Citations

Abstract Background: Myelofibrosis (MF) is characterized by progressive bone marrow (BM) fibrosis resulting from aberrant megakaryopoiesis and expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines. These processes, heavily influenced by bromodomain and extraterminal domain (BET) protein-mediated gene regulation, lead to myeloproliferation and cytopenias. There is a high unmet need for a treatment that can potentially delay or reverse BM fibrosis in patients (pts) with MF. Pelabresib (CPI-0610) is a potent, first-in-class, selective, oral small-molecule BET inhibitor, which is able to modify the expression of genes involved in nuclear factor kappa B (NFκB) signaling in pts with MF. Pelabresib is currently being investigated as a monotherapy and in combination with the JAK inhibitor (JAKi) ruxolitinib (RUX), in the ongoing MANIFEST Phase 2 study (NCT02158858). Methods: In arm 1 of MANIFEST, pelabresib is administered as monotherapy to pts with MF who are intolerant/refractory to, or ineligible for RUX; in arm 2, as an 'add-on' to RUX in pts with MF who have suboptimal/lost response; and in arm 3 as combination therapy with RUX in JAKi treatment-naïve pts with MF. To evaluate the effects of pelabresib on BM biology, analyses were conducted using BM biopsy samples obtained pre-treatment and at 24 weeks post-treatment during the MANIFEST trial. Central pathology review of reticulin staining was conducted to evaluate BM fibrosis (BMF) grading and immunohistochemistry staining for changes in erythroids (ERY) and megakaryocytes (MK), respectively. Independent digital images of stained BM slides were also evaluated with a semi-quantitative cell-specific detection algorithm for reticulin density, percentage CD71+ ERY, mean number of CD61+ MK and mean distance between nuclei for CD61+ MK. Results: Exploratory analyses across the three treatment arms showed BM improvements after 24 weeks of treatment. Paired comparison by digital analysis of baseline and 24-week treatment BM biopsies from 29 pts showed reduction (range 67%-15.5%) in reticulin intersections per field in 45% (13/29) pts. Furthermore, digital analysis of CD71+ ERY and CD61+ MK from paired biopsies showed increased ERY progenitors in 50% (16/32) pts, decreased MK density in 57% (15/26) pts and decreased MK clustering in 46% (12/26) pts at 24 weeks. Decreased MK clustering correlated with decreased density of CD61+ MK in 75% pts (9/12). Correlative analysis between observed clinical responses and bone marrow improvements are ongoing and will be available for presentation at the conference. We previously reported (Talpaz M, et al. ASH 2020; Abstract 2163) that in pts with MF, pelabresib can reduce spleen volume, improve symptoms, improve bone marrow fibrosis, demonstrate increase in hemoglobin levels, and reduce transfusion burden. Updated 24-week data reflecting a higher number of evaluable pts and new long-term data at 48 weeks across the MANIFEST trial, will be presented. Conclusions: Treatment with pelabresib as monotherapy or in combination with RUX, in both RUX treatment-naïve and -experienced pts with MF, resulted in increased ERY progenitors, decreased MK density and reduction of BM fibrosis, as assessed by digital pathology. These data suggest possible disease-modifying potential for pelabresib by improving BM histology and function, leading to potential clinical benefits. Disclosures Verstovsek: Roche: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines Corp: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Protagonist Therapeutics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Ital Pharma: Research Funding; PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Constellation: Consultancy; Pragmatist: Consultancy. Salama: Mayo Clinic: Current Employment, Other: Mayo Clinic had the contractual work for the central pathology review for this study and I was one of the reviewing pathologists; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mascarenhas: AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Kartos: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Constellation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Geron: Consultancy, Research Funding; Prelude: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PharmaEssentia: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Galecto: Consultancy; Promedior: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merus: Research Funding; Forbius: Research Funding; CTI Biopharm: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Geron: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Talpaz: Celgene: Consultancy; Imago: Consultancy; Takeda: Other: Grant/research support ; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Constellation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Mesa: La Jolla Pharma: Consultancy; Samus: Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharma: Consultancy; CTI: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; AOP: Consultancy. Vannucchi: Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rampal: Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmaessentia: Consultancy; Blueprint: Consultancy; Disc Medicine: Consultancy; Stemline: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy; CTI: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Constellation: Research Funding; Memorial Sloan Kettering: Current Employment; Kartos: Consultancy. Oh: Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Blueprint Medicines: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Constellation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CTI Biopharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Disc Medicine: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Geron: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kartos Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PharamaEssentia: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sierra Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Taverna: Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Current Employment. Cui: Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Current Employment. Zavidij: Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Current Employment. Chen: Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Current Employment. Colak: Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Current Employment. Efuni: Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Current Employment. Keller: Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Current Employment. Trojer: Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Current Employment. Harrison: Galacteo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; CTI BioPharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Geron: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Keros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Promedior: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

