Bartoo, Gabriel

ABSTRACT Hypomethylating agents (HMA) and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) have both demonstrated remissions in VEXAS; however, comparative data is lacking. We conducted a multicenter, retrospective analysis of 66 patients diagnosed with VEXAS syndrome treated with HMA ( n = 35) or alloHSCT ( n = 31). Baseline characteristics such as genetics, co‐morbidities, and performance status were balanced between the groups, except older age in the HMA group. Median follow‐up from therapy initiation was 18 months (95% CI: 11–26), and 14 (21%) deaths were reported (alloHSCT n = 3; HMA n = 11). Among all evaluable patients within the alloHSCT cohort, all patients achieved molecular remission, and a substantial proportion of patients discontinued glucocorticoids (58%). In contrast, HMA therapy was associated with lower but meaningful rates of molecular remission (22%) and glucocorticoid discontinuation (6%). In a real‐world setting, HMA therapy was associated with a high discontinuation rate related to toxicity or lack of response. On multivariable analysis adjusted for age and Charlson Comorbidity Index, alloHSCT was associated with improved overall survival (HR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.05–0.81; p = 0.024). This association remained consistent across multiple ancillary sensitivity analyses, including restriction to transplant‐eligible patients, patients aged ≤ 75 years, 1:1 matching, and propensity score‐based weighted analyses. Although limited by retrospective design, these findings suggest that alloHSCT remains an attractive and potentially curative strategy in selected patients with VEXAS. Prospective validation of these findings is warranted.

Abstract Background: VEXAS (Vacuoles, E1 enzyme, X-linked, Autoinflammatory, Somatic) syndrome is a hemato-inflammatory syndrome due to somatic mutations in UBA1 gene. Recently, DNA methyltransferase inhibitors (specifically, 5-azacitidine) and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) have shown success in eradication of UBA1 clones and clinical remission in some patients. This study aims to provide a comparative efficacy analysis between DNA methyltransferase inhibitors (hypomethylating agents/HMA) versus alloHSCT in VEXAS syndrome patients. Methods: This is a multi-center, retrospective cohort study. UBA1 mutations were detected either through next generation sequencing [NGS, limit of detection (LOD) 2% variant allele fraction (VAF)] or quantitative droplet digital polymerase chain reaction testing (ddPCR, LOD 0.5% VAF). Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS), glucocorticoid (GC) discontinuation/reduction in dose (prednisone < 10 mg/day), and complete molecular remission (CMR, defined as an undetectable UBA1 mutation). OS was calculated from the time of diagnosis to death or last follow up. Cumulative incidence of reduction in GC dose was calculated using competing risk analysis after accounting for death. Results: Between years 2020-2024, a total of thirty-nine male patients (median age 67, range 45-82 years) with VEXAS syndrome, necessity for therapy (GC-refractory inflammation and/or progressive marrow failure/myeloid neoplasm) and confirmed UBA1 pathogenic mutation were included. Of these, 18 (46%) received HMA therapy (5-azacitidine 72% and Decitabine 28%) with a median of 4 (range 1-36) cycles. and 21 (54%) underwent alloHSCT (MSD=4, MUD=12, MMUD=2, and haploidentical=3), all received reduced intensity conditioning (Flu/Mel =11, Flu/Bu=5, Flu/Cy/TBI=2, and TBF=3) and 91% received post-transplant cyclophosphamide-based graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis (only 2 patients in alloHSCT group received prior HMA without benefit). Baseline characteristics were well-balanced between HMA and alloHSCT groups; age at treatment (median 70 vs 65 years, p=0.2), and UBA1 M41V subtype (25% vs 40%, p=0.3), cytogenetic and non-UBA1 mutation abnormalities (p=0.4), prior lines of therapy (median 4 in both, p=0.5), time from diagnosis to therapy (median 7 vs 13 months, p=0.15), indication for therapy (p=0.12), Charlson CI scores (median 4 in both, p=0.4) and HCI-CI scores (median 4 in both, p=0.7). At a median follow-up of 45 (range 7-57) months, 11 (28%) deaths (alloHSCT=3 and HMA=8) were documented. Causes of death included infections (n=6), cardiac disease (n=2), poor graft function (n=2) and pulmonary GVHD (n=1). Compared to HMA therapy, alloHSCT group demonstrated higher rates of GC discontinuation (52% vs 6%, p<0.01) and CMR (evaluable= 22, 100% vs 50%, p<0.01). In the HMA group, 50% (n=9) discontinued therapy after a median of 4 months due to infectious complications or lack of benefit. In the alloHSCT group, 3 (14%) patients developed grade 2 acute GVHD (1-skin, 2-gut, no grade 3-4 acute GVHD) and 4 (19%) experienced moderate to severe chronic GvHD (2-lung, 2-mucocutaneous). In multivariable analysis (MVA) adjusted for age and HCT-CI, alloHSCT was identified as the strongest favorable predictor for OS (HR 0.18 95% CI 0.04-0.8) with similar results when analysis was restricted to transplant-eligible patients < 75 years of age (HR 0.1, 95% CI 0.03-0.6). In a 6-month post-treatment landmark analysis (n=31 evaluable), patients who underwent alloHSCT (n=17) exhibited numerically superior GC discontiuation rate (29% vs 14%, p=0.049) and subsequent OS compared to HMA (2-years OS: 84% vs. 61%, median not reached vs 25 months, 95% CI: 0.06–1.7). In a post-treatment competing risk [GC dose reduction (death)] analysis alloHSCT was associated with superior 2-, and 3-year rates of 57% (10%), and 76% (10%), compared to HMA 22% (24%), and 31% (42%) [p<0.01 (0.04)]. AlloHSCT was also associated with higher rate of CMR (evaluable= 21, alloHSCT N=16 and HMA N=5, 100% vs 60%, p=0.01). At the last follow up, none of the patients who achieved CMR had re-emergence of the UBA1 clone (despite early mixed chimerism). Conclusions: This study represents the largest comparative analysis of alloHSCT versus HMA therapy in VEXAS syndrome, and confirms superiority of alloHSCT in achieving molecular remission, GC discontinuation/dose reduction, and overall survival. Prospective clinical trial confirmation is warranted.

Introduction: Fludarabine combined with melphalan 140 mg/m2 (FluMel140) is a commonly used reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimen in patients undergoing matched related (MRD) and unrelated donor (MUD) allogeneic stem cell transplant (alloSCT). Ciurea et al Blood 2020, described outcomes of Flu 160 mg/m2 and Mel 100 mg/m2. In this study, we describe our experience of attenuated melphalan dosing 100-120 mg/m2 versus 140 mg/m2 with fludarabine 125 mg/m2 (attenuated FluMel versus regular dose FluMel). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients from November 2016 to April 2023 with AML, ALL or MDS undergoing alloSCT who received fludarabine and melphalan. Patients who received the lower dose of melphalan were considered to be the attenuated FluMel cohort, whereas patients receiving the melphalan 140 mg/m2 were considered to be the control cohort. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests were used to estimate OS. NRM and relapse incidence (RI) was calculated using competing risk analysis. R 4.2.0 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing) was used for statistical analyses. Results: A total of 134 patients [92 (68.7%) males] were evaluated. Thirty-seven (27.6%) patients received attenuated FluMel and 97 (72.4%) patients received regular dose FluMel (controls). Among the patients in the attenuated FluMel cohort, 5 (13.5%) patients also received fludarabine at doses less than 125 mg/m 2 [median 20 mg/m 2 (range 87.5-112.5 mg/m 2]. Median age at transplant was 65 years (range 30 - 76 years). The most common disease was AML [75 (56.0%) patients] ( Table 1). Patients in the attenuated FluMel group had comparable iothalamate clearance compared to control cohort (clearance <65 ml/min/1.73 m2: 18.9% vs. 12.4%, P = 0.52). Patients in the attenuated FluMel group had comparable rates of high/very high DRI to those in control cohort (51.4% vs. 43.3%, P = 0.91). Compared to the control cohort, patients in the attenuated FluMel group were less likely to have a matched related donor (21.6% vs. 45.4%, P = 0.02) and were more likely to receive PTCy for GVHD prophylaxis (37.8% vs. 16.5%, P = 0.02). Among the patients receiving attenuated FluMel, the median melphalan dose administered was 100 mg/m2. The median time to neutrophil engraftment was 19 days (IQR 16-21 days), and median time to platelet engraftment was 18 days (range 12-25 days). Eleven (29.7%) patients developed post-alloSCT mucositis, and 3 (8.1%) patients developed grade 3-4 mucositis. All the patients in the attenuated FluMel group achieved 100% CD33 donor chimerism at day +30 (n=35) and day +100 (n=28) after alloSCT. Similarly, 26 (74.3%, n = 35) patients achieved ≥ 95% CD3 donor chimerism at day +30 after alloSCT and 23 (82.1%, n = 28) patients achieved ≥ 95% CD3 donor chimerism at day +100 after alloSCT. Median follow-up of the entire cohort after alloSCT was 2.3 years (95% CI 2.1-2.5 years). Median follow-up was 1.5 years in the attenuated FluMel cohort and 2.5 years for the control cohort ( P<0.001) . Survival was similar among patients receiving attenuated FluMel vs. control cohort (2-year OS 74.7% vs. 65.0%, P = 0.28). At 2 years post-alloSCT, the attenuated FluMel and control cohort had similar non-relapse mortality (19.9% vs. 24.4%, P=0.58) and relapse (22% vs. 15.2%, P=0.51). The attenuated FluMel was not associated with an increased incidence