Citations

Background: Hypomethylating agents (HMA) with venetoclax (VEN) have shown encouraging clinical efficacy in single arm clinical trials for patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) (Garcia JS et al. ASH 2023, Zeidan AM et al. Am J Hematol. 2023). Many centers have started utilizing HMA-VEN in the clinical management of MDS due to unmet need, pending results of the ongoing phase 3 randomized clinical trial (VERONA) using this combination. However, real world studies with large sample size investigating the use of these agents in MDS, practice patterns and clinical outcomes are lacking. Methods: This is a multicenter retrospective study of 13 US academic medical centers. We included contemporary cohorts of adults (age≥18 years) with MDS who were treated with upfront combination of HMA-VEN, upfront HMA monotherapy, or VEN added after inadequate response or progression on HMA (post-HMA failure VEN). Outcomes analyzed includes clinical response, adverse events (AE) of interest, dose administration and survival. Descriptive statistics were used for baseline characteristics. Overall survival and event free survival (EFS: progression, leukemic transformation, death as events) analysis was conducted using Kaplan-Meier method. Determinants of outcomes were analyzed using multivariable regression models. All analyses were conducted at a significance level of p<0.05. Results: Among 454 patients included, 258 patients received VEN in combination with HMA [upfront HMA-VEN (n=175), post-HMA failure VEN (n=83)] and 196 patients received HMA monotherapy. Median age was 69 (59-77) years and majority of patients had MDS with excess blasts (75%), high risk (31.9%) or very-high (41.8%) risk disease by IPSS-R, 23.7% had therapy related disease, 33% had deletion17p or TP53 mutation and 40.9% underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation. VEN was predominantly started in outpatient setting (78.6%) with tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) prophylaxis and VEN doses ranged from 70-400mg, adjusted for concomitant antifungal drugs. Incidence of TLS was minimal (No TLS- 92.9%, lab-only TLS 6.2%, 1 pt with clinical TLS). Neutropenic fever was the main AE noted [upfront VEN-HMA (34.2%), HMA monotherapy (22.5%), post-HMA VEN (44.5%)]. In the upfront setting, response rate was significantly higher with HMA-VEN than HMA monotherapy (CR: 33% vs 12%; marrow CR: 40% vs 27%, p<.001). VEN given in the post HMA failure setting also resulted in encouraging response rates (CR 10%, marrow CR 32%). After adjusting for covariates in multivariable analysis, patients treated with HMA-VEN in the upfront setting had significantly improved event free survival as compared to HMA monotherapy (HR 0.59, HR 0.44-0.78, p<0.01), but overall survival did not reach statistical significance (overall survival HR 0.77, 95%CI 0.57-1.04, p=0.08). Conclusions: In this large multicenter retrospective analysis from US academic medical centers, we found that VEN in combination with HMA resulted in encouraging clinical outcomes and was effectively administered in the outpatient setting with minimal TLS. Infection risk management and supportive measures would be important to improve the ability to use this treatment widely, pending results of the ongoing phase 3 randomized clinical trial. Updated results with additional variables will be available at the main meeting.

Background: PV is a myeloproliferative neoplasm that leads to excessive production of erythrocytes and increased platelet and leukocyte counts. The current standard of care is to use therapeutic phlebotomy (TP) with or without cytoreductive therapy (CRT) to treat PV. Over time, the CRT dose often needs to be increased to treat PV progression. Preliminary results from the phase 2 REVIVE study (NCT04057040) demonstrated that rusfertide was superior to placebo in achieving hematocrit (Hct) levels <45% and reducing or eliminating the need for TP in patients who were phlebotomy-dependent prior to study entry (Kremyanskaya et al. EHA2023. [Abstract LB2710]; Kremyanskaya et al. New Engl J Med 2024;390:723-35).Final data from REVIVE will be presented. Methods: In Part 1 (Weeks 1-29), subcutaneous rusfertide (starting dose: 20 mg q1w) was initiated and titrated to control Hct to <45%. In Part 2 (Weeks 29-41; blinded randomized withdrawal phase), patients were randomized to receive rusfertide or placebo. Randomized patients were eligible to participate in the open-label extension (OLE) portion of the study (Part 3), in which all patients could receive rusfertide and investigators could make CRT dose adjustments. Results: In Part 1, 70 patients were enrolled; 59 were randomized in Part 2. Fifty-eight patients continued to Part 3. As of 9 July 2024, 50 (71.4%), 37 (52.9%), and 17 (24.3%) patients received rusfertide for ≥2, ≥2.5, or ≥3 years, respectively.Overall, median (range) patient age was 57.5 years (27-77); the majority were male (70%) and had high-risk disease (55.7%). Overall, 52.9% and 47.1% of patients were treated with TP alone or TP plus CRT, respectively. Prior to enrollment, the estimated average (mean) phlebotomy rate (EAPR) in patients who enrolled on study was 8.5/year, which was reduced to <1.0/year in Part 1. In Part 2, the EAPR was <1.0/year and 6.6/year in the rusfertide and placebo groups, respectively. For patients who continued onto Part 3 and received rusfertide, the EAPR remained at <1.0/year. In Parts 1, 2, and 3, the mean (SD) weekly average rusfertide dose was 30.7 mg (12.2), 38.5 mg (21.3), and 44.9 mg (20.3), respectively. Rusfertide consistently maintained Hct <45%, including in patients receiving therapy for ≥3 years. Platelets increased following initiation of rusfertide therapy and stabilized over time; mean leukocyte counts remained stable. Prior to enrollment, iron-related parameters were consistent with systemic iron deficiency. Throughout the study, rusfertide resulted in the normalization of mean serum ferritin levels, increased mean transferrin saturation, and increased mean serum iron levels. Overall, mean corpuscular volume increased slightly over the duration of the study. Throughout the study, there was no evidence of increased markers of inflammation (eg, C-reactive protein or interleukin 6). The most common (≥20%) treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were injection site reactions (85.7%), fatigue (38.6%), COVID-19 (32.9%), pruritus (34.3%), arthralgia (30.0%), dizziness (30.0%), nausea (24.3%), headache (24.3%), and anemia (21.4%). Grade 3 TEAEs occurred in 25.7% of patients.There were no Grade 4 or 5 TEAEs. One patient developed acute myeloid leukemia after treatment discontinuation. After more than 150 patient-years of rusfertide exposure, malignancies (most of which were skin cancers) were reported in 11 patients (all had risk factors that may have contributed to the development of these malignancies). There was no obvious correlation between increasing exposure to rusfertide and malignancies reported. Six thrombotic events (5 arterial and 1 venous) occurred in 5 patients with high-risk PV. Conclusions: In REVIVE, rusfertide added to TP with or without CRT provided long-term durable control of Hct and decreased the need for TP. Patients are eligible to roll over to the phase 2 THRIVE OLE study (NCT06033586), which will continue to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of rusfertide for a total period of up to 5.8 years. The randomized phase 3 VERIFY study (NCT05210790) is ongoing and will evaluate rusfertide vs placebo in PV patients.

Introduction: Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is an uncommon B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) Prognosis is highly variable due to underlying biological and molecular heterogeneity. The first-line (1L) treatment paradigm for MCL continues to evolve with increasing use of bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi) and decreasing use of autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). TP53 alterations are associated with inferior outcomes in MCL. The aim of this retrospective study is to determine treatment strategies and clinical outcomes in MCL patients based on TP53 gene mutation status. Methods: Retrospective data were collected from 19 institutions in the United States from 1/1993 to 1/2024. We examined treatment patterns and outcomes among MCL patients >18 years of age with known TP53 mutation status by sequencing. Patients who did not receive treatment were excluded. The analysis was stratified based on presence of TP53 mutations. Systemic therapies were categorized as chemo-immunotherapy (CIT), non-chemotherapy (including monoclonal antibodies, lenalidomide, venetoclax, and novel agents on clinical trial), and regimens containing BTKi. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) and secondary outcomes were progression free survival (PFS) and time to next treatment (TTNT). OS and PFS were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank tests were used to compare groups. Results: 645 patients were included in the study, with 468 men (72.6%) and median age was 64 years (range 30-89). 230/645 patients (35.7%) had a TP53 mutation, of which 182 (79%) were identified prior to 1L. While the male/female distribution was the same between the mutated and unmutated groups, median age at diagnosis and MIPI risk score was higher in the TP53 mutated group (age 65.9 vs 63.1 yrs, p= 0.015; MIPI 6.4 vs 6.1, p<0.001). TP53 unmutated patients had a median of 1 line of therapy vs. 2 for the mutated group (p<0.001, range 1-8). Blastoid histology and higher ki67 were also associated with the TP53 mutated group (p=0.045, 0.01 respectively) The median OS was 14.2 years for TP53 unmutated and 8.3 years for TP53 mutated patients (p<0.0001). PFS in 1L was 0.95 years in TP53 mutated compared to 2.02 years in TP53 unmutated group (p<0.0001). Selection of 1L therapeutic strategy was not associated with presence