Citations

Abstract Genome wide association studies (GWAS) in 9,013 pancreatic cancer patients and 12,452 controls of European ancestry have discovered over 20 risk loci in the human genome. Here, we fine mapped one such locus on chromosome 16q23.1 in the vicinity of two Chymotrypsinogen precursor genes, CTRB1 and CTRB2. We fine-mapped this locus to rs72802365 (P=2.51x10-17, OR=1.36, 95% CI=1.31-1.40) and identified colocalization (PP=87%) with aberrant exon 5→7 CTRB2 splicing in pancreatic tissues. Imputation of a 584 bp insertion/deletion variant overlapping exon 6 of CTRB2 into the GWAS datasets resulted in a highly significant association with pancreatic cancer risk (P=2.83x10-16, OR=1.36, 95% CI=1.31-1.42), indicating that it may underlie this signal. Exon skipping attributable to the deletion (risk) allele introduces a premature stop codon in exon 7 of CTRB2, yielding a truncated chymotrypsin B2 protein that lacks chymotrypsin activity, is poorly secreted, and accumulates intracellularly in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). The intracellular accumulation of a nonfunctional chymotrypsinogen B2 protein may lead to ER stress and pancreatic inflammation, which in turn, may explain the increased pancreatic cancer risk in carriers of CTRB2 exon 6 deletion alleles. Citation Format: Ashley Jermusyk, Jun Zhong, Naomi Gordon, Katelyn Connelly, Sumeth Perera, Ehssan Abdolalizadeh, Tongwu Zhang, Aidan O'Brien, Jason Hoskins, Irene Collins, Daina Eiser, Chen Yuan, Harvey Risch, Eric J. Jacobs, Donghui Li, Mengmeng Du, Rachael Stolzenberg-Solomon, Alison P. Klein, Jill P. Smith, Brian M. Wolpin, Stephen J. Chanock, Jianxin Shi, Gloria M. Petersen, Christopher Westlake, Laufey T. Amundadottir. An exception to the rule: A coding functional variant at a pancreatic cancer GWAS locus [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Virtual Special Conference on Pancreatic Cancer; 2020 Sep 29-30. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(22 Suppl):Abstract nr IA-11.

SummaryThe familywise error rate has been widely used in genome-wide association studies. With the increasing availability of functional genomics data, it is possible to increase detection power by leveraging these genomic functional annotations. Previous efforts to accommodate covariates in multiple testing focused on false discovery rate control, while covariate-adaptive procedures controlling the familywise error rate remain underdeveloped. Here, we propose a novel covariate-adaptive procedure to control the familywise error rate that incorporates external covariates which are potentially informative of either the statistical power or the prior null probability. An efficient algorithm is developed to implement the proposed method. We prove its asymptotic validity and obtain the rate of convergence through a perturbation-type argument. Our numerical studies show that the new procedure is more powerful than competing methods and maintains robustness across different settings. We apply the proposed approach to the UK Biobank data and analyse 27 traits with 9 million single-nucleotide polymorphisms tested for associations. Seventy-five genomic annotations are used as covariates. Our approach detects more genome-wide significant loci than other methods in 21 out of the 27 traits.

AbstractPercutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty (PTRA) has been used to treat renovascular disease (RVD), a chronic condition characterized by renal ischemia and metabolic abnormalities. Mitochondrial injury has been implicated as a central pathogenic mechanism in RVD, but whether it can be reversed by PTRA remains uncertain. We hypothesized that PTRA attenuates mitochondrial damage, renal injury, and dysfunction in pigs with coexisting renal artery stenosis (RAS) and metabolic syndrome (MetS). Four groups of pigs (n = 6 each) were studied after 16 weeks of diet‐induced MetS and RAS (MetS + RAS), MetS + RAS treated 4 weeks earlier with PTRA, and Lean and MetS Sham controls. Single‐kidney renal blood flow (RBF) and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) were assessed in vivo with multidetector computed tomography, and renal tubular mitochondrial structure and function and renal injury ex vivo. PTRA successfully restored renal artery patency, but mean arterial pressure remained unchanged. Stenotic kidney RBF and GFR, which fell in MetS + RAS compared to MetS, rose after PTRA. PTRA attenuated MetS + RAS‐induced mitochondrial structural abnormalities in tubular cells and peritubular capillary endothelial cells, decreased mitochondrial H202 production, and increased renal cytochrome‐c oxidase‐IV activity and ATP production. PTRA also improved cortical microvascular and peritubular capillary density and ameliorated tubular injury and tubulointerstitial fibrosis in the poststenotic kidney. Importantly, renal mitochondrial damage correlated with poststenotic injury and dysfunction. Renal revascularization attenuated mitochondrial injury and improved renal hemodynamics and function in swine poststenotic kidneys. This study suggests a novel mechanism by which PTRA might be relatively effective in ameliorating mitochondrial damage and improving renal function in coexisting MetS and RAS.

