Citations

Introduction: High-risk smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) is an asymptomatic precursor disorder to active multiple myeloma (MM) without approved treatment options. However, recent evidence suggests patients at high risk of progression to MM may benefit from early treatment. Daratumumab (DARA) is a human IgGκ monoclonal antibody targeting CD38 with direct on-tumor and immunomodulatory mechanisms of action. DARA is approved as monotherapy for relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) and in combination with standard-of-care regimens for RRMM and newly diagnosed MM. Based on the encouraging activity and tolerability observed with DARA monotherapy in patients with intermediate- or high-risk SMM in the phase 2 CENTAURUS study, the phase 3 AQUILA study sought to determine if DARA could delay progression to MM versus active monitoring. Here we report the primary analysis from the AQUILA study. Methods: Eligible patients had a confirmed diagnosis of high-risk SMM for ≤5 years, defined as clonal bone marrow plasma cells (BMPCs) ≥10% and ≥1 risk factor (serum M protein ≥30 g/L, IgA SMM, immunoparesis with reduction of 2 uninvolved Ig isotypes, serum involved:uninvolved free light chain ratio ≥8 and <100, and/or clonal BMPCs >50% to <60%). Focal and lytic lesion assessment was performed in screening by CT and MRI and centrally reviewed prior to study enrollment. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive DARA SC versus active monitoring. DARA (QW in Cycles 1 and 2, Q2W in Cycles 3-6, and Q4W thereafter) was given in 28-day cycles until cycle 39, 36 months, or disease progression, whichever came first. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), defined as progression to active MM as assessed by an independent review committee and according to IMWG diagnostic criteria for MM (SLiM-CRAB) or death. Major secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), PFS on first-line MM treatment (PFS2), and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 390 patients (DARA, n = 194; active monitoring, n = 196) were randomized. Median (range) age (64 [31-86] years) and time from initial SMM diagnosis to randomization (0.72 [0-5.0] years) were balanced between treatment groups. Median treatment duration in the DARA group was 38 cycles (35.0 months). At a median (range) follow-up of 65.2 (0-76.6) months, PFS was significantly improved with DARA versus active monitoring (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.36-0.67; P <0.0001). Median PFS was not reached in the DARA group versus 41.5 months for active monitoring; estimated 60-month PFS rates were 63.1% versus 40.8%, respectively. Prespecified analyses showed generally consistent PFS improvement with DARA versus active monitoring across subgroups. ORR was 63.4% with DARA versus 2.0% with active monitoring (P <0.0001). As of the clinical cutoff, 64 (33.0%) patients in the DARA group and 102 (52.0%) patients in the active monitoring group had started first-line MM treatment. Median time from randomization to the date of first-line MM treatment was not reached with DARA versus 50.2 months with active monitoring (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.33-0.62; nominal P <0.0001). There was a positive trend in favor of DARA for PFS2 (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.35-0.96) and OS (60-month OS rates: DARA, 93.0%; active monitoring, 86.9%; HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.27-0.98). A total of 41 deaths were observed, 15 for the DARA group and 26 for the active monitoring group. Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 40.4% and 30.1% of patients in the DARA and active monitoring groups, respectively. The most common (≥5% in either group) grade 3/4 TEAE was hypertension (DARA, 5.7%; active monitoring, 4.6%). The frequency of TEAEs leading to DARA discontinuation was low (5.7%), as was the incidence of fatal TEAEs in both groups (DARA, 1.0%; active monitoring, 2.0%). Conclusions: DARA monotherapy was well tolerated and demonstrated a clinically meaningful and significant benefit in preventing or delaying progression to active MM compared with active monitoring in patients with high-risk SMM. ORR was significantly higher and time to first-line MM treatment was prolonged with DARA compared with active monitoring. This was accompanied by positive trends for PFS2 and OS in favor of DARA. These results strongly support the benefit of early intervention with DARA monotherapy versus active monitoring, the current standard of care, in patients with high-risk SMM.

The NCCN Guidelines for Cutaneous Melanoma (termed Melanoma: Cutaneous ) provide multidisciplinary recommendations for diagnostic workup, staging, and treatment of patients. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the update to neoadjuvant systemic therapy options and summarize the new clinical data evaluated by the NCCN panel for the recommended therapies in Version 2.2024 of the NCCN Guidelines for Cutaneous Melanoma.

