Citations

7540 Background: The combination of a proteasome inhibitor (PI) with lenalidomide (R) and dex (d) has been a common initial therapy for newly diagnosed myeloma (NDMM). We designed a randomized phase 3 trial to examine if carfilzomib (K), a next generation PI, improved progression free survival (PFS) compared with bortezomib (V) when either is combined with Rd for initial treatment of NDMM. Initial analysis at a median follow up of 15.3 months (mos) showed comparable PFS for both triplets. We present the long-term results of the trial with ~70 months median follow up. Methods: Patients (Pts) with NDMM, were randomized 1:1 to receive VRd or KRd for 36 weeks followed by a 2 nd randomization (1:1) to indefinite versus 2 yrs of R maintenance. Pts without del17p, t(14;16), t(14;20), plasma cell leukemia or high-risk GEP70 profile, were enrolled. VRd arm included V 1.3 mg/m 2 on days(d) 1, 4, 8, and 11 (d1, 8 for cycles 9-12), R 25 mg d1-14, and d 20 mg d1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12 of a 3-week (wk) cycle for 12 cycles, while pts in the KRd arm received K 36 mg/m 2 d1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 with R 25 mg daily on d1-21 and d 40 mg wkly, in 4 wk cycles for 9 cycles. Maintenance used 15 mg R d1-21 q4 wks. Results: The study accrued 1087 pts (VRd=542, KRd=545). Median age was 65y; baseline characteristics including intent to transplant were similar across the arms. Median induction duration (mos; IQR) was 7.2 (3.4-8.9) and 8.4 (5.1-9.1) for VRd and KRd, respectively; 59.8% in VRd and 45.3% in KRd did not proceed to Step 2. Median PFS (mos) was VRd=41.9 and KRd=44.6; HR = 0.89 (0.76-1.04). Toxicity data, PFS sensitivity analyses and OS probabilities are as in the table. Conclusions: In this randomized trial, with median follow up of nearly 6 years, KRd and VRd had comparable PFS and OS in an intent to treat analysis. While similar numbers proceeded to SCT in the 2 arms, more did so during induction in the VRd arm while more patients in the KRd arm went to SCT later. VRd remains a standard triplet induction regimen in standard and intermediate risk NDMM, and a suitable backbone for 4 drug combinations. Clinical trial information: NCT01863550 . N (%) VRd(n=527) KRd(n=526) SCT anytime 186 (34.3) 183 (33.6) SCT without Step 2 registration 146 112 Median Time to SCT (mos; range) 7.7 (3.5-83.9) 10.6 (3.7-70.6) Grade 3-4 Treatment-Related Toxicity 315 (59.8) 344 (65.4) Grade 5 Treatment-Related Toxicity 2 (0.4) 9 (1.7) Grade 5 All Events 11 (2.1) 20 (3.8) Survival outcomes HR Median (95% CI) Median (95% CI) PFS Primary: PD or death within 3 months of last evaluation as events 0.89(0.76-1.04) 41.9(35.7, 50.3) 44.6(38.2, 51.9) PFS Sensitivity: All deaths as events, 0.87(0.75-1.02) 39.5(34.9, 46.0) 42.8(37.4, 49.7) PFS Sensitivity: Censor at alternate Rx 0.83(0.69-0.99) 35.0(31.3, 42.6) 38.7(34.7, 49.0) PFS Sensitivity: Event at alternate Rx 0.84(0.73-0.97) 18.0(14.2, 23.0) 24.4(20.9, 27.9) Overall survival 0.92(0.75-1.12) 119(100, NE) 118(103-NE)

