González-Vélez, Miguel

Abstract Minimal residual disease (MRD) assays allow response assessment in patients with multiple myeloma (MM), and negativity is associated with improved survival outcomes. The role of highly sensitive next generation sequencing (NGS) MRD in combination with functional imaging remains to be validated. We performed a retrospective analysis on MM patients who underwent frontline autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Patients were evaluated at day 100 post-ASCT with NGS MRD and positron emission tomography (PET-CT). Patients with ≥ 2 MRD measurements were included in a secondary analysis for sequential measurements. 186 patients were included in the analysis. At day 100, 45 (24.2%) patients achieved MRD negativity at a sensitivity threshold of 10− 6. MRD negativity was the most predictive factor for longer time to next treatment (TTNT). Negativity rates did not differ according to MM subtype, R-ISS Stage nor cytogenetic risk. PET-CT and MRD positivity had poor agreement. Patients with sustained MRD negativity had longer TTNT, regardless of baseline risk characteristics. Our results show that the “real world” ability to measure deeper and sustainable responses distinguishes a subpopulation of patients with better outcomes. Achieving MRD negativity was the strongest prognostic marker and could help guide therapy-related decisions and serve as a response marker for clinical trials.

Abstract Introduction: Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have an increased risk for venous thromboembolic events. Thrombotic events contribute to the morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19 infection, and have prompted investigation into strategies for mitigating thrombosis risk in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection. Our team reviewed the charts of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia at a tertiary hospital in metropolitan Phoenix Arizona between 2020-2021, to assess frequency and efficacy of utilizing a VTE prophylaxis algorithm designed to prevent thrombosis in patients infected with COVID-19. Methods: A total of 846 patients were retrospectively evaluated to determine if they were treated with guideline-appropriate anticoagulation while hospitalized with COVID-19, as well as if they developed venous or arterial thrombotic events, or major or minor bleeds. 317 patients were excluded for taking therapeutic anticoagulation prior to admission, or for having a COVID-19 diagnosis >7 days after admission. Appropriate anticoagulation was determined by an institutionally designed COVID-19 thromboprophylaxis algorithm, based on platelet count, d-dimer, bleeding risk, and level of medical care required. Regimen options included: no anticoagulation, prophylactic enoxaparin (40 mg SQ daily) or heparin in the setting of kidney dysfunction, weight-based dosing of enoxaparin (40 mg SQ BID if BMI>40), intermediate intensity enoxaparin without thrombus (30 mg BID if BMI<40, or 40 mg BID if BMI>40), and therapeutic anticoagulation (for example enoxaparin 1 mg/kg BID) with thrombus. Demographics: Demographic data and clinical characteristics were collected for 529 patients. Average age was 59 years old, and the majority were men (58.4%). Most patients were White (58.3%), followed by Hispanic (17.8%), or Native American (15.7%). Fewer patients had a normal BMI (21.3%; BMI 18.5 - 24.9) compared to those who were overweight (31.2%; BMI 25-29.9) or obese (43.1% BMI > 30). Other comorbidities included Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes mellitus (N= 172, 32.5%), hypertension (N = 271, 51.2%), and hyperlipidemia (N = 176, 33.3%). Results: A total of 42 patients (8%), were diagnosed with a venous thrombosis during hospitalization. Patients admitted to the ICU were significantly more likely to have a thrombotic event of any type compared to non-ICU patients (21.6% to 5.7%; p < 0.001). Specifically, critically ill patients had higher incidences of deep vein thrombosis (9.5% to 0.7%), pulmonary emboli (8.1% to 4.8%), and superficial thrombi (2.7% to 0.2%). Only 1.1% of patients (6/529) experienced any bleeding, of which 3 were classified as a major bleed. Discussion: Among patients hospitalized at our institution with COVID-19, the majority were anticoagulated appropriately according to the COVID-19 thromboprophylaxis algorithm. Overall incidence of thrombosis in the study population was 8%. A significantly higher percent of critically ill patients had thrombi, supporting reports of correlation between severity of illness and thrombosis risk. The two regimens of anticoagulation least adhered to were weight-based and intermediate-based dosing, likely reflecting a departure from the hospital's thromboprophylaxis regimens prior to COVID-19 pandemic. Further studies are needed to characterize whether identifiable risk factors correlate with the incidence of thrombosis, and whether treatment with lower than recommended doses of anticoagulation, based on the COVID-19 thromboprophylaxis algorithm, were associated with thrombosis. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Objective In this study, we aimed to determine the cause of death (COD) after the diagnosis of neuroendocrine tumors (NET). Methods We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program to review patients diagnosed with NET during 2000 to 2016. Patients were followed until death, and different CODs were determined. Results Of 94,399 patients with NETs, 40.9% died during the study period. During the first year of diagnosis, most deaths were from NETs (73%), followed by other cancers (11.2%) and cardiac diseases (4.6%). After more than 10 years, NET deaths decreased to 24.3%, whereas other cancers and cardiac disease became more common. Neuroendocrine tumors were responsible for 42.8%, 63.4%, and 81.2% of deaths in grade I, grade II, and grade III, respectively. For grade I localized NET, other cancers (22.2%) were the most common COD followed by NET (19.7%), whereas in grade 2 localized NET, NET was COD in 31.1% of cases followed by other cancers (22.4%). In metastatic disease, NET was the most common COD regardless of grade. Conclusions For low-grade localized NET, deaths were mostly secondary to non-NET causes. In contrast, NET is responsible for most of deaths in metastatic NET regardless of grade.

