Geyer, Susan

Abstract Combination therapy incorporating programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) blockade results in unprecedented response rates in both frontline and relapsed/refractory (R/R) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). Previous retrospective studies have suggested benefit for PD-1 blockade before autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) but included few patients receiving PD-1 blockade with cytotoxic chemotherapy. To explore the impact of anti–PD-1 based salvage on outcomes for patients with R/R cHL, we retrospectively reviewed 1280 patients with R/R cHL who underwent ASCT from 2010 to 2022 at 6 transplant centers, none of whom received PD-1 blockade as part of frontline therapy. Overall, 25% received a PD-1 inhibitor at any point before ASCT (10% in conjunction with chemotherapy), 28% received salvage brentuximab vedotin (BV) without PD-1 blockade, and the rest received salvage chemotherapy alone. Patients who received PD-1 inhibitors at any point before ASCT had a significantly higher 2-year progression-free survival than those who received BV without PD-1 inhibitors or patients receiving chemotherapy alone (88.2%, 70.2%, and 67.4%, respectively; P< .0001). When restricted to patients in complete response before ASCT, the benefit of PD-1 blockade remained significant. PD-1 blockade before ASCT is independently associated with superior post-ASCT outcomes and patients proceeding to ASCT should be treated with PD-1–based salvage.

Abstract Background: Treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) has advanced dramatically over the past decade with median overall survival (OS) for newly diagnosed MM patients (pts) now exceeding 10 years. However, outcomes in pts with high-risk disease remain poor. While most pts with high-risk disease are identified through baseline cytogenetic risk stratification, presence of extramedullary disease, or R-ISS stage, there is also a population of pts who may or may not have these traditional high-risk factors who relapse earlier than expected and have similarly poor outcomes. These pts are often delineated as “functional high-risk,” but a standardized definition of this population in the era of modern myeloma therapy is lacking. Methods: Using the ASH Research Collaborative (ASH RC) Data Hub, we retrospectively searched 7,249 pts across 10 participating institutions for those with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) treated with a triplet or quadruplet induction regimen (with or without autologous stem cell transplant) who had response data available. We evaluated duration of response from first line therapy (PD1) on post-PD1 clinical outcomes such as: time to next treatment (TTNT), time to subsequent progression and/or death (PFS2), and OS. We also analyzed characteristics of those who did vs. did not progress at prespecified time points of interest (12-, 18-, 24-, and 36-months) from the start of induction. We utilized recursive partitioning analyses to iteratively explore all possible cutpoints and identify which one(s) provide the greatest differentiation in the risk of subsequent progression and/or death. Results: We identified 1,305 pts who met the eligibility criteria. Of these, 264 had PD1 data including 201 who had response follow-up (f/u) after PD1. Median f/u after PD1 in this population was 3.2 years, and median PFS2 f/u after PD1 (n=201) was 4.4 years. Months to PD1 was significantly associated with PFS2 (p=0.038). All prespecified time points examined showed inferior PFS2 compared to those with PD1 >36 mos, although each subgroup was not statistically significant, likely due to limited numbers in each group: PD1 <12 mos HR=1.44 (n=43; 95% CI: 0.90 – 2.30; p=0.126), PD1 12-24 mos HR=1.65 (n=30; 95% CI: 0.95 – 2.85; p=0.073), and PD1 24-36 mos HR=1.58 (n=52; 95% CI: 0.98 – 2.53; p=0.059). Similarly, timing of PD1 was also associated with OS post-PD1; pts with PD1 <12 mos had significantly