Citations

TPS3173 Background: ELU001, pasifolate exatecan, is an ultra-small nanoparticle drug conjugate, known as a CDC (~6 nm), designed to target and penetrate into solid tumors. Due to its size, ELU001 exhibits rapid renal elimination which is expected to reduce or eliminate the toxicities associated with many antibody drug conjugates. ELU001 has ~13 folic acid targeting moieties and ~21 cathepsin-B cleavable exatecan topoisomerase-1 inhibitor payloads covalently bound to short polyethylene glycol chains surrounding a silica core, the C’Dot. ELU001 binds to cancer cells expressing FRα and is internalized into the lysosome where it releases the exatecan payload. ELU001’s dose escalation study reported at ESMO Congress 2023 (1), examined weekly, bi-weekly (Q2W), and tri-weekly schedules over a range of doses in 42 patients. The study revealed that ELU001 could be administered safely and identified a dose level and schedule for the Expansion Studies described below. 22 of the patients with ovarian or endometrial cancers had >1 post-baseline scan(s), of these 2 had a PR and 19 had SD by RECIST v1.1 criteria. ELU001 demonstrated activity against tumors across a range of FRα expression levels, from low to high, retrospectively assessed using the VENTANA FOLR1 RxDx assay and the PS2+ scoring system. Methods: The current multicenter, Tumor Group Expansion open-label phase 1/2 clinical trial investigates ELU001 in patients with ovarian and endometrial cancers and is enrolling three cohorts; 1) ovarian cancer with high FRα expression, 2) ovarian cancer with moderate and low expression and 3) endometrial cancer with low to high expression with assessments based upon the PS2+ scoring system (high = ≥ 75%, moderate = ≥ 50% to < 75%, low = 25% to < 50%, negative = <25% of tumor cells with 2+ or 3+ staining intensity). An initial exploratory dose of 2.0 mg/m2 Q2W was employed in all three cohorts and a second dose of 1.7 mg/m2 Q2W will be studied in the ovarian cancer cohorts. Patients will ultimately be randomized to one of two or more doses to optimize dosing for registration. Primary endpoint: Objective Response Rate (ORR); secondary endpoints include DOR, PFS, TFST, PFS2, OS, adverse events, PK, and ADA assessments. Approximately 20 patients per tumor group will be recruited in the U.S. 1. Ann. Oncol. (2023) 34 (suppl_2): S458-S497. Clinical trial information: NCT05001282 .

Abstract Background This is a phase II subprotocol of the NCI-COG Pediatric MATCH study evaluating vemurafenib, a selective oral inhibitor of BRAF V600 mutated kinase, in patients with relapsed or refractory solid tumors harboring BRAF V600 mutations. Methods Patients received vemurafenib at 550 mg/m2 (maximum 960 mg/dose) orally twice daily for 28-day cycles until progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary aim was to determine the objective response rate and secondary objectives included estimating progression-free survival and assessing the tolerability of vemurafenib. Results Twenty-two patients matched to the subprotocol and 4 patients (18%) enrolled. Primary reasons for non-enrollment were ineligibility due to exclusions of low-grade glioma (n = 7) and prior BRAF inhibitor therapy (n = 7). Enrolled diagnoses were one each of histiocytosis, ameloblastoma, Ewing sarcoma, and high-grade glioma, all with BRAF V600E mutations. Treatment was overall tolerable with mostly expected grade 1/2 adverse events (AE). Grade 3 or 4 AE on treatment were acute kidney injury, hyperglycemia, and maculopapular rash. One patient came off therapy due to AE. One patient (glioma) had an objective partial response and remained on protocol therapy for 15 cycles. Conclusion There was a low accrual rate on this MATCH subprotocol, with only 18% of those who matched with BRAFV600 mutations enrolling, resulting in early termination, and limiting study results (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03220035).