of TP53 mutation (Χ2 p= 0.21) although more patients in the TP53 unmutated group underwent ASCT (119/415 vs 38/230; Χ2 p=0.0006) TP53 mutation was associated with inferior survival compared to TP53 unmutated patients for CIT in 1L but the difference did not reach statistical significance when non-chemotherapy regimens and regimens containing BTKi were used. For CIT in 1L, 5 year OS was 78% [71-84%] for unmutated compared to 58% [48-67%] for the mutated group (p=0.0001 ). For non-chemotherapy regimens, 5 year OS for unmutated patients was 73% [52- 86%] compared to 52% [25-73%] for the mutated group (p=0.09). For regimens containing BTKi, 5 year OS for unmutated was 93% [81-97%] compared to 57% [28-78%] for mutated (p=0.07). Within the TP53 mutated group, there were no differences in any clinical outcomes between those receiving CIT, non-chemotherapy, or BTKi in 1L. While median OS appeared numerically longer in the BTKi group (14.4 yrs vs 8.8 yrs for CIT and 6.8 yrs for non-chemotherapy), the difference did not reach statistical significance (p=0.58). In contrast,TP53 unmutated patients who received CIT in 1L had better TTNT (p=0.0039) compared to those in non-chemotherapy and BTKi groups. There was no improvement in PFS (p=0.79) or OS (p=0.47). Conclusions To our knowledge this is the largest retrospective real world dataset of MCL treatment outcomes stratified by TP53 mutation. As in prior studies, TP53 mutation portends a worse prognosis in MCL compared to TP53 unmutated patients, but outcomes are better than historically reported. CIT in 1L was not associated with improved OS in either group. Irrespective of TP53 mutation status, incorporation of BTKi in first line was not associated with improved clinical outcomes. The gap in OS between TP53 mutated and unmutated MCL may be narrowing as treatment paradigms shift away from intensive induction chemotherapy and ASCT, and due to an increasing number of effective therapies for relapsed patients. Clinical trials of novel agents are needed to further improve the OS of TP53 mutated MCL patients.

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.

Background: A donor search prognosis score based on HLA type and race/ethnicity can classify patients into 3 groups based on the likelihood of finding an HLA-matched (8/8) unrelated donor (MUD): Very Likely (44% of the population), Likely (41%) and Very Unlikely (15%). Previous studies showed that >90% of Very Likely, 26% of Likely and <10% of Very Unlikely patients used a MUD for their hematopoietic cell transplants (HCT), with the rest using other donor sources (mismatched unrelated donor, cord blood, or haploidentical relative). For some patients, prolonged efforts to identify a MUD might be futile and delay HCT, leading to increased morbidity, greater chance for relapse and disease resistance, and worse HCT outcomes. BMT CTN 1702 (NCT03904134) was the first national study to track the entire donor search identification process. Designed as a biologic assignment study, the goal was to estimate and compare overall survival between two arms: patients who are Very Likely to find a MUD versus those who are Very Unlikely to find a MUD. It tested whether provision of a donor search prognosis score to centers could prevent prolonged futile searches for the Very Unlikely group and improve their transplant rates and outcomes, compared to the Very Likely group. Methods: Eligible diagnoses included acute leukemia, myelodysplastic syndromes, lymphoma, acquired aplastic anemia and sickle cell disease. Patients could be consented at any time after diagnosis until an unrelated donor search was started. Consented patients became evaluable only after it was determined that no appropriate HLA-identical siblings were available. The primary endpoint was survival time after the patient was declared evaluable, regardless of whether HCT occurred, and was compared between the Very Unlikely and Very Likely groups. The target enrollment was 1732 evaluable patients. Because this was a biologic assignment trial and not a randomized trial, formal comparisons of overall survival between the Very Likely and Very Unlikely groups were done using a covariate-adjusted Cox proportional hazards model. The following covariates were a priori specified for adjustment in the model, according to the statistical analysis plan: sex, age, Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS), race/ethnicity, disease, disease status, and interval from consent to evaluability. Results: 1751 evaluable patients were enrolled at 47 centers: 44% female, median age 59.4 years (range 0.6-81.3 years), 73% were non-Hispanic White, 10% Hispanic White, 8% Black, 5% Asian/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, 0.5% American Indian/Alaska Native. Among the evaluable patients, 1181 received a HCT, 827 died, and 924 are still alive with or without HCT, with a median of 25 months of follow up (range=6-54 months [mos], inter-quartile range [IQR]=25-34 mos). The