Citations

Abstract Background Teclistamab (Tec) and Talquetamab (Tal) are the two first FDA approved bispecific antibodies (BsAb) for the treatment of patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Both Tec and Tal should be initiated with step-up dosing (SUD) in an inpatient (IP) setting to mitigate the risk of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), per US label. However, standard of care practice continues to evolve and more pts receive SUD as an outpatient (OP) to reduce healthcare resource utilization and improve pt convenience. While most real-world evidence has focused on clinical and safety outcomes of pts treated with Tec and Tal, pt experience associated with these novel BsAb therapies is relatively unexplored. Methods HealthTree Foundation, a multiple myeloma pt advocacy group which provides enrolled pts with information on treatments, community groups, and research participation, surveyed RRMM patients who have received Tec or Tal. Eligible pts who completed the treatment experience survey had at least 4 months of follow-up after starting BsAb. The survey was fielded from May 2024 through June 2025. Data collection followed IRB-exempt protocols with informed consent. Results A total of 32 patients (24 Tec, 8 Tal) completed the survey. The median age was 70 years, 50% were male, and 84% were white. Most pts (n=24; 75%) received SUD at their primary oncology clinic (n=19, 59% at an academic center; n=5, 16% at local community center), and 8 (25%) at an academic center which was not their primary oncology clinic. All pts who received SUD at an academic center that was not their primary oncology clinic later transitioned to their local community clinic post-SUD and reported being satisfied or very satisfied with their transition of care experience. Overall, most pts (n= 21; 66%) received their entire step-up dosing during a single hospitalization, while some (n=6; 19%) received all doses of the SUD during separate hospitalizations for each dose. About 13% (n=4) received all SUD in an OP setting, and 3% (n=1) received SUD in a hybrid setting (mix of IP and OP). Although 85% (n=27) of the pts received IP SUD, 66% (n=21) would have preferred IP SUD in one hospitalization, while the remaining 34% (n=11) would have preferred OP or hybrid SUD. Among pts who received IP SUD (n=27), almost a quarter reported a preference for either OP (n=4; 15%) or hybrid SUD (n=2; 7%) and 78% (n=21) preferred one IP hospitalization for SUD. The factors influencing their preference for the setting of SUD in this IP sub-group were feeling more secure with IP monitoring (78%), convenience (26%), less worry about staying near healthcare centers (15%), being able to stay with their local physician (11%), staying closer to home (7%), and lower costs to the pt (4%). Among pts receiving OP SUD (n=4), 75% (n=3) preferred fully OP SUD and 25% (n=1) preferred hybrid SUD because of convenience (n=2; 50%), lower cost to pt (n=1; 25%), flexible dosing schedule (n=1; 25%), and feeling of security with IP monitoring (n=1; 25%). All the pts receiving hybrid SUD (n=1) preferred fully OP SUD due to convenience. Although Tec and Tal are subcutaneous (SC) injections, when patients were asked to compare the options of BsAbs with comparable efficacy and safety profile, they favored SC injection (n= 22; 69%) over intravenous infusion (n = 3; 9%), while 22% (n=7) had no preference for mode of drug administration. The challenges that impacted pt experience with Tec or Tal were treatment side effects (Tal pts: n=6, 75%; Tec pts: n=9, 38%) and distance or travel time to the treatment facility (Tal pts: n=2, 25%; Tec pts: n=4; 17%). Other reasons included caring for others, continuing to work, cost and insurance, lack of caregiver/care partner, being away from home, unavailability of the therapy in community setting near home, and eligibility criteria. Conclusions Most pts in this study received SUD at their primary oncology clinic. While most pts received IP SUD and preferred a single planned IP visit, one third preferred OP or hybrid SUD due to convenience. As the field moves toward OP-only SUD, this study underscores the need to consider pt preferences. There is an unmet need for community clinics providing SUD options closer to pt homes.

Abstract Introduction: Lutetium-177 DOTATATE peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) is an effective treatment for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs). While generally well tolerated, PRRT can result in hematologic toxicity ranging from mild cytopenias to therapy-related myeloid neoplasms (t-MNs). Understanding the incidence, severity, and clinical consequences of hematologic toxicity is essential for optimizing treatment decisions and establishing effective monitoring strategies. This study aimed to characterize hematologic toxicity patterns, severity, and recovery profiles in GEP-NET patients treated with Lutetium-177 DOTATATE PRRT and to determine the frequency of cytopenia-related treatment discontinuation. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 160 consecutive GEP-NET patients who underwent PRRT. Hematologic parameters (hemoglobin, white blood cell count, absolute neutrophil count, platelet count, and lymphocyte count) were assessed at baseline, mid-treatment (post-cycle 2), and post-treatment (post-cycle 4). Cytopenias were graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.03 and categorized as never (grade <2 throughout), transient (grade ≥2 mid-treatment, resolving post-treatment), persistent (grade ≥2 at both timepoints), or late-onset (grade <2 mid-treatment, grade ≥2 post-treatment). Treatment completion rates and discontinuation reasons were documented. Results: Overall, 73% of patients (117/160) completed all planned PRRT cycles. Among the 43 patients who discontinued treatment early, only 4 (2.5% of total cohort) discontinued specifically due to cytopenia, while the remainder discontinued for other reasons. Post-treatment grade ≥2 cytopenias were uncommon: lymphocytes (4.4%), hemoglobin (2.5%), neutrophils (1.9%), white blood cells (1.3%), and platelets (1.3%). The majority of patients (≥85%) never experienced grade ≥2 cytopenia throughout treatment. When cytopenias occurred, they were predominantly transient (8-10% of patients) with complete recovery by treatment completion. Persistent cytopenias were rare (<5% across all cell lines), while late-onset cytopenia occurred most frequently with neutrophils (14%). Conclusion: Lutetium-177 DOTATATE PRRT demonstrates an excellent hematologic safety profile in GEP-NET patients. Severe cytopenias are uncommon, predominantly transient, and rarely necessitate treatment discontinuation. These findings support the continued use of PRRT in appropriate candidates, with cytopenia-related discontinuation occurring in fewer than 3% of cases. Long-term follow-up remains essential to monitor delayed hematologic effects, including t-MNs. Future research should evaluate baseline predictors such as prior chemotherapy, renal function, and marrow reserve to identify patients at higher risk who may benefit from closer hematologic surveillance.

