Citations

Abstract Purpose: Germline pathogenic variants in CHEK2 confer moderately elevated breast cancer risk (odds ratio, OR ∼ 2.5), qualifying carriers for enhanced breast cancer screening. Besides pathogenic variants, dozens of missense CHEK2 variants of uncertain significance (VUS) have been identified, hampering the clinical utility of germline genetic testing (GGT). Experimental Design: We collected 460 CHEK2 missense VUS identified by the ENIGMA consortium in 15 countries. Their functional characterization was performed using CHEK2-complementation assays quantifying KAP1 phosphorylation and CHK2 autophosphorylation in human RPE1–CHEK2-knockout cells. Concordant results in both functional assays were used to categorize CHEK2 VUS from 12 ENIGMA case–control datasets, including 73,048 female patients with breast cancer and 88,658 ethnicity-matched controls. Results: A total of 430/460 VUS were successfully analyzed, of which 340 (79.1%) were concordant in both functional assays and categorized as functionally impaired (N = 102), functionally intermediate (N = 12), or functionally wild-type (WT)–like (N = 226). We then examined their association with breast cancer risk in the case–control analysis. The OR and 95% CI (confidence intervals) for carriers of functionally impaired, intermediate, and WT-like variants were 2.83 (95% CI, 2.35–3.41), 1.57 (95% CI, 1.41–1.75), and 1.19 (95% CI, 1.08–1.31), respectively. The meta-analysis of population-specific datasets showed similar results. Conclusions: We determined the functional consequences for the majority of CHEK2 missense VUS found in patients with breast cancer (3,660/4,436; 82.5%). Carriers of functionally impaired missense variants accounted for 0.5% of patients with breast cancer and were associated with a moderate risk similar to that of truncating CHEK2 variants. In contrast, 2.2% of all patients with breast cancer carried functionally wild-type/intermediate missense variants with no clinically relevant breast cancer risk in heterozygous carriers.

Abstract Purpose: Myelofibrosis (MF) is a clonal myeloproliferative neoplasm characterized by systemic symptoms, cytopenias, organomegaly, and bone marrow fibrosis. JAK2 inhibitors afford symptom and spleen burden reduction but do not alter the disease course and frequently lead to thrombocytopenia. TGFβ, a pleiotropic cytokine elaborated by the MF clone, negatively regulates normal hematopoiesis, downregulates antitumor immunity, and promotes bone marrow fibrosis. Our group previously showed that AVID200, a potent and selective TGFβ 1/3 trap, reduced TGFβ1-induced proliferation of human mesenchymal stromal cells, phosphorylation of SMAD2, and collagen expression. Moreover, treatment of MF mononuclear cells with AVID200 led to increased numbers of progenitor cells (PC) with wild-type JAK2 rather than JAK2V617F. Patients and Methods: We conducted an investigator-initiated, multicenter, phase Ib trial of AVID200 monotherapy in 21 patients with advanced MF. Results: No dose-limiting toxicity was identified at the three dose levels tested, and grade 3/4 anemia and thrombocytopenia occurred in 28.6% and 19.0% of treated patients, respectively. After six cycles of therapy, two patients attained a clinical benefit by IWG-MRT criteria. Spleen and symptom benefits were observed across treatment cycles. Unlike other MF-directed therapies, increases in platelet counts were noted in 81% of treated patients with three patients achieving normalization. Treatment with AVID200 resulted in potent suppression of plasma TGFβ1 levels and pSMAD2 in MF cells. Conclusions: AVID200 is a well-tolerated, rational, therapeutic agent for the treatment of patients with MF and should be evaluated further in patients with thrombocytopenic MF in combination with agents that target aberrant MF intracellular signaling pathways.