distribution was: 958 Very Likely, 517 Less Likely, and 276 Very Unlikely. Individuals in the Very Unlikely group were younger and were less likely to be non-Hispanic White. The unadjusted cumulative incidences of undergoing HCT by 6 mos and 2 years [yrs], in the Very Unlikely group were 51% and 61% vs. 60% and 69% in the Very Likely Group; after adjustment, there was not a significant difference in the likelihood of undergoing HCT (Dehn et al, submitted). There was no difference in median time from evaluability to HCT: 3.4 mos Very Unlikely and 3.3 mos Very Likely. Unadjusted survival rates from the time of evaluability for the Very Unlikely and the Very Likely groups were: 6 mos (85% vs 84%), 1 yr (69% vs. 69%) and 2 yrs (55% vs. 56%). In the multivariate Cox model, there was no significant difference in the risk of death (HR = 1.07 for Very Unlikely vs. Very Likely, 95% confidence interval 0.86-1.33, p=0.56) adjusting for significant clinical covariates: age, KPS, disease status, and time from consent to evaluability were all significantly associated with overall survival. There was no significant center effect and no interaction between donor search prognosis group and clinical covariates. Conclusion: In this large multicenter BMT CTN study, using the donor selection strategy described, there was no difference in adjusted time to HCT or survival for patients Very Likely versus Very Unlikely to find an 8/8 MUD. These results suggest that patients Very Unlikely to identify a MUD should proceed to HCT using the best available alternative donor rather than delaying HCT to try to identify a MUD.

INTRODUCTION While prognostic understanding (PU) is important for all patients (pts) considering hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT), it may be particularly important for older (>65 years), medically infirm, and/or frail pts deciding whether to undergo allogeneic HCT (allo-HCT). This abstract reports on PU and concordance with transplant physician (hereafter MD) PU for pts participating in an ongoing seamless, phase II-III randomized clinical trial (ACE-BMT) comparing 4-arms: a pt-administered comorbidity management intervention (CM), specialist-administered palliative care (PC), a combined arm of CM and PC to standard of care. Here we report preliminary data on the concordance between pt and MD PU on the chance of cure 1-year (yr) post allo-HCT. METHODS Pt PU was compared to MD PU (gold standard) to determine concordance. MD and pt answers were compared on a single validated question asked at enrollment to the study (typically 2 weeks prior to HCT). Both pts and MD's estimated the chance of cure 1 yr after allo-HCT by selecting one of six possible response options: very good (more than 90%), good (75-90%), better than 50% (50-74%), worse than 50% (25-49%), bad (10-24%) or very bad (less than 10%). PU was “concordant” or “accurate” if MD and pt selected the same response option. Pts with discordant PU were labeled “pessimistic” if the pt selected a response option with a lower chance of cure than the MD (and “optimistic” if a higher chance). Response options were further simplified to greater than or less than 50% chance of cure and MD and pt PU were compared again. Descriptive statistics, chi-square for categorical and t-tests for continuous variables were used. Logistic regression was used to determine the association between pt prognostic concordance and pt socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS All pts consented to date were included (n=358), except those who did not answer the prognosis question (n=61). 54.2% (n=194) had HCT-Comorbidity Index (HCT-CI) of ≥3, 67.9% (n=243) were older than 65 yrs and 4.5% (n=16) were frail, defined by walk speed <0.8 m/s. Median age was 68 yrs (range 20-80). 39.7% (n=141) were female. 89.9% (n=322) identified as White, 4.2% (n=15) Asian, and 1% each as Black/African American and Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander. 5.3% (n=19) identified Hispanic. 11.5% (n=44) had high school education or less. 54.1% (n=183) made less than $100,000/yr. 40.1% (n=136) had acute myelogenous leukemia, 25.4% (n=86) had high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome and 10.6% (n=36) had a myeloproliferative cancer. 72.1% (n=245) had matched, 82.5% (n=283) unrelated and 95.0% (n=36) peripheral blood allo-HCT. 9% (n=31) had KPS of 100%, 35% (n=121) KPS 90%, and 47.5% (n=147) KPS 80%. Pts reported having a very good, good, better than 50%, worse than 50% and bad/very bad chance of cure 1 yr post allo-HCTL 34.4% (n=123), 30.7% (n=110), 26.0% (n=93), 7.3% (n=26) and 1.7% (n=6), respectively. 91.1% (n=326) of pts felt they had a >50% chance of being cured 1 yr post allo-HCT. MD answers were missing for 159/358 (44.4%) pts. MDs reported pt had a very good, good, better than 50%, worse than 50% and bad/very bad chance of being cured 1 yr post allo-HCT, 3.0% (n=6), 6.5% (n=13), 52.8% (n=105), 35.7% (n=71) and 2% (n=4) respectively. 