Citations

Background: Philadelphia (Ph)-like acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is a heterogenous subtype of B-ALL defined by the presence of gene expression profiling similar to Ph+ ALL in the absence of a BCR::ABL1 fusion. Ph-like ALL has lower response rates to standard frontline therapies and carries a poorer prognosis when compared to other B-ALL subtypes. However, the role in which specific patient characteristics may impact responses is not well described. Our aim for this retrospective study was to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of a real-world cohort of patients (pts) with Ph-like ALL across multiple institutions, including describing key patient characteristics, treatments, and factors that may contribute to minimal residual disease (MRD) status and treatment response. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of adult pts with Ph-like ALL diagnosed and treated at the University of New Mexico, Mayo Clinic Phoenix, University of Chicago, and University of Michigan between 1/1/18 - 2/1/2024. Pts were eligible if they carried a diagnosis of B-ALL, and were determined to have Ph-like ALL according to each institutional diagnostic algorithm. Descriptive statistics, ANOVA, and Fisher's exact test were employed to summarize various clinical characteristics and their associations. Cox regression analysis was utilized to estimate the median survival time and assess the relationship between clinical characteristics and survival outcomes, including overall survival and progression-free survival. All statistical analyses were conducted using the R statistical software. Results: 67 pts were identified with a median age of 34.2 (IQR 28.5) and 35.8% were female. Twenty-eight pts identified as Hispanic or Latino (H/L) (43.1%), 25 (38.5%) identified as non-Hispanic White/Caucasian (NHW), 10 (15.4%) as American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN), and 2 (3.1%) as Asian/Pacific Islander. Thirteen pts (19.4%) had central nervous system (CNS) involvement at diagnosis, 22.4% of pts had extramedullary disease, and, in those who had NGS or cytogenomic microarray testing (n=49), 51% had an identified mutation/deletion in IKZF1. Initial treatment varied widely with pts receiving most commonly: Children's Oncology Group (COG) protocols (22.4%), CALGB 10403 (22.4%), HyperCVAD (11.9%), and CALGB 8811 (10.4%). Fifty-eight percent achieved a CR/CRi and 21% were refractory to initial therapy. Thirteen percent of pts received a Jak inhibitor and 6% of pts were treated with a TKI. Thirty pts (50.8%) underwent allogeneic stem cell transplant, with 8 of those pts (26.7%) experiencing a relapse post-transplant. Nine pts (13.4%) underwent treatment with CAR-T therapy with few pts experiencing grade 2 or higher cytokine release syndrome (CRS) or immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). Pts with CNS disease at diagnosis were less likely to achieve a CR/CRi compared to those without CNS disease at diagnosis (33.3% vs 64.0%; p=0.12). Pts identifying as AI/AN were more likely to be refractory to their first treatment compared to other racial/ethnic groups (75%, p=0.002). Forty two percent of pts never achieved MRD negativity (< 0.01% by flow cytometry) during treatment; pts identifying as H/L and AI/AN had a higher rate of MRD positivity after induction compared to NHW pts (56% and 70% vs. 25%; p=0.02). In pts with IKZF1 mutation, 57.1% did not achieve MRD negativity compared to 21.7% in pts without a mutation (p=0.029). The median overall survival (OS) was 66.3 months (mos) and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 15.7 mos. Pts who did not achieve MRD negativity after initial treatment had shorter OS compared to those who did achieve MRD negativity, 33.9 mos vs 66.3 mos (p=0.086). Progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly shorter for patients who did not achieve MRD negativity after initial treatment compared to those who did, 3.9 mos vs 43.9 mos (p=0.001). PFS was shorter in pts who identify as AI/AN compared to H/L and NHW pts (2 mos vs 35.7 mos and 35.7 mos; p=0.046). Conclusion: Pts with Ph-like ALL experience poor response rates to therapies used to treat B-ALL, highlighting the urgent need for novel therapies and treatment strategies. We identified race/ethnicity and CNS disease at diagnosis as risk factors for poor treatment response. In addition, race/ethnicity and the presence of an IKZF1 mutation was associated with worse rates of MRD negativity during treatment.

