Citations

Abstract Background: Lithium (Li) remains the treatment of choice for bipolar disorders (BP). Its mood-stabilizing effects help reduce the long-term burden of mania, depression and suicide risk in patients with BP. It also has been shown to have beneficial effects on disease-associated conditions, including sleep and cardiovascular disorders. However, the individual responses to Li treatment vary within and between diagnostic subtypes of BP (e.g. BP-I and BP-II) according to the clinical presentation. Moreover, long-term Li treatment has been linked to adverse side-effects that are a cause of concern and non-adherence, including the risk of developing chronic medical conditions such as thyroid and renal disease. In recent years, studies by the Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLiGen) have uncovered a number of genetic factors that contribute to the variability in Li treatment response in patients with BP. Here, we leveraged the ConLiGen cohort (N=2,064) to investigate the genetic basis of Li effects in BP. For this, we studied how Li response and linked genes associate with the psychiatric symptoms and polygenic load for medical comorbidities, placing particular emphasis on identifying differences between BP-I and BP-II. Results: We found that clinical response to Li treatment, measured with the Alda scale, was associated with a diminished burden of mania, depression, substance and alcohol abuse, psychosis and suicidal ideation in patients with BP-I and, in patients with BP-II, of depression only. Our genetic analyses showed that a stronger clinical response to Li was modestly related to lower polygenic load for diabetes and hypertension in BP-I but not BP-II. Moreover, our results suggested that a number of genes that have been previously linked to Li response variability in BP differentially relate to the psychiatric symptomatology, particularly to the numbers of manic and depressive episodes, and to the polygenic load for comorbid conditions, including diabetes, hypertension and hypothyroidism. Conclusions: Taken together, our findings suggest that the effects of Li on symptomatology and comorbidity in BP are partially modulated by common genetic factors, with differential effects between BP-I and BP-II.

Introduction: Paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) is a rare, acquired hematologic condition characterized by complement-mediated, life-threatening hemolysis and thrombosis which are associated with significant impacts on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Pegcetacoplan is the first targeted complement component 3 (C3) therapy approved for adults with PNH (US) and adults with PNH plus anemia despite receiving a complement component 5 inhibitor (C5i) for ≥3 months (EU). In clinical trials including patients with PNH who were C5i-experienced or -naive, pegcetacoplan significantly improved levels of hemoglobin (Hb) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and reduced transfusion burden. Pegcetacoplan had a favorable safety profile in parent studies and an ongoing long-term, rollover, open-label extension study (NCT03531255). Compliance with pegcetacoplan treatment was high across all clinical studies. In the US real-world OPERA and Adelphi PNH Disease Specific Programme™ (DSP) patient-reported outcomes (PRO) studies, improvements in levels of Hb and LDH, along with self-reported fatigue and cognitive outcomes, were observed. Pegcetacoplan treatment also led to reductions in the frequency and severity of PNH symptoms (including shortness of breath and fatigue) and improvements in social, physical, and emotional HRQoL domains in the US real-world Voice of the Patient PRO study. Further, both patient and physician satisfaction with pegcetacoplan treatment was high in the Adelphi PNH DSP study. However, to date, compliance and safety with pegcetacoplan treatment in the real-world setting have not been described. The objective of this real-world evidence review study was to evaluate compliance and safety with pegcetacoplan treatment in patients with PNH in the US post-marketing setting. Methods: Post-marketing data from the US, including the number of patients who received pegcetacoplan and reported safety events, were collected and analyzed from the pegcetacoplan Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) program which controls the distribution of pegcetacoplan and the pharmacovigilance safety database through May 13, 2023. Treatment compliance was calculated as the proportion of days a patient had the drug in possession, divided by the total number of days of follow-up, using central pharmacy prescription refill data. Thrombosis (a leading cause of death in patients with PNH prior to the availability of complement inhibitors) and meningococcal infections (a potential risk with complement inhibitors) were safety events of interest. To reduce the risk of serious meningococcal infections, clinical trial protocols and pegcetacoplan labeling required vaccination against Streptococcus pneumoniae; N meningitidis types A, C, W, Y, and B; and Haemophilus influenzae type B before starting treatment with pegcetacoplan. If pegcetacoplan treatment must be initiated before vaccination, the US label mandates prophylactic antibiotic use. In this study, the rates of thrombosis and meningococcal infection per 100 patient-years were estimated based on the total number of thrombosis and meningococcal infection events reported in the REMS program. Results: As of May 13, 2023, the cumulative pegcetacoplan exposure was 273.10 patient-years in the US post-marketing setting. Based on prescription refill data, compliance with pegcetacoplan treatment was ~98%. There were 2 confirmed thrombotic events reported and the incidence of thrombotic events was 0.73 events/100 patient-years in 273.10 patient-years. Similar to clinical trials, no meningococcal infections were reported in the US post-marketing setting. Conclusions: The high compliance rate and favorable safety profile of pegcetacoplan in the US post-marketing setting were consistent with clinical trial observations. These data, coupled with the effectiveness on hematologic parameters and improvements in symptoms and HRQoL reported in pegcetacoplan real-world PRO studies, support a positive benefit:risk profile for pegcetacoplan in the real-world setting.

