Lazarus, Hillard M.

Introduction: Based on a donor versus no-donor analysis, UKALLXII/E2993 showed a survival benefit for adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) who underwent allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) in first complete remission (CR1) compared to consolidation/maintenance chemotherapy alone. The follow-up phase 3 E1910 trial (NCT02003222) randomized BCR::ABL1-negative B-lineage ALL patients (pts) aged 30-70 years in measurable residual disease (MRD)-negative CR1 after intensification to conventional chemotherapy (CC) +/- blinatumomab (blin) and demonstrated significantly improved overall survival (OS) with blin (Litzow, NEJM 2024). The current exploratory subgroup analysis evaluates outcomes of MRD-negative pts randomized on E1910 who underwent alloHCT on trial. Methods: Among pts enrolled on E1910, pts in MRD-negative CR1 by 6-color flow cytometry after intensification who were randomized to CC +/- blin and subsequently underwent alloHCT were identified. We compared baseline characteristics, MRD status post induction, relapse-free survival (RFS) and OS using the Kaplan-Meier method and the two-sided log-rank test and Cox model. A multivariable analysis was performed with alloHCT included as a time-varying covariate as well as a landmark analysis comparing the outcome of pts with unfavorable risk on the CC + blin arm who underwent alloHCT versus those who did not. Results: Of 224 MRD-negative randomized pts, 44 underwent alloHCT on trial: 22 in each arm. The median time from randomization to transplant was 3.2 months (mos). The median follow-up from initial registration was 57.8 mos. Baseline demographics including age (median 55 years), gender (53% male), race (89% white) and ethnicity (89% non-Hispanic/Latino) were equally distributed. Compared to CC + blin, the median peripheral blood white cell (WBC) count and blast percentage at diagnosis were higher in the CC arm at 6,640 vs 3,740/uL and 55 vs 9%, respectively, while median marrow blast percentage and overall unfavorable risk as defined in E1910 (55% vs 64%) were similar. Of the 44 MRD-negative pts who proceeded to alloHCT on study, 77% in the CC arm and 64% in the CC+ blin arm were MRD-negative after induction. Myeloablative conditioning was given to the majority of pts (68% CC arm and 73% CC+blin arm) and the most common graft versus host disease prophylaxis was tacrolimus-based on both arms. Among the 44 pts who underwent alloHCT, the observed hazard ratio (HR) comparing relative risk of death between pts randomized to CC+blin or CC only was 0.59 (95% CI: 0.12-2.11) with a 3-year OS rate of 82% versus 71% and the HR comparing relative risk of relapse/death was 0.52 (CI: 0.15-1.79) with a 3-year RFS rate of 82% versus 67%. For patients with unfavorable risk, 3-year OS and 3-year RFS in each treatment arm were both 71% versus 65%. Among 50 pts with unfavorable risk in MRD-negative CR after intensification who were randomized to CC + blin, a landmark analysis performed at 5 mos post randomization showed 3-year OS and RFS rates of 71% versus 90% and 71% versus 86% between the 14 pts who underwent alloHCT and those who did not, respectively. Receipt of alloHCT was a time-varying covariate in a multivariable analysis with gender, WBC count, platelets, hemoglobin, peripheral blood blasts, bone marrow blasts, performance status, and combined molecular risk category. Age, CD20 status, rituximab use, and intention to receive alloHCT were used as stratification factors. In the entire cohort of MRD-negative pts who were randomized, there was a significant association between improved OS and the receipt of CC+blin vs CC alone (HR 0.46, 95% CI: 0.26 - 0.82; p=0.009), better performance status of 0-1 vs ≥2 and favorable vs unfavorable risk ALL. In contrast, the receipt of alloHCT had no significant effect on OS (HR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.49 - 2.01). Conclusions: Within the constraints of small numbers, this exploratory subgroup analysis demonstrates that in pts with newly diagnosed BCR::ABL1-negative B-ALL treated on E1910 who achieved MRD-negativity after intensification, alloHCT outcomes did not appear to be different with or without blin in consolidation. In a multivariate analysis of all MRD-negative pts, receipt of blin but not alloHCT was associated with improved OS. Further investigation is warranted to characterize the relative benefit of blinatumomab in pts receiving alloHCT in frontline consolidation.