of relapse (HR 1.36, 95% CI 0.50-3.73, P=0.55) or NRM (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.28-1.95, P = 0.55). GVHD-free relapse free (GRFS) survival was also similar among the attenuated Flu/Mel and control cohort (1-year GRFS rate 41.1% vs. 45.6%, P = 0.8). Among the patients receiving PTCy for GVHD prophylaxis, the 2-year OS in patients receiving attenuated FluMel was higher than the control group, but it was not statistically significant (2-year OS rate: 90% vs. 55%, P=0.37, Figure 1). Compared to the control group, the attenuated FluMel group had similar rates of NRM at 100 days (10% vs. 12.5%), 1 year (NA vs. 25%) and at 2 years after alloSCT (NA vs. 25%, P=0.54). GRFS at 1 year was also similar between the attenuated FluMel and control group (68.6% vs. 43.8%, P = 0.69). Conclusion: The attenuated dosed FluMel conditioning is a safe and effective regimen for elderly patients with acute leukemia and MDS, and is non-inferior to regular dose FluMel. Among patients receiving PTCy for GVHD prophylaxis, the lower dose of melphalan was non-inferior to regular dose FluMel for survival outcomes. Larger studies are needed to confirm our findings.

Introduction Orally administered tacrolimus is widely used in hematopoietic cell transplant patients, but multiple clinical situations may arise rendering oral administration infeasible. The undesirable sequelae of intravenous administration, including toxicity, challenges with administration and cost call for innovative solutions to conserve existing supply and optimize safety and efficacy of medication delivery. We sought to demonstrate feasibility of sublingual tacrolimus use and estimate a sublingual-to-oral (SL:PO) conversion ratio in the hematopoietic cell transplant setting. Methods Ten adults undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant received tacrolimus 0.04 mg/kg/dose twice daily. Initial doses were given via sublingual route and a steady state trough level was collected after 4 consecutive doses. Participants were then switched to oral tacrolimus, the dose adjusted for a goal trough 8-12ng/mL, and another steady state trough was drawn. Total daily dose was divided by trough concentration for each route to determine the dosing ratio of SL:PO. Results Median trough level following sublingual administration was 11.3 ng/mL. Three of these were within goal, 3 were low (4.7–6.4 ng/mL) and 4 were elevated (15.9–18.6 ng/mL). Median SL:PO ratio was 1.02. In 5 participants the SL:PO ratio was <1 (range 0.57–0.94) and in 5 the ratio was ≥1 (range 1.10–1.92). No significant barriers or intolerance to sublingual tacrolimus use were noted. Conclusions Results demonstrate reliable absorption with sublingual tacrolimus use in patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplant. Sublingual administration may allow for avoidance of the undesirable complications of IV tacrolimus, such as increased toxicities, required hospitalization for continuous infusion, risk of dose conversion and dilution errors and increased cost. Trial Registry name: Use of Sublingual Tacrolimus in Adult Blood and Marrow Transplant Patients, NCT04041219 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04041219?term=NCT04041219&draw=2&rank=1

Abstract Background Voriconazole is a common antifungal medication used in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) patients. In solid organ transplantation, multiple studies have associated the use of voriconazole with the development of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) post-transplant, but its association with SCC in allo-HSCT patients is unknown. We sought to determine this association. Methods After IRB approval, Mayo Clinic’s transplant database (2007-2012) was accessed and electronic charts of allo-HSCT patients were retrospectively reviewed. Voriconazole exposure was defined as exposure to voriconazole at any time during treatment of primary disease, prior to or following HSCT. Cumulative voriconazole exposure was defined as total days of voriconazole use following HSCT; days were not required to be consecutive. Two time-dependent voriconazole exposure variables were defined: (1) history of voriconazole exposure (yes/no) over time, and (2) cumulative days on voriconazole over time. Results 404 patients underwent allo-HSCT during this timeframe, and 381 patients (table 1) were included in the final analysis. 23 patients were excluded (8 patients received multiple transplants, 9 patients were treated under pediatric protocols, 6 patients lacked research consent). 