Costa, Luciano J.

Abstract Proteins in the antiapoptotic B-cell lymphoma 2 (BCL-2) family play a role in the pathophysiology of multiple myeloma (MM). Venetoclax is a highly selective, potent, oral BCL-2 inhibitor that induces apoptosis of MM cells, and its efficacy may be potentiated through combination with agents that increase BCL-2 dependency or have complementary mechanisms of action. The safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of venetoclax in combination with carfilzomib and dexamethasone (VenKd) in adults with relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) were investigated in this phase 2 dose-escalation study. Oral venetoclax (400 or 800 mg) was administered daily in combination with intravenous carfilzomib (27, 56, or 70 mg/m2) and oral dexamethasone (20 or 40 mg) in 4 dose-finding cohorts. The expansion cohort received venetoclax 800 mg, carfilzomib 70 mg/m2, and dexamethasone 40 mg. Forty-nine patients received treatment. Median prior lines of therapy was 1 (range, 1-3), and median time in the study was 27 months. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were diarrhea (65%), fatigue (47%), nausea (47%), and lymphopenia (35%). Serious adverse events occurred in 26 (53%) patients. Of 3 treatment-emergent deaths, 1 was considered treatment related. The overall response rate was 80% in all patients, 92% in patients with t(11;14) (n = 13), and 75% in patients without (n = 36). The rate of complete response or better was 41%. Median progression-free survival was 22.8 months. Treatment with VenKd was well tolerated and showed promising response rates in this RRMM patient population, with greater responses observed in patients with t(11;14). This trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02899052.

8030 Background: CARTITUDE-1 is a single arm study of Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel; JNJ-68284528) anti-BCMA CAR-T cell therapy in US patients (pts) with relapsed multiple myeloma (RRMM) refractory to both IMiD and proteasome inhibitor (PI) or with at least 3 prior lines of therapy and previously exposed to anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody (MoAb). While recently reported efficacy results of cilta-cel were encouraging, it is unknown how they compare with similar pts receiving conventional (non CAR-T) treatment. Methods: We utilized a contemporary US-based dataset of pts with MM refractory to anti-CD38 MoAb (MAMMOTH) to identify pts who would meet eligibility for CARTITUDE-1 and who received conventional therapy. We analyzed the intent-to-treat population (ITT) in CARTITUDE-1, defined as pts who underwent apheresis (N=113) and a modified ITT population (mITT) defined as subset of pts who received cilta-cel at the RP2D (N=97). From the MAMMOTH dataset, we identified a population corresponding to CARTITUDE-1 ITT (N=190) and a mITT population, pts without death or progression within 47 days (median time between apheresis and cilta-cel infusion) from onset of therapy (N=122). We calculated propensity scores (PS) with demographics, N of prior therapies, cytogenetics and refractoriness to MM agents as covariates. An analyst blinded to outcomes performed nearest neighbor 1:1 PS matching. We analyzed overall response rate (ORR), progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for ITT and mITT in CARTITUDE-1 vs matching MAMMOTH cohorts. Results: Ninety-five ITT (75 received bridging therapy, 82 received cilta-cel) and 69 mITT (54 received bridging) CARTITUDE-1 pts matched MAMMOTH pts (Table). Among the pts in the MAMMOTH ITT cohort 34% received pomalidomide, 24% anti-CD38 MoAb, 19% carfilzomib and 35% cytotoxic chemotherapy in next therapy. ORR in the ITT cohorts was higher in CARTITUDE-1 (84% vs. 28%). Compared to their MAMMOTH counterparts, pts in CARTITUDE-1 ITT cohort had improved PFS (12 mo. 73% vs. 12%) and OS (12 mo. 83% vs 39%). Between the mITT cohorts, CARTITUDE-1 pts had superior ORR (96% vs. 30%), PFS (12 mo 79% vs. 15%) and OS (12 mo. 88% vs. 41%). Conclusions: In pts with RRMM beyond therapy with IMID, PI, and anti-CD38 MoAb, treatment with cilta-cel is associated with higher response rate and superior PFS and OS when compared to conventional treatment.[Table: see text]

