Shah, Raj

Abstract Background: Luspatercept, an erythroid maturation agent, has shown efficacy in improving anemia in both β-thalassemia and lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). In the BELIEVE trial, which led to its approval in transfusion-dependent β-thalassemia, thromboembolic events were notably higher in patients with risk factors such as splenectomy. More recently, the COMMANDS trial demonstrated superior transfusion independence with luspatercept over erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) in ESA-naive, lower-risk MDS patients. However, limited data exist regarding comparative thrombotic risk in real-world MDS populations. We conducted a multicenter, real-world study to evaluate thrombotic event rates associated with luspatercept versus ESAs in MDS patients without prior venous thromboembolism (VTE). Methods: We queried the TriNetX Research Network, a federated real-time electronic health record (EHR) database covering over 100 million patients across major healthcare organizations. Adults (≥18 years) with a diagnosis of MDS (ICD-10-CM code D46) and no prior history of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE) were included. Patients were stratified based on treatment with luspatercept or ESAs (epoetin alfa or darbepoetin alfa). Propensity score matching (PSM) using a 1:1 nearest-neighbor algorithm without replacement was performed to balance demographics and clinical covariates. Primary outcomes included the incidence of DVT, PE, and composite VTE events within 12 months of therapy initiation. Results: A total of 6,448 patients with MDS and no prior VTE were identified: 5,698 received ESAs and 750 received luspatercept. The overall mean age was 72.5 ± 13.5 years, with 48.1% male. After PSM, 741 patients were included in each treatment arm. The matched cohort had a mean age of 76.7 ± 10.7 years, and 41.3% were female. In the ESA group, 58/741 (7.8%) developed DVT compared to 27/741 (3.6%) in the luspatercept group (Hazard Ratio [HR] 1.4; 95% CI, 0.9–2.3). PE occurred in 27 ESA-treated patients (3.6%) versus 13 luspatercept-treated patients (1.8%) (HR 1.3; 95% CI, 0.6–2.7; p=0.941). The overall composite VTE rate was 10.0% (74/741) in the ESA group and 4.9% (36/741) in the luspatercept group (HR 1.3; 95% CI, 0.9–2.0; p=0.732). Conclusion: In this large, multicenter real-world analysis, we observed a numerically lower incidence of thrombotic events with luspatercept compared to erythropoietin-based agents in patients with MDS, though differences did not reach statistical significance. These findings support the thrombotic safety profile of luspatercept observed in clinical trials and warrant further prospective validation.

Abstract Introduction: CAR T-cell therapy is an important treatment option for patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) DLBCL. Three CAR T-cell products have received approval: axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta), lisocabtagene maraleucel (Breyanzi), and tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah). Although direct head-to-head studies comparing the three therapies do not exist, clinical trials have revealed notable differences in response rates and remission rates among them. All three products induce CRS and ICANS; however, variations in the incidence and severity of these adverse effects have been observed. We utilized data from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) to gain further insights into the incidence of various adverse events associated with different CAR-T products in DLBCL. Method: In this retrospective study, the 2022 NIS database was used to identify hospitalizations with DLBCL and those who received Yescarta, Breyanzi, or Kymriah using appropriate ICD-10-CM diagnostic and ICD-10-PCS procedure codes. Data on CRS, ICANS, infections, and adverse cardiac events were extracted using relevant ICD-10-CM codes. These outcomes were compared across different CAR-T products using Pearson's chi-square analysis. Multivariate logistic regression was also performed, adjusting for demographics, hospital-specific characteristics, and comorbidities. Results: We identified 1440 patients with DLBCL. Among these, 1100 patients (64.6% male; 70.7% Caucasian, 8.8% African American, 20.5% other ethnicities) received Yescarta, 90 patients (66.7% male; 82.4% Caucasian, 0% African American, 17.7% other ethnicities) received Kymriah and 250 patients (64% male; 82.6% Caucasian, 10.9% African American, 6.5% other ethnicities) received Breyanzi. The incidence of CRS was 52% for Breyanzi, 44.4% for Kymriah and 68.6% for Yescarta, and the difference was statistically significant by chi-square analysis (p = 0.03). This difference remained statistically significant for Kymriah after multivariate analysis [Adjusted Odds ratio (OR) = 0.3, CI 0.1 to 0.9, p=0.032], but not for Breyanzi (Adjusted OR = 0.3, CI 0.1 to 0.9, p=0.032) in comparison to Yescarta. The incidence of ICANS was 16% for Breyanzi, 22.2% for Kymriah, and 33.2% for Yescarta, with a statistically significant difference observed by chi-square analysis (p = 0.05). This difference remained statistically significant for Breyanzi after multivariate analysis [Adjusted OR = 0.3, CI 0.1 to 0.6, p=0.002], but not for Kymriah (Adjusted OR = 0.6, CI 0.1 to 2.9, p=0.551) in comparison to Yescarta. Among cardiovascular events, there was no significant difference in the incidence of acute myocardial infarction (Yescarta vs Kymriah vs Breyanzi, 0.5% vs 0% vs 0.2%, p = 0.487), stroke (0.5% vs 5.6% vs 2%, p = 0.07), cardiogenic shock (0.5% vs 0% vs 0%, p = 0.880), and arrhythmias (20.9% vs 27.8% vs 32%, p = 0.258) among these CAR T-cell therapies. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in the incidence of infectious complications, including pneumonia (5.9% vs 5.6% vs 2%, p = 0.510), sepsis (5% vs 5.6% vs 6%, p = 0.962), or septic shock (2.3% vs 0% vs 0%, p = 0.535) among these CAR T-cell therapies. There was no difference in all-cause in-hospital mortality across these therapies (2.3% vs 5.6% vs 2%, p = 0.692). Conclusion: Kymriah showed lower CRS rates and Breyanzi showed lower ICANS rates in comparison to Yescarta in our study. All CAR T-cell therapies have the potential to cause infections and cardiac events, which require monitoring, early identification and prompt treatment. When selecting among various CAR T-cell products, several factors must be considered, including the patient's lymphoma type, prior treatment history, manufacturing turnaround time, cost, availability, and potential short-term and long-term side effects. The limitations of our study include its retrospective nature, reliance on ICD-10 codes to identify patients with adverse events, and the absence of longitudinal data on long-term adverse events. Nevertheless, this study provides essential insights for hematologists regarding the incidence of specific adverse events associated with different CAR T-cell products within the real-world population.