501 Background: EA1181 (NCT04266249) is a single-arm trial of neoadjuvant THP for patients with clinical anatomic stage II/III HER2+ breast cancer; patients with cT4 or cN3 disease were excluded . Assessing the primary endpoint, 3-year recurrence-free survival in patients with a pCR (ypT0/Tis, ypN0), requires longer follow-up. Here, we present results for the secondary objective of pCR rate and its relation to clinicopathologic factors and the HER2DX pCR likelihood score (Reveal Genomics) derived from gene expression and clinical features. Methods: Patients received 4 cycles of trastuzumab and pertuzumab (HP) with weekly paclitaxel (12 weeks) or docetaxel (q3w x 4), followed by surgery. Clinicopathologic features were assessed for all patients and HER2DX pCR score (stratified by ER status) was determined using the diagnostic biopsy in a representative subset of study participants. Results: 2175 patients were enrolled. Median age was 55 years (range 22-88 years); 58% had clinical stage IIA, 33% stage IIB, and 9% stage III. 45% had nodal involvement (mostly cN1). 781 tumors were HER2+/ER- and 1394 HER2+/ER+ (locally tested ). 2141 patients started THP, for whom the pCR rate was 44% overall, 63.7% in HER2+/ER- and 32.4% in HER2+/ER+ tumors. Disease progressed during THP in 16 patients (0.7%). The pCR rate varied inversely to the proportion of cells staining for ER among patients with HER2+/ER+ breast cancer: 1-10%+, 62.5%; 11-69%, 51.6%; ≥70%, 22.5% (p <0.001). The pCR rate was significantly associated with higher grade, especially in HER2+/ER+ disease. T and N stage did not significantly affect pCR rate. Among 569 patients assessed for the HER2DX pCR score, the pCR rate was significantly greater for patients with a higher vs lower score, regardless of ER status (Table). Further correlations and interactions will be presented. Conclusions: Neoadjuvant THP resulted in pCR in nearly two-thirds of pts with clinical stage II/III HER2+/ER- and in one-third with HER2+/ER+ breast cancer. There was no association with clinical stage. Lower ER expression and higher grade were associated with higher pCR rates. The HER2DX pCR score was a significant predictor of pCR, regardless of ER status. Clinical trial information: NCT04266249 . All Participants HER2+/ER- HER2+/ER+ # patients enrolled pCR rate (95% CI) # patients enrolled pCR rate (95% CI) # patients enrolled pCR rate (95% CI) Evaluable Cohort 2141 44%(42-46%) 774 64%(60-67%) 1367 32%(30-35%) HER2DX Cohort 569 48%(44- 52%) 230 69% (63-75%) 339 34%(29-39%) HER2DX pCR-high score 182 (32%) 68%(60-74%) 147 (64%) 70% (62-77%) 36 (11%) 58%(41-74%) HER2DX pCR-medium score 161 (28%) 67% (59- 74%) 70 (30%) 74%(62- 84%) 89 (26%) 61%(50-71%) HER2DX pCR-low score 226 (40%) 19%(14- 25%) 13 (6%) 31%(9-61%) 214 (63%) 18%(13-24%) P-value HER2DX score <0.001 0.010 <0.001

Abstract Background: MCL is a B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma for which auto-HCT is often employed in first CR, based on non-randomized phase 2 trials, and a randomized trial (Dreyling et al, Blood 2005) conducted before the advent of more effective induction and maintenance regimens. The TRIANGLE trial (Dreyling et al, Lancet 2024) suggested that auto-HCT may not add benefit to more effective induction and maintenance regimens containing high-dose cytarabine, rituximab and BTK inhibitors. E4151 explored whether auto-HCT benefits pts achieving deep first remission, as measured by a highly sensitive immunoglobulin high throughput sequencing minimal residual disease (MRD) assay. Methods: EA4151 is a four arm trial conducted through the U.S. National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) and Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT-CTN). Pts with MCL between the ages of 18 and 70 and in first remission were eligible. After induction, pts underwent PET/CT, bone marrow biopsy, and the clonoSEQ® MRD assay from peripheral blood. Pts in CR with uMRD at 1 in 10-6 