Montesinos, Pau

PURPOSE Ziftomenib—a potent, highly selective, oral menin inhibitor—was well tolerated and demonstrated encouraging clinical activity as monotherapy for relapsed/refractory NPM1 -mutated ( NPM1 -m) and KMT2A -rearranged AML in the KOMET-001 phase I trial. METHODS In the registration-enabling phase II part of KOMET-001, patients with relapsed/refractory NPM1 -m AML received ziftomenib 600 mg once daily. The primary end point was the rate of complete remission with full hematologic recovery (CR)/CR with partial hematologic recovery (CRh). RESULTS From January 26, 2023, to May 13, 2024, 92 patients (median age, 69 years [range, 33-84]) were treated. The primary end point was met, with a CR/CRh rate of 22% (95% CI, 14 to 32; P = .0058); 61% were negative for measurable residual disease. Overall response rate was 33% (95% CI, 23 to 43), with a median duration of 4.6 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 7.4). Prespecified subgroup analyses showed comparable CR/CRh regardless of previous therapy, including venetoclax, or type of comutations. Median overall survival was 6.6 months (95% CI, 3.6 to 8.6). Common grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events were febrile neutropenia (26%), anemia (20%), and thrombocytopenia (20%). Differentiation syndrome occurred in 25% of patients (15% grade 3; no grade 4-5) and was manageable with protocol-defined mitigation. Three patients (3%) discontinued treatment because of ziftomenib-related adverse events. CONCLUSION Ziftomenib demonstrated significant clinical benefit and deep responses in patients with heavily pretreated, relapsed/refractory NPM1 -m AML. Ziftomenib was well tolerated with a safety profile consistent with previous studies, including manageable differentiation syndrome, lack of clinically significant QTc prolongation, and low rates of myelosuppression.

Background: Menin, a protein involved in transcriptional regulation, plays a role in the genesis of multiple cancers. Preclinical data from BMF-219, an investigational, highly selective, oral small-molecule inhibitor of menin, show sustained potent abrogation of menin-dependent oncogenic signaling. BMF-219 is the first and only covalent menin inhibitor in clinical development and is being evaluated in multiple hematologic malignancies, solid tumors, and diabetes mellitus. COVALENT-101 (NCT05153330) is a Phase I dose-escalation and -expansion study of BMF-219 in R/R AL (Cohort 1), DLBCL (Cohort 2), MM (Cohort 3), and CLL (Cohort 4). Here we report preliminary safety, PK and anticancer activity data from Cohort 1 (AL). Methods: Doses of BMF-219 are escalated independently for each indication, initially in single-subject cohorts followed by a “3 + 3” design. Eligible patients (pts) include adults with R/R AL ineligible for standard therapy. Initially pts were enrolled agnostic to molecular status. A subsequent amendment introduced quotas for KMT2Ar (MLL1r), NPM1 and other known menin-dependent mutations: CEBP/A, MLL1-PTD, MN1, NUP98, NUP214, PICALM-AF10, SETBP1. Prior exposure to reversible menin inhibitor therapy is permitted. Subjects receive BMF-219 daily for continuous 28-day cycles until progression/intolerability. There are 2 parallel dose-escalation arms: pts not taking (Arm A) or taking (Arm B) moderate or strong CYP3A4 inhibitors. The study is ongoing and accruing in the escalation. Expansion cohorts will enroll pts to obtain further safety and efficacy data at the OBD/RP2D. Results: As of data cutoff of 7/24/2023, 26 pts with R/R AL (24 AML; 2 ALL) are enrolled; 7 remain on study treatment. Baseline