62.3% (n=124) of MDs felt the pt had a >50% chance of being cured 1 yr post allo-HCT. For the subset of pts with MD prognostic data (n=199), pt's PU was concordant 20.6% (n=41) of the time when compared across all 6 response options. Overall, 71.9% (n=143) of pts erred toward optimism, while 7.5% (n=15) of pts were pessimistic. 60.8% of MD and pts agreed on prognosis when dichotomized to better or worse than 50% chance of being cured 1 yr post allo-HCT. Prognostic concordance was not significantly associated with any pt socio-demographic factors, HCT-CI or KPS via descriptive statistics or regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS In this prospective randomized trial focusing on a population of older, medically infirm, and/or frail pts receiving allo-HCT, pts' PU was not concordant with MD prognosis approximately 80% of the time. While some pts were pessimistic, the majority overestimated the likelihood they would be cured of disease compared to MD estimates. Future studies should investigate the true accuracy of both MD and pt prognosis, as well as how to improve communication about prognosis and pt PU (if inaccurate based on best available information) prior to HCT.

Introduction: The BMT CTN 1704 study developed and validated the CHARM that stratified risk for non-relapse mortality and overall mortality among older adults, performing better than the HCT-CI alone (Artz A et al, Blood. 2023;142:109) and equally to two machine learning models. CHARM assigns a total score for 7 health variables: increasing age, higher HCT-CI scores, lower albumin, higher C-reactive protein, higher percent of weight loss over the preceding year, lower patient-reported performance status scores, and lower cognitive score per Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA). A CHARM calculator is available at:https://cibmtr.org/CIBMTR/OffNav/DevSandbox/CHARM-Risk-NRM-Calculator No multi-institutional prospective data exist on functional trajectories and morbidity after HCT in older patients. We now report on the association of CHARM to trajectories of secondary morbidity outcomes among allo-HCT survivors of this large, prospective study. Patients and Methods: Allo-HCT candidates, aged ≥60 years (yrs), were enrolled (n=1226) from 49 centers in the US between 2019 - 2021. The primary analysis includes 1105 patients proceeding to allo-HCT on study and secondary endpoints were assessed at day (D) 100, 180 and 365 except MoCA and organ toxicity were restricted to D100 and frailty had inadequate data for D100. A sequential multiple imputation strategy was implemented to impute endpoints for survivors at each time point with missing data. Analyses on multiply imputed datasets were conducted and the results combined using Rubin's rule. Associations between CHARM scores and secondary outcomes were analyzed using a multivariable Cox, Fine-Gray, Generalized Estimating Equations, and logistic regression model for survival, competing risks, continuous, and binary outcomes, respectively, with latter two focused on surviving patients. Models were adjusted for other variables including conditioning intensity, graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis regimen, disease-risk index, donor-recipient gender match, ethnicity, baseline value of the dependent variable, and visit timepoints. Results: Higher CHARM scores were associated with development of serious organ toxicities by D100 (OR: 2.05, [1.52-2.78], p<0.0001) and ≥2 worsening score on the MoCA (odds ratio (OR) 1.55 [1.16-2.1], p=0.003). Among survivors at all timepoints, higher CHARM scores were associated with greater disability by instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) (Slope -0.640 [-0.433-0.846], p<0.001) and worsening Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Reporting System (PROMIS) physical function (Slope -0.981 [-0.057 - -1.904], p=0.037), depression (Slope 0.763 [0.042-1.484], p=0.038) and in a lesser magnitude anxiety (Slope 0.659, p=0.076). Among survivors at D180 and D365, higher CHARM scores were associated with worse frailty (Slope 0.193 [0.081-0.305], p<0.001). CHARM scores were not associated with development of acute GVHD grades 2-4 or 3-4 but were associated with post-GVHD increased mortality (HR: 1.61, [1.25-2.08], p=0.0002). Higher CHARM scores are associated with a lower incidence of chronic GVHD (HR: 0.83, p=0.026), likely due to the effect of CHARM on the competing risk of death leaving fewer patients at risk for chronic GVHD. Conclusions: The novel primary CHARM, originally developed to predict risks of NRM, also predicts worse frailty, disability, cognitive decline, and serious organ toxicities; outcomes that are critically important to older recipients of allo-HCT. CHARM therefore informs risks of transplant morbidity, separate from risks of developing acute GVHD. Results further support adopting CHARM in practice to counsel patients, expedite HCT referrals for lower risk CHARM, and design trials for high CHARM score patients.