sensitivity (uMRD6) were randomized 1:1 to Arm A (auto-HCT + 3 years of maintenance rituximab [MR]) or Arm B (3 years of MR alone), stratified by MIPI-c score and intensive vs non-intensive induction. Pts with either MRD-positive (MRD+) CR or MRD-indeterminate CR (Arm C and Arm D, respsectively) both received auto-HCT + 3 years of MR. Pts who were MRD+ pre-transplant had MRD repeated at day 100. Primary endpoint was to compare overall survival (OS) in Arms A and B, with secondary endpoints including progression-free survival (PFS). Primary analysis population included all randomized pts. As some pts refused their assigned treatment (N=65 [25.3%] for arm A and N=2 [0.8%] for arm B), a “treated as assigned” analysis was also performed. Stratified logrank test was used to compare survival distributions. P-values are two-sided. Results: From Aug 2017 to July 2024, 650 pts were assigned to a treatment arm with 257, 259, 49, and 85 pts enrolled on Arms A, B, C, and D, respectively. Pts were 79% male and 92% white race. Median age was 60 years (range 27-70). MIPI-c was low/low-intermediate (LI) in 63% and high/ high-intermediate (HI) in 37%. Induction was intensive (defined as high-dose cytarabine-containing) in 73% and non-intensive in 27%. A BTK inhibitor was given during induction in 7.2% of pts, and during maintenance in 0.3% of pts. The third pre-planned interim analysis was based on data as of 7/15/24, with median follow up of 2.7 years. The futility boundary was an OS hazard ratio (HR) of 0.984 for Arm A vs B. The estimated OS HR for Arm A vs B in all randomized (n=516) and pts treated as assigned (n=375) were 1.11 (CI 0.71-1.74, p=0.66) and 1.00 (CI 0.58-1.74, p=0.99), respectively and crossed the futility boundary. The 3 year (yr) OS for Arms A and B were 82.1% and 82.7% in all randomized pts, and 86.2% and 84.8% in pts treated as assigned. The estimated PFS HR for Arm A vs B in all randomized and pts treated as assigned were 1.05 (CI 0.71-1.56, p=0.79) and 0.95 (CI 0.59-1.54, p=0.84), respectively. The 3 yr PFS for Arms A and B were 76.6% and 77.4% in all randomized pts, and 81.5% and 80.4% in pts treated as assigned. For Arm C, 3 yr OS and PFS were 81.9% (CI 69.6-96.4%) and 76.9% (CI 64.4-91.7%), respectively. For Arm D, 3 yr OS and PFS were 85.1% (CI 76.0%-95.4%) and 73.4% (62.7-85.9%), respectively. For the MIPI-c low/LI group, 3 yr OS was 84.6% vs 85.7% for Arm A vs B (p=0.96), while in the MIPI-c high/HI group, 3 yr OS was 77.4% vs 77.6% for Arm A vs B (p=0.71). For the intensive induction group, 3 yr OS was 83.0% vs 86.2% for Arm A vs B (p=0.30), while in the non-intensive induction group, 3 yr OS was 79.5% vs 72.8% for Arm A vs B (p=0.48). Exploratory analysis of MRD+ pts (Arm C) showed that pts who converted to uMRD6 post auto-HCT (n=17) had 3 yr OS of 100% and PFS of 100%, whereas those who remained MRD+ (n=13) post auto-HCT had 3 yr OS of 63.6% and PFS of 48.8%. Causes of death (COD) in Arm A were 4.7% lymphoma, 5.1% COVID-19, and 5.0% other/unknown. COD in Arm B were 3.5% lymphoma, 6.6% COVID-19, and 4.6% other/unknown. In Sept 2024, the DSMC recommended termination of accrual and release of trial findings based on these results. Conclusion: In this interim analysis, in the era of highly effective induction and maintenance regimens, MCL pts in first CR with uMRD6 did not benefit from consolidative auto-HCT. Pts who remain MRD+ after induction may benefit from auto-HCT. Longer follow-up will be important to confirm these findings.