Introduction: Most induction regimens for multiple myeloma (MM) contain bortezomib. In most clinical trials, bortezomib has been prescribed either intravenously or subcutaneously twice per week in 21-day or 28-day cycles. However, several retrospective single-center studies have shown that once-weekly bortezomib has comparable efficacy and less peripheral neuropathy compared to twice-weekly bortezomib ( Sidana et al, PLoS One 2017; Cook et al, AJH 2021). These findings have also been confirmed by a secondary analysis of data from three prospective Phase 3 randomized studies ( Mateos et al, Haematologica 2014). As such, many clinicians have adopted once-weekly bortezomib regimens in routine care in the past decade. However, the real-world (RW) prevalence and efficacy of once-weekly vs twice-weekly bortezomib regimens in a larger population have not yet been characterized. Methods: This study used US nationwide longitudinal Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived de-identified data. We included patients aged 18-70 years with newly diagnosed MM between 2017-2022 with ≥ 6 months of follow-up and ≥ 2 clinical visits who were treated with a first-line (1L) bortezomib-containing regimen. Patients aged >70 were excluded a priori given the likelihood of altered practice patterns and more frequent comorbidities. Twice-weekly bortezomib was defined as patients for whom the most frequent interval between two doses of 1L bortezomib within a cycle was 3.0-4.9 days, while once-weekly bortezomib was defined as a corresponding interval of 5.0-9.9 days. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess demographic and clinical factors associated with once-weekly vs twice-weekly (reference) bortezomib. RW progression free survival (rwPFS) and RW overall survival (rwOS) from 1L treatment initiation were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Outcomes were compared using Cox proportional hazards model including transplant as a time-varying covariate and adjustment for other demographic and clinical factors. Results: Of 2,522 patients included, 927 (36.8%) received twice-weekly while 1,522 (63.2%) received once-weekly bortezomib. Approximately half of patients (50.3%) were non-Latinx White, 21.7% non-Latinx Black, and 8.0% Latinx. Most patients were treated in the community setting (78.8%). Rates of once-weekly bortezomib administration were 66.2% and 62.1% among patients treated at academic and community practices, respectively. The frequency of weekly bortezomib use increased over time, from 58.0% between 2017-2019 to 68.8% between 2020-2022. In multivariate analysis, ECOG PS ≥ 2 (odds ratio [OR] 1.50; [95% CI 1.14 to 1.99] vs ECOG PS 0), and more recent year of diagnosis (OR 1.14; [95% CI 1.08 to 1.20] per year) were associated with higher odds of receiving once-weekly bortezomib. Conversely, Latinx patients vs non-Latinx White (OR 0.60 [95% CI 0.44 to 0.82]) and patients with ≥ 2 high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HRCA) vs 0 HRCA (OR 0.66 [95% CI 0.48 to 0.91]) had lower odds of receiving once-weekly bortezomib administration. No significant associations were found between gender, ISS stage, practice setting, insurance category, or baseline creatinine. There was no statistically significant difference in rwPFS among patients receiving once-weekly (median 37.3 months, 95% CI 33.8 to 42.5) vs twice-weekly bortezomib (median 39.2 months, 95% CI 32.9 to 42.8) (HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.77 to 1.00]) (Figure 1A). Similarly, there was no statistically significant difference in rwOS with median 25.5 months follow-up (Figure 1B). Median rwOS was not reached in either group (hazard ratio 0.89 [95% CI 0.75 to 1.07]). Discussion: We evaluated US bortezomib prescribing patterns for the first time in the modern era using a large nationwide RW-study. Whereas prescribing patterns have shifted towards once-weekly bortezomib over time, over 30% of patients diagnosed in the last three years received twice-weekly bortezomib. Importantly, once-weekly and twice-weekly bortezomib performed comparably with regard to rwPFS and rwOS. While our study did not analyze neuropathy or patient quality of life, once-weekly bortezomib is known to be associated with less neuropathy and less time in clinic. These data further support the conclusion that once-weekly bortezomib should be considered the standard of care for newly diagnosed patients with MM.