Background: Pts with high-risk LBCL have poor outcomes with R-CHOP chemoimmunotherapy (Sathyanarayanan, et al. ASH 2016. #106), and ≈50% of pts will not achieve long-term disease remission (Coiffier, et al. ASH Ed Program. 2016), highlighting unmet need for new therapies. Axi-cel, an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy, was approved for treatment of adults with R/R LBCL after ≥ 2 lines of systemic therapies based on the pivotal study, ZUMA-1 (Neelapu SS, et al. NEJM. 2017). ZUMA-12 is a Phase 2, multicenter, open-label, single-arm study of axi-cel as part of first-line therapy in pts with high-risk LBCL. Here, we present interim efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics (PK) results from ZUMA-12. Methods: Eligible adults (≥ 18 y) met 2 criteria for high-risk LBCL: i) double- or triple-hit lymphoma by fluorescent in situ hybridization per investigator or LBCL with IPI score ≥ 3; and ii) positive interim PET per Lugano Classification (Cheson, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2014; Deauville score [DS] 4 or 5) after 2 cycles of an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody and anthracycline containing regimen, which served as a dynamic risk assessment. Pts with PMBCL were not eligible. Pts underwent leukapheresis (≥ 2 wks after prior systemic therapy) and optional non-chemotherapy bridging at investigator discretion, followed by conditioning chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2/d and fludarabine 30 mg/m2/d for 3 d) and a single axi-cel infusion (target dose, 2 × 106 CAR T cells/kg). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed complete response (CR) rate per Lugano. Key secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), frequency of adverse events (AEs), and levels of CAR T cells and cytokines in blood and serum. Results: As of July 15, 2020, 31 pts have been enrolled and treated, and as of January 24, 2020, in a planned interim analysis, 15 pts were treated with axi-cel with ≥ 3 mos of follow-up. Median age was 60 y (range, 39 - 86), 67% of pts were male, 73% had ECOG of 1, 40%/60% had DS4/5; 60% had double- or triple-hit status per investigator, and 67% had IPI score ≥ 3. Baseline characteristics were largely comparable to ZUMA-1 Cohort 1 except for lower median tumor burden in ZUMA-12 (ZUMA-1: 3897 mm2 vs ZUMA-12: 1610 mm2). Of 12 response-evaluable pts (pts with centrally confirmed high-risk LBCL who received axi-cel), the investigator-assessed ORR was 92% (95% CI, 62% - 100%) with a CR rate of 75% (95% CI, 43% - 95%); 75% of pts had ongoing responses at data cutoff. Of 15 pts treated (safety analysis set), the investigator-assessed ORR was 93% (95% CI, 68% - 100%) with a CR rate of 80% (95% CI, 52% - 96%); 86% of pts had ongoing responses at data cutoff. Of 15 safety-evaluable pts, 80% experienced Grade ≥ 3 AEs. The most common Grade ≥ 3 AEs (≥ 25% of pts) were white blood cell count decreased (40%), anemia (27%), and encephalopathy (27%). Grade ≥ 3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurologic events (NEs) occurred in 20% and 27% of pts, respectively. All CRS and 10/11 NEs of any grade resolved (causally unrelated Grade 1 tremor was ongoing in 1 pt at data cutoff). Median time to onset of CRS was 4 d (range, 1 - 8), with median duration of 5 d (range, 2 - 12). Median time to onset of NEs was 9 d (range, 2 - 44), with median duration of 10 d (range, 1 - 40). Grade ≥ 3 infection was reported in 27% and Grade ≥ 3 neutrophil count decreased was reported in 20%. No Grade 5 AEs occurred. Despite similar assessment schedule and methodology, median peak CAR T cell levels were greater in ZUMA-12 vs ZUMA-1 Cohort 1 (131 cells/µL [range, 10 - 555] vs 32 cells/µL [range, 1 - 1514]). Median CAR T cell expansion (AUC0-28) was also greater in ZUMA-12 (1124 cells/µL × d [range, 147 - 4261]; ZUMA-1: 357 cells/µL × d [range, 5 - 11,507]). Median time to peak levels of CAR T cells in blood was 7 d after infusion. PK were similar in pts with double- or triple-hit lymphoma and IPI score ≥ 3. Updated safety, efficacy, and PK results will be reported, along with product characteristics and levels of key cytokines. Conclusion: ZUMA-12 is the first study evaluating CAR T cell therapy as first-line therapy in high-risk LBCL, which notably was defined by both histology and/or IPI and dynamic risk assessment