characteristics include 17(65%) males and 9(35%) females with a median age of 57.5 years (range 33-84). There is a median of 4 (range 1-8) prior lines of therapy and 11 (42%) with prior HSCT(s). Six pts (23%) had KMT2Ar, 3 (12%) KMT2A-PTD, 4 (15%) NPM1, and 13 (50%) WT for KMT2A and NPM1. Dosing began with single-patient cohorts at 100 mg QD (Arm A) and 25 mg QD (Arm B) and has been escalated through 4 dose levels. Thus far, pts have been dosed up to 500 mg QD (Arm A) and 125 mg QD (Arm B). BMF-219 exposures were comparable between arms, with ~2-4-fold higher exposures observed with co-administration of a moderate or strong CYP3A4 inhibitor. At the highest dose (DL4) in which PK was evaluated, Arm A (500 mg QD) and Arm B (125 mg QD), pts on average achieved ~50% of target exposure (2000 ng*hr/mL) with some pts surpassing it. Higher QD dosing or corresponding BID dosing is expected to achieve desired exposure. BMF-219 has generally been well tolerated with no DLTs observed and no discontinuations due to treatment-related toxicities. No related QTc prolongation was observed. At the time of data cutoff, 23 of 26 pts were included in the safety population. Common TRAEs (≥10%) include vomiting 13% (3) and Differentiation Syndrome (DS) 13% (3). No Grade 5 TRAEs were reported. The only common Grade ≥3 TRAE (≥5%) was DS 13% (3). The efficacy evaluable population includes AML pts who meet the following criteria: dosed at or near predicted efficacious dose (500 mg or above [Arm A]; 125 mg or above [Arm B]), had known menin-dependent mutations, and completed at least one scheduled response assessment (or had a minimum of 7 doses if discontinued prematurely). Thus far, 2 of 5 efficacy evaluable patients achieved a complete remission (1 CR; 1 CRi) and both continue BMF-219 treatment. Patient A: 39/M, NUP98-NSD1, ECOG=0, 500 mg QD, Arm A, 4 prior lines of treatment including intensive chemotherapy and allo-HSCT. At C1D27, marrow blasts were reduced to 6% from 13% at study entry. The patient achieved CR at C2D28 with 0% blasts.Patient B: 70/F, NPM1m, ECOG=1, 125 mg QD, Arm B, 1 prior line of treatment with decitabine and an investigational agent. At C1D28, marrow blasts were reduced to 34% from 52% at study entry. The patient achieved CRi with 3% blasts at C2D28. Conclusion: BMF-219 is generally well tolerated with no DLT observed (and able to be taken with and without CYP3A4 inhibitors) with no pts discontinuing therapy due to toxicity. BMF-219 dose escalation is ongoing and approaching target exposure. BMF-219 demonstrates early signs of clinical activity in different genomic subgroups. The trial is ongoing and includes enrollment for pts diagnosed with AL, DLBCL, MM and CLL.

Background In unfit patients (pts) with newly diagnosed (ND) AML, long-term survival remains short (mOS 14.7 months) despite improved responses (CR 37% and CR/CRi 66%) with azacitidine (AZA) and venetoclax (VEN) (VIALE-A, DiNardo NEJM 2020). In a pooled analysis of AZA-VEN in ND AML pts with poor risk cytogenetics the response rates were higher in TP53wt pts (CR/CRi 70%) compared with TP53mut pts (CR/CRi 41%) (Pollyea Clin Cancer Res 2022). The measurable residual disease (MRD)-negative rate was 41% in AZA-VEN treated pts in VIALE-A which was associated with improved survival (Pratz JCO 2022). Pivekimab sunirine (PVEK, IMGN632) is a first-in-class antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) comprising a high-affinity CD123 antibody, cleavable linker, and an indolinobenzodiazepine pseudodimer (IGN) payload. The novel IGN payload alkylates DNA and causes single strand