Citations

Mayo Clinic

Clear

1479 citation(s) found for "Ma, Khan".

Carfilzomib Based Regimens for Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Review
Khan, Maimoona , Waheed, Asma, Jannat, Rida Ul, Farooqui, Arafat Ali , Farooqi, Muhammad Saad , Khan, Ali Younas , Shafqat, Madeeha, Ahmad, Muhaddis Ejaz, Yousaf, Muhammad Abdullah , Syed, Tariq Iqtidar Sadiq, Abdullah, Syed Maaz , Kotapati, Sravanthi, Anwer, Faiz , Anwer, Faiz , Riaz, Irbaz Bin

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 5588-5588

10.1182/blood-2019-128833 Get It

Background: Carfilzomib (Car), a second-generation proteasome inhibitor (PI), has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as therapy for relapsed and /or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), either as a single agent or in combination with other agents. It has proven to be superior in many ways compared to the the first generation PI, bortezomib, both in terms of superior efficacy and neuropathy related adverse effect profile. Carfilzomib has lower rate of peripheral neuropathy. In this review, we gathered data from trials which studied Carfilzomib for newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). Carfilzomib based two and three drug combination as induction regimens for the management of NDMM is an emerging approach. Through this systematic review, we explore efficacy, adverse effect profile of Car based regimens for NDMM. Methods: Per PRISMA guidelines, a thorough database search was conducted on 06/24/2019 using the following search engines; PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Clinicaltrials.gov. We included all published trials that used carfilzomib as an induction agent in NDMM patients and had at least response rates after induction. Results: The total number of articles identified with initial search were 1131, out of which 19 articles met our selection / eligibility criteria (n=2286). The overall response rates (ORR) after induction therapy with carfilzomib based regimens was very impressive (range: 84.3% - 100%). Two drug combination using carfilzomib and dexamethasone (n=72) had an ORR of 90% and a greater than very good partial response rate (>VGPR) of 84%. Three drug combinations used for induction therapy included carfilzomib/dexamethasone with immunomodulators (n=391) and alkylating agents (n=308). The combination of carfilzomib/dexamethasone with lenalidomide (n=189, ORR: 97% - 98%, >VGPR: 69% - 98%) and thalidomide (n=202, ORR: 90% - 94%, >VGPR: 66% - 68%) showed the best response. Alkylating agents used in combination with carfilzomib were melphalan (n=98, ORR: 90% - 93%, >VGPR: 58% - 70%), cyclophosphamide (n=192, ORR: 87% - 95%, >VGPR: 39% - 71%) and bendamustine (n=18, ORR; 100%, >VGPR: 89%). Four drug combinations with carfilzomib used were daratumumab/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (n=22, ORR: 100%, >VGPR: 90%, 12m PFS: 95%) and cyclophosphamide / thalidomide / dexamethasone (n=64, ORR; 91%, >VGPR: 69%, 24m PFS: 76%). One trial directly compared carfilzomib/melphalan/dexamethasone (n=478, ORR: 84%, >VGPR: 61%, PFS: 22.3m) with bortezomib/melphalan/dexamethasone (n=477, ORR: 79%, >VGPR: 49%, PFS: 22.1m). Another trial compared the combination of carfilzomib / dexamethasone with lenalidomide (n=315) or cyclophosphamide (n=159) that showed similar ORR (97% vs 91%) though >VGPR rate was better with lenalidomide (75% vs 60%). Efficacy data including progression free survival (PFS) for carfilzomib based regimens is reported in table 1. Most common >grade 3 hematological adverse effects reported were anemia (2% - 35%), lymphopenia (5% - 76%), thrombocytopenia (4% - 28%) and neutropenia (1% - 38%). Most Common >grade 3 non-hematological adverse events included cardiac events (5% - 10%), respiratory disorders (8% - 16%), infections (2% - 9%), hypertension (6% - 17%), renal events (9% - 10%) and hyperglycemia (6% - 23%). (Table 1) Conclusion: The overall efficacy and favorable adverse effect profile of Carfilzomib-based induction regimens seem very promising for the treatment of NDMM. Car is now approved for weekly dosing which is convenient. Due to cardiovascular toxicity seen in upto 10% cases, Car should be used very judiciously in patients with cardiovascular risk factors and heart failure. Several ongoing phase 3 clinical trials are studying Carfilzomib in various combinations will help to establish foundation for future standard therapy as well as next phase of drug development through clinical trials. Disclosures Anwer: In-Cyte: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.
Primary Analysis of Anti-CD19 Tafasitamab (MOR208) Treatment in Combination with Idelalisib or Venetoclax in R/R CLL Patients Who Failed Prior BTK Inhibitor Therapy (COSMOS Trial)
Staber, Philipp B. , Brugger, Wolfram, Chanan‐Khan, Asher , Greil, Richard , Hellmann, Andrzej, Dirnberger‐Hertweck, Maren, Montillo, Marco , Motta, Marina , Munir, Talha, Neumeister, Peter , Niederweiser, Dietger, Schetelig, Johannes , Vučinić, Vladan , Weirather, Johannes, Woyach, Jennifer A. , Wendtner, Clemens‐Martin , Staber, Philipp B , Jurczak, Wojciech , Kelemen, P. B. , Middeke, Jan Moritz , Parikh, Sameer A. , Stilgenbauer, Stephan