Background and Rationale: Systemic mastocytosis (SM) is a clonal hematologic neoplasm characterized by abnormal accumulation of mast cells which can lead to symptoms related to mast cell degranulation and/or, in the case of advanced systemic mastocytosis (AdvSM), organ dysfunction due to mast cell infiltration. AdvSM is a category of SM comprised of aggressive systemic mastocytosis (ASM), mast cell leukemia (MCL), and SM with an associated hematologic neoplasm (SM-AHN). Among these, SM-AHN is the most common subtype, accounting for approximately 70% of AdvSM. A KIT D816V mutation found in up to 95% of SM cases is the primary oncogenic driver, making it a key therapeutic target. Avapritinib, a highly potent and selective inhibitor of D816V mutant KIT, has demonstrated high rates of rapid, deep, and durable responses in all AdvSM subtypes, including SM-AHN (Gotlib et al. Nature Medicine, 2021; DeAngelo et al., Nature Medicine, 2021). However, despite showing prolonged OS and low risk of progression of the SM component, some patients (20%) exhibit progression of the AHN component, including transformation to AML. In some patients, combination therapy with avapritinib and AHN-directed therapy may therefore be necessary for optimal control of SM-AHN. Hypomethylating agents (HMA) form the backbone of therapy for advanced myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasm (MDS/MPN); hematologic neoplasms most likely to co-occur with SM in patients (pts) with SM-AHN. To date, the combination of HMA and KIT inhibitors has not been clinically evaluated. In this study, we aim to assess the safety and tolerability of the combination of avapritinib and decitabine in patients with SM-AHN. Study design and Methods: The primary objective of the study is to establish the recommended dose (RP2D) of avapritinib in combination with decitabine based on dose-limiting toxicity, overall safety, and clinical activity data. A dose evaluation steering committee (DESC) comprised of participating investigators will review the totality of safety and efficacy data to determine RP2D. Secondary endpoints include SM overall response rate by the end of 6 cycles by the m-IWG consensus criteria and proposed ECNM-AIM criteria (Gotlib et al., J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract, 2022) and incidence/frequency of adverse events. Exploratory endpoints include patient reported outcomes, PFS, OS, and correlative biomarkers linked to mast cell disease or AHN. Pts with a diagnosis of SM-AHN by the WHO 2022 criteria will be eligible for inclusion. Pts must have any of the following myeloid AHN per WHO 2022 criteria: MDS, CMML, MDS/MPN with neutrophilia, MDS/MPN with SF3B1 mutation and thrombocytosis, or MDS/MPN-NOS. Patients with MDS must have intermediate, high- or very-high risk by IPSS-R. Patients with very-low or low-risk MDS by IPSS-R must be intolerant/refractory to ESA or have serum EPO > 200 U/L. A baseline platelet count of ≥ 75 x 109/L and ≥ 25 x 109/L will be required for inclusion in the dose-finding and the dose-expansion phases, respectively. Key exclusion criteria include a diagnosis of AML, history of intracranial hemorrhage, prior treatment with avapritinib or decitabine with documented progression in SM or AHN component, respectively, or treatment with alternative KIT inhibitor or azacitidine within 4 weeks of study treatment initiation. In the dose finding part of the study, a Bayesian adaptive design will be employed to assess different doses of avapritinib (50 to 200 mg PO daily) in combination with fixed doses of decitabine (oral decitabine/cedazuridine: 35/100 mg/day or intravenous decitabine: 20 mg/m2/day on days 1-5) in a 28-day treatment cycle. Close attention will be paid to treatment-emergent thrombocytopenia with protocol-driven treatment holds and dose modification strategies employed when platelet count drops below 50 x 109/L. After RP2D is determined, an additional 10 patients will be enrolled in the dose expansion phase. Patients with platelet count ≥ 25 x 109/L and < 75 x 109/L, will receive lead-in dosing with decitabine or decitabine/cedazuridine with the ability to add avapritinib if sufficient platelet thresholds are achieved. Planned correlative studies include serial single-cell multi-omics utilizing scDNA-seq and immunophenotyping to assess impact of combination treatment on a molecularly complex disease state. This study is currently open to accrual (NCT06327685).