Abstract BACKGROUND TTFields are electric fields that exert physical forces to disrupt cellular processes critical for cancer cell viability and tumor progression. TTFields therapy is approved for adults with recurrent (r) and newly diagnosed (nd) glioblastoma (GBM), based on the phase 3 EF-11 (TTFields 200 kHz) and EF-14 studies (TTFields therapy 200 kHz + temozolomide), respectively, which showed clinical benefit without increase in systemic adverse events (AEs). Pediatric patients were not included in the EF-11 and EF-14 studies. Here, we present pediatric safety data from an updated global post-marketing surveillance (PMS) analysis of patients with brain tumors treated with TTFields therapy, over an 11-year timeframe. METHODS Unsolicited PMS data from patients with brain tumors who received TTFields therapy from October 2011-March 2022 in North America, Europe, Middle East, Africa, and Japan were included. AEs were categorized using MedDRA version 25.1. RESULTS Overall, 25,898 patients were included. Diagnoses were ndGBM (68%), rGBM (26%), anaplastic astrocytoma/oligodendroglioma (4%) and other (2%). Two-thirds of patients were male. The analysis included 93 (0.4%) pediatric/adolescent patients (<18 years). In pediatric patients, 62% experienced ≥1 AE, with 53% related to TTFields therapy; these values were comparable with the overall population (73% and 56%, respectively). The most common treatment-related AEs in pediatric patients were: skin reaction (39%), heat sensation (14%), and headache (12%); and in the overall population were: skin reaction (43%), electric sensation (14%), and heat sensation (12%). CONCLUSIONS This long-term, global, real-world data analysis, including pediatric patients with brain tumors, demonstrates a tolerable safety profile of TTFields therapy, consistent with pivotal clinical studies. There were no major differences in AEs between pediatric and adult patients and no new safety signals identified in the pediatric population. Consistent with the overall dataset, most AEs in pediatric patients were localized mild–moderate skin events, which are typically easily managed.

e19078 Background: MECOM (EVI1) rearrangements in MDS/AML are rare and carry an unfavorable prognosis. Although allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) may prolong survival, factors impacting outcomes are not known. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with MECOM (EVI1) to associate clinicopathologic variables with prognosis. Methods: This study was approved by the Mayo Clinic IRB. Patients >18 years of age with MDS or AML and MECOM EVI1 at Mayo Clinic between 01/2012 and 12/2022 were included. Response was defined by ELN criteria. Intensive chemotherapy was defined as 7+3 or high dose cytarabine. Non-intensive chemotherapy included hypomethylating agents with or without venetoclax. Median overall survival (OS) and median leukemia free survival (LFS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Outcome differences between sub-groups and univariate analyses were assessed with Cox regression. Results: Sixty patients met criteria for inclusion. Sixty-three percent (n = 38) were male and the median age at diagnosis was 67.8 yrs (range, 56 – 75). Eighty percent had AML (n = 48) and 18% had MDS (n = 11). Sixty-seven percent of patients had secondary AML/MDS (n = 40). Inv(3)/t(3;3) was present in 65% (n = 39) and t(3;21) was present in 12% (n = 7). Thirty-eight percent (n = 23) of patients had cooccurring monosomy 7 or 7q deletion and 5% had complex karyotype (n = 3). SF3B1 was the most common cooccurring mutation in 31% (n = 10), followed by KRAS in 19% (n = 6). Thirty-eight percent of patients (n = 23) received intensive chemotherapy. Complete response (CR) rates were 36% with intensive treatment (n = 8) and 4% with non-intensive treatment (n = 1; p = 0.007). Thirty percent (n = 18) underwent SCT (78% in CR1 and 22% in CR2) and of those, myeloablative conditioning (MAC) was used in 38% while 61% received reduced intensity conditioning (RIC). The mOS in the entire cohort was 11 months (95% CI 6.2, 17). Patients who received a SCT had longer mOS compared to patients who did not (19 vs 6.2 months, HR = 0.31, 95% CI 0.16,0.64; p = 0.001). AML-MRC was a poor prognostic factor in the HCST group for OS (HR = 4.23, 95% CI 1.02, 17.5, p = 0.047). Intensive vs. non-intensive chemotherapy, response prior to transplant (CR vs. no CR), or having 2 or more mutations on NGS did not significantly impact OS or LFS. Conclusions: In line with previous reports, allo-HSCT was associated with improved survival outcomes. Our results showed a high frequency of secondary AML/MDS, but only AML-MRC was associated with decreased survival outcomes. Regardless of therapy type, outcomes were poor. Novel therapies are urgently needed for these patients.