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 1754-1754

10.1182/blood-2019-128388 Get It

Introduction: Patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory (R/R) chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who failed treatment with the Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi) ibrutinib have a poor outcome and are difficult to treat. This ongoing, two-cohort, Phase II trial evaluates the safety and preliminary efficacy of tafasitamab (MOR208), an Fc-enhanced anti-CD19 monoclonal antibody in combination with idelalisib (IDE) (Cohort A) or venetoclax (VEN) (Cohort B) in R/R CLL pts previously treated with a BTKi. Preliminary results were published at EHA 2018 for Cohort A and at ASH 2018 for Cohort B. Here, we report the results of the primary analysis for both cohorts. Methods and Patients: Pts who either progressed or were intolerant to BTKi were enrolled at 12 sites in six countries in Europe and the US from Nov 2016 to Apr 2018. The primary endpoint is the incidence and severity of adverse events (AEs); secondary endpoints include overall response rate (ORR) as per investigator assessment according to International Workshop on CLL (IWCLL) 2008 guidelines. Complete response (CR) was confirmed by computed tomography assessment and by bone marrow (BM) biopsy. The exploratory endpoint minimal residual disease (MRD) was assessed centrally by quantitative allele-specific oligonucleotide-polymerase chain reaction (ASO-PCR) in peripheral blood (PB) and BM. Each treatment cycle (C) lasts 28 days (D). Dose and administration: tafasitamab intravenous infusion, 12 mg/kg weekly in C1-C3, every other week in C4-C6 and monthly from C7D1; IDE orally, 150 mg twice daily; VEN orally, weekly ramp up starting on C1D8 at 20 mg to full daily dose of 400 mg. Patients: mean time since first CLL diagnosis was 135 months (mos) for pts in Cohort A and 105 mos in Cohort B. Median number of prior therapy lines was five (2-9) and three (1-5), respectively. All pts had received ibrutinib; one pt had subsequent acalabrutinib treatment as last prior therapy line. Mutations of BTK and PLCγ2 were assessed in nine pts in Cohort A and 13 pts in Cohort B. BTK/PLCγ2 mutations were centrally detected in 4/3 pts in Cohort A and in 2/3 pts in Cohort B, respectively. Complex karyotype was observed in six (54.5%) pts in Cohort A and 12 (92.3%) pts in Cohort B. Results with a data cut-off date of 9 Nov 2018 are presented. Results: Cohort A: Median time on study was 9.9 mos (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.7-not reached). Eleven pts were enrolled and received tafasitamab and IDE. Two pts discontinued treatment due to AEs (aspartate-aminotransferase increased; acute pancreatitis), two due to progressive disease (PD) and one pt by physician's decision. One pt died due to PD and one pt due to cardiac failure. At the cut-off date, treatment was ongoing in four pts. Table 1 summarizes treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) with neutropenia Grade ≥3 being most common (5 [46%]). Fourteen treatment-emergent serious AEs (SAEs) were reported in eight (72.7%) pts. ORR was 90.9% (CR=9.1%, partial response [PR]=81.8%), disease control was achieved in all 11 pts. One of eight pts (12.5%) assessed for MRD status reached MRD-negativity in PB at C14. Cohort B: Median time on study was 12 mos (95% CI: 2.8-not reached). Eleven of 13 enrolled pts received tafasitamab and VEN while two pts received tafasitamab only. Three pts discontinued treatment due to AEs (infusion-related reactions [two pts], diarrhea [one pt], one due to PD and one withdrew consent. At the cut-off date, treatment was ongoing in eight patients. Table 2 summarizes TEAEs, neutropenia Grade ≥3 was most commonly observed (six [46%] pts). Fourteen SAEs were reported in nine (69.2%) pts. The ORR in all 13 pts was 76.9% (CR=23.1%, PR=53.8%, not evaluable=23.1%). Six of seven pts assessed for MRD in PB (46.2% of 13 [100%] pts) reached negative status in PB by C7 at the latest. One of three pts assessed for MRD in BM (7.7% of 13 [100%] pts) reached MRD negative status in BM at C15. Conclusions: This trial demonstrates that in heavily pretreated pts with R/R CLL who failed prior BTKi, tafasitamab in combination with IDE or VEN is a potential therapeutic option. The safety profiles of the combinations are influenced by the combination partner, but both combinations are manageable. The response rates and MRD-negativity rates indicate that combinations of targeted agents with anti-CD19 tafasitamab have valuable antitumor activity and warrant further investigation of tafasitamab-based combinations in CLL. Disclosures Staber: AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda-Millenium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Jurczak:Celtrion: Research Funding; Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Loxo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Brugger:AstraZeneca: Equity Ownership; MorphoSys: Employment. Chanan-Khan:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic: Employment; Ascentage: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding. Greil:Mundipharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers-Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/accomodation expenses, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria; Sandoz: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/accomodation expenses, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/accomodation expenses, Research Funding; Eisai: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Cephalon: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/accomodation expenses, Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/accomodation expenses, Research Funding; Ratiopharm: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/accomodation expenses, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/accomodation expenses, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/accomodation expenses, Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Dirnberger-Hertweck:MorphoSys: Employment. Kelemen:MorphoSys: Employment. Middeke:Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy; Roche: Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Montillo:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Acerta: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Versatem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Munir:Acerta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Other: TBC; AbbVie: Honoraria; Alexion: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Morphosys: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sunesis: Consultancy. Parikh:Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ascentage Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria; MorphoSys: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Stilgenbauer:Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Hoffmann La-Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Weirather:MorphoSys: Employment. Woyach:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Loxo: Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; Verastem: Research Funding. Wendtner:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Hoffman-La Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.
Real World Outcomes of Adult B-Cell Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia Patients Treated with Blinatumomab
Wadleigh, Martha , Arslan, Shukaib , Siebenaller, Caitlin, Schultz, Elizabeth, Shallis, Rory M. , Yurkiewicz, Ilana R. , Curran, Emily , Yang, Jay , Mattison, Ryan J. , Dinner, Shira, Liedtke, Michaela , Litzow, Mark, Badar, Talha , Szabó, Anikó , Advani, Anjali S. , Khan, Muhammad Ali , Aldoss, Ibrahim , Schultz, Elizabeth, Hefazi, Mehrdad , Podoltsev, Nikolai , Patel, Anand , Balasubramanian, Suresh , Burkart, Madelyn , Atallah, Ehab