Abstract Background The treatment (tx) landscape for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) has evolved, with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline-preferred novel therapies (NTs), such as acalabrutinib, zanubrutinib, and venetoclax-based regimens, now preferred over ibrutinib and chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) in front-line (1L) settings. We previously showed that patients (pts) from different racial/ethnic groups may not have equitable access to NTs. Here, we examined racial/ethnic inequities in 1L NT utilization among US pts with CLL and potential social determinants of health (SDOH) drivers of these inequities. Methods This retrospective cohort study utilized the US-based, electronic health record-derived de-identified Flatiron Health Research Database, linked to neighborhood (US Census track or block group) data from American Community Survey and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality datasets. Eligible pts included adults with CLL who started 1L tx 01/01/2019-07/31/2024. The primary outcome was receipt of 1L therapy (CIT vs preferred NTs, ibrutinib vs preferred NTs), with NCCN guideline-preferred NTs (v2.2023-v3.2025) as a reference. Associations between race/ethnicity (White, Black, Hispanic) and 1L tx types were assessed using logistic regressions, adjusting for age, sex, year of 1L start, immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region status, and del17p/TP53 status. To better understand which SDOH factors contribute to racial and ethnic inequities in tx utilization, we performed mediation analysis using Multiple Mediation Analysis implemented through nonlinear multiple additive regression tree models. Individual-level (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status, practice type, insurance) and 20 area-level SDOH factors measuring social deprivation (defined as limited access to economic, social, neighborhood, physical, or healthcare resources) were assessed as potential mediators. Results Of the 4452 pts included in the study, 3717 were White (83%), 371 were Black (8%), 209 were Hispanic (5%), and 155 were Other race (4%). Black and Hispanic pts were more likely to live in neighborhoods with higher social deprivation, such as residential segregation (predominant race/ethnicity in the area: White, Black, Hispanic, Diverse), with no internet access, no vehicle ownership, and no health insurance coverage. Overall, 37% of pts received a preferred NT, highest among White (38%) pts, followed by Black (35%) and Hispanic (26%) pts. Compared with White pts, Hispanic pts were more likely to receive CIT than preferred NTs (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.12; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.46-3.09); Black (aOR 1.44; 95% CI 1.05-1.97) and Hispanic pts (aOR 1.83; 95% CI 1.17-2.85) were more likely to receive ibrutinib than preferred NTs. Pts living in areas with the highest social deprivation were less likely than their counterparts in lowest social deprivation neighborhoods to receive preferred NTs. Specifically, residence in predominantly Black or Hispanic neighborhoods (26% or 27% vs 39% predominantly White), areas with lowest socioeconomic status (32% vs 40%), and neighborhoods with the lowest levels of internet access (32% vs 39%), vehicle ownership (32% vs 39%), and health insurance coverage (34% vs 41%) was associated with lowest receipt of preferred NTs. In the mediation analysis, individual- and area-level SDOH factors explained 94.4% (95% CI 2.9-185.9) of the observed Black-White inequity in receipt of ibrutinib versus preferred NTs; residential segregation appeared to be the most important mediator (59.7%; 95% CI −3.5 to 123.0). Similarly, the Hispanic-White inequity in receipt of preferred NTs was driven by the combined effect of area-level SDOH and individual-level variables (88.5%; 95% CI 45.6-131.3), with residential segregation as the main driver (48.3%; 95% CI 10.7-85.9), followed by practice setting (9.8%; 95% CI −3.5 to 23.1). In contrast, measured SDOH factors did not explain the inequity in receipt of CIT versus preferred NTs between Hispanic and White pts (21.5%; 95% CI −8.3 to 51.4), suggesting that other factors may contribute to the observed inequities. Conclusion Black and Hispanic pts with CLL were less likely than White pts to receive preferred NTs. A significant proportion of these disparities was explained by area-level SDOH, particularly residential segregation. These findings underscore the need to address structural barriers to ensure equitable access to emerging, guideline-recommended treatments.

