Choquet, Sylvain

PURPOSE In large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL), use of high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) to prevent CNS relapse (so-called CNS prophylaxis) remains controversial. International guidelines continue to recommend HD-MTX in patients deemed ultra high risk (UHR) because of a lack of robust data specific to these subgroups. This study was designed to examine the impact of HD-MTX specifically in UHR patients. METHODS Data from two previous retrospective analyses were combined to produce a cohort of UHR patients (≥1 of the following criteria: CNS international prognostic index score 5-6; testicular, renal/adrenal, or breast involvement; ≥3 extranodal sites), treated with or without HD-MTX. The primary outcome was CNS relapse rate (isolated or concurrent with systemic relapse) measured from diagnosis with additional landmark analysis of all responding patients with no progression event at 6 months. RESULTS Analyses were performed on 1,923 patients meeting UHR criteria. No significant difference in 3-year CNS relapse rate was observed between no HD-MTX (n = 1,051) versus HD-MTX patients (n = 872), including in multivariable analyses adjusting for baseline characteristics (3-year rate, 9.3% v 8.1%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.13 [95% CI, 0.82 to 1.57]). Analyses restricted to isolated CNS relapse also confirmed no difference (5.9% v 5.7%; adjusted HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.69 to 1.53]). In the landmark analysis (no HD-MTX n = 782, HD-MTX n = 773), no difference in 3-year CNS relapse was observed (6.7% v 6.6%, adjusted HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.62 to 1.44]). CONCLUSION To our knowledge, this is the largest international comparative data set of patients with LBCL with UHR features showing no significant reduction in CNS relapse with HD-MTX in all UHR or in any individual subgroup. Despite inherent limitations of retrospective analyses, the data strongly support previous studies in suggesting HD-MTX prophylaxis has no meaningful benefit for most patients.

Abstract Introduction: The prognosis of patients (pts) with histological transformation (HT) of Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) remains dismal with standard chemoimmunotherapy. CD19-targeted chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies (CAR-T) can lead to durable responses in relapsed/refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) and are approved in the second or third line settings. Pts with HT-WM were largely excluded from CAR-T trials. We previously reported high response rates in a series of 23 pts. The aim of the present study was to evaluate a larger cohort of pts with R/R HT-WM treated with CAR-T with a longer follow-up. Methods: We performed a multicenter retrospective study of pts with biopsy-proven transformed WM/lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma treated with CAR-T in the French DESCAR-T registry (NCT04328298), 4 centers from ECWM and 4 US centers. This study includes updated data from previously published cases (Durot et al, Blood, 2024). Responses were assessed according to the Lugano 2014 criteria. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) were graded according to the ASTCT 2019 consensus criteria. Hematological toxicity and infections were graded according to the NCI CTCAE (version 5.0). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from the date of CAR-T infusion and estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: 50 pts were included (39 from DESCAR-T centers, 7 from US centers and 4 from ECWM centers). Median age was 60 (range: 32-72) and 68 (range: 42-82) years at WM diagnosis and CAR-T infusion, respectively. MYD88L265P and CXCR4 mutations were present in 79% (23/29) and 15% (2/13) of patients with available data, respectively. The median time from WM to HT diagnosis was 5.3 years (range: 0-32). Median prior lines of therapy was 1 (range: 0-9) for WM and 2 for HT (range: 0-4). Twenty (40%) pts previously received a BTK inhibitor for WM or HT, 12 (24%) underwent prior autologous SCT and 1 pt allogeneic SCT. 40% of pts presented primary refractory disease and 44% were refractory to last treatment before CAR-T. 40 pts (80%) received bridging therapy, of whom 17 (44%) responded (7 complete responses (CR)). 