Citations

Background: The term classical hematology (CH), referring to a subspecialty focusing on non-cancer blood disorders, was officially adopted by the American Society of Hematology (ASH) in 2022. There is a perceived shortage of classical hematologists, although data are limited (Winter JN, Hematologist 2022). Prior studies have shown that <6% of hematology-oncology fellows pursue a practice subspecializing in CH after training (Todd RF, Blood 2004; Marshall Al, Blood Adv 2018). Moreover, mentorship is consistently cited as the most important factor guiding fellows' career decisions (Sharma D, Blood Adv 2019; Masselink LE, Blood Adv 2019). To help bridge the CH workforce gap, ASH has supported additional hematology-focused fellowship programs (HFFP) within select hematology-oncology fellowship programs. CH constitutes a large proportion of consults in US National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers (West CV, JCO Oncol Pract 2024). The goals of our study were: 1) to determine the proportion of adult hematologist-oncologists within NCI cancer centers who practice CH; and 2) to describe the physician characteristics of cancer centers with HFFP and compare these centers to those without HFFP. Methods: We included all NCI-designated cancer centers with a clinical program as of April 1, 2024. The only exception was St Jude Children's Hospital due to its pediatric focus. We obtained the practice profile of each internal medicine-trained adult hematologist-oncologist (henceforth, physician) as well as the availability of HFFP from the respective cancer center websites. We also searched the corresponding department of medicine and division of hematology at each affiliated academic institution to ensure inclusion of all physicians practicing CH. Each physician was classified into one of the following categories: classical hematologist (attending to only non-cancer conditions), general hematologist-oncologist (cancer and non-cancer conditions), and oncologist (cancer only). The number of hematology-oncology fellowship programs in the US was obtained from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Results: We included 64 NCI-designated cancer centers, 55 of which were considered as comprehensive cancer centers. There was a total of 4,616 physicians (3,891 oncologists [84.3%], 487 hematologists-oncologists [10.6%], and 238 classical hematologists [5.1%]). The median numbers of physicians, oncologists, general hematologist-oncologists, and classical hematologists per center were 55 (range, 16-275), 45 (range, 12-270), 5 (range, 0-48), and 3 (range, 0-13), respectively. The median proportions of classical hematologists and physicians practicing CH (general hematologist-oncologists plus classical hematologists) were 5.1% (range, 0-20.0) and 14.9% (range, 0-55.6%), respectively. There were 12 HFFP within NCI-designated cancer centers (18.8%). Most (11/12) centers with HFFP had >50 physicians (median 95 [range, 38-185]) and >5% classical hematologists (median 6% [range, 3.8-13.5%]); 11 centers with similar characteristics did not have HFFP. Centers with HFFP have significantly higher numbers of physicians (median 95.0 [range, 38-185] vs 49.5 [range, 16-275]; P=0.001) and classical hematologists (median 6.0 [range, 3-13] vs 2.0 [range, 0-11]; P<0.001) but similar proportions of classical hematologists (median 6.0% [range, 3.8-13.5] vs 4.5% [range, 0-20.0]; P=0.078) and physicians practicing CH (median 12.3% [range, 6.5-47.7] vs 15.7% [range, 0-55.6]; P=0.402) compared to those without HFFP. Conclusions: Among adult hematologist-oncologists at NCI-designated cancer centers, only 1 in 20 are classical hematologists, although 1 in 7 have CH as part of their practice. Within NCI-designated cancer centers, only 1 in 5 have an HFFP. These findings suggest that there is an opportunity for NCI-designated cancer centers to encourage and recruit physicians subspecializing in CH and a rationale to create additional HFFPs. These measures may help further alleviate CH workforce shortages and expand CH mentorship to meet the needs of an increasingly complex subspecialty within hematology.

