Citations

451 Background: In first-line E/GEJ/G adenocarcinoma, anti-PD-1 + chemotherapy improves outcomes, yet many patients do not respond. Beyond PD-L1 CPS, tumor-intrinsic biomarkers of primary resistance remain limited. We applied a validated IFN-γ–linked T cell-inflamed (Tinfl) framework to define exclusionary programs and nominate targets. Methods: Bulk RNAseq was analyzed from TCGA ESCA/STAD adenocarcinoma (n=79, discovery) and a de novo Mayo cohort of pretreatment samples (n=74, validation) with harmonized survival and response data. Tinfl scores (160-gene signature) defined quartiles (Q1 cold, Q4 hot). Cold versus hot tumors were compared by edgeR + limma-voom to identify differentially expressed genes (DEGs) (Bioconductor v3.20). Pathway and upstream-regulator/causal-network analyses used Ingenuity Pathway Analysis seeded by top DEGs (|log2FC|>1.5, p<0.05). Survival was assessed by Cox proportional hazards models (two-sided α=0.05) and KM log-rank testing (α=0.05). A 14-gene Tinfl-weighted cold signature produced a per-sample composite score. Results: In the Mayo cohort, median age was 62 years; 72% were stage IV at diagnosis; 24% were HER2-positive and 3% MSI-H; primary sites were GEJ/esophagus/gastric 50%/34%/16%; PD-L1 CPS <1/1–5/6–49/≥50 occurred in 18%/46%/27%/4%; patients received a mean of 2.4 lines of therapy. Across discovery and validation cohorts, Tinfl-cold tumors showed significantly higher expression of developmental and lineage transcription factors (HOXC12, HOXC13, ZIC1, DLX3, EVX1), an oncofetal post-transcriptional hub (IGF2BP1), cancer-testis and piRNA components (MAGEA4, TDRD12, THEG), and neuronal or transport genes (GABRQ, KCNF1, LDLRAD1, SLC6A10P) (logFC >2, p<0.05). Pathway analysis highlighted chromatin and lineage regulators (KAT6A, SIRT1, LEF1), TGF-β signaling (TGFBR2), and repressors of innate DNA/IFN sensing (TREX1, IRF2BP2) (Z-score >2, p<0.05). The 14-gene Tinfl-weighted cold signature was higher in cold versus hot tumors (p<0.05) and showed a directional association with inferior overall survival in the Mayo validation cohort. Among patients who received first-line anti-PD-1–containing regimens, several signature members and the composite score were higher in non-responders (p<0.05). Conclusions: Using a discovery–validation design, we define tumor-intrinsic expression pathways that characterize Tinfl-cold E/GEJ/G adenocarcinoma. We also derive a concise 14-gene Tinfl-weighted cold signature that is enriched in non-responders and associated with inferior overall survival. Targetable nodes such as IGF2BP1 and MAGEA4, together with chromatin and Wnt/TGF-β regulators, support rational combinations with PD-1 blockade. Planned validation in a third cohort, single-cell confirmation of tumor-cell expression, and in vivo cytokine profiling in knockdown models will refine mechanisms and nominate clinical candidates.