Introduction E1910 randomized pts with ALL aged 30-70 years who were measurable residual disease negative (MRD-) by multi-color flow cytometry (FC) after intensification to conventional chemotherapy (chemo) with or without blinatumomab (blina). The addition of blina resulted in improved overall survival (OS) (Litzow, NEJM 2024) and led to a new standard of care. Older ALL pts have inferior outcomes when compared to younger pts in part due to increased treatment toxicity. In E1910, exposure to dexamethasone and pegasparagase was reduced for older pts (age &gt;55 years). We present results of subgroup analyses describing outcomes of older pts enrolled in E1910. Methods Details of the E1910 protocol remission induction (step 1), high dose methotrexate with pegaspargase intensification (step 2), blina randomization (step 3), and maintenance (step 4) or allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) were previously presented (Litzow, NEJM 2024). MRD status was determined after step 2 centrally with 6-color FC with MRD- defined as &lt;0.01% in the bone marrow (BM). Following approval of blina in the US for MRD positive (MRD+) disease in 2018, MRD+ pts were assigned to the blina arm and no longer randomized. The primary objective was to compare the OS and relapse free survival (RFS) among older pts aged &gt;55 years (pre-specified stratification factor) who received chemo + blina to that of pts who received chemo alone (step 3 treatment). Estimates of OS and RFS were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Comparison of OS and RFS between treatment arms was conducted using the two-sided stratified log-rank test and Cox model with CD20 status, rituximab use, and whether pts intended to receive HCT or not as stratification factors. Stratified Multivariate Cox models of OS and RFS were used to further evaluate the effect of step 3 treatment, adjusted by gender, white blood cell count (WBC), platelets, hemoglobin, peripheral blood blasts, BM blasts, performance status and combined molecular risk category. Results Among the 488 enrolled pts, 211 were ≥55 years old with median age of 61 (range 55-70). Among older pts, 49.3% were female and 83.4% were white, 17 (8.1%) pts had WBC &gt;30.000/uL at the time of diagnosis. 156 (73.9%) pts had CD10+ early B-ALL and 46 (21.8%) had CD10- B-ALL immunophenotype. The most common genetic subgroups were low hypodiploid (n=58, 27.5%), BCR::ABL1-like (n=34, 16.1%) and KMT2A rearranged (n=26, 12.3%). 8.1% of pts had low, 9.0% intermediate, 63.5% high combined molecular risk disease and in 19.4% of pts risk could not be assigned. Baseline characteristics were not significantly different in chemo + blina and chemo only pts. The median follow-up for this analysis from step 1 registration was 54.6 months. Complete response with (CR) or without (CRi) count recovery after induction was observed in 174 (82.5%) pts (167 CR, 7 CRi). 93 (44%) pts were MRD-. 32 (15.1%) pts received HCT on study and 24 (11.4%) pts received it off study. Among MRD- pts (n=93), 46 were randomized to and 45 received blina: 6 (13.3%) pts had 1, 14 (31.1%) had 2, 2 (4.4%) had 3 and 23 (51.1%) had 4 cycles. 3-year OS were 71% and 67% for the blina and the chemo only arm (univariate model: HR 0.75, 95% CI: 0.37-1.50; multivariate model: HR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.25-1.27). 3-year RFS were 69% and 59% for the blina and the chemo only arm (univariate model: HR 0.75, 95% CI: 0.39-1.45; multivariate model: HR 0.67, 95% CI: 0.32-1.42). Among MRD+ pts (n=25), 14 were randomized to and 11 received blina: 7 (63.6%) pts had 2, and 4 (36.4%) had 4 cycles. 3-year OS were 66% and 44% for the blina vs the chemo only arm (univariate model: HR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.12-3.64). 3-year RFS were 64% and 31% for the blina vs the chemo only arm (univariate model: HR 0.64, 95% CI: 0.15-2.74). Frequency of treatment-related toxicities among older pts during different study phases and treatment assignments will be presented. Conclusion Despite evidence of improved outcomes in the whole study cohort, the addition of blina to consolidation chemo for older pts with ALL was not associated with statistically significant improvement of OS or RFS in this exploratory analysis not powered to detect the difference in subgroups. This is possibly due to sample size but may be due to biologic differences in the older adult population. Further studies are needed to definitively determine tolerance and benefit of blina addition to consolidation for older pts with ALL.