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 3809-3809

10.1182/blood-2019-125466 Get It

Background Blinatumomab is a bispecific T cell antibody construct, that binds and allows CD-3 positive cytotoxic T cells to recognize and eradicate CD19-positive acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL) blasts. The drug is approved for patient (pts) with relapsed/ refractory (RR) B-cell ALL and those with minimal residual disease (MRD) based on efficacy in clinical trials. We sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of blinatumomab in the "real world" setting. Methods We conducted a retrospective multicenter study in collaboration with 11 U.S. academic institutions, and evaluated the outcome of RR B-cell ALL pts, who received blinatumomab outside of clinical trials. These pts were evaluated for response, duration of response (DOR), overall survival (OS) from the time of blinatumomab initiation and toxicity. DOR was estimated among pts who had achieved complete remission (CR)/CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi). Survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared via log-rank test. Results From December 2014 to May 2019, 239 pts with B-cell ALL were identified. Baseline characteristics are summarized in Table 1. The median age of pts at blinatumomab initiation was 48 years (yrs) (range, 18-85). Sixty-one (26%) pts had Philadelphia chromosome [t(9;22)] positive (Ph+ve) disease. Sixty-one (26%) pts had ≥ 3 prior therapies and 46 (19%) pts had allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT) prior to blinatumomab. Twenty-two (9%) pts received inotuzumab ozagamicin prior to blinatumomab. Twenty-nine (12%) pts received blinatumomab in combination with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). Twelve (5%) pts received blinatumomab for MRD. Response rate (CR/CRi) in pts with RR disease was 61%; 44% had CR with MRD negativity by flow cytometry. Rate of CR/CRi in Ph+ve B-cell ALL was 74.5%. Among 12 pts who received Blinatumomab for MRD, 9 (75%) pts achieved MRD negativity. Overall 113 (48%) pts were successfully bridged to allo-HCT. Median DOR in pts with RR disease was 32.1 months (95% CI; 9.5-not reached [NR]) (Fig. 1a) and when censored at allo-HCT was 14.8 months (95% CI; 5.2-NR) (Fig. 1b). Median OS in pts with RR disease after blinatumomab was 12.7 months (95% CI; 9.2 -17.9) (Fig. 1c) and when censored at allo-HCT was 8.6 months (95% CI; 6.4-11.6) (Fig.1d). Median OS after blinatumomab in RR B-cell ALL Ph+ve pts was NR (59% alive at 2 yr). Among pts who received blinatumomab for MRD, median DOR was NR and 54% sustained MRD negativity at 2 yrs. Median OS was 34.7 months (95% CI; 8.8-34.7) in group of pts who received blinatumomab for MRD. Seven (3%) pts discontinued blinatumomab due to adverse events and 40 (21%) pts had dose interruptions. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) of any grade (G) was reported in higher number of pts (93 [39%]) compared to clinical trials, though G3-4 CRS appears to be similar (G1-2 [36%], G3-4 [3%]). Forty-four (44%) pts were treated with steroids and 8 (8%) pts required tocilizumab with steroids for CRS. Ninety-three percent of pts had complete resolution of CRS. CNS toxicities were observed in 31 (13%) pts, among them 60% (n= 19) had G3-4 toxicities. Hepatic toxicities were observed in 84 (35%) pts as outlined in Table 1. Six (2.5%) pts died due to blinatumomab induced toxicities. Conclusion: Our real-world data with multicenter collaboration suggest that overall blinatumomab was well tolerated and had led to significant response in pts with RR B-cell ALL. Disclosures Advani: Amgen: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Macrogenics: Research Funding; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Aldoss:AUTO1: Consultancy; Helocyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel/accommodation/expenses; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Other: travel/accommodation/expenses, Speakers Bureau. Podoltsev:Agios Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Other: Grant funding, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; AI Therapeutics: Research Funding; Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Arog Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Kartos Therapeutics: Research Funding. Curran:Incyte: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding. Yang:Agios: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Research Funding. Mattison:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Liedtke:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; IQVIA/Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BlueBirdBio: Research Funding; Amgen/Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Atallah:Helsinn: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Helsinn: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy.
Clinical Utility of Telomere Length-Directed Genomic Assessment in Patients with Short Telomere Syndromes
Mangaonkar, Abhishek A. , Cousin, Margot A. , Kuisle, Ryan J., Kennedy, Cassie C. , Gangat, Naseema , Litzow, Mark R. , Peters, Steve G. , Klee, Eric W. , Scott, JP, Utz, James P., Baqir, Misbah , Porquera, Eva Carmona, Khan, Shakila P. , Rodriguez, Vilmarie , Kamath, Patrick S. , Joshi, Avni Y. , Wylam, Mark E. , Patnaik, Mrinal M. , Kennedy, Cassie C , Ferrer, Alejandro , Vairo, Filippo Pinto e , Coltro, Giacomo , Hogan, William J. , Sekiguchi, Hiroshi, Simonetto, Douglas A.