breaks without crosslinking (Kovtun Blood Adv 2018). Methods This is an ongoing, open-label, multicenter, Phase 1b/2 study of PVEK in combination with AZA +VEN in adults with ND CD123-positive AML (any CD123+ expression by local flow cytometry or IHC). Pts received the recommended phase 2 dose of PVEK 0.045 mg/kg IV on D7 + AZA 75 mg/m 2 SC or IV daily on D1-7 + VEN up to 400 mg PO daily for 14 to 28 days (based on cohort assignment) in a 28-day cycle. Bone marrow assessment was performed at D14 (cohort 1) or D21 (cohort 2) of cycle 1 to determine VEN duration. The primary endpoints are composite CR rate (CCR [CR+CRh+CRp+CRi]), MRD rate (assessed centrally [Hematologics, Inc.] by flow cytometry; <0.1% defined as negative) and duration of remission. Key secondary endpoints are safety, pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity. Responses were determined using ELN 2017 criteria (with the addition of CRh) and a 14-day post-marrow count recovery window. Results As of July 17, 2023, data is available for 50 ND pts (n=25 per cohort) treated with PVEK+AZA+VEN and are aggregately reported here. The median age was 74 years (range, 46-83), 42% were ≥ 75 years old, 26% had secondary AML, 64% were ELN 2017 adverse risk, and 38% had a TP53mut. The most common non-hematologic treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) (all grades [grade 3+]) seen in > 20% of all pts were febrile neutropenia (44% [38%]), constipation (42% [2%]), peripheral edema (36% [4%]), diarrhea (36% [2%]), hypophosphatemia (32% [0%], nausea (28% [4%]), and hypokalemia (24% [2%]). No veno-occlusive disease (VOD) events were reported. In responders, the median time to achieve absolute neutrophil count ≥500/µL and platelet count ≥50,000/µL was 35.5 days (range, 20-55) and 22 days (range, 20-55), respectively. The median post-remission cycle delay (beyond cycle day 28) was 14 days. Two pts discontinued PVEK due to a TEAE (edema; marrow aplasia). The 60-day mortality was 4%. In the ITT population (N=50) the CR rate was 52% (26/50), and the CCR rate was 66% (33/50). In pts ≥ 75 years old, the CCR rate was 76% (16/21). In pts known to be TP53wt, both the CR and CCR rate was 88% (22/25). Additional response subsets in Table 1. Twenty-one pts received 9-14 days of VEN, 9 pts received 15-21 days of VEN and 20 pts received ≥ 22 days of VEN in cycle 1; of those who received ≤ 14 days of VEN the CR rate was 71% (15/21) and the CCR rate was 76% (16/21). Of the 26 pts who achieved CCR and had an MRD-evaluable sample, 73% (19/26) achieved MRD negativity (CCR MRD-, <0.1% residual blasts); notably all had undetectable MRD levels (lower level of detection is 0.02%). MRD-negativity was achieved rapidly with a median of 1.7 months (range, 0.8-4.5). CCR MRD- rates were high across major molecular subsets, including FLT3 (ITD/TKD) at 100% (7/7), IDH1/2 at 89% (8/9), and NPM1 at 89% (8/9), as well as ELN risk groups (intermediate 80% [8/10]; adverse 64% [9/14]). Conclusion With a manageable safety profile in pts with ND AML, the PVEK+AZA+VEN triplet demonstrated anti-leukemia activity with robust CR rates and early MRD negative responses in a cohort enriched for adverse disease characteristics (64% ELN adverse risk; 38% TP53mut). Encouraging CCR MRD- rates were observed across cytogenetic/molecular subsets, and the majority of responding pts achieved early and deep remissions, which may translate to improved clinical outcomes. The regimen was well tolerated with no new safety signals, and the addition of PVEK to the AZA-VEN backbone did not appear to meaningfully prolong count recovery.