Abstract Background: Outcomes of adults with relapsed/refractory T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia or lymphoma (T-ALL or T-LBL respectively) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have remained poor despite the availability of newer agents. CD38 is a 45 kDa transmembrane glycoprotein expressed by lymphoid and myeloid cells with several important functions including a role in immune escape from tumor cells [Chillemi A et al. Front Immunol 2017, Furano A et al. J Immunol 1990]. Several studies have demonstrated that CD38 is expressed in tumor cells of patients with T-ALL and AML and potentially targetable using CD38 blocking agents [Naik J et al. Haematologica 2019, Bride KL et al. Blood 2018, Tembhare et al. J Immunother Cancer 2020, Farber M et al. ASH 2018]. XmAb18968 is structurally distinct CD3-CD38 bi-specific T-cell engager with a full fragment crystallizable (Fc) domain modified to minimize Fcγ receptor binding and non-selective activation of T cells and other immune effector cells. XmAb18968 has optimized relative affinities for both CD3 and CD38 which results in reduced cytokine release without compromising target cell killing. We hypothesize targeting CD38 in relapsed/refractory- T-cell ALL/LBL and AML is safe and feasible using XmAb18968, a novel CD3-CD38 bispecific antibody. Study design and methods: This is an investigator-sponsored multi-institutional phase I study evaluating the safety and tolerability of XmAb18968. Patients aged 18 years or above with T-ALL, T-LBL or AML (including undifferentiated leukemia and bi phenotypic leukemia), in relapsed/refractory status (at least one line of prior therapy) including measurable residual disease relapse, CD38 expression ≥ 20%, and adequate organ function will be eligible. Major exclusion criteria are hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) within 6 months of enrollment, active acute GVHD, veno-occlusive disease, and acute promyelocytic leukemia. The study is planned to be conducted at 6 sites in United States. The primary endpoint is to determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) and toxicity profile of XmAb18968. The secondary endpoints include determination of response rates, duration of response, survival and pharmacokinetics. Exploratory endpoints include correlation of responses with genomic profile, assessment of serum cytokine response, identifying the changes in phenotypic expression of activated T-cells and leukemic cells, correlation of the phenotypic expression with changes in the transcriptome at the single-cell level, proteomics evaluation of cytokine secretion at the single-cell level and correlation of response with N-glycan profiling, quantitative site-occupancy and direct glycopeptide analysis. The study will follow 3+3 design for dose escalation and de-escalation in case of dose limiting toxicity (DLT). Dose escalation will proceed in two separate groups: Group A for subjects with T-ALL and T-LBL and Group B for subjects with AML. Patients will be entered sequentially to each dose level, starting with the first dose level. The DLT observation period for dose-escalation will be 28-days. RP2D will be defined as the highest dose level at which none of the first 3 treated subjects, or no more than 1 of the first 6 treated subjects experience a DLT. A minimum of 24 and a maximum of 60 patients will be needed for the dose escalation phase. Disclosures Guru Murthy: Curio Sciences: Honoraria; Techspert: Consultancy; Qessential: Honoraria; CancerExpertNow: Honoraria; DAVA Oncology: Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Other: Advisory board meeting; Cardinal health: Honoraria; Guidepoint: Consultancy. Johnson: Miltenyi Biotec: Research Funding. Abedin: AltruBio: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Agios: Honoraria; Helsinn: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma Inc.: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding. Stock: Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; amgen: Honoraria; agios: Honoraria; jazz: Honoraria; kura: Honoraria; kite: Honoraria; morphosys: Honoraria; servier: Honoraria; syndax: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pluristeem: Consultancy, Honoraria. Shah: Precision Biosciences: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Expenses, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics/Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Expenses; Acrotech/Spectrum: Honoraria; BeiGene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: Expenses; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Expenses; Bristol-Myers Squibb/Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Expenses; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Servier Genetics: Other; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. Leonard: Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Pratz: Agios: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Cellgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millenium: Research Funding; University of Pennsylvania: Current Employment; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Luger: Syros: Honoraria; Agios: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Brystol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Acceleron: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Onconova: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Biosight: Research Funding; Hoffman LaRoche: Research Funding; Kura: Research Funding. Badar: Pfizer Hematology-Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Atallah: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding.

LINKED CONTENTThis article is linked to Wijarnpreecha et al and Huang & Nguyen papers. To view these articles, visit https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.16590 and https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.16576

LINKED CONTENTThis article is linked to Wijarnpreecha et al and Gillespie & Hayes papers. To view these articles, visit https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.16490 and https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.16512

