Zamagni, Elena

Solitary plasmacytomas (SPs) are rare localized tumors of clonal plasma cells, either in the bone (solitary bone plasmacytoma) or in soft tissue/extraosseous (extramedullary) with either no or with minimal bone marrow (BM) infiltration (<10% clonal plasma cells by immunohistochemistry) and no evidence of systemic involvement or myeloma defining events. Approximately 50% of SPs will progress to symptomatic myeloma within 5 years after initial definitive local radiotherapy. Increased availability of improved diagnostic and monitoring tools has increased the sensitivity of detection of additional lesions and marrow involvement and has implications for the follow-up strategy after treatment. Thus, the definitions and requirements for the diagnosis and follow-up of SPs are evolving. The diagnosis of SP requires the careful exclusion of multiple myeloma (MM) that would require systemic therapy, by using all the available methods to detect systemic disease (advanced imaging, sensitive BM assessment methods, blood and urine tests). Local radiotherapy remains the mainstay of therapy, and despite the availability of innovative drugs for MM, the clinical benefit of systemic therapy currently remains poorly defined. The International Myeloma Working Group provides here updated recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and response assessment of patients with SPs, incorporating recent data and advances in diagnostic tools.

7533 Background: Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) shows benefit for patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). A recently recognized uncommon adverse reaction, IEC-EC is characterized by severe/persistent diarrhea typically 1–3 months post CAR-T cell infusion. Here we summarize incidence and features of IEC-EC in clinical trials of cilta-cel for RRMM. Methods: 483 pts across RRMM studies (CARTITUDE-1, -2, -4, and CARTIFAN-1) were evaluated for evidence of IEC-EC. The clinical picture and nomenclature for IEC-EC were described in the real-world setting after infusion of most pts. As such, retrospective analysis was performed to identify cases consistent with IEC-EC, defined as prolonged (≥3 weeks) and severe (≥grade 3) diarrhea after cilta-cel infusion, without clear infectious etiology. Correlative biomarker analyses included peripheral CAR-T cell expansion/persistence, immune cell composition, and cytokines/inflammatory markers. Centralized pathomorphological review and immunohistochemical analysis of available biopsies was conducted. Results: Across RRMM studies, 6/483 (1.2%) pts demonstrated the clinical picture of IEC-EC, presenting 12–214 days after receiving cilta-cel (median onset 67 days post infusion). Best response was CR/sCR for all subjects. Pts received therapies including steroids (4/6). Four pts experienced symptom resolution within 123–227 days; 2 had persistent symptoms until death (causes: multiorgan failure and COVID19). Pts with IEC-EC had lower levels of B cells and higher levels of CAR+ T cells and inflammatory cytokines (eg, IL-6) at onset compared to a GI symptom-free control group at comparable time; while all cilta-cel–treated pts experienced B cell depletion, pts with IEC-EC had more prolonged deficiency. Histological analyses of GI biopsies from 5 pts with IEC-EC revealed plasma cells, normally present in the GI tract, were absent. CAR-T cells were detected and localized to the lamina propria and were not observed juxtaposed with epithelia, making it unlikely direct damage to epithelia was caused by CAR-T cells. Histologic damage was greater in the small intestine (predominantly duodenum) than the colon. Conclusions: Retrospective analysis of cilta-cel trials identified a low IEC-EC incidence (1.2%). Findings support a reactive mechanism involving plasma cell depletion and immune dysregulation rather than direct CAR-T cell cytotoxicity and highlight the importance of upper endoscopy to identify injury patterns in the small intestine that may be less pronounced in the colon. Although the pathophysiology is not fully defined, increased awareness and earlier diagnosis may improve understanding of management and enhance likelihood of IEC-EC reversibility.

ABSTRACT Despite advances in therapy, extramedullary disease (EMD) remains an aggressive form of multiple myeloma associated with poor outcomes. Patients with true EMD, in which plasmacytomas have become completely independent of bone, have a particularly poor prognosis. The pathogenesis of EMD is driven by complex mechanisms involving loss of adhesion molecules, heterogeneous genetic and epigenetic changes, and a solid tumor‐like architecture within the microenvironment. Although the introduction of advanced imaging techniques and immunotherapy has led to improved detection and more promising outcomes and regimens, respectively, more prospective studies dedicated to true EMD are needed.