lower OS compared to those with PD1 >36 mos (HR=2.35, 95% CI: 1.27 – 4.32; p=0.006). Our recursive partitioning analysis identified 30-months at the cutoff that produced the greatest differential in outcomes between those above vs. below the landmark. Approximately 23% of the pts analyzed had PD1 within 30 mos, and these pts had significantly lower OS compared to those with PD1 ≥30 mos (HR=1.99, 95% CI: 1.21 – 3.27; p=0.006). Similarly, pts who progressed within 30 mos of starting 1L therapy (n=98) had significantly shorter PFS2 (median=12.5 mos vs 22.8 mos; HR=1.55, 95% CI: 1.09 – 2.20; p=0.014) than those who did not (n=103). Those pts who progressed within 30 mos were more likely to have a higher R-ISS stage at diagnosis (p=0.048), but were not more likely to have high-risk cytogenetics (p=0.66) compared to pts with PD1 ≥30 mos. Interestingly, receiving SCT as part of 1L therapy was not significantly associated with improved PFS2 (HR=0.89, 95% CI: 0.62 – 1.29; 0.54) but was significantly associated with improved OS (HR=0.53, 95% CI: 0.31 – 0.90; 0.018) by univariate analysis. Conclusion: Our study is the first to use a large, multicenter, cohort to evaluate the definition of functional high-risk MM in the era of novel induction therapies. Our data suggest that pts who progress within 30 mos of induction on triplet or quadruplet regimens (irrespective of whether they underwent stem cell transplant) have poorer outcomes than those who progress at 30 mos or later, and that progression prior to 30 mos represents functional high-risk disease. These pts represent a clear unmet medical need, and additional focus should be taken to identify them early with the goal of designing trials to optimize their subsequent therapies.

Abstract BACKGROUND Cognitive symptoms are common among cancer patients treated with intracranial radiation but inadequately assessed and suboptimally treated, owing in part to the time-consuming and resource-intensive nature of formal neuropsychological testing. Through remote administration of brief cognitive assessments and symptom-directed interventions, decentralization uniquely addresses this problem. METHODS In this single-site phase 2 fully decentralized clinical trial (NCT06377696), patients treated with radiation therapy (RT) for primary or metastatic brain tumors undergo cognitive evaluations with the application, Mayo Test Drive, and the Short Test of Mental Status (STMS; via telehealth or in person), at baseline and every three months for one year. Participants are provided wearable devices for health promotion. Half the participants are randomized to metformin to evaluate this agent’s efficacy in treating RT-related cognitive symptoms. Target enrollment is 100 participants. RESULTS Seventy-three patients (median age 45.5, 46% female) with brain tumors who received RT were enrolled May 2024 to May 2025. In this unplanned interim analysis, we evaluated the impact of decentralization on study participation. Thirty-six participants (49%) reported a primary residence greater than 150 miles from our institution. Seven patients were consented remotely, the remainder in person. Of 380 study-related visits (201 STMS, 179 treatment toxicity checks) 216 (57%) were completed by telehealth. Thirty-two of 336 (9.5%) study-related lab draws were completed at locations outside our institution. Wearable device data was continuously collected, with median 3022 steps tracked per patient per day on study. 190/250 (76%) quality-of-life surveys sent digitally were completed to date. CONCLUSION Decentralization implemented as part of this clinical trial enabled participation despite significant distance from our institution and facilitated study-related assessments through digital solutions, eliminating the need for travel. Our findings demonstrate the feasibility of conducting a fully decentralized supportive care trial in neuro-oncology, which can increase participation and accelerate evaluation of novel therapeutics.