2537 Background: Orva-cel is a B-cell maturation antigen–targeted chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy being evaluated in the phase 1/2 EVOLVE study (NCT03430011) in pts with RRMM who had at least 3 prior lines of therapy (Tx). We previously reported safety and efficacy in the phase 1 study and established the recommended dose (RD) of orva-cel as 600 × 106 CAR+ T cells (Mailankody et al, ASCO 2020). Cytokine release syndrome (CRS), a dominant toxicity of CAR T cell therapy, is mediated in part by IL-1. We explore the role of ppx with AKR, an IL-1 signaling inhibitor, on reducing the incidence of grade (G) ≥2 CRS after orva-cel treatment at the RD. Methods: Fourteen pts were enrolled sequentially for AKR ppx and treated with orva-cel at the RD. The non-AKR ppx control group comprised the remainder of the phase 1 pts receiving orva-cel at the RD (n = 19). The median follow-up (range) was 3.0 mo (1.8–6.2) for the AKR ppx group and 8.8 mo (5.3–12.2) for the non-AKR ppx group. AKR was administered as 100 mg SC the night before orva-cel infusion, 3 h before the infusion (Day 1), and q24 h on Days 2–5. Dosing was increased to q12 h if CRS developed. CRS was graded by Lee (2014) criteria. Tocilizumab (T) and steroids (S) were used per protocol-specified treatment management guidelines. Results: Disease characteristics and outcomes are shown in the table. In AKR ppx and non-AKR ppx groups, median number of prior regimens was 6 and 5, and bridging Tx was used in 57% and 68% of pts, respectively. The total frequency of CRS was similar in the 2 groups, but with less G 2 in the AKR ppx pts; relative risk (95% CI) = 0.54 (0.21, 1.38). No G ≥3 CRS was seen in either group. The incidence of neurological events (NE), G ≥3 infection, and macrophage activation syndrome/hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (MAS/HLH) was similar. T and S use was numerically lower with AKR ppx. Orva-cel expansion kinetics were similar in the 2 groups. All pts had a 2-month efficacy assessment, with ORR in 100% of AKR ppx and 95% of non–AKR ppx pts. Conclusions: In this nonrandomized evaluation of AKR ppx with orva-cel treatment, the incidence of G ≥2 CRS was lower in pts receiving AKR ppx. The use of AKR ppx produced no adverse effect on the incidence of NE, infection, or MAS/HLH, nor on orva-cel expansion or disease response. These results warrant further study of AKR ppx in CAR T cell therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT03430011. [Table: see text]

8515 Background: AL is a clonal plasma cell (PC) disorder causing multiorgan dysfunction from amyloid fibril deposition. While bortezomib (B) induction has been used prior to AHCT recently, AHCT without prior induction has been a common practice. The primary objective of this study was to compare outcomes of AL patients who proceeded to AHCT without induction to those receiving pre-AHCT induction with B. Methods: Outcomes of 426 systemic AL AHCT recipients between 2014-2018 reported to the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) were reviewed. Patients receiving induction with therapy other than B, AHCT occurring > 9 months after diagnosis, no documented AL end-organ involvement, myeloma-defining events and conditioning other than melphalan (MEL) monotherapy were excluded. Multivariate analysis (MVA) was conducted to identify prognostic factors associated with relapse, PFS and overall survival (OS). Results: 286 patients received B induction therapy vs 140 patients receiving no induction. Age, gender, number and type of organs involved, and AL AHCT center volume were similar between the groups. Patients receiving induction had greater PC burden compared with no induction (PC ≥ 10%, 41% vs 11%, p < 0.01). Induction was B, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (D) in 83% followed by B, lenalidomide and D (10%) or B+D (7%). Median follow-up was 24.9 months. At 2 years, B induction vs. no induction was associated with 13% (95% CI 10-17%) vs 22% (95% CI 15-30%) relapse risk (p = 0.03); 83% (95% CI 79-87%) vs 74% (95% CI 66-81%) PFS (p = 0.04); 93% (95% CI 90-95%) vs 94% (95% CI 89-97%) OS (p = 0.7). On MVA, the B induction group had improved PFS (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.3-0.7, p < 0.001) with similar OS (HR 0.6, 95% CI 0.3-1.2, p = 0.1) compared with no induction. Creatinine < 2 mg/dl (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.3-0.9, p = 0.02) and Karnofsky score ≥90 (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.33-0.78, p < 0.01) were also associated with improved PFS. MEL dose < 180 mg/m2 was associated with inferior PFS (HR 2.17, 95% CI 1.31-3.61, p < 0.01) and OS (HR 3.6, 95% CI 1.5-8.6, p < 0.01). No deaths were seen in the first 100 days post-AHCT. At last follow-up, 32 deaths occurred, 26 (81%) due to AL. Conclusions: Compared with prior CIBMTR analyses, B induction use has increased in AL AHCT recipients and a higher PC burden was the only clinical determinant. Furthermore, B induction was associated with lower relapse and improved PFS at 2 years with no OS difference despite higher proportion of patients with > 10% PC, which has been associated with poor outcomes.