Background Venetoclax + hypomethylating agent (Ven-HMA) therapy has demonstrated improved outcomes in elderly/unfit patients with newly-diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (ND-AML) (N Engl J Med 2020;383). However, ~50% of patients who respond to Ven-HMA, eventually relapse (Am J Hematol 2024;99). In the current study we examined the prognostic contribution of gene mutations, karyotype, measurable residual disease (MRD) status and clinical risk factors for relapse in patients with ND-AML treated with Ven-HMA therapy. Methods Our study population of ND-AML was retrospectively recruited from Mayo Clinic (MN, AZ, FL), after institutional review board approval and based on documentation of complete remission with/without count recovery (CR/CRi) following Ven-HMA therapy. Relapse-free survival was determined from the time of remission to relapse or last follow-up. Survival analysis was censored for transplant. The 2022 European LeukemiaNet (ELN) criteria was used to assign cytogenetic risk and classify treatment response (Blood 2022;140). Standard statistical analyses were performed using JMP Pro (Version 17.0.0). Results 247 ND-AML patients treated with Ven-HMA (median age 73 years, 62% male, 64% de novo) who achieved CR (n=153), or CRi (n=94) were included. MRD by multiparameter flow cytometry (sensitivity 0.01%) performed at the time of CR/CRi, was negative in 117 (70%) of 166 informative cases. ELN cytogenetic risk categories at diagnosis included favorable 2%, intermediate 69%, or adverse 29%. Mutations involved TET2 21%, SRSF2 21%, TP53 19%, ASXL1 18%, DNMT3A 18%, NPM1 17%, IDH2 15%, RUNX1 15%, K/NRAS 12%, IDH1 8%, FLT3-ITD 7%, and DDX41 in 6% of informative cases. Relapse was documented in a total of 99 (40%) patients who achieved CR (39%) or CRi (41%) after a median remission duration of 6 months (1-31). Patients that relapsed within the first-year vs those that did not, were more likely to be males (75% vs 55%), MRD positive (44% vs 24%), and harbor TP53 mutations (23% vs 16%). Univariate analysis for RFS identified male gender (12 vs 29 months; p=0.02), secondary AML (10 vs 21 months; p<0.01), adverse karyotype (9 vs 22 months; p<0.01), TP53 mutations (6 vs 18 months, p<0.01) and MRD positive remission (13 months vs not reached; p<0.01) as risk factors for relapse; on the other hand, IDH2 mutations (not reached vs 15 months; p<0.01) were associated with a lower risk of relapse. Multivariable analysis confirmed male gender (HR 2.2), TP53 mutations (HR 3.0) and MRD positive remission (HR 1.7) as unfavorable predictors of relapse. Subsequently, in a three-tiered relapse prediction model, RFS was significantly inferior in the presence of three risk factors (male gender, TP53 mutations, MRD positive remission) (n=10, median 4 months), vs two (n=34, median 10 months) vs ≤ 1 risk factor (n=122, median 31 months) (p<0.01); 1-year cumulative incidence of relapse was 100%, 56%, and 26% in the presence of three, two and ≤ 1 risk factors, respectively. 50 of 99 (65%) patients received salvage therapy which included cladribine-cytarabine-Ven (n=19), intensive induction chemotherapy (n=9), FLT3 inhibitors (n=5), Ven-HMA-FLT3 inhibitor (n=1), IDH1/2 inhibitors (n=5), glasdegib-cytarabine (n=4), gemtuzumab (n=3), lenalidomide (n=1), or investigational therapies (n=3); in addition, Ven-HMA was resumed in 14 patients in whom treatment had been discontinued for a median of 5 months (2-12). Overall, 20 (31%) of patients achieved second CR/CRi and response rates were similar with intensive vs less intensive therapy (CR/CRi; 44% vs 29%; p=0.37). Median follow up after relapse was 3.4 months (1-66), during which 73 (74%) deaths, and 4 (5%) ASCT were recorded. Median transplant-censored survival was 4.2 months (1-year; 22%), and inferior in patients with adverse karyotype (median 4.6 vs 3.4 months; p=0.02), and TP53 mutations (3.6 vs 4.4; p=0.11); on the other hand, male gender (3.5 vs 6.8 months; p=0.51), MRD positive remission (4.6 vs 4.2; p=0.56), and IDH2 mutations (6.7 vs 4.2; p=0.28), did not influence post-relapse survival. Conclusions The current study identifies male gender, TP53 mutations, and MRD status as powerful predictors of relapse and proposes a relapse prediction model for ND-AML patients receiving Ven-HMA therapy. Furthermore, relapse following Ven-HMA was associated with uniformly poor outcomes, regardless of salvage treatment strategy.