399 Background: The standard of care for resectable GEA adenocarcinomas is perioperative chemotherapy with the FLOT (fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, docetaxel) regimen. Recent studies investigating the addition of checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) to perioperative chemotherapy have shown mixed results. An NMA can leverage both direct and indirect comparisons to evaluate the relative efficacies of available regimens in this setting. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science and CENTRAL were searched until August 27th, 2025. Eligible studies included phase 3 randomized trials evaluating perioperative or neoadjuvant chemotherapy +/- CPIs ± radiation in resectable GEA. The primary outcomes were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using a frequentist NMA framework. Results: Fifteen trials including 8072 patients were analyzed. For DFS, perioperative durvalumab + FLOT (dFLOT) ranked highest (P-score = 0.99), followed by FLOT (P-score = 0.84) (HR for dFLOT vs. FLOT was 0.71, 95% CI 0.58-0.86). dFLOT also ranked higher than perioperative pembrolizumab + cisplatin and fluorouracil/capecitabine (KN-585), though this comparison was not statistically significant (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.40-1.04). Compared with CROSS, dFLOT showed superior DFS (HR of 0.48, 95% CI 0.36-0.63). For OS, dFLOT ranked the highest (P-score=0.95) and was superior to CROSS (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.42-0.77). While dFLOT appeared favorable versus FLOT (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.62-0.98), this finding was primarily driven by MATTERHORN, which did not meet its prespecified OS significance boundary (P = 0.03 vs threshold P < 0.0001), and the proportional hazards assumption was violated. Similarly, no significant OS difference was observed between dFLOT and the KN-585 arms (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.45-1.23). Conclusions: In this NMA, perioperative FLOT remained the benchmark regimen for resectable GEA. dFLOT has shown promising early results, ranking the highest for DFS and showing favorable, but not statistically definitive OS trends in comparison to FLOT. Importantly, the network enabled indirect comparisons not tested in head-to-head trials, demonstrating that dFLOT ranked above pembrolizumab+CF/CX (KN-585) without reaching statistical significance, and also outperformed CROSS. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution, as they are primarily driven MATTERHORN data in which OS did not cross the prespecified threshold and proportional hazards assumptions were violated. Perioperative immunotherapy combinations appear promising, but final MATTERHORN results and further confirmatory studies are needed before dFLOT can be considered as a new standard of care.

381 Background: In RATIONALE-306 (NCT03783442), patients (pts) with LA unresectable or metastatic ESCC who received TIS (intravenously, 200 mg, every 3 weeks) + CT (platinum + fluoropyrimidine or paclitaxel) had longer median overall survival (OS) than pts who received PBO + CT at the interim analysis; improvement was maintained after a ≥3-year follow-up. Post hoc analyses in the PD-L1 TAP ≥1% subgroup showed clinically meaningful improvement with TIS + CT. These data supported the US FDA approval for unresectable or metastatic ESCC. Here we report the subgroup analysis of pts who had LA ESCC with PD-L1 TAP score ≥1%. Methods: Pts who had LA unresectable ESCC with PD-L1 TAP score ≥1% were included in this post hoc analysis. Efficacy outcomes (OS, progression-free survival [PFS], objective response rate [ORR], duration of response [DoR]) and safety were analyzed. Results: At data cutoff (Feb 28, 2022), of 649 pts randomized, 63 had LA ESCC with PD-L1 TAP score ≥1% (TIS + CT n=31; PBO + CT n=32; median age 67.0 years; 85.7% male). At median follow-up (TIS + CT 24.4 months; PBO + CT 24.5 months), efficacy with TIS + CT was improved vs PBO + CT (Table) and was consistent with the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Efficacy was maintained after a ≥3-year follow-up (data cutoff: Nov 24, 2023; Table). Conclusions: In this post-hoc analysis, the median OS for pts receiving TIS + CT exceeded two years. The regimen was well tolerated. While the findings require validation in future clinical trials, first-line TIS + CT is an encouraging option for pts who have LA unresectable ESCC with PD-L1 TAP score ≥1%. Clinical trial information: NCT03783442 . Interim Analysis 3-Year Follow-up TIS + CT (n=31) PBO + CT (n=32) TIS + CT (n=32) e PBO + CT (n=31) f Median OS, mo(95% CI) 25.6 (15.3, NE) 11.5(9.0, 21.8) 25.6 (15.3, NE) 12.3(9.0, 21.8) HR (95% CI) a 0.36 (0.17, 0.77) – 0.50 (0.26, 0.95) – Median PFS, a mo(95% CI) 13.2(6.8, NE) 6.7(4.2, 9.7) 13.2(6.8, 27.7) 6.7(4.2, 9.7) HR (95% CI) a 0.46 (0.22, 0.96) – 0.47 (0.23, 0.96) – ORR, b,c n (%) 18 (58.1) 10 (31.3) 19 (59.4) 10 (32.3) Median DoR, b,d mo(95% CI) Not reached (8.4, NE) 5.7 (1.5, 9.6) 22.1 (6.1, NE) 5.7 (1.5, 9.6) a Stratified. b Investigator assessed. c Unconfirmed. d Based on unconfirmed ORR. e One patient’s disease status at baseline was changed to LA after interim analysis. f One patient’s disease status at baseline was changed to metastatic after interim analysis. NE, not estimable.