Introduction: The optimal induction for younger fit patients (pts) with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is unknown; though intensive chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) containing high dose cytarabine has been shown to prolong remission. Achieving molecular remission is an independent predictor of outcomes post induction therapy in patients with MCL. Incorporating undetectable measurable residual disease (uMRD) status into the primary endpoint may be preferable to progression-free survival (PFS), particularly when approaches following induction are varied (e.g., ASCT, maintenance treatment, observation). Induction with 3 cycles of bendamustine and rituximab followed by 3 cycles of cytarabine and rituximab (BR/CR) is associated with high complete metabolic response (CMR) and uMRD rates (Armand et al., BJH 2016; Merryman et al., Blood Adv 2020). Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi) including ibrutinib and acalabrutinib (A) in combination with CIT are highly effective in MCL (Wang et al., EHA 2024, LBA 3439). In 2019, the US Intergroup activated EA4181 to explore the efficacy with the addition of fixed duration BTKi, to BR or BR/CR for patients with MCL ≤ 70 years old. Patients and methods: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 (stratified by MIPI risk status) to 6 cycles of BR/CR (control arm), BR/CR-A, or BR-A. Cytarabine was dosed at 2 g/m2 Q12 hours x 4, with dose reductions based on age and creatinine clearance. Acalabrutinib was dosed at 100 mg BID continuously on BR cycles with the BR/CR-A and BR-A arms and at 100 mg BID on days 1-7 and 22-28 with CR cycles on the BR/CR-A arm to mitigate hematologic toxicity. Consolidation approaches following induction were at the discretion of the treating physician. The primary endpoint was a composite of PET/CT CMR and peripheral blood uMRD rate (&lt; 1 in 105). ClonoSEQ (Adaptive Biotechnologies) was performed at baseline and MRD testing was obtained at the end of induction. Secondary clinical objectives included PFS and overall survival (OS) at 36 months (mo), objective response rates (ORR), and toxicity rates. With 108 patients per arm expected, there was 86% power to detect an increase in PET/CT CMR/uMRD rate from 60% in the control arm to 75% in either BR/CR-A or BR-A arms using a Z-test with a 10% alpha (1-sided). Results: Between October 2019 and March 2023, 359 participants were randomized to BR/CR (n = 128), BR/CR-A (n = 129), and BR-A (n = 102). BR-A was closed to further accrual by the DSMC based on interim futility analysis for superiority in Fall 2022. The median (range) age was 61 (25, 70), 30% were ≥ 65 years, 77% were male, 89% were white, 89% were non-Hispanic, 18%/43%/39% were low/intermediate/high risk MIPI. Baseline clonal sequence was identified in 308/326 (95%) among samples received. 281/308 were eligible and treated and 260/281 had an end of treatment MRD test result (BR/CR = 85, BR/CR-A = 98, BR-A = 77). This subset (n = 260) is the focus of the primary analysis; sensitivity analysis included 281 eligible and treated pts with trackable clonal marker. In the primary analysis subset, 94%, 91%, and 90% in BR/CR, BR/CR-A, and BR-A arms, respectively, completed 6 cycles of protocol therapy. The PET/CT CMR/uMRD rates were 82% (BR/CR), 82% (BR/CR-A; p = 0.55 vs BR/CR), and 78% (BR-A; p = 0.76 vs BR/CR). In the sensitivity analysis set, PET/CT CMR/uMRD rates were 74% with BR/CR (n = 94), 76% (p = 0.44) with BR/CR-A (n = 106), and 74% (p = 0.52) with BR-A (n = 81). ORR (CMR) rates were 94% (91%), 99% (90%), and 94% (91%) with BR/CR, BR/CR-A, and BR-A, respectively. At a median follow-up of 27.9 mo, estimated 12-mo PFS/OS were 86%/94% (BR/CR), 89%/98% (BR/CR-A) and 87%/95% (BR-A). The proportion of treatment-related grade 3 or higher adverse events (AE) was 78%/88%/73%, with neutropenia in 52%/58%/27%, anemia in 23%/32%/3%, thrombocytopenia in 55%/66%/6%, and febrile neutropenia in 11%/12%/4%; treatment discontinuation due to AE occurred in 5%/7%/8% in BR/CR, BR/CR-A, and BR-A arms, respectively. Conclusion: High PET/CT CMR uMRD rates were seen in all 3 arms. BR/CR can be considered as a standard induction in pts ≤ 70. Addition of acalabrutinib to the standard arm added toxicity without improvement in efficacy, suggesting acalabrutinib should be avoided during Ara-C cycles. BR-A was found not superior and closed early by the DSMC; however, it is the least toxic arm with similar efficacy, and represents an appealing option to avoid high dose cytarabine.