Background: Waldenström Macroglobulinemia (WM) is an indolent lymphoma with heterogeneous outcomes. The recently developed, Revised International Prognostic Scoring System for WM (rIPSS-WM) did not examine the prognostic impact of MYD88L265P, a somatic alteration present in most patients with WM. Moreover, rIPSS-WM could only be partially validated in an external cohort. Here, we report the performance of rIPSS-WM and propose a refined prognostic model with external validation. Methods: We reviewed medical records of treatment-naïve patients with active WM consecutively seen at Mayo Clinic, Rochester (MCR) between 01/01/1996 and 12/31/2017. We applied the rIPSS-WM model in patients with data available for all required parameters, including age, serum beta-2 microglobulin (β2M), serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and serum albumin at diagnosis to assess the prognostic utility of this model. We then identified the dichotomized clinical and laboratory parameters prognostic for overall survival (OS) by univariate analyses (UVA) in our cohort. The significant parameters were analyzed to independently predict OS in a multivariable analysis (MVA) and to create a prognostic model, which was subsequently validated in an independent multi-institutional cohort. Results: We identified 889 patients with active WM at MCR, with a median follow-up of 8.2 [95% confidence interval (CI): 7.5-9] years. The estimated median OS for this cohort was 10.6 (95%CI: 9.7-11.4) years. Patients with available data in this cohort for the validation of rIPSS-WM (n=241) were risk stratified into very low (n=46), low (n=64), intermediate (n=58), high (n=46) and very-high risk groups (n=27) per rIPSS-WM, with the respective 5-year OS rates of 96%, 76%, 72%, 77% and 32%, demonstrating overlapping survival curves for the low, intermediate and the high-risk groups. Because rIPSS-WM could not be validated, we used the data from the MCR cohort and identified age at diagnosis of active WM, LDH >upper limit of normal (ULN), β2M >3µg/mL and albumin <3.5g/dL as statistically significant prognostic markers for OS on UVA. Notably, the presence of MYD88 L265P did not impact OS [median 11.4 years (95%CI: 10.1-not reached (NR) for MYD88 L265P genotype (n=231) versus 10 years (95% CI: 8.1-NR) for MYD88 WT genotype (n=65); p=0.33]. On MVA, LDH >ULN (HR 2.34), serum albumin <3.5 g/dL (HR 1.5) and age groups 65-75 years (HR 1.4) and >75 years (HR 2.6) were independently prognostic. Based on comparable HRs, we assigned a score of 1 point each to serum albumin <3.5 g/dL and age group 66-75 years and similarly, 2 points each for age >75 years and serum LDH >ULN per their impact on OS. Patients with the composite scores of 0, 1 and 2 were categorized as low risk, low- intermediate risk and intermediate risk, respectively. Due to similar OS for the scores of 3 to 5, these were combined to form the high-risk group of our proposed model: Modified Staging System for WM (MSS-WM). The median OS was 14.6 years [95%CI: 9.1 years-NR] for low-risk (score 0, n=71, 21%), 11.2 years (95% CI: 9.1-15.2 years) for low-intermediate risk (score 1, n=110, 32%), 8.1 years (95% CI: 6.4-12.2) for intermediate risk (score 2, n=81, 24%) and 5.5 years (95 % CI: 3.9-11 years) for the high-risk group (score ≥3, n=79, 23%); p<0.0001. In this derivation cohort, the 5-year OS rate was 93%, 82%, 69% and 55% and 10-year OS rate was 60%, 53%, 45% and 30% for the low, low-intermediate, intermediate, and high-risk cohort, respectively ( Figure 1A). We also validated MSS-WM using competing risk analysis (p=0.001) and in the cohort of rituximab treated patients (p<0.0001). We then used data from an independent series of 335 treatment-naïve symptomatic patients from academic institutions (n=5) across the US and Europe for external validation of the MSS-WM model. The median follow-up for the validation cohort was 6.3 years (95% CI: 5.5-7.2 years). The 5-year OS was 93%, 90%, 75% and 57% and the estimated 10-year OS was 91%, 80%, 64% and 35% for the low risk (n= 86, 26%), low-intermediate (n=107, 32%), intermediate (n=86, 26%) and high-risk (n=59, 18%) cohorts, respectively (p<0.0001, Figure 1B). Conclusions: Our proposed model, MSS-WM, is a simple, clinically useful, externally validated model that reliably risk stratifies previously untreated patients with active WM into four groups that have distinct outcomes based on the composite scores derived from the patients' age, serum albumin and serum LDH at diagnosis.

