (44-77); 55 (98%) pts had high-risk cytogenetics, such as del(17p) (n = 25), TP53 mutation (n = 24), and unmutated IGHV (n = 39); 43% had LDH ≥ ULN; and median (range) SPD was 27 cm2 (1-218). Pts had a median (range) of 5 (1-13) prior therapies (≤ 2, n = 13 [23%]). Median (range) time from leukapheresis to liso-cel availability was 25 d (17-79). Median (range) ibr exposure was 34 d (15-188) before and 94.5 d (6-1517) after liso-cel. At DL2, ORR (95% CI) was 86% (73.7-94.3), median (range) time to first response was 1.0 mo (0.9-6.0), and median (95% CI) DOR was 41.4 mo (23.3-not reached [NR]). CR/CRi rate (95% CI; primary endpoint) was 45% (31.1-59.7), median (range) time to first CR/CRi was 3.1 mo (0.9-12.1), and median (95% CI) DOCR was NR (26.6-NR). Median (95% CI) PFS and OS was 31.4 mo (20.1-NR) and NR (27.5-NR), respectively. uMRD rate (95% CI) in blood and marrow was 86% (73.7-94.3) and 84% (71.4-93.0), respectively. Grade (gr) ≥ 3 TEAEs occurred in 48 (86%) pts (most commonly neutropenia [52%] and anemia [41%]) with no gr 5 TEAEs. Liso-cel-related gr ≥ 3 TEAEs occurred in 32 (57%) pts and ibr-related gr ≥ 3 TEAEs in 24 (43%) pts including cardiovascular events of hypertension (7%) and atrial fibrillation (2%). Any-gr CRS occurred in 45 (80%) pts (gr ≥ 3, n = 2 [4%]) and any-gr neurological events (NE) in 23 (41%) pts (gr ≥ 3, n = 6 [11%]). Eight (14%) pts had gr ≥ 3 infections and 5 (9%) had second primary malignancies. Twenty-five (45%) pts had prolonged cytopenias (gr ≥ 3 at D30); most recovered to gr ≤ 2 by D90. Sixteen pts died after infusion (PD, n = 6; unknown, n = 6; COVID-19, n = 3; mixed septic/cardiogenic shock, n = 1). Liso-cel showed rapid expansion (median tmax, 10 d) and was detected up to 42 mo after infusion. Conclusions: Combined liso-cel + ibr demonstrated substantial efficacy with deep remissions (86% ORR, 45% CR rate, and 86% blood uMRD rate) and manageable safety in pts with R/R CLL/SLL. Though comparisons should be made with caution and there were differences in disease characteristics between cohorts, liso-cel + ibr showed a numerically higher ORR/CR rate and lower gr ≥ 3 CRS/NE rates vs liso-cel monotherapy, supporting the combination as a promising new therapeutic strategy for pts with R/R CLL/SLL.