35 (70%), 10 (20%), and 5 (10%) pts received axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel), tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel), and lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel), respectively. The best overall response rate (ORR) was 94%, with 44 (88%) pts reaching CR. With a median follow-up of 25.7 months (range: 1-69) from CAR-T infusion, the median PFS was 1.2 years (95% CI: 0.5-4.5) and median OS was 4.2 years (95% CI: 1.2-not reached). Median duration of response was 1.5 years (95% CI: 0.4-4.4), with a median of 4 years (95% CI: 1.5-NR) for pts still in CR at 6 months after CAR-T. 22 pts experienced relapse/progression after CAR-T, 19 related to LBCL and 3 to WM. Median survival after relapse was 7.9 months (95% CI: 3.8-25.3). At LBCL relapse after CAR-T, salvage therapy consisted of CD20xCD3 bispecific antibodies for 9 pts, lenalidomide +/- anti-CD20 or anti-CD19 antibody for 6 pts, and BTKi for 3 pts. Among 19 pts who died, 14 (74%) were due to progressive disease and 5 (26%) from infections. 37 (76%) pts experienced CRS, including 2 (4%) grade 3 events, and 22 (45%) had ICANS, with 2 (4%) ≥ grade 3 events. 17 (35%) pts presented infections, including 12 ≥ grade 3. 21 (43%) pts developed ≥ grade 3 prolonged cytopenias (ie, not resolved within 30 days post infusion). CNS involvement due to LBCL was present in 11 pts (22%) at the time of CAR-T. 6 of them had ICANS, with 1 grade 4. The best ORR was 91% (best CR 91%). Only 1 patient did not obtain a response, with stable disease at 1 month and progression at 3 months. The median PFS was 1.2 year (95% CI: 0.2-NR) and median OS was NR (95% CI: 0.5-NR). On univariate analysis, only elevated LDH was correlated with worse PFS (HR 2.5, p=0.04) and OS (HR 3.3, p=0.04). Other variables, including number of prior lines of therapy, MYD88 mutation status, primary refractory disease, refractory to last treatment, CNS involvement before CAR-T, response after bridging therapy and type of CAR-T received, were not associated with inferior PFS or OS. Conclusion: This cohort represents the largest series of pts with transformed WM treated with anti-CD19 CAR-T. We confirm the high efficacy previously reported with an acceptable safety profile, including for pts with CNS involvement due to LBCL at CAR-T infusion.

Abstract Introduction: Selinexor is a novel, oral Selective Inhibitor of Nuclear Export (SINE) compound that blocks exportin 1 (XPO1). Selinexor treatment results in nuclear accumulation and activation of tumor suppressor proteins, inhibition of NF-kB, and translational suppression of several oncoprotein mRNAs (e.g., c-myc, cyclin D).Multiple myeloma (MM) remains incurable, and most patients (pts) eventually progress through standard drug classes of proteasome inhibitors (PIs), immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs), anti-CD38 mAbs and others. The increased use of combinations in MM treatment, (PIs/IMiDs/mAbs), has led to a growing number of pts with penta-refractory MM (pts that have been treated with bortezomib (bort), carfilzomib (carfil), lenalidomide (len), pomalidomide (pom) and daratumumab (dara)). Active novel therapies with different mechanisms of actions are needed to address this unmet medical need. Part 1 of STORM enrolled pts with both quad- (bort, carfil, len, pom, treated MM) or penta-refractory MM and demonstrated an overall response rate (ORR) of 21% (Vogl et al, JCO 2018). Based on these findings, the Pivotal Part 2 of STORM was initiated, enrolling an additional cohort of 122 patients with penta-refractory MM. Methods: Pts with penta-refractory MM were treated with 80 mg selinexor plus 20 mg dexamethasone (Sd) twice weekly. Pts must have received an alkylator, bort, carfil, len, pom and dara, and had MM refractory to ≥1 PI, ≥1 IMiD, dara, a glucocorticoid, and their last therapy. Pts must have a total ANC ≥1000 mm3,platelets ≥50k/mm3 (or ≥75k if marrow plasma cells <50%), and creatinine clearance ≥20 mL/min. The primary endpoint was ORR. Secondary endpoints: duration of response (DOR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), progression free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Efficacy was assessed by an Independent Review Committee (IRC) based on IMWG criteria. OS was also compared to a cohort of pts with PI, IMiD, dara refractory MM from the Flatiron Health Analytic Database (FHAD), (ref: ASH 2018 abs ID: 116493),who met all the inclusion criteria for STORM. Results: As of 1-Jun-2018, 122 pts (71 M/ 51 F) were enrolled in 38 sites (US and EU). Pt characteristics were [medians (range)]: age 65 yrs (40-85); 7 (3 - 18) prior treatment regimens, 6.6 yrs (<1 - 23.4) from initial MM diagnosis.65 pts (53%) had