with PET scan. Axi-cel demonstrated significant clinical benefit, with high ORR and CR rates and a manageable safety profile in pts for whom there is an unmet medical need. The study also provides new insights into the pharmacology of CAR T cell therapy for pts exposed to fewer prior therapies. Disclosures Neelapu: Pfizer: Other: personal fees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Merck: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; N/A: Other; Adicet Bio: Other; Poseida: Research Funding; Unum Therapeutics: Other, Research Funding; Celgene: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Novartis: Other: personal fees; Allogene Therapeutics: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Patents & Royalties; Precision Biosciences: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Cell Medica/Kuur: Other: personal fees; Incyte: Other: personal fees; Acerta: Research Funding; Karus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; Legend Biotech: Other; Calibr: Other. Dickinson:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Merck Sharp & Dohme: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Oluwole:Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy. Herrera:Genentech, Inc./F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy. Thieblemont:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Bayer: Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Cellectis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company), Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Hospira: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company), Research Funding. Ujjani:AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Verastem Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Atara: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; MorphoSys: Consultancy. Lin:Sorrento: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Vineti: Consultancy; Gamida Cells: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Legend BioTech: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Riedell:Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Kite/Gilead: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; MorphoSys: Research Funding. Kekre:Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. de Vos:Bayer: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy. Yang:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Milletti:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Other: stock or other ownership . Goyal:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Kawashima:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Other: stock or other ownership . Chavez:Merck: Research Funding; Morphosys: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Speakers Bureau; Epizyme: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; BeiGene: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy.

BACKGROUND: MF is characterized by anemia, splenomegaly, debilitating constitutional symptoms, and shortened survival. Fedratinib is an oral JAK2 inhibitor approved in the United States for treatment (Tx) of adult patients (pts) with intermediate (INT)-2 or high-risk MF. The randomized, placebo (PBO)-controlled, phase III JAKARTA trial evaluated clinical outcomes with fedratinib in pts with JAK-inhibitor-naïve MF. Initial findings from the JAKARTA study have been reported (Pardanani, JAMA Oncol, 2015). JAKARTA data were recently reanalyzed in preparation for regulatory review. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety with fedratinib 400 mg/day in updated analyses of the JAKARTA study. METHODS: JAKARTA was an international, randomized, double-blind, PBO-controlled study that enrolled pts aged ≥ 18 years with INT-2 or high-risk primary, post-PV, or post-ET MF. Pts were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to fedratinib 400 mg, fedratinib 500 mg, or PBO, administered orally once-daily for ≥ 6 consecutive 4-week cycles ("randomized Tx period"). After completing 6 Tx cycles (or earlier in the case of disease progression), pts randomized to PBO could crossover to fedratinib. The primary endpoint was the spleen volume response rate (SVRR), the proportion of pts who achieved a ≥ 35% spleen volume reduction from baseline (BL) confirmed by MRI/CT at end of cycle 6 (EOC6), confirmed by follow-up scan 4 weeks later. Secondary endpoints