Background: The primary analysis of the phase 1/2, single-arm, multicenter TRANSCEND CLL 004 (NCT03331198) study with a median follow-up of 21.1 mo showed that a single administration of liso-cel achieved rapid, deep, and durable responses and a manageable safety profile in pts with heavily pretreated, high-risk R/R CLL/SLL, including those with progression on a previous Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi) and venetoclax failure (primary efficacy analysis set [PEAS]; Siddiqi T, et al. Lancet 2023). With 5 mo of additional follow-up (median of 23.5 mo), liso-cel continued to demonstrate durable CR/CR with incomplete marrow recovery (CRi) and high undetectable MRD (uMRD; 10−4 by next-generation sequencing) rates with no new safety signals. Median duration of response (DOR) was 35.3 mo (95% CI, 12.4-not reached [NR]), and median OS was 30.3 mo (95% CI, 15.0-NR) (Siddiqi T, et al. Blood 2023). Here, we report updated results from TRANSCEND CLL 004 with 16 mo of additional follow-up since primary analysis and a median on-study follow-up of 23.8 mo (range, 0.4-59.6). Methods: Pts must have received ≥ 2 prior lines of therapy (LOTs), including a BTKi (full population). Eligible pts received liso-cel at a target dose of either 50 × 106 (dose level [DL] 1) or 100 × 106 (DL2) CAR+ T cells after lymphodepleting chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was CR/CRi per independent review committee in the PEAS at DL2. Key secondary endpoints were ORR and blood uMRD rate. All pts who received liso-cel and completed or discontinued early from the study were asked to enroll in a separate long-term follow-up (LTFU) study (NCT03435796) assessing safety and OS for up to 15 y after liso-cel. Results: As of the data cutoff (01/12/2024), 118 of 137 leukapheresed pts received liso-cel (safety set), 97 (DL1, n = 9; DL2, n = 88) were efficacy evaluable, and 54 (DL1, n = 4; DL2, n = 50) were in the PEAS. A total of 22 pts were ongoing in TRANSCEND CLL 004, and 19 of 60 eligible pts enrolled to the LTFU study. In the safety set, pts had a median age of 65 y (range, 49-82), and 83% had high-risk cytogenetic markers (del[17p], 42%; TP53 mutation, 47%; unmutated immunoglobulin heavy-chain variable gene, 47%). Median prior LOTs was 5 (range, 2-14); 86% of pts had prior chemoimmunotherapy. In the PEAS at DL2, CR/CRi rate remained at 20%, ORR at 44%, blood uMRD rate at 64%, and marrow uMRD rate at 60%. Median DOR was NR (95% CI, 12.4-NR), with a median follow-up of 31.7 mo (95% CI, 21.3-35.5). Estimated 36-mo DOR rate was 61% (95% CI, 30-81). Median (95% CI) DOR was NR in pts with CR/CRi. Median (95% CI) PFS was 11.9 mo (5.7-26.2) overall, 26.2 mo (11.9-NR) in pts with blood uMRD, and 2.8 mo (0.8-3.2) in pts with detectable blood MRD. Median OS, including 19 pts in the LTFU, was 43.2 mo (95% CI, 14.5-NR). Efficacy outcomes were similar in the full population at DL2. A subgroup of 23 pts who had only prior BTKi exposure and were venetoclax naïve was less heavily pretreated, with a median of 3 prior LOTs (range, 2-11); all pts had prior chemoimmunotherapy. In the efficacy-evaluable pts of this subgroup at DL2 (n = 18), the CR/CRi rate was 22%; ORR was 61%; and median (95% CI) DOR was NR (17.1-NR), PFS was NR (18.0-NR), and OS was 52.2 mo (26.9-NR). In the safety set, rates of any-grade/grade ≥ 3 cytokine release syndrome (85%/8%), any-grade/grade ≥ 3 neurological events (45%/19%), prolonged cytopenia (grade ≥ 3 at Day 30 after liso-cel infusion [54%]), grade ≥ 3 infections (18%), and second primary malignancy (9%) remained the same as previously reported (Siddiqi T, et al. Blood 2023); most pts with prolonged cytopenia had resolution to grade ≤ 2 by Month 3. Forty-six (34%) of 137 leukapheresed pts died after CAR T cell infusion, including 1 additional pt since the previous report with an unknown cause of death at ~14.5 mo after infusion. Persistence of the liso-cel transgene was detected up to 48 months after liso-cel infusion (2/5 evaluable pts at DL2 at Month 48). Conclusions: In this updated follow-up, liso-cel continued to demonstrate durable responses with an extended median OS of 43.2 mo in pts with R/R CLL/SLL. The safety results were similar to those previously reported with no new safety signals. These data confirm the sustained clinical benefit and favorable benefit-to-risk profile of a single treatment of liso-cel in pts with R/R CLL/SLL.