Introduction: Response assessment at day 100 post Autologous Stem Cell Transplant (ASCT) is associated with long-term relapsed free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in multiple myeloma (MM). The International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) are the preferred criteria to define best response to treatment and define relapse. In the last years, response assessment has incorporated minimal residual disease (MRD) status -associated with improved RFS and OS (Munshi et al); and PET/CT combined with clinical characteristics -also associated with favorable outcomes (Zamagni et al. NCT01910987; MMY3033). The 2016 IMWG MRD criteria, combined imaging (PET/CT) plus next-generation sequencing (NGS) MRD-negative to define complete response (CR). To our knowledge, there is limited data examining the correlation and prognostic value of MRD and FDG-PET/CT at day 100 post ASCT in MM. IN this study, we aimed to determine the prognostic valued of MRD by NGS combined with PET/CT in RFS and OS status after high dose chemotherapy and ASCT in MM. Methods: Patients who underwent ASCT for MM at Mayo Clinic Arizona and had MRD and PET/CT data were included in the study. Clinical data was obtained via retrospective chart review. Cytogenetic risk (CyR) was classified using the mSMART criteria . Disease and ASCT related characteristics were compared by MRD status. MRD was measured by NGS on bone marrow aspirates using the previosly validated clonoSEQ ® Assay (Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation, Seattle, USA) tracking the IgH, IgK and IgL rearrangements at a minimum sensitivity level of 10-5. MRD was defined by residual clonal cells per million nucleated cells as: negative= 0, borderline= 1-5, positive >5. PET/CT scans were performed locally at baseline and at day 100. Comparisons were performed using the chi-square test for categorical variables, Wilcoxon rank-sum test for continuos variables, McNemar's test and Cohens's Kappa for agreement measures. Results: A total of 103 patients had matched MRD and PET/CT assessment around day 100 (+/-9 days) and were included in the analysis. Median age at diagnosis was 62 years (range, 54-66 years), 71 patients (68.9%) were men. CyR was standard risk in 49 (47.6%), high-risk in 39 (37.9%) and unknown in 15 (14.6%) patients. Most 75 (72.8%) patients were MRD positive, 16 (15.5%) were MRD negative, and 12 (11.7%) borderline. The median main MRD clone detected was 64 (range 0-91,874). 70 patients (68%) and 33 (32%) had a negative and positive PET/CT respectively. The median follow-up time was 18 months (range, 13-31 months). At the time of data analysis, 10 patients (9.7%) had relapsed and only 4 (3.9%) had died. There was a high-correlation between MRD status and PET/CT, 31 patients (93.9%) with positive PET/CT were also MRD positive (p=0.0027). There were no statistical differences between PET/CT and CyR (p=0.95). We analyzed the correlation using the FREQ procedure (McNemars's test); there was a strong association between positive PET/CT and positive MRD in 31/33 patients (93.9%, high sensitivity), and low association for negative PET/CT the negative/borderline MRD in 26/70 (37.1%, low specificity; p<0.001). The agreement measure between the PET/CT and MRD using negative/borderline combined had a kappa of 0.23 (95% CI 0.11, 0.35) indicating a fair agreement beyond chance (Figure 1). PET/CT-CT was a statistically significant predictor of worse RFS (HR 3.53, 95%CI: 1.02-12.24, p<0.0337) and OS (HR 11.38, 95%CI: 1.18-109.56, p<0.0078) (Figure 2-3, respectively). MRD was not predictive of neither RFS (HR 1.72, 95%CI: 0.36-8.14, p<0.49) or OS (p<0.16). Conclusions: In conclusion, we demonstrate that the combination of MRD by NGS (clonoSEQ ®) and PET/CT at day 100 are complementary and have a high sensitivity (true positive rate) and fair correlation of agreement but low specificity (true negative rate). PET/CT was the best most sensitive technique to prognosticate RFS and OS. We did not find prognostic correlation of MRD with RFS and OS. However, our findings might be confounded by the low risk of relapse and death, a longer follow-up may demonstrate clinically important differences. Our results add evidence that MRD plus PET/CT improve the definition of CR in MM patients post ASCT. Prospective studies are needed to elucidate the optimal timing and role of combined MRD, PET/CT with other prognostic markers of clinical outcomes. Disclosures Larsen: Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Oncology: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Fonseca:Juno: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Aduro: Consultancy; OncoTracker: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy.