11504 Background: Surgery & radiation therapy (RT) yield high local control rates for soft tissue sarcoma (STS) of the extremity and limb girdle. However, patients (pts) with high-grade stage III STS are at significant risk for developing metastasis. Median survival for pts with metastatic STS is < 2 years. SARC028 (NCT02301039) evaluated the efficacy of pembrolizumab (pembro) for metastatic STS, showing 20% and 8.7% response rates in undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS) and pleomorphic/dedifferentiated liposarcoma (LPS), respectively. We hypothesized that neoadjuvant pembro with concurrent RT followed by surgery and adjuvant pembro for stage III UPS, including myxofibrosarcoma, or LPS would stimulate an anti-tumor immune response to eliminate micrometastatic disease & improve disease-free survival (DFS). SU2C-SARC032 (NCT03092323) is a multi-institutional, international, randomized phase 2 trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of adding pembro to standard of care (SOC) RT & surgery for pts with stage III UPS or LPS. Methods: Pts aged > 12 yo with stage III (FNCLCC grade 2 or 3) UPS or LPS of the extremity and limb girdle were enrolled. Pts were randomized (1:1, stratified by grade) to neoadjuvant RT (50 Gy/25 fx) then surgery (SOC arm) or neoadjuvant pembro and RT then surgery & adjuvant pembro (EXP arm). Pembro was given 200 mg IV Q3 wk for 3 doses (before, during & after RT) & up to 14 adjuvant cycles. The primary endpoint was 2-yr DFS. Secondary endpoints included local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), & overall survival (OS). Target enrollment of 126 evaluable patients (max 144 total) provided 80% power (1-sided α = 0.05) to distinguish between a null hypothesis of 50% 2-yr DFS rate & alternative hypothesis of 75% 2-yr DFS rate by log-rank test, with initial analysis at 45 DFS events. Cox models were stratified by grade; primary analysis was a one-sided stratified log-rank test. Results: Between July 2017-November 2023, 143 patients were enrolled, predominantly with UPS (85%) & grade 3 (64%) histology. Median follow-up for alive patients is 24.1 mo. DFS in the EXP arm is significantly higher than the SOC arm (p = 0.023; HR 0.57, 90% CI: 0.35, 0.91). Estimated 2-yr DFS is 53% (90% CI: 43, 66%) for SOC vs 70% (90% CI: 61, 81%) for EXP arm. Currently, there is no statistically significant difference in LRFS (HR 0.55, 95% CI: 0.21, 1.42), DDFS (HR 0.57, 95% CI: 0.32, 1.01), or OS (HR 0.39, 95% CI: 0.14, 1.12). Pts with grade 3 sarcomas had improved DFS with pembro (HR 0.47, 95% CI: 0.25, 0.89), but no difference in DFS was observed in grade 2 tumors (HR 1.21, 95% CI: 0.35, 4.18). The proportion of patients with grade 3+ adverse events was significantly higher in EXP (52%) vs SOC arm (26%) (p = 0.002). Conclusions: Theaddition of neoadjuvant & adjuvant pembro to RT and surgery significantly improves DFS for pts with stage III UPS and LPS of the extremity and limb girdle. Clinical trial information: NCT03092323 .