7018 Background: CAR-T cell therapy represents a notable advancement in treating relapsed/refractory (R/R) hematological malignancies. Adverse events include CRS, infections, and neurological and cardiac complications. While there are reports from major academic institutions on the adverse effects of CAR-T therapy, we used data from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) to gather national estimates of complications related to CAR-T therapy. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted to analyze patients who underwent CAR-T cell therapy by utilizing appropriate ICD-10-PCS procedure codes (XW033C3, XW043C3, XW23346, XW24346, XW23376, and XW24376) from NIS 2019 to 2021. Data regarding infections, toxic encephalopathy (a surrogate for neurological toxicity), and adverse cardiac events were extracted using relevant ICD-10-CM diagnostic codes. Patients experiencing various grades of CRS were identified through specific ICD-10 codes available in 2021 (Grades 1-5: D89.831-D89.835). Results: This study analyzed 6515 patients who underwent CAR-T cell therapy from January 2019 to December 2021. Among them, 60.7% were male. 74.6% were Caucasian, 11.7% were Asian and 6.7% were African American. 49.8% of patients had private insurance, 36.2% had Medicare, and 8.6% had Medicaid. 6.8% of patients were diagnosed with pneumonia, while sepsis occurred in 7.4% of patients and 3% experienced septic shock. 19.4% of patients experienced cardiac arrhythmias, and major cardiovascular events were recorded in 4.7% of the cohort. Acute myocardial infarction and stroke were documented in 0.6 and 1.2% of patients, respectively. Toxic encephalopathy was reported in 19.7% of patients. Among 2235 patients identified to have received CAR-T in 2021, 59.7% developed CRS. Grade 1 and grade 2 CRS were reported in 32% and 21% of patients, respectively, while grade 3 and grade 4 reactions were noted in 4.7% and 2% of patients, with no cases of grade 5 identified. The mean total cost of hospitalization was 308,364$, and the mean length of hospital stay was 19.5 days. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 3.4%. Conclusions: Our study describes real-world outcomes from a large dataset of CAR-T patients. Infections pose a significant challenge with CAR-T therapy, highlighting the importance of early detection and timely antimicrobial treatment. CRS is common, with a 60% incidence, similar to previous clinical trials (55%). Immediate management is crucial for addressing CRS toxicity. Adverse neurological and cardiovascular incidents are often reported, emphasizing the need for meticulous monitoring and coordinating multidisciplinary care plans. The financial burdens also bear mentioning: CAR-T therapy costs significantly higher than autologous stem cell transplants. Further studies to address these issues are warranted.