Introduction: Based on a donor versus no-donor analysis, UKALLXII/E2993 showed a survival benefit for adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) who underwent allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) in first complete remission (CR1) compared to consolidation/maintenance chemotherapy alone. The follow-up phase 3 E1910 trial (NCT02003222) randomized BCR::ABL1-negative B-lineage ALL patients (pts) aged 30-70 years in measurable residual disease (MRD)-negative CR1 after intensification to conventional chemotherapy (CC) +/- blinatumomab (blin) and demonstrated significantly improved overall survival (OS) with blin (Litzow, NEJM 2024). The current exploratory subgroup analysis evaluates outcomes of MRD-negative pts randomized on E1910 who underwent alloHCT on trial. Methods: Among pts enrolled on E1910, pts in MRD-negative CR1 by 6-color flow cytometry after intensification who were randomized to CC +/- blin and subsequently underwent alloHCT were identified. We compared baseline characteristics, MRD status post induction, relapse-free survival (RFS) and OS using the Kaplan-Meier method and the two-sided log-rank test and Cox model. A multivariable analysis was performed with alloHCT included as a time-varying covariate as well as a landmark analysis comparing the outcome of pts with unfavorable risk on the CC + blin arm who underwent alloHCT versus those who did not. Results: Of 224 MRD-negative randomized pts, 44 underwent alloHCT on trial: 22 in each arm. The median time from randomization to transplant was 3.2 months (mos). The median follow-up from initial registration was 57.8 mos. Baseline demographics including age (median 55 years), gender (53% male), race (89% white) and ethnicity (89% non-Hispanic/Latino) were equally distributed. Compared to CC + blin, the median peripheral blood white cell (WBC) count and blast percentage at diagnosis were higher in the CC arm at 6,640 vs 3,740/uL and 55 vs 9%, respectively, while median marrow blast percentage and overall unfavorable risk as defined in E1910 (55% vs 64%) were similar. Of the 44 MRD-negative pts who proceeded to alloHCT on study, 77% in the CC arm and 64% in the CC+ blin arm were MRD-negative after induction. Myeloablative conditioning was given to the majority of pts (68% CC arm and 73% CC+blin arm) and the most common graft versus host disease prophylaxis was tacrolimus-based on both arms. Among the 44 pts who underwent alloHCT, the observed hazard ratio (HR) comparing relative risk of death between pts randomized to CC+blin or CC only was 0.59 (95% CI: 0.12-2.11) with a 3-year OS rate of 82% versus 71% and the HR comparing relative risk of relapse/death was 0.52 (CI: 0.15-1.79) with a 3-year RFS rate of 82% versus 67%. For patients with unfavorable risk, 3-year OS and 3-year RFS in each treatment arm were both 71% versus 65%. Among 50 pts with unfavorable risk in MRD-negative CR after intensification who were randomized to CC + blin, a landmark analysis performed at 5 mos post randomization showed 3-year OS and RFS rates of 71% versus 90% and 71% versus 86% between the 14 pts who underwent alloHCT and those who did not, respectively. Receipt of alloHCT was a time-varying covariate in a multivariable analysis with gender, WBC count, platelets, hemoglobin, peripheral blood blasts, bone marrow blasts, performance status, and combined molecular risk category. Age, CD20 status, rituximab use, and intention to receive alloHCT were used as stratification factors. In the entire cohort of MRD-negative pts who were randomized, there was a significant association between improved OS and the receipt of CC+blin vs CC alone (HR 0.46, 95% CI: 0.26 - 0.82; p=0.009), better performance status of 0-1 vs ≥2 and favorable vs unfavorable risk ALL. In contrast, the receipt of alloHCT had no significant effect on OS (HR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.49 - 2.01). Conclusions: Within the constraints of small numbers, this exploratory subgroup analysis demonstrates that in pts with newly diagnosed BCR::ABL1-negative B-ALL treated on E1910 who achieved MRD-negativity after intensification, alloHCT outcomes did not appear to be different with or without blin in consolidation. In a multivariate analysis of all MRD-negative pts, receipt of blin but not alloHCT was associated with improved OS. Further investigation is warranted to characterize the relative benefit of blinatumomab in pts receiving alloHCT in frontline consolidation.

Background: Polatuzumab vedotin (Pola) is an antibody drug conjugate targeting CD79b that incorporates the microtubule disrupting monomethyl auristatin E payload. Pola was approved in 2023 for the upfront treatment of diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in combination with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (polaRCHP) based on the POLARIX trial. However, the activity of pola appears to vary based on DLBCL cell of origin (COO) subtype, with greater efficacy in activated B cell (ABC) DLBCL compared to germinal center B cell (GCB) DLBCL (Russler-Germain Blood 2023). When outcomes in POLARIX are stratified by COO, polaRCHP demonstrated progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) benefits over RCHOP in patients with ABC but not GCB subtype DLBCL (PFS HR 0.34 ABC vs 1.03 GCB, OS HR 0.27 ABC vs 1.64 GCB; Morschhauser ASH 2023 and FDA data). Most prospective studies of pola used gene expression to assess COO, which is not readily clinically available. This study aims to examine if COO subtype by Hans algorithm (based on CD10, BCL6, and MUM1 expression by immunohistochemistry) is predictive of pola responses and outcomes in patients with large B cell lymphoma (LBCL). Methods: We conducted a retrospective, multicenter observational study of adults with LBCL who received pola (monotherapy or in combination) from 2015-2024 with Hans algorithm COO data and response assessment available. Patients were stratified by receipt of pola in the frontline vs relapsed/refractory (R/R) setting. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) to pola-based treatment in GCB vs non-GCB subtypes. Secondary endpoints included complete response rate (CRR), PFS, and OS. For time to event endpoints, patients responding to pola who received CAR T or stem cell transplantation prior to progression were censored at time of cellular therapy. Demographics were summarized by descriptive statistics. Comparative and survival analyses used Chi squared/Fischer exact tests and Kaplan Meier analysis. Data cutoff was July 1, 2024. Results: 718 patients were included. Median follow-up was 15 months (interquartile range [IQR] 8-32). Median age at LBCL diagnosis was 66 years (IQR 56-74); 62% were men; 69 (10%) had double hit lymphoma (DHL); 129 (18%) had underlying low grade lymphoma. Pola was used in the frontline setting in 293 (41%) patients, of whom 139 (47%) had GCB vs 154 (53%) non-GCB COO. Of the 426 patients receiving pola for R/R LBCL (including one patient receiving pola retreatment), 224 (53%) had GCB vs 202 (47%) non-GCB COO. Among patients receiving pola-based regimens in the R/R setting (GCB vs non-GCB: pola monotherapy = 7% vs 4%, pola + R = 26% vs 26%, pola + BR = 55% vs 61%, pola + other = 12% vs 9%; p = 0.44), the ORR in GCB vs non-GCB LBCL was 36% vs 61% (p < 0.001), while CRR in GCB vs non-GCB was 17% vs 36% (p < 0.001). COO remained a significant component of logistic multivariate regression models of ORR (p < 0.001) and CRR (p < 0.001) when incorporating IPI at original LBCL diagnosis, histology, DHL status, and refractory status to frontline therapy. Despite this, no significant PFS or OS differences by COO were seen, potentially due to approximately 1/4 patients being censored due to receiving subsequent cellular therapy (e.g. CAR T) prior to progression. In patients receiving frontline pola-based regimens (of which 275 [94%] included an anthracycline), ORR and CRR were similar in GCB vs non-GCB (ORR 89% vs 88% p > 0.5; CRR 76% vs 77% p > 0.5). While PFS and OS were similar between COO groups in the frontline cohort, follow-up and cohort size were limited. Conclusion: Based on this real-world evidence, COO classification by Hans algorithm is a strong predictor of the activity of pola-containing therapy in R/R LBCL, with significantly higher ORR and CRR in patients with non-GCB compared to GCB COO LBCL. This aligns with the cumulative existing evidence. ORR and CRR to pola-containing therapy in the frontline setting did not differ significantly by COO subtype, but longer follow-up of larger cohorts is needed to clarify the predictive role of COO by Hans algorithm in this setting, especially considering the PFS advantage with polaRCHP in POLARIX was not associated with significant differences in ORR or CRR. Overall, clinicians should consider factoring COO subtype into treatment decisions regarding pola-containing regimens, and studies of pola-based therapies should stratify patients and report outcomes by COO subtype.

Background: Physical function (PF) is an important outcome that can inform cancer treatment tolerability from a clinical and regulatory perspective. PF can be assessed through different modalities: patient-reported (PRO), clinician-reported (ClinRo), performance tests (PerfO), and digital sensors (wearables). No standard approach for PF measurement has been defined, and each modality bears unique implementation challenges. The Integrating 4 Measures to Assess Physical Function study (In4M, NCT05214144) characterized the performance of these PF modalities in patients receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy, with a goal of guiding an assessment strategy in future cancer trials. Here we present feasibility results of the In4M study in patients with lymphoma. Methods: In4M is a prospective observational study with longitudinal PF assessment of PROs, ClinRo, PerfO, and wearable sensor data for over 9 months in patients initiating chemotherapy for lymphoma or breast cancer at Mayo Clinic and Yale University. Patient-reported PF was assessed using several validated ePRO instruments, ClinRo utilized clinician-reported Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, PerfO was measured via 6-minute walk test (6MWT), and digital sensor data was obtained from a wearable (Fitbit) provided to all participants. We evaluated the feasibility of implementing these PF modalities through compliance outcomes and a study-specific exit survey. Descriptive statistics included medians and interquartile ranges (IQR) for continuous variables and frequencies for categorical variables. We used a mixed model to estimate mean number of Fitbit compliant days per week. Results: Among 66 patients with lymphoma in the study (median age was 57 years; 52% were male), 90% self-reported as White, 4.9% as Black, 1.6% as Asian, 1.6% as American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1.6% as