Background: Bortezomib (Velcade), a mainstay of treatment regimens for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM), is often dosed twice-weekly in trials (i.e., Days 1, 4, 8, 11 in 21-day cycles). However, several analyses have shown that once-weekly bortezomib performs comparably and is associated with less peripheral neuropathy (Sidana PLoS One 2017, Mateos L&L 2020, Cook AJH 2021). Many centers thus use once-weekly bortezomib in MM induction regimens regardless of transplant eligibility, e.g. modified VRd or Dara-VRd in 28-day cycles with once-weekly subcutaneous (SC) bortezomib 1.3 mg/m 2 (McCaughan BJH 2022). Physician attitudes and perceptions regarding how bortezomib should be dosed, an important step toward establishing a global standard of care in MM, have not been investigated. Methods: We conducted a global online survey of hematologists/oncologists who had treated ≥1 patient with MM in the past 12 months. The survey was distributed via social media platforms as well as targeted emails to MM physicians, IMWG members, and outreach through professional societies. The survey comprised 14 questions including usage of once- vs twice-weekly bortezomib, usage of SC vs IV bortezomib, attitudinal questions about potential benefits/disadvantages of each approach, and perceived barriers to using once-weekly bortezomib. Statistics were analyzed descriptively with Wilcoxon rank-sum and signed-rank tests. Results: Of 317 webpage visits, 205 responses were recorded (65% completion rate).Most respondents were from US academic practices (25%, n=52), US community practices (22%, n=46), or Australian academic practices (6%, n=13); however, responses were recorded from 38 countries including 22 low- or middle-income countries (LMICs: 29% of responses, n=60).Over a third of respondents (37%, n=76) practiced in community settings, and most respondents (58%, n=119) reported >20 patients with MM under their personal care . 93 respondents (45%) had previously helped write institutional or societal guidelines, including 21 IMWG members.Respondents reported using once-weekly bortezomib most of the time (median 95% of patients, IQR 80%-100%) and almost always used SC bortezomib (IQR 100%-100%).There were no significant differences in bortezomib frequency or route based on academic vs community practice, experience with MM, US vs non-US, or LMIC vs non-LMIC. Large majorities of respondents (Table 1) felt that once-weekly bortezomib is preferred by patients (94%), associated with comparable durations of response (79%), and associated with less peripheral neuropathy (89%). Conversely, 61% of respondents felt that twice-weekly bortezomib in superior in newly diagnosed MM with acute cast nephropathy.Physician estimates of the incidence of any-grade peripheral neuropathy were significantly lower with once-weekly bortezomib (median 30%, IQR 20-43%) vs twice-weekly bortezomib (median 50%, IQR 40-73%). Similarly, Grade 3+ neuropathy estimates were significantly lower with once-weekly (median 10%, IQR 5-17%) vs twice-weekly bortezomib (median 25%, IQR 15-38%), with p<0.001 in all cases . The most common cited barriers to ordering once-weekly bortezomib (Table 2) were perceived lack of prospective data (31%), difficulty modifying treatment orders (24%), and resistance from pharmacist colleagues who prefer adhering to trial-studied regimens (13%). Discussion: In our survey of over 200 MM-treating physicians from 38 countries (including 22 LMICs), once-weekly subcutaneous bortezomib was overwhelmingly preferred regardless of practice setting or country. The only exception was acute cast nephropathy, where twice-weekly bortezomib may expedite renal recovery and is reasonable to use initially. Neuropathy estimates were similar to published incidences (32% with once-weekly bortezomib vs 47% with twice-weekly bortezomib) from prospective data collected from the ALCYONE, GIMEMA-QW, and VISTA randomized trials (Mateos L&L 2020). Our findings highlight the widening mismatch between what physicians routinely prescribe to patients versus what registrational trials typically require. Given that >90% of physicians personally prefer once-weekly bortezomib and that >90% report that their patients feel similarly, once-weekly bortezomib appears to have become the global standard of care. This consensus should be taken into consideration for clinical trial design in the future.

Background: Dex is a key component of induction regimens for NDMM despite common toxicities including insomnia and anxiety. The E4A03 randomized trial (Rajkumar, Lancet Oncol 2010) demonstrated that dex dosed at 40 mg weekly outperformed higher-intensity dex and established this regimen as the standard of care for NDMM. In standard practice as well as clinical trials, however, dex doses are often reduced to 20 mg weekly or lower (if not stopped entirely) among older patients or among patients experiencing toxicities. As a first step toward establishing the equipoise of planned dex dose reductions in NDMM, we investigated outcomes with patients from two previous SWOG trials to understand the impact of dex dose reductions on post-induction outcomes. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of data from two completed NDMM studies, S0777 (comparing VRd vs Rd) and S1211 (comparing Elo-VRd vs VRd). For this secondary analysis, we analyzed the subset of patients who completed all eight 3-week cycles of induction (or six 4-week cycles in the S0777 Rd arm). As shown in Figure 1A, we defined DEX fullDose as patients for whom the starting dex dose (either 40 mg once per week or 20 mg on Days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12 of 21-day cycles) did not change during induction. In contrast, DEX lowered was defined as patients for whom the end-of-induction dex dose and/or frequency were lower than their starting values. As an exploratory analysis, we also compared PFS and OS between the DEX fullDose (no changes to dex strength during induction) and DEX veryLow (dex dosing reduced ≥50% during induction) subgroups. All analyses were landmarked from the end of induction, defined as 24 weeks from registration, to account for the time-dependent nature of dex treatment received. Survival curves were based on the Kaplan-Meier method and comparisons were made using the log-rank test. Results: Of 541 evaluable patients ( n = 441 from S0777, n = 100 from S1211), dex was reduced during induction in 76% ( n = 410). Compared to DEX fullDose patients, DEX lowered patients were more likely to be anemic (37% vs 26%, p = 0.02) but had similar distributions of age ≥70 (24% of DEX lowered vs 26% of DEX fullDose), Performance Status > 1 (15% vs 12%), ISS stage 3 disease (33% vs 27%), ≥ 60% bone marrow plasma cell burden (37% vs 31%), M-spike > 3 g/dL (48% vs 48%) platelets < 150,000 cells/mm 3 (18% vs 14%), baseline LDH ≥ 190 U/L (36% vs 41%), and baseline CRP ≥ 8 mg/L (27% vs 30%). PFS (Figure 1B) was comparable between DEX lowered (median 36 months, 95% CI 29 to 39 months) and DEX fullDose (median 33 months, 95% CI 24 to 48 months) with p = 0.90. Similarly, OS (Figure 1C) was comparable between DEX lowered [median 77 months, 95% CI 68 months to not reached (NR)] and DEX fullDose (median 92 months, 95% CI 65 months to NR) with p = 0.93. In the DEX veryLow subgroup with ≥50% reduction in dex dosing during induction, median PFS was 39 months (95% CI 34 to 50 months) and median OS was NR (95% CI NR to NR). As shown in Figure 1D and Figure 1E, PFS and OS were comparable between these patients and DEX fullDose patients. Discussion: To our knowledge, this is the first analysis of dex dosing strength in NDMM since E4A03. In two separate randomized trials, over half of patients required dex reductions below a starting dose of ~40 mg weekly. Dex dose reductions during induction had no impact on post-induction PFS and OS, even in the subset of patients who required significant dose reductions. Limitations of our post hoc analysis include heterogeneity between dex dosing schedules and lack of cytogenetic data for all patients. We could not discern specifically why dex was lowered, and it is possible that dex might have been lowered disproportionately commonly in patients who had achieved early responses and thus independently did better. Regardless, these results strongly suggest that maintaining dex 40 mg weekly for the entirety of NDMM induction may be unnecessary in the modern era. Cooperative efforts to study a planned dex de-escalation protocol (i.e., once no longer needed for symptom management or as a pre-medication) alongside patient-reported outcome assessments of symptom burden are being planned. Funding: NIH/NCI/NCTN grants U10CA180888, U10CA180819, U10CA180821, U10CA180820; and in part by Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (now part of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company), and by Celgene.

Introduction: Myelofibrosis (MF) is a clonal hematologic malignancy characterized by constitutive JAK-STAT activation and aberrant cytokine signaling. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT) remains the only potentially curative therapy in MF. The contribution of disease-, patient- and donor-related factors to allo-HCT outcomes remains to be fully elucidated, as well as the presence of somatic mutations in genes such as ASXL1, EZH2, SRSF2, U2AF1 and IDH1/2 which are associated with worse prognosis in MF patients (pts). In this large multi- center retrospective analysis, we aimed to study the impact of clinical and molecular mutations on transplant outcomes. Methods: This analysis including 498 pts from 11 centers in North America and Canada. Univariate proportional-hazard Cox regression analysis stratified by center was used to assess the association of patient, transplant, and disease characteristics on overall survival (OS). Baseline patient demographic data and disease characteristics were selected as covariates in the multivariate analysis. Results: Pts transplanted between 2002-2021 were included in this analysis. Baseline and transplant characteristics are summarized in table 1. The 1- and 2-year OS was 77% (95% CI; 73-81) and 70% (95% CI; 66-74) and non-relapse mortality (NRM) 19% (95% CI: 17-21) and 23% (95% CI: 19-27), respectively. The cumulative incidence (CMI) of relapse at 1- and 2-years was 12% (95% CI; 10-14) and 16% (95% CI; 12-20). The CMI of acute graft versus host disease (aGVHD) grade II-IV was 31% (95% CI; 27-35) at 3 months and 42% (95% CI; 38-46) at 1-year post-transplant and grade was III-IV 13% (95% CI; 11-15) and 18% (95% CI; 14-22), respectively. The CMI of neutrophil engraftment at 1 and 3 months was 90% (95% CI: 87-93) and 97% (95% CI: 95-95) and for platelets 55% (95% CI: 50-59) and 80% (95% CI: 76-83). Univariate analysis included pts (age and gender), transplant (donor type and conditioning regimen intensity) and disease characteristics (DIPSS, mutations, cytogenetics (CG), blood counts, and spleen size). Hemoglobin > 10 g/dL (HR .5, 95% CI .34 -.73 p=3 x 10 -4) and platelets >50× 10 9/L (HR .59, 95% CI .42-.81, p=.0013) prior to transplant were associated with improved OS. High risk DIPSS was associated with decreased OS (p=0.0002). Mutations in ASXL1, EZH2, IDH1/2, U2AF1 and SRSF2 were not associated with decreased OS in this analysis (Figure 1). However, mutations in ZRSR2 were associated with inferior OS (HR 2.07, 95% CI 1.08-3.95, p=.0252). Lastly, JAK2 which had the most frequent mutations was not associated with OS (HR .0.93, 95% CI .65-1.31). There was no association between the CG risk groups and OS. Splenomegaly, measured radiographically, had no impact on OS but was strongly associated with engraftment (better engraftment defined as HR>1). For platelets, spleen size of 15.6-18.9 cm HR of 0.69 (95% CI .47-1, p=.0489) and size >18.9-22.5 cm HR of 0.48 ( 95% CI .33-.7, p=1x10^-4). For neutrophils, spleen size >19.9-22.5 cm had a HR of 0.68, (95% CI .48-.96, p=.0268) and size>22.5 cm had a HR of 0.65 (95% CI .46-.91, p=.0114). Mismatched unrelated (MMURD) and haplo identical donors had no impact on survival but were associated with delayed platelet engraftment; MMURD (HR .67, 95% CI .47-.96, p=.0298) and haploidentical donors (HR .56, 95% CI .39-.8, p=.0017). In a multivariate analysis adjusted for age, gender, highest DIPSS, donor type and conditioning regimen, platelets > 50× 10 9/L (HR .61, 95% CI .44-.87, p=.0053) hemoglobin >10 g/dL (HR .6, 95% CI .4-.9, p=.0244) and lower DIPSS at the time of transplant were associated with improved OS. Conclusions: In this large multicenter analysis only clinical variables; hemoglobin and platelets, were found to be associated with OS after allo-HCT in MF patients. Somatic mutations associated with poor prognosis were not associated with OS suggesting that transplant can overcome their negative impact. Splenomegaly was associated with delayed engraftment but not OS. Interestingly, using alternative donors (MMURD and haplo identical) didn't have a negative effect on OS, possibly reflecting the use of post-transplant cyclophosphamide for GVHD prophylaxis in recent years. These results highlight the importance of biologic factors in the prognostication of outcomes in MF pts undergoing allo-HCT independent of somatic mutations. Supported by the American Society of Hematology (ASH) and MPN Research Foundation

INTRODUCTION: Luxeptinib (CG-806; LUX) is an orally active noncovalent kinase inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK), wild type and mutant forms of Fms-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) (including the internal tandem duplicates (ITD), tyrosine kinase domain (TKD), and F691L mutant forms), and growth receptors like KIT, CSF1R, PDGFRα, and TRKs. In prior studies, LUX has been shown to suppress aberrant proliferative signaling in B cell malignancies and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) via regulation of BTK, LYN, SYK, AKT, ERK, and MAPK. LUX is cytotoxic to primary AML cells insensitive to other FLT3 inhibitors and to malignant B-cells insensitive to ibrutinib, at pM and nM concentrations, respectively. AIMS: The primary objectives of these studies are to assess the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of LUX and determine recommended phase 2 doses for relapsed or refractory (R/R) AML and B cell malignancy patients. METHODS: In two studies (NCT04477291; NCT03893682), LUX (original formulation, G1) was administered continuously as oral capsules BID in 28-day cycles of ascending cohorts (relapsed or refractory de novo, secondary, or therapy-related AML or higher risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), and relapsed and refractory for B cell lymphoma and chronic lymphocytic/small lymphocytic leukemia). A novel generation 3 (G3) formulation of LUX designed to increase bioavailability was tested at a single-dose (sub-study) for relative bioavailability (RBA), followed by continuous dosing in subsequent R/R AML patients. RESULTS: In the B-cell study (as of 15 th May 2023), LUX has been administered to 36 patients at dose levels from 150 mg to 900 mg BID in patients with a median of 3 lines of prior treatment, with 47.2% having received a BTK-inhibitor. Only one (2.8%) patient had a DLT of hypertension and 14 (38.9%) experienced at least one drug related ≥Grade3 treatment emergent adverse event (TEAE). Two patients (900 mg) are currently on study with no DLT and no ≥Grade 3 related TEAEs. A Follicular lymphoma patient is at cycle 28, and achieved a best response as partial response (PR) with a decrease in lesion size of 76.2%; an SLL patient is at cycle 13, and achieved stable disease (SD) showing a decrease in lesion size of 43.1% (Figure A). The overall best response achieved among the 17 patients who have been on treatment for more than 12 weeks are stable disease (SD) (n=11), partial response (PR) (n=3), minor response (n=2) and complete response (CR) (n=1). As of 5 th June 2023, in the AML trial, a total of 40 patients (16 (40%) FLT3-ITD, 21 (52.5%) FLT3-WT, 2 (5.0%) FLT3-TKD, and 1 (2.5%) unknown mutations) with a median of 3 prior treatments (range, 1 - 10) have been treated with LUX G1 formulation at dose levels from 450 mg - 900 mg BID (n=34) or with 50 mg BID of G3 formulation (n=6). Four (10%) experienced drug related SAE and 7 (17.5%) had a drug related grade ≥3 TEAEs. The most common related TEAEs were lymphocyte count decrease, platelet count decrease, and anemia (n=2; 5% patients each). One (2.5%) patient at 450 mg dose, reported complete remission without minimum residual disease (CRmrd) and remained on study for 56 weeks. In the RBA sub-study, G3 (50 mg) produced comparable exposures to G1 (450-900 mg range) (Figure B) and was, therefore, selected as the starting dose for use in the R/R AML study. Six patients were treated with a continuous dosing of 50 mg BID G3; with plasma levels of 274 ng/mL and 195 ng/mL LUX observed by the end of C1D15 and C1D22 respectively. No drug related Grade ≥3 TEAEs or DLTs were observed in 50 mg BID G3 LUX treated patients; with no new safety signals observed for the G3 formulation. Based on these findings and expected exposures for higher dose levels, the cohort safety review committee has approved escalation of G3 dosing to 200 mg BID at which dosing is ongoing. CONCLUSIONS: LUX has a favorable safety profile in patients at all tested dose levels, for multiple cycles, for both studies. Antitumor activity was observed in a heavily pretreated relapsed AML patient and in multiple B-NHL subtypes and CLL/SLL patients including several with prior ibrutinib exposure. Continuous dosing of patients with R/R AML and Higher-Risk MDS with the G3 formulation is ongoing; with updated clinical data (200 mg dose level) to be presented at the meeting.