Introduction: MPAL is a rare and heterogenous subtype of acute leukemia characterized by a single blast population with phenotypic expression of both myeloid and lymphoid lineages (biphenotypic) or multiple co-existing lineages of blasts that satisfy criteria for both acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). MPAL presents both a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge given its rarity and resistance to traditional therapies. Data suggest ALL-directed or hybrid therapies are most effective at inducing durable remissions as a bridge to allogeneic stem cell transplantation (Allo-SCT; Lazzarotto 2023, Rasekh 2021); however, many are single-institution with limited sample sizes. Methods: A retrospective analysis at 7 US academic centers was performed. Adult patients (pts) with a confirmed diagnosis of MPAL between 2003-2023 were included. Comparisons of categorical and continuous variables utilized the Fisher exact test and Wilcoxon rank-sum or Kruskal-Wallis test as appropriate. Time-to-event outcomes were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank test. Results: A total of 79 pts with MPAL were included in this study. Median age at diagnosis was 61 years (range, 18-89); 52% were ≥ 60 years. Majority of pts were male (60%), non-Hispanic white (64%), and had an ECOG ≤ 1 (83%). Of the 50 pts with baseline CSF analysis, 5 (10%) had CNS disease. Phenotypically, the predominant blast population was biphenotypic in 68%, myeloid in 17%, and lymphoid in 15% of cases. KMT2A-rearrangement and BCR::ABL1 translocation constituted 4% and 14% of cases, respectively, and 30% of pts had complex cytogenetics. Most common mutations at baseline included RUNX1 (33%), DNMT3A (30%), FLT3-ITD (26%), TET2 (19%), WT1 (19%), NRAS (18%), TP53 (17%), and ASXL1 (14%) mutations. Of the 79 pts, 61 (77%) received intensive chemotherapy (IC), 12 (15%) received HMA-based regimens, 4 (5%) received other non-intensive regimens, and 2 (3%) transitioned to hospice prior to therapy. Among those receiving IC, 37 (61%) received ALL-directed therapies, 16 (26%) AML-directed, and 8 (13%) received hybrid regimens which included FLAG-VIPR (6/8), 7+3+vincristine (1/8), and cladrabine/low-dose cytarabine/vincristine/dexamethasone (1/8). Therapies were phenotype-discordant in 4/61 pts receiving IC; 3 myeloblast-predominant MPAL pts received ALL-directed therapy and one lymphoid-predominant pt received AML-directed therapy. Among 54 pts with predominant biphenotypic blasts, 52% received ALL-directed regimens. Of the 11 pts with BCR::ABL1 translocation, 8 (73%) received dasatinib, 2 (18%) ponatinib, and 1 (9%) received both. Only 30% of pts with FLT3-ITD mutated MPAL (5/17) received a FLT3 inhibitor. Overall, 56% of pts achieved complete remission (CR) or CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi), with a median duration of response of 16.7 months (IQR: 8.1-46.1). The rates of CR/CRi were 39%, 56%, and 75% for myeloid, biphenotypic, and lymphoid MPAL, respectively. All pts with CNS disease (5/5) cleared after induction. Thirty-seven percent of pts proceeded with Allo-SCT in first remission (23% of myeloid pts, 58% lymphoid, 35% biphenotypic). Thirty-two percent of responders (CR/CRi; 14/44) relapsed with a median time to relapse of 9.4 months (range, 0.5-42). Median overall survival (OS) for the entire cohort was 51 months (95% CI: 15-89). The 2-year OS rate was higher in pts with lymphoid-predominant phenotype (83%) compared to biphenotypic (55%) or myeloid-predominant phenotype (38%; p=0.16). Median OS was significantly longer in transplant versus non-SCT recipients (121 vs 14 months) with a 1-year OS rate of 97% vs. 59% (p<0.0001), respectively. Among pts who achieved CR/CRi, median OS significantly longer in transplant versus non-SCT recipients (121 vs 55 months, p=0.031), with a 2-year OS rate of 91% vs 75%. Conclusions In this large multi-center study, there were differences in survival based on predominant blast phenotype, with improved OS in lymphoid-predominant MPAL. Although most pts with biphenotypic-predominant MPAL received ALL-directed regimens, OS was worse in this subtype compared to lymphoid-predominant MPAL. There was significantly improved OS among Allo-SCT recipients underscoring the importance of Allo-SCT in this subtype of acute leukemia. Additional studies are needed to understand this rare and heterogenous disease.

