Back to Authors

Cook, Joselle

Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic

Citations 3

Impact of prophylactic cyclophosphamide on ALC and delayed neurotoxicity after cilta-cel.
Tan, Melinda, Schaefers, Christoph, Lim, Kenneth J. C., Chhabra, S, Gertz, MA, Kapoor, Prashant , Kourelis, T., Warsame, Rahma , Cook, Joselle, Bergsagel, Leif P., Wiedmeier-Nutor, Julia Erin, Zanwar, Saurabh , Abdallah, Nadine, Ailawadhi, Sikander, Fonseca, Rafael, Kumar, Shaji, Anastasia, Zekeridou, Lin, Yi, Tan, Melinda Si Yun , Schaefers, Christoph , Lim, Kenneth J C , Chhabra, Saurabh , Parrondo, Ricardo D , Gertz, Morie A. , Kourelis, Taxiarchis , Cook, Joselle , Binder, Moritz , Bergsagel, P. Leif , Abdallah, Nadine , Ailawadhi, Sikander , Fonseca, Rafaël , Kumar, Shaji

Journal of Clinical Oncology | May 28, 2026 | Volume: 44 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: 7543-7543

10.1200/jco.2026.44.16_suppl.7543 Get It

7543 Background: Delayed neurotoxicity (DNT) after ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) is associated with severe morbidity and mortality occurring in 10-15% of patients. A high post-infusion peak absolute lymphocyte count (ALCpeak ≥3x10 9 /L; ALC hi ) is correlated with an increased risk of DNT (25-30%). We previously examined prophylactic dexamethasone (PPX DEX) administered for 3 days when ALC hi was reached and found no reduction in ALC expansion, DNT incidence or severity. Here, we report the use of prophylactic cyclophosphamide (PPX CTX) on ALC kinetics and DNT. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients (pts) treated with cilta-cel at Mayo Clinic (09-12/2025; n =60). Pts with ALC hi received CTX 500 mg IV/PO once (n = 22). Outcomes and ALC kinetics including ALCpeak, ALC D28 (ALC D28 ), and area under the curve D1-D28 (ALC AUC ) were compared with PPX DEX cohort (12/2024-08/2025; n =50) and a historical cohort without PPX (04/2022-11/2024; n =116). Results: Pre-lymphodepletion (LD) demographics were similar across historical ALC hi , PPX DEX, and PPX CTX groups. Pre-LD CRP was higher in the historical ALC hi cohort; however, baseline ferritin, CRS, and ICANS, and disease burden did not differ significantly between groups. There were no statistically significant differences in time to ALCpeak or ALC kinetics among the 3 cohorts. Among pts with ALC < 3×10⁹/L treated during the PPX CTX study period, 2 developed cranial nerve palsy (IEC-CNP; 2/38, 5%). Both presented with unilateral facial nerve palsy and were treated with corticosteroids. One pt resolved symptoms by one month, while the second had persistent symptoms at 2 weeks and remains on follow-up. Among ALC hi patients in the PPX CTX cohort, DNT occurred in 4/22 pts (18%), including 1 case of IEC-CNP (5%) and 3 with parkinsonism (IEC-PKS, 14%). Within the PPX CTX cohort, baseline characteristics and post-infusion CRS or laboratory parameters did not differ between patients with and without DNT. Among patients who developed DNT, ALC kinetics were similar across PPX CTX, PPX DEX, and historical cohorts. PPX CTX was well tolerated, with 2 cases of grade 1 nausea reported. The incidence of DNT did not differ significantly between the PPX DEX (14/61, 23%) and PPX CTX (4/22, 18%) cohorts. However, DNT presentations in the PPX CTX cohort appeared milder and were responsive to treatment. Two of three patients (67%) presented with mild symptoms (one with dynamic dysphasia; second with flat affect) that responded to DEX. A third patient presented with typical parkinsonian features (hypomimia, bradykinesia, rigidity) and demonstrated clinical improvement following high-dose CTX. Conclusions: PPX CTX was well tolerated. While it did not significantly impact ALC expansion kinetics or DNT rates, first few cases of IEC-PKS suggest that the presentation may be milder and amenable to less toxic treatment. Larger cohorts are needed to refine optimal prophylactic strategies.
Efficacy and safety of iberdomide, daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.
Kapoor, Prashant , Kumar, Shaji, Muchtar, Eli, Gonsalves, Wilson I., Kourelis, Taxiarchis, Buadi, Francis, Asmus, Erik, Larson, Alyssa, Abdallah, Nadine, Zanwar, Saurabh , Cook, Joselle, Dispenzieri, Angela, Warsame, Rahma , Go, Ronald S., Dingli, David, Gertz, MA, Rajkumar, S. Vincent, Knopf, Betsy R., Siddiqui, Mustaqeem Ahmad, Kumar, Shaji , Muchtar, Eli , Gonsalves, Wilson I. , Kourelis, Taxiarchis , Buadi, Francis K. , Asmus, Erik, Abdallah, Nadine , Cook, Joselle , Dispenzieri, Angela , Binder, Moritz , Go, Ronald S. , Dingli, David , Gertz, Morie A. , Siddiqui, Mustaqeem