Introduction Genomic alterations are common in multiple myeloma precursor stages, monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM). However, commonly used stratification systems do not include somatic alterations that play a role in the disease. To address this clinical need, we generated a comprehensive genomic map of MM and precursors by harmonizing and analyzing mostly WGS data from 1,030 patients. We used these data to define a simple MM-like score, that is able to discriminate which premalignant patients are at risk to progress. Methods We collected, enriched, and performed WGS of tumor plasma cells and matched normals from 138 participants with MGUS or SMM, including those in low, intermediate, and high-risk groups. We combined our precursor dataset with genomic profiles from MM (n=20) and external sources of 872 individuals with MGUS (n=18), SMM (n=62), and MM (n=792) for a cohort of 1,030 individuals with MM or a precursor condition. In 16 patients, we could perform WGS serially from the bone marrow or circulating tumor cells (n=39) and reassess the presence of mutations. Results To develop a simple score that reflects the similarity of precursor genomes to full-blown multiple myeloma disease, we searched among the 107 common driver events (occurring in &gt;1% of patients) and initiating translocations for ones that are differently altered in precursor conditions versus MM. We found 26 differentially altered events: only MAF and MAFB translocations were enriched in MGUS/SMM whereas 24 events were enriched in MM, including known drivers MYC, KRAS, FAM46C, del(1p) and gain(1q). We then defined a simple “MM-like” score for each tumor as the number of MM-enriched drivers minus the number of MGUS-enriched drivers. As expected, the MM-like score in our cohort increased throughout MM development (MM-like score median of 1 in MGUS, 2 in SMM, and 3 in MM). Even among SMM patients, we found a gradual increase of the MM-like score from low- (median=1), to intermediate (median=2), to high-risk (median=3) groups that match the overall medians in MGUS, SMM and MM (p=2e-5). We tested whether the MM-like score can be used to estimate risk of progression. Among untreated SMM patients characterized with WGS, an MM-like score greater than 2 was associated with a higher likelihood of progression (HR=5.3, P=0.03). Using an independent dataset of 87 patients with SMM, we were able to validate that a MM-like score greater than 2 was indeed associated with a higher risk of progression (HR=3.3, P=5x10-5). 11 patients who did not progress and for whom we performed longitudinal WGS, has stable MM-like scores over time, while three patients clinically progressed and their MM-like score increased at the time of progression (due to newly detected mutations in KRAS and NRAS). For the two remaining patients, their MM-like score increased, and we observed growth of the subclone that acquired the additional MM-like driver. In the first patient with MGUS/low-risk SMM, a novel hyperdiploid clone was detected in addition to a TP53 bi-allelic hit and t(11;14) translocation and was shown to increase in clonal fraction with tumor burden (light chains +104% within three years). In the second non-progressor with an increasing MM-like score, a novel del(1p) was detected, and other subclones in the phylogenetic tree either shrank or were stable over three years. Finally, because the MM-like score can place tumors on a gradual axis of evolution towards a more genomically-mature tumor, we tested whether the MM-like score was also predictive of survival in patients treated with a newly diagnosed MM. To do so, we calculated the MM-like score in patients from the publicly available CoMMpass database. We found that an increased score significantly correlated with shorter progression-free survival (median PFS1: 3 years in high score, versus 5 years in low/intermediate score; p=1e-3) and overall survival (median OS: 4.5 years in high score, versus not reached in low/intermediate score; p=1e-5). Conclusion Overall, we demonstrate that it is possible to stratify precursor stages of MM by discovering drivers, detecting those that are associated with the stage of the disease, and defining a genomically-based score that can be used to assess risk of progression and is easy to implement in the clinic.