Introduction: Brexucabtagene Autoleucel (brexu-cel) is the first CD19-targeting chimeric antigen receptor (CD19.CAR) T-cell therapy approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory (r/r) B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) in adult (≥18 yo) patients (pts) based on results from the ZUMA-3 trial. However, data on the safety and efficacy of CAR-T cells in older pts (≥60 yo) remains limited, with only 8 pts >65 yo enrolled in the ZUMA-3 trial. We evaluated the treatment characteristics and outcomes with use of brexu-cel amongst patients ≥60 yo in the Real-World Outcomes Collaborative for CAR-T in ALL (ROCCA) consortium database. Methodology: ROCCA is a consortium of over 30 U.S.-based institutions with a database of adult pts with B-ALL who received brexu-cel as standard of care therapy. We identified pts ≥60 yo and further stratified them into two cohorts: 60-69 yo and ≥70 yo. Outcomes of interest included OS, PFS, ORR, and toxicities (CRS and ICANS). Both OS and PFS were calculated from the day of brexu-cel infusion. Response assessment occurred on day +28, and MRD evaluation was per institutional practices. CRS and ICANS were graded according to the American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy criteria. Results: Of 280 brexu-cel recipients in the ROCCA database, 73 (26%) were ≥60 yo, of which 58 (79%) were between 60-69 yo and 15 (21%) were ≥70 yo. Among pts ≥60 yo, the median age at infusion was 65 (range 60-81). Pts were heavily pretreated with a median of 3 prior lines of therapy (range 2-9). Prior therapies included: allogeneic HSCT (38%), inotuzumab ozogamicin (41%), and blinatumomab (62%). Forty pts (55%) had Ph-negative B-ALL, 24 (33%) had Ph+ B-ALL and 9 (12%) had Ph-like B-ALL. When grouped by HCT-CI equal to 0, 1-2 or ≥3, a higher proportion of pts ≥60 yo had HCT-CI ≥3 (19% vs. 7% in <60 yo; p=0.004). Pre-apheresis, 33 pts (45%) had active disease (>5% marrow blasts or extramedullary disease), 34 (47%) were in CR (of whom 14 were MRD-negative) and 6 had unknown disease status. Following brexu-cel, 43 (59%) achieved MRD-negative CR, 20 (27%) had MRD + or CR with unknown MRD status, 6 (8%) had refractory disease and 5 had no disease evaluation available. The ORR was similar between pts 60-69 and ≥70 yo (MRD-negative CR rate: 58% vs 61%, r/r to brexu-cel: 9% vs 6%) and was comparable to pts <60 yo (MRD-negative CR 66%; r/r disease of 9%). The rate of all grade ICANS was higher in pts ≥70 (77%) than in pts 60-69 (47%) or pts <60 (49%), with grade 1-2 ICANS occurring at a significantly higher rate in pts ≥70 (44% vs. 20% in 60-69 and 20% in <60, p=0.049). Grade 3-4 ICANS were similar between the groups: 33%, 27% and 29% in the ≥70, 60-69, and <60 groups, respectively. Conversely, rates of CRS were similar across age groups (80-84%). There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of grade 3-4 CRS which was 17% in pts ≥70, 4% in pts 60-69, and 11% in pts <60 yo. With a median follow-up of 332 days (range 8-936 days) from infusion, pts ≥60 yo had a median PFS of 395 days compared to 547 days in pts <60 yo. Median PFS was lower in the ³70 yo (231 days) compared to 677 in the 60-69 yo cohort. No statistically significant difference was found between the <60 and ≥60groups in 6- and 12-month PFS rates (6 months PFS: 66% vs 64%, p=0.77 and 12 months PFS: 57% vs 57%, p=1.00). When pts ≥60 yo were stratified by age, pts ≥70 yo had similar 6-month PFS compared to other age groups but significantly lower 12-month PFS (38%; vs. 64% in pts 60-69and 57% in pts <60, p=0.001). Median OS was not reached in any of the age groups, and there was no statistically significant difference in 6-month OS (72% in ≥ 70 vs. 82% in the 60-69 vs. 82% in <60, p=0.14) or 12-months OS (61% in ≥ 70 vs. 69% in 60-69 vs. 73% in <60, p=0.18). Conclusion: This is the largest study to date of older B-ALL pts receiving CAR-T cells. We observed that older pts, particularly those aged 60-69, have similar outcomes to younger pts. However, pts ≥70 yo had lower median and 12-month PFS when compared to younger patients. Additionally, pts ≥70 yo had higher rates of grades 1-2 ICANS. An important limitation of this analysis is the potential selection bias among clinicians when selecting older patients for this treatment. Longer follow-up, including inclusion of additional pts ≥70 yo is needed to confirm these results, and further studies are needed to identify the optimal approach for use of CAR T-cell therapy in patients in this age group.

