Citations

Abstract We evaluate the impact of donor types on outcomes of hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in myelofibrosis, using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research registry data for HCTs done between 2013 and 2019. In all 1597 patients, the use of haploidentical donors increased from 3% in 2013 to 19% in 2019. In study-eligible 1032 patients who received peripheral blood grafts for chronic-phase myelofibrosis, 38% of recipients of haploidentical HCT were non-White/Caucasian. Matched sibling donor (MSD)–HCTs were associated with superior overall survival (OS) in the first 3 months (haploidentical hazard ratio [HR], 5.80 [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.52-13.35]; matched unrelated (MUD) HR, 4.50 [95% CI, 2.24-9.03]; mismatched unrelated HR, 5.13 [95% CI, 1.44-18.31]; P < .001). This difference in OS aligns with lower graft failure with MSD (haploidentical HR, 6.11 [95% CI, 2.98-12.54]; matched unrelated HR, 2.33 [95% CI, 1.20-4.51]; mismatched unrelated HR, 1.82 [95% CI, 0.58-5.72]). There was no significant difference in OS among haploidentical, MUD, and mismatched unrelated donor HCTs in the first 3 months. Donor type was not associated with differences in OS beyond 3 months after HCT, relapse, disease-free survival, or OS among patients who underwent HCT within 24 months of diagnosis. Patients who experienced graft failure had more advanced disease and commonly used nonmyeloablative conditioning. Although MSD-HCTs were superior, there is no significant difference in HCT outcomes from haploidentical and MUDs. These results establish haploidentical HCT with posttransplantation cyclophosphamide as a viable option in myelofibrosis, especially for ethnic minorities underrepresented in the donor registries.

Abstract Background Few antiviral therapies have been studied in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and kidney impairment. Herein, the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of remdesivir, its metabolites, and sulfobutylether-β-cyclodextrin excipient were evaluated in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and severe kidney impairment. Methods In REDPINE, a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, participants aged ≥12 years hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia with acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, or kidney failure were randomized 2:1 to receive intravenous remdesivir (200 mg on day 1; 100 mg daily up to day 5) or placebo (enrollment from March 2021 to March 2022). The primary efficacy end point was the composite of the all-cause mortality rate or invasive mechanical ventilation rate through day 29. Safety was evaluated through day 60. Results Although enrollment concluded early, 243 participants were enrolled and treated (remdesivir, n = 163; placebo, n = 80). At baseline, 90 participants (37.0%) had acute kidney injury (remdesivir, n = 60; placebo, n = 30), 64 (26.3%) had chronic kidney disease (remdesivir, n = 44; placebo, n = 20), and 89 (36.6%) had kidney failure (remdesivir, n = 59; placebo, n = 30); and 31 (12.8%) were vaccinated against COVID-19. Composite all-cause mortality or invasive mechanical ventilation rates through day 29 were 29.4% and 32.5% in the remdesivir and placebo group, respectively (P = .61). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 80.4% for remdesivir versus 77.5% for placebo, and serious adverse events in 50.3% versus 50.0%, respectively. Pharmacokinetic plasma exposure to remdesivir was not affected by kidney function. Conclusions Although the study was underpowered, no significant difference in efficacy was observed between treatment groups. REDPINE demonstrated that remdesivir is safe in patients with COVID-19 and severe kidney impairment. Clinical Trials Registration EudraCT 2020-005416-22; Clinical Trials.gov NCT04745351.