PURPOSE Older patients with relapsed or refractory AML (RR AML) have dismal prognoses without allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT). SIERRA compared a targeted pretransplant regimen involving the anti-CD45 radioconjugate 131 I-apamistamab with conventional care. METHODS SIERRA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02665065 ) was a phase III open-label trial. Patients age ≥55 years with active RR AML were randomly assigned 1:1 to either an 131 I-apamistamab–led regimen before alloHCT or conventional care followed by alloHCT if initial complete remission (CR)/CR with incomplete platelet recovery (CRp) occurred. Initial response was assessed 28-56 days after alloHCT in the 131 I-apamistamab group and 28-42 days after salvage chemotherapy initiation; patients without CR/CRp or with AML progression could cross over to receive 131 I-apamistamab followed by alloHCT. The primary end point was durable complete remission (dCR) lasting 180 days after initial CR/CRp. Secondary end points were overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS), assessed hierarchically in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. RESULTS The ITT population included 153 patients ( 131 I-apamistamab [n = 76]; conventional care [n = 77]). In total, 44/77 conventional care arm patients crossed over and 40/77 (52%) received 131 I-apamistamab and alloHCT, with six patients (13.6%) experiencing a dCR. In the ITT population, the dCR rate was significantly higher with 131 I-apamistamab (17.1% [95% CI, 9.4 to 27.5]) than conventional care (0% [95% CI, 0 to 4.7]; P < .0001). The OS hazard ratio (HR) was 0.99 (95% CI, 0.70 to 1.41; P = .96), and the EFS HR was 0.23 (95% CI, 0.15 to 0.34), with HR <1 favoring 131 I-apamistamab. Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 59.7% and 59.2% of the 131 I-apamistamab and conventional care groups, respectively. CONCLUSION The 131 I-apamistamab–led regimen was associated with a higher dCR rate than conventional care in older patients with RR AML. 131 I-apamistamab was well tolerated and could address an unmet need in this population.

Background : Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT) is the only potentially curative therapy for patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory (R/R) AML. Only a minority undergo alloHCT as they typically have dismal outcomes due to high relapse rates, especially those with TP53 mutations and active disease. Additionally, older pts cannot tolerate intensive treatment and hence are not eligible for alloHCT. 131I-apamistamab, an anti-CD45 radioimmunoconjugate, delivers high dose targeted radiation to hematopoietic cells, allowing for myeloablation and eradication of leukemic cells. 131I-apamistamab led induction and conditioning can thus provide these pts access to alloHCT potentially leading to better disease control and outcomes even in pts with the TP53 mutation. Methods: The SIERRA trial (NCT02665065) is a multi-center, randomized, controlled Phase 3 study comparing the rate of durable complete remission (dCR) lasting ≥6 months (mos) after complete remission with/without platelet recovery (CR/CRp) between two groups: 131I-apamistamab led induction and conditioning followed by alloHCT vs physician's choice of conventional care (CC). Pts were randomized (1:1) to CC or 131I-apamistamab with fludarabine and total body irradiation (2 Gy) followed by alloHCT. CR/CRp assessment was 28-56 days post alloHCT or 28-42 days post initiation of therapy in the CC group. Pts in the CC group not achieving leukemia-free state could crossover (CO) to 131I-apamistamab. We report the characteristics and outcomes of all pts with TP53 mutation who were enrolled in the SIERRA trial. Results: In total, 153 pts were randomized (CC, n=77; 131I-apamistamab, n=76). All pts who received the therapeutic dose of 131I-apamistamab (n=66) underwent HCT vs 14 (18.2%) in the CC group. Of evaluable pts, dCR rates at 6 months were 22% in the 131I-apamistamab group vs 0% in the CC group (95% CI;12.29, 34.73; p&lt;0.0001). A total of 37 pts with TP53 mutation were enrolled (CC=20; 131I-apamistamab =17) with a prevalence of 24.2%. Table 1 shows the baseline characteristics of these pts. Median overall survival (OS) for pts in the 131I-apamistamab group, who were TP53 negative was 6.37 mos compared to 5.72 mos for the TP53 mutation positive pts (HR=0.66; 95% CI [0.37, 1.18]; p=0.16). In the CC group (including CO pts), the median OS for TP53 positive pts was 2.96 mos. When the CC group without CO were analyzed, the median OS was 6.51 mos and 1.66 mos for the TP53 mutation negative and positive groups respectively (HR=0.28; 95% CI [0.12, 0.67]; p=0.0022). For TP53 mutation positive pts who received 131I-apamistamab ( 131I-apamistamab plus CO pts), the median OS was 5.49 mos compared to a median 1.66 mos in pts who did not receive 131I-apamistamab (CC pts without CO) [(HR=0.23; 95% CI [0.10, 0.52]; p=0.0002) (Figure 1)]. Conclusion: Pts with TP53 mutated R/R AML have a dismal prognosis and are seldom offered alloHCT due to high post-transplant relapse rates. 131I-apamistamab led alloHCT significantly improves survival outcomes in pts with TP53 mutations, commensurate with rates observed in pts with wildtype TP53, thereby overcoming the negative impact of this mutation. These data clearly support the use of 131I-apamistamab led induction and conditioning and alloHCT in R/R AML, including in patients with a TP53 mutation.

