Alegre, Adrían

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.

Abstract Introduction Few treatments options are available for patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who have previously been treated with lenalidomide (LEN) and bortezomib (BORT), and their prognosis is poor. Pomalidomide (POM) is a distinct IMiD® immunomodulatory agent with a mechanism of action consisting of direct anti-myeloma, stromal-support inhibitory, and immunomodulatory effects. In randomized phase 2 and 3 trials (MM-002 and MM-003), POM plus low-dose dexamethasone (POM+LoDEX) demonstrated marked efficacy in RRMM pts who had received multiple prior therapies, including LEN and BORT. This side-by-side analysis presents the most recent survival and safety data from these trials. Methods The MM-002 and MM-003 trials enrolled pts with ≥ 2 prior therapies, including LEN and BORT. In MM-002, pts received POM (4 mg/day on days 1–21 of each 28-day cycle) alone or in combination with LoDEX (40 mg/week). In MM-003, pts were randomized 2:1 to receive POM+LoDEX or high-dose DEX alone (HiDEX) (40 mg/days 1–4, 9–12, 17–20 in a 28-day cycle); HiDEX was chosen as the comparator to isolate the effects of POM, as at the time of trial design it was the standard salvage therapy for heavily pretreated pts. Thromboprophylaxis was required for all pts treated with POM and pts at high risk of developing venous thromboembolism. Data cutoff was February 1, 2013 for MM-002 and March 1, 2013 for MM-003. The primary endpoint in both trials was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), response rates, duration of response, and safety. Results In each study, pts had received a median of 5 prior therapies (range 1-17), and all pts had received prior LEN and BORT. In MM-002, 113 pts were treated with POM+LoDEX and 108 were treated with POM alone (60% of POM alone pts subsequently received DEX). A total of 79% of pts were LEN refractory; 62% were refractory to both LEN and BORT; and 35% had received LEN as their last prior therapy. With a median follow-up of 14.2 months (mos), median PFS was 4.2 mos, OS was 16.5 mos, and overall response rate (ORR, defined as at least a partial response) was 33% with POM+LoDEX (Table 1). In MM-003, 302 pts were treated with POM+LoDEX and 153 pts were treated with HiDEX (50% of HiDEX pts subsequently received POM). A total of 94% of pts were LEN refractory; 74% were both LEN and BORT refractory; and 29% had received LEN as their last prior therapy. Survival outcomes were similar in MM-003; with a median follow-up of 10 mos, median PFS was 4.0 mos, OS was 12.7 mos, and ORR was 31% with POM+LoDEX. In both trials, LEN as last prior therapy did not impact response, PFS, or OS vs the overall population. Commonly observed adverse events (AEs) are presented in Table 2 for pts treated with POM+LoDEX. Grade 3 and 4 neutropenia was 28% and 13% in MM-002, and 26% and 22% in MM-003 for the POM+LoDEX arms, respectively. AEs were generally manageable for POM+LoDEX in MM-002 and MM-003 with dose interruptions (67% for both) and reductions (29% and 26%, respectively), and standard supportive care, including growth factor support (46% and 43%), red blood cell transfusions (45% and 49%), platelet transfusions (14% and 20%), and anti-infective agents (89% in both trials). Rates of POM discontinuation due to treatment-related AEs were low (2–4% with POM+LoDEX). In MM-002 and MM-003, 49% and 51% of pts in the POM+LoDEX arms experienced neutropenia of any grade. With appropriate AE management, 9% and 23% had dose interruptions, 4% and 8% had dose reductions, and 1 pt in both MM-002 and MM-003 discontinued due to neutropenia. Febrile neutropenia developed in 3% and 10% of pts; 1% and 4% had dose interruptions, 0% and 2% had dose reductions, and no pts discontinued due to febrile neutropenia in the MM-002 and MM-003 studies, respectively. The majority of infections occurred in the absence of neutropenia of any grade (54% in MM-002 and 66% in MM-003). The rate of POM discontinuation due to infection was low (1% in MM-002 and 2% in MM-003). Conclusion In both the MM-002 and MM-003 trials, POM+LoDEX consistently extended PFS in advanced RRMM pts. PFS, OS, and ORR were not negatively impacted in patients who were refractory to LEN or BORT, even as last prior therapy. Both trials demonstrated that with dose modifications and supportive care POM was well tolerated, leading to few discontinuations. POM+LoDEX should be considered a standard of care for pts with advanced RRMM who have exhausted LEN and BORT. Disclosures: Siegel: Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Richardson:Millennium: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dimopoulos:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Song:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Vij:Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millenium: Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Bahlis:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Baz:Millenium: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Hofmeister:Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Weisel:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Jagannath:Millennium: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria. Lonial:Millennium: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Delforge:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria. Talpaz:Ariad, Sanofi, Novartis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ariad, Novartis, BMS, Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Ariad, BMS, Sanofi, INCYTE: Research Funding. Moreau:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. San Miguel:Jansen, Celgene Corporation, Onyx, Novartis, Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Karlin:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Expert board committee Other, Honoraria. Goldschmidt:Celgene Corporation, Janssen, Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Oriol:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Alegre:Janssen: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Cavo:Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Martinez-Lopez:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Casey:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sternas:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zaki:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Jacques:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Anderson:Onyx: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Gilead: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; sanofi aventis: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Oncopep: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Acetylon: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Equity Ownership.

BACKGROUNDNVP‐AUY922 (AUY; Luminespib) with or without bortezomib showed preclinical activity against multiple myeloma (MM) cells. This phase 1/1B study assessed NVP‐AUY922 alone and with bortezomib in patients with relapsed or refractory MM.METHODSDose escalation was guided by an adaptive Bayesian logistic regression model. In phase 1, patients who progressed after 2 to 4 prior therapies received NVP‐AUY922 intravenously once weekly. In phase 1B, patients who progressed after 2 or fewer prior therapies received NVP‐AUY922 plus bortezomib. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of NVP‐AUY922.RESULTSTwenty‐four patients received NVP‐AUY922 monotherapy at doses of 8 to 70 mg/m2. One dose‐limiting toxicity (DLT) was observed (grade 3 blurred vision at 70 mg/m2); no MTD was reached. The recommended phase 2 dose was 70 mg/m2. The most frequent drug‐related adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea, nausea, and ocular toxicities. Grade 3/4 AEs were uncommon (<10%). Eight patients discontinued treatment because of AEs; 5 had ocular toxicities (≥45 mg/m2). The best response was stable disease in 66.7% of the patients. There were no partial or complete responses. Five patients received NVP‐AUY922 (which was started at 50 mg/m2) plus bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2). Three of these patients experienced DLT. No further dose escalation was performed; the MTD for NVP‐AUY922 plus bortezomib was not established.CONCLUSIONSThis study showed disease stabilization with NVP‐AUY922 in patients with relapsed or refractory MM. The MTD for NVP‐AUY922 was not reached, but reversible ocular toxicity has been reported at high dose levels. Bortezomib at the standard recommended dose plus NVP‐AUY922 was not tolerated. Cancer 2015;121:2185–2192. © 2015 American Cancer Society.