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 1222-1222

10.1182/blood-2019-127185 Get It

Introduction: Short telomere syndromes (STS) are accelerated aging syndromes affecting hematopoietic, pulmonary, hepatobiliary and/or immunological systems. Clinical assessment of age-appropriate telomere length (TL) is performed using flow cytometry & fluorescence in-situ hybridization (flowFISH). Screening for germline variants in STS-related genes is guided by flowFISH-determined centile categories of TL, with screening recommended for TL <1st centile or 1-10th centile in lymphocytes (L) or granulocytes (G). However, the utility of genetic testing for patients with TL >10th centile and integration of clinical phenotype with flowFISH data in predictive algorithms is currently unclear. Methods: FlowFISH testing was done at reference laboratories in Vancouver (Repeat Diagnostics; Canada) & Johns Hopkins University (JHU, USA). Salient clinical features were pre-determined as, personal history of premature hair greying (onset at age < 30 years), idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) or IPF/emphysema overlap (in smokers), cryptogenic cirrhosis or NRH, unexplained cytopenias &/or immunodeficiency, & family history of the above (in >1 1st or 2nd degree relatives). Clinical likelihood score (CLS) was assigned as low (1), intermediate (int, 2) or high (>2), based on the number of aforementioned clinical features present prior to flowFISH testing. Genetic testing was performed using either an in-house or commercial bone marrow failure-specific next generation sequencing (NGS) panel or whole exome sequencing (WES), and data for known variants affecting telomerase or telomeric function (TERT, TERC, DKC1, TINF2, NHP2, NOP10, TCAB1, NAF1, & RTEL1) was recorded. Results: One hundred forty-nine patients at our institution underwent TL assessment at Repeat diagnostics (n=38) and JHU (n=111) laboratories, respectively. Median age was 56 (range: 7-79) years; 88 (59%) being males. Significant family history was present in 40 (27%) patients, while premature greying of hair was present in 13 (9%) patients. Organ-specific clinical features included unexplained cytopenias (n=89, 60%) IPF (n=71, 48%), cryptogenic cirrhosis or NRH (n=21, 14%), & unexplained immunodeficiency (n=14, 9%). CLS stratification included low (n=74, 50%), int (n=54, 36%), & high (n=21, 14%), with higher CLS significantly correlating with lower delta TL for L (p=0.0005) but not G (p=0.3). Genetic testing was performed in 51 (35%) patients (NGS-51, WES-1) among which 13 (26%) patients had a telomere-associated variant; 5 (10%) pathogenic (pv, all TERT). CLS alone was unable to predict likelihood of finding a telomere-associated variant (p=0.4). Based on age-appropriate centile categorization of L & G TL (information for both available in 134 patients), patients were stratified into six groups (table 1). TL <1st centile in L: This group was further divided into two groups; TL<1st centile in both L & G [A1, n=7, CLS low-3 (43%), int-2 (29%), & high-2 (29%)] and TL <1st centile in L and 1-50th centile in G (A2, n=2, CLS low & high) patients. Among the 4 (57%) patients who underwent genetic (NGS-3, WES-1) testing, 3 (75%) had TERTpv in A1 subgroup and 1 A2 subgroup patient had a VUS in TERT.TL <1st centile in G, 1-10th centile in L (n=18): This group included 9 (50%) low, 8 (44%) int and 1 (6) high CLS patients, of which only 1 of 8 NGS-tested patients had TERTpv.TL 1-10th centile in L or G: This group was divided into; 1-10th centile in both L & G [C1, n=28, CLS low-3 (11%), int-14 (50%), high-11(39%)] of whom 8 (22%) underwent NGS with no pathogenic variants but 3 VUS in RTEL1, NAF1 & PARN genes, and 1-10th centile in L, >1-90th centile in G [C2, n=36, CLS low-19 (53%), 16 (44%), 1 (3%)] of whom 8 (22%) underwent NGS with 1 TERTpv and 2 VUS in TINF2TL >10th centile in L & 1-90th centile in G (n=43, 32%): CLS stratification in this group included 27 (63%) low, 12 (28%) int, 4 (9%) high. NGS testing was done in 13 (30%) patients [CLS low-9(69%), int 2(15%), high 2 (15%)], of whom only 2 (15%) had VUS in TINF2 and TERT gene, but no pathogenic variants (figure 1). Conclusion: Our study demonstrates the importance of using a flowFISH assay based predictive algorithm to screen patients with suspected STS for telomere-related genetic alternations, in comparison to a clinical likelihood score. We also demonstrate a limited role for genetic testing in patients with lymphocyte TL >10th centile, regardless of the clinical likelihood score. Disclosures Patnaik: Stem Line Pharmaceuticals.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.
Phase 2 Trial of Ixazomib, Cyclophosphamide and Dexamethasone in Relapsed Multiple Myeloma
Lacy, Martha Q. , LaPlant, Betsy, Wolfe, Eric, Hayman, Suzanne R. , Helgeson, Dania Kaehlyn, Reeder, Craig B. , Fonder, Amie , Hwa, Yi L. , Hobbs, Miriam, Kapoor, Prashant , Chanan‐Khan, Asher , Kourelis, Taxiarchis , Larsen, Jeremy T. , Lust, John A., Sher, Taimur , Stewart, A. Keith, Warsame, Rahma , Kyle, Robert A. , Kumar, Shaji , Buadi, Francis K. , Gertz, Morie A. , Ailawadhi, Sikander , Go, Ronald S. , Roy, Vivek , Bergsagel, P. Leif , Fonseca, Rafaël , Dingli, David , Gonsalves, Wilson I. , Siddiqui, Mustaqeem , Rajkumar, S. Vincent