BackgroundAcute myeloid leukemia (AML) is fatal in elderly patients who are unfit for standard induction chemotherapy. The objective of this study was to evaluate the survival benefit of administering sapacitabine, an oral nucleoside analogue, in alternating cycles with decitabine, a low‐intensity therapy, to elderly patients with newly diagnosed AML.MethodsThis randomized, open‐label, phase 3 study (SEAMLESS) was conducted at 87 sites in 11 countries. Patients aged ≥70 years who were not candidates for or chose not to receive standard induction chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to arm A (decitabine in alternating cycles with sapacitabine) received 1‐hour intravenous infusions of decitabine 20 mg/m2 once daily for 5 consecutive days every 8 weeks (first cycle and subsequent odd cycles) and sapacitabine 300 mg twice daily on 3 consecutive days per week for 2 weeks every 8 weeks (second cycle and subsequent even cycles) or to control arm C who received 1‐hour infusions of decitabine 20 mg/m2 once daily for 5 consecutive days every 4 weeks. Prior hypomethylating agent therapy for preexisting myelodysplastic syndromes or myeloproliferative neoplasms was an exclusion criterion. Randomization was stratified by antecedent myelodysplastic syndromes or myeloproliferative neoplasms, white blood cell count (<10 × 109/L and ≥10 × 109/L), and bone marrow blast percentage (≥50% vs <50%). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were the rates of complete remission (CR), CR with incomplete platelet count recovery, partial remission, hematologic improvement, and stable disease along with the corresponding durations, transfusion requirements, number of hospitalized days, and 1‐year survival. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01303796).ResultsBetween October 2011 and December 2014, 482 patients were enrolled and randomized to receive decitabine administered in alternating cycles with sapacitabine (study arm, n = 241) or decitabine monotherapy (control arm, n = 241). The median OS was 5.9 months on the study arm versus 5.7 months on the control arm (P = .8902). The CR rate was 16.6% on the study arm and 10.8% on the control arm (P = .1468). In patients with white blood cell counts <10 × 109/L (n = 321), the median OS was higher on the study arm versus the control arm (8.0 vs 5.8 months; P = .145), as was the CR rate (21.5% vs 8.6%; P = .0017).ConclusionsThe regimen of decitabine administered in alternating cycles with sapacitabine was active but did not significantly improve OS compared with decitabine monotherapy. Subgroup analyses suggest that patients with baseline white blood cell counts <10 × 109/L might benefit from decitabine alternating with sapacitabine, with an improved CR rate and the convenience of an oral drug. These findings should be prospectively confirmed.

Abstract Background. The AML is a heterogeneous disease with a high variety of subtypes stratified by cytogenetic and molecular markers. To date, the major prognosis criteria is cytogenetic, but 40-50% of de novo AML patients have normal karyotype; AML treatment is based on risk profiles depending on age and genetic molecular factor. New methods such as Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) and ex vivo sensitivity drug tests might be able to improve this classification and to individualize the treatment for AML patients. Aims. We performed targeted massively parallel sequencing on a 32 myeloid genes custom panel to identify a mutational profile of AML which predicts ex vivo pharmacological and clinical response. Methods. We analyzed bone marrow (BM) samples at diagnosis from 39 AML patients, 34 were treated with chemotherapy; 28 AML patients received one cycle of Idarubicin (Ida)/ Cytarabine(Cyt) induction treatment (3+7) and 8 received one cycle of Fludarabine/Cyt. Median age at diagnosis was 53 years (24-81), male:female ratio 19:16. We carried out targeted gene sequencing by NGS (Ion Torrent Proton System-Life Technologies) using a 32 genes custom panel (all coding regions) implicated in leukemia prognosis, including ASXL1, CBL, DNMT3A, EPOR, ETV6, EZH2, FLT3, HRAS, IDH1, IDH2, JAK2, KDM6A, KIT, KRAS, LNK, MLL, MPL, NRAS, PHF6, PRPF40B, PTEN, RUNX1, SF1, SF3A1, SF3B1, SRSF2, TET2, TP53, U2AF35, VHL, ZRSR2 and CALR. Ex vivo pharmacological studies were performed using an