Background: Randomized studies in newly diagnosed (ND) AML patients with a FLT3 mutation show that adding 14 days of a FLT3 inhibitor to each intensive chemotherapy cycle improves overall survival. For patients unsuitable for intensive chemotherapy due to older age or comorbidities, the presence of a FLT3-ITD mutation is associated with high rates of early relapse and short remission duration. There is a limited survival benefit of venetoclax (ven) plus azacitidine (aza) compared to aza alone among patients with AML with a FLT3-ITD mutation. Accordingly, there is significant interest in adding FLT3-targeted therapy to lower intensity chemotherapy for patients with ND AML and FLT3 mutations, but to date no randomized data have demonstrated a survival benefit for this approach.Gilteritinib (gilt) is a highly potent and FLT3-selective oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor that is the standard therapy of relapsed/refractory FLT3-mutated AML, based upon superior survival in randomized studies. Gilt can also be combined safely with ven and/or aza, though myelosuppression remains a concern. Despite this, single institution studies of ven, aza, and gilt therapy of ND AML patients with FLT3-mutations show that this three-drug regimen is associated with near-universal complete remission rates (CR 90%, CRi 6%) and a majority of studied patients eliminate detectable FLT3-ITD (&lt;1 x10-5) within four cycles by an ultrasensitive, amplicon-based NGS assay (Short, et al. JCO 2024). Rates of CR with full count recovery and survival appear superior to historical comparisons, but myelosuppression is potentially increased with the triplet regimen. These data demonstrate a need for multi-institutional comparative trials, not only to determine whether adding FLT3-inhibitors to ven and aza improve deep remission rates, but also to refine schedules of the triplet combination that improve tolerability for widespread use.Methods: This tier 1 MyeloMATCH substudy is an open-label, randomized phase 2 trial that will enroll ND AML patients older than age 60 or individuals judged by their treating physician to be best served by azanucleoside + ven-based therapy due to comorbidity. Subjects provide samples to the central MyeloMATCH Master Screening and Reassessment Protocol (MSRP, NCT05564390 ) and are assigned to the MM1OA-EA02 substudy (NCT06317649) based upon the presence of a FLT3-ITD or FLT3-TKD (D835) mutation by NGS. Subjects are randomized to one of three arms (regimens 1, 2, or 3), stratified by age (&lt;70 years vs. older) and FLT3-ITD burden (ITD VAF&gt;33% vs. lower VAF or D835). All study arms contain aza and ven administered in 28-day cycles with two study arms also including gilt. Regimen 1 is ven and aza administered as per the pivotal VIALE-A study. Regimen 2 adds gilt 80 mg once daily on days 1-28 and regimen 3 adds gilt on days 8-21 only. A marrow biopsy is performed during the first cycle (day 14-21, depending on study arm) and all chemotherapy is held until count recovery if a morphologic leukemia-free state or aplasia is seen. Patients receive up to two induction cycles to achieve remission and then receive ongoing consolidation cycles of therapy with a similar pattern of gilt administration up to 2 years. To minimize risk of cumulative myelosuppression, during consolidation azacitidine administration is reduced to days 1-5 on regimens 2 and 3 and ven limited to days 1-7 on regimen 2 and days 1-14 on regimen 3. For all arms, treatment-related adverse events prompt further reduction in ven, aza, or gilt dose or duration. Response will be measured after cycles 2 and 4, including centrally-performed MRD by flow cytometry. The primary endpoint is the rate of MRD(-) CR (&lt;1 x 10-3) after up to 4 cycles. Key secondary endpoints include safety data, response rate, EFS, and OS. The study is powered to detect a 25% absolute improvement in MRD(-) CR rate in either triplet arm from a target accrual of 147 patients. A safety run-in for regimens 2 and 3 to confirm tolerability and feasibility will be performed after 20 subjects enroll to these arms; an interim futility analysis will be performed once response assessment of 50% of all planned accrual occurs. Study was activated on June 6, 2024 and is expected to continue until December 2025.