7019 Background: High-risk essential thrombocythemia (HR ET) is characterized by thrombocytosis, thrombohemorrhagic events and systemic symptoms. Pts can experience intolerance, inadequate response or loss of response to first-line cytoreductive therapies (hydroxyurea [HU] or interferon alfa-2a). BET protein inhibition is a novel therapeutic strategy that downregulates inflammatory cytokines and may inhibit differentiation and proliferation of abnormal megakaryocytes involved in ET pathogenesis. Results from the Phase 2 MANIFEST study (NCT02158858) suggested potentially encouraging clinical efficacy in pts with myelofibrosis treated with Pelabresib (PELA), an oral, small-molecule, investigational BET inhibitor. Here we present preliminary results from MANIFEST Arm 4 investigating PELA monotherapy in HR ET refractory or intolerant to HU. Methods: Eligible pts had platelets > 600 x 109/L and ≥ 2 symptoms (average score ≥3/ TSS≥15). Pts received PELA monotherapy 225 mg QD. The primary endpoint was complete hematologic response (CHR; normalization of platelet count (≤400 x 109/L), WBC count (≤10 x 109/L) confirmed after one cycle [after 3 weeks]) and normal spleen size. Secondary endpoints included partial HR (PHR; platelets 400–600 x 109/L and WBC ≤10 x 109/L), symptom improvement (≥50% TSS reduction) and safety. Results: As of July 2022, 20 pts with HR ET were treated: median age 64 yrs (42–83), median Hgb 13 (10–16) g/dL, median platelet count 772 (418–1255) x 109/L and median TSS 32.7 (6.9–123). The majority of pts had a hematologic response (90% [18/20] unconfirmed CHR or PHR); confirmed CHR was observed in 40% (8/20) (Table). Median platelet and WBC count at Wk 12 was 446 x109/L and 8.2 x 109/L, respectively. TSS reduction was reported in 86% (12/14 pts); median TSS reduction at Wk 12 was –31%. Hgb levels remained stable through Wk 24. The most common nonhematologic AEs were nausea (60%; 10% Gr 3), diarrhea (35%; 5% Gr 3) and dysgeusia (35%; no Gr 3). Hemorrhagic or thromboembolic events were reported in 30% pts (15% Gr 3). No events of thrombocytopenia and no Gr 4 events or higher were reported. Conclusions: Preliminary results from Arm 4 of the MANIFEST study suggest potential clinical benefit with PELA monotherapy in pts with HR ET refractory or intolerant to HU as supported by hematologic responses and symptom improvement. Safety results are consistent with the known safety profile of PELA and as expected in the underlying study population. Clinical trial information: NCT02158858 . [Table: see text]

7018 Background: MF is a life-limiting malignancy characterized by marrow fibrosis, splenomegaly, and progressive cytopenias. JAK2 inhibitors can reduce spleen volume, which is considered a surrogate for disease response. For example, ≥10% SVR on ruxolitinib (RUX) is associated with improved OS among patients with platelet (PLT) counts ≥100×109/L. RUX cannot be administered at full dose in patients with lower PLTs, and it is not known whether the association between SVR and OS persists in such patients. PAC is a JAK1-sparing inhibitor of JAK2/IRAK1/ACVR1 that demonstrated SVR benefit vs BAT (including RUX) in PERSIST-2, which enrolled MF patients with PLTs ≤100×109/L. Here we present a retrospective landmark OS analysis of the relationship between SVR and OS on PERSIST-2. Methods: This analysis includes PERSIST-2 patients who were alive and on study at the start of the 12-week SVR window (study week 10) on PAC 200 mg BID or BAT. Spleen volume was assessed radiographically (MRI or CT). OS was evaluated among SVR responders vs non-responders within each treatment arm using different SVR thresholds (≥35%, ≥20%, ≥10%, > 0%) and a landmark analysis methodology. OS was compared using the log-rank test. Results: Among patients on PAC (n = 89), any SVR ( > 0%) at 12 weeks was significantly associated with improved survival (HR = 0.08 [95% CI: 0.01, 0.51], P = 0.0007). Among all SVR response thresholds, SVR ≥10% demonstrated the greatest separation in OS curves between responders vs. non-responders on PAC, with no deaths on study among 65 responders compared to 5 deaths among 24 non-responders (HR = 0.0 [95% CI: 0.0, 0.14], P < 0.0001). By contrast, SVR did not predict OS benefit on BAT (n = 84), including RUX (n = 39). For example, 11% (3/28) of patients on BAT who achieved SVR ≥10% died compared to a similar number (14%, 8/56) of non-responders (HR = 0.63 [95% CI: 0.17, 2.37], P = 0.49). Of the 28 patients on BAT who achieved SVR ≥10%, 23 (82%) were treated with RUX. Among these 23 patients, most patients were receiving low-dose RUX at the time of the landmark: 78% were on ≤10 mg BID and 43% were on £5 mg BID. By contrast, the median relative dose intensity on PAC was 100% (200 mg BID) through week 12 among both SVR ≥10% responders and non-responders. Conclusions: In MF patients with PLTs ≤100×109/L, achieving SVR on full-dose PAC was associated with significant OS benefit. By contrast, this association was not found with BAT, even though most responders were on RUX, albeit at low doses. As PAC can be given at full dose regardless of PLT count, it is possible that PAC may offer a unique survival advantage for MF patients with moderate or severe thrombocytopenia who achieve spleen reduction. Clinical trial information: NCT02055781 .