SummaryBackgroundPrevious studies have demonstrated an association between nonselective beta‐blockers (NSBBs) and lower risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in cirrhosis. However, there has been no population‐based study investigating the risk of HCC among cirrhotic patients treated using carvedilol.AimsTo determine the risk of HCC among cirrhotic patients with NSBBs including carvedilol.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study utilised the Cerner Health Facts database in the United States from 2000 to 2017. Kaplan‐Meier estimate, Cox proportional hazards regression, and propensity score matching (PSM) were used to test the HCC risk among the carvedilol, nadolol, and propranolol groups compared with no beta‐blocker group.ResultsThe final cohort comprised 107 428 eligible patients. The 100‐month cumulative HCC incidence of NSBBs was significantly lower than the no beta‐blocker group (carvedilol (11.24%) vs no beta‐blocker (15.69%), nadolol (27.55%) vs no beta‐blocker (32.11%), and propranolol (26.17%) vs no beta‐blocker (28.84%) (P values < 0.0001). NSBBs were associated with a significantly lower risk of HCC (Hazard ratio: carvedilol 0.61 (95% CI 0.51‐0.73), nadolol 0.74 (95% CI 0.63‐0.87), propranolol 0.75 (95% CI 0.66‐0.84) after PSM in the multivariate cox analysis. In subgroup analysis, NSBBs reduced the risk of HCC in cirrhosis with complications and non‐alcoholic cirrhosis.ConclusionsNSBBs, including carvedilol, were associated with a significantly decreased risk of HCC in patients with cirrhosis when compared with no beta‐blocker regardless of complications status. Future randomised‐controlled studies comparing the incidence of HCC among NSBBs should elucidate which NSBB would be the best option to prevent HCC in cirrhosis.

SPOP mutation disables 53BP1 ubiquitination and exclusion from DNA double-strand break sites and causes genome instability.

Introduction: There are many treatment options for patients who have osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) and management strategies vary widely both among and within individual countries. Although many researchers have attempted to elucidate the optimal strategies for managing this disease, the lack of large-scale randomized control trials and the lack of agreement on disease staging have curtailed the development of clear-cut guidelines. Materials and Methods: The Association Research Circulation Osseous (ARCO) group sought to address three questions for the management of patients who have ONFH: 1) What imaging studies are most sensitive and specific for the diagnostic evaluation of patients who have ONFH?; 2) What is the best treatment strategy for preventing disease progression in patients who have pre-collapse lesions?; and 3) What is the best treatment strategy for patients who have post-collapse disease? The Patient, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) format was used to formulate the search strategy for each research question. A systematic review will be performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. ARCO participants have been allocated to three groups, each representing one of the PICO questions. After qualitative and quantitative analysis of the data extracted from studies pertaining to each of the three research questions, a set of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines will be proposed for the management of patients who have ONFH. Discussion: It is not always clear which treatment method is optimal for the management of ONFH. Thus, many surgeons have developed and performed various procedures based on patient-specific factors. As there is no consensus on the optimal treatment for various stages of disease, it was clear that developing evidence-based clinical practice guidelines would provide more structure and uniformity to management of these patients. Therefore, the results of this systematic review will lead to the development guidelines that may improve patient-care strategies and result in better outcomes for patients who have ONFH.

Melanoma is the sixth most common cancer in the US. Immunotherapies, such as anti‐CTLA‐4 and anti‐PD‐1, have transformed the treatment of advanced melanoma; however, a subset of patients fail to respond to immunotherapy. Thus, improved predictors of the anti‐melanoma immune response and response to immunotherapy are needed. We have previously shown that 1) gamma‐interferon‐inducible lysosomal thiol reductase (GILT) is critical for MHC class II‐restricted presentation of a melanoma antigen, 2) there is variable GILT protein expression in melanoma cells from primary and cutaneous metastatic melanoma specimens, and 3) high GILT mRNA expression in melanoma specimens is associated with improved overall survival. Here, we created a database of n = 43 metastatic melanoma patients (stage III or IV) annotated with clinical outcome. Formalin‐fixed, paraffin‐embedded sections of pre‐treatment metastatic melanoma specimens were tested for GILT protein expression using immunohistochemistry and scored by a dermatopathologist and dermatologist. GILT expression in melanoma cells was detected in 65% of lymph node and distant organ metastases, consistent with our prior finding of GILT expression in 58% of cutaneous metastases. The frequency of GILT‐staining melanoma cells was determined by the ratio of the area of tumor cells with positive GILT staining to the total area of tumor cells. The frequency of GILT‐staining melanoma cells among specimens with positive GILT staining was 15.2% ± 24.7% (mean ± SD). The median frequency of GILT staining was used to divide the patients into no/low and high GILT expression groups. The median overall survival was 52.8 months in the no/low GILT expression group, while the median overall survival was not reached in the high GILT expression group (log‐rank, p = 0.67). For the n = 34 patients who were treated with immunotherapy targeting CTLA‐4 and/or PD‐1, the median overall survival was 38.2 months in the no/low GILT expression group, while the median overall survival was not reached in the high GILT expression group (log‐rank, p = 0.83). These data suggest that high GILT expression in melanoma cells may be associated with improved overall survival, although a statistically significant association of GILT with survival was not observed in the whole group or the subset of patients treated with immunotherapy. A limitation of the current analysis is that 65% of patients have incomplete clinical outcome data. This study demonstrates variable GILT protein expression in tumor cells in metastatic melanoma specimens. Updated clinical outcome data will allow us to better evaluate the association of GILT protein expression in melanoma cells with overall survival and response to immunotherapy in metastatic melanoma patients.