Abstract BACKGROUND Access to in-person evaluations is challenging for patients with glioma due to disease-related disability and distance from specialized neuro-oncology centers. Telehealth is an alternative to in-person evaluations, but acceptability of and therapy compliance with this model has not been prospectively evaluated. METHODS In this single-arm non-randomized pragmatic clinical trial, we compared patient satisfaction with telehealth and in-person assessments among patients with glioma undergoing chemotherapy with temozolomide. Participants acted as their own controls, alternating between telehealth and in-person visits. Patient satisfaction with care delivered was evaluated by Press-Ganey surveys with Likert response scales (1-5, 1=very poor, 5=very good). A digital pill diary (DPD) was implemented to track chemotherapy compliance. RESULTS We accrued 30 patients (median age 59, 38% female) between October 2024 and May 2025. Half of the patients (n=15) reported a primary residence greater than 150 miles from our institution. Surveys from 25 participants were reviewed, with 17/25 completing one or more surveys following an in-person visit, and 21/25 completing one or more surveys following a telehealth visit. Overall average Press-Ganey scores were similar between the two visit modalities with high scores (telehealth=4.8; in-person=4.7). Median scores for specific modalities were similarly highly rated: likelihood of recommending practice to others (telehealth=5.0; in-person=5.0), concern the care provider showed (telehealth=5.0, in-person=4.7), provider’s discussion of treatment options (telehealth=5.0, in-person=5.0), provider effort to include patients in decision-making (telehealth=5.0, in-person=5.0). DPDs used to monitor treatment compliance indicated adherence to all prescribed doses of temozolomide in 75/79 cycles; the other 4 (of 79) treatment cycles were halted per provider instructions. CONCLUSION This interim assessment demonstrates feasibility of treating patients with similar patient satisfaction of care delivered between telehealth and in-person visits. The DPD was effective in tracking chemotherapy administration. Additional results including visit type preference and acute care utilization data are maturing.

Abstract BACKGROUND Craniopharyngiomas are a rare tumor along the pituitary-hypothalamic axis. Genetic analysis revealed that 95% of papillary craniopharyngiomas (PCP) have BRAF V600E mutations (Brastianos et al. Nature Genetics 2014). We previously reported that BRAF/MEK inhibition was associated with significant anti-tumor activity in newly-diagnosed PCP patients (Brastianos et al. NEJM 2023). We have now evaluated the efficacy of vemurafenib/cobimetinib in a separate cohort of patients with recurrent PCP whose tumors progressed after prior radiation. METHODS In this multicenter, NCI-sponsored cooperative group trial, patients with histologically confirmed BRAF-positive PCP who progressed after radiation were treated with vemurafenib/cobimetinib. The primary endpoint of response rate (RR) based on centrally determined imaging data was to be evaluated in 16 patients, where a partial response was defined as ≥20% decrease in volume. This single arm, Simon two-stage phase 2 trial had 89% power to detect a true RR ≥ 30% (vs. null 5%; α=0.04). In this design, 3 or more observed responses in 16 evaluable patients would be considered evidence of promising activity. RESULTS Of the planned 16 patients, a total of 5 patients enrolled before the study was closed due to slow accrual. Median follow-up was 50 months (95% CI: 32 to not yet reached). Based on volumetric response criteria, all 5 patients had a response to treatment (100%; 95% CI: 47.8% to 100%). To date, 2 patients progressed, one of whom died 22 months after study entry. This cohort met the criteria for efficacy under the original design with >3 responders. No grade 4 or 5 toxicities were observed. CONCLUSIONS Vemurafenib/cobimetinib resulted in an objective response in all patients with previously treated PCP. The study met primary endpoint, similar to that reported for previously untreated PCP. Thus, BRAF/MEK inhibitors could be an effective tool for previously treated PCP and warrants further evaluation. SUPPORT U10CA180821; U10CA180882; Genentech, https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org;ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03224767

PURPOSE Patients with advanced, well-differentiated extrapancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (epNETs) have limited systemic treatment options. Pazopanib, an oral multikinase inhibitor with activity against vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-2 and -3, PDGFR-alpha and-beta, and c-Kit, was tested for efficacy in epNET. PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, phase II study of pazopanib (800 mg once daily) versus placebo in low- to intermediate-grade epNET with radiologic progressive disease (PD) within 12 months of study entry. Previous somatostatin analog (SSA) was required for midgut tumors, and concurrent SSA was allowed. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review. Unblinding and crossover were allowed if PD was confirmed by central review. RESULTS One hundred seventy-one patients (97 pazopanib and 74 placebo) were randomly assigned between September 2013 and October 2015. The majority had a midgut primary site (75%) and previous SSA treatment (93%). About half (49%) of the patients had functional tumors. The median follow-up was 61 months (95% CI, 60 to 63). Median PFS was 11.8 versus 7.6 months in pazopanib versus placebo, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.37 to 0.79]; P < .001); 49 placebo patients crossed over to pazopanib. There was no significant difference in overall survival between the treatment arms. Rates of grade 3 or greater adverse events (regardless of attribution) were higher in pazopanib versus placebo (84% v 47%; P < .001), as were grade 5 death events (8% v 0%, P = .017). CONCLUSION Pazopanib compared with placebo significantly improves PFS in patients with progressive epNET, confirming that the VEGF signaling pathway is a valid target for therapy in epNET. However, after integrating the associated risks relative to the benefits, further development of pazopanib in this clinical context is not planned.