multiple races. Ethnicity was reported as non-Hispanic/Latino by 93% of patients. Education status was reported as more than high school by 92% of patients, and 49% reported full-time employment at time of enrollment. The overall ePROs completion rate was 80.7% for the entire study period. Baseline ePRO completion rate was 93.9%. Completion rate while undergoing chemotherapy was 91.3% and 75.4% in the post-treatment follow-up. The median time to complete ePROs was 4.1 minutes (IQR 2.8-5.9), ranging from 3.1 minutes for surveys with 37 questions to 5.6 minutes for surveys with 55 questions (survey length varied by timepoint). The baseline 6MWT was completed by 91% of patients. The most common reasons for not completing the baseline 6MWT were: patient refusal (50%, 3/6), patient not physically present (33%, 2/6), and unable to complete due to fatigue (17%, 1/6). The 3-month 6MWT was completed by 66% (40/61) of patients, with the most common reasons for missingness being: patient not physically present (38%, 8/21) and unable to complete due to fatigue (14%, 3/21). When considering the days when Fitbit was used, the median wear time was 21.3 hours (IQR 18.9-22.5) per day. The proportion of compliant days (>10 hours of wear time during waking hours) was 53% (IQR 20-84). The median of participants' average compliant days per week was 5.4 (IQR 4.3-6.1) days/week after enrollment, with a slight downward trend over time (-0.017 compliant days per week [95% CI: -0.021, -0.012, p <0.001] over each consecutive week in the study). The exit survey was completed by 39 (59%) patients. Most participants (85%) indicated they did not find the ePRO surveys burdensome to complete. Using the Fitbit (charging and syncing) was found to be manageable by most patients (87% and 84%, respectively). 60.8% of patients did not find the wearable bothersome to use, while the main themes reported by the remaining patients were related to the operation of the wearable itself (functions, small text size, forgetting login information) or discomfort (band material, wearing at night). Conclusion: Multi-modal assessment of PF with PRO, ClinRo, PerfO and wearable sensor data in patients with lymphoma undergoing treatment is feasible. Designing lymphoma therapeutic trials that incorporate at least one PF assessment modality, or assessment with a parsimonious combination of modalities, is achievable and may yield valuable insights into treatment tolerability for clinical and regulatory purposes.

Introduction: Measurable residual disease (MRD) is a well-validated prognostic marker and interim outcomes measure in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Despite its broad acceptance as a robust prognostic marker, the MRD status is only available down the treatment line, and there is limited information on the markers at diagnosis that can predict achievement of MRD negativity post-transplant. This study explored the relationship between baseline risk factors and post-autologous stem cell transplantation (post-ASCT) MRD status, as well as the combined impact of these baseline factors and post-ASCT MRD status on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective, single-center study of patients achieving at least VGPR after ASCT between 01/01/2016 and 12/30/2023, majority (n=814, 98%) received ASCT in the frontline setting. MRD testing was performed between days 60-100 post-transplant using next-generation flow cytometry with a sensitivity of at least 1x10^5 nucleated cells (minimum 2x10^6 cells assessed). Treatment response and disease progression were determined by IMWG criteria. High-risk disease (HRD) was defined as presence of International Staging System ISS stage 3, high lactate dehydrogenase, 1q gain, 17p deletion, or t(4;14) chromosomal abnormalities. We calculated PFS/OS from transplant day 0 to first documented event (progression or death). Categorical variables were compared using chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. Non-parametric tests compared continuous variables, and logistic regression analyses tested associations between clinical/lab variables and MRD status post-ASCT. Time-to-event analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier and compared using log-rank test. Multivariable analyses were conducted using the Cox regression model. Result: The study cohort included 831 newly diagnosed MM patients. The median follow-up for the cohort was 50 months (95% CI: 48-51). 48% (n=402) achieved MRD negativity (MRD-neg) post-ASCT. Univariate analysis demonstrated that R2-ISS stage, depth of response pre-ASCT, and presence of t(11;14) to be associated with worse MRD-negativity rates. Multivariate analysis revealed that t(11;14) significantly decreased the odds of MRD-negativity (p<0.0001, OR=0.4, 95% CI: 0.3-0.6) and a deeper pre-ASCT response was associated with increase odd of MRD-negativity OR-4.7 (95%CI 3.2-7.4) p<0.0001. Patients with MRD-positive disease post-transplant had an inferior estimated median PFS of 57.6 months (95% CI: 49-69) with a 5-year PFS of 49% (95% CI: 43-56), compared to an estimated median PFS of 83.3 months (95% CI: NA) and a 5-year PFS of 66% in MRD-negative patients (p<0.0001, HR=1.9, 95% CI: 1.5-2.5). Similarly, MRD positivity was associated with an inferior OS [estimated median of 92.6 months (95% CI NA) ,5-year OS 76% (95%CI 72-82) for MRD-pos vs. Median OS NR, 5-year OS 85%(95%CI NA) in MRD-neg; p=0.003, HR=1.69, 