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.

Abstract There has been an increase in volume as well as an improvement in overall survival (OS) after hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for hematologic disorders. It is unknown if these changes have affected racial/ethnic minorities equally. In this observational study from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research of 79 904 autologous (auto) and 65 662 allogeneic (allo) HCTs, we examined the volume and rates of change of autoHCT and alloHCT over time and trends in OS in 4 racial/ethnic groups: non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs), non-Hispanic African Americans (NHAAs), and Hispanics across 5 2-year cohorts from 2009 to 2018. Rates of change were compared using Poisson model. Adjusted and unadjusted Cox proportional hazards models examined trends in mortality in the 4 racial/ethnic groups over 5 study time periods. The rates of increase in volume were significantly higher for Hispanics and NHAAs vs NHW for both autoHCT and alloHCT. Adjusted overall mortality after autoHCT was comparable across all racial/ethnic groups. NHAA adults (hazard ratio [HR] 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.22; P = .004) and pediatric patients (HR 1.62; 95% CI 1.3-2.03; P &lt; .001) had a higher risk of mortality after alloHCT than NHWs. Improvement in OS over time was seen in all 4 groups after both autoHCT and alloHCT. Our study shows the rate of change for the use of autoHCT and alloHCT is higher in NHAAs and Hispanics than in NHWs. Survival after autoHCT and alloHCT improved over time; however, NHAAs have worse OS after alloHCT, which has persisted. Continued efforts are needed to mitigate disparities for patients requiring alloHCT.

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.

Introduction: ECOG ACRIN E1910 is a randomized phase III trial that showed that adults with newly diagnosed BCR::ABL1 negative acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) who become MRD negative (&lt;0.01%) after induction chemo who receive blinatumomab with conventional chemotherapy (chemo) have improved survival compared with those who received chemo only (Litzow et al, Blood (2022) 140: Supplement 2, LBA-1). However, not all pts were able to receive all four planned cycles of blinatumomab in consolidation. In this report we assessed outcomes of pts in the blinatumomab arm of the trial who received all 4 cycles of blinatumomab compared to those who received 1-2 cycles. Methods: Patient between the ages of 30 and 70 with newly diagnosed BCR::ABL1 negative B-lineage ALL were enrolled and initially received 2.5 months of combination induction chemo utilizing a BFM-like regimen adapted from the E2993/UKALLXII clinical trial, with pegaspargase (after induction only for patients &gt;=55 years of age) and addition of rituximab for CD20 positive patients. After remission induction (step 1) pts in morphologic complete remission (CR/CRi) received an intensification course of high dose methotrexate with pegaspargase for CNS prophylaxis (step 2). At the conclusion of step 2, remission and MRD status were determined centrally by 6-color flow cytometry with MRD negativity defined as &lt;0.01%. In the primary analysis subset, MRD negative patients were randomized to receive an additional 4cycles of consolidation chemo or 2 cycles of blinatumomab at 28 mcg/day (flat dose) for 28 days each cycle followed by 3 cycles of consolidation chemo, another 4-week cycle of blinatumomab (3rd cycle of blinatumomab) followed by an additional cycle of chemo and then a 4th cycle of blinatumomab (step 3). Following completion of consolidation chemo +/- blinatumomab, pts were given 2.5 years of POMP maintenance therapy timed from the start of the intensification cycle (step 4). Estimates of OS were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Comparison of OS between treatment arms were conducted using the stratified log-rank test and Cox proportional-hazards model with age, CD20 status, rituximab use, and whether pts intend to receive HSCT or not as stratification factors. As the number of cycles needed to optimize outcome has not been studied, an unplanned landmark analysis was used to compare OS of pts in the blinatumomab arm who received all 4 cycles o those who received 1-2 cycles. Time 0 was chosen as 9 months post step 3 randomization (the time that patients were supposed to complete 4 cycles of blina). Four pts who received blinatumomab but died within 9 months post step 3 randomization were therefore excluded from this analysis. Results: The study was activated on December 17, 2013 and closed to enrollment on October 15, 2019. 772 pts were screened for the trial and 488 were enrolled on step 1 induction therapy. The median age of the pts was 51 years (range 30-70). 224 MRD negative pts were randomized, 112 pts to each arm. In the blinatumomab arm 12 pts received 1 cycle (11%), 32 pts received 2 cycles (29%), 4 pts received 3 cycles (4%) and 63 pts received 4 cycles (57%). The OS of pts who received 1-2 cycles of blinatumomab was compared to control (Figure 1) The difference was not significant (hazard ratio 0.62, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.34, p=0.22). Fig 2 compares the survival of those who received 1-2 cycles to those who received 4 cycles ( (HR: 0.39, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.16, p=0.076). Conclusion: The addition of blinatumomab to consolidation chemotherapy resulted in a significantly better overall survival compared to chemotherapy alone in pts with newly diagnosed B-lineage ALL who were MRD negative after intensification. This represents a new standard of care for pts aged 30-70 years with BCR::ABL1 negative ALL. The optimal dose and number of cycles is however unknown. In this unplanned subgroup analysis we demonstrate that a survival benefit can only be confirmed in patients who receive the intended 4 cycles of blinatumomab during consolidation. Further studies will be needed to determine if fewer cycles can provide a similar benefit.