4136 Background: NAPOLI 3 (NCT04083235, N = 770), a global, randomized, open-label phase 3 study, demonstrated that NALIRIFOX significantly improved overall survival (OS, primary endpoint) and progression-free survival compared with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine in patients with untreated mPDAC. Here, we report an updated analysis of OS. Methods: Eligible patients with histopathologically/cytologically confirmed untreated mPDAC were randomized (1:1) to receive liposomal irinotecan 50 mg/m2 + oxaliplatin 60 mg/m2 + leucovorin 400 mg/m2 + 5-fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 (NALIRIFOX, n = 383) on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle or nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 (Gem+NabP, n = 387) on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. Randomization was stratified by ECOG performance status, geographic region and presence/absence of liver metastases. An updated OS analysis (data cutoff: 3 October 2023) was conducted. Kaplan–Meier methods were used to estimate median (95% confidence interval [CI]) OS and hazard ratios (HRs [95% CI]) were estimated using stratified Cox proportional hazard models. The difference between groups was tested using a stratified log-rank test. Results: The median follow-up for OS was 28.7 months in the NALIRIFOX arm and 29.7 months in the Gem+NabP arm. At data cutoff, 11 patients were still receiving study treatment, all of whom were in the NALIRIFOX arm. With a total of 673 OS events (NALIRIFOX, n = 328; Gem+NabP, n = 345), median OS was 11.1 months (95% CI 10.0–12.1) in the NALIRIFOX arm compared with 9.2 months (8.3–10.6) in the Gem+NabP arm (HR 0.84 [95% CI 0.72–0.98]; nominal p = 0.026). At 12 months and 18 months, survival rates were 45.6% (95% CI 40.5–50.5) and 26.6% (22.2–31.1), respectively, in the NALIRIFOX arm and 39.6% (34.7–44.5) and 20.0% (16.1–24.1), respectively, in the Gem+NabP arm. Conclusions: In this 29-month follow-up of NAPOLI 3, NALIRIFOX continued to demonstrate improved OS compared with Gem+NabP, with 11 patients still receiving the NALIRIFOX regimen. These data confirm NALIRIFOX as a new possible standard of care and reference regimen for the first-line treatment of patients with mPDAC. Clinical trial information: NCT04083235 .

12079 Background: Many troublesome symptoms experienced by men with prostate cancer are not specific to a particular disease state or treatment modality. As such, these issues' scope is neither fully appreciated nor characterized in the reporting of clinical trial data. A modern accounting of poorly controlled symptoms is needed to better inform survivorship and supportive care efforts. Methods: Data are drawn from the Enhanced, EHR-facilitated Cancer Symptom Control (E2C2) study, a cluster-randomized stepped wedge trial examining the effectiveness of routine symptom assessment and management on patient-centered outcomes and healthcare utilization (NCT03892967). This is a population-level study supporting patients with cancer, who are cared for in medical oncology clinics across the Midwest United States. The trial utilizes an automated symptom monitoring system with EHR-enabled algorithms for symptom triage and intervention. The current analysis focuses on pre-intervention surveys. The cohort includes E2C2 participants with prostate cancer (as determined by the Mayo Clinic Cancer Registry) receiving curative or palliative-intent therapies, along with prostate cancer survivors who previously completed their treatment. The prevalence of SPPADE symptoms (sleep disturbance, pain, impaired physical function, anxiety, depression, fatigue [low energy]) was assessed using 0 to 10 numerical rating scales (NRS), with scores of 4-6 indicating moderate symptoms and 7-10 indicating severe symptoms. Results: A total of 1,388 men with prostate cancer completed a pre-intervention survey between March 2019 and January 2023. The median age at completion of first survey was 74 years. The cohort includes patients living in diverse settings, including urban (n=718, 52%), micropolitan (n=250, 18%), small town (n=218, 16%), and rural (n=200, 14%) environments. The proportion of patients experiencing moderate-to-severe symptoms (NRS score ≥4) was 47% for fatigue, 40% for impaired physical function, 32% for sleep disturbance, 27% for pain, 22% for anxiety, and 20% for depression/emotional distress. The three domains with the highest prevalence of severe symptoms (NRS score ≥7) were fatigue (17%), impaired physical function (12%), and sleep disturbance (10%). Conclusions: Proactive symptom monitoring identifies a high overall burden of moderate-to-severe symptoms, particularly fatigue and impaired physical function, among prostate cancer patients and survivors. Collaborative care approaches and symptom control trials are needed to mitigate and manage these burdensome symptoms. Clinical trial information: NCT03892967 . [Table: see text]