Introduction: Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitors are a class of drugs that inhibit B-cell receptor (BCR) and are increasingly used in B-cell lymphoproliferative neoplasms, including chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), and Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia. Ibrutinib, a first-generation BTK inhibitor has been associated with increased risk of cardiovascular adverse events (AEs), including atrial fibrillation (AF), hypertension (HTN) and bleeding. These unique AEs are thought to be due to off-target effects. Acalabrutinib, a second-generation BTK inhibitor is characterized by less off-target effects, and is thought to be associated with a decreased risk of cardiovascular and other AEs. However, a head to head comparison of ibrutinib and acalabrutinib has not been conducted. Herein, we conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of AEs from prospective clinical trials of ibrutinib and acalabrutinib in B-cell lymphoproliferative disorders to compare their safety profile. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science from database inception through November 15th 2019. Only full-text articles were included. Other inclusion criteria included prospective trials (single arm or randomized) with ibrutinib, ibrutinib plus anti-CD20 antibody, or acalabrutinib as investigational agents. Trials investigating BTK inhibitor plus chemotherapy were excluded. When updated results of prospective trials were available, data were extracted from the most recent publication with the longest follow-up. Reports of 17 AEs of interest, including number of events (any grade and grade 3 or higher) were documented. Rate of discontinuation was investigated. Results: Twenty-seven prospective clinical trials, 12 multicenter single-arm, 9 multicenter randomized, 5 single center single-arm, and 1 single center randomized, were included. Data from 29 study arms including 3207 patients were analyzed in 3 groups - ibrutinib, ibrutinib plus anti-CD20 antibody, and acalabrutinib with augmented Bayesian network meta-analysis and meta-regression implemented in R including packages gemtc and rjags. The most common any grade AEs (>20%) with ibrutinib were diarrhea (46%, 95% CI 36-55%), myalgias/arthralgias (37%, 95%CI 28-46%), fatigue (33%, 95% CI 24-42%), cough (26%, 95% 17-36%), anemia (23%, 95% 15-30%), thrombocytopenia (22%, 95% 15-30%), and pyrexia (21%, 95% 13-30%). The most common any grade AEs with acalabrutinib were headache (37%, 95%CI 26-48%), diarrhea (30%, 95% 20-41%), peripheral edema (21%, 95% 15-28%), fatigue (20%, 95% 11-29%), and myalgias/arthralgias (16%, 95% 8-24%). The most common any grade cardiovascular AEs with ibrutinib were bleeding/bruising (32%, 95% 23-41%), HTN (23%, 95% 15-32%), AF (9%, 95% 3-15%). The most common any grade cardiovascular AEs with acalabrutinib were bleeding/bruising (41%, 95% CI 30-52%), and HTN (6%, 95% 1-11%). The rate of AEs with ibrutinib compared to ibrutinib plus anti-CD20 antibody were similar so the data was pooled. Of all AEs of interest, there was a significant difference in any grade AEs favoring ibrutinib for headache (12% vs. 37%), and infections (35% vs 57%). There was a significant difference in any grade AEs favoring acalabrutinib for myalgias/arthralgias (16% vs. 37%), anemia (6% vs. 23%), thrombocytopenia (5% vs. 22%), and HTN (6% vs. 23%). After adjusting for median follow-up and age, there was no significant difference in rates of bleeding/bruising and any grade infections between ibrutinib and acalabrutinib. However, there was a significant difference favoring acalabrutinib for any grade HTN (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.17-0.40) p<0.0001, grade 3 HTN (OR 0.15, 95% 0.08-0.27) p<0.0001, any grade AF (OR 0.35, 95% 0.18-0.66), p=0.0012, grade 3 AF (OR 0.04, 95% 0.01-0.25) p=0.0009, and grade 3 infections (OR 0.62, 95% 0.46-0.85),p=0.003. Conclusions: Acalabrutinib appears to have an overall improved safety profile compared to ibrutinib. This is particularly true for anemia, thrombocytopenia, and cardiovascular AEs, including AF and HTN. Figure 1 Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