included SVRR without 4-week confirmation, durability of spleen response, and symptom response rate (proportion of pts with a ≥ 50% reduction from BL in total symptom score [TSS] on the modified Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form [MFSAF]) at EOC6. An exploratory analysis evaluated proportions of pts with ≥ 50% reductions from BL at EOC6 in individual MFSAF symptom scores: night sweats, pruritus, abdominal discomfort, early satiety, pain under ribs on left side, and bone or muscle pain. These analyses are limited to pts randomized to fedratinib 400 mg (the approved starting dose of fedratinib) or to PBO. Efficacy analyses were performed for the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and safety was assessed in all pts who received ≥ 1 dose of study drug. RESULTS: 96 pts were randomized to fedratinib 400 mg and 96 pts to PBO. In the fedratinib and PBO arms, median ages at BL were 63 (range 39-86) and 66 (27-85) years, respectively, 65% and 60% of pts had primary MF, 76% and 73% had constitutional symptoms, median spleen volumes were 2652 (316-6430) and 2660 (662-7911) mL, and median TSS were 15.3 (0-57) and 12.4 (0-53). Median durations of exposure were 15.5 months in the fedratinib 400 mg arm and 6 months in the PBO arm. With a confirmation scan 4 weeks after EOC6, SVRR was significantly higher in the fedratinib arm (37% [95%CI 27%, 46%]) vs. the PBO arm (1% [0%, 3%]) (P < 0.0001). Without the confirmation scan, SVRR at EOC6 was 47% (95%CI 37%, 57%) in the fedratinib 400 mg arm and 1% (0%, 3%) in the PBO arm (P < 0.0001; Figure). Estimated median duration of spleen response with fedratinib was 18.2 months. Symptom response rate at EOC6 for evaluable pts (ie, with TSS data available at BL and EOC6) was 40% (36/89) with fedratinib and 9% (7/81) with PBO (P < 0.0001). Fedratinib was associated with higher response rates vs. PBO in all 6 MFSAF symptoms: abdominal discomfort (41% vs. 15%, respectively), night sweats (58% vs. 22%), bone or muscle pain (33% vs. 14%), early satiety (51% vs. 18%), pruritus (39% vs. 20%), and pain under the ribs on the left side (42% vs. 24%). The most common Tx-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) during the randomized Tx period were grade 1-2 gastrointestinal events (Table). New or worsening grade 3 anemia and grade ≥ 3 thrombocytopenia laboratory abnormalities were reported in 34% and 12% of fedratinib-treated pts, most (75%) occurring within 3-4 months of Tx initiation. Compared with PBO, fedratinib-treated pts more frequently experienced increased serum creatinine, amylase, and lipase; these were mainly grade 1-2 in severity. TEAEs led to Tx discontinuation for 14% of fedratinib pts and 8% of PBO pts. CONCLUSIONS: Fedratinib 400 mg/day significantly reduced splenomegaly and symptom burden in pts with JAK-inhibitor-naïve MF. Relatively few pts discontinued fedratinib therapy due to TEAEs, suggesting these events are manageable. These data corroborate results initially reported for the JAKARTA trial, and further support the efficacy and safety of fedratinib in this pt population. Disclosures Masszi: AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Drummond:Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Blueprint Medicine Corporation: Research Funding; Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Jourdan:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vannucchi:Blueprint: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ribrag:AZD: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Infinity: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; nanostring: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; EPZ: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; epizyme (EPZ): Research Funding; argenX: Research Funding; pharmamar: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; servier: Consultancy; gustave roussy comprehensive cancer center: Current Employment. Rambaldi:Abbvie: Honoraria; Jazz: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Omeros: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; MSD: Honoraria. Rose:Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Zhang:Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Harrison:Promedior: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; CTI Biopharma Corp: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau.