Journal of Clinical Oncology | May 28, 2026 | Volume: 44 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: 7514-7514

10.1200/jco.2026.44.16_suppl.7514 Get It

7514 Background: Iberdomide (Iber) is a CELMoD that binds with greater specificity & affinity to the cereblon protein of the E3 ligase complex than a traditional IMiD. Both transplant-eligible (TE) & ineligible (TIE) patients (pts) with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) are currently treated with quadruplet induction, consisting of an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, a proteasome inhibitor, an IMiD & dexamethasone (dex). We conducted a clinical trial (NCT05392946, IDEAL) to examine the efficacy of a novel finite-duration approach, using Iber, daratumumab, bortezomib & dex (Iber-DVd) quadruplet induction followed by Iber monotherapy maintenance. Methods: Both TE and TIE pts with NDMM were enrolled in this Phase 1 (3+3 design)/Phase 2 (single stage) trial. The primary goal was to assess the ≥complete response (CR) rate — utilizing the more sensitive serum MASS-FIX assay in lieu of serum immunofixation — during induction. Treatment involved twelve 28-day cycles of induction with Iber, given PO at the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), days 1-21, daratumumab 1800mg SQ, weekly for 2 cycles, every other week during Cycles 3-6, & every 4 weeks thereafter, bortezomib 1.3 mg/m 2 SQ, weekly & dex 40 mg, weekly, followed by Iber monotherapy (24 cycles). Growth factor was not allowed during the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) assessment period (Cycle 1). Results: Among 47 pts enrolled, 9 pts were in Phase 1 portion which assessed the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), with Iber starting at 1 mg/day dose, days 1-21 [Dose Level (DL) 1]. DLT (all grade 4 neutropenia) was noted in 3 pts, 2 at DL 1 & 1 at DL -1. This analysis includes 44 pts who received Iber at the RP2D (0.75 mg/day, days 1-21), including 6 pts from the Dose Confirmation Cohort (Phase 1, DL -1), dosed at MTD, & 38 pts in the Dose Expansion Cohort. The median age at registration was 65 years (range 36-86 years), & 23 pts (52.3%) were deemed high-risk. At data cut-off, pts had received a median of 15 cycles (range 3-36) of therapy. Overall response rate was 100%; ≥CR rate, 36.4% (95% CI: 22.4, 52.2) during induction & 52.3% (95% CI: 36.7, 67.5), overall, including the maintenance phase. The marrow flow-based (10 -5 ) MRD negative rate was 29.5% during induction & 47.7% overall. At a median follow-up (FU) 18.3 mos, 2 pts have died (one during FU due to progressive disease & the other on-treatment due to COVID-19). 12- (& 18-) month progression-free survival & overall survival rates were 91% (88%) & 97% (94%), respectively. Most common toxicities at RP2D were lymphopenia, neutropenia (leading 27% of pts to require pegfilgrastim support), rash, peripheral neuropathy, diarrhea, & infections. Cases of high-grade fatigue were low (<5%). Updated data will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: Iber-DVd is an active and safe regimen for both TE and TIE pts with NDMM, leading to high response rates which improved over time, with nearly one-half of the pts achieving MRD negative state. Clinical trial information: NCT05392946 .
Prediction of progression in MGUS using transformer-based survival time-series modeling.
Kumbhar, Vaishnavi, Braun, Nicholas, Cook, Joselle, Gonsalves, Wilson I., Buadi, Francis, Hayman, Suzanne R. , Siddiqui, Mustaqeem Ahmad, Kapoor, Prashant , Dispenzieri, Angela, Vachon, C M, Kyle, Robert A., Rajkumar, S. Vincent, Kumar, Shaji, Kumbhar, Vaishnavi, Binder, Moritz , Cook, Joselle , Gonsalves, Wilson I. , Buadi, Francis K. , Siddiqui, Mustaqeem , Dispenzieri, Angela , Kyle, R., Kumar, Shaji