Background There is limited prospective or comparative data evaluating the HRQoL impact of intensive chemotherapy (IC) in older adults (age ≥60 years) with AML. In the recent EA E2906 phase 3 study of '7&3' (daunorubicin & cytarabine) vs. clofarabine (CLO), a putative lower intensity therapy, we incorporated a prospective patient-reported outcomes (PRO) assessment of HRQoL and fatigue to understand treatment impact from the patients' (pts) perspective. Methods E2906 study design and results have been presented previously [n=727, med. age 68 years (range 60-86), randomized 1:1 to ‘standard’ ‘7&3‘ & high dose cytarabine (Arm A) vs. single agent CLO (Arm B), as remission induction (Step 1) and consolidation (Step 2), respectively]. There was no difference in composite complete remission (CCR, 50%) or 30-day mortality rates (8.5%), and in primary analysis CLO was inferior for Overall Survival. HRQoL was a key secondary protocol endpoint. PROs assessed HRQoL and leukemia-specific symptoms and concerns using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Leukemia scale (FACT-Leu), & Fatigue using FACT-Fatigue subscale. PROs were administered at prespecified time points: (1) Baseline; (2) Cycle 1 at nadir (approx. Day 15); (3) End of Step 1 restaging (approx. D 40); (4) Beginning of Step 2 (1 st consolidation, approx. D 45); and (5) 2 nd cycle consolidation/End Step 2 (approx. D 60). The FACT-Leu Trial Outcome Index ( TOI) was calculated by summing physical well-being, functional well-being, and leukemia-specific concerns subscales to create a single composite score. Higher TOI scores correspond to better HRQoL. The primary endpoint was to evaluate TOI difference from randomization to day 30 after induction therapy between arms, evaluated using Wilcoxon rank sum test. We also compared Clinically Meaningful differences (CMiD) in TOI (defined as patient change ≥½ standard deviation from baseline TOI) between arms, using the X2 test. Pts not completing at least 2 assessment forms (including baseline) were excluded. Testing of constructs of Physical Well-being (PWB), Functional, Leukemia & Fatigue scales demonstrated high Cronbach's a values (a &gt;0.7) except for PWB (a=0.672) at a single time point (End of Step 2). Results Baseline TOI was available for n=489, and 364 pts (n=182 each Arm) were evaluable in this planned analysis. Evaluating CMiD during Cycle 1 induction, pts in Arm B were less likely to experience ‘Worse’ TOI score (32% vs. 40.7%, Arm A), more likely to maintain stable TOI scores (49.1% vs. 39%, Arm A), and had a similar proportion of ‘Better’ TOI scores (20.3%, A vs. 18.9%, B) although differences were not significant (p=0.1389). Conversely in cycle 1 consolidation, more patients in Arm A experienced Better TOI (45.1% vs. 29.2%, Arm B), fewer had stable TOI (45.1% vs. 58.3%, Arm B), and rates of ‘Worse’ TOI were similar (9.8%, A vs 12.5%, Arm B), again differences were not significant (p=0.2616). There was no difference in Fatigue scores between Arms (p=0.49). We evaluated whether TOI and Fatigue scores could predict the ability to complete protocol therapy. In univariate analysis baseline TOI (p=0.0059) and Fatigue (p=0.0057) were associated with Step 1 completion, however on multivariate analysis (adjusting for age, sex, and Arm) were no longer significant [TOI, Odds Ratio (OR) 1.03 (0.98-1.08, p=0.27); Fatigue, OR 1.03 (0.96-1.11, p=0.42)]. There was a borderline association of TOI with Step 2 completion [TOI OR 1.10 (1.00-1.23, p=0.06)]. Using a multivariable linear mixed effects model, we observed similar and significant changes in TOI scores in both Arms, demonstrating the effect of IC & CLO on HRQoL (Figure). Comparing to baseline, TOI scores decreased significantly at C1 induction nadir (-4.0873, p&lt;0.0001), and increased by 5.0762 (p=0.0004) at end Step 1, by 6.9047 at cycle 1 consolidation (p&lt;0.0001), and by 11.4601 (p&lt;0.0001) at end Step 2. Differences were mainly apparent in those who achieved CCR, and there was significant attrition in PRO responses in non-CCR pts. Conclusions Older adults experienced significant improvement in HRQoL after nadir regardless of therapy, and those achieving CCR report significantly higher scores. We did not observe differences in leukemia specific HRQoL or fatigue between treatment Arms (7&3 vs. CLO). Patient-reported HRQoL & Fatigue was not predictive of completion of protocol therapy. These results serve as a benchmark for expectations with IC in older adults.