Background: Axi-cel, an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy, is approved for treatment of adult pts with R/R LBCL after ≥ 2 lines of systemic therapy. In the pivotal ZUMA-1 study, axi-cel demonstrated durable responses and a largely manageable safety profile (Locke FL, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2019). ZUMA-9 (NCT03153462), a multicenter, open-label study, provided pts with R/R LBCL with expanded access to axi-cel until commercial availability (Cohort 1 [C1]) and later, if commercially manufactured product did not meet commercial release specification(s) (Cohort 2 [C2]). Safety and efficacy of axi-cel (C1 and C2) and translational analyses (C2) are presented. Methods: Eligible adults had histologically confirmed R/R LBCL, ECOG ≤ 1, and received prior CD20-targeting and an anthracycline-containing regimen. C2 pts must have had commercial OOS product. Pts underwent leukaphersis and conditioning chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2/day and fludarabine 30 mg/m2/day) for 3 days followed by a single axi-cel infusion (target dose, 2 × 106 CAR T cells/kg). C1 and C2 pts with high disease burden could receive bridging therapy before conditioning at investigator's discretion. Endpoints included frequency of adverse events (AEs), objective response rate (ORR) per standard-of-care imaging assessment, overall survival (OS) for C1 and C2, and blood CAR T cells levels and serum cytokines for C2 only. Outcomes were contextualized with the primary analysis of ZUMA-1 C1+2 (n = 101; ≥ 6 mo of follow-up; Neelapu SS, et al. NEJM. 2017). Results: As of 11/29/2019 (C1) and 3/15/2020 (C2), 25 C1 pts and 36 C2 pts received axi-cel with a median follow-up of 27.1 mo (range, 23.6 - 29.6) and 13.2 mo (range, 0.4 - 25.7), respectively. In C1, median age was 56 y (range, 28 - 76), 60% were male, 80% had DLBCL, 48%/0% had ECOG1/≥2, 44% had IPI ≥3, and 64% had ≥ 3 prior lines of therapy. In C2, median age was 61 y (range, 24 - 81), 75% were male, 78% had DLBCL, 58%/17% had ECOG 1/≥2, 56% had IPI ≥3, and 69% had ≥ 3 prior lines of therapy. In C2, 50% of pts had OOS product with low viability, 28% had high IFN-γ, 14% had low IFN-γ, 14% received a low dose, and 6% had high transduction ratio. The ORR was 76% (64% complete response [CR]) for C1, 53% (36% CR) for C2, and 82% (54% CR) for ZUMA-1 C1+2. Median OS was 23.8 mo (95% CI, 13.5 - NE) for C1 and not reached (95% CI, 3.4 - NE) for C2, respectively. ORR and OS were consistent in C2 OOS subgroups (Table). Grade ≥ 3 AEs were reported in 88% and 89% of C1 and C2 pts, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 CRS (Lee et al, Blood. 2014) was not observed in C1 but was reported in 3% of C2 pts (13% in ZUMA-1 C1+2). Grade ≥ 3 neurologic events (NEs) occurred in 36% and 19% of pts in C1 and C2, respectively, and 28% of pts in ZUMA-1 C1+2. No Grade 5 CRS or NEs occurred in C1 or C2. All CRS and NEs resolved in C1, and most CRS (29/30) and NEs (19/24) resolved in C2 as of the data cutoff. Of 3 Grade 5 AEs in C1, 2 were unrelated to axi-cel (clostridial sepsis [on Day (D) 6] and respiratory failure [on D212]) and 1 was related to conditioning (myelodysplastic syndrome [on D563]). Of 3 Grade 5 AEs in C2, 2 were unrelated to axi-cel (multiple organ dysfunction syndrome [on D6] and cardiac arrest [on D482]) and 1 was related to axi-cel (systemic mycosis [on D30]). Median peak CAR T cell levels and median CAR T cell expansion (area under the curve in the first 28 days) were lower in ZUMA-9 C2 (n = 32/36; 12 cells/µL [range, 0 - 442] and 112 cells/µL × days [range, 0 - 3413]) vs ZUMA-1 C1+2 (n = 96/101; 42 cells/µL [range, 1 - 1514] and 462 cells/µL × days [range, 5 - 14,329]). Serum IFN-γ levels peaked within 8 days after axi-cel infusion (median, 170 pg/mL [range, 8 - 1876]) and were lower vs ZUMA-1 C1+2 (median, 477 pg/mL [range, 8 - 8209]). Axi-cel in ZUMA-9 C2 contained fewer, less differentiated CCR7+ naïve and central memory T cells, and a greater proportion of more differentiated CCR7- effector memory and effector T cells vs ZUMA-1 C1+2. No cases of replication-competent retroviruses were reported in C1 or C2. Conclusion: Axi-cel treatment demonstrated a