Abstract BACKGROUND: DNA methyltransferase inhibition offers palliative benefit but does not alter disease biology. in chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML, Merlevede J et al. Nat Comm 2016). This was conclusively demonstrated in the phase 3 DACOTA study, where decitabine did not improve event-free survival in comparison to hydroxyurea (median 12.1 versus 10.3 months, P=0.27) in advanced myeloproliferative CMML (MP-CMML). Hence, there is in urgent need to develop disease modifying therapies for this dismal condition. We and others have demonstrated a role for RAS mutations in MP-CMML through the activation of the KMT2A-PLK1 axis. Targeting of this axis using onvansertib, an inhibitor of PLK1, has demonstrated its pre-clinical efficacy in MP-CMML patient-derived organoid and xenograft models. (Carr RM et al. Nat Comm 2021). METHODS: We conducted a single center phase 1 study to assess the safety and efficacy of onvansertib in relapsed/refractory MP-CMML (NCT05549661). We used a Bayesian Optimal Interval (BOIN) study design to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). The three dose cohorts included 6, 9 and 12 mg/m2 given orally from days 1 to 21 of each 28-day cycle. Key inclusion criteria included a WHO-defined diagnosis of MP-CMML with a white blood cell (WBC) count > 13,000/mm3 and adequate organ function (estimated GFR > 50 mL/min/m2). Response was evaluated per the MDS/MPN International Working Group Criteria (Savona et al. Blood 2015). Targeting efficacy was assessed by measuring phosphorylation of TCTP (a PLK1 substrate), specifically pTCTP/TCTP ratios by immunoblotting in peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) samples pre and post cycle 1 (Days 1, 7, 21) and end of cycle 3. Pharmacokinetic studies and translational correlative studies were conducted per protocol. RESULTS: Between April 2023 and July 2025, a total of 9 patients were enrolled. The median age at enrollment was 68 years (range: 60-83); all caucasian with 4 (44%) males. All patients had a diagnosis of CMML-1 with a median bone marrow (BM) blast percentage of 4 (0-9), median hemoglobin 10 (7.1-13.2) g/dL, median WBC count of 11.1 (3.1-72.7) x 109/L (4 patients had a WBC count < 13 x 109/L at enrollment due to hydroxyurea use but were confirmed to be MP-CMML at diagnosis), absolute monocyte count 2.1 (1.9-19.6) x 109/L, and platelet count of 36 (20-494) x 109/L. TET2 (89%), SRSF2 (78%), ASXL1 (56%), NRAS, KRAS and CBL (22% each) were the most frequent molecular abnormalities. Previous therapies included hydroxyurea (n=8) and decitabine (n=1). Four patients were enrolled at the 6mg/m2dose level, 2 at the 9 mg/m2 dose level and we currently have one patient at the 12 mg/m2 dose level. While there were 2 planned patients at the 6 mg/m2 dose level, due to a case of pericardial effusion that was possibly drug related, an additional two patients were enrolled at the same dose level, without any dose limiting toxicity (DLT). Targeting efficacy was confirmed by pTCTP immunoblotting in PBMC samples from 4 patients (6 and 9 mg/m2 dose levels) showing suppressed pTCTP/TCTP ratios. No confirmed DLT has been identified thus far, and no grade 3 or 4 toxicities attributable to the study drug have been reported. Possible or unrelated grade 3 adverse effects included infections (sepsis/cellulitis, n=2, 22%), acute kidney injury (n=1, 11%), pericardial effusion (n=1, 11%), and atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response (n=1, 11%). Median duration on therapy was 124 (range: 15-654) days with most common cause of study discontinuation being disease progression (33%). Response was assessed as per the MDS/MPN IWG criteria in patients who received at least 1 cycle (n=8) with 3 (38%) patients meeting criteria for either hematological or optimal marrow response. Specifically, there was one (14%) patient with >100% platelet response, one (14%) with normalization of WBC count (baseline WBC count >50 x 109/L), one (14%) optimal marrow response with BM blast% reduction from 8 to 2, facilitating candidacy for an allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, and three patients (38%) remained as stable disease. CONCLUSION: In MP-CMML, PLK1 inhibition with onvansertib is relatively well tolerated and shows preliminary efficacy in approximately 40% of patients, with one patient having an optimal marrow response at the 9 mg/m2 dose. Future directions include a dose expansion phase and studying upfront combination with DNA methyltransferase inhibitors.