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.

Introduction: Scant data exist on prognostic factors, survival and treatment (Tx)-related outcomes in SCNSL. We conducted a multicenter international analysis to identify prognostic factors and outcomes in SCNSL at diagnosis (de novo), or after frontline Tx (1L) either with (concomitant) or without (isolated) systemic (syst) relapse. Methods: This study collected data from patients (pts) treated between 2001-2023 at 35 centers. Overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated from SCNSL diagnosis to first event (death for OS, relapse/death for PFS) or last follow-up. Uni- (UVA) and multivariable (MVA) Cox analyses were performed to assess prognostic factors; Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate survival. Results: 1173 (US: 863, UK: 273, Canada: 37) pts with SCNSL were included. Baseline characteristics were median age: 62 years (interquartile range 52.5-69), male sex: 58.7%, elevated LDH: 71.1%, stage III/IV: 88.6%, HIV: 3%, transformed LBCL (tLBCL): 13.8%, non-germinal center B-cell like (non-GCB) subtype: 52.3%, double expressor (DE): 40%, MYC rearrangement (MYC-R): 28.3%, MYC/BCL2 double hit: 16.6%, MYC/BCL2/BCL6 triple hit (TH): 6.1%. Among 522 pts with de novo SCNSL, 84.2% had involvement of a single CNS compartment (44.7% brain parenchyma; 40.4% leptomeningeal [lepto]). 1L regimens included 36.2% R-CHOP with high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX), 12.5% MARIETTA-type, and 9.8% R-CODOX-M/IVAC; 54.6% received intrathecal chemotherapy. Consolidation Thiotepa-based autologous stem cell transplant (TT-ASCT) occurred in 15.3%. The majority of pts who underwent TT-ASCT had previously achieved CR or PR in syst (92.5%) and CNS (72.5%) compartments. At median follow-up 25.7 months (mos), subsequent relapse was observed in 27.5% TT-ASCT recipients: 36.3% had isolated CNS, 27.4% syst, and 36.3% concomitant. 588 pts presented with SCNS after 1L (66.2% isolated, 33.8% concomitant). Brain parenchyma involvement was observed in 56.8%, lepto in 22.6%. Tx included 31.6% HD-MTX combination (eg, R-MPV, MTR); 18.4% HD-MTX +/- rituximab; 16.2% MARIETTA-type; and 9.4% platinum-based regimen. Consolidation TT-ASCT occurred in 22.4% (n=132), and 13.8% (n=81) received CAR-T cell therapy (excluding subsequent relapses in de novo group). Syst (65.1%) & CNS (69.1%) responses (CR/PR) were higher before TT-ASCT compared to CAR-T cell (49.5% & 54.5%, respectively). After TT-ASCT, 52 pts (39.3%) relapsed, mainly in the CNS (n=30, 57.7%), with only 4 (7.7%) concomitant. After CAR-T, 48 pts (59.3%) relapsed: 15 (31.2%) isolated in CNS and 15 (31.2%) concomitant. 12-month cumulative incidence of relapse (with death as competing risk) was 21.1% after TT-ASCT and 55.8% after CAR-T. In 63 pts (5.4%), the first CNS event occurred >2 lines of Tx. With median follow-up of the entire cohort of 24.6 mos, median PFS and OS were 11 and 21 mos, respectively. mPFS and mOS were significantly better in pts with de novo SCNSL (13.4 & 47.4 mos) compared to SCNSL after 1L (10.4 & 14.2 mos) and >2 lines of Tx (6.5 & 9.7 mos); P<0.0001. Factors associated with significantly shorter OS in UVA across all presentations were age >60, male sex, GCB subtype, MYC-R, tLBCL, DE, TH, elevated LDH, ECOG PS ≥2, SCNSL after 1L (vs. de novo), and failure to achieve syst/CNS response to 1L. Of these, age >60, male sex, MYC-R, ECOG