Abstract BACKGROUND Both radiation and temozolomide (TMZ) have meaningful single-modality anti-tumor activity against low-grade gliomas. ECOG-ACRIN E3F05 tested whether combined therapy with radiation and temozolomide is more effective than radiation alone in patients with grade II gliomas. METHODS Patients with grade II gliomas (central pathology review performed post hoc), no prior radiation/chemotherapy, and either age &gt; 40, uncontrolled symptoms/seizures, or progression after initial observation were randomized 1:1 to radiation 50.4 Gy alone in 28 fractions (Arm A) versus radiation 50.4 Gy with concomitant and 12 four-week cycles of post-radiation TMZ (Arm B). Randomization was stratified by 1p/19q codeletion status, age, KPS, pre-operative tumor diameter, and contrast enhancement. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); overall survival (OS), quality of life, cognition, severe toxicities, and impact of codeletion status were secondary objectives. RESULTS The trial opened 1/09. Accrual was stopped in 1/14 after RTOG 9802 reported benefit from the addition of PCV chemotherapy to radiation in grade II gliomas. A total of 172 subjects were enrolled. Median age was 44 (range 19-78) and 54% male. 1p/19q codeletion was present in 44%. NCI CTCAE (version 4) grade 3+ toxicity was more common in participants treated with TMZ: thrombocytopenia (11%) and neutropenia (5%) versus none in the radiation alone arm. With a median follow-up of 117 months, OS was superior in Arm B (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31-0.95, stratified log-rank p value 0.03). OS HRs were 0.56 and 0.53 for subjects with and without 1p/19q codeleted tumors, respectively. PFS did not differ between Arms A and B (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.44-1.28, p = 0.30). Five and ten-year OS were 78% and 70% in Arm B versus 70% and 47% in Arm A. CONCLUSION The addition of temozolomide to radiation improves overall survival in both co-deleted and non-co-deleted grade II gliomas.

6026 Background: We examined a large patient dataset based on E1305, a completed phase III randomized trial of platinum-based chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab (Argiris et al. JCO 2019), to evaluate prognostic factors in the first-line treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (RM SCCHN) and expand on our previous observations in cooperative group trials (Argiris et al. Cancer 2004). Methods: All 403 patients enrolled in E1305 were analyzed. Overall survival (OS) was the outcome of interest. Clinical and tumor characteristics were examined using Cox proportional hazards models. Variables which were significant in the univariate setting at a level of ≤ 0.10 were included in a multivariable model, and backwards selection was performed (threshold of p ≤ 0.05). The final multivariable model was then applied to the two treatment arms, separately. Variables for which the hazards ratio (HR) within an arm was more than 10% different than that for the whole cohort, were removed from the final cohort model. Results: The median OS in the whole study cohort was 11.8 months. A prognostic score model for OS was built, using the 4 independent prognostic factors identified in the multivariable model: ECOG performance status (1 vs 0), prior radiation, primary region (non-oropharynx vs oropharynx), and metastatic disease bone or liver (vs other sites/no metastases). Prognostic score was dichotomized (0-2 and > 2). Patients with 0-2 risk factors (n = 249) had a median OS of 15.2 months (90% CI: 13.8, 18.1), while patients with > 2 risk factors (n = 154) had a median OS of 7.6 months (90% CI: 6.5, 9.3); HR of 2.14 (95% CI: 1.73, 2.66), p < 0.0001. Compared to our previous 5-factor model from analysis of older trials in a similar setting, the variable “bone/liver metastasis” is new, but “tumor cell differentiation” and “weight loss” were not significant and not included in the new model for OS. Conclusions: The new proposed model includes 4 prognostic factors for OS (performance status, primary site, prior radiation, presence of bone/liver metastasis) in the first-line treatment of RM SCCHN.