Abstract Background Disruption of the blood–brain barrier (BBB) in high-grade brain tumors is characterized by contrast accumulation on diagnostic imaging. This window of opportunity study correlates contrast imaging features with the tumor distribution of BBB-permeable (levetiracetam) and -impermeable (cefazolin) drugs. Methods Patients with a clinical diagnosis of a high-grade brain tumor underwent MRI for surgical planning. Cefazolin and levetiracetam were administered prior to skin incision, and serial plasma and image-registered tumor samples were collected during the operation. Drug levels were measured by LC-MS/MS, tissue drug levels were corrected for residual blood, and tumor-to-plasma concentration ratios were calculated. Intraoperative microdialysis was performed in a subset of patients to measure the same two drugs. Results Tumor (n = 125) and plasma (n = 261) samples were available for analysis from 42 operative cases. Across all samples, the tumor-to-plasma ratio was significantly lower for cefazolin (marginal mean [MM]: 0.15, 95% CI: 0.11–0.19) as compared to levetiracetam (MM: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.64–0.75; P &lt; .001). When compared between contrast-enhancing and non-enhancing regions, tumor-to-plasma ratios for cefazolin varied by 4.4-fold (0.27, 95% CI: 0.20–0.35 vs. 0.06, 95% CI: 0.04–0.08, respectively; P &lt; .001), and varied for levetiracetam by 1.4-fold (0.88, 95% CI: 0.78–0.97 vs. 0.61, 95% CI: 0.55–0.66, respectively; P &lt; .001). These results were confirmed with the intra-operative microdialysis and a population pharmacokinetic analysis. Conclusions This study demonstrates significant inter- and intra-tumoral heterogeneity in drug delivery for both levetiracetam and cefazolin within high-grade brain tumors that is not necessarily predicted by clinical MR imaging and may reflect tumor-induced changes in both perfusion and BBB integrity.

7522 Background: Movement and neurocognitive treatment emergent adverse events (MNTs), cranial nerve palsies (CNPs) and immune-effector cell enterocolitis (IEC-EC) are late onset toxicities associated with cilta-cel and are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We aimed to identify predisposing risk factors to allow for formulating risk-reduction strategies. Methods: Retrospective study of MM pts who received FDA approved cilta-cel at Mayo Clinic between Feb 2022-Dec 2024. Interrogated factors included demographics, disease and treatment characteristics, and selected lab values at different time points. In odds ratio (OR) analyses, pts were divided by toxicity type (1) No delayed toxicity (2) MNT (3) IEC-EC without MNT (4) isolated CNP. Differences between pts in the MNT, IEC-EC and CNP groups were compared separately in a pairwise manner vs. those with no delayed toxicity. Results: Of 235 pts, 26 (11%) had delayed toxicity [MNT = 8 (3%), IEC-EC = 9 (4%), CNP = 14 (6%)]; 3 pts had both MNT/IEC-EC and 2 had both CNP/IEC-EC. Median onset from CAR-T infusion for MNT, IEC-EC and CNP was 19 (range 8-96), 106 (35-169) and 21 (7-43) days respectively. Of 164 evaluable pts, those who had ICANS had increased odds for any delayed toxicity (OR 4.7; 95% CI 1.6-13.8). Pts who had ICANS (OR 7.7; 1.6-36.9), HLH/MAS (OR 6.2; 1.1-6.7) and Ferritin >400mcg/L at time of lymphodepletion (OR 6.3; 1.5-32) had increased odds for MNTs. Pts who received alkylator-based bridging therapy had increased odds (OR 6.1; 1.1-35) for IEC-EC. Analysis of serial post-CAR infusion lab values showed that peak ALC was the most significant variable with differences between groups shown in table. Median time to peak ALC was 12 days (IQR 11-13). ROC analysis determined peak ALC >3 x 10 9 /L as a meaningful cut point. Pts with peak ALC >3.0 x 10 9 /L had increased odds of developing any delayed toxicity (OR 9.3; 3.5-29.3), MNT and CNP (table). Absolute risk of any delayed toxicity was 33% in pts