Citations

LBA7564 Background: Patients with r/r B-NHL have a dismal prognosis. DIAL (Dual Immunomodulation in Aggressive Lymphoma) was a multi-center randomized phase II study testing the efficacy of nivolumab (PD-1 inhibitor) plus varlilumab (CD27 agonist) in this population. Methods: Patients were randomized (1:1) to nivolumab (240 mg IV every 2 weeks for 4 months, 480 mg IV monthly thereafter; group 1) alone or combined with varlilumab (3 mg/kg IV monthly; group 2). Cross-over (group 1 to 2) was allowed for progression. Primary endpoint was overall response (ORR) per LYRIC criteria. A sample size of 48 patients per arm would provide 80% power to detect increase in ORR from 25% to 45% using a one-sided test (p = 0.15). Pre-specified interim analysis occurred after half of the patients completed first radiologic assessment. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events (AEs). Exploratory endpoints included tumor genomic assessment and immune profiling of blood and tumor. Results: 53 patients were enrolled (27 in group 1; 26 in group 2). Interim analysis included 24 patients from each arm. Mean age was 65.2 years, 34 (70.8%) were male, and 36 (75%) received prior CAR-T cell therapy. Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms. Grade ≥ 3 AEs were observed in 8 (33.3%) and 7 (30.4%) of patients in groups 1 and 2, respectively. Common AEs (> 5%) of any grade included fatigue, lymphopenia, diarrhea, rash. There were no treatment-associated deaths. Toxicity profile was similar between arms. Table summarizes efficacy outcomes. ORR was achieved in 6 patients (12.5%), not statistically different between arms; 4 responses were complete. Seven patients crossed over (1 responded after crossing). Median OS (8.6 vs 7.3 months; p = 0.39) and PFS (2.7 vs 1.4 months; p = 0.06) were similar between arms. Subgroup analysis of patients with prior CAR-T cell therapy showed similar ORR (5/36; 14%), not statistically different between arms. Correlative analysis results will be presented at conference. The trial met futility criterion on interim analysis and enrollment ceased based on pre-specified stopping rule. Conclusions: Dual immunomodulatory therapy did not enhance anti-tumor activity in patients with aggressive B-NHL compared to nivolumab alone. Response rates were low and consistent with previous data using PD-1 inhibitors in this population. Prior therapy with CAR-T cell does not seem to sensitize patients to PD-1 blockade. Toxicity profile was acceptable and dual therapy did not increase the rate of AEs. Clinical trial information: NCT03038672. [Table: see text]

The introduction of robotics in living donor liver transplantation has been revolutionary. We aimed to examine the safety of robotic living donor right hepatectomy (RLDRH) compared to open (ODRH) and laparoscopic (LADRH) approaches. A systematic review was carried out in Medline and six additional databases following PRISMA guidelines. Data on morbidity, postoperative liver function, and pain in donors and recipients were extracted from studies comparing RLDRH, ODRH, and LADRH published up to September 2020; PROSPERO (CRD42020214313). Dichotomous variables were pooled as risk ratios and continuous variables as weighted mean differences. Four studies with a total of 517 patients were included. In living donors, the postoperative total bilirubin level (MD: −0.7 95%CI −1.0, −0.4), length of hospital stay (MD: −0.8 95%CI −1.4, −0.3), Clavien–Dindo complications I–II (RR: 0.5 95%CI 0.2, 0.9), and pain score at day > 3 (MD: −0.6 95%CI −1.6, 0.4) were lower following RLDRH compared to ODRH. Furthermore, the pain score at day > 3 (MD: −0.4 95%CI −0.8, −0.09) was lower after RLDRH when compared to LADRH. In recipients, the postoperative AST level was lower (MD: −0.5 95%CI −0.9, −0.1) following RLDRH compared to ODRH. Moreover, the length of stay (MD: −6.4 95%CI −11.3, −1.5) was lower after RLDRH when compared to LADRH. In summary, we identified low- to unclear-quality evidence that RLDRH seems to be safe and feasible for adult living donor liver transplantation compared to the conventional approaches. No postoperative deaths were reported.