Abstract Background Acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a major cause of non-relapse mortality (NRM) after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). High-dose steroids are standard first-line therapy for grade II–IV acute GVHD, whereas systemic treatment (tx) is generally not recommended for grade I. However, in practice many patients (pts) with grade I GVHD receive systemic steroids. A prior GITMO randomized trial (n=173) of grade I GVHD to either systemic steroid tx or “watch and wait” found that preemptive steroid tx reduced progression to grade II but not grade III/IV GVHD, increased serious infections, and resulted in similar chronic GVHD, NRM and survival (Bacigalupo, Haematologica 2017). In this study we analyzed real world evidence for early systemic steroid use and the potential impact of serum biomarkers in grade I GVHD. Methods We analyzed clinical data and serum samples from pts with grade I acute GVHD at 24 Mount Sinai Acute GVHD International Consortium (MAGIC) centers between 2014 and 2022 who were treated according to physician discretion. Pts were divided into a preemptive steroid tx group or a watch-and-wait group (systemic steroids administered only if progression to grade II–IV GVHD). Preemptive steroid use was treated as a time-dependent covariate and a frailty proportional hazards model with random effects was used to adjust for center effects to account for possible heterogeneity in clinical practices across transplant centers. Serum samples collected at the diagnosis of grade I GVHD were analyzed for ST2 and REG3α to calculate validated Ann Arbor (AA) scores (1, 2, 3). Results Grade I GVHD was diagnosed in 1143 pts; 591 (52%) received preemptive tx and 552 (48%) were treated by a watch-and-wait strategy. In the preemptive tx group, steroids were initiated at a median of 0 days and within 7 days for >90%. The median initial dose of steroids was 1 mg/kg of prednisone or its equivalent. In the watch and wait group, only 184 pts (33%) required systemic steroids for progression to grade II-IV GVHD at a median of 14 days from grade I diagnosis. Preemptive steroid tx reduced the risk of grade II–IV acute GVHD (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.56–0.89; P=0.003), but not the risk of grade III/IV acute GVHD (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.69–1.52; P=0.899) or chronic GVHD (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.69–1.52; P=0.899), consistent with the GITMO trial. The 12-month incidence of NRM was higher for preemptive tx vs. watch and wait (13% vs 7%, P=0.002). In multivariate analysis preemptive steroid use independently predicted an increased risk of NRM (HR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.06–2.50; P=0.026) as did several other known risk factors (older recipient age, umbilical cord blood donor, HCT-CI ≥3, and myeloablative conditioning). Greater NRM in the preemptive tx group was driven primarily by 3-fold more infectious deaths; deaths due to uncontrolled GVHD were similar for both tx groups. The risk for relapse was unexpectedly lower in the preemptive tx group (HR 0.64; 95% CI 0.47-0.88; P=0.006) and overall survival was therefore not different between groups, but risk factors for relapse such as minimal residual disease status were not available precluding further analysis of this finding. Serum was collected in 871 (76%) pts at onset of grade I GVHD for retrospective biomarker analysis. AA scores were AA1 (80%), AA2 (15%), and AA3 (5%). AA scores were highly predictive of progression to grade III/IV GVHD (AA1 vs AA2 vs AA3: 9% vs 14% vs 44%, all P<0.001) and the risk of 12-month NRM (8% vs 16% vs 39%, all P<0.001); this pattern was observed in both tx groups. The negative effect of preemptive steroid tx was most pronounced in pts with grade I/AA1 GVHD who experienced 5-fold more infectious related deaths compared to pts managed with a watch and wait approach. Conclusion Treatment of grade I GVHD with systemic steroids did not reduce the incidence of grade III/IV GVHD or deaths due to uncontrolled GVHD and instead increased the risk of NRM from infections compared to pts who were treated only after GVHD progressed. Importantly, 2/3 of the watch and wait pts never needed systemic steroid tx. These findings remained robust after adjusting for multiple confounders, including center effects, and were consistent with the GITMO trial. MAGIC biomarkers at the onset of grade I GVHD predicted outcomes and a watch and wait strategy may be best for the 80% of pts with AA1 GVHD. Better treatment options are needed for the 20% of pts with grade I and AA2/3 GVHD.

Abstract INTRODUCTION The ECHELON-2 trial for newly diagnosed CD30+ peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCL) demonstrated superior overall survival with brentuximab vedotin plus chemotherapy (BV-CHP) compared to CHOP. However, total enrollment was restricted to only 30% of patients with non-anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) histologies and was not powered to analyze survival benefits in this cohort. Thus, the benefit of BV-CHP in non-ALCL patients remains less clear. Adding to this uncertainty, CHOP plus etoposide (CHOEP) remains a standard regimen for many non-ALCL PTCL histologies for patients <60 years of age. Which of these three regimens offers superior outcomes for patients with CD30+ non-ALCL PTCL remains to be determined, is a critical knowledge gap in this area, and could meaningfully inform the management of these patients. METHODS We conducted a retrospective analysis of chemotherapy-naïve CD30+ (≥1%) PTCL from 7 centers in the United States. Histologies were limited to PTCL-NOS and PTCL with a T follicular helper phenotype (PTCL-TFH). Frontline regimens were defined as BV-based (BV-CHP), etoposide-based (CHOEP/EPOCH), novel-CHOP (CHOP/CHOEP + novel drug on a clinical trial), or CHOP. CD30 was considered positive if any expression was reported, and when available, stratified as ≥10% or <10% of the total lymphocyte population. RESULTS The CD30+ PTCL cohort consisted of 194 patients with a median age of 68 years at diagnosis and a male (65%) predominance. Nodal PTCL-TFH (65%) was the most common histology. Most had stage III-IV disease (89%) with a high-intermediate to high-risk IPI score of 3-5 (54%). 