7016 Background: Many patients (pts) with myelofibrosis (MF) experience anemia resulting from disease or JAK inhibitor therapy. The open-label, phase 2 ACE-536-MF-001 study (NCT03194542) evaluated the safety and efficacy of luspatercept (LUSPA) for the treatment of MF-related anemia. Methods: Eligible pts comprised 4 cohorts based on transfusion dependence (TD, defined as receiving 4–12 red blood cell [RBC] units/84 days [d] immediately up to cycle 1 d 1) and stable ruxolitinib (RUX) treatment; cohort 1: no TD, no RUX; cohort 2: TD, no RUX; cohort 3A: no TD, RUX; cohort 3B: TD, RUX. Pts received subcutaneous LUSPA 1.0 mg/kg (1.33 mg/kg for pts in cohort 3B expansion) with titration up to 1.75 mg/kg in 21-d cycles. Disease response was assessed at d 169 and treatment extended for pts showing clinical benefit; pts were followed for ≥ 3 years (y) post last dose. The primary endpoint was anemia response (defined as 84 consecutive d: ≥ 1.5 g/dL hemoglobin [Hgb] from baseline without transfusion [cohorts 1 and 3A] or RBC transfusion-free [cohorts 2 and 3B]); secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), transfusion frequency, change in Hgb level, and symptom response. Results: Of 95 pts in the ITT group, the most common reason for treatment discontinuation was lack of clinical benefit at d 169 (n = 28). Median (range) age was 71.0 (50–89) y. Most (54.7%) pts had primary MF, intermediate-risk 2 disease (75.8%), and > 2 y since initial diagnosis (74.7%). Median prior RUX therapy was 18.1 months (cohorts 3A/3B) and 84.7% of pts had baseline transfusion burden 6–12 units/84 d (cohorts 2/3B). Mean treatment duration was 42.8 weeks. Cohort 3B had the highest anemia response rate with 26.3% (95% CI, 13.4–43.1) of pts transfusion independent during the primary treatment period and 31.6% (95% CI, 17.5–48.7) transfusion independent during the entire treatment period; median (range) DOR was 448 d (85–1582). In cohort 3B: 19 (50.0%) pts had reduced transfusion burden by ≥ 50% during the primary treatment period; 8 (21.1%) pts achieved mean Hgb increase ≥ 1.5 g/dL from baseline throughout the entire treatment period and 6 (15.8%) achieved a mean ≥ 50% reduction in symptom score from baseline. Overall, 47.4% of pts had ≥ 1 treatment-related adverse event (TRAE), most frequently hypertension (17.9%, 5.3% grade ≥ 3); 3.2% of pts had a serious TRAE. One TRAE led to LUSPA discontinuation. Two (2.1%) pts had transformation to acute myeloid leukemia. Nine pts died on treatment from: post-procedural hemorrhage, pneumonia, intracranial hemorrhage, septic shock, ischemic stroke, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, renal failure, pneumonitis, and myelofibrosis (n = 1 each); no deaths were considered related to the study drug. Conclusions: In pts with MF, the safety profile of LUSPA was consistent with previous studies and efficacy results showed promising improvements in anemia and transfusion burden in all cohorts. Clinical trial information: NCT03194542 .