manageable safety profile and meaningful clinical benefit in this expanded access and OOS product study. While CAR T cell therapy showed clinical benefit in C2 (OOS product), the lower CR rate was corroborated by lower CAR T cell expansion and a more differentiated product vs ZUMA-1 C1+2, warranting further investigation. ZUMA-9 C2 is enrolling pts and evaluation is ongoing. Disclosures Jacobson: Precision Biosciences: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; AXIS: Speakers Bureau; Nkarta: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; Clinical Care Options: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; Lonza: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support. Locke:Calibr: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Wugen: Consultancy; GammaDelta Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Cellular Biomedicine Group: Other: Consultancy with grant options; Allogene: Consultancy. Miklos:Adaptive Biotech: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Juno-Celgene-Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Allogene Therapeutics Inc.: Research Funding; Miltenyi Biotec: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel support; Kite-Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, Research Funding. Vose:Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Allogene: Honoraria; Loxo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Miltenyi Biotec: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Epizyme: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria; Wugen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Roche/Genetech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other. Lin:Sorrento: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Research Funding; Vineti: Consultancy; Gamida Cells: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Legend BioTech: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Budde:Roche: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Mustang Therapeutics: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding. Maloney:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; A2 Biotherapeutics: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Patents & Royalties: Patents are pending, but not issued, licensed, no royalties, no licensees., Research Funding; Bioline Rx: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Jaglowski:Juno: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; CRISPR: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Riedell:MorphoSys: Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Perales:Celgene: Honoraria; MolMed: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Omeros: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bellicum: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Miltenyi Biotec: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Nektar Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cidara Therapeutics: Other; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Medigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; NexImmune: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kim:Gilead Sciences: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Kawashima:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Other: stock or other ownership . Yang:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Rossi:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Goyal:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Neelapu:Legend Biotech: Other; Allogene Therapeutics: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Cell Medica/Kuur: Other: personal fees; Incyte: Other: personal fees; Unum Therapeutics: Other, Research Funding; Adicet Bio: Other; Novartis: Other: personal fees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Merck: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Precision Biosciences: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Poseida: Research Funding; Calibr: Other; Acerta: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Patents & Royalties; Celgene: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Other: personal fees; Karus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; N/A: Other.