95% CI: 1.2-2.38)]. In MRD-neg patients, a baseline bone marrow plasma cells BMPC% >60% was significantly associated with worse PFS (HR=1.9, 95% CI: 1.26-2.99; p<0.01). High-risk disease was not associated with an inferior PFS or OS in patients with MRD-negativity. For MRD-neg patients, estimated median PFS was not reached for those without HRD, 5-year PFS was 66% (95%CI 51-85), compared to 83 months(95%CI 65-NA) for those with HRD, 5-year PFS was 65%(95%CI57-74), p=0.6441. The median OS was not reached in either group (p=0.07). Five-year OS was 94% (95%CI 86-100) in MRD-neg without HRD vs. 81%(95%CI 75-87) with HRD (p=0.07). In MRD-pos patients, median PFS was 81 months (95%CI 58-NA) for those without HRD, 5-year PFS of 59% (95%CI 46-77), compared to PFS of 41 months(95%CI 36-52) for those with HRD ,5-year PFS of 39% (95%CI 31.3-47) , p=0.003. Median OS was not reached in MRD-pos patients without HRD, but it was 59.8 months ( for those with HRD (p=0.0012). Five-year OS was 94% (95%CI 89-99) in MRD-pos without HRD vs. 67%(95%CI 60-74) with HRD (p<0.0001). For every 1 log increase in the residual cell % on MRD testing in MRD-pos patients, the hazard ratio for PFS increased by 42% (p=0.0002, HR=1.42, 95% CI: 1.2-1.7). Conclusion: Patients with t(11;14) have a reduced likelihood of achieving MRD negativity post-ASCT, whereas high-risk cytogenetics did not impact MRD-negativity rates. Achievement of MRD negativity post-ASCT mitigates the impact of high-risk characteristics.

Background: A deeper understanding of the cytogenetic features has enabled robust risk stratification for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). However, heterogeneity persists in the currently available prognostic tools and there is further room for personalization. We assess the utility of PC-PRO, a test to measure the proportion of monotypic plasma cells in the synthetic phase (S-phase) of cell cycle, as a prognostic marker for NDMM. Methods: Patients with active MM diagnosed between January 2013 and January 2023 with a flow cytometry-based S-phase assessment at diagnosis were included. Flow cytometric immunophenotyping was performed using the following antibodies: CD19, CD38, CD45, CD138, cytoplasmic kappa and lambda immunoglobulin, and DAPI (4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole). The percentage of plasma cells in S-phase was determined by measuring the proportion of cells with DNA content of the monotypic plasma cells between the G0/G1 and G2/M peaks. Plasma cell clonality was detected through demonstrating CD38 and CD138 positivity along with immunoglobulin light chain restriction, abnormality of CD19/ CD45 expression and/or ploidy difference by DAPI staining. High-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HRCA) by FISH were defined as follows: presence of deletion 17p (del17p), t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), 1q gain/amplification, 1p deletion (when available). Additionally, the second iteration of the revised ISS (R2-ISS), incorporating both laboratory and cytogenetic features as well an adaptation of the recently proposed International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) Classification for high-risk disease, was utilized for risk stratification. All time-to-event analyses were performed using the Kaplan Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards analyses were performed to assess the independent prognostic impact of S-phase. Results: A total of 823 patients were included in the study. The median follow-up was 6 years [95% Confidence interval (CI): 5.5-6.3 years] and estimated median overall survival (OS) was 8.3 years. The median S-phase value for the cohort was 0.8 % (interquartile range: 0.5-1.4%), with 135 (16%) patients harboring an S-phase of ≥2% at diagnosis. Applying the R2-ISS prognostic model to our cohort, 11% (79/706) patients were stratified to the R2-ISS high-risk cohort; 93 patients (out of 788, 12%) had 2 or more HRCA at diagnosis. Patients with a S-phase ≥2% at diagnosis had a median OS of 3.9 years (95% CI: 2.9-5.7) vs. 9.2 years [95% CI: 7.9-not reached (NR)] for patients with a S-phase <2% [Hazard ratio (HR): 2.2 (95% CI: 1.7-2.8), p<0.0001]. The median OS was inferior for cohorts with an increasing S-phase value: S-phase of 0.1-1%: HR: 1 (standard), S-phase 1.1-3%: HR 1.7 (95% CI: 1.3-2.1), S-phase >3%: HR 3.0 (95% CI: 2.2-4.1)]. On a multivariable analysis including S-phase ≥2%, age at diagnosis of MM (>65 years) and R2-ISS high-risk status, S-phase ≥2% was an independent predictor of inferior OS [hazard ratio (HR) 1.9 (95% CI: 1.4-2.6), p<0.0001]. Age >65 years [HR 1.9 (95% CI: 1.5-2.5), p<0.0001] and R2-ISS high-risk status [HR 1.8 (1.3-2.6), p=0.001] were also independent predictors of OS. Within the sub cohort of patients with 2 or more of the listed high-risk cytogenetic features (n=93, 12%), a S-phase ≥2% (n=24) was associated with a worse median OS of 1.6 years (95% CI: 0.7-NR) vs. 6.2 years (95 % CI:3.3-NR) for S-phase <2% (p=0.002). Conclusion: Flow cytometry-based determination of the proportion of monotypic plasma cells in S-phase is an easy-to-study and powerful prognostic tool for NDMM. A S-phase of ≥2% at diagnosis is a predictor of OS independent of age and R2-ISS high-risk stage. An S-phase of ≥2% was able to identify a distinct group with markedly inferior outcomes even within the sub cohort of patients with 2 or more high-risk cytogenetic features.