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 1904-1904

10.1182/blood-2019-131478 Get It

Background: Combinations of alkylating agents with proteasome inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy in newly diagnosed and relapsed multiple myeloma (MM), with melphalan or cyclophosphamide combinations being some of the commonly used regimens for initial treatment of MM. Ixazomib (Ixa) is an oral proteasome inhibitor that is approved for use in combination with lenalidomide for patients with relapsed MM. We examined if Ixa can be effectively combined with cyclophosphamide (Ctx) in order to develop a less expensive, all oral regimen for patients with relapsed MM. Patients and Methods: Patients with relapsed MM, who were proteasome inhibitor naïve OR have received less than 6 cycles of therapy with bortezomib and had a better than PR with no progression at the time of discontinuation, were enrolled. The primary objective was to determine overall response rate (ORR). Treatment consisted of Ixa 4mg PO days 1, 8, 15; Ctx 300 mg/m2 PO days 1, 8, 15, 22 and dexamethasone (Dex) 40 mg PO weekly in a 28-day cycle. Overall, 37 patients were accrued; data on 33 eligible patients were available for analysis as of July 18, 2019. Results: The median age was 71 (48-89), 61% were male and the median duration from diagnosis was 46 months (mos). Median number of prior lines of therapy was 4 (range 1-5), 76%, 42% and 67% respectively had a prior IMiD, proteasome inhibitor or stem cell transplant, respectively. At data cutoff, 22 (67%) had progressed, 4 (12%) had died and the median follow up of those alive was 21.3 mos. Fourteen patients are still receiving treatment, with median of 8.5 cycles. Most common reason for treatment discontinuation was disease progression (10 pts; 53%). The ORR was 60% including 6% CR and 24% VGPR. The median event free survival was 11.3 mos (95%CI: 9.0 - 26.8). Overall, 401 cycles have been administered across the study, with dose modifications/ hold required for Ixa, Ctx, and Dex in 9 (27%), 14 (42%), and 22 (67%) patients respectively, the most common reason being hematologic toxicity. A grade 3 or higher adverse event at least possibly attributed to the study drugs was seen in 77% of patients, hematologic in 67% and non-hematologic in 30%. (Table 1) The most commonly observed hematologic toxicities included thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, lymphopenia and anemia; for non-hematologic was nausea, diarrhea, peripheral neuropathy toxicity and fatigue. Conclusions: The combination of Ixa, Ctx and Dex (ICd) offers a convenient, all oral regimen for treatment of relapsed disease not refractory to proteasome inhibitors. The regimen has good efficacy in this group f heavily pretreated patients, with an acceptable toxicity profile. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:Ionis: Honoraria; Spectrum: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Prothena: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria. Ailawadhi:Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Bergsagel:Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Ionis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Fonseca:AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, Celgene, Kite, Janssen, Juno, Merck, Pharmacylics, Sanofi, Takeda: Other: Consultant/Advisor; Prognosticatin of MM based on Genetic Categorization by FISH: Patents & Royalties; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Other: Scientific Advisory Board. Dingli:alexion: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Kapoor:Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Cellectar: Consultancy; Janssen: Research Funding. Chanan-Khan:AbbVie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic: Employment; Ascentage: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding. Larsen:Janssen Oncology: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Russell:Imanis: Equity Ownership. Stewart:Roche: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Ionis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Ono: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding.
Phase I Trial of Ibrutinib, Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone in Patients with Relapsed and/or Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM)
Paulus, Aneel , Alegria, Victoria R., LaPlant, Betsy, Chapin, Dustin, Jackson, Keisha , Jani, Prachi, Edwards, Brett , Sher, Taimur , Chanan‐Khan, Asher , Paulus, Aneel , Ailawadhi, Sikander , Moustafa, Muhamad Alhaj , Jackson, Keisha, Ahmed, Salman , Edwards, Brett, Manna, Alak , Roy, Vivek

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 1912-1912

10.1182/blood-2019-128233 Get It

Background: Ibrutinib (ibr) is a small-molecular inhibitor of Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase (BTK), active in the treatment of various B-cell malignancies. B-cell receptor signaling blockade by BTK inhibition using ibr down regulates IRF4 (survival transcription factor) which is down regulated by lenalidomide (R) as well, suggesting possible synergistic effect on cell death. Higher doses of ibr (560-840 mg daily) have been used in combination regimens for MM with no significant dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) but the combination of ibr and len has not been previously tested. We present safety and preliminary efficacy of the combination ibr, R, and dexamethasone (d) in RRMM patients. Methods: This is a phase I dose escalation study (NCT03015792) of 28-day cycles of ibr (420 mg daily, 560 mg daily, 700 mg daily or 840 mg daily) days 1-28 in combination with R 25 mg PO days 1-21, and d 40 mg PO weekly utilizing a 3+3 dose-escalation design. Eligible RRMM patients had progression after ≥2 prior lines of treatment, measurable disease as per International Myeloma Working Group criteria, ECOG performance status ≤2, adequate bone marrow (BM) (absolute neutrophil count ≥1.0 x 109, platelets ≥50,000 cells/mm3 for patients with BM plasmacytosis <50% or ≥30,000 cells/mm3 for patients with BM plasmacytosis ≥50%), kidney (creatinine clearance ≥30 mL/min), and liver function [total bilirubin ≤1.5 x upper limit of normal (ULN), aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase ≤3 x ULN], and PT/INR ≤1.5 X ULN. Treatment was to be continued till progressive disease (PD) or any unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of ibr+Rd in RRMM and secondary objective was to evaluate safety profile of this regimen. Results: As of July 26 2019, 18 patients had been enrolled in the trial. Three patients had to be replaced (2 at 700 mg cohort, 1 each due to withdrawal and ineligibility, and 1 at 840 mg due to withdrawal). Median age of all patients was 67 years (range 49-79) with 9 of the 15 evaluable patients being females. Evaluable patients as per ibr dose level included 3 at 420 mg, 3 at 560 mg, 3 at 700 mg, and 6 at 840 mg. Four out of 15 patients had high-risk cytogenetics. Median prior lines of treatment were 4 (range 2-13) and prior treatments included bortezomib in 87% (n=13), carfilzomib in 47% (n=7), ixazomib in 47% (n=7), lenalidomide in 87% (n=13), pomalidomide in 40% (n=6), thalidomide in 40% (n=6), daratumumab in 60% (n=9), and stem cell transplant in 53% (n=8). High risk cytogenetics [del 17p, t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20)] were noted in 4 of the 15 evaluable patients (27%). Median follow up for alive patients was 8.6 months (range 1.1-25.1 months) and the median number of treatment cycles was 2 (range 1-5). Most common reason for treatment discontinuation was PD (40%) followed by adverse events (AEs) (26.7%). Only 1 DLT possibly related to ibr was a grade 3 rash at the 840 mg dose. Grade 3/4 AEs at least possibly related to study treatment included anemia (n=3), thrombocytopenia (n=3), neutropenia (n=3), leucopenia (n=3), lymphopenia (n=2), febrile neutropenia (n=1), and rash (n=2). Overall, the most common all grade AEs included anemia (n=12), thrombocytopenia (n=10), fatigue (n=10), neutropenia (n=8), leucopenia (n=5), and diarrhea (n=5). (Figure 1) No treatment-related deaths were noted. Overall response rate (ORR) was 7% with partial response (PR) noted in 1 patient. Additionally, 1 patient achieved a minor response (MR) and 10 patients had stable disease (SD) for a clinical benefit rate (CBR) of 80%. (Figure 2) PD was noted in 1 patient and 2 patients did not get response assessment. Ibr 840 mg (daily) with R 25 mg (days 1-21) and d 40 mg weekly was considered the MTD of this regimen. The median progression-free survival (PFS) for the 15 evaluable patients was 4.5 months (95% CI: 1.8-not reached). Conclusions: We report the first phase 1 trial of combining a BTK inhibitor with Rd in RRMM patients. MTD of ibr was determined as 840 mg (daily) in combination with R 25 mg (days 1-21) and d 40 mg weekly. This dose of ibr is consistent with some other trials showing the benefit of a higher dose of ibr in various regimens for treatment of B-cell malignancies. We noted this regimen to be well-tolerated without much high-grade AEs. Disease stabilization was noted in majority of patients. These data lay the basis for a larger trial in a more uniform cohort of patients to better define the efficacy of this regimen. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy. Chanan-Khan:AbbVie: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic: Employment; Ascentage: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Ibrutinib is not FDA-approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma. The regimen of ibrutinib with lenalidomide and dexamethasone is not FDA-approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma.
Preliminary Safety and Anti-Tumor Activity of XmAb13676, an Anti-CD20 x Anti-CD3 Bispecific Antibody, in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma and Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia
Patel, Krish , Chanan‐Khan, Asher , Salles, Gilles , Peyrade, Frédéric, Bouabdallah, Réda, Liebowitz, David, Pagel, John M. , Saville, M. Wayne, Johnson, Chelsea, Ly, Thomas, Salles, Gilles A , Patel, Krish , Michot, Jean‐Marie , Cartron, Guillaume , Reid, Erin G , Thomas, Sheeba K. , Wierda, William G. , Ribrag, Vincent , Phillips, Tycel