with peak ALC >3 x 10 9 /L vs 5% without. At this threshold, number needed to treat was 3.6. Conclusions: Real-world data shows that cilta-cel associated delayed toxicity is seen in ~10% of patients, with specific toxicity rates between 4-8%. Factors associated with these toxicities predominantly occur in the post CAR-T infusion period. Given that ALC expansion in the first 2 weeks correlate with CAR-T expansion, peak ALC is potentially predictive of toxicity and 3 x 10 9 /L may be an interventional threshold for primary prophylaxis. Peak ALC by toxicity groups. No ToxN=138 MNTN=8 CNPN=12 IEC-ECN=6 p value Peak ALC (10 9 /L), median (IQR) 1.8 (1.0-4.1) 6.2 (4.8-14.4) 4.3 (3.2-6.7) 3.6 (1.9-5.2) <0.001 1 ALC >3 x 10 9 /L, n (%) 43 (31%) 7 (88%) 10 (83%) 4 (67%) <0.001 2 Odd Ratios vs no Tox 3 , 95% CI 15.5 (2.6-293.7) 11.0 (2.8-73.9) 4.4 (0.8-25.0) 1 Wilcoxon/Kruskal-Wallis Tests, 2 Chi square test, 3 Logistic regression analysis.

4020 Background: In previously treated patients (pts) with advanced extra-pancreatic NET (epNET) or pancreatic NET (pNET), cabozantinib (cabo) demonstrated improved progression-free survival compared to placebo (pbo) in the CABINET trial (NCT03375320). Here we present HRQOL data from CABINET. Methods: Pts with previously treated unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic epNET or pNET were randomized (2:1) in separate cohorts to receive cabo 60 mg daily vs pbo. HRQOL was an exploratory endpoint measured using the EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-GI.NET21, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), and PRO-CTCAE questionnaires. Optional participation was by paper surveys at baseline and every 12 weeks (wks) until disease progression or new anticancer therapy. Mean changes from baseline were compared between treatment arms at wk12 using general linear mixed models. Minimally important within-arm improvements and between-arm differences were defined as 8 points on the C30 Global Health Status (GHS)/QOL Scale. PGIC was dichotomized as improved vs unchanged/worsened and compared using Chi-squared tests. Rates of pt-reported adverse events (AEs) by PRO-CTCAE were baseline-adjusted and compared using Fisher’s exact tests. Results: 172 pts (113 cabo, 59 pbo) with epNET and 81 pts (53 cabo, 28 pbo) with pNET consented for survey participation. Pts completed 524 (82%) of 640 expected surveys across baseline, wk12, and wk24. For epNET, C30 GHS/QOL was significantly improved at wk12 in pts receiving cabo (mean change 9.5, standard error (SE) 2.2, p < 0.001) but not pbo (mean change 0.2, SE 3.1, p = 0.95) resulting in significantly different mean changes from baseline between arms (p = 0.02). For pNET, C30 QHS/QOL was significantly improved at wk12 in pts receiving cabo (mean change 8.0, SE 3.0, p = 0.008) but not pbo (mean change 6.8, SE 4.4, p = 0.12); mean changes from baseline did not statistically differ between arms (p = 0.82). No significant differences in mean changes from baseline at wk12 in C30 Physical, Role, Emotional, Cognitive and Social Function were observed between arms in the epNET or pNET cohorts. In both cohorts at wk12, pts on cabo reported improved overall status as measured by PGIC more often than those on pbo (epNET: 38% vs 19%, p = 0.04; pNET: 57% vs 18%, p = 0.006). Rates of pt-reported AEs were statistically significantly higher in cabo for diarrhea (68% vs 53%), hand-foot syndrome (57% vs 26%), mouth or throat sores (47% vs 27%), and dysgeusia (67% vs 37%) [all p < 0.05]. GI.NET21 data will be presented. Conclusions: Although cabo is associated with pt-reported AEs consistent with its known safety profile, global HRQOL was maintained. A higher proportion of patients receiving cabo reported improved overall status. Results support cabo as a treatment option for pts with previously treated advanced NET that preserves patient HRQOL. Clinical trial information: NCT03375320 .