high risk cytogenetics, 86 pts (70%) had prior dara in combination, 102 pts (84%) had prior stem cell transplantation, 2 pts had prior CAR-T therapy. All pts enrolled with progressive disease (PD), 72% of pts had increases (3% - 792%) in MM markers from screening to C1D1 (median 11 days). Frequently reported Sd treatment related adverse events (AEs) included (all grades, grades 3/4): thrombocytopenia (67%, 53%), nausea (67%, 10%), fatigue (68%, 21%), anorexia (50%, 2%), anemia (46%, 28%), and weight loss (46%, 0%). Eight pts remain on study and 114 pts discontinued treatment (most commonly for PD). There were 4 deaths on treatment: sepsis, respiratory failure, pulmonary embolism, and an unrelated, unspecified cardiac event. IRC determined ORR (≥PR) was 26.2%, with 6.5% ≥ very good partial response, including 2 stringent complete responses (sCRs; MRD negative at 1:10-6 and at 1:10-4sensitivity). Both pts who relapsed after CAR-T achieved PRs. The CBR (≥minimal response, [MR]) was 39.3%, and 79% of pts achieved ≥stable disease (SD). Responses typically occurred within the first month. Medians: DOR 4.4 months (mo) (range <1 - 10 mo), PFS 3.7 mo, and OS 8.0 mo. Pts with ≥MR had significantly longer OS than pts with PD/NE (median not reached vs 1.9 mo, p=<0.0001). Compared to the FHAD cohort, STORM cohort had longer OS (Figure 1, HR 0.41, p=0.0001). Conclusions: Results of the pivotal STORM Part 2 in penta (PI, IMiD, dara)-refractory MM demonstrated that oral selinexor plus low-dose dexamethasone (Sd) was highly active with an ORR of 26.2%. Importantly, responses were rapid and deep with 2 patients achieving sCRs (both MRD negative) in these heavily pre-treated penta-refractory MM pts (median 7 prior regimens, 53% high risk). AEs are a function of dose/schedule/disease severity and can be managed with dose modifications and supportive care. No major organ toxicity was observed and AEs were typically transient and reversible. Sd is an all-oral, first in class mechanism with novel MOA and represents a potential therapeutic option to the growing number of pts with penta-refractory MM who have exhausted approved therapies. Disclosures Chari: Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; The Binding Site: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Array Biopharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Vogl:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy. Dimopoulos:Takeda: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Nooka:GSK: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive technologies: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Moreau:Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cole:University of Michigan: Employment; Cancer Support Community myeloma advisory board: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dingli:Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding. Vij:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myer Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Raab:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Weisel:Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, and Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, and Sanofi: Research Funding; Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Juno, Sanofi, and Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Delforge:Celgene and Janssen: Research Funding; Amgen, Celgene, Janssen and Takeda: Consultancy. Stewart:Amgen Inc., BMS, Celgene, Takeda, Roche, Seattle Genetics, Janssen, Ono: Consultancy; Amgen Inc., Celgene, Roche, Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Mohty:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Molmed: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; MaaT Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers: Consultancy, Research Funding. Sylvain:Gilead: Other: scientific advisor board. Costa:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; BMS: Research Funding. Shah:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment. Picklesimer:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment. Saint-Martin:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment. Li:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment. Kauffman:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shacham:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Richardson:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jagannath:Celgene: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation: Speakers Bureau; Medicom: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy.