Gemcitabine plus docetaxel is an effective treatment regimen for advanced soft tissue sarcomas (STSs). However, the prognosis for patients remains poor, and thus there is an urgent medical need for novel and effective therapies to improve long-term outcomes. The aim of the ANNOUNCE 2 trial was to explore the addition of olaratumab (O) to gemcitabine (G) and docetaxel (D) for advanced STS. Adults with unresectable locally advanced/metastatic STS, ≤2 prior lines of systemic therapy, and ECOG PS 0–1 were eligible. In Phase 2, patients were randomized 1:1 from two cohorts (O-naïve and O-pretreated) to 21-day cycles of olaratumab (20 mg/kg Cycle 1 and 15 mg/kg other cycles, Days 1 and 8), gemcitabine (900 mg/m2, Days 1 and 8), and docetaxel (75 mg/m2, Day 8). The primary objective was overall survival (OS) in the O-naïve population (α level = 0.20). Secondary endpoints included OS (O-pretreated), other efficacy parameters, patient-reported outcomes, safety, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity. A total of 167 and 89 patients were enrolled in the O-naïve and O-pretreated cohorts, respectively. Baseline patient characteristics were well balanced. No statistically significant difference in OS was observed between the investigational vs. control arm for either cohort (O-naïve cohort: HR = 0.95 (95% CI: 0.64−1.40), p = 0.78, median OS, 16.8 vs. 18.0 months; O-pretreated cohort: HR = 0.67 (95% CI: 0.39−1.16), p = 0.15, median OS 19.8 vs. 17.3 months). Safety was manageable across treatment arms. There was no statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint of OS between the two arms in the O-naïve population, and therefore based on hierarchical evaluation no other outcomes in this study can be considered statistically significant. No new safety signals were observed.

Background: Most strokes and cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are potentially preventable if their risk factors are identified and well controlled. Digital platforms, such as the PreventS-MD web app (PreventS-MD) may aid health care professionals (HCPs) in assessing and managing risk factors and promoting lifestyle changes for their patients. Methods: This is a mixed-methods cross-sectional two-phase survey using a largely positivist (quantitative and qualitative) framework. During Phase 1, a prototype of PreventS-MD was tested internationally by 59 of 69 consenting HCPs of different backgrounds, age, sex, working experience, and specialties using hypothetical data. Collected comments/suggestions from the study HCPs in Phase 1 were reviewed and implemented. In Phase 2, a near-final version of PreventS-MD was developed and tested by 58 of 72 consenting HCPs using both hypothetical and real patient (n = 10) data. Qualitative semi-structured interviews with real patients (n = 10) were conducted, and 1 month adherence to the preventive recommendations was assessed by self-reporting. The four System Usability Scale (SUS) groups of scores (0–50 unacceptable; 51–68 poor; 68–80.3 good; >80.3 excellent) were used to determine usability of PreventS-MD. Findings: Ninety-nine HCPs from 27 countries (45% from low- to middle-income countries) participated in the study, and out of them, 10 HCPs were involved in the development of PreventS before the study, and therefore were not involved in the survey. Of the remaining 89 HCPs, 69 consented to the first phase of the survey, and 59 of them completed the first phase of the survey (response rate 86%), and 58 completed the second phase of the survey (response rate 84%). The SUS scores supported good usability of the prototype (mean score = 80.2; 95% CI [77.0–84.0]) and excellent usability of the final version of PreventS-MD (mean score = 81.7; 95% CI [79.1–84.3]) in the field. Scores were not affected by the age, sex, working experience, or specialty of the HCPs. One-month follow-up of the patients confirmed the high level of satisfaction/acceptability of PreventS-MD and (100%) adherence to the recommendations. Interpretation: The PreventS-MD web app has a high level of usability, feasibility, and satisfaction by HCPs and individuals at risk of stroke/CVD. Individuals at risk of stroke/CVD demonstrated a high level of confidence and motivation in following and adhering to preventive recommendations generated by PreventS-MD.