Introduction Knowledge of epidemiologic risk factors, clonal changes associated with MDS development from precursor states, and evolution from one MDS state to another (lower- (LR) or higher-risk (HR) disease or leukemia (AML)) are largely limited to retrospective studies, which may not reflect the true MDS spectrum. The MDS NHS is an established prospective cohort of patients (pts) with suspected MDS enrolled at diverse US sites. Extensive clinical data and biospecimens are collected at baseline and throughout follow-up (F/U), in real time, as pts are followed for life. Here, we assess rates and potential predictors of progression providing a foundation for precise stratification across the MDS spectrum, which may ultimately guide intervention. Methods At baseline, all MDS NHS pts have central pathology review and those assigned to MDS, MDS/MPN overlap, AML<30% blasts, or at-risk of MDS (AR-MDS: CCUS and other at-risk) are followed prospectively. We compared AR-MDS with LR-MDS (MDS and MDS/MPN overlap with IPSS-R ≤ 3.5) and HR-MDS (MDS and MDS/MPN overlap with IPSS-R > 3.5). We defined disease progression as any F/U diagnosis of worsening disease or documented disease-related death. Rates of disease progression were compared between groups using survival analysis methods for cumulative incidence incorporating non-disease death as a competing risk. Associations between progression and predictor variables were explored using univariate tests of association and multivariable survival (Cox regression) models for time-to-progression and logistic models for probability of progression (yes/no). Results The MDS NHS enrolled 2051 pts during June 2016-February 2024, with 54% (1111, above categories) followed prospectively. Median F/U is 1.7 yrs (IQR: 0.8-3.1 yrs, max: 7.9 yrs). For the current analysis, 582 MDS and 505 AR-MDS pts were included. Compared to AR-MDS, MDS patients were more often male (70% v 61%, p<0.01), older (median age: 75 v 72 years, p<0.01), and had lower baseline hemoglobin (median: 10.1 v 11.9 g/dL, p<0.001), platelets (median: 124 x109 v 146 x109 cells/L, p<0.001), and absolute neutrophil counts (median: 1.9 x109 vs 2.8 x109 cells/L, p<0.001). F/U time was similar among AR-MDS and MDS (median: 1.9 vs 1.6 yrs), with both groups having a 75th percentile of 3 yrs and maximum of 7 yrs. A total of 331 deaths were observed (30%), with 145 (44%) of these due to causes related to MDS (myeloid disease and/or cardiovascular disease). Overall, 18.5% had disease progression, with annual rates of 8% (MDS) and 2% (AR-MDS) (p<0.01). Among HR-MDS, progression rates were greatest in the 1st year following diagnosis (33%) and declined thereafter, whereas progression rates remained between 5-8% for LR-MDS and 1-3% for AR-MDS over 5 yrs of F/U. AR-MDS had similar rates of progression within the first 3 yrs from diagnosis as MDS with the lowest IPSS-R category. Among AR-MDS, low hemoglobin (hazard ratio, HR [95% CI]=3.2 [1.4-7.3], p<0.01) was significantly associated with progression. Among MDS, low hemoglobin (HR=4.0 [2.2-7.0], p<0.001), low platelet count (HR=3.1 [1.7-5.6], p<0.001) and higher numbers of mutations (HR=1.13 [1.0-1.2], p<0.01) were significantly associated with progression. Due to the low rate of progression in AR-MDS, meaningful comparisons of mutations could not be completed. In MDS, univariate analyses showed that somatic mutation prevalence in gene pathways for transcription, cell cycle and RAS signaling, and in genes TP53, BCOR, SF3B1, DDX41, PTPN11, SETBP1, and JAK2 were significantly associated with the probability of progression (p<0.05 in all). In multivariable models, adjusting for patient age, sex, and MDS risk level, the probability of progression (PP) was significantly higher among those with vs without somatic mutations in BCOR (PP=63% vs 29%, p=0.004), PTPN11 (PP=67% vs 29%, p=0.009), SETBP1 (PP=61% vs 30%, p=0.02), JAK2 (PP=59% vs 30%, p=0.02), DDX41 (PP=56% vs 30%, p=0.03) and TP53 (PP=43% vs 29%, p=0.04). Conclusions In this large prospective cohort of MDS and pts at risk for MDS, the annual rate of any disease progression was 8% among MDS and 2% among AR-MDS, lower than some retrospective series. Specific cytopenias and genetic factors associated with progression were identified. The MDS NHS provides an incomparable opportunity to address the critical clinical challenges of management and prevention of MDS progression across its spectrum.