18% had an ECOG of ≥2, 45% had ≥2 extranodal sites, and 43% had bone marrow involvement, although biopsies were not performed in all patients. CD30 expression in ≥10% of malignant T cells was observed in 55% of all quantitatively reported cases. Frontline therapy consisted of BV-based (36%), etoposide-based (30%), CHOP (27%), and novel-CHOP (7%). Baseline characteristics and CD30 expression were similar between treatment groups. The ORR was 72% (64% CR, 8% PR), with no differences observed by treatment or histology. On multivariate analysis (MVA), a high LDH was associated with lower CR (OR 2.84, p=0.003). For the patients who demonstrated a CR to frontline therapy, 61% underwent ASCT. With a median follow-up of 26.1 months (IQR 12.3-51.6), the median PFS and OS were 11.4 (9.8-14.2) and 47 (32-60.3) months, respectively. The 2-year PFS and OS were 34.9% (28.1-41.7) and 62% (54.5-68.6), respectively. PFS and OS were similar for PTCL-NOS compared to PTCL-TFH, and AITL fared similarly to non-AITL PTCL-TFH. By treatment, novel-CHOP demonstrated the most favorable PFS (median 41.9 months) and OS (median 68.1 months). Survival curves overlapped continuously with all other treatment regimens and was not statistically significant. For patients <60, PFS and OS were equivocal with BV-based (n=17) compared to etoposide-based (n=26) regimens. On MVA, stage III/IV disease conferred an inferior PFS (HR 2.00, p=0.018) as did an IPI score of 3-5 for OS (HR 2.15, p=0.001). Neither histology nor frontline treatment impacted PFS or OS. The chosen frontline treatment also had no survival impact in key subgroup analyses including patients <60 (n=56) or with CD30-expression ≥10% (n=43). For patients with CR to frontline therapy, ASCT demonstrated a significant PFS benefit (HR 0.59, p=0.028) but no statistically significant difference in OS benefit (HR 0.58, p=0.073). CONCLUSION These data provide valuable insight into the lesser-represented patient population from the pivotal ECHELON-2 trial. In this cohort of CD30+ (≥1%) non-ALCL PTCL, there was no clearly superior standard frontline regimen. The number of patients with quantitively reported CD30 expression was too small for definitive conclusions in the ≥10% CD30+ cohort and retrospective pathology review is ongoing. ASCT for patients in CR offered superior outcomes, supporting this strategy regardless of the frontline regimen, recognizing the limitations of non-randomized, retrospective analyses. Novel-CHOP regimens demonstrated encouraging survival, and clinical trials should maintain priority over standard regimens for patients with CD30+ (1-10%) PTCL-NOS and PTCL-TFH.

Abstract Background: The synergistic mechanisms of BCL-2 inhibitors and CD20-directed antibodies in the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) often lead to deep and durable responses. Although the use of venetoclax-obinutuzumab (Ven-O) in the frontline setting (1L) for CLL/SLL has led to a paradigm shift in the disease management, there are limited data on its efficacy in the relapsed/refractory (R/R) setting. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of Ven-O in both 1L and R/R CLL among patients treated outside the context of clinical trials at our institution. Methods We used the Mayo Clinic CLL Database to identify patients with CLL who were treated with Ven-O, both in 1L and R/R settings. Patients seen at Mayo Clinic Rochester between 2017 and 2025 were included. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from date of Ven-O initiation until last known alive date. Event-free survival (EFS) was calculated from date of Ven-O initiation until the next line of treatment or last known alive date. Kaplan-Meier methods estimated EFS and OS rates at 1, 3, and 5 years. Cox proportional hazards models were used to explore the association between baseline factors and EFS and OS; results are reported as hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). Finally, we compared the OS to the age- and sex-matched general population of the state of Minnesota. Results A total of 154 patients (91 1L, 63 R/R) were included in the study. The median age was 68 years (69 1L, 68 R/R), and 68% were male (64% 1L, 73% R/R). Overall, TP53 disruptions (either del17p by FISH or TP53 mutation) were noted in 22 (15%) patients (9% 1L, 23% R/R). CLL FISH findings demonstrated del11q in 24 (19%) patients (19% 1L, 18% R/R), del13q in 46 (36%) patients (36% 1L, 36% R/R), and trisomy 12 in 21 (16%) patients (16% 1L, 18% R/R). IGHV genes were unmutated in 95 (68%) patients (60% 1L, 80% R/R). The CLL-IPI risk score was high in 54 (51%) patients (51% 1L, 53% R/R) and very-high in 18 (17%) patients (8% 1L, 34% R/R). A total of 121 (89%) patients completed planned treatment (1 year of venetoclax in 73 [90%] 1L and 2 years of venetoclax in 48 [87%] R/R). Median follow-up for the entire cohort was 1.8 years (2.2 1L, 1.5 R/R). Neither median EFS nor OS was reached for the overall cohort or within the 1L and R/R subgroups. The 1, 3, and 5-year EFS estimates for the overall cohort were 91% (86-96%), 85% (78-92%), and 67% (51-89%), respectively; corresponding EFS values for the 1L subgroup were 95% (91-100%), 89% (82-98%), and 67% (47-95%), respectively; and for the R/R subgroup were 85% (76-95%), 77% (65-92%), and 77% (65-92%), respectively. The 1, 3, and 5-year OS estimates were 98% (95-100%), 95% (91-99%), and 