Introduction Lymphoid malignancy (LM) is a heterogenous neoplasm with respect to biology, aggressiveness, and treatment with over 100 subtypes, including Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), and multiple myeloma (MM). Genome-wide association studies have identified common variants associated with risk of specific LM subtypes, but less is known about the contribution of rare inherited pathogenic variants (PV) in the genetic architecture of LM risk. Rare PV have been shown to contribute to the genetic architecture of solid tumor cancer risk, many of which have been found in genes that are important to the DNA-damage repair (DDR) pathway (e.g., BRCA1, BRCA1, ATM). Here, we investigated the prevalence of PV in cancer predisposition genes regularly included on multi-gene panel testing based on NCCN guidelines and correlated with risk of LM overall and by common subtypes. Methods In this association study, cases were newly diagnosed lymphomas (excluding chronic lymphocytic leukemia) from Mayo Clinic who were enrolled between 2002 and 2015 in the Lymphoma SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) and MM from Mayo Clinic enrolled primarily between 1998 and 2022 in a clinical registry. Controls were from the Mayo Clinic Biobank who were enrolled between 2009 and 2016, from which we excluded individuals with a history of hematologic malignancy. All participants provided a blood sample for whole exome sequencing, performed by Regeneron on an Illumina NovaSeq panel (mean coverage of 48X). Variants were called using GATK v4 and variant annotation was performed using BioR. All loss-of-function variants (i.e., nonsense, frameshift, and consensus splice sites) and pathogenic missense in 19 cancer predisposition genes with a minor allele frequency < 0.5% were included in the analyses. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between mutation status by gene (burden test) and risk of LM overall, and by subtype that had more than 5 mutation carriers. All analyses were adjusted for age (at diagnosis for cases and at enrollment for controls) and sex. Results A total of 6990 cases and 42432 controls were included. Median age was 63 years for both cases and controls (case range 18-94 years, control range 18-99 years). Males accounted for 58.5% (n=4090) of the cases and 41.7% (n=17762) of the controls. MM accounted for 31% (n=2138) of the cases, followed by diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL, n=1146) and follicular lymphoma (FL, n=1132) each accounting for 16% of cases. CHEK2 (1.0%), ATM (0.4%), BRCA2 (0.4%), and BRCA1 (0.3%) had the most PV carriers in controls; these frequencies are in the range of published control populations. A total of 1816 (3.7%) individuals had a PV across the 19 genes, with 4.7% of cases and 3.5% of controls carrying any PV (OR=1.34, 95% CI: 1.18-1.51). ATM (OR=1.86, 95% CI: 1.36-2.49), CHEK2 (OR=1.74, 95% CI: 1.42-2.13) and TP53 (OR=9.07, 95% CI: 4.51-18.87) were all significantly associated with increased risk of LM overall (Figure 1). When investigating subtypes (Table 1), CHEK2 (OR=1.93, 95% CI: 1.23-2.89) and TP53(OR=10.97, 95% CI: 3.06-31.43) were significantly associated with DLBCL. ATM (OR=2.22, 95% CI: 1.13-3.90) was significantly associated with FL. ATM (OR=1.97, 95% CI: 1.16-3.12), CHEK2 (OR=1.75, 95% CI: 1.24-2.41) and TP53 (OR=7.67, 95% CI: 2.43-20.72) were significantly associated with MM and ATM (OR=8.62, 95% CI: 4.47-15.12), NBN (OR=6.94, 95% CI: 2.41-15.76) and TP53 (OR=38.30, 95% CI: 10.27-116.69) were significantly associated with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). When subset to LM cases overall, there was no evidence of enrichment for young onset (age <60 years), male sex, or family history of hematologic malignancy between PV carriers and non-PV carriers. However, FL cases with an ATM PV tended to be less than 60 years (OR=3.21, P=0.09) compared to non- ATM PV carriers. Similarly, MM cases with a TP53 PV tended to be less than 60 years of age (OR=7.39, P=0.07) compared non-carriers. Discussion In this large case-control study, PV in established cancer predisposition genes were associated with increased risk of LM overall, demonstrating that rare inherited variants may play an important etiologic role. This study also suggests that PV in cancer predisposition genes may be subtype specific. These results will help inform LM risk for individuals who undergo genetic testing of cancer predisposition genes.