AbstractThe development of novel agents has transformed the treatment paradigm for multiple myeloma, with minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity now achievable across the entire disease spectrum. Bone marrow–based technologies to assess MRD, including approaches using next-generation flow and next-generation sequencing, have provided real-time clinical tools for the sensitive detection and monitoring of MRD in patients with multiple myeloma. Complementary liquid biopsy–based assays are now quickly progressing with some, such as mass spectrometry methods, being very close to clinical use, while others utilizing nucleic acid–based technologies are still developing and will prove important to further our understanding of the biology of MRD. On the regulatory front, multiple retrospective individual patient and clinical trial level meta-analyses have already shown and will continue to assess the potential of MRD as a surrogate for patient outcome. Given all this progress, it is not surprising that a number of clinicians are now considering using MRD to inform real-world clinical care of patients across the spectrum from smoldering myeloma to relapsed refractory multiple myeloma, with each disease setting presenting key challenges and questions that will need to be addressed through clinical trials. The pace of advances in targeted and immune therapies in multiple myeloma is unprecedented, and novel MRD-driven biomarker strategies are essential to accelerate innovative clinical trials leading to regulatory approval of novel treatments and continued improvement in patient outcomes.

e21006 Background: Induction with novel biological agents has significantly improved progression free survival (PFS) of MM pts. However, role and timing of ASCT is unclear and there remains a need for a practical means to predict post-ASCT outcome. Our goal was to determine the prognostic value of FDG PET/CT (PET) after induction therapy (IT) in comparison with other prognostic factors and International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) response criteria. Methods: Prospective, multicenter study of 113 newly diagnosed MM pts undergoing IT+ASCT. IT was not controlled and consisted of 2 or 3 novel agent combinations. The tested variables to predict PFS are shown in table. Two PET scoring systems were used: Score1, positive>marrow uptake; Score2, positive>liver uptake. ROC analysis determined the SUV cut-off. Results: With a median follow-up of 29.5 mo 56 (49.6%) pts relapsed (median PFS: 24.3 mo). Results are displayed in table. Post-IT, when a "+" PET (Score2) was associated with less than a VGPR response, relapses occurred in 83% of pts vs. in only 30% when PET was "-" and pts were in CR or VGPR. Multivariate analysis revealed only ISS to be an independent predictor of PFS (p=0.014). Conclusions: Post-IT a "-" PET associated with CR+VGPR suggests a durable response. Qualitative PET evaluation using a more liberal threshold (liver) to define positivity can be used to accurately assess response in MM. These data failed to prove the post-IT IMWG and PET response to be independent prognosticators while ISS was a superior predictor. This may be attributed to inadequate sample size, nonuniform pre- and post-ASCT treatments, varying follow-up times. Further analyses with stratifying various prognostic indicators and therapy schemes in a larger population are underway to determine a definitive role for PET as a predictor of post-ASCT outcome. [Table: see text]

Abstract Treatment of myeloma has benefited from the introduction of more effective and better tolerated agents, improvements in supportive care, better understanding of disease biology, revision of diagnostic criteria, and new sensitive and specific tools for disease prognostication and management. Assessment of minimal residual disease (MRD) in response to therapy is one of these tools, as longer progression-free survival (PFS) is seen consistently among patients who have achieved MRD negativity. Current therapies lead to unprecedented frequency and depth of response, and next-generation flow and sequencing methods to measure MRD in bone marrow are in use and being developed with sensitivities in the range of 10−5 to 10−6 cells. These technologies may be combined with functional imaging to detect MRD outside of bone marrow. Moreover, immune profiling methods are being developed to better understand the immune environment in myeloma and response to immunomodulatory agents while methods for molecular profiling of myeloma cells and circulating DNA in blood are also emerging. With the continued development and standardization of these methodologies, MRD has high potential for use in gaining new drug approvals in myeloma. The FDA has outlined two pathways by which MRD could be qualified as a surrogate endpoint for clinical studies directed at obtaining accelerated approval for new myeloma drugs. Most importantly, better understanding of MRD should also contribute to better treatment monitoring. Potentially, MRD status could be used as a prognostic factor for making treatment decisions and for informing timing of therapeutic interventions. Clin Cancer Res; 23(15); 3980–93. ©2017 AACR.