88% (76%-100%), respectively; corresponding OS values for the 1L subgroup were 99% (96-100%), 97% (94-100%), and 97% (94-100%) and for the R/R subgroup were 96% (91-100%), 91% (82-100%), and 61% (27-100%), respectively. Univariable analyses showed that TP53 disruption was associated with shorter EFS (HR 3.8, 95%CI 1.4-10.2, p=0.01), although IGHV mutation status was not associated with shorter EFS. A higher level of serum beta-2 microglobulin (HR 1.27, 95%CI 1.01-1.59, p=0.04) and R/R status (HR 4.9, 95%CI 0.9-25.8, p=0.06) were associated with a shorter OS. Interestingly, TP53 mutation status and IGHV mutation status were not associated with inferior OS. There was no difference in the observed and expected OS for both the 1L (p-0.23) and R/R (p=0.14) Ven-O treated cohorts compared to the age- and sex-matched general population of the state of Minnesota. Conclusions Our study shows that Ven-O is a well-tolerated regimen with demonstration of durable treatment responses both in the 1L and R/R groups, when used outside the context of a clinical trial. To the best of our knowledge, these data for the first time demonstrate no difference in OS of patients treated with Ven-O compared to age- and sex-matched general population, in both the 1L and R/R settings.

Abstract Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) using an HLA mismatched unrelated donor (MMUD) with calcineurin inhibitor-based graft versus host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis results in increased incidence of non-relapse mortality (NRM) and lower survival compared to matched donor HCT. The NMDP sponsored 15-MMUD study demonstrated that post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy)-based prophylaxis following bone marrow derived MMUD HCT resulted in reduced incidence of GVHD and favorable survival. Because marrow grafts can be difficult to procure and vary in quality, we conducted a phase II, prospective, multicenter study to evaluate PTCy-based GVHD prophylaxis in adult recipients of MMUD using peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) allografts. The primary study aim was to estimate the probability of one-year overall survival (OS) post HCT. Secondary aims were to assess other key clinical endpoints and determine the rate of severe infections. Initial results of the first 70 recipients who received reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) were previously reported by Al Malki et al (JCO 2025) demonstrating a 1-year OS of 78.6% (95% CI, 67% to 86.5%). Here, we report results from a planned expansion of the study that included 123 additional RIC recipients, with updated results from the initial cohort of 70 patients (total N = 193 subjects) treated at 33 centers. Study participants received cyclophosphamide 50 mg/kg (ideal body weight) administered on days 3 and 4 post HCT with tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil as previously described (Al Malki, JCO, 2025). The median study participant age was 65.0 (range: 22.9-78.9); 92 (47.7%) of participants were male, and 84 (43.5%) identified as having other than non-Hispanic white ancestry. The HCT comorbidity index was high-risk (>3) in 65 (33.7%). Underlying histologic diagnosis was AML in 96 (49.7%) participants, MDS in 43 (22.3%), ALL in 20 (10.4%), lymphoma or CLL in 24 (12.4%), and CML/other leukemias in 10 (5.2%). Conditioning regimens used were fludarabine and melphalan (100 or 140 mg/m2) (N=120; 62.2%), 2-day busulfan and fludarabine (N=38; 19.7%), and fludarabine, cyclophosphamide and total body irradiation (200 cGy) (N=32; 16.6%). Donor HLA matching (considering HLA-A, -B, -C, and -DRB1) was 7/8 in 131 (67.9%) of participants, 6/8-matched in 51 (26.4%), and 4-5/8-matched in 11 (5.7%) participants. Median donor age was 25.5 years (range: 18.7-35.7). The one-year overall OS estimate was 79.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 73.2-84.7). Survival was similar among HLA 7/8-matched donor recipients (77.8%, 69.7-84%) and <7/8 matched donor recipients (83.7%, 71.8-90.9%). The one-year GVHD-free, relapse-free survival (GRFS) was 49.9% (42.6-56.9%) and the one-year progression-free survival was 70.2% (63.2-76.2%). The one-year cumulative incidence (CI) rates of NRM and relapse were 12.5% (8.3-17.6%) and 17.3%(12.3-23%), respectively. The 6-month CI of grade II-IV and grade III-IV acute GVHD were 40.0% (33.0-46.8%) and 7.8% (4.6-12.1%), respectively. The one-year incidence of all chronic GVHD and severe chronic GVHD were 15.6% (10.7-21.2%) and 3.7% (1.6-7%), respectively, by NIH consensus criteria. The CI of grade 1-4 cytokine release syndrome (CRS) by day 7 post HCT was 28.0% (21.8-34.9%), and grade 3-4 CRS was 0.5% (0-2.9%). Primary engraftment failure occurred in 9 (4.7%) participants. Among 145 evaluated participants, 85.5% were >95% donor in blood chimerism at day 100 post HCT. Within the first 100 days after HCT, CTCAE grade 2-5 infections occurred in 113 (58.5%) of participants and grade 3-5 infections occurred in 59 (30.6%) of participants. The most common etiologies of grade 2-5 infections were bacterial (N=78), followed by viral (N=48). The most common grade 3-5 non-infectious toxicities were cardiac disorders, which occurred in 4 (2.1%) of participants. In conclusion, the results including this expansion cohort demonstrate encouraging 1-year OS, NRM and relapse rates in RIC recipients of PTCy-based GVHD prophylaxis and PBSC allografts from MMUDs. This larger cohort of 193 recipients re-affirm the results from the initial cohort with greater robustness.Measures to mitigate infection risk are likely to further improve outcomes. Reducing the dose of PTCy is a candidate approach currently being tested in the ongoing OPTIMIZE trial (NCT 06001385).These results support the extension of PBSC MMUD using PTCy to individuals who lack an HLA-matched donor and require RIC HCT.