AbstractBackgroundMuscle cramps are common among persons with cirrhosis and are associated with poor health‐related quality of life (HRQOL). Treatment options are limited. We compared stretching or meditation in a randomized‐controlled trial (RCT).PatientsWe enrolled 98 patients with a history of >4 muscle cramps in the prior month from 7/22–7/23. We randomized patients 1:1 to stretching versus meditation for 35 days. Our primary outcome was the change in cramp severity measured by the visual analogue scale for cramps (VAS‐cramps, scaled 0–10). Secondary outcomes included a patient global impression of change (PGIC), change in sleep quality and global HRQOL measured using the EQ‐5D and VAS‐global HRQOL.ResultsOverall, 48% of patients had cirrhosis, 40% had diabetes, 16% the median age was 63, most were women (67%) and 81% were college educated. Both arms experienced a reduction in cramp severity—a median of 1.44 (.58–2.29) points for stretching and 1.97 (1.01–2.93) points for meditation. These changes were significant changes from baseline (p = .001 for stretching, p < .0001 for meditation) but these changes were equivalent between arms (p = .4). The PGIC was improved: 1.33 (1.02–1.65) for stretching, 1.05 (.70–1.41) for meditation, p‐difference .2. Sleep was also improved for both. HRQOL did not change according to the Eq5D; according to the VAS, HRQOL rose for meditation by 6 (.1–11.8) points but not for stretching. More patients recommended stretching than meditation (79.2% vs. 55.3%, p = .02).ConclusionIn a randomized trial, stretching and meditation both reduced cramp severity and improved sleep quality and global impression of change. While patients preferred stretching, there was no difference in effect between arms.

7522 Background: Elranatamab (ELRA) is a humanized BCMA-CD3 bispecific antibody. In the phase 2 registrational MagnetisMM-3 (MM-3) trial, SC ELRA was given as 2 step-up priming doses (12 mg on C1D1 and 32 mg on C1D4) followed by 76 mg QW in patients (pts) with RRMM. Overall, 56.3% of pts had CRS (grade 2, 14.3%; no grade ≥3). Most events occurred after doses 1 (44.5%), 2 (20.2%), and 3 (5.9%); 0.8% (1 pt) had CRS with doses 4+. Recurrent CRS (>1 event) occurred in 15.1% of pts (Lesokhin Nat Med 2023). Methods: MagnetisMM-9 (MM-9; NCT05014412) is a phase 1/2, open-label, nonrandomized study of ELRA examining an alternative 2-dose step-up priming regimen (4 and 20 mg on C1D1 and C1D4, respectively). Eligible pts had RRMM and were refractory to ≥1 IMiD, ≥1 PI, and ≥1 anti-CD38 antibody. After the priming doses, ELRA 76 mg was given QW for 6 cycles (Part 1) or for 1 cycle followed by 116 or 152 mg Q2W for 5 cycles (Part 2A). The RP2D from Part 2A (152 mg) was evaluated in Part 2B (dose expansion). The rate of grade ≥2 CRS per ASTCT criteria during C1 is the primary endpoint for both parts. Secondary endpoints include evaluation of AEs and PK. Here, we report the overall safety and CRS profile associated with the 4/20 mg priming regimen. Results: For 85 treated pts, median age was 64.0 y; 49.4% were male; 23.5% had EMD; 31.8% had high-risk cytogenetics. Pts had a median of 5.0 (range, 1-12) prior LOTs; 85.9% had triple-class refractory disease. After a median follow-up of 7.4 mo, the most common (>50%) AEs were CRS (63.5%; grade ≥2, 15.3%) and neutropenia (54.1%; all grade ≥2). ICANS occurred in 4.7% of pts (all grade ≤2). The grade ≥2 CRS rate in C1 was 14.1% (90% CI, 8.4-21.9). CRS rates after the first 3 doses are in the the table. For doses 4+, any grade (grade ≥2) CRS was observed in 10.6% (3.5%) of pts overall, 12.1% (3.0%) of pts continuing to receive 76 mg (n=33), 25.0% (0%) of pts receiving 116 mg (n=12), and 5.0% (5.0%) of pts receiving 152 mg (RP2D; n=40). Overall, recurrent CRS was observed in 20.0% of pts. The geometric means (CV%) of free ELRA concentrations 24 h (Cmax-24h) after step-up doses 1 and 2 were 85.64 (48%) and 242.8 (55%). Conclusions: The 4/20 mg step-up priming regimen and alternative dosing schedules resulted in similar safety and incidence of overall and grade ≥2 CRS events vs the regimen used in MM-3 (12/32 mg), with no new safety signals identified. However, the CRS profile in this study differed, with more CRS after doses 2, 3, and 4+ and a higher prevalence of recurrent CRS. The Cmax-24h of free ELRA (CV%) after the priming doses were lower than those in MM-3 (107.4 [47%] and 405.1 [72%], respectively). Thus, the priming regimen used in MM-3 remains the optimal regimen for mitigating CRS. Future analyses of ongoing studies will be used to confirm these results. Clinical trial information: NCT05014412 . [Table: see text]