312/381 received voriconazole; other antifungal therapy included fluconazole (n=40), posaconazole (n=23), anidulafungin (n=1), and caspofungin (n=5). Median duration of cumulative days of voriconazole was 214 (range 2 -1553). SCC developed in 26/312 exposed to voriconazole and in 1/69 who received alternative antifungals. Cumulative incidence of SCC at 1 year was 3%, 2 years was 8%, 3 years was 13%, 4 years was 14%, and at 5 years was 19% (figure 1). Cumulative days of voriconazole use was found to be a risk factor for the development of SCC, and this relationship persisted in a multivariate model using previously identified risk factors (gender, age at transplant, TBI conditioning regimen, skin cancer pre-HSCT, chronic GVHD) as covariates (HR 1.859 for each 180 days of use, p<0.001). History of prior voriconazole exposure was not associated with an increased risk of SCC after covariate adjustment (HR 2.436, p=0.2369). Conclusion This is the first study to establish cumulative days of voriconazole use as a risk factor for SCC development following allo-HSCT, and may help guide appropriate antifungal prophylaxis in this patient population which is already at an increased risk of developing skin cancers. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Since its emergence as a novel therapy for cutaneous T-cell lymphoma in 1987, extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) has gained popularity in the fields of solid organ and stem cell transplantation (Perotti et al Transfus Apher Sci 2015). Though ECP is thought to be associated with few adverse effects, we have anecdotally noted that some patients treated with ECP develop iron deficiency anemia. Anemia has been reported in ECP literature at an incidence of anywhere from 0% to 24.5%, however, the etiology of the anemia has not been described (Quaglino et al Int J Dermatol 2013, Flowers et al Blood 2008, Jaksch et al J Heart Lung Transpl 2012, Dignan et al Bone Marrow Transpl 2014). We performed a retrospective chart review to further investigate the magnitude of this potential adverse effect. Adult patients receiving ECP for any indication at Mayo Clinic Hospital-Rochester were eligible for inclusion. Patients with pre-existing iron deficiency anemia (IDA) or physiologic and/or pharmacologic reasons for altered iron homeostasis were excluded from analysis. The primary endpoint was to describe the cumulative incidence of IDA at one year of ECP therapy, utilizing Kaplan-Meier methodology. We defined IDA as a hemoglobin < 12 g/dL (females) or < 14 g/dL (males), plus any of the following: MCV < 80 fL, ferritin < 11 mcg/L, iron < 35 mcg/dL (females) or < 50 mcg/dL (males), total iron binding capacity > 400 mcg/dL, or percent saturation <14%. Secondarily, we aimed to describe the proportion of patients who underwent further diagnostic evaluation of IDA and those that were initiated on iron supplementation for IDA. Patients were followed for the primary endpoint until diagnosis of IDA, death, or date of last ECP session; those who did not develop IDA were censored at the date of last follow-up. Between January 1, 2006 and July 1, 2015, a total of 120 adult patients were treated with ECP at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN; 80 patients met inclusion criteria. For the remaining 40 patients, patients were excluded for recent history of transfusions and/or phlebotomy (n=27), incomplete documentation (n=7), IDA at baseline (n=3), or potentially confounding past medical histories (n=3). Treatment of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) was the foremost ECP indication in our cohort, accounting for 63.8% of our patients. Patients also received ECP for treatment of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, treatment of solid organ transplant rejection, and other indications (25%, 7.5%, and 3.8%, respectively). Mean age was 55.6 years, 38.7% were female, and the median duration of ECP therapy was 344 days (IQR 130 - 755 days). At 1 year from the start of ECP therapy, the cumulative incidence of IDA in our cohort was 21.1% (95% CI 9% - 31.6%; Figure 1). At 4 years from the start of ECP therapy, the cumulative incidence of IDA was 49.1% (95% CI 26.4% - 64.8%). Of those that developed an IDA at any time during ECP therapy, 6/20 (30%) underwent invasive diagnostic procedures (colonoscopy and/or upper endoscopy) to evaluate the etiology of the IDA. Iron supplementation was initiated in 18/20 (90%) patients; hemoglobin returned to normal in 8 patients (44.4%) based on available follow-up. These data indicate that a substantial number of patients develop IDA while receiving ECP therapy; a finding which may lead to more prompt recognition and treatment of IDA in patients receiving ECP, and perhaps spare expensive diagnostic procedures. Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier Curve of Cumulative Incidence of IDA During ECP Therapy Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier Curve of Cumulative Incidence of IDA During ECP Therapy Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Introduction: Ibrutinib has shown remarkable safety and efficacy in CLL. Due to CYP3A4 (3A4) metabolism, the concurrent use of 3A4 inhibitors/inducers with ibrutinib should be avoided. Ibrutinib is also associated with bleeding complications, in part due to effects on collagen-mediated platelet aggregation, thus caution is advised with the simultaneous use of anticoagulant (AC) and antiplatelet agents. It is unknown what proportion of CLL patients starting ibrutinib therapy in routine practice are on these medications. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate these aspects in a large cohort of CLL pts treated with ibrutinib outside the context of clinical trials. Methods: Following IRB approval, consecutive CLL pts who initiated ibrutinib off-protocol at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN from November 2013 through July 2015 were evaluated. A medication review for drug-drug interactions was performed by a pharmacist on all pts. Baseline characteristics, concomitant medications, and toxicity were recorded. Time to toxicity and ibrutinib discontinuation were analyzed by Kaplan Meier and cumulative incidence methods accounting for competing risk of death, respectively. Results: Ninety-six CLL pts started ibrutinib. Median age was 66 years and 64 (67%) were male. Ibrutinib indications included: relapsed/refractory CLL (n=84), treatment-naïve CLL with del17p (n=8), and CLL with Richter's transformation (n=4). Approximately 80% had unmutated IGHV and 45% had del17p or del11q on FISH. Upon initial pharmacy consult prior to ibrutinib, the median number of concomitant medications was 9 (range, 1-31). Sixty (63%) pts were taking concurrent medications increasing their risk of ibrutinib toxicity and 4 (4%) pts were on drugs potentially reducing ibrutinib efficacy. At ibrutinib initiation, 16 (17%) pts were on concomitant 3A4 inhibitors. This included 9 (9%) on moderate 3A4 inhibitors (fluconazole, diltiazem, imatinib, cyclosporine) and 7 (7%) on strong 3A4 inhibitors (voriconazole, posaconazole, clarithromycin, itraconazole). In 4 pts, the 3A4 inhibitor was switched to another agent or discontinued to allow standard 420 mg daily dosing. Ibrutinib was initiated at 140 mg daily in 7 pts on moderate 3A4 inhibitors and at 140 mg every 48 hours in 5 pts on strong 3A4 inhibitors. Four (4%) pts were on strong 3A4 inducers (carbamazepine, rifampin, rifabutin) at the initiation of ibrutinib. The 3A4 inducer was discontinued prior to ibrutinib start in 3 pts, while the initial ibrutinib dose was decreased to 140 mg every 48 hours in the remaining patient (also on 2 strong 3A4 inhibitors). During the course of ibrutinib, an additional 8 (8%) pts were started on 3A4 inhibitors/inducers which necessitated dose modifications. Upon commencing ibrutinib, 9 (9%) pts were on concomitant AC (6 warfarin, 3 enoxaparin). Due to significant bleeding risk, warfarin was switched to enoxaparin in 2 pts, to aspirin (ASA) in 1 and warfarin was discontinued in 1. In 2 pts, an alternative AC could not be used so ibrutinib was begun at 140 mg daily and titrated upward. Twenty-nine (30%) pts were on ASA (3 [3%] also on clopidogrel) at ibrutinib initiation. Nineteen (20%) pts were on selective serotonin release inhibitors (SSRIs), and 9 (9%) were on NSAIDs. Thirteen (13%) pts were on fish oil and 24 (25%) were on herbal medications; all of which were discontinued prior to starting ibrutinib. Ten (10%) pts had clinically significant bleeding on ibrutinib including 4 (4%) requiring hospitalization (1 subdural hematoma). Of these 4 pts, 1 was on enoxaparin, 2 were on a SSRI and 1 a NSAID. Six pts had minor bleeding necessitating a dose reduction of ibrutinib to 140-280 mg daily. After 16 months follow-up, the risk of bleeding was 21% (95% CI: 1-37%, Figure). After a median follow-up of 7.6 months, 73 (76%) pts remain on ibrutinib. There was no difference in rates of discontinuation of ibrutinib between patients who were on 3A4 inhibitors/inducers versus those who were not. Conclusion: In the "real-world" setting, 2 out of 3 CLL patients commencing ibrutinib therapy is on a concomitant medication with a potentially clinically significant drug-drug interaction with ibrutinib. These findings have implications for the practicing hematologist who must maintain a high degree of vigilance when prescribing ibrutinib to CLL pts. We highly recommend a formal medication review by a clinical pharmacist in all patients initiating ibrutinib. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Ding: Merck: Research Funding. Kay:Hospira: Research Funding; Tolero Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Shanafelt:Glaxo-Smith_Kline: Research Funding; Pharmactckucs: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding; Polyphenon E Int'l: Research Funding.