Abstract Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) remains inaccessible to many patients, particularly those of non-European ancestry, due to the limited availability of matched unrelated donors (URD). While single-HLA mismatched donors (7/8) often yield acceptable outcomes, URD HCT mismatched at ≥ 2 HLA alleles (<7/8) has historically been associated with poor survival and prohibitive toxicity. Post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) has improved outcomes following mismatched unrelated donor (MMUD) HCT, potentially enabling less stringent donor matching. Whether the degree of donor-recipient HLA disparity remains prognostic after MMUD HCT when PTCy is used is unknown. The ACCESS trial (NCT04904588) was conducted by the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research Clinical Research Organization and prospectively evaluated PTCy-based graft versus host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis in adult recipients of 4–7/8 (HLA-A, -B, -C and -DRB1) MMUD peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) from donors age ≤35 years old following either myeloablative (MAC) or reduced intensity/non-myeloablative (RIC/NMA) conditioning. This analysis focused on all adult recipients of <7/8 grafts enrolled on the study across both conditioning strata, with descriptive comparison to patients who received 7/8 MMUD PBSC grafts. The primary endpoint was 1-year overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included primary graft failure (PGF), non-relapse mortality (NRM), relapse, acute and chronic GVHD, and GVHD-free relapse-free survival (GRFS). A total of 268 adults received MMUD PBSC grafts: 85 with <7/8 matches (MAC: n=23; RIC/NMA: n=62) and 183 with 7/8 matches (MAC: n=52; RIC/NMA: n=131). Among <7/8 recipients, median age was 57 years old (range, 24–78), 49% were male, with diagnoses of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) (55%), myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) (15%), and lymphoma (14%). HLA mismatch distribution in the <7/8 group was 6/8 in 82%, 5/8 in 14%, and 4/8 in 4%. Most received fludarabine/melphalan (44%) or myeloablative busulfan/fludarabine (21%). Median CD34+ cell dose was 5.5 ×10^6/recipient kg (range: 3.2-8.0) and 75% of grafts were cryopreserved prior to infusion. Median donor age was 25.8 (range: 18.7-35.7) in the 7/8 group and 25.0 (range: 18.3-34.8) in the <7/8 group. The <7/8 cohort was racially and ethnically diverse, with 61% identifying as other than non-Hispanic white. The 7/8 cohort had a median age of 63 years old (range, 20–79), with 52% male. Disease distribution, conditioning intensity, and infused cell doses were similar to the <7/8 group. A smaller proportion of grafts were cryopreserved (61%), and 47% of patients identified as other than non-Hispanic White. One-year OS for <7/8 recipients was 86% (95% CI: 76–92%), compared to 79% (95% CI: 72–84%) in 7/8 recipients. One-year incidence of relapse was 23% (95% CI: 14–33%) in the <7/8 group and 17% (95% CI: 12–23%) in 7/8 recipients; NRM was 8% (95% CI: 4–16%) and 14% (95% CI: 9–19%), respectively. GRFS was 55% (95% CI: 43–65%) for <7/8 and 51% (95% CI: 44–58%) for 7/8 recipients. PGF occurred in 8% (95% CI: 3–18%) of <7/8 RIC recipients and 3% (95% CI: 1–8%) of 7/8 RIC recipients; no MAC recipients had PGF. At 6 months post-HCT, grade II–IV acute GVHD occurred in 34% (95% CI: 24–44%) of <7/8 patients and 39% (95% CI: 32–46%) of 7/8; grade III–IV acute GVHD was observed in 7% (95% CI: 3–14%) and 8% (95% CI: 5–13%), respectively. Moderate to severe chronic GVHD (NIH consensus criteria) at one year occurred in 8% (95% CI: 3–15%) of <7/8 recipients and 11% (95% CI: 7–16%) of 7/8 recipients. When grouped by conditioning intensity, 1-year outcomes within the <7/8 cohort were: OS 91% after MAC and 84% after RIC/NMA; relapse in 32% after MAC and 20% after RIC/NMA, respectively; GRFS was 53% for MAC and 55% for RIC/NMA; and NRM remained low at 9% after MAC and 8% after RIC/NMA. In this cohort of adult recipients of <7/8 MMUD PBSC grafts with PTCy-based GVHD prophylaxis enrolled on the ACCESS study, 1-year OS exceeded 80% and was comparable to 7/8 recipients. Relapse, NRM, and GVHD rates were similarly favorable and consistent with outcomes reported in 7/8 donor recipients. These findings support extending suitable MMUD match considerations to include 4-6/8 in the context of PTCy, potentially enabling near-universal donor access, while allowing for optimization of other non-HLA donor factors.