Abstract Background: Germinal center B cell-like (GCB) DLBCL, as determined by gene expression profiling or immunohistochemistry, is more likely to be cured by initial conventional chemoimmunotherapy than non-germinal center B cell-like (non-GCB) DLBCL. For patients with relapsed or refractory chemosensitive DLBCL, high-dose chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) transplant is considered standard-of-care treatment, but it is unknown whether the outcome of these patients is similarly influenced by the subtype of DLBCL. We therefore explored the differences between patients with GCB and non-GCB DLBCL as regards their clinical features at relapse after first line therapy and their outcome following salvage autologous HSC transplant. Methods: Patients undergoing BEAM conditioning and autologous HSC transplantation for relapsed or refractory chemosensitive DLBCL at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN between 2001 and 2006 were included. Immunohistochemical analysis was performed for CD10, BCL-6 and MUM1 allowing classification in GCB and non-GCB-like DLBCL, as well as for BCL-2. GCB and non-GCB groups were compared in terms of known prognostic factors at time of progression and outcome after HSC transplant Results: Fifty-nine patients were included and had retrievable tumor samples to allow immunohistochemical analysis. Median follow-up of survivors was 25 months; median age at the time of transplant was 60 years (range 17–77); All patients had failed at least one previous anthracycline-based regimen (15 had refractory disease). Overall, 25/59 cases (42%) were positive for CD10, 32/58 (55%) for BCL-6, and 19/58 (32%) for MUM1. Thirty-two patients (54%) were classified as having GCB and 27 (46%) non-GCB-like DLBCL. Patients in the GCB and non-GCB group had similar time to progression (TTP) (median 12.5 months vs. 11 months, Wilcoxon P=0.81) after first line therapy and similar IPI-R scores (Chi-square, P=0.38). In univariate analysis, GCB and non-GCB did not differ in time to relapse after HSC transplant (log rank test P=0.77) or survival (log rank test P=0.48; figure). The lack of demonstrable difference in survival persisted even after correction for IPI-R and TTP, factors know to affect transplant outcome (Cox regression, RR=0.80 for GCB; P=0.28). BCL-2 was highly expressed in both GCB (81%) and non-GCB (96%) and did not correlate with outcome in the entire population nor in any of the two groups. Conclusion: Patients with chemosensitive relapsed or refractory GCB and non-GCB-like DLBCL derive similar benefit from autologous HSC transplant. Figure Figure