TPS7100 Background: Despite the promising efficacy of CAR-T for patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphomas (LBCL), more than 60% of patients will relapse, the majority of which occur in the first 6 months. Approximately 30% of patients with LBCL treated with CAR-T achieve a partial response (PR) on day 30 (D30) PET-CT assessment. Of patients in a D30 PR, 70% will eventually progress, yet the standard of care remains close observation. Early consolidative treatment strategies utilizing therapies with a different mechanism of action may improve outcomes, but there are currently no reliable biomarkers. Epcoritamab (Epco), a bispecific antibody directed against CD20 and CD3, has been approved by the FDA for LBCL patients who relapse after at least 2 lines of therapy. In the phase 2 study, Epco was associated with an overall response rate (ORR) of 63% and a complete response (CR) rate of 39%, including similar responses in a subset of patients who were relapsed 100 days post CAR-T. This study is a trial-in-progress that will evaluate the efficacy of epco compared to observation for patients with LBCLs achieving a PR on D30 post CAR-T PET-CT assessment. Methods: This is an investigator-initiated, randomized, phase II, multicenter, open-label study (NCT06238648) evaluating epco monotherapy for a fixed duration of 12 cycles compared to observation for LBCL patients with D30 PR after standard of care CAR-T. A maximum of 120 patients will be randomized 1:1 to epco or observation across 10 academic centers. Stratification factors include line of CAR-T (second vs third line) and costimulatory domain (CD28 vs 4-1BB). Key inclusion criteria include PET evidence of a D30 PR. non-bulky disease ( <7.5cm), ANC of >1000, hemoglobin >7 g/dL if asymptomatic or >8 if symptomatic, platelet count >50,000. G-CSF, pRBCs and platelet transfusions are allowed. Key exclusion criteria include prior anti CD20xCD3 bispecific antibody therapy, ongoing or uncontrolled CRS or ICANS, and active or symptomatic CNS disease. Epco is administered subcutaneously at a dose of 0.16mg on day 1, 0.8mg on day 8, prior to full dose of 48mg on day 15. Epco is administered weekly in 28 day cycles (C) for C1-3, on day 1 and 15 of C4-9 and on day 1 of C10-12. PET-CT response is assessed by the 2014 Lugano criteria after 2 cycles, and then every 3 months during active treatment. The primary objective is efficacy, measured as conversion from D30 PR to CR. The secondary endpoints include frequency and severity of treatment emergent adverse events, ORR, duration of response, duration of complete response, progression free survival, event free survival, and overall survival. Peripheral blood samples will be collected pre-treatment and during treatment to assess for biomarkers of response and resistance. The study was activated in January 2024 and recruitment is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT06238648 .

LBA7005 Background: Despite recent advances, there remains a need for novel therapies for pts with R/R DLBCL. BV, an anti-CD30 antibody-drug conjugate, has shown efficacy and safety when combined with lenalidomide (len) and with rituximab (R) in heavily pretreated populations (Bartlett 2022; Ward 2022). The double-blind, global phase 3 ECHELON-3 study (NCT04404283) compared BV with R+len (R2) vs R2 in pts with R/R DLBCL who are ineligible for HSCT or CAR T-cell therapy. Here, we present results from the interim analysis (IA) for overall survival (OS). Methods: Pts with R/R DLBCL received BV+R2 or placebo+R2 (randomized 1:1). Pts received BV (1.2 mg/kg) or placebo q3w, R (375 mg/m2) q3w, and len (20 mg) qd. The primary endpoint was OS in the intent-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and complete response (CR) rate. The preplanned IA was performed at 134 OS events with a prespecified efficacy boundary of 2-sided P=0.0232. Results: 230 pts were randomized: 112 to BV+R2 and 118 to R2; all but 2 pts (both in R2 arm) received ≥1 dose of study drug. Median age was 71 yrs (range, 21-89), 56.5% were male, and 10.9% had an ECOG of 2. Median prior lines of therapy was 3 (range, 2-8); 29% had prior CAR T-cell therapy and 68% were CD30- (<1% CD30 tumor expression). At median follow-up of 16.4 months (mos) (range, 0.1-31.5) (cut-off: January 22, 2024), median OS was 13.8 mos (95% CI: 10.3-18.8) with BV+R2 vs 8.5 mos (95% CI: 5.4-11.7) with R2 (HR 0.629; 95% CI: 0.445-0.891; P=0.0085); OS benefit was consistent across key subgroups. Median PFS was 4.2 mos (95% CI: 2.9-7.1) with BV+R2 vs 2.6 mos (95% CI: 1.4-3.1) with R2 (HR 0.527; 95% CI: 0.380-0.729; P<0.0001). ORR was 64.3% (95% CI: 54.7-73.1) with BV+R2 vs 41.5% with R2 (95% CI: 32.5-51.0; P=0.0006); CR rate was 40.2% vs 18.6%, respectively. In CD30+ vs CD30- subgroups, ORR/CR was 72.2%/38.9% vs 60.5%/40.8% with BV+R2, respectively, and 50.0%/26.3% vs 37.5%/15.0% with R2, respectively. Efficacy analysis including cell of origin will be presented. The safety profile of BV+R2 was tolerable vs R2: Grade (Gr) ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were 88% vs 77%, serious TEAEs were 60% vs 50%, and Gr 5 TEAEs were 12% vs 8%, respectively. Most common TEAEs were neutropenia (46% vs 32%), anemia (29% vs 27%), and diarrhea (31% vs 23%). Rates of peripheral neuropathy for BV+R2 vs R2 were 31% vs 24% (all Gr) and 6% vs 2% (Gr 3). Median treatment duration was 3.6 mos with BV+R2 vs 2.0 mos with R2. Conclusions: Treatment with BV+R2 triplet, compared to R2, demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in all key efficacy outcomes including OS in high-risk subgroups, with manageable safety. This triplet regimen represents a novel treatment option for pts with heavily pretreated R/R DLBCL. Clinical trial information: NCT04404283 .