Abstract Introduction: T-PLL is a rare, aggressive leukemia with poor prognosis and limited therapies. Previous studies on T-PLL patients receiving an allogeneic stem cell transplant (alloSCT) are limited by small numbers with limited data on disease and transplant characteristics. Further, recent data from our large national cohort of patients demonstrated significant survival difference between TCL1A+ and TCL1A- T-PLL, and CD8+ T-PLL vs CD8- T-PLL. In this large multi-center series, utilizing comprehensive disease subtype and alloSCT clinical data, we evaluated prognostic and survival therapeutic outcomes in T-PLL patients that had an alloSCT with a particular focus on T-PLL disease subtypes. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 572 diagnosed with T-PLL at 21 academic cancer centers throughout the USA between 2000-2023, of which we performed a further evaluation on the169 that proceeded with alloSCT. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazard models. Results: Among n=169 alloSCT recipients with T-PLL, the median follow-up time was 20.9 months post-alloSCT (range: 0.2-182.9), the median age at transplant was 59 years (range: 35-77) and 52% were male. In evaluated patients (n=109), TCL1A was positive by cytogenetics or FISH in 69%. As our recent analysis demonstrated significant differences in survival among specific subtypes of T-PLL, we evaluated outcomes in patients with CD4+CD8- T-PLL (n=90, 53%), CD4-CD8+ (n=17, 10%) T-PLL, and CD4+CD8+ T-PLL (n=52, 31%). 53% (87/164) had known nodal involvement at diagnosis identified by PET or CT scan and 45% (43/96) of known patients had minimal residual disease (MRD) at the time of transplant [defined as <5% T-PLL in marrow by flow, or +cytogenetics (e.g. TCL1A)] prior to alloSCT. At the time of alloSCT, 136 (80%) patients were in CR and 23 (14%) patients were in PR. Forty-nine (30%) had a myeloablative (MAC)conditioning regimen and 114 (70%) had a reduced intensity chemotherapy (RIC) conditioning regimen. Eighty (49%) patients had TBI as part of their regimen. The most common regimens were fludarabine (flu)/melphalan based regimens (n=44; 26.0%), flu/cyclophosphamide (cy) based regimens (n=33; 19.5%), flu/busulfan based regimens (n=22; 13.0%), flu/total body irradiation (TBI) (n=8; 4.7%), and cy/TBI (n=4; 2.4%). Across the whole cohort, the median OS and PFS post-alloSCT was 32.6 months (95% CI: 21.0-41.9) and 20.8 months (95% CI: 14.4-30.5) months while the 1-year cumulative incidences (CI) of NRM and relapse were 17% and 20%, respectively. The incidences of grade II-IV acute GVHD and cGVHD were 19% and 23%. There was no difference between patients with myeloablative conditioning (MAC) (n=49, 29%) when compared to patients that received reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) (n=114, 67%) in OS (33.1 vs 29.2; p=0.68) and PFS (20.2 vs 20.8; p=0.97). Patients that were MRD+ (n=31) had worse OS (22.2 vs 48.6; p=0.1) and PFS (14.1 vs 32.5; p=0.04) and higher rates of relapse (1-year relapse 20% vs 8%; p=0.08) than patients that were MRD- (n=50). PFS was improved in those who received alloSCT though only trended towards significance due to low numbers (HR 0.76, p=0.09). In subtype analysis, TCL1A+ T-PLL had significantly worse outcomes compared to TCL1A negative T-PLL. TCL1A+ disease had significantly worse OS (21.6 vs 63.1; p=0.01) and PFS (12.4 vs 50.7; p=0.01) compared to TCL1A-. Additionally, in TCL1A+ disease CI of NRM (24% vs 3%; p=0.02) and relapse (25% vs 12%; p=0.86) was higher vs TCL1A- PLL. CD4+CD8-, CD4-CD8+, and CD4+CD8+ disease had no difference in survival via either OS (28.0 vs 34.4 vs 21.0; p=0.17) or PFS (29.4 vs 23.5 vs 13.6; p=0.09) as well as no difference 1-year CI of NRM ( 11.6 vs 23.5 vs 26.2; p=0.35) and relapse (18.5 vs 23.5 vs 20.0; p=0.67).Conclusions: AlloSCT significantly improved outcomes for patients with T-PLL compared to those who did not proceed to alloSCT and remains he only curative therapy for those with T-PLL. OS, PFS, and CI relapse were significantly worse for patients with TCL1A+ subtype of T-PLL, or those with MRD positivity or PR prior to alloSCT. Novel strategies to decrease relapse such as post-alloSCT maintenance therapy to improve outcomes are urgently needed in these patients.