334 Background: Sarcopenia, or decreased skeletal muscle mass, has been associated with worse surgical and oncologic outcomes across multiple malignancies. This study investigates the impact of sarcopenia on outcomes after multimodal therapy for esophageal cancer. Methods: Retrospective observational cohort study including adult patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy followed by esophagectomy for primary esophageal cancer from January 2000 - December 2021. A fully automated abdominal segmentation using deep convolutional neural network was utilized to calculate skeletal muscle index (SMI) from preoperative CT scans performed at our institution. Males with SMI <52.4 cm 2 /m 2 and females with SMI <38.5 cm 2 /m 2 at any point before surgery were classified as sarcopenic. The relationship between sarcopenia and patient demographics, operative details, and complications were explored using chi-square tests. The relationship between sarcopenia and disease-free survival and overall survival were investigated using parsimonious multivariable analysis retaining variables with p-value <0.05 using backward selection method. Results: We identified 200 patients meeting the study criteria with 142 (71%) having sarcopenia at any time prior to surgery. Patients with sarcopenia were significantly older [65.2 (59.6, 71.2) vs 63 (53.6, 67.5), p = .023] and more likely to have had open surgery [129 (90.8%) vs 46 (79.3%), p = .034]. There were no significant differences in sex, history of diabetes, coronary artery disease, renal disease, smoking, cancer type, cancer stage, tumor size, tumor location, or margin status between sarcopenic groups ( p > .05). Sarcopenic patients were significantly more likely to require blood transfusion ≥3 units after esophagectomy [79 (55.6%) vs 8 (13.8%), p < .001] or to experience complications requiring surgical intervention [36 (24.6%) vs 7 (12.1%), p = .048]. Multivariate analysis revealed that sarcopenia was associated with disease-free and overall survival (Table). Conclusions: Sarcopenia is a prognostic factor in patients undergoing multimodal therapy for esophageal cancer. Interventions that aim to prevent decreases in SMI after initiating neoadjuvant therapy should be investigated. Multivariate analysis with sarcopenia predicting outcomes. Disease free survivalHR (95% CI) p-value Overall survivalHR (95% CI) p-value Age 1.04 (1.02, 1.06) < .001 1.04 (1.02, 1.07) < .001 Epicenter Middle Upper 1.88 (1.21, 2.86)3.16 (1.67, 5.98) .001.005< .001 1.96 (1.26, 3.04)4.00 (1.90, 8.44) < .001.003< .001 Stage Stage II Stage III Stage IV 1.88 (0.95, 3.71)2.90 (1.46, 5.75)16.02 (6.12, 41.93) < .001.069.002< .001 1.65 (0.83, 3.25)2.76 (1.37, 5.55)10.14 (4.03, 25.53) < .001.151.005< .001 Cancer type - - 1.76 (1.03, 3.02) .039 Transfusion > 3 pRBC - - 1.54 (0.99, 2.40) .057 BMI prior to cancer diagnosis - - 0.98 (0.94, 1.01 .208 Sarcopenic 1.76 (1.16, 2.67) .007 1.64 (1.04, 2.60) .033

Importance The 2007 US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Amendments Act (FDAAA) expanded its safety-related regulatory authorities, including enhanced postmarketing safety surveillance and new clinical study requirements. However, whether FDAAA has been associated with differences in the frequency and timing of postmarket safety-related actions remains poorly understood. Objectives To assess whether FDAAA was associated with differences in time to first FDA postmarket drug safety−related action, and to assess whether therapeutic and regulatory characteristics were associated with differences in time to these actions post-FDAAA implementation. Design and Setting This was a cross-sectional study of all novel therapeutics approved by FDA between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2019, and followed up through December 31, 2024. Approvals were categorized as pre- or post-FDAAA (before or after March 25, 2008). Post-FDAAA therapeutic and regulatory characteristics included drug class, therapeutic area, orphan status, special regulatory pathway, and presence of a boxed warning or FDAAA-mandated postmarket study requirement at approval. Main Outcomes and Measures Time to first FDA postmarket drug safety−related action, a composite of withdrawals due to safety concerns, incremental boxed warnings, and