Citations

Abstract Introduction: Daratumumab is approved across lines of therapy for multiple myeloma (MM) by subcutaneous administration (DARA SC) or by intravenous administration (DARA IV). In clinical studies, the administration time ranges from 3-5 minutes for DARA SC versus 3-7 hours for DARA IV, and DARA SC is associated with reduced rates of administration-related reactions (ARRs). These characteristics of DARA SC are associated with benefits for clinics in terms of safety and clinic time. We previously reported DARA administration characteristics at Mayo Clinic infusion centers: DARA SC had shorter total clinic and total chair times compared with DARA IV, and DARA SC was associated with very low rates of ARR-related events (Soefje S, et al. EHA Library. 2021). Based upon this analysis, the treatment plan was modified to reduce the mandated observation time for DARA SC to improve clinic efficiency. Here, we describe updated clinical administration characteristics for DARA SC at Mayo Clinic infusion centers before and after the reduction in procedure-mandated observation time, versus DARA IV, using a novel empirical data extraction approach from Electronic Health Records (EHR). Methods: Patients ≥18 years of age with an ICD-9/10 diagnosis code of MM and a first DARA treatment between April 5, 2017 and June 22, 2021 were identified in Mayo Clinic's EHR database. Data were extracted using a scheduling and pharmacy software that tracked patient movement through appointments at a Mayo Clinic infusion center. On May 3, 2021, the Mayo treatment plan was amended to shorten the mandated post-administration observation time for DARA SC from 4 to 2 hours for Dose 1 and from 1 hour to 30 minutes for Doses 2 and 3, with no mandated observation time for Doses 4+. In this analysis, data were captured for patients initiating DARA IV throughout the defined treatment window. For DARA SC, data were captured for patients starting DARA SC therapy on the initial treatment plan (before May 3, 2021; DARA SC initial) and after the change to shorten the mandated post-administration observation time for DARA SC (after May 3, 2021; DARA SC shortened). Time-based measures included: total clinic time (check-in time through patient check-out); total chair time (time from infusion room entry to infusion room exit or check-out time, including order review, pharmacy preparation time, and post-administration observation time); and observation time (time from the end of medication administration to infusion room exit or patient check-out). The medication administration time documented for DARA SC was 0 minutes due to the default duration for SC injections in the EHR. Results: In total, 755 (DARA IV, n=586; DARA SC initial, n=145; DARA SC shortened, n=24) patients received DARA treatment for MM. For all doses combined, the median total clinic time was 2.9 hours shorter for DARA SC compared with DARA IV (DARA IV, 4.9 hrs; DARA SC initial, 2.0 hrs). The median total clinic time for DARA SC and DARA IV was highest at Dose 1 (DARA IV, 9.5 hrs; DARA SC initial, 6.1 hrs; DARA SC shortened, 4.4 hrs) and lower for subsequent doses (Dose 4+: DARA IV, 4.6 hrs; DARA SC initial, 1.7 hrs; DARA SC shortened, 1.6 hrs; Figure). Similarly, the median total chair time was 2.7 hours shorter in the DARA SC group compared with the DARA IV group for all doses combined (DARA IV, 4.1 hrs; DARA SC initial, 1.4 hrs). The median total chair time for DARA SC and DARA IV was highest at Dose 1 (DARA IV, 8.8 hrs; DARA SC initial, 5.6 hrs; DARA SC shortened, 3.9) and lower for subsequent doses (Dose 4+: DARA IV, 3.7 hrs; DARA SC initial, 1.1 hrs; DARA SC shortened, 1.1 hrs). Conclusion: Marked reductions in the amount of time spent both in clinic and in chair were observed with DARA SC compared with DARA IV, with additional time savings observed following the Mayo procedure change to reduce the DARA SC mandated observation time. These favorable DARA SC administration characteristics may indicate a reduction in the burden on both clinical resources and patients in Mayo Clinic infusion centers. These results add to the growing body of evidence supporting the use of DARA SC as an efficient and convenient treatment administration option for patients with MM. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Soefje: Beigene: Consultancy; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Carpenter: nference Inc.: Current Employment; Janssen: Consultancy. Carlson: nference Inc.: Current Employment; Janssen: Consultancy. Awasthi: nference Inc.: Current Employment, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company; Janssen: Consultancy. Lin: Janssen: Current Employment. Kaila: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Current Employment. Kayal: nference Inc.: Current Employment; Janssen: Consultancy. Kirkup: nference Inc.: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Ended employment in the past 24 months; Path AI: Current Employment, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Wagner: nference Inc.: Current Employment; Janssen: Consultancy. Gray: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Current Employment, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Kumar: Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Carsgen: Research Funding; Antengene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Tenebio: Research Funding; Roche-Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding.