innovative automated flow cytometry method based platform (Ex-viTech) is able to evaluate effect of drugs used to treat AML, Cyt and Ida, using 4 parameter: Emax (Effective Maximum Response) measures potency, EC50 (Effective Concentration inducing 50% cell death) measures efficacy, and the activity was quantified by AUC (Area Under Curve) and VUS (Volume Under Superficies). Clinical response was evaluated after induction treat. Complete remission was defined according to hematologic recovery and blast count fewer than 5%. Analysis of NGS results was performed by Ion Report software. Differences measured by Exvitech were determined using t-test or Kruskal-Wallis test. Discrete variables of patients with and without gene variants were compared using the X2 test. For survival analysis we used Kaplan-Meier analysis (log rank) using SPSS 15. Two sided p values below 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results. We found 94 non-synonymous variants (SNVs and small Indels) in coding regions. On average, 90.8% of the target sequence showed mean depth coverage ~ 1100x. See Figure 1. We analyzed results of pharmacological test by Ex-viTech plataform in function of presence of gene variants. Only significant favorable differences were detected: KRAS (Cyt-Emax p=0,000, Ida-EC50 p=0.001, VUS p=0.003, Cyt-AUC p=0.036, Ida-AUC p=0.000), KIT (VUS p=0,010) and FLT3-TKD (Cyt-Emax p=0.002, Cyt-AUC p=0.001, VUS p=0.011). Mutational positive score, found it in 40% of patients, was defined by the presence of variants in KRAS, KIT and/or FLT3-TKD; it was correlated with pharmacological results and clinical response. All cases with positive score (n=13) achieve complete remission (CR); only 11 cases without favorable score (n=21) achieve RC (p=0.003) after induction treatment (See Table 2). In addition, response obtained for Ida Emax and Ida EC50 by Ex-viTech was able to detect patients who reached CR after induction treatment (p=0.042, p=0,039 respectively). Ex-viTech results showed that patients with positive score have a significantly more potent and effective cytotoxic effect than patients without it. See table 2. No differences were observed respect Overall Survival (OS) between cases with mutational favorable score and without it. However, we observed a plateau in OS with favorable mutational score. With a median follow-up of 5.9 months (1.9-25.74), patients having positive score showed better relapse free survival (p = 0.013). See Figure 3. Conclusion. Very deep sequencing NGS identifies a mutational profile score (KRAS, KIT or FLT3-TKD) in AML patients, which predicts ex vivo pharmacological and clinical response. This favorable score was found in 40% of AML patients. Merging NGS and ex vivo drug sensibility might be able early to predict response to induction and individualize treatments. This study was funded by Instituto Carlos III (PI13/02387). Disclosures Ballesteros: Vivia Biotech: Employment.

Abstract Introduction: Patients with RR-AML, particularly older adults, have dismal outcomes and limited therapy options. Given low response rates and high toxicity with salvage intensive chemotherapy, and frequent ineligibility for allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT), many patients are treated with HMAs. Robust data regarding use of HMAs in AML predominates in the frontline setting, while their use in RR-AML has limited supportive data. Here wesought to analyze theoutcomes and their predictors in patients with RR-AML treated with HMAs. Methods:We collected data, spanning a period from 2006 to 2016, from 7 centers in the United States and 4 centers in Europe regarding patients treated with HMAs for RR-AML. Responses were defined by International Working Group criteria. Kaplan-Meier methods estimated overall survival (OS) from initiation of HMAs to death or end of follow-up. Multivariable logistic regression models estimated odds for response, and multivariable Cox Proportional Hazard (CPH) models estimated hazards ratios (HR) for OS. Covariates considered included HMA received, age at diagnosis (in years), AML classification at diagnosis (AML with myelodysplasia-related changes [AML-MRC], therapy-related [t]-AML), disease status (relapsed vs. refractory), number of therapy lines prior to HMA (1 vs. 2 vs. >=3), duration of first complete remission (CR1), white blood cell count, peripheral