Journal of Clinical Oncology | May 28, 2026 | Volume: 44 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: 7518-7518

10.1200/jco.2026.44.16_suppl.7518 Get It

7518 Background: Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) is common, yet only a minority progress to malignant plasma-cell disorders. Mayo risk stratification uses baseline factors and is commonly implemented/validated in a Cox proportional hazards (CoxPH) framework, which may miss prognostic longitudinal patterns. Methods: We assembled 15,158 MGUS patients with longitudinal laboratory data and progression outcomes (smoldering multiple myeloma, multiple myeloma, AL amyloidosis, or Waldenström macroglobulinemia). We compared a Mayo-factor Cox proportional hazards (CoxPH) baseline versus STRaTS, a transformer-based survival model, to predict progression risk at 3-, 5-, and 10-year horizons. STRaTS leveraged longitudinal trajectories of routine labs including hemoglobin, platelets, differential counts (neutrophils/lymphocytes/monocytes), immunoglobulins (IgG/IgA/IgM), free light chains (kappa/lambda), M-spike, and creatinine. To minimize bias, we used laboratory results collected from 1–3 years after diagnosis and started follow-up at year 3; patients progressing before year 3 or lacking follow-up beyond year 3 were excluded. A total of 7,305 patients met eligibility and were split into train/validation/test cohorts of 4,383/1,461/1,461. Discrimination was assessed by concordance index (C-index). Clinical operating performance was evaluated on a held-out test cohort by comparing sensitivity and specificity at the same proportion of patients selected for intensified surveillance (same workload). Results: Among MGUS patients with complete baseline Mayo factors(N=3,388), Kaplan–Meier–estimated 3-/5-/10-year cumulative progression risk was 0.1/0.4/3.4% (Low), 3.0/4.3/7.9% (Low-Intermediate), 4.4/6.4/14.1% (High-Intermediate), and 8.9/12.5/16.9% (High). On a held-out test cohort, STRaTS demonstrated superior discrimination versus the Mayo-factor CoxPH (C-index 0.75 vs 0.538; p<0.0001). Both models were trained and evaluated on identical train/test splits. At the same surveillance workload, STRaTS achieved higher sensitivity with comparable specificity; when 40.3% of patients were selected for closer surveillance, 3-year sensitivity was 81.0% for STRaTS versus 47.6% for CoxPH (Table). Conclusions: Among MGUS patients who remain progression-free at 3 years, transformer-based survival modeling of longitudinal laboratory trajectories provides more accurate individualized conditional progression risk estimates and improved workload-matched identification of progressors compared with the conventional Mayo/Cox approach. Sensitivity/specificity (%). Operating Point Flagged % STRaTS Sens / Spec (%) CoxPH Sens / Spec (%) Int+High, 3y 40.3 81.0 / 58.5 47.6 / 58.9 Int+High, 5y 40.3 81.2 / 60.4 46.9 / 58.8 Int+High, 10y 40.3 25.0 / 56.3 23.8 / 58.7 Two-Group High (≥2 factors), 5y 5.6 37.4 / 93.4 35.4 / 93.1