Abstract Clinical significance of somatic gene variants needs to be comprehensively characterized for their diagnostic, prognostic and/or therapeutic actionability in patient management. However, challenges remain due to discrepancies in interpretation and reporting of these somatic variants among different testing labs. Therefore, standardized curation, clinical interpretation and reporting of somatic variants in hematologic cancers is critical. To address this issue, the Hematologic Cancer Taskforce (HCT), composed of 52 multi-disciplinary experts including oncologists, molecular pathologists, lab directors, genomic scientists and biocurators, was formed in January 2020 within the ClinGen Somatic Cancer Clinical Domain Working Group (CDWG) with a goal to undertake systematic curation and evidence-based clinical interpretation of genes/somatic variants associated with hematologic malignancies. In collaboration with the Clinical Interpretation of Variants in Cancer (CIViC) (civicdb.org) knowledgebase, HCT members curate, edit, and verify Evidence Items for each variant extracted from peer-reviewed publications. Monthly discussions based on these Evidence Items lead to the preparation of variant Assertions, which summarize the state of the field consensus variant interpretation and include tiering based on the AMP/ASCO/CAP guidelines (PMID: 27993330). FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) encodes a class III receptor tyrosine kinase expressed in hematopoietic cells. FLT3 mutations, including both internal tandem duplication (ITD) and mutations in the tyrosine kinase domain (TKD), are the most common mutations in acute myeloid leukemia (AML), occurring in approximately 30% of all AML cases. Implementing FLT3 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in different treatment regimens for FLT3 mutated AML patients has led to significantly improved overall survival. Type I FLT3 inhibitors, including midostaurin, gilteritinib, sunitinib, lestaurtinib, and crenolanib, bind to the ATP-binding site when the receptor is in active conformation. Type II FLT3 inhibitors, including sorafenib, ponatinib, and quizartinib, interact with a hydrophobic region directly adjacent to the ATP-binding domain that is only accessible when the receptor is inactive, which prevents receptor activation. Generally in AML cells, type I FLT3 inhibitors prevent activity for both ITD and TKD mutations, while Type II inhibitors target ITD but lack efficiency against TKD mutations. The development of TKD mutations in AML cells with ITD have proved to be a mechanism of acquired, or secondary resistance to Type II FLT3 inhibitors. The HCT is piloting curation assessments of FLT3 alterations, including ITD, TKD and non-TKD variants, in AML. So far, the HCT has curated 75 evidence items for FLT3 somatic variants. FLT3-ITD, as well as D835 and I836 were asserted as tier 1 level A variants based on the prediction of response to gilteritinib in relapsed/refractory AML (PMIDs: 27993330, 31665578, 28645776, 28516360, 27908881). Recent curation activities are focused on FLT3 D839G and N676K, as clinical trials using large AML patient cohorts are lacking in their ability to validate drug response/resistance associations of these two TKD variants due to their low frequency. Functional studies showed both variants result in increased proliferation and protection from apoptosis, supporting the oncogenic potential of these two variants (PMIDs: 26891877, 2468088). FLT3 D839G combined with ITD confers resistance to pexidartinib and ponatinib, both Type II FLT3 inhibitors (PMIDs: 25847190, 23430109). FLT3 N676K predicts response to the Type I FLT3 inhibitor, gilteritinib, when N676K is present alone or in combination with ITD. Interestingly, FLT3 N676K in the absence of ITD predicts response to sorafenib, a Type II FLT3 inhibitor (PMIDs: 32040554, 32984009). However, these results are mostly derived from in vitro studies. Two separate Tier II, Level D Assertions have been submitted for FLT3-ITD&D839G for its response to pexidartinib and ponatinib, and more evidence is being collected to form an Assertion for FLT3 N676K. The complexity of the prediction of response/resistance associated with FLT3 D839G and N676K supports the importance of evidence-based curation and collection for these variants in the context of the overall mutation profile, disease context and specific FLT3 TKIs to clearly define their clinical impact. Disclosures Pullarkat: Stemline Therapeutics: Honoraria.