Abstract Background: High-dose chemotherapy and hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) transplantation is curative in about 40% of patients with relapsed chemosensitive diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). The international prognostic index obtained at the time of relapse (IPI-R) and the time from initial treatment to relapse (TTR) have been suggested in different series to be predictors of outcome after HSC transplantation. We explored the concomitant effect of IPI-R and TTR on therapeutic outcome in a modern and uniform cohort of patients with relapsed chemosensitive DLBC undergoing high-dose chemotherapy and peripheral HSC transplantation. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 80 consecutive patients treated at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN between 2001 and 2006 who received a peripheral HSC transplant (except for 3 patients who receive bone marrow) after being conditioned with BCNU, etoposide, cytarabine and melphalan (BEAM) for relapsed chemosensitive DLBCL. Results: Median follow-up of survivors was 31.4 months, Median age at the time of transplant was 62 (interquartile range 53–65; range 26–77), 65% were males; median number of prior chemotherapy regimens was 2. All patients had received at least one previous anthracycline-based regimen, 78% had been previously exposed to rituximab and all achieved at least CRu after the initial treatment. The median time from diagnosis to relapse was 19 months (interquartile range 10–43), 25% of patients had a high or high-intermediate IPI-R. The median survival from the time of transplant for patients with TTR&gt;18 months v. ≤ 18 months was not reached and 50 months respectively (P=0.005). Median survival for patients with high or high-intermediate IPI-R at the time of relapse (IPI score ≥3) was 23.3 months and not reached for patients with low or low-intermediate IPI (P=0.01). These two factors were independent in multivariate analysis with RR for death of 1.8 (1.2–2.9; P=0.004) for TTR ≤ 18 months and 1.7 (1.1–2.5; P=0.017) for high or high-intermediate IPI and therefore combined in a prognostic system were patients with none (n=32), one (n=39) or two (n=9) of these prognostic factors had median disease free survival not reached v. 50 months v. 3.3 months (P=0.001) and overall survival not reached v. 50 months v. 5 months (P=0.0001) (Figure). Conclusion: TTR and IPI-R provide an easy and powerful prognostic system in patients with DLBCL undergoing modern high-dose chemotherapy with HSC support. Figure Figure

8010 Background: Carfilzomib is a proteasome inhibitor that irreversibly binds its target with favorable toxicity profile that has shown significant activity in relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). Here we used carfilzomib as the center of a 4 drug induction regimen designed for MM patients pre stem cell transplant (SCT). Methods: We conducted a phase I safety run in 6 patients with no DLT observed before expanding to phase II. The phase II regimen is shown below. Treatment was for 4 cycles with expected SCT post induction. For the phase II portion of this trial, the primary endpoint is the proportion of patients who have ≥ very good partial response to treatment. All patients received herpes zoster prophylaxis and ASA daily. Results: Twenty seven patients were enrolled. Median age was 65 (range 27-74). ORR for evaluable patients (n=17) at phase II dosing is 100%: CR 35%, VGPR 48%, PR 18% after 4 cycles of CYCLONE. Grade 3 toxicity was reported in 52% of patients and 14% experienced a grade 4 toxicity. Grade 3/4 toxicities occurring in >5% of patients included fatigue, neutropenia, lymphopenia, thromboembolism, myopathy. Toxicities of any grade seen in >20% of patients included fatigue, constipation, lethargy, thrombocytopenia, somnolence, creatinine increased, malaise. Four patients (20%) developed grade 1 sensory neuropathy; no higher grade or painful neuropathy was evident. All patients are alive. All patients advancing to SCT successfully collected stem cells. One patient with t(4;14) disease who was not transplanted has progressed. 94% remain progression free. Conclusions: The 4 drug CYCLONE regimen has remarkable efficacy (83% ≥VGPR) and manageable toxicity in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma. Especially notable was the low incidence of neuropathy and depth of response (CR 35%) after only 4 cycles. Given the relative lack of toxicity an extension of this regimen at higher doses of carfilzomib (20/45mg/m2) has been initiated. [Table: see text]

The NCCN Guidelines for Management of Immunotherapy-Related Toxicities provide interdisciplinary guidance on the management of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) resulting from cancer immunotherapy. These NCCN Guidelines Insights describe symptoms that may be caused by an irAE and should trigger further investigation, and summarize the NCCN Management of Immunotherapy-Related Toxicities Panel discussions for the 2020 update to the guidelines regarding immune checkpoint inhibitor–related diarrhea/colitis and cardiovascular irAEs.