Abstract The vision of the ASPEN Rhoads Research Foundation is to promote innovation and research discovery to improve nutrition care and health. The Foundation was launched in 1993, incorporated in 2002, and established as a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization in 2007. On the occasion of American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN)'s 50th anniversary, this article examines the creation of the Foundation, the state of clinical nutrition research funding, the Foundation's philanthropic mission, and the return on investment of Foundation grant support. To date, 114 investigators have received 2.78 million dollars in funding. The article examines the success of ASPEN research programs and Foundation grant support in career development, leadership, and mentorship. It is important to document a historical account of the ASPEN Rhoads Research Foundation and encourage innovation and discovery and ongoing financial support.

Background Blast or accelerated phase myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN-BP/AP) carries a dismal prognosis, with 3-year survival estimates of <5% (BCJ 2023;108). Patients with MPN-BP/AP were excluded from venetoclax (Ven) plus hypomethylating agent (HMA) clinical trials for acute myeloid leukemia (NEJM 2020;383:617). In the current retrospective study, we examined response patterns and long-term survival of newly-diagnosed MPN-BP/AP patients who received treatment with Ven+HMA, outside of clinical trials. Methods Newly-diagnosed patients with MPN-BP/AP treated with Ven+HMA at the Mayo Clinic, between March 2019 and May 2024, were retrospectively reviewed. Diagnostic criteria were according to the International Consensus Classification (Blood 2022;140:1200). Cytogenetic and molecular studies were performed by conventional karyotype and next-generation sequencing, respectively. All patients received at least one cycle of Ven+HMA (azacitidine 75 mg/m2 days 1-7 or decitabine 20 mg/m2 days 1-5). Response was assessed according to the 2022 European Leukemia Net criteria (Blood 2022;140:1345). Standard statistical analyses were performed using JMP Pro (Version 17.1.0). Results Patient characteristics 70 patients (median age 73 years, 59% males, 48% splenomegaly >14 cm, 4% isolated myeloid sarcoma) with newly-diagnosed MPN-BP (n=58) or AP (n=12) received Ven+HMA with (n=13) or without (n=57) concomitant JAK2 inhibitor. Driver mutation distribution was 69% JAK2, 21% CALR, 6% MPL, and 4% triple negative. Mutations involved ASXL1 (31%), TP53 (28%), TET2 (28%), RUNX1 (25%), SRSF2 (18%), IDH2 (12%), U2AF1 (11%), DNMT3A (9%), IDH1 (7%), and K/NRAS (7%). Karyotype was abnormal in 50 (76%) of 66 informative cases, of which 28 (56%) were complex (CK). Median TP53 mutation variant allele frequency (VAF) was 30% (8-96%) and all evaluable cases displayed CK (n=18). Response and Survival Complete remission (CR; 21%) or CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi; 19%) was documented in 28 (40%) patients with residual MPN in 18 (64%) patients. Median response duration was 5.5 months (1-60 months). After a median follow up of 7 months (1-62 months), 48 (69%) deaths, 13 relapses (46%), and 15 (21%) allogeneic stem cell transplants (ASCT; 12 in CR/CRi) were recorded. Median overall survival (OS) was 9 months and was superior with ASCT (median 22 vs. 8 months; p=0.01). In univariate analysis, transplant-censored survival was superior with CR/CRi (12 vs. 5 months; p<0.01) and IDH1 mutation (33 vs. 8 months; p=0.04) and inferior with CK (7 vs. 10 months; p=0.05), TP53 mutation (5 vs. 10 months; p<0.01), post polycythemia vera myelofibrosis (post-PV MF) (3 vs. 9 months; p=0.01), and splenomegaly >14 cm (5 vs. 16 months; p<0.01). Multivariable analysis confirmed the negative survival impact of not achieving CR/CRi (HR 3.8; p<0.01) and presence of TP53 mutation (HR 4.0; p<0.01); median survival (1/3-year survival rate) was 3 months (10%/0%) in TP53 mutated patients not achieving CR/CRi (n=11) vs. 27 months (65%/28%) in TP53 unmutated cases achieving CR/CRi (n=19) (p < 0.01). Median survival in patients with TP53 mutations or CK who achieved CR/CRi (n=7; 7 months) was inferior to that in treatment responders without TP53 mutations or CK (n=18; 23 months; p=0.01). CR/CRi rates in the presence vs. absence of TP53 mutations were 42% vs. 39% (p=0.80) and of CK (25% vs. 50% (p=0.04). Importantly, responses in the presence of TP53 mutations or CK were too short-lived to allow