2057 Background: To date, a comprehensive evaluation of core limitations in clinical trials leading to anti-cancer drug approvals by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not been undertaken.The aim of this analysis was to assess the percentage of clinical trials with core limitations, defined as lack of randomization, lack of overall survival data, inappropriate use of crossover, and use of sub-optimal control arms that led to FDA approvals from 2014 to 2019. Methods: This observational analysis included all approved anti-cancer drug indications by the FDA from July 2014 through July 2019. All indications were investigated and each clinical trial evaluated for design, enrollment period, primary endpoints, and presence of core limitations. The standard of care therapy was determined by evaluating the literature and published guidelines 1-year prior to start of clinical trial enrollment. Crossover was examined and evaluated for optimal use. We then calculated the percentage of approvals based on clinical trials with any or all core limitations. Results: A total of 187 anti-cancer approvals were evaluated. The number of anti-cancer drug approvals doubled over time with 68 in first half of study period (June 2014 to December 2016) to 119 in second half of study period (January 2017 to July 2019). Of those, 125 (67%) were based on a clinical trial with at least one core limitation. 64 (34%) approvals were based on a single-arm clinical trial. Of the remaining 123 approvals based on randomized trials, 60 (32%) had a core limitation. Of all randomized trials, 37 (30%) lacked overall survival benefit, 31 (25%) had a sub-optimal control, and 17 (14%) used crossover inappropriately. Conclusions: The majority of cancer drugs are approved based on clinical trials with core limitations. Efforts to minimize core limitations at the time of clinical trial design are essential to ensure that new anti-cancer drugs being marketed truly improve patient outcomes over current standards.

AbstractObjectiveTo determine the presence of racial/ethnic differences in patients with anemia and serum folate deficiency.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of data from patient samples collected from January 2010 to October 2018. Reference laboratory ranges were determined by Mayo Clinic Reference Laboratories. Race and ethnicity were classified according to National Institutes of Health categories.ResultsThe analysis comprised 197 974 samples. Hemoglobin, hematocrit, and SF results were available for 173 337, 173 056, and 129 760 samples, respectively. Of the samples, 46 505 (26.8%) showed anemia, with a higher prevalence among American Indian/Alaskan Natives (AI/AN) 42.9% and African Americans (AA) 47.2% (P < .001). SF deficiency was present in 897 (0.7%), with a higher prevalence among AI/AN (9, [1.4%]) and AA (78, [1.2%]) and a lower prevalence in non‐Hispanic whites (NHW) (758, [0.7%]), Hispanics (40, [0.6%]), and Asians (8, [0.3%]). In multivariable analysis, the prevalence of anemia was higher in all non‐NHW racial/ethnic groups: AA (OR, 3.67, [95%CI: 3.47‐3.88, P < .001]), AI/AN (OR, 3.25, [95%CI: 2.71‐3.90, P < .001]), Asians (OR, 1.62, [95%CI: 1.47‐1.77, P < .001]), and Hispanics (OR, 1.41, [95%CI: 1.32‐1.50, P < .001]). SF deficiency was more common in AA (OR, 1.48, [95%CI: 1.17‐1.88, P.001]) and less common in Asians (OR, 0.35, [95%CI: 0.17‐0.70, P = .003]), compared with NHW.ConclusionsWe showed significant racial/ethnic differences in anemia and SF deficiency. Differences were observed especially among NHW, AA, and Asians. We believe that these differences may be explained by social determinants of health. More research is needed regarding the causes of these differences and their clinical implications at a population level.

Recent clinical trials have addressed the notion of early treatment of smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM). The results evidence improvement in progression-free survival and, in one study, overall survival. Although the treatment of SMM can be considered under specific circumstances, we propose here that careful interpretation of the clinical trials and the patient-specific data are needed before recommending therapy. In particular, many questions remain regarding the best regimen to be used as well as how to adapt based on the underlying disease biology. Hematologists should have a very thorough understanding of models designed to predict the progression from SMM to multiple myeloma, because their correct interpretation is paramount to establish proper care. Although there is no doubt that treatment should be started before overt end-organ damage, we do not believe that the current data support the widespread treatment of all SMM.