7508 Background: Idecabtagene vicleucel (Ide-cel) has demonstrated excellent efficacy in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). However, outcomes in patients with extramedullary disease (EMD) remain to be better characterized. Methods: We included patients from 11 US academic centers, who were evaluated for EMD and were infused with ide-cel between May 2021 and April 2023. Patients with soft tissue or visceral lesions non-contiguous from bony lesions were classified as having true EMD, with paraskeletal disease classified as non-EMD. Disease responses were evaluated using the IMWG criteria. Time-to-event analyses were performed from the date of ide-cel infusion. Results: Among 351 patients with RRMM treated with ide-cel, 84 (24%) had EMD prior to infusion. Median follow-up for the entire cohort was 18.2 months (95% CI: 17-19.3). Baseline characteristics at ide-cel infusion for EMD and non-EMD cohorts are depicted in the table. For the EMD and non-EMD cohorts, the Day 30 objective response rates (ORR) were 58% vs. 69% (p=0.1), Day 30 ≥complete response rates were 16% vs 24% (p=0.11), the Day 90 ORR were 52% vs 82% (p<0.001), and best ORR were 58% vs 82%, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.3 months (95% CI: 4.1-6.9) for the EMD cohort vs. 11.1 months (95% CI: 9.2-12.6; p<0.0001) for the non-EMD cohort. The median duration of response for EMD among day 30 responders was 6.4 months (95% CI: 5.1-8.4). In a multivariable analysis, EMD was an independent predictor of inferior PFS [hazard ratio 1.8 (95% CI: 1.2-2.5), p<0.001] after adjusting for ECOG status, revised ISS stage, penta-drug refractoriness, elevated ferritin, prior BCMA-directed therapy and use of bridging therapy. Pattern of progression in the EMD cohort (n=68/84) included EMD site only (21%), hematologic only (22%), or both (57%), with comparable PFS for type of progression (p=0.19). The median overall survival (OS) was 14.8 months [95% CI: 9-Not reached (NR)] for EMD and 26.9 months [95% CI: 26.3 vs NR, p=0.006)] for the non-EMD group. Rates of Grade ≥2 cytokine release syndrome or neurotoxicity syndrome were comparable between the two cohorts. Conclusions: Patients with EMD demonstrate significantly inferior Day 90 ORR and presence of EMD is an independent risk factor for inferior PFS. [Table: see text]

e19008 Background: Bispecific antibodies (BsAb) have emerged as a new treatment modality for relapsed/refractory non-Hodgkin lymphomas (R/R NHL). They exert their effect by binding to CD3 on T-cells and CD19 or CD20 on lymphoma cells, activating the T-cell to exert cytotoxic effects against the tumor and normal B-cells. Treatment related adverse events (TRAE) include infections, cytokine release syndrome (CRS), neurotoxicity (ICANS). This meta-analysis was conducted to assess prevalence of TRAEs from prospective clinical trials that evaluated BsAb in R/R NHL. Methods: A systematic review was conducted through PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane to identify BsAb clinical trials in NHL through October 2023. Eligible studies included phase I-III trials evaluating BsAb in any type of NHL, either as monotherapy or combination therapy irrespective of prior lines of treatment. Primary outcomes of interest include infection, neutropenia, CRS, and ICANS. All studies were weighted equally. Pooled prevalence estimates of TRAE were calculated using common and random effects models. Heterogeneity tests were performed using Cochran’s Q test. Subgroup analysis examined infection rates in monotherapy versus combination therapy cohorts. Results: After screening 1039 studies, 36 clinical trials with 2162 patients were included. The lymphoma subtypes were diffuse-large B cell lymphoma, follicular lymphoma, and mantle cell lymphoma. The BsAbs included mosunetuzumab (13 studies), epcoritamab (10 studies), blinatumomab (5 studies), glofitamab (5 studies), odronextamab (2 studies), and AFM11 (1 study). The median age of patients was 66 years, and patients had received a median of two prior lines of therapy. Median follow-up duration was 9.1 months. The prevalence of all-grade infections was 35% (95% CI: 0.33-0.38; I2 = 79%). For grade ≥3 infections, the prevalence was 16% (95% CI: 0.14-0.18, (I2 = 77%). There were higher rates of all-grade infections in the combination therapy cohort (41%, 95% CI: 0.36-0.47) compared with the monotherapy cohort (33%, 95% CI: 0.30-0.36). All-grade and grade ≥3 neutropenia occurred in 31% (95% CI: 0.29-0.34; I2 = 80%) and 22% (95% CI: 0.20-0.24, I2 = 61%) of patients. CRS was observed in 45% of patients (95% CI: 0.43-0.48, I2 = 85%). Grade ≥3 CRS occurred in only 2% of patients (95% CI: 0.02-0.03, I2 = 0%, p = 0.99). ICANS occurred in 12% (95% CI: 0.10-0.14, I2 = 90%) while grade ≥3 ICANS was rare, at 3% (95% CI: 0.02-0.03, I2 = 0%, p = 0.99). Conclusions: BsAb is associated with nontrivial rates of infections and neutropenia. The rates of high grade CRS and ICANS are low. The heterogeneity of the findings could be attributed by an underreporting of TRAE and small sample sizes from various studies. These results highlight the need for vigilant practices to diagnose and treat infections early and consideration for antibacterial prophylaxis in this immunocompromised population.