Abstract Blastic plasmacytoid dendritic cell neoplasm (BPDCN) is a rare hematological malignancy with a poor prognosis and considered incurable with conventional chemotherapy. Small observational studies reported allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) offers durable remissions in patients with BPDCN. We report an analysis of patients with BPDCN who received an allo-HCT, using data reported to the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR). We identified 164 patients with BPDCN from 78 centers who underwent allo-HCT between 2007 and 2018. The 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), relapse, and nonrelapse mortality (NRM) rates were 51.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 42.5-59.8), 44.4% (95% CI, 36.2-52.8), 32.2% (95% CI, 24.7-40.3), and 23.3% (95% CI, 16.9-30.4), respectively. Disease relapse was the most common cause of death. On multivariate analyses, age of ≥60 years was predictive for inferior OS (hazard ratio [HR], 2.16; 95% CI, 1.35-3.46; P = .001), and higher NRM (HR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.13-4.22; P = .02). Remission status at time of allo-HCT (CR2/primary induction failure/relapse vs CR1) was predictive of inferior OS (HR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.14-3.06; P = .01) and DFS (HR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.11-2.76; P = .02). Use of myeloablative conditioning with total body irradiation (MAC-TBI) was predictive of improved DFS and reduced relapse risk. Allo-HCT is effective in providing durable remissions and long-term survival in BPDCN. Younger age and allo-HCT in CR1 predicted for improved survival, whereas MAC-TBI predicted for less relapse and improved DFS. Novel strategies incorporating allo-HCT are needed to further improve outcomes.