Introduction: Epcoritamab (Epcor) is a novel subcutaneous CD3xCD20 bispecific antibody (bsAb) that is currently approved as monotherapy for the treatment of adults with relapsed or refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma after ≥2 systemic therapies. The combination of Epcor with standard treatment regimens has been shown to be safe and efficacious; Epcor in combination with gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (Epcor+GemOx) has provided deep and durable responses with favorable survival outcomes in a transplant-ineligible R/R diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patient (pt) population, of which 99% were from the US and Europe (EPCORE NHL-2; NCT04663347). Another CD3xCD20 bsAb, intravenous glofitamab, has been studied in combination with gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (Glofi+GemOx) in the randomized STARGLO trial (NCT04408638) and demonstrated benefit over rituximab plus GemOx (R-GemOx), despite not demonstrating superiority over R-GemOx in patients from the US and Europe. In the absence of head-to-head data, this study used matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) to assess the comparative efficacy of Epcor+GemOx vs R-GemOx and vs Glofi+GemOx. Methods: Individual pt-level data from EPCORE NHL-2 arm 5 and aggregated data from pts in each of the STARGLO arms were used to conduct an MAIC. Logistic propensity score models were used to weight Epcor+GemOx-treated pts to create matched cohorts with the R-GemOx and Glofi+GemOx arms separately. Weighting was conducted based on the distribution of baseline characteristics and prognostic factors such as age, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, previous therapies, and primary refractory status. Overall response rate (ORR), complete response (CR) rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared for Epcor+GemOx vs R-GemOx, and vs Glofi+GemOx. Results: A total of 103 pts treated with Epcor+GemOx (median follow-up: 13.2 months) were compared to 91 pts treated with R-GemOx and 183 pts treated with Glofi+GemOx (median follow-up: 20.7 months), although differences in median follow-up time limited comparisons of longer-term survival outcomes. Match-adjustment mitigated differences in baseline characteristics across the 3 cohorts. After adjustment, Epcor+GemOx demonstrated a significant 44.8% advantage in ORR over R-GemOx (85.4% vs 40.7%), with a 110% increase in the likelihood of achieving a response (odds ratio [OR] 2.1; 95% CI 1.6-2.8; P<0.0001). Epcor+GemOx also demonstrated a significant 43.2% advantage in CR rate over R-GemOx (68.5% vs 25.3%), with a 170% increase in the likelihood of achieving a CR (OR 2.7; 95% CI 1.8-4.1; P<0.0001). With the current follow-up, Epcor+GemOx demonstrated superior PFS vs R-GemOx (hazard ratio [HR] 0.37; 95% CI 0.22-0.63; P<0.001), corresponding to a 63% reduction in the risk of progression. Median OS was not reached [NR] for Epcor+GemOx vs 13.9 months for R-GemOx, corresponding to a 43% reduction in the risk of mortality (HR 0.57 [95% CI 0.33-0.98]; P=0.04). After adjustment, Epcor+GemOx demonstrated a significant 15% advantage in ORR over Glofi+GemOx (83.3% vs 68.3%), with a 20% increase in the likelihood of achieving a response (OR 1.2; 95% CI 1.0-1.4; P=0.021). Epcor+GemOx demonstrated a trend toward higher CR rate than Glofi+GemOx (66.8% vs 58.5%; OR 1.1; 95% CI 0.90-1.5; P=0.277). Adjusted median PFS and OS for Epcor+GemOx, with limited follow-up and substantial censoring, was 12.9 months and NR, respectively. For Glofi+GemOx with longer follow-up, PFS and OS were 13.8 months and 25.6 months, respectively. Conclusions: Results show significantly superior efficacy for all outcomes with Epcor+GemOx vs R-GemOx from STARGLO. Epcor+GemOx also provided superior ORR and a trend toward higher CR rates vs Glofi+GemOx, indicating potential for better long-term efficacy outcomes. The Epcor+GemOx survival data are still maturing given shorter follow-up time, preventing a robust comparison of survival vs Glofi+GemOx. Findings support the efficacy of Epcor+GemOx as an alternative therapeutic regimen in transplant-ineligible patients with R/R DLBCL.