e23536 Background: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has gained prominence as a potential indirect marker for minimal residual disease (MRD) in various cancers, including soft tissue sarcomas (STS). Previous studies have suggested that indirect hematologic ratios – such as Neutrophil-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR), Monocyte-Lymphocyte Ratio (MLR), Platelet-Lymphocyte Ratio (PLR), and Eosinophil-Lymphocyte Ratio (ELR) may correlate with worse outcomes. We sought to evaluate the correlation of NLR, MLR, PLR and ELR in a real world cohort of Non-Hispanic Whites (NHW) and Hispanics (H) with advanced STS. Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review at Dignity Health Cancer institute using our Electronic Medical Records (EMR) and Signatera™ assay to obtain our data points. Inclusion criteria were STS patients of all ages and stages of disease with complete records. We reviewed 33 patient charts, 14 NHW and 19 H patients. Of the NHW population, 11 were male (M) and 3 females (F). For the H population, 14 were M, and 5 were F. We utilized Spearman's rank correlation coefficient to assess monotonic relationships between ct-DNA levels and the hematologic ratios. ct-DNA was quantified through standardized assays per Protocol, with the resultant values treated as continuous variables in our statistical analyses. Power considerations, based on expected effect sizes and type I error rate adjustments were performed. Results: The Spearman’s correlation coefficients and p-values indicated varied associations across ethnic groups. For NHW, the correlations were generally weak and non-significant (NLR: r = 0.18, p = 0.54; MLR: r = -0.04, p = 0.89; PLR: r = 0.35, p = 0.21; ELR: r = 0.001, p = 1.00). Conversely, in the Hispanic cohort, stronger and statistically significant correlations were observed, particularly with NLR (r = 0.78, p < 0.0001) and MLR (r = 0.70, p < 0.001). Overall, the correlations across the entire study population did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions: This study revealed notable racial variations, particularly in the H population, in the relationship between ctDNA levels and hematologic ratios. The noteworthy associations found with NLR (r = 0.78, p < 0.0001) and MLR (r = 0.70, p < 0.001) highlight the possible usefulness of these ctDNA and these indirect biomarkers in assessing disease status in STS. These findings suggest the possibility of using hematologic ratios, particularly in the Hispanic population, as markers of disease progression similar as ctDNA. Hematologic ratios are more easily accessible to the general population compared to ctDNA in many underserved countries and communities. Future studies with larger cohorts are need to further analyze its validity.