PS ≥2, and failure to achieve response to 1L remained significant in MVA. In de novo cases, age >60, DE, ECOG PS≥2, and failure to achieve syst/CNS response to 1L were associated with poorer OS; for pts with SCNSL after 1L, age >60, GCB subtype, and ECOG PS ≥2 were significant. Pts treated with HD-MTX-based regimens after 1L experienced longer OS than those treated with platinum regimens or high-dose cytarabine. In de novo cases, TT-ASCT was significantly associated with longer OS (HR=0.58; P=0.025) in MVA after adjusting for significant factors, 1L type, and response. For SCNSL at relapse, TT-ASCT (HR=0.34; P<.0001) and isolated SCNSL presentation (vs. concomitant HR=0.70, P=0.007) were associated with longer OS, adjusting for significant factors, type of second-line Tx, & site of CNS relapse. Conclusions: This study represents the largest analysis of SCNSL inclusive of all modes of presentation. Concomitant SCNSL at relapse was associated with poor outcomes, while TT-ASCT consolidation was associated with improved OS in de novo & relapsed disease. Despite advances in LBCL SCNSL remains an unmet therapeutic need.

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: Response assessment is used to evaluate effectiveness of hypomethylating agent (HMA)-based therapy in myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS) in clinical practice and trials. Recently, the clinical response criteria (IWG 2023) and the clinical-molecular risk assessment (IPSS-M) in MDS were published. However, it remains unknown whether the IWG 2023 response criteria have an independent impact on overall survival (OS) when adjusting for baseline IPSS-M risk. Additionally, the association of IWG 2023 response criteria with OS in patients (pts) undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT) versus those who do not is unknown. Lastly, it is unclear if optimal time-to-transplant impacts OS in MDS pts who achieve a IWG 2023 defined remission with HMA therapy. We examined these questions in a large population of MDS pts within the multi-institutional international consortium for MDS (icMDS) VALIDATE database. Methods: High-risk MDS pts with IPSS ≥1.5 or IPSS-R >3.5 treated with HMA-based therapy were included in the study. Baseline IPSS-M risk was stratified into very low/low/moderate low (VL+L+ML), moderate-high/high (MH+H), and very high (VH). Response to treatment was evaluated using the IWG 2023 criteria and grouped into: composite complete response (cCR) and no cCR. cCR included: complete response (CR), CR equivalent (CRequ), CR bilineage (CRbi), CR unilineage (CRuni), and CR with partial hematologic recovery (CRh). We analyzed the differential impact of achieving cCR on HMA-based therapy prior to transplant on OS in pts who either did or did not undergo allo-HCT, while adjusting for their baseline IPSS-M risk in Cox regression analysis. Optimal time-to-transplant was determined based on age and IPSS-M category as described by Tentori et al. (JCO 2024). Pts proceeding to allo-HCT were stratified on whether they underwent transplant within the optimal time-to-transplant timeframe after MDS diagnosis or not. VALIDATE protocol was exempted, acknowledged, or approved by all centers' IRBs. VALIDATE is supported by an independent grant from AbbVie. Results: We analyzed 762 MDS pts. The median age at MDS diagnosis was 68 years (range: 19-95 years) and 64% of pts were male. Distribution