AbstractIntroductionRelapsed or refractory (r/r) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) or lymphoblastic lymphoma (LL) remains a therapeutic challenge. Preclinical data in both B‐ and T‐ALL suggests synergy of venetoclax (VEN) with vincristine (VCR). We designed a phase I/II trial (EA9152) of the combination of L‐VCR and VEN for patients with r/r B‐or T‐cell ALL or LL. Here, we report the safety and efficacy outcomes of the phase I portion of this trial (NCT03504644).MethodsIn a 3+3 dose escalation design, r/r ALL subjects were given single‐agent VEN doses reaching 400, 600, or 800 mg for the three respective dose levels. Weekly L‐VCR at 2.25 mg/m2 IV was started on D15 of cycle 1. The primary phase I objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination.ResultsAmong the 18 patients in phase I, grade ≥ 3 treatment‐related adverse events were reported in 89% of treated patients. Two patients (two of three) at dose level 3 experienced dose‐limiting toxicities. Therefore, the MTD of the combination was determined to be dose level 2 (VEN 600 mg). Twenty‐two percent of evaluable patients (N = 4) achieved a complete response, with two of them showing no evidence of measurable residual disease (MRD).ConclusionThe combination of VEN and L‐VCR was found to be safe for patients with r/r ALL and encouraging preliminary efficacy, including MRD negative responses. With the removal of L‐VCR from the US market, the phase 2 portion of this trial is actively enrolling with vincristine sulfate.

Abstract Background The PALLAS trial investigated the addition of palbociclib to standard adjuvant endocrine therapy reduces breast cancer recurrence. This pre-specified analysis was conducted to determine whether adjuvant palbociclib benefited patients diagnosed with lower risk stage IIA disease compared to those with higher stage disease. Methods PALLAS was an international, multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase III trial, representing a public-private partnership between Pfizer, the Austrian Breast Cancer Study Group and, the U.S. ALLIANCE Foundation. Patients diagnosed with stage II-III, hormone-receptor-positive, HER2/neu negative breast cancer who were within 12 months of diagnosis, and had completed all definitive therapy aside from endocrine therapy, which was started within 6 months prior to study entry. All patients were required to submit a formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor block. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive standard adjuvant endocrine therapy (of physicians’ choice) for at least 5 years with or without 2 years of Palbociclib, administered orally at a starting dose of 125 mg daily, given for 21 days followed by a 7-day break. Results A total of 5,796 patients with HR+/HER2- early breast cancer (including 1,010 with stage IIA) were enrolled. Median follow-up was 50 months for stage IIA patients and 43.1 months overall. In the stage IIA cohort, four-year iDFS in the palbociclib arm was 92.9% versus 92.1% for ET alone (HR 0.75, 95%CI 0.48–1.19, p = 0.23). There was no differential benefit by histologic grade, chemotherapy receipt, age, or anatomic/clinical risk. Additionally, no benefit to palbociclib was seen in this cohort in invasive breast cancer-free survival (iBCFS), locoregional relapse-free survival (LRFS), distant relapse-free survival (DRFS), or overall survival (OS). For the stage IIB/III patients, 4-year iDFS was 85.3% for palbociclib + ET versus 83.6% for ET alone (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.77–1.07, p = 0.24). Conclusions and Relevance: While there were substantial differences in outcome for stage IIA versus IIB/III patients at 4 years of follow-up, the addition of 2 years of palbociclib did not improve outcomes for patients, regardless of stage. Trial Registration: The study was registered on Clinicaltrials.gov on July 31, 2015, and was assigned the clinical trial number (NCT02513394).