e23535 Background: Our study aims to examine the relationship between the presence of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) in patients diagnosed with soft tissue sarcoma (STS). There is emerging yet limited data on the applicability of ctDNA in STS. LDH is a cheaper readily available test that has been associated with unfavorable overall survival in different malignancies. This research aims to understand the correlation between ctDNA and LDH as a tool to assess its utility as indirect markers of response to treatment in STS. Methods: This was a single-center retrospective chart review on patients diagnosed with STS. Eligibility criteria included a confirmed diagnosis and available measurements of both ctDNA and LDH levels. Correlation was compared between Non-hispanic whites (NHW) and Hispanics (H). Data was sourced from our electronic medical record and Signatera™ assay to obtain the primary endpoints. Specimens were standardized in accordance to Natera’s™ specifications. Study endpoints included the correlation coefficients between ctDNA and LDH levels. A two-stage study design was applied for a robust analysis. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (denoted as r) was employed for statistical analysis, assessing the strength and direction of the monotonic relationship between ctDNA and LDH levels. Marker values were treated as continuous variables in these analyses. All analyses were executed in GraphPad Prism software. Results: The cohort comprised 33 patients with STS (14 NHW, 19 H). The median LDH in H was 189 (interquartile range (IQR) = 184) vs 184 (IQR = 105) in NHW. Comparatively, the median ctDNA in H was 0 (IQR = 39.3) and also 0 (IQR = 11.1) in NHW. The overall correlation between ctDNA and LDH levels was moderate positive (r = 0.5, p = 0.002), indicating a consistent, though not necessarily linear, relationship. Subgroup analysis showed r = 0.19 (p = 0.52) in NHW and r = 0.43 (p = 0.1) in H groups, suggesting ethnic variability in the ctDNA-LDH correlation. These findings were statistically significant within the predefined confidence limits and probability values. Conclusions: Our study demonstrated a significant correlation between ctDNA levels and LDH in STS patients, implying that higher ctDNA may be associated with higher LDH levels. This association can lead clinicians in monitoring LDH more frequently as an indirect marker of response to treatment in STS. This correlation suggests an increased tumor burden with a higher inflammatory response, with variations across different racial groups. The wider availability of LDH testing compared to ctDNA in many centers highlights LDH's potential as an indirect marker for STS. Further research with larger prospective cohorts is essential to confirm LDH's role paired with ctDNA in guiding treatment decisions in STS, enhancing its utility in clinical practice.

e23534 Background: The use of tumor genomic profile (TGP) has led to improved genomic-directed therapies in many solid cancers. Due to its heterogeneity, soft tissues sarcomas (STS) have not benefited much from these genomic advances. Emerging research indicates that about 30% STS have actionable alterations which can lead to potential treatment options (Gounder et al. Nature 2022). Our study aimed to compare the differences in genomic-directed therapy between Non-Hispanic White (NHW) and Hispanic (H) patients with STS at Dignity Health Cancer Institute. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of medical records using the electronic medical record. Our study specifically examined patients diagnosed with STS, with a sample size of 14 NHW and 19 H individuals.The eligibility criteria consisted of known diagnosis of STS with completed TGP. We conducted a descriptive analysis using GraphPad Prism Software, where mutations were evaluated as continuous variables. The statistical significance of differences between groups was assessed using an unpaired t-test, with a significance level of < 0.05. Results: We found 73 tumor alterations, with 11 potentially targetable (15.2%). Most patients had negative to low tumor mutational burden (0-2 mut/Mb) with only 2 patients with high TMB ( > 10 mut/Mb). The most common mutations were TP53 and CDK4 with 9 patients (12%) each. The NHW group had an average of 2.57 mutations (standard deviation = 2.87), whereas the H group had an average of 1.42 mutations (standard deviation = 1.35). The median values were 2 and 1, respectively, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.21). The average for mutations of unknown significance was 1.54 in NHW individuals, while it was 1.00 in Hispanics. In the NHW group showed 11 males and 3 females, while the H group included 14 males and 5 females. There was no significant difference in gender representation between the two groups (p = 1). 3 patients (9%) received non-FDA approved treatments based on TGP (1 CDKN2A-abemaciclib, 1 CDK4-ribociclib and 1 IDH1-ivosidenib) and 2 patients (6.6%) were enrolled in clinical trials. Conclusions: Our investigation reveals that there is no statistically significant disparity in the frequency of mutations between NHW and H groups in our sample. Nevertheless, there was an evident inclination towards an increased frequency of mutations in NHW. Similarly, the occurrence of mutations with uncertain significance was slightly higher in NHWs, although the difference was not statistically significant. Only a minority of patients had targetable mutations or were enrolled in clinical trials. However, the routine use of genomic profiles may lead to more personalized treatments. Our research emphasizes the need to expand the use of comprehensive genomic profiles to increase directed treatments for patients with STS.