5006 Background: The PRESTO trial (NCT03009981) showed that in patients with biochemically relapsed prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy with a PSA doubling time of ≤ 9 months and without evidence of metastatic disease by conventional imaging, intensified androgen receptor blockade for 52 weeks (androgen deprivation therapy [ADT] plus apalutamide [Apa], or ADT plus Apa and abiraterone acetate [Abi] plus prednisone) prolonged PSA progression-free survival compared to ADT alone (Aggarwal et al, JCO 2024). Here we report the HRQOL results. Methods: HRQOL measures included the Hot Flash Related Daily Interference Scale (HFRDIS), Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC)-26 Sexual domain, PROMIS Fatigue Short Form and EQ-5D-5L, which assesses overall HRQOL in the 504 randomized patients. Published minimally important difference thresholds for these HRQOL measures are: HFRDIS 1.66 points, EPIC Sexual 10-12, PROMIS Fatigue 3-5, and EQ-5D-5L 0.06. General linear mixed modeling was used to estimate between-arm mean differences in HRQOL according to an intent-to-treat approach. Results: Mean changes from baseline to end of treatment (EOT) for each arm and for each HRQOL measure are summarized in Table. No statistically significant mean difference was reported between intensified androgen receptor blockade (Arm B, Arm C) vs ADT alone (Arm A) in any HRQOL measure. Further, numerical differences across arms for all HRQOL measures are below published minimally clinically important difference thresholds. Conclusions: Intensified androgen receptor blockade with Apa or Apa/Abi added to 52 weeks of ADT improves PSA progression-free survival without negatively affecting HRQOL. These HRQOL results add further support to intensification of androgen blockade in patients with high-risk biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. Clinical trial information: NCT03009981 . [Table: see text]

PURPOSE Identification of those at risk of hereditary cancer syndromes using electronic health record (EHR) data sources is important for clinical care, quality improvement, and research. We describe diagnostic processes, previously seldom reported, for a common hereditary cancer syndrome, Lynch syndrome (LS), using EHR data within a community-based, multicenter, demographically diverse health system. METHODS Within a retrospective cohort enrolled between 2015 and 2020 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, we assessed electronic diagnostic domains for LS including (1) family history of LS-associated cancer; (2) personal history of LS-associated cancer; (3) LS screening via mismatch repair deficiency (MMRD) testing of newly diagnosed malignancy; (4) germline genetic test results; and (5) clinician-entered diagnostic codes for LS. We calculated proportions and overlap for each diagnostic domain descriptively. RESULTS Among 5.8 million individuals, (1) 28,492 (0.49%) had a family history of LS-associated cancer of whom 3,635 (13%) underwent genetic testing; (2) 100,046 (1.7%) had a personal history of a LS-associated cancer; and (3) 8,711 (0.1%) were diagnosed with colorectal cancer of whom 7,533 (86%) underwent MMRD screening and of the positive screens (486), 130 (27%) underwent germline testing. One thousand seven hundred and fifty-seven (0.03%) were diagnosed with endometrial cancer of whom 1,613 (92%) underwent MMRD screening and of the 195 who screened positive, 55 (28%) underwent genetic testing. (4) 30,790 (0.05%) had LS germline genetic testing with 707 (0.01%) testing positive; and (5) 1,273 (0.02%) had a clinician-entered diagnosis of LS. CONCLUSION It is feasible to electronically characterize the diagnostic processes of LS. No single data source comprehensively identifies all LS carriers. There is underutilization of LS genetic testing for those eligible and underdiagnosis of LS. Our work informs similar efforts in other settings for hereditary cancer syndromes.