666 Background: In the phase 3 CABINET trial (NCT03375320), cabozantinib (CABO) significantly prolonged median progression-free survival (PFS) compared to placebo (PB) in patients with advanced, previously treated, progressive extrapancreatic NET (epNET) [HR 0.38 (95% CI, 0.25-0.59, P<0.0001)] and pancreatic NET (pNET) [HR 0.23 (95% CI, 0.12-0.42, P<0.0001)] (Chan et al., NEJM, 2024). In this analysis, we focus on outcomes of patients with epNET arising in the GI tract. Methods: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic epNET or pNET were randomized 2:1 in separate cohorts to receive CABO 60 mg daily vs PB. The epNET cohort included patients with tumors arising in the GI tract (not including pancreas), lung, unknown primary, and other rare primary sites. In this subgroup analysis of the epNET cohort, patients with GI NET were included. Eligibility included progression by RECIST within 12 months (mo) prior to registration, ≥ 1 prior systemic therapy. Primary endpoint: PFS by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints: objective response rate, overall survival, safety. Results: 116 of the 203 patients in the epNET cohort had GI NET (CABO, n=70; PB, n=46). Median age was 66 yrs; females: 46%; G1/G2/G3/unknown grade: 35%/57%/6%/2%. ECOG performance status: 0/1-2: 43%/57%. White race: 86%. The most common primary tumor locations were ileum/cecum (54%), small intestine with location not specified (20%); non-cecum colon or rectum (11%), stomach (4%); duodenum (3%); jejunum and nonspecified midgut site (3% each). Prior systemic therapies included somatostatin analogs (SSA) (100%), everolimus (59%); Lu-177 dotatate (77%); temozolomide +/- capecitabine (16%). In patients with GI NET, CABO was associated with improved PFS by BICR compared to PB (stratified HR, 0.50; 95% CI: 0.28-0.88, 1-sided stratified log-rank P=0.007). Median PFS with cabozantinib was 8.5 mo (95% CI, 6.0-16.7) compared to 5.6 mo (95% CI, 3.9-11.0) with PB. CABO demonstrated potential benefit in patients with midgut GI NET and across clinical factors including grade, functional status related to hormone secretion, concurrent SSA use, and prior therapy with Lu-177 dotatate or everolimus. The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events attributed to therapy with CABO included hypertension (19%), diarrhea (13%), fatigue (10%). Conclusions: CABO is associated with improvement in PFS compared to PB in patients with advanced GI NET. Potential benefit was observed across clinical factors including grade, functional status, concurrent SSA, and prior treatment. The safety profile for CABO in patients with GI NET is consistent with that previously reported. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; U10CA180820 (ECOG-ACRIN), U10CA180868 (NRG Oncology), U10CA180888 (SWOG); Exelixis; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . Clinical trial information: NCT03375320 .