2505 Background: ATRC-101 monoclonal antibody targets tumor-specific ribonucleoprotein complex (RNP) and elicits anti-tumor immunity, innate and adaptive, in preclinical models. Methods: Phase 1b is evaluating ATRC-101 as monotherapy, every 3 (3M) or 2 (2M) weeks (wk), and ATRC-101 in combination with pembrolizumab (3P) in participants (pts) with advanced solid tumors. ATRC-101 target expression is determined by CAP-CLIA IHC assay. For pts described herein, pre-treatment (tx) tumor biopsies were assessed for target expression by IHC retrospectively or prospectively. Enrollment in 3M and 3P is currently open to pts who are target positive (RNP+ve) by IHC with an H-score ≥ 50. Objectives are safety (primary), PK, immunogenicity, recommended dose for expansion, activity by RECIST1.1 and biomarker analyses in pre-tx and on-tx tumors. Results: As of Nov 18th, 2022, 67 pts received ≥1 dose of ATRC-101 (median prior tx 5, range 1-12). Tumor types were colorectal (CRC, 28), ovarian (10), breast (9), melanoma (8), non-small cell lung (NSCLC, 6), head and neck squamous cell (3), urothelial (1), esophageal (1) and small bowel (1). Tx emergent adverse events (TEAEs) Grade ≥3 occurred in 22 (33%) pts and were related to ATRC-101 in 2 (3%). No tx discontinuations or dose reductions related to ATRC-101. RECIST1.1 best overall responses in efficacy evaluable 61 pts included 1 complete response (CR) in RNP+ve melanoma (3P, 10mg/kg), and 1 partial response (PR) in RNP+ve NSCLC (3M, 30mg/kg). Further, disease stabilized (SD) in 24 pts (39%) and 35 pts had disease progression (PD, 57%) with evidence of association between anti-tumor activity and target expression. Of 24 SD, 22 were in monotherapy cohorts and included 9 CRC pts with highly refractory disease. Conclusions: ATRC-101 alone and in combination with pembrolizumab continues to be well tolerated with evidence of anti-tumor activity. Interim data support ongoing enrollment of pts with RNP+ve pre-tx tumors. Updated and new data including durability of disease control will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT04244552 . [Table: see text]

PURPOSE Antitumor activity in preclinical models and a phase I study of patients with dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DD-LPS) was observed with selinexor. We evaluated the clinical benefit of selinexor in patients with previously treated DD-LPS whose sarcoma progressed on approved agents. METHODS SEAL was a phase II-III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients age 12 years or older with advanced DD-LPS who had received two-five lines of therapy were randomly assigned (2:1) to selinexor (60 mg) or placebo twice weekly in 6-week cycles (crossover permitted). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included for safety analysis (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02606461 ). RESULTS Two hundred eighty-five patients were enrolled (selinexor, n = 188; placebo, n = 97). PFS was significantly longer with selinexor versus placebo: hazard ratio (HR) 0.70 (95% CI, 0.52 to 0.95; one-sided P = .011; medians 2.8 v 2.1 months), as was time to next treatment: HR 0.50 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.66; one-sided P < .0001; medians 5.8 v 3.2 months). With crossover, no difference was observed in overall survival. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events of any grade versus grade 3 or 4 with selinexor were nausea (151 [80.7%] v 11 [5.9]), decreased appetite (113 [60.4%] v 14 [7.5%]), and fatigue (96 [51.3%] v 12 [6.4%]). Four (2.1%) and three (3.1%) patients died in the selinexor and placebo arms, respectively. Exploratory RNA sequencing analysis identified that the absence of CALB1 expression was associated with longer PFS with selinexor compared with placebo (median 6.9 v 2.2 months; HR, 0.19; P = .001). CONCLUSION Patients with advanced, refractory DD-LPS showed improved PFS and time to next treatment with selinexor compared with placebo. Supportive care and dose reductions mitigated side effects of selinexor. Prospective validation of CALB1 expression as a predictive biomarker for selinexor in DD-LPS is warranted.

Purpose: To evaluate the safety and therapeutic effects of orally administered AKST4290 (formerly BI 144807 and ALK4290) in treatment-naive patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Methods: In this prospective, multicenter, open-label Phase 2a pilot clinical study, 30 patients with newly diagnosed neovascular age-related macular degeneration self-administered AKST4290 (400 mg) orally twice daily for 6 weeks. Patients were examined weekly for safety, to measure best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and to perform exploratory morphologic assessments. The primary endpoint was the mean change in BCVA from baseline to end of treatment, and the secondary endpoint was safety. Exploratory endpoints investigated potential changes in macular morphology. Results: Mean BCVA improved by +7.0 letters (95% CI, 2.2–11.7); 24 patients (82.8%) had stable or improved BCVA, with 6 (20.7%) gaining ≥15 letters. No patients experienced severe or serious adverse events. Conclusion: In this 6-week study, AKST4290 treatment was associated with improved BCVA scores in patients with treatment-naive neovascular age-related macular degeneration. All adverse events were mild or moderate in severity and no safety issues were identified. Treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration with AKST4290 warrants further investigation in randomized, placebo-controlled trials.