Small-molecule recruitment of an endogenous nuclease rescues pathologies associated with c9ALS/FTD in vivo by targeting an RNA repeat expansion.

Study Design: This was a narrative review. Objective: This review discusses our current knowledge regarding cellular-based allografts while highlighting the key gaps in the literature that must be addressed before their widespread adoption. Summary of Background Data: Iliac crest bone graft is the gold-standard bone graft material but is associated with donor site morbidity. Commonly utilized bone graft extenders such as demineralized bone matrix and bone morphogenetic protein have conflicting data supporting their efficacy and lack the osteogenic potential of new cellular-based allograft options. Methods: An extensive literature review was performed. The literature was then summarized in accordance with the authors’ clinical experience. Results: There is not widespread evidence thus far that the addition of the osteogenic cellular component to allograft enhances spinal fusion, as a recent study by Bhamb and colleagues demonstrated superior bone formation during spine fusion in an aythmic rat model when demineralized bone matrix was used in comparison to Osteocel Plus. Furthermore, the postimplantation cellular viability and osteogenic and osteoinductive capacity of cellular-based allografts need to be definitively established, especially given that a recent study by Lina and colleagues demonstrated a paucity of bone marrow cell survival in an immunocompetent mouse posterolateral spinal fusion model. Conclusions: This data indicates that the substantially increased cost of these cellular allografts may not be justified. Level of Evidence: Level V.

Abstract Background: Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a life-limiting inherited hemoglobinopathy that results in significant complications and affects quality of life. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is currently the only curative intervention for SCD; however, guidelines are needed to inform how to apply HSCT in clinical practice. Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and health professionals in their decisions about HSCT for SCD. Methods: The multidisciplinary guideline panel formed by ASH included 2 patient representatives and was balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The Mayo Evidence-Based Practice Research Program supported the guideline development process, including performing systematic evidence reviews (through 2019). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, including GRADE Evidence-to-Decision frameworks, to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment. Results: The panel agreed on 8 recommendations to help patients and providers assess how individuals with SCD should consider the timing and type of HSCT. Conclusions: The evidence review yielded no randomized controlled clinical trials for HSCT in SCD; therefore, all recommendations are based on very low certainty in the evidence. Key recommendations include considering HSCT for those with neurologic injury or recurrent acute chest syndrome at an early age and to improve nonmyeloablative regimens. Future research should include the development of a robust SCD registry to serve as a comparator for HSCT studies.

Study Design This study is a retrospective case control. Objectives This study aims to determine whether cervical degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) is associated with increased baseline neck/arm pain and inferior health quality states compared to a similar population without DS. Methods Patient demographics, pre-operative radiographs, and baseline PROMs were reviewed for 315 patients undergoing anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) with at least 1 year of follow-up. Patients were categorized based on the presence (S) or absence of a spondylolisthesis (NS). Statistically significant variables were further explored using multiple linear regression analysis. Results 49/242 (20%) patients were diagnosed with DS, most commonly at the C4–5 level (27/49). The S group was significantly older than the NS group (58.0 ± 10.7 vs 51.9 ± 9.81, P = .001), but otherwise, no demographic differences were identified. Although a higher degree of C2 slope was found among the S cohort (22.5 ± 8.63 vs 19.8 ± 7.78, P = .044), no differences were identified in terms of preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) neck pain or NDI. In the univariate analysis, the NS group had significantly increased VAS arm pain relative to the S group (4.93 ± 3.16 vs 3.86 ± 3.30, P = .045), which was no longer significant in the multivariate analysis. Conclusions Although previous reports have suggested an association between cervical DS and neck pain, we could not associate the presence of DS with increased baseline neck or arm pain. Instead, DS appears to be a relatively frequent (20% in this series) age-related condition reflecting radiographic, rather than necessarily clinical, disease.