Introduction: BTK inhibitors (BTKis) are approved for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM), mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), and marginal zone lymphoma (MZL). Disease that progresses on BTKis often has BTK mutations that lead to treatment (tx) resistance; novel BTK-targeting agents that overcome BTKi resistance are needed. BGB-16673 is a heterobifunctional small molecule that binds to BTK and E3 ligase, resulting in BTK degradation via ubiquitination. In preclinical models, BGB-16673 degraded wild-type (WT) BTK and known covalent and noncovalent BTKi-resistant mutant proteins, leading to tumor suppression. Methods: Pts with R/R CLL, WM, MCL, MZL, non-germinal center B-cell diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), follicular lymphoma (FL), or Richter transformation (RT) were eligible for this open-label, first-in-human, phase 1 trial (BGB-16673-101; NCT05006716). Pts must have received ≥2 prior therapies (≥1 for RT) and have an ECOG performance status of 0-2 and adequate end-organ function. In the US and Australia, pts must have received a covalent BTKi (cBTKi) if approved for their disease. BGB-16673 was dosed daily by mouth in 28-day cycles. Escalation using a Bayesian optimal interval design with 6 dose levels (50-600 mg once daily) is planned. Primary objectives are to assess safety/tolerability and establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose. Key secondary objectives are to assess pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics (PD), and preliminary antitumor activity. Safety was assessed according to CTCAE v5.0 (all pts) and iwCLL hematologic toxicity criteria (pts with CLL). Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were assessed in the first 4 weeks. Response was assessed per Lugano criteria for all except CLL (iwCLL 2018 criteria) and WM (iwWM-6 criteria). Results: As of May 26, 2023, 26 pts (10 CLL, 4 MCL, 2 MZL, 4 WM, 4 FL, 1 DLBCL, 1 RT) were enrolled at 5 dose levels (50 mg, 4; 100 mg, 9; 200 mg, 9; 350 mg, 3; 500 mg, 1). Median age was 70.5 y (range, 25-83). Median number of prior therapies was 3.5 (range, 2-9), including cBTKis (n=21; 10 CLL, 4 WM, 4 MCL, 1 MZL, 1 RT, 1 DLBCL), BCL2 inhibitors (n=12; 9 CLL, 2 WM, 1 RT), and noncovalent BTKis (ncBTKis; n=4; 2 CLL, 1 WM, 1 FL). In CLL, del17p/ TP53 mutation (n=8) and unmutated IGHV (n=7) were frequent. Median follow-up was 3.5 mo (range, 0.2-13.9). MTD was not reached. Treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were reported by 88.5% of pts (grade [gr] ≥3, 46.2%; serious, 38.5%). The most common TEAEs were contusion (30.8%; no gr ≥3), pyrexia (23.1%; no gr ≥3), neutropenia/neutrophil count decreased (23.1%; gr ≥3, 15.4%), and lipase increased (23.1%; gr ≥3, 3.8%; all transient and asymptomatic). No hypertension or atrial fibrillation was observed. One pt died from sepsis with possible disease progression. No discontinuations due to AEs occurred. Two pts had dose reductions due to TEAEs (gr 3 hematuria with urinary tract infection and recurrent urothelial carcinoma and gr 2 arthralgia). One DLT occurred in 1 pt at 200 mg (gr 3 maculopapular rash on day 27; after 5-day dose hold, assigned dose was recommenced with persistent gr 1 rash). BGB-16673 exposure increased in a dose-dependent manner. At steady state with doses ≥50 mg daily, BGB-16673 exposure exceeded the calculated half maximal degradation concentration for WT and cysteine 481-mutated BTK for the dosing interval. Preliminary PD data showed deep, sustained reductions in BTK protein levels in peripheral blood and tumor tissue, even at the lowest dose. Most CLL pts experienced lymphocytosis during the first 3 cycles of tx. Twenty of 26 pts (77%) remain on therapy (discontinuation: 4 progressive disease, 2 withdrawal). Of 18 response-evaluable pts, 12 (67%) responded (5/6 CLL, 1/3 MCL, 2/2 MZL, 3/4 WM, 1/2 FL, 0/1 DLBCL; 1 CR in MCL, all others had PR; Figure), including pts who received a cBTKi (n=10) and an ncBTKi (n=2). Responses started at the lowest dose level. All responders remain in response, the longest responder remaining on tx for 60 weeks. Conclusions: Preliminary data from this ongoing, first-in-human study of the novel BTK degrader BGB-16673 demonstrate a tolerable safety profile and clinical responses in heavily pretreated pts with B-cell malignancies, including those with BTKi-resistant disease. Substantial reductions in BTK protein levels in peripheral blood and tumor tissue were also observed, demonstrating proof-of-concept of a strong, on-target effect.