Introduction: Bortezomib has been reported to favourably impact the outcomes of t(4;14) and del(17p) in multiple myeloma (MM), but its impact on gain 1q (+1q) is unknown. Methods: To address this, 250 patients treated with bortezomib-based induction were analysed. All myeloma samples had fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) performed on CD138-sorted bone marrow aspirate, and plasma cells were analysed using DNA probes specific for the following chromosomal aberrations: del(13q14), del(17p), t(14;16), t(4;14), and +1q. Presence of +1q was defined as the presence of at least three copies of 1q21 at the cut off level of 20% of bone marrow plasma cells. Results: +1q identified in 167 (66.8%) and associated with t(4;14) and high lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). +1q was not associated with response rate but shorter event-free survival (EFS) (median EFS 35 vs 55 months, p = 0.05) and overall survival (OS) (median OS 74 vs 168 months, p = 0.00025). Copy number and clone size did not impact survival. Multivariate analysis showed +1q was an independent adverse factor for OS together with International Staging System (ISS)3, high LDH, del(17p) and t(4;14). When a risk score of 1 was assigned to each independent adverse factor, OS was shortened incrementally by a risk score from 0 to 4. Post-relapse/progression survival was inferior in those with +1q (median 60 vs 118 months, p = 0.000316). Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) improved OS for those with +1q (median OS 96 vs 49 months, p = 0.000069). Conclusion: +1q is an adverse factor for OS in MM uniformly treated with bortezomib-based induction but was partially mitigated by ASCT. A risk scoring system comprising +1q, LDH, high-risk FISH, and ISS is a potential tool for risk stratification in MM.

Background: A composite metric for the quality of glycemia from continuous glucose monitor (CGM) tracings could be useful for assisting with basic clinical interpretation of CGM data. Methods: We assembled a data set of 14-day CGM tracings from 225 insulin-treated adults with diabetes. Using a balanced incomplete block design, 330 clinicians who were highly experienced with CGM analysis and interpretation ranked the CGM tracings from best to worst quality of glycemia. We used principal component analysis and multiple regressions to develop a model to predict the clinician ranking based on seven standard metrics in an Ambulatory Glucose Profile: very low–glucose and low-glucose hypoglycemia; very high–glucose and high-glucose hyperglycemia; time in range; mean glucose; and coefficient of variation. Results: The analysis showed that clinician rankings depend on two components, one related to hypoglycemia that gives more weight to very low-glucose than to low-glucose and the other related to hyperglycemia that likewise gives greater weight to very high-glucose than to high-glucose. These two components should be calculated and displayed separately, but they can also be combined into a single Glycemia Risk Index (GRI) that corresponds closely to the clinician rankings of the overall quality of glycemia (r = 0.95). The GRI can be displayed graphically on a GRI Grid with the hypoglycemia component on the horizontal axis and the hyperglycemia component on the vertical axis. Diagonal lines divide the graph into five zones (quintiles) corresponding to the best (0th to 20th percentile) to worst (81st to 100th percentile) overall quality of glycemia. The GRI Grid enables users to track sequential changes within an individual over time and compare groups of individuals. Conclusion: The GRI is a single-number summary of the quality of glycemia. Its hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia components provide actionable scores and a graphical display (the GRI Grid) that can be used by clinicians and researchers to determine the glycemic effects of prescribed and investigational treatments.