safety-related communications. Results Of the 560 novel therapeutics approved, FDA took postmarket safety-related actions for 130 (23.2%) during a median (IQR) follow-up of 12.1 (7.8-18.2) years. These comprised actions within 5 years of approval for 34 of 164 therapeutics (20.7%) approved pre-FDAAA, and 57 of 396 (14.4%) approved post-FDAAA (rate ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.47-1.02; P = .06). Compared to pre-FDAAA approvals, after accounting for therapeutic and regulatory characteristics, there was no statistically significant difference in time to first postmarket safety-related action for post-FDAAA approvals (time ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.15-1.07; P = .07). However, among therapeutics with postmarket safety-related actions within 5 years of approval, median time to first action was shorter post-FDAAA (median [IQR], 3.1 (2.0-4.2) years for pre-FDAAA vs 1.8 [1.3-2.5] years post-FDAAA; P = .004). Among 260 novel therapeutics approved post-FDAAA, after the October 2013 enactment of breakthrough therapy designation, the following therapeutic and regulatory characteristics were associated with time to first postmarket safety-related action: small molecule type (time ratio, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.07-0.81; P = .02), orphan designation (time ratio, 8.29; 95% CI, 2.43-28.27; P &amp;lt; .001), fast track (time ratio, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.08-0.64; P = .005), breakthrough therapy designation (time ratio, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.03-0.32; P &amp;lt; .001), prolonged regulatory review time (&amp;gt;400 days; time ratio, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.03-0.73; P = .02), and FDAAA-mandated postmarket study requirements at approval (time ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.15-0.80; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance This cross-sectional analysis found that the enhanced safety-related regulatory authorities of FDAAA were not associated with differences in time to first postmarket safety-related action. However, among therapeutics with postmarket safety-related actions within 5 years of approval, median time to first action was shorter post-FDAAA implementation.

Abstract Pyroptosis is a form of programmed cell death characterized by the cleavage of the gasdermin (GSDM) family proteins that form pores in the plasma membrane, cell rupture, and the release of proinflammatory cytokines. In this study, we performed immunohistochemistry for cleaved gasdermin D (GSDMD), gasdermin E (GSDME) N-terminus, and gasdermin C (GSDMC) in 2 different cohorts of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and analyzed the impact of GSDM expression on prognosis and immunity. The results showed frequent cleaved GSDMD (N-terminal) expression. Only cytoplasmic GSDMD N-terminal expression correlated with significantly better patient survival in the 2 cohorts. In contrast, GSDME was mainly expressed in the vascular endothelium, and correlated with significantly adverse prognostic effect. Correlating with the multiplex fluorescent immunohistochemistry results, we found that cytoplasmic GSDMD N-terminal expression was associated with increased CD38+ (activated) M1 macrophages in both cohorts, cognate interactions between live DLBCL cells and activated M1 macrophages (and T cells), and lower PD-1/PD-L1 expression in the analyzed cases. In contrast, T-cell pyroptosis, lymphoma cell-resistance to cell death, and phagocytosis by M2 macrophages were observed in tissues with predominantly nuclear GSDMD N-terminal expression. Bulk gene expression profiling and deconvolution analysis revealed associations of cytoplasmic GSDMD N-terminal expression with downregulation of “Don’t eat me”–signaling genes, upregulation of many RNA genes, decreased frequency of “inflammatory” lymphoma microenvironment subtype, increased frequencies of prognostically favorable cell states and ecotypes, and decreased frequency of T-cell exhaustion state. In summary, this study showed distinct cellular and subcellular patterns of 3 GSDM proteins and their associated immune response phenotypes and prognostic effects, with implications for novel therapeutic strategies for B-cell lymphoma.