Background: Most older patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory (R/R) AML cannot tolerate intensive treatment and are not eligible for curative allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT). 131I-apamistamab, an anti-CD45 radioimmunoconjugate, delivers high dose targeted radiation to hematopoietic cells, allowing for myeloablation and eradication of leukemic cells. 131I-apamistamab led induction and conditioning can provide these pts with access to alloHCT. Methods: SIERRA (NCT02665065) was a multi-center, randomized, controlled phase 3 study comparing the efficacy of 131I-apamistamab led induction and conditioning versus physician's choice of conventional care (CC) in pts ≥55 years of age with active, R/R AML. Pts were randomized (1:1, n=153) to CC or 131I-apamistamab with fludarabine and total body irradiation (2 Gy) followed by alloHCT. Primary endpoint was durable complete remission (dCR), defined as CR ≥6 mos with or without platelet recovery (CRp). Pts not achieving CR in CC could crossover (CO) to receive 131I-apamistamab. Treatment with 131I-apamistamab was prescribed as an individualized dose for each pt following a dosimetric infusion and biodistribution analysis, with the prescribed activity of 131I set to deliver a maximum estimated radiation dose to the liver as the dose limiting organ of 24 Gy (determined as the maximum tolerable dose (MTD)) in earlier studies), thereby providing the highest dose to the diseased bone marrow and circulating leukemic cells without exceeding individual organ radiation dose tolerances. Here, we performed an analysis to determine whether a radiation dose-response relationship could be established based on either 1) administered radiation dose to liver and the rate of achieving the primary endpoint of dCR (with 95% binomial confidence intervals) or 2) dCR rate and the ratio of bone marrow/liver absorbed radiation dose as an indicator of favorable biodistribution between target/risk organ. Results: All pts receiving the therapeutic dose of 131I-apamistamab (n=66) were able to receive an alloHCT, and the primary endpoint (dCR) was achieved in 13 pts receiving 131I-apamistamab vs 0 pts in CC (p&lt;0.0001). The median absorbed liver dose was 21.6 Gy (IQR: 21.0 - 22.8 Gy), median absorbed dose to bone marrow was 16.0 Gy (IQR: 11.5 - 22.3 Gy), and median ratio between marrow/liver dose was 0.79 (IQR: 0.52 - 1.02). Table 1 shows the distribution and rate of dCR for pts who received above or below 22 Gy administered dose to liver (24 Gy to liver was the established MTD from earlier studies, in which doses were escalated in 2 Gy increment and thus, 22 Gy represented MTD-1), and for pts stratified by marrow/liver dose ratio (higher ratio representing more favorable biodistribution). Pts with ≤22 Gy liver dose had a dCR rate of 13.5% vs. 27.6% for pts with &gt;22 Gy liver dose, and pts with &lt;median dose to bone marrow had a dCR rate of 12.1% vs. 27.3% for pts with ≥median estimated marrow dose. Importantly, pts with increasingly favorable biodistribution had nominally higher dCR rates of 10.0%, 20.0% and 26.9% for a marrow/liver ratio &lt;0.6, 0.6-0.9 and &gt;0.9, respectively, as illustrated in Figure 1. Taken together this demonstrates a radiation dose-response for the primary endpoint in this study. Overall, safety was similar across doses to the liver. Conclusion: 131I-apamistamab led induction and conditioning followed by alloHCT resulted in statistically significant improvement in dCR at 6 mos vs conventional care. A dose-response was demonstrated for pts receiving 131I-apamistamab with those receiving a liver dose closer to the MTD of 24 Gy having about twice the dCR rate compared to pts 22 Gy (MTD-1) or less. We also found pts with higher marrow/liver ratio experienced considerably higher rates of dCR which highlights the importance of maximizing the dose to target tissues, within the limits of established risk organ dose tolerances.