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 4079-4079

10.1182/blood-2019-128564 Get It

Introduction: XmAb13676 is a humanized bispecific antibody that binds both CD20 and CD3 in order to recruit cytotoxic T cells to kill CD20 expressing malignant cells. Interim results of an ongoing first-in-human, dose-escalation study (XmAb13676-01; NCT02924402) in subjects with relapsed/refractory (R/R) non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) are reported here. Methods: The study is a first-in-human, multi-center, open-label, phase 1, dose-escalation study in subjects with R/R NHL and R/R CLL with a standard 3 + 3 design. The primary objectives are to determine safety, tolerability, and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or recommended dose of XmAb13676. Secondary objectives include preliminary anti-tumor activity and PK/PD of XmAb13676. This study is designed in two parts: Part A, escalating dose cohorts that establish an initial priming dose as part of repeated weekly infusions at a fixed dose in a 28-day cycle; and Part B, with a dosing schedule consisting of a priming dose on C1D1 , established in Part A, followed by escalated dose(s) on subsequent weeks. Cytokine Release Syndrome (CRS) prophylaxis with dexamethasone was mandated prior to each administration of XmAb13676. Treatment was continued for 2 cycles or longer if there was evidence of therapeutic benefit. Results: At data cut-off, 44 subjects have been treated, 36 with NHL and 8 with CLL. NHL: Subjects with R/R NHL had a median age of 61.5 years (range 32-89), a median of 3.5 prior therapies (range 1-9) and had been diagnosed a median of 24.6 months (range 6.3-181.2) prior to treatment in the study. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) related to treatment occurring in ˃ 3 subjects are shown in Table 1A. Nine treatment-related serious adverse events (SAE) occurred in 6 subjects. The most common treatment-related SAE was CRS, which occurred in 4 (11.1%) subjects with 1 of the events being Grade 4 and the other events being ≤ Grade 2. Treatment responses were assessed by the Lugano criteria or International Working Group criteria for Waldenström Macroglobulinemia (WM). There have been 7 objective responses: 2 complete responses (CR; DLBCL), 1 Very Good PR (VGPR; WM), and 4 partial responses (PR; 1FL, 3 DLBCL) at doses of 20-125 µg/kg. In the efficacy-evaluable population, at doses of 80-125 µg/kg, objective responses were observed in 6/18 patients. A priming dose of 45 µg/kg has been chosen for Part B. An MTD has not been reached and dose escalation is ongoing in Part B in NHL. CLL: Subjects with R/R CLL had a median age of 76 years (range 62-81), a median of 4.5 prior therapies (range 2-6) and had been diagnosed a median of 76.1 months (range 17.5-328.9) prior to treatment in the study. Treatment-related TEAEs occurring in ˃ 1 subject are shown in Table 1B. Three treatment-related serious adverse events (SAE) occurred in 2 subjects. The treatment related SAEs were CRS (Grade 3), hepatocellular injury (Grade 3), and jaundice cholestatic (Grade 2), each of which occurred in 1 (12.5%) subject. There has been 1 CR reported (Richter transformation) in 5 subjects at 20 µg/kg, the highest dose administered thus far. The treatment response was assessed by the Lugano criteria. An MTD has not been reached and dose escalation is ongoing in Part A in CLL. Conclusions: XmAb13676 demonstrated evidence of clinical activity in heavily pretreated subjects with R/R NHL and R/R CLL treated at doses between 20 and 125 µg/kg. CRS was generally manageable with premedication. The study is ongoing with further optimization of dose and schedule. Disclosures Patel: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics/Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sunesis: Consultancy. Chanan-Khan:AbbVie: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic: Employment; Ascentage: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding. Salles:Novartis, Servier, AbbVie, Karyopharm, Kite, MorphoSys: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational events; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche, Janssen, Gilead, Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational events; Autolus: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Educational events; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational events; BMS: Honoraria. Cartron:Gilead: Honoraria; Jansen: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria. Thomas:Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding. Wierda:KITE pharma: Research Funding; Sunesis: Research Funding; Miragen: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma Inc: Research Funding; GSK/Novartis: Research Funding; Cyclcel: Research Funding; Loxo Oncology Inc.: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Research Funding; Oncternal Therapeutics Inc.: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Liebowitz:Xencor: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pagel:AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Ribrag:MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Other: Travel, accommodations, and expenses ; Nanostring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Epizyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Servier: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AZ: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accommodations, and expenses ; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ArgenX: Research Funding. Saville:Xencor: Employment, Equity Ownership. Johnson:Xencor: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ly:Xencor: Employment, Equity Ownership. Phillips:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; Abbvie: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.
Impact of Anti-CD19 CAR-T Axicabtagene Ciloleucel on Vaccine Titers of DTaP and MMR
Gannon, Nicole, Melody, Megan , Muniz, Paul, Ayala, Ernesto , Brumble, Lisa , Sher, Taimur , Foran, James M. , Rivera, Candido E., Chanan‐Khan, Asher , Kharfan‐Dabaja, Mohamed A. , Rahman, Zaid Abdel , Roy, Vivek , Ailawadhi, Sikander , Murthy, Hemant S. , Tun, Han W. , Zubair, Abba C.