Abstract E1910 evaluated the addition of blinatumomab to chemotherapy in adults with B-acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). The addition of blinatumomab in patients (pts) with measurable residual disease (MRD) negative (neg) B-ALL significantly improved both relapse-free and overall survival (NEJM 2024; 391: 320-33)1. Given the increasing use of blinatumomab and the E1910 backbone chemotherapy regimen, we evaluated &gt; Grade 3 toxicities on this trial in further detail. We assessed toxicity among the MRD-neg pts by age, gender, body mass index (BMI), combined cytogenetic-molecular risk, and number of cycles of blinatumomab received. We also evaluated toxicities during induction since this trial used a modified chemotherapy backbone. Methods: The eligibility, combined cytogenetic-molecular risk, and treatment have been previously described.1 All toxicities were &gt; Grade 3 by CTCAE version 4 with at least a possible relationship to treatment. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the occurrence and rates of toxicities and Fisher's exact test was used to compare differences in proportions between groups. Analysis of induction included all pts who started treatment. Analysis of Step 3 toxicities included MRD-neg pts who started treatment on the blinatumomab (n=111) or chemotherapy only arm (n=112). Results: Pt characteristics: For induction (n=488), median age was 51 years (yrs) (range 30-70); 48.6% female. Combined cytogenetic-molecular risk: favorable (13.5%); intermediate (12.9%); no risk assigned (16.2%); unfavorable (57.4%). For induction, we compared toxicities for E1910 (n=488) to pts treated on a prior young adult study (n=289) (C10403) (Blood Adv 2021; 5(2): 504-12). The incidence of hyperglycemia (8% vs. 31.1%, p&lt; 0.001), aspartate aminotransferase (AST) increase (6.1% vs. 12.8%, p=0.002), alanine aminotransferase increase (ALT) (11.7% vs. 28.7%, p&lt; 0.001), and hyperbilirubinemia (11% vs. 19%, p=0.002) were significantly lower in E1910 pts. The incidence of pancreatitis (1.8%), thromboembolic events (4.5%), and febrile neutropenia (25.4%) in E1910 was similar to C10403. Toxicities in the MRD-neg pts in the blinatumomab arm (n=111): Despite a high incidence of neutropenia (74.8%) and thrombocytopenia (55.9%) in Step 3, there was a relatively low incidence of sepsis (7.2%), bacteremia (1.8%), cytokine release syndrome (CRS) (3.6%) and neurologic adverse events (0-6.3%). There was a higher incidence of neurological or psychiatric events in the blinatumomab arm (23%) versus chemotherapy arm (5%) (p &lt; 0.001) when all events were combined. There was a numerically higher incidence of ataxia (4.4% vs. %, p=0.16) and dysphasia (11.1% vs. 3%, p=0.12) in pts &gt; 55 yrs and a higher incidence of neutropenia (80.3% vs. 66.7%, p=0.12) and thrombocytopenia (62.1% vs. 46.7%, p=0.12) in the younger pts (age &lt; 55 yrs). In pts with a BMI &lt; 30 kg/m2 (vs. &gt; 30 kg/m2), there was a significantly higher incidence of leukopenia (51.7% vs. 26.4%, p=0.007) and thrombocytopenia (65.5% vs. 45.3%, p=0.037). However, this did not translate into an increased incidence of bleeding or infectious complications. By gender, females had a higher numerical incidence of AST increase (8.8% vs. 0%, p=0.057) and CRS (7% vs. 0% p=0.12); whereas males had a higher incidence of catheter- related infections (7.4% vs. 0%, p=0.05) and hyperglycemia (11.1% vs. 3.5%, p=0.16). A little more than half (56.8%) of pts received 4 cycles of blinatumomab with the remainder of pts receiving 1 (10.8%), 2 (28.8%), or 3 cycles (3.6%). Pts receiving 3-4 cycles of blinatumomab vs. 1-2 cycles of blinatumomab had a statistically higher incidence of anemia (38.8% vs. 6.8%, p&lt; 0.001), neutropenia (98.5% vs. 38.6%, p&lt; 0.001), and thrombocytopenia (83.6% vs. 13.6%, p&lt; 0.001), likely related to being on treatment for a longer period of time. Conclusions: Blinatumomab was well tolerated with no significant toxicity differences noted by age, gender, or number of cycles of blinatumomab received. Pts with a lower BMI did have an increased incidence of leukopenia and thrombocytopenia, possibly related to flat dosing of the drug. However, this did not translate into increased complications. Toxicites during induction were notably few, which suggests that this backbone with age adjustments may serve as a good backbone for future trials. Blinatumomab is being evaluated with low dose chemotherapy and other targeted agents in ongoing trials.

Abstract Background: MyeloMATCH is an NCI-sponsored initiative for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) employing a Master Screening and Reassessment Protocol (MSRP) to assign patients (pts) to a pt and disease biology-specific clinical trial. Several trials evaluating initial therapies are currently open, while subsequent trials dedicated to eradicating measurable residual disease during consolidation and including stem cell transplant are being developed. A pt enrolled at diagnosis may be followed longitudinally and be eligible for trials in sequential tiers throughout the treatment course. We report key data concerning the first cohort of pts enrolled on the MSRP. Methods: After pts with suspected AML or MDS consent for the MSRP, blood and marrow are sent to the myeloMATCH Molecular Diagnostics Network (MDNet) of central CLIA labs operating under a single Investigational Device Exemption to rapidly define molecular, cytogenetic, and immunophenotypic characteristics. These data are catalogued by a bioinformatics team (MATCHBox) and reviewed daily to assign participants to an available trial based on pt and disease features. A Tier Advancement Pathway (TAP) allows standard of care therapy with potential for assignment to subsequent myeloMATCH trials. Since activation in May 2024, 550 patients age≥18 were enrolled on the MSRP from 76 institutions: 48 Academic, 14 NCORP, 11 community, 3 VA. There are currently 4 open randomized AML trials (≥age 60 or unfit with mutant FLT3, ≥age 60 IDH2 mutant AML, fit age&lt;60 ELN 2017 intermediate-risk AML, fit age&lt;60 ELN 2017 adverse risk) and 1 MDS trial(IDH2 mutant). Patients not eligible for an open protocol were assigned to TAP. Results: Of the 550 pts consented, 491 completed screening assays; 49 had no or incomplete samples; 10 withdrew before completed analysis. Median cytogenetic turnaround time (TAT) was 69 hours (91% within 72 hours), and median Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) TAT from receipt was 49 hours (95% within 72 hours). Seventy-six pts (of 491 with assay data) were not assigned due to non-AML or non-MDS diagnoses, the most common being: B-ALL [n=11], MPN [9], benign marrow [9], APML [7], and MPAL [6]. The AML/MDS verified