Abstract Abstract 879 Background: Several solid organ transplant (SOT) PTLD series have reported that PCNS disease is a poor prognostic factor (e.g., Leblond et al, JCO 2001; Maeker et al, JCO 2007; Knight et al JCO 2009; Evens et al, JCO 2010). However, these reports contained small PCNS PTLD numbers and most series studied patients (pts) in the pre-rituximab era. Methods: We performed an International retrospective analysis of PCNS SOT-related PTLD diagnosed from 1998 through 2010. Cases with secondary CNS localization were excluded. Detailed pt and disease characteristics, including frontline therapy, were evaluated. Fisher's exact test was used to compare PCNS PTLD vs non-PCNS PTLD cases. Further, univariate associations with survival were determined, while a multivariate Cox regression proportional hazards model was performed. Results: 71 PCNS PTLD cases were identified, of which 65 had complete data. There were 35 men and 30 women; the median age was 53 years (range, 20–77 years). The most common type of SOT was kidney in 72%, followed by lung 18% and 5% each pancreas and heart. The median time from SOT to PCNS PTLD was 46 months (range, 2 to 504 months). Further, only 18% occurred within 12 months of SOT, and 32% of PTLD diagnoses occurred > 10 years after SOT. 85% of pts had received prior mycophenolate, while 30% received tacrolimus prior to PCNS PTLD. According to WHO histology, 83% of PCNS PTLD cases were monomorphic subtype (all B-cell), while tumor was EBV+ in 93% despite EBV being detectable in the peripheral blood (by PCR) in only 38% of these cases. In addition, 49% of pts had poor performance status (i.e., 2–4), 48% had elevated LDH, and 48% were hypoalbuminemic at diagnosis. Interestingly, several of these characteristics were notably different when compared with a non-PCNS PTLD cohort (Table 1A). All pts here presented with CNS-related symptoms and 98% had abnormal findings on MRI showing a parenchymal brain lesion(s); 50% of pts had >1 CNS lesion and 40% had involvement of deep regions of the brain. Further, 12% had concomitant CSF involvement, while no pts had ocular involvement. In terms of therapy, 89% of pts had reduction in immunosuppression (RI). Additional frontline therapy consisted of high dose methotrexate (HD-MTX)-based therapy in 43% (46% of whom also received concurrent rituximab), whole-brain radiation in 20% (61% with rituxmab), high-dose cytarabine (HDAC)-based in 15% (30% with rituximab), while 11% received rituximab alone and 11% had no other therapy (i.e., RI alone). Altogether, 48% of pts received rituximab as part of initial therapy. The overall response rate (ORR) was 55% with 30% complete remission (CR) rate. With a median follow-up of 39 months (1–135), the 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for all pts were 31% and 32%, respectively (Figure 1). Pts who received rituximab vs not as a component of first line therapy had superior PFS (40% vs 22%, respectively, p=0.02) and borderline improved OS (43% vs 22%, respectively, p=0.06), while pts who did not receive rituximab nor HD-MTX-based therapy as frontline therapy did particularly poor (PFS and OS both 10%). Several pre-treatment and treatment-related factors predicted survival on univariate analysis (Table 1B). When analyzing only pre-treatment related factors in the Cox multivariate regression model, only increasing age remained significant (PFS: HR 1.04 [95%CI 1.00–1.07], p=0.031; and OS: HR 1.04 [95%CI 1.01–1.08], p=0.020). With treatment-related factors included in the model, response to frontline therapy (CR or partial remission) was the dominant predictive factor of survival on multivariate analysis (PFS: HR 0.136 [95%CI 0.047–0.390], p=0.0002; and OS: HR 0.130 [95%CI 0.045–0.381], p=0.0002). Conclusion: These data represent the largest report of PCNS PTLD to date. PCNS PTLD appears to represent a distinct biologic and clinical entity within the PTLD spectrum that retains EBV positivity, occurs late, and presents with additional high-risk features. Furthermore, outcome of PCNS PTLD remains overall modest. However, these data suggest that rituximab and HD-MTX appear to favorably impact survival. Continued study of this subset of pts is critically needed. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.