Context.— Organ weights are an essential part of autopsy analysis. Deviations from normal organ weights provide important clues to disease processes. The assessment of normal organ weights depends on reliable reference tables, but most widely available reference tables are based on data that are either decades old or derived from relatively small sample sizes. Objective.— To provide an updated reference table of organ weights based on contemporary sources and a large sample size. Design.— Organ weights from 4197 carefully screened autopsies performed on adults at the Palm Beach County Medical Examiner's Office in West Palm Beach, Florida, and the Mayo Clinic Hospital in Rochester, Minnesota. Results.— Height and body weight data in this study reflect the well-recognized increases in both variables, but most particularly in body weight, seen during the last decades. The study data show a strong positive association between organ weight and body weight for the heart, liver, and spleen. There is a similar but weaker association between body weight and the weight of the lungs and kidneys. Brain weight is independent of body weight but shows a strong negative association with age. Even when controlling for body weight, men's organs are heavier, except for the weight of the liver, which is comparable in men and women. These associations are in agreement with the findings of previous studies. The current study suggests that, for some of the commonly weighed organs, there has been an increase in median organ weight when compared with existing references. Conclusions.— The tables presented here provide an updated reference that should prove useful to autopsy pathologists in the forensic and hospital settings.

AbstractInhaled treprostinil is an approved therapy for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and pulmonary hypertension associated with interstitial lung disease in the United States. Studies have confirmed the robust benefits and safety of nebulized inhaled treprostinil, but it requires a time investment for nebulizer preparation, maintenance, and treatment. A small, portable treprostinil dry powder inhaler has been developed for the treatment of PAH. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of treprostinil inhalation powder (TreT) in patients currently treated with treprostinil inhalation solution. Fifty‐one patients on a stable dose of treprostinil inhalation solution enrolled and transitioned to TreT at a corresponding dose. Six‐minute walk distance (6MWD), device preference and satisfaction (Preference Questionnaire for Inhaled Treprostinil Devices [PQ‐ITD]), PAH Symptoms and Impact (PAH‐SYMPACT®) questionnaire, and systemic exposure and pharmacokinetics for up to 5 h were assessed at baseline for treprostinil inhalation solution and at Week 3 for TreT. Adverse events (AEs) were consistent with studies of inhaled treprostinil in patients with PAH, and there were no study drug‐related serious AEs. Statistically significant improvements occurred in 6MWD, PQ‐ITD, and PAH‐SYMPACT. Forty‐nine patients completed the 3‐week treatment phase and all elected to participate in an optional extension phase. These results demonstrate that, in patients with PAH, transition from treprostinil inhalation solution to TreT is safe, well‐tolerated, and accompanied by statistically significant improvements in key clinical assessments and patient‐reported outcomes with comparable systemic exposure between the two formulations at evaluated doses (trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03950739).