Background : Most older patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory (R/R) AML cannot tolerate intensive treatment and are not eligible for curative allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT). 131I-apamistamab, an anti-CD45 radioimmunoconjugate, delivers high dose targeted radiation to hematopoietic cells, allowing for myeloablation and eradication of leukemic cells while sparing toxicity to healthy organs. 131I-apamistamab led induction and conditioning can thus provide these pts with access to alloHCT. Methods: The SIERRA trial (NCT02665065) is a multi-center, randomized, controlled Phase 3 study comparing the rate of durable complete remission (dCR) lasting &gt;6 months (mos) after complete remission with/without platelet recovery (CR/CRp) between two groups: 131I-apamistamab led induction and conditioning followed by alloHCT vs physician's choice of conventional care (CC). Pts were randomized (1:1) to CC or 131I-apamistamab with fludarabine and total body irradiation (2 Gy) followed by alloHCT. CR/CRp assessment was 28-56 days post alloHCT or 28-42 days post initiation of therapy on the CC group. Pts in the CC group not achieving leukemia-free state could crossover (CO) to 131I-apamistamab. Here we report the results of a post hoc analysis to determine if the presence of various risk factors (i.e., Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) &lt;90, HCT Comorbidity Index &gt;3, age &gt;65, adverse-risk cytogenetics, venetoclax failure prior to randomization) influenced achievement of dCR in pts treated with 131I-apamistamab. Results: In total, 153 pts were randomized (CC, n=76; 131I-apamistamab, n=77). All pts who received the therapeutic dose of 131I-apamistamab (n=66) underwent alloHCT vs 14 (18.2%) in the CC group. Of evaluable pts, dCR rates at 6 mos were 22% in the 131I-apamistamab group vs 0% in the CC group (95% CI;12.29, 34.73; p&lt;0.0001). A total of 19 pts (13, 131I-apamistamab group; 6, CO) achieved dCR. Table 1 shows the pt, disease, and transplant characteristics of dCR vs. non-dCR pts. Eight of the 19 pts (42.1%) had primary induction failure and the median time to randomization from diagnosis was 5.4 mos. Approximately 50% of pts (9/19) had adverse-risk cytogenetics. Over 35% (7/19) of the pts had failed prior venetoclax and the median number of prior treatments was 3 (range 1-5). A total of 10/19 (52%) pts had KPS of &lt;90% and a comorbidity index of &gt;3. There was no difference in the rate of dCR when stratifying by number of risk factors for a given pt (0 to 5) with 27% for pts with 0-1 risk factors, 14% for pts with 2-3 risk factors, and 11% for pts with 4-5 risk factors (p=0.251). Conclusion: Pts with R/R AML who have multiple risk factors such as adverse risk cytogenetics, age &gt;65, venetoclax failure, high comorbidity index or poor KPS are typically not considered for alloHCT due to high transplant-related mortality and post-transplant relapse rates. 131I-apamistamab was effective in achieving durable responses in R/R AML pts irrespective of the presence of multiple risk factors and successfully enabled alloHCT in such pts due to its targeted mechanism of action.