Background FDG-PET is used in staging and response assessments in patients (pts) with DLBCL. An analysis of 158 pts with DLBCL receiving R-CHOP or DA-EPOCH-R on CALGB/Alliance 50303 failed to show an association between the interim PET (iPET, after cycle 2 of therapy) visual 5-point scale score (5-PS) by central review and progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS), but did show a significant association between percent change in FDG uptake from baseline to after cycle 2 (∆SUV) and PFS/OS (Schoder et al. 2020). As central review of FDG-PET is not feasible in routine practice, we retrospectively compared local vs central readings, and determined associations from local imaging data with PFS/OS. Methods 126 pts at baseline and 109 at iPET had local imaging data submitted across 21 institutions. Visual scores 1-3 defined PET- and scores 4-5 defined PET+ disease. ∆SUV was defined as the percent change in the maximum SUV at any site (maxSUV) from baseline to iPET. Continuous ∆SUV and categorized ∆SUV (<66% vs >66%) were analyzed. Differences in quantitative measures were calculated as the local minus central result. The Kappa statistic estimated agreement in PET and ∆SUV groups between local and central review. PFS and OS distributions for local PET and ∆SUV groups were landmarked at iPET, estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method, and compared using the log-rank test. Results At baseline, maxSUV was reported locally and centrally in 118 pts. Median maxSUV was 24.3 (range: 5.9-77.3) by local review and 24.3 (range: 5.9-77.0) by central review. The median difference in maxSUV was 0 (range: -12.9 to 21.9), with 50% of differences between -1.1 and 0.1, and 90% of differences between -7.8 and 4.1. In 106 pts with visual iPET 5-PS results, 52 (49.1%) were PET+ by local review and 37 (34.9%) by central review. Agreement in local and central review was moderate (kappa=0.53), occurring in 81 pts (76.4%; 32 PET+ and 49 PET-). Disagreement occurred in 25 patients, 20 with local PET+ but central PET- and 5 with local PET- but central PET+. iPET maxSUV was reported locally and centrally in 90 pts. Median maxSUV was 3.4 (range: 0-18.3) by local review and 3.3 (range: 1.2-18.2) by central review. The median difference in maxSUV was 0 (range: -8.6 to 2.4), with 50% of differences between -0.3 and 0.4, and 90% of differences between -4.4 and 1.8. ∆SUV was calculated in 87 pts. Median ∆SUV was 84.6% (range: -3.0% to 95.9%) by local review and 85.1% (range: -34.9% to 95.8%) by central review. The median difference in ∆SUV was -0.3 (range: -19.6 to 31.9), with 50% of differences between -2.1 and 1.1, and 90% of differences between -7.1 and 12.3. ∆SUV was <66% in 12 (13.8%) pts by local review and 12 pts by central review. Agreement in local and central review was high (kappa=0.81), occurring in 83 pts (95.4%; 10 with ∆SUV <66%, 73 with ∆SUV >66%). Disagreement occurred in 4 pts, 2 in each direction. Using local data, PFS and OS estimates were numerically lower in pts with iPET+ vs iPET- disease, but did not reach statistical significance (p=0.12 and p=0.15). Two-year estimates for PFS were 79% (95% CI 68-91%) and 89% (95% CI 81-98%), and 2-year estimates for OS were 84% (95% CI 75-95%) and 96% (95% CI 91-100%) in pts with iPET+ and iPET-, respectively. In contrast, ∆SUV groups were significantly associated with PFS and OS (p=0.03 and p=0.002). Two-year estimates for PFS were 56% (95% CI 34-94%) and 87% (95% CI 79-95%) and 2-year estimates for OS were 56% (95% CI 34-94%) and 93% (95% CI 88-99%) in pts with ∆SUV <66% and ∆SUV >66%, respectively. Conclusion Agreement in visual 5-PS at iPET was moderate; most discrepancies arose from a local PET+ result when central review called PET-. Differences in maxSUV and ∆SUV tended to be small. Grouping ∆SUV resulted in only 4 discrepancies (4.6%). Similar to the previous analysis using central data, the separation in PFS and OS curves using local data for ∆SUV was greater than by visual 5-PS. Encouragingly, the agreement in ∆SUV of <66% vs ≥66% was high between local and central review. Overall agreement however may be unduly influenced by the large proportion of pts with ∆SUV ≥66%, with less certainty in agreement for pts with ∆SUV <66%. Larger prospective studies comparing local and central imaging data are warranted to best determine the utility of local imaging in clinical trials. Support: P30 CA008748, U10CA180821, U10CA180882; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00118209 (CALGB 50303) Disclosures Kahl: Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BeiGene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche Laboratories Inc: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy. Friedberg:Astellas: Consultancy; Acerta Pharma - A member of the AstraZeneca Group, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.: Other; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Roche: Other: Travel expenses; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy. Leonard:MEI Pharma: Consultancy; Sutro: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy; GenMab: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Regeneron: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; Miltenyi: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy. Bartlett:Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Research Funding; BTG: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta: Consultancy; Affimed Therapeutics: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Autolus: Research Funding.