Abstract Background: FGFR gene amplifications are found in 18% of breast cancers (BCs), with FGFR1 amplifications occurring in ≈10% of cases, predominantly in hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2−) MBCs. FGFR1 amplifications are associated with resistance to endocrine therapy, and in preclinical experiments, FGFR pathway inhibition has been shown to overcome resistance to hormone therapy in BC harboring FGFR1 amplifications. Futibatinib, a highly selective, irreversible FGFR1-4 inhibitor, has shown preclinical activity in BC xenograft models harboring FGFR1/2 amplifications. In a phase 1 study, futibatinib showed promising clinical activity and tolerability across tumor types, including MBC, harboring various FGFR aberrations. A multicohort phase 2 trial (FOENIX-MBC2; NCT04024436) was designed to evaluate futibatinib alone (cohorts 1-3) or in combination with fulvestrant (cohort 4) in patients with MBC harboring FGFR2 or FGFR1 amplifications, respectively. Here, we report preliminary safety data from cohort 4 of FOENIX-MBC2, including data from a safety lead-in. Methods: Cohort 4 of FOENIX-MBC2 enrolled adult patients with HR+ HER2− MBC harboring high levels of FGFR1 amplification (FGFR1:CEN8 ratio ≥5 or FGFR1 copy number ≥10 signals per cell), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, and adequate organ function. Patients were fulvestrant naive and had previously received 1-2 endocrine-containing therapies, ≤1 chemotherapy regimen, and a CDK4/6 inhibitor (if eligible). Cohort 4 began with a safety lead-in to assess dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) during the first treatment cycle. Patients received oral futibatinib 20 mg once daily continuously, and intramuscular fulvestrant 500 mg was administered on days 1 and 15 of cycle 1 and day 1 of every subsequent 28-day cycle. Patients were treated until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or another discontinuation criterion was met. Results: As of data cutoff (March 31, 2021), cohort 4 had enrolled 8 female patients with HR+ HER2− MBC harboring high-level FGFR1 amplification. The median age was 55.5 years (range: 31-62 years), and all patients had received ≥2 prior therapies for advanced/metastatic BC. The median duration of treatment was 8.0 weeks (range: 3.0-32.7 weeks); 3 of 8 patients (38%) were continuing treatment at time of data cutoff. All patients experienced treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs; grade ≥3: 25%). The most common TRAE was hyperphosphatemia (88%), followed by constipation (62%), transaminase elevation (50%), dry mouth (38%), and alopecia (38%). Among these TRAEs, grade ≥3 events were only reported for hyperphosphatemia (12%), and no serious adverse events were reported. In this cohort, TRAEs led to dose reductions in 4 patients, dosing interruptions in 3 patients, and treatment discontinuation in 1 patient; no patients died due to TRAEs. DLTs were evaluated in 5 patients following 1 treatment cycle (1 patient was enrolled after data cutoff, and 4 of 9 patients were not evaluable for DLTs); DLTs were not experienced by any of the 5 evaluable patients. Conclusions: Based on these preliminary safety results, the combination of futibatinib and fulvestrant appears to be safe and tolerable in patients with HR+ HER− MBC harboring high-level FGFR1 amplification. The safety profile was consistent with the individual profiles of both drugs, and the treatment combination did not appear to result in synergistic toxicity. As no DLTs were observed in 5 evaluable patients, the recommended futibatinib dose in combination with fulvestrant is 20 mg once daily. Efficacy will be evaluated in the complete 28-patient post-lead-in cohort, in which enrollment is ongoing. Citation Format: Senthil Damodaran, Nisha Unni, Karthik V. Giridhar, Brooke Daniel, Sacha Howell, Luis Costa, Marta Ferreira, Masashi Shimura, Gareth Tomlinson, Maciej Gil, Nicholas Turner. Futibatinib in combination with fulvestrant in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) harboring high-level FGFR1 amplification: Preliminary data from a phase 2 study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-18-35.

AbstractDual combination therapy with a phosphodiesterase‐5 inhibitor (PDE5i) and endothelin receptor antagonist is recommended for most patients with intermediate‐risk pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). The RESPITE and REPLACE studies suggest that switching from a PDE5i to a soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC) activator may provide clinical improvement in this situation. The optimal approach to escalation or transition of therapy in this or other scenarios is not well defined. We developed an expert consensus statement on the transition to sGC and other treatment escalations and transitions in PAH using a modified Delphi process. The Delphi process used a panel of 20 physicians with expertise in PAH. Panelists answered three questionnaires on the management of treatment escalations and transitions in PAH. The initial questionnaire included open‐ended questions. Later questionnaires consolidated the responses into statements that panelists rated on a Likert scale from −5 (strongly disagree) to +5 (strongly agree) to determine consensus. The Delphi process produced several consensus recommendations. Escalation should be considered for patients who are at high risk or not achieving treatment goals, by adding an agent from a new class, switching from oral to parenteral prostacyclins, or increasing the dose. Switching to a new class or within a class should be considered if tolerability or other considerations unrelated to efficacy are affecting adherence. Switching from a PDE5i to an SGC activator may benefit patients with intermediate risk who are not improving on their present therapy. These consensus‐based recommendations may be helpful to clinicians and beneficial for patients when evidence‐based guidance is unavailable.