LBA509 Background: I-SPY2.2 is a multicenter phase 2 platform sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) evaluating novel experimental regimens in the neoadjuvant breast cancer setting. The novel therapy is given as first in a sequence (Block A), followed by standard chemo/targeted therapies (Block B/C) if indicated. The goal is to identify agents that lead to pCR after novel targeted agents alone, or in sequence with optimal therapy assigned based on the tumor response predictive subtype (RPS). RPS incorporates expression-based immune, DNA repair deficiency (DRD), and luminal signatures with hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 status to classify patients by subtype: S1: HR+HER2-Immune-DRD-; S2: HR-HER2-Immune-DRD-; S3: HER2-Immune+; S4: HER2-Immune-DRD+; S5: HER2+/non-Luminal; S6: HER2+/Luminal. Methods: RPS S1, S2, S3 and S4 were eligible for assignment to Dato in Block A. Patients (pts) were followed by MRI during treatment (at 3, 6 and 12 weeks after start of Blocks A and B). Predicted responders by MRI and biopsy at the end of Block A or B have the option of going to surgery early, otherwise they proceed to next treatment Block (B +/- C). Randomization to Block B includes a taxane-based regimen specific to the RPS, and options include S1: paclitaxel; S2 and S3: paclitaxel + carboplatin + pembrolizumab; S4: paclitaxel + carboplatin vs. paclitaxel + carboplatin + pembrolizumab. Patients who did not go to surgery after Block B proceeded to Block C (AC or AC + Pembrolizumab if HR-HER2-). The primary endpoint is pCR. Efficacy is evaluated within each RPS and HR+HER2- and HR-HER2- signatures. To estimate the arm's efficacy as a stand-alone therapy, we use a Bayesian covariate-adjusted model to estimate the pCR rate and compare the posterior distribution to a subtype-specific fixed threshold. This model uses pCR data when available and MRI data when pCR is not. To estimate pCR rate in the context of a multi-decision treatment regimen, we use a Bayesian model based on if and when a pCR occurred in the trial. The posterior is compared to a subtype-specific dynamic control generated from historical I-SPY data. Results: 103 pts were randomly assigned to the Dato arm between August 2022 and August 2023. All patients have proceeded beyond Block A; 33 went to surgery after Dato alone. The efficacy results for Dato as a stand-alone therapy are summarized in Table. Conclusions: Dato monotherapy was active, particularly in the HR-HER2- signature, but did not meet the pre-specified threshold for graduation in I-SPY 2.2. Clinical trial information: NCT01042379 . [Table: see text]

e12641 Background: Many promising agents or combinations regimens relevant to breast cancer lack sufficient clinical information for use in the neoadjuvant setting. To enable acceleration of drug development by reducing time and cost of clinical trial planning and conduct, the Phase I initiative PRE-ISPY Program was created. Methods: The PRE-ISPY Program is built within the I-SPY network, with the overall aim to streamline the regulatory pathway and the processes of trial design, contracting, activation, enrollment, execution, data gathering and analysis, as well as reporting of new therapeutic agents or combinations of relevance to breast cancer. Results: The PRE-ISPY trial is an open-label platform phase IB study designed to evaluate compelling single agent or combination regimens with the overall goal of moving promising drug regimens into I-SPY2 Trial and/or into other oncology-based trials in a timely manner. Graduation of a PRE-ISPY regimen to I-SPY2 is not mandatory. The primary objectives in each study Arm are to determine safety and to obtain preliminary efficacy data of the new regimen in patients with metastatic cancer, including a cohort of breast cancer patients. Each Arm may contain a Part 1 (dose finding) and a Part 2 (dose expansion). The new treatment can be tested also in patients with other solid malignancies than breast cancer, in which the treatment may be applicable, as specified in the design of the Arm. A breast cancer specific cohort is required in Part 2. Candidate treatment regimens are selected with advice from the I-SPY2 Agent Selection Working Group. The PRE-ISPY/Phase IB trial has multiple ongoing drug regimen Arms subsequently added as new protocol appendices through amendments to a Master protocol. There is no randomization; participants are enrolled, and treatment selected according to the relevance of therapy to their disease. Prospective companion biomarkers are evaluated. The current arms under study are PRE1: ALX-148 combined with trastuzumab deruxtecan; PRE2: tucatinib combined with zanidatamab; and PRE3: vidutolimod combined with cemiplimab. Selected agents or therapeutic combinations are tested through this protocol in the I-SPY Network Centers that participate in the PRE-ISPY Program. Toxicities are graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). Clinical responses are evaluated based on RECIST v1.1 criteria. Conclusions: Once safety is established, promising regimens can be rapidly transitioned to I-SPY 2.2 or other phase 2/3 trials. The first patient was enrolled on 2/1/2023. Clinical trial information: NCT05868226 .