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 5610-5610

10.1182/blood-2019-122067 Get It

Background: Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy has revolutionized the treatment of relapsed/refractory B-cell lymphoid malignancies. Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel), an anti-CD19 CAR-T not only targets the malignant B-cell, but can potentially also target and eliminate normal B-cells. This can interfere with the normal B-cell repertoire, compromising host humoral immunity such as decreased titers of common vaccines (DTaP, MMR). To assess if this was a clinically significant problem, we evaluated all recipients of axi-cel at our center between 6/2018 through 7/2019. Patients and methods: For patients who received commercial axi-cel, humoral immunity was evaluated both quantitatively [absolute lymphocyte count (ALC)] as well as qualitatively by serology titers [IgG antibodies (Abs)] for diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, measles, mumps, and rubella, and total Immunoglobulin G (IgG) levels. Data was collected within 30 days prior to CAR-T infusion, then at day +30 and between days +60 and +100 after CAR-T infusion. Results: We identified 10 patients (males = 5, 50%), with a median age of 49.9 years (range 30-65) who received commercial axi-cel during the study period. Patient characteristics and indications for CAR-T therapy are shown in Table 1; the cohort represented a heavily pre-treated aggressive B-cell lymphoma patient population. Baseline information on antibody (Ab) titers was available in 8 patients. At baseline, all patients had positive tetanus IgG Abs (≥0.01 IU/mL), 7 had positive diphtheria IgG Abs (≥0.01 IU/mL), 6 had positive measles IgG Abs (≥ 1.1 AI), 5 had positive rubella IgG Abs (≥ 1.0 AI), 3 had positive mumps IgG Abs (≥ 1.1 AI). None of the patients had a positive pertussis IgG Abs (≥100 IU/mL). At follow-up, all patients with positive Ab at baseline maintained titers in the positive range at day +30 and between days +60 and +100 (Figure 1). None of the patients demonstrated a clinically meaningful decrease in Abs titers, despite a drop in ALC and IgG levels (table 2). Conclusions: Albeit a small sample size, IgG Ab titers for diphtheria, tetanus, measles, mumps, and rubella did not appear to be affected by axi-cel at a short interval follow-up after infusion (up to day +100). We plan to extend this analysis in a larger cohort with a longer-term prospective follow-up to validate our findings, especially in light of dropping absolute lymphocyte counts and IgG levels. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Foran:Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding. Tun:Celgene: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Mundi-pharma: Research Funding; DTRM Biopharma: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding. Chanan-Khan:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic: Employment; Ascentage: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding. Kharfan-Dabaja:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy.
Spectrum of Abnormalities and Clonal Transformation in Germline RUNX1 Familial Platelet Disorder and a Comparative Analysis with Somatic RUNX1 Mutations in Myeloid Neoplasms
DiFilippo, Emma C., Mangaonkar, Abhishek A. , Khan, Shakila P. , Rodriguez, Vilmarie , Gangat, Naseema , Wolanskyj, Alexandra P., Pruthi, Rajiv K. , He, Rong , Viswanatha, David S., Finke, Christy M. , Tefferi, Ayalew , Pardanani, Animesh , Litzow, Mark R. , Patnaik, Mrinal M. , Coltro, Giacomo , Carr, Ryan M , Binder, Moritz , Chen, Dong , Lasho, Terra L.