2049 Background: Glioblastoma (GBM) has a poor prognosis. Standard treatments are associated with systemic toxicity, further increasing the disease burden in this patient population. Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) are electric fields that disrupt cancer cell processes which affect cancer cell viability, and are generated by a portable, wearable device which is locoregional and noninvasive. TTFields therapy was approved by the FDA for the treatment of newly diagnosed (nd) and recurrent (r) GBM based on the phase 3 EF-14 (TTFields therapy 200 kHz + temozolomide) and EF-11 (TTFields 200 kHz) studies, respectively. TTFields therapy is also approved for pleural mesothelioma. We report an updated global, post-marketing surveillance (PMS) safety analysis of patients with CNS malignancies treated with TTFields therapy over an 11-year timeframe. This analysis represents the largest dataset of TTFields therapy use to date. Methods: Unsolicited safety data were collected from routine post-marketing activities for patients (N = 25,898) in North America, Europe, Middle East and Africa and Japan, from October 2011 to March 2022. AEs were stratified by diagnosis, age, and sex and categorized using MedDRA version 25.1. Results: Diagnoses were ndGBM (68%), rGBM (26%), anaplastic astrocytoma/oligodendroglioma (4%) and other (2%). Baseline demographics were reflective of real-world practice: median (range) age was 59 (3–103) years; two-thirds of patients were male. Most (69%) patients were 18–65 years; 0.4% were < 18 years, and 30% were > 65 years. All-cause and TTFields-related AEs occurred in 18,798 (73%) and 14,599 (56%), patients, respectively. The most common device-related AE was skin reaction (43% patients overall). There were no major differences in occurrence of this AE between pediatric, adult, and elderly groups (39%, 42%, and 45%, respectively), or between males and females (41% and 46%, respectively). The incidence of device-related skin reactions was higher in ndGBM than rGBM (46% vs 34%, respectively), in line with previous reports. Only 405 (2%) of patients overall reported an AE of treatment-related ‘quality-of-life decreased’. In line with the phase 3 studies, there were no treatment-related systemic AEs. Conclusions: In this updated global PMS safety analysis, TTFields therapy demonstrated a tolerable safety profile in patients with CNS malignancies, with no new safety findings. In line with previous real-world and clinical data, most AEs were localized, non-serious skin events, which were consistent between age groups. Such events can typically be managed easily using prophylaxis and topical therapies, together with optimization of caregiver techniques. Importantly, no TTFields therapy-related systemic AEs were detected.

4541 Background: PROSPER is a phase 3 National Clinical Trials Network study that accrued pts with clinical stage ≥T2 or TanyN+ RCC of any histology planned for radical/ partial nephrectomy. Pts were randomized to perioperative nivo followed by primary tumor resection and 9 cycles of nivo postoperatively or standard surgery followed by observation. To address concerns that core kidney bx might 1) not provide accurate diagnosis and 2) delay surgery due to adverse events (AEs) or scheduling, the study was amended from requiring all patients to undergo core bx prior to treatment for confirmation of RCC, to only require bx in patients randomized to the nivo arm. Herein, we report the accuracy and safety of primary tumor core bxs in predicting final histology and nuclear grade by both site and central pathology review as well as time from enrollment to surgery. We also report AEs of preoperative nivo. Methods: Concordance of both core bx and primary tumor by site and central pathology review of histology and grade (1-2 vs 3-4) are reported, along with the Cohen’s Kappa value, which measures the agreement and concordance (kappa=0 is no concordance and 1 is highest). AEs relating to core bxs and preoperative nivo, as well as time from enrollment to surgery for each arm, comparing pre- and post-amendment (dropping bx requirement in surgery alone arm) are also reported. Results: 387/404 pts in the nivo arm and 171/415 pts in the surgery alone arm had core bxs. 632 patients had both central pathology and site review available. 41 of all randomized patients (819) were considered as non-RCC and 26/41 were identified via bx. The median times from enrollment to surgery for nivo and control arms pre-amendment were 32d vs 19 d, and post-amendment were 21 d vs 14 d, respectively. The median (25th-75th percentile) number of days from last preoperative nivo to surgery was 14 d (9-20). AEs related to core bx, generally from bleeding, were reported in 13/558 (2.3%) pts. 2/13 bxs resulted in life-threatening complications. 21/353 (6%) of pts receiving nivo pre-surgery had ≥ grade 3-5 AE attributed to nivo. 181/353 (51%) pts had any grade AE attributed to nivo. Concordance between bxs and primary tumor pathologies for determining histological subtype was Kappa = 0.62. Agreement between central pathology and originating site review of primary tumor for determining nuclear grade was Kappa = 0.56, and concordance of histology was Kappa = 0.78. Conclusions: The PROSPER trial use of core bxs in advance of neoadjuvant therapy was generally safe, largely consistent with primary tumor histology and grade, and did not delay resection of the primary tumor. AEs of preoperative nivo were consistent with nivo AEs in metastatic disease. This approach is valid for future neoadjuvant trials. Clinical trial information: NCT03055013 .