of the baseline IPSS-M risk was: VL+L+ML in 110 (14%) pts, MH+H in 347 (46%) pts, VH in 305 (40%) pts. Pts received azacitidine monotherapy, decitabine monotherapy, and HMA-based combination therapy (e.g. HMA + venetoclax) in 52%, 21%, and 28% of cases, respectively. A total of 282/762 (37%) pts achieved cCR as their best response to HMA-based therapy. The median OS for all pts was 18.7 months (95% CI: 16.6-21.3 months). Pts who did not undergo allo-HCT (n=436, 57%) had an improved median OS if they achieved cCR when compared to pts in the no cCR group in all IPSS-M risk groups (VL+L+ML: 23.5 months vs. 10.7 months; MH+H: 20.8 months vs. 11.6 months; VH: 13.8 months vs. 7.5 months). Cox analysis demonstrated an independent effect of cCR on OS in these pts when adjusted for baseline IPSS-M risk (cCR vs. no cCR: HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.48-0.76, p<0.001). In contrast, in pts who subsequently received an allo-HCT (n=326, 43%), achieving cCR with HMA prior to allo-HCT did not provide an additional OS benefit, when adjusted for baseline IPSS-M risk (cCR vs. no cCR: HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.73-1.38, p=0.986). The median time-to-transplant was 6.7 months and 34% of transplanted MDS pts received their allo-HCT during the optimal timeframe. Among pts who achieved cCR with HMA-based therapy prior to allo-HCT, optimal time-to-transplant was associated with significantly improved OS (optimal vs. non-optimal timing: HR 0.55; p=0.033). Conclusion: Baseline IPSS-M risk and allo-HCT had an independent impact on OS, while IWG 2023 defined cCR had an independent effect on OS only in non-transplanted MDS pts. While this retrospective analysis occurred at large academic centers with specific expertise in the management of MDS, our data may have an impact on clinical practice: (i) failure to achieve cCR on HMA therapy prior to transplant should not impact the decision to proceed to allo-HCT, (ii) upfront allo-HCT without prior HMA therapy might also be an option if the clinical situation and availability of donors allow, and (iii) allo-HCT should ideally be performed during the timeframe that is considered optimal as defined by pt age and baseline IPSS-M.

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

Background: The addition of midostaurin (M), an oral multi-kinase inhibitor, to intensive chemotherapy (IC) prolongs survival in newly diagnosed (ND) FLT3 mutated (m) AML. It is not known if there is a benefit to more potent and selective FLT3 inhibitors. Among these is Gilteritinib (G), now approved as a single agent in relapsed/refractory FLT3m AML. Combined with IC, G also leads to high measurable residual disease (MRD)negative (-) composite complete remission (CRc) in FLT3 Internal Tandem Duplication (ITD)m AML. The aim of the PrECOG 0905 study was to compare FLT3m clearance and CRc rates of G vs M with IC in adults with ND FLT3m AML. Methods: We conducted a randomized, open-label, phase 2 trial comparing G to M in combination with IC during induction and consolidation in ND AML pts with centrally PCR detected FLT3 ITD or TKD mutations. Pts age 18-70 with non M3 AML and no known core binding factor rearrangement were eligible. Pts were stratified by mutation type (TKD only vs. ITD (+/- TKD)), NPM1 mutation status, and FLT3-ITD allelic ratio. Induction consisted of cytarabine 100 mg/m2 by continuous infusion daily, on day (d) 1-7 and daunorubicin 90 mg/m2 IV on d 1-3. G 120 mg daily or M 50 mg twice daily was given orally on d8-21. Consolidation (up to 4 cycles) began within 60 d of induction with Cytarabine (1.5-3 g/m2 IV) X 6 doses and G or M (as per randomization) on d8-21. Pts could proceed to transplant (HCT) at any time. Maintenance was not included. The primary outcome was FLT3m MRD (-) CRc after induction. MRD for TKD mutations was tested by PCR (sensitivity 10-2); ITD MRD was tested by amplicon-based NGS (sensitivity 10-4). Safety and efficacy were analyzed in all eligible pts who received treatment. Secondary endpoints included comparison of CRc, MRD by flow cytometry (sensitivity 10-3), and survival. Results: From 11/2019 to 11/2022, 722 pts were screened at 37 centers, 180 pts randomized, and 177 pts (58% female, 77% white, 8.5% black, 8.5% hispanic) treated on the G (n=90) or M (n=87) arm. Median age was 54, with 27.7% > age 60. FLT3-ITD was present in 80% in the G arm and 78.2% in the M arm. Of those with FLT3-ITD, NPM1 was detected in 56.9% pts in G arm and 58.8% in M arm. 24.4% G and 20.7% M pts had co-occuring FLT3-ITD, NPM1 and DNMT3A mutations. Adverse karyotype was seen in 3.4% G and 9.3% M while 10% G and 13.8% M were ELN 2022 adverse risk. For pts on G arm, 85.6% achieved CRc compared to 72.4% for M (p=0.042). 5 (5.6%) pts on G arm and 6 (6.9%) on M arm received 2 cycles in induction. Post induction, the FLT3m- CRc rate was 40% for G vs 47.1% for M (p=0.366). FLT3-TKD only mutated pts achieved CRc in 88.9 % with G and 63.2% with M and FLT3m- CRc in 72.2% and 63.2% respectively. FLT3-ITDm (+/- TKDm) pts achieved CRc/FLT3m- CRc in 84.7%/31.9% with G and 75%/42.6% with M, respectively. In pts with FLT3-ITD, NPM1 and DNMT3A mutations, 95.5% G and 72.2% M achieved CRc and 50% G vs 33.3% on M achieved FLT3m- CRc. Flow cytometry MRD negative CRc was documented in 64.4% on G arm and 59.8% on M arm after induction (p=0.539). On G arm 67 (74%) patients received at least one cycle of consolidation compared to 53 (61%) pts on M arm. On exploratory analysis, 54 (66%) G and 40 (46%) M were reported to proceed to HCT in first remission. FLT3m testing was done post consolidation cycle 1 in 27 pts in FLT3m+ CRc after induction and 15/18 (83%) on G and 4/9 (44.4%) on M converted to FLT3m-. On multivariate logistic regression analysis for FLT3m-CRc post-induction, FLT3-ITD allelic ratio, NPM1m, WBC and hemoglobin at baseline were significant at the 0.10 two-sided level, while treatment arm, and 2017 ELN risk were not. There were no deaths from treatment-related (TR) adverse events (TRAEs) while grade >=3 TRAE was reported in 73%G vs 70% M during induction and 79%G vs 73%M pts during consolidation. Conclusion: Induction therapy with daunorubicin 90 mg/m2 X 3 days, cytarabine 100 mg/m2 and gilteritinib results in an excellent CRc rate with no TR deaths in pts with ND FLT3m AML up to age 70. Compared to M, G increased the CRc but not the FLT3m- CRc rate after induction. More post induction FLT3m+CRc pts who received G became FLT3m- after consolidation cycle 1 and more G pts succeeded in proceeding to HCT. Future survival data will help evaluate the clinical impact of G and MRD assessments in ND FLT3mAML. Larger studies will be needed to establish most predictive timing of MRD and for definitive comparisons of these drugs in patients with specific mutation profiles ( ie TKD, ITD/NPM1/DNMT3).