blood blast percentage, bone marrow (BM) cellularity (<=20% vs. > 20%), BM blast percentage (<=20% vs. >20%), cytogenetic risk group, and the presence of complex or chromosome 7 abnormalities. Results: Of 514 patients, 217 patients (42.2%) had refractory and 297 (58%) had relapsed AML. By end of study, 415 patients (88.5%) had died. Median follow-up for living patients was 11.6 months.Median age at diagnosis was 64 years (range [R], 16-92). AML-MRC was diagnosed in 29.0% while 8.2% had t-AML. Median number of prior therapies was 2 (R, 1-7), with 48.3% receiving 1 prior line, 30.2% receiving 2 prior lines, and 21.5% receiving >=3 prior lines. Prior alloSCT was performed in 21.2%. Only 1.9% had good risk (core binding factor) karyotype, while 56.2% had intermediate risk karyotype, and 41.9% had poor risk karyotype. Azacitidine was used in 45.8% and decitabine in 54.2%; median number of azacitidine cycles was 4 (Interquartile range [IQR], 2-6) compared to 2 for decitabine (IQR, 1-4, p <0.001). Best response to HMAs was CR in 11.7% (95%CI, 9%-14%), CRi in 6.4% (95%CI, 4.3%-8.8%), hematologic improvement (HI) in 8% (95%CI, 5.7%-10.5%), stable disease (SD) in 9.8% (95%CI, 7.2%-12.5%), while 64.1% (95%CI, 57.7%-66.2%) had progressive disease (PD). Median OS from HMA initiation for all patients was 6.9 months (IQR, 3.0-13.3). There was a significant difference in OS based on best response achieved [Figure 1]. Unadjusted OS showed an insignificant trend for worsening with increasing number of prior lines of therapy [Figure 2A]. In unadjusted analyses, there was no difference in OS based on HMA received in all patients [Figure 2B] or the subset who received only 1 prior line of therapy (median OS: Azacitidine vs. decitabine 8.4 vs 7.3 months, p=0.88). Following HMA therapy, the median number of subsequent therapies was 0 (R, 0-6), and only 12.8% underwent alloSCT. In multivariate CPH models, HMA used was not significantly associated with OS (HR=0.80, 95%CI, 0.42-1.51, p=0.49), while increasing age, and presence of complex cytogenetics and chromosome 7 abnormalities were significantly associated with risk of death [Table 1]. In multivariable logistic regression models, HMA used was not associated with achieving CR+CRi (Odds ratio=0.56, p=0.32). Conclusions: In this largest reported cohort of patients with RR-AML treated with HMAs, we found that HMAs are often used as alast line of therapy, with a minority of patients receiving subsequent treatment. Nonetheless, the minority of patients who achieve CR (11.7%) with HMA therapy had a median OS of 25.6 months. Therefore, use of HMAs for management of RR-AML is a reasonable intervention in the absence of clinical trial options. There appears to be no difference in OS or probability of achieving CR+CRi based on HMA used. Ongoing analyses in this dataset include further evaluations of predictors, including genetic mutations, and the development of prediction tools for clinical outcomes with HMA therapy. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Podoltsev: Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria. Ritchie:Novartis: Honoraria; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Arian: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Sekeres:Millenium/Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Komrokji:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Al-Kali:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Santini:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onconova: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Astex: Consultancy. Roboz:Cellectis: Research Funding; Agios, Amgen, Amphivena, Astex, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celator, Celgene, Genoptix, Janssen, Juno, MEI Pharma, MedImmune, Novartis, Onconova, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Sunesis, Teva: Consultancy. Fenaux:Celgene, Janssen,Novartis, Astex, Teva: Honoraria, Research Funding. Prebet:celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Gore:celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Zeidan:Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Key Points In the largest study of HMAs in RR-AML to date, 16% of patients achieved CR/CRi and experienced a median OS of 21 months. Low proliferative disease (peripheral blood blasts <5%) was associated with improved response and OS.