Background and Aims Vascular invasion (VI) is a critical risk factor for HCC recurrence and poor survival. The molecular drivers of vascular invasion in HCC are open for investigation. Deciphering the molecular landscape of invasive HCC will help identify therapeutic targets and noninvasive biomarkers. Approach and Results To this end, we undertook this study to evaluate the genomic, transcriptomic, and proteomic profile of tumors with VI using the multiplatform cancer genome atlas (The Cancer Genome Atlas; TCGA) data (n = 373). In the TCGA Liver Hepatocellular Carcinoma cohort, macrovascular invasion was present in 5% (n = 17) of tumors and microvascular invasion in 25% (n = 94) of tumors. Functional pathway analysis revealed that the MYC oncogene was a common upstream regulator of the mRNA, miRNA, and proteomic changes in VI. We performed comparative proteomic analyses of invasive human HCC and MYC‐driven murine HCC and identified fibronectin to be a proteomic biomarker of invasive HCC (mouse fibronectin 1 [Fn1], P = 1.7 × 10 −11 ; human FN1, P = 1.5 × 10 −4 ) conserved across the two species. Mechanistically, we show that FN1 promotes the migratory and invasive phenotype of HCC cancer cells. We demonstrate tissue overexpression of fibronectin in human HCC using a large independent cohort of human HCC tissue microarray (n = 153; P < 0.001). Lastly, we showed that plasma fibronectin levels were significantly elevated in patients with HCC (n = 35; mean = 307.7 μg/mL; SEM = 35.9) when compared to cirrhosis (n = 10; mean = 41.8 μg/mL; SEM = 13.3; P < 0.0001). Conclusions Our study evaluates the molecular landscape of tumors with VI, identifying distinct transcriptional, epigenetic, and proteomic changes driven by the MYC oncogene. We show that MYC up‐regulates fibronectin expression, which promotes HCC invasiveness. In addition, we identify fibronectin to be a promising noninvasive proteomic biomarker of VI in HCC.

The excess intake of dietary sodium is a key modifiable factor for reducing disease progression in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD). The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that the scored salt questionnaire (SSQ; a frequency questionnaire of nine sodium-rich food types) is a valid instrument to identify high dietary salt intake in ADPKD. The performance of the SSQ was evaluated in adults with ADPKD with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥ 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 during the screening visit of the PREVENT-ADPKD trial. High dietary sodium intake (HSI) was defined by a mean 24-h urinary sodium excretion ≥ 100 mmol/day from two collections. The median 24-h urine sodium excretion was 132 mmol/day (IQR: 112–172 mmol/d) (n = 75; mean age: 44.6 ± 11.5 years old; 53% female), and HSI (86.7% of total) was associated with male gender and higher BMI and systolic blood pressure (p < 0.05). The SSQ score (73 ± 23; mean ± SD) was weakly correlated with log10 24-h urine sodium excretion (r = 0.29, p = 0.01). Receiving operating characteristic analysis showed that the optimal cut-off point in predicting HSI was an SSQ score of 74 (area under the curve 0.79; sensitivity 61.5%; specificity 90.0%; p < 0.01). The evaluation of the SSQ in participants with a BMI ≥ 25 (n = 46) improved the sensitivity (100%) and the specificity (100%). Consumers with an SSQ score ≥ 74 (n = 41) had higher relative percentage intake of processed meats/seafood and flavourings added to cooking (p < 0.05). In conclusion, the SSQ is a valid tool for identifying high dietary salt intake in ADPKD but its value proposition (over 24-h urinary sodium measurement) is that it may provide consumers and their healthcare providers with insight into the potential origin of sodium-rich food sources.

Abstract Summary Distance-based tests of microbiome beta diversity are an integral part of many microbiome analyses. MiRKAT enables distance-based association testing with a wide variety of outcome types, including continuous, binary, censored time-to-event, multivariate, correlated and high-dimensional outcomes. Omnibus tests allow simultaneous consideration of multiple distance and dissimilarity measures, providing higher power across a range of simulation scenarios. Two measures of effect size, a modified R-squared coefficient and a kernel RV coefficient, are incorporated to allow comparison of effect sizes across multiple kernels. Availability and implementation MiRKAT is available on CRAN as an R package. Supplementary information Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.