Introduction Linvoseltamab is an investigational, BCMA×CD3 bispecific antibody designed for the treatment of RRMM. High objective response rates (ORR) to linvoseltamab 200 mg in the LINKER-MM1 trial (NCT03761108) were demonstrated across high-risk subgroups, including patients aged ≥75 years, patients with high-risk cytogenetics, and patients with penta-class refractory status. The aim of this study was to compare ORR, overall and in key subgroups, between patients in Phase 2 of the LINKER-MM1 trial and patients in an international RW SOC external control arm (ECA). Methods The ECA was derived from a chart review of 16 academic sites across 10 countries that are part of the International Myeloma Foundation (IMF)-International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) and 2 US electronic health record databases (COTA and Guardian Research Network [GRN]). Included patients initiated ≥1 anti-MM treatment after meeting key eligibility criteria of LINKER-MM1. Weighted random sampling and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were used to select 1 line of therapy (LOT) per patient and balance the overall ECA and trial populations on prespecified prognostic factors (Kumar S, et al. IMS 2023). For ORR assessment, LINKER-MM1 and IMF-IMWG used independent central review committees per IMWG criteria, COTA used algorithmic assessment based on IMWG criteria, and GRN used physician-assessed responses. Prior to conducting comparative analyses, an independent committee of epidemiology and oncology experts reviewed the comparability of the cohorts and endpoint assessments, and approved study continuation. ORR among patients in LINKER-MM1 and patients in the ECA was compared overall and across prespecified subgroups (≥10 patients per subgroup), including age, race, cytogenetic risk score, international Staging System (ISS), presence of extramedullary plasmacytoma (EMP), refractory class, bone marrow plasma cell (BMPC) proportion, and number of prior LOTs. Results Median duration of follow-up was 14.3 months (data cut-off: January 6, 2024) for patients receiving linvoseltamab (n=105) and 13.6 months for the ECA (n=307; n=194, n=72, and n=41 from IMF-IMWG, COTA, and GRN, respectively). Following IPTW, 13 prognostic factors with <30% missingness were balanced between cohorts, with an effective sample size in the ECA of 197. After adjustment, ORR was significantly higher in patients who received linvoseltamab compared with patients in the ECA (69.5% vs 45.7%, odds ratio [OR] 2.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6-4.1]) and in key subgroups with age 65-74 years (76.9% vs 48.3%, OR 3.6 [1.6-8.6]), age ≥75 years (72.4% vs 48.5%, OR 2.8 [1.1-7.4]), Black or African American race (82.4% vs 25.0%, OR 14.0 [3.0-85.4]), White race (68.9% vs 49.7%, OR 2.2 [1.3-4.0]), standard cytogenetic risk (72.3% vs 51.3%, OR 2.5 [1.3-4.8]), ISS stage III (58.8% vs 19.7%, OR 5.8 [1.5-25.2]), absence of EMP (71.6% vs 49.3%, OR 2.6 [1.5-4.6]), triple-class refractory status (68.2% vs 45.7%, OR 2.6 [1.5-4.4]), quadruple-class refractory status (66.7% vs 45.9%, OR 2.4 [1.3-4.3]), 4-5 prior LOTs (65.1% vs 40.4%, OR 2.8 [1.3-6.0]), and >5 prior LOTs (75.7% vs 36.1%, OR 5.5 [2.4-13.6]). Numerically higher (not statistically significant) or similar ORR was observed for patients receiving linvoseltamab compared with patients in the ECA with age <65 years (59.5% vs 46.8%, OR 1.7 [0.79-3.6]), high-risk cytogenetics (65.0% vs 63.1%, OR 1.1 [0.41-2.9]), ISS stage I (73.3% vs 64.6%, OR 1.5 [0.62-3.7]), ISS stage II (67.6% vs 53.5%, OR 1.8 [0.72-4.7]), presence of EMP (58.8% vs 56.9%, OR 1.1 [0.32-3.8]), penta-class refractory status (64.3% vs 48.5%, OR 1.9 [0.78-4.8]), BMPC <50% (77.0% vs 67.2%, OR 1.6 [0.61-4.3]), BMPC ≥50% (41.7% vs 36.0%, OR 1.3 [0.36-4.7]), and ≤3 prior LOTs (68.0% vs 66.4%, OR 1.1 [0.43-2.9]). Separate findings will be presented for IMF-IMWG and COTA/GRN data at the congress. Conclusions Linvoseltamab induced better ORR vs RW SOC treatments overall, and better or similar ORR in the key subgroups assessed, highlighting its therapeutic value across a range of patients with RRMM with heterogeneous risk profiles and levels of disease burden.