successful bridging to ASCT (median 2 vs. 9 months; p<0.01). Additional predictors of inferior treatment response included splenomegaly >14 cm (24% vs. 53%; p=0.01), and post-PV MF (0% vs. 46%; p<0.01) while SRSF2 (67% vs. 34%; p=0.04) and IDH2 mutations (75% vs. 35%; p=0.03) were associated with favorable response. In multivariable analysis, CK (p=0.04) and splenomegaly >14 cm (p=0.01) remained independent predictors of inferior response. The use of concomitant JAK2 inhibitor therapy did not impact treatment response (CR/CRi 46% vs. 39%; p=0.62) or survival (median 9 vs. 8 months; p=0.71). Conclusions TP53 mutations and CK undermine the value of Ven+HMA, with or without concomitant JAK2 inhibitor, in enabling successful bridging of newly-diagnosed MPN-BP/AP to ASCT. An alternative treatment approach is advised, in the particular scenario, while the observed 3-year survival rate of 28%, in treatment responders without TP53 mutations, is encouraging.

Introduction: Light chain multiple myeloma (LCMM) is a distinct subtype of multiple myeloma (MM) characterized by the exclusive production of immunoglobulin light chains, unlike the common form of MM that produces the complete immunoglobulin. There is a paucity of literature on the specific tumor cell alterations leading to light chain-only disease as opposed to the typical presentation in MM. Additionally, data on treatment response and outcomes in this subgroup of patients is sparse. This study explores the differences in baseline characteristics, including cytogenetic abnormalities and treatment response between LCMM and multiple myeloma with heavy chain involvement. Materials and Methods: We reviewed patient charts to obtain clinical and laboratory information for individuals diagnosed with LCMM and those with heavy chain MM (comparison cohort) from 2004 to 2022. Patients were matched for age, sex, and year of diagnosis. Data collected included treatment assessment, overall survival, and progression-free survival (PFS). Associations between outcomes and categorical variables were analyzed using the chi-square test, while the Mann-Whitney U test was employed to compare medians. Progression-free survival following initiation of initial therapy and overall survival were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. The Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved the study. Results: We identified 848 patients, representing 17.1% of newly diagnosed MM cases. The median age of the LCMM cohort was 63 years (range 16-92), with a female-to-male ratio of 1:5. The LCMM cohort had higher levels of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), beta-2 microglobulin (p<0.0001), higher baseline creatinine (p<0.0001) and calcium (p<0.0001). The two cohorts had no significant difference in the International Staging System (ISS) or revised ISS (R2-ISS). Additionally, hemoglobin (Hb) and white blood cell count at presentation were higher in the LCMM cohort. Chromosome 1 abnormalities were lower in the LCMM cohort: 1q gain (OR-0.7; 95% CI: 0.6-0.9) and 1p deletion (OR-0.7; 95% CI: 0.6-0.9, p=0.02). Likewise, the frequencies of trisomies and hyperdiploidy were lower in the LCMM cohort, with odds ratios of 0.32 (p=0.012) and 0.37 (p<0.001), respectively. The frequencies of translocations t(4;14) (OR-0.35, p<0.001) and t(14;16) (OR-0.6, p=0.03) were lower in LCMM compared to heavy chain MM. In contrast, the frequencies of t(11;14) (OR-3.4) and t(6;14) (OR-4.9) and deletion of 13q(OR-1.3) was higher in the LCMM cohort. There was no significant difference in the occurrence of del(17p)/TP53 abnormalities. The median PFS after the first regimen was shorter in the LCMM cohort (23 months vs. 27 months, p=0.03), and this difference remained significant after adjusting for baseline adverse prognostic indices and treatment regimen. Median PFS in LCMM patients with monoclonal antibody (Mab) as part of their treatment was 37 months vs. 23 months (Proteasome Inhibitor or immunomodulator-based regimen without Mab), though this difference is not statistically significant p=0.87. No significant difference was found in overall survival between the two groups. Conclusion: This study highlights unique features of light chain multiple myeloma, including increased frequencies of specific cytogenetic abnormalities. Further evaluation of observed differences in cytogenetic abnormalities may enhance our understanding of LCMM and potentially guide baseline treatment choices to improve outcome.