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 3003-3003

10.1182/blood-2019-124830 Get It

Introduction: Germline RUNX1 mutations/deletions result in a Familial Platelet Disorder with propensity to Myeloid Malignancy (FPDMM); an autosomal dominant condition characterized by thrombocytopenia, qualitative platelet defects, and myeloid clonal evolution (MDS and AML). The advent of next generation sequencing (NGS) has allowed detection of clonal cytopenias of unclear significance (CCUS) prior to bone marrow (BM) morphological changes. Somatic RUNX1 mutations (RUNX1MT) can be seen in myeloid malignances, including MDS/MPN overlap syndromes, with an indeterminate prognostic impact. We carried out this study to define the landscape of clonal evolution in FPDMM patients and to compare germline RUNX1MT with somatic mutations. Methods After IRB approval, families with RUNX1MT FPDMM (detected by germline sequencing and deletion/duplication assays) and patients with 2016, WHO-defined MDS/MPN overlap syndromes (except JMML) were included in the study. Index patients with FPDMM underwent BM biopsies and in select cases NGS at diagnosis and then as indicated for follow up, or at disease progression. All MDS/MPN overlap syndrome patients underwent a 29-gene panel NGS assay on BM samples obtained at diagnosis by previously described methods (Patnaik et al., BCJ 2016). Results Eight index patients with FPDMM were included; median age at diagnosis 58 (range, 0-71) years, 3 (38%) males (Figure A). Four (50%) had intragenic deletions involving multiple exons in 3 cases and 2 nucleotides in 1 case, 1 (13%) each had missense, frameshift and splice site mutations, while 1 (13%) patient had a whole gene deletion (Figure C). Notably, in 4 (100%) of 4 patients with large deletions, NGS testing was negative for RUNX1 abnormalities. Four (50%) index patients presented with a myeloid neoplasm; JAK2, SRSF2, ASXL1 mutant CMML, MDS/MPN-U with trisomy 8, AML with del7q and normal karyotype AML (negative NGS). Three (38%) index patients had CCUS at diagnosis with TET2 (67%) being the most common acquired mutation, and others including SRSF2, EZH2, and SF3B1. Cumulatively, myeloid clonal evolution was seen in 7 (88%) patients. Three (38%) index patients (AML-2, CMML-1) underwent allogeneic HCT, and at last follow up were in remission. Median age at myeloid clonal evolution was 61 (range, 4-71) years; median overall survival (OS) from date of myeloid clonal evolution was 12 (range, 7-53) months. For the comparative analysis, 499 patients with MDS/MPN overlap syndromes were included; 382 (77%) with CMML, 48 (10%) with MDS/MPN-RS-T (MDS/MPN with ring sideroblasts and thrombocytosis), 17 (3%) with aCML (atypical CML), and 52 (10%) with MDS-MPN-U (unclassifiable). Median age at diagnosis was 71 (range, 18-99) years, and 329 (66%) were male. RUNX1MT were detected in 57 (11%) patients; 43 (11%) with CMML, 5 (30%) with aCML, and 9 (17%) with MDS-MPN-U. No RUNX1MT were found in MDS-MPN-RS-T. Overall, 62 RUNX1MT were identified in 57 patients, with 52 (39 CMML, 4 aCML, 9 MDS-MPN-U) and 5 (4 CMML, 1 aCML) patients harboring 1 and 2 RUNX1MT, respectively. RUNX1MT spanned the entire coding sequence without specific hotspots (Figure B): 27 (44%) were missense, 2 (3%) involved the splicing sites, 5 (8%) were nonsense and 28 (45%) were frameshift. There was only one RUNX1MT (R273K), seen in both germline and somatic patients (Figures B and C). Compared to wild type patients, RUNX1MT patients with MDS/MPN overlap syndromes had significantly lower platelet counts (median 72 vs 117 x109/L, p<0.0001), without any other phenotypic differences. In the somatic RUNX1MT cohort, co-occurring mutations included ASXL1 (54%), SRSF2 (54%), TET2 (49%), and NRAS (28%), with NRAS (28% vs 13%, p=0.0028), and SRSF2 (54% vs 39%, p=0.0218) mutations clustering with RUNX1MT. Median OS of the entire cohort was 29 (range, 0-170) months. On univariate analysis, while there was a trend for an inferior OS in RUNX1MTvs wild type patients (20 vs 29 months, p=0.0523), the leukemia-free survival was clearly inferior (p=0.0175, Figure D). Conclusion RUNX1 MT FPDMM is a germline predisposition syndrome with a high rate of myeloid clonal evolution (88%), including clonal cytopenias (38%). Germline RUNX1MT have minimal overlap with somatic mutations seen in myeloid malignancies, with NGS testing often missing RUNX1 deletions. Somatic RUNX1MT in myeloid malignancies are significantly associated with thrombocytopenia and an inferior leukemia-free survival. Figure Disclosures Patnaik: Stem Line Pharmaceuticals.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.
SCIDOT-46. MicroRNA NANOCELL THERAPY FOR GLIOBLASTOMA
Khan, Muhammad Babar , Ruggieri, Rosamaria, MacDiarmid, Jennifer A. , Brahmbhatt, Himanshu , Boockvar, John A. , Symons, Marc , Tran, Nhan L. , Sarkaria, Jann N.

Neuro-Oncology | November 11, 2019 | Volume: 21 | Issue: Supplement_6 | Pages: vi281-vi281

10.1093/neuonc/noz175.1182 Get It

Abstract Therapeutic resistance stemming from inter and intra-tumoral heterogeneity is a significant impediment towards development of effective therapeutics for glioblastoma. We hypothesized that microRNAs can potentially counteract resistance emanating from such heterogeneity as they simultaneously modulate the expression of multiple proteins. We identified microRNA-34a as a unique microRNA which modulates multiple oncoproteins in GBM using two different in silico approaches. We investigated the therapeutic effects of microRNA-34a in three primary patient-derived xenografts (PDX) representing classical (GBM6), proneural (GBM118) and mesenchymal (GBM118) subtypes; four established cell lines (T98G, U251, A172, LN229) and two cell lines with acquired resistance to temozolomide (A172-TR, LN229-TR) in vitro. Glioblastoma cell cultures showed variable responses to temozolomide but microRNA-34a inhibited proliferation in all cell cultures. Furthermore, microRNA-34a also sensitized all tested cell lines to temozolomide (combination index < 0.8, p=.03) and radiation treatment (dose enhancement factor 1.7–2.2, p=0.02). Mechanistically, microRNA 34a down-regulates at least six distinct therapeutic resistance proteins. Importantly, these resistance proteins are expressed in distinct spatial niches and are prognostic for patient survival based on our analysis of the cancer genome atlas (TCGA) data. For in vivo delivery of microRNA-34a, we utilized nanocells which are derived from genetically modified bacteria, loaded with microRNA-34a and tagged with a bispecific antibody targeting EGFR. Nanocells were injected intravenously while temozolomide was administered by oral gavage in an orthotopic PDX model. We confirmed delivery of microRNA-34a to tumor by observing down-regulation of cMet and phosphorylated Akt in treated mice. Importantly, microRNA-34a nanocells resulted in significant reduction in tumor growth (p=0.021), increased survival (p<0.001) with microRNA-34a monotherapy and synergy in combination with temozolomide in vivo. Taken together, our results suggest that delivery of miR-34a may be a powerful new adjuvant for the treatment of glioblastoma in combination with temozolomide that can mitigate both inter- and intra-tumor heterogeneity.