cohort was 415 pts, 366 (89.2%) patients with AML (45% age &lt;60) and 49 (11.8%) with MDS. The median age at screening was 63 years (range:18-95) and 186 (45%) were female. Eighty-two percent identified as White, 7.5% Black, 3% Asian, 7% unknown, and 9% as Hispanic. The most frequent mutations in the AML pts were NPM1 (24.0%), DNMT3A (22.7%), TET2 (19.9%), NRAS (18.0%), FLT3 (18.0% ITD, TKD 7.1%), TP53 (14.5%), and CEBPA (8.7%); IDH1/2 mutation rates were 8.2% and 13.7%, respectively. Co-mutations include FLT3/NPM1 (9.8%), NPM1/IDH2 (4.4%), IDH1/2 and any RAS (3.8%). Karyotypes were normal in 40.4%, complex 20.8%, inv(16) 6.0%, MLL/KMT2A 4.6% and t(8;21) 1.9%. 29% had favorable risk disease, 29% intermediate, and 42% adverse (ELN 2017). In MDS, mutations included: TP53 (36.7%), RUNX1 (20.4%) ASXL1 (20.4%), TET2 (18.4%), spliceosome mutations (SRSF2, SF3B1, U2AF1 and ZRSR2, 28.6%) andIDH1/2 in 4.1% and 6.1%, respectively. Karyotypes were normal in 24.5%; complex in 40.8%. By IPSS-R, 2.4% were low, 73.8% intermediate, 2.4% high, and 21.4% very high risk. 82/415 (20%) pts were assigned to initial therapy protocol, with an increase in assignment rate to 44% in the most recent two months. 71/415 pts (16%) were enrolled in one of the MyeloMATCH studies. Three-hundred forty-four pts (80%) were assigned and enrolled to TAP (296 AML, 48 MDS) for potential assignment to subsequent tier trials. In the TAP AML pts, 99 (33%) have completed initial treatment, including intensive chemotherapy (IC) in 62% of pts and hypomethylating agents/venetoclax (HMA/VEN) in 38%. In pts &lt;60 years of age, 87% received IC v. 13% with HMA/VEN, in &gt;60 34% IC v. 66% HMA/VEN and in age 60-75 42% IC v. 58% HMA/Ven. Conclusion: MyeloMATCH has screened over 500 pts from academic and community sites in the US and Canada in 14 months, meeting the TAT goal of sample acquisition to results of &lt;72 hours. Assignment to treatment protocols has substantially increased recently. As additional trials open (12 in development) we expect the percentage of pts enrolled on MSRP who go on to therapeutic trials will markedly increase, thereby allowing a personalized medicine approach for a broad group of US and Canadian adult pts with AML and MDS.

Abstract Introduction: Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutations are observed in ~20% of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). In the U.S., ivosidenib (ivo) is approved with or without azacitidine (aza) in the frontline (FL) and as monotherapy in relapsed/refractory (R/R) IDH1-mutated (mut) AML. Olutasidenib (oluta) is approved as monotherapy for R/R IDH1-mut AML. Enasidenib (ena) is approved as monotherapy for R/R IDH2-mut AML. This study describes real-world IDH inhibitor (IDHi) administration patterns and evaluates their outcomes in on-label settings. Methods: A retrospective review of patients with IDH1/2-mut AML who received ivosidenib, olutasidenib, or enasidenib was conducted at 12 academic institutions in the U.S. Best response at any time during treatment, including complete response (CR) and complete response with partial hematologic recovery (CRh), were graded using European Leukemia Net (ELN) 2022 criteria. Results: A total of 387 patients with IDH1- and IDH2-mut AML were treated with an IDHi in the FL or R/R setting. Median follow-up was 9.6 months (range, 0.03-90.7). Demographics include 79% White, 14% Black, 3% Asian, and 4% other/unknown race; 5% were Hispanic ethnicity; 46% were female; the median age was 70 years (range, 28-95). 70% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-1, 26% had secondary AML, and 10% had therapy-related AML. Per the ELN 2024 less-Intensive risk classification, 58% were favorable risk, 29% intermediate, 7% adverse, and 6% unknown. Overall, 209 of 387 patients (54%) received IDHi regimens on-label. In FL IDH1-mut AML (n=45), 11 received ivo monotherapy, 25 aza/ivo, and 9 used off-label combinations: 3 hypomethylating agent (HMA) + venetoclax (ven) + ivo, 5 decitabine/ivo, 1 intensive chemotherapy (IC)/ivo. Among R/R IDH1-mut AML (n=109), 47 received ivo monotherapy, 7 oluta monotherapy, and 55 off-label (31 HMA/ivo, 16 HMA/ven/ivo, 3 IC/ivo, and 5 other). 44 received off-label ena for FL treatment of IDH2-mut AML (25 ena monotherapy, 9 HMA/ena, 8 HMA/ven/ena, and 2 IC/ena). In R/R IDH2-mut AML (n=189), 119 patients received ena monotherapy and 70 received off-label combinations (25 HMA/ena, 30 HMA/ven/ena, 7 IC/ena, 6 ena/gilteritinib, and 2 other). In on-label treatment of FL IDH1-mut AML, one of four patients with response assessment of FL ivo monotherapy had a CR/CRh. Of 19 patients with response assessment on FL aza/ivo, 13 patients (68.4%) had a CR as best response (95% CI, 46.0-84.6%). Median OS was 14.9 mo (95% CI, 4.17-NR) for ivo monotherapy (n=11) and 31.9 mo (95% CI, 9.1-NR) for aza/ivo (n=25), with 0 and 2 patients receiving allogeneic stem cell transplant (allo-SCT), respectively. In R/R IDH1-mut AML, the rate of CR/CRh was 35.5% (95% CI, 21.1-53.1) for on-label ivo monotherapy. All 4 patients with response assessment for on-label oluta monotherapy had a CR. Median OS was 14.0 mo (95% CI, 10.1-22.4) for ivo monotherapy and NR for oluta monotherapy (95% CI, 10.1-NR), with 10 and 0 receiving allo-SCT, respectively. The CR/CRh rate for ivo was 38.1% (8 of 21 assessed; 95% CI, 20.8-59.1) in age &lt; 70, and 30.0% (3 of 10 assessed; 95% CI, 10.8-60.3) in age ≥ 70. Median OS was 15.2 mo (95% CI 9.3-NR) in age &lt; 70 (n=27) and 10.4 mo (95% CI 8.0-18) in age ≥ 70 (n=20). In R/R IDH2-mut AML, the rate of CR/CRh for on-label ena monotherapy was 38.2% (95% CI, 27.6-50.1). Median OS was 12.1 mo (95% CI, 8.2-16.6), with 5 having received allo-SCT. In demographic subgroups for ena monotherapy, 52 non-Hispanic White (NHW) patients with response assessment had a CR/CRh rate of 42.3% (95% CI, 0.30-0.56). Only 1 of 13 non-Hispanic Black (NHB) patients with response assessment had a CRh (7.7%; 95% CI, 1.4-33.0) as best response, with none attaining CR. Median OS was 13.7 mo (95% CI 10.3-26.3) in NHW (n=82), 11.2 mo (95% CI, 6.1-NR) in NHB (n=18), and 69.1 mo (95% CI, 52.6-NR) in Hispanic patients (n=8). The CR/CRh rate was 48.6% (17 of 35 assessed; 95% CI, 33.0-64.4) for age &lt; 70, and 27.3% (9 of 33 assessed; 95% CI, 15.1-44.2) for age ≥ 70. Median OS was 12.0 mo (95% CI, 9.9-22.1) in age &lt; 70 (n=48) and 5.8 mo (95% CI, 4.1-8.7) in age ≥ 70 (n=69). Conclusion: Practice patterns for IDH inhibitors in AML vary considerably, with high amounts of off-label use. Response rates for ivosidenib and enasidenib in the real-world setting are comparable to those of clinical trials. Descriptive analyses of demographic subgroups highlight areas in need of further research.