Citations

Abstract Background: Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of multiple myeloma in populations of European ancestry (EA) identified and confirmed 24 susceptibility loci. For other cancers (e.g., colorectum and melanoma), risk loci have also been associated with patient survival. Methods: We explored the possible association of all the known risk variants and their polygenic risk score (PRS) with multiple myeloma overall survival (OS) in multiple populations of EA [the International Multiple Myeloma rESEarch (IMMEnSE) consortium, the International Lymphoma Epidemiology consortium, CoMMpass, and the German GWAS] for a total of 3,748 multiple myeloma cases. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess the association between each risk SNP with OS under the allelic and codominant models of inheritance. All analyses were adjusted for age, sex, country of origin (for IMMEnSE) or principal components (for the others) and disease stage (ISS). SNP associations were meta-analyzed. Results: SNP associations were meta-analyzed. From the meta-analysis, two multiple myeloma risk SNPs were associated with OS (P < 0.05), specifically POT1-AS1-rs2170352 [HR = 1.37; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.09–1.73; P = 0.007] and TNFRSF13B-rs4273077 (HR = 1.19; 95% CI = 1.01–1.41; P = 0.04). The association between the combined 24 SNP MM-PRS and OS, however, was not significant. Conclusions: Overall, our results did not support an association between the majority of multiple myeloma risk SNPs and OS. Impact: This is the first study to investigate the association between multiple myeloma PRS and OS in multiple myeloma.

SummaryBelantamab mafodotin (BLMF) is a B‐cell maturation antigen‐directed antibody‐drug conjugate, recently approved for advanced multiple myeloma (MM). The impact of BLMF‐induced ocular toxicity on patient outcomes is unknown. We studied a cohort of 38 consecutively seen patients treated with BLMF outside of trials. Of those, 75% experienced ocular toxicity, with 69% developing keratopathy. Among patients requiring ocular toxicity‐related permanent BLMF discontinuation (14%) or dose reduction (11%), 70% had progression of MM within a median of 3 months (95% confidence interval: 0.2–not reached) following BLMF interruption or dose reduction. Ocular toxicity is a major deterrent to the continuous use of BLMF in routine clinical practice. Measures to successfully prevent and mitigate ocular toxicity should be developed to achieve the full potential of this agent.

Purpose: In RE-MIND2 (NCT04697160), patient-level outcomes from the L-MIND study (NCT02399085) of tafasitamab plus lenalidomide were retrospectively compared with patient-level matched observational cohorts treated with National Cancer Care Network (NCCN)/European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO)-listed systemic therapies for relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Patients and Methods: Data were collected from health records of eligible patients aged ≥18 years with histologically confirmed DLBCL who had received ≥2 systemic therapies for DLBCL (including ≥1 anti-CD20 therapy). Patients from L-MIND were matched with patients from the RE-MIND2 observational cohort using estimated propensity score-based 1:1 nearest-neighbor matching, balanced for nine covariates. The primary analysis compared tafasitamab plus lenalidomide with patients who received any systemic therapy for R/R DLBCL (pooled in one cohort) or bendamustine plus rituximab (BR) or rituximab plus gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (R-GemOx; as two distinct cohorts). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included treatment response and time-to-event outcomes. Results: In RE-MIND2, 3,454 patients were enrolled from 200 sites in North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific. Strictly matched pairs of patients consisted of tafasitamab plus lenalidomide versus systemic therapies pooled (n = 76 pairs), versus BR (n = 75 pairs), and versus R­GemOx (n = 74 pairs). Significantly prolonged OS was reported with tafasitamab plus lenalidomide versus systemic pooled therapies [hazard ratios (HR): 0.55; P = 0.0068], BR (HR: 0.42; P < 0.0001), and R-GemOx (HR: 0.47; P = 0.0003). Conclusions: RE-MIND2, a retrospective observational study, met its primary endpoint, demonstrating prolonged OS with tafasitamab plus lenalidomide versus BR and R-GemOx. See related commentary by Cherng and Westin, p. 3908

TPS8075 Background: Standard of care for SMM includes active monitoring until progression to multiple myeloma (MM); however, recent evidence suggests pts with high-risk features may benefit from early treatment. DARA is a human IgGκ monoclonal antibody targeting CD38 that is approved as monotherapy for relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) or in combination with standard of care for RRMM or newly diagnosed MM. Results from the phase 3 COLUMBA study showed that DARA SC demonstrated similar efficacy to intravenous (IV) DARA but with a lower rate of infusion-related reactions and shorter administration time. Based on the promising single-agent activity observed with IV DARA in intermediate- or high-risk SMM pts during the phase 2 CENTAURUS study, we hypothesized that DARA SC may delay progression to MM versus active monitoring in pts with high-risk SMM. Methods: AQUILA is an ongoing, randomized, open-label, multicenter phase 3 study of DARA SC versus active monitoring in pts with high-risk SMM. DARA SC (DARA 1,800 mg + recombinant human hyaluronidase PH20 [rHuPH20; 2,000 U/mL; Halozyme]) is administered by manual injection over approximately 5 minutes at alternating locations on the abdomen weekly in Cycles 1 and 2, every 2 weeks in Cycles 3-6, and every 4 weeks thereafter until 39 cycles (28 days/cycle), up to 36 months, or until disease progression. Eligibility criteria include confirmed diagnosis of SMM for ≤5 years, factors indicating high risk of progression to MM (clonal bone marrow plasma cells [BMPCs] ≥10% and ≥1 of the following: serum M protein ≥30 g/L, IgA SMM, immunoparesis with reduction of 2 uninvolved Ig isotypes, serum involved:uninvolved free light chain ratio ≥8 to < 100, or clonal BMPCs > 50% to < 60% with measurable disease), and ECOG performance status ≤1. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS), assessed by an independent review committee, with disease progression defined according to International Myeloma Working Group diagnostic criteria for MM. Secondary endpoints include time to biochemical or diagnostic (SLiM-CRAB) progression, overall response rate, complete response rate, duration of response, time to response, time to first-line treatment for MM, PFS on first-line treatment for MM (PFS2), overall survival, and incidence of MM with adverse prognostic features. The study completed enrollment on May 6, 2019; 390 pts have been randomly assigned to DARA SC or active monitoring. The primary efficacy analysis will be performed after approximately 165 PFS events have been observed. Clinical trial information: NCT03301220.

8054 Background: The introduction of immunomodulatory agents, proteasome inhibitors, and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has improved outcomes for patients with multiple myeloma (MM), but those with high risk MM (HRMM) have a poor long-term prognosis. Herein we provide survival outcomes on the first randomized trial in newly diagnosed HRMM, S1211, to follow-up on the previously reported progression-free survival (PFS) (NCT01668719, Usmani SZ et al, Lancet Haem 2021). Methods: S1211 is a randomized phase II trial comparing 8 cycles of lenalidomide, bortezomib and dexamethasone (RVd) induction followed by dose-attenuated RVd maintenance until disease progression with or without elotuzumab (RVd-Elo). Stem cell collection was allowed, but ASCT was deferred until progression. HRMM was defined by one of the following: gene expression profiling high-risk (GEPhi), t(14;16), t(14;20), del(17p), amplification 1q21, primary plasma cell leukemia (pPCL), or elevated serum LDH (> 2X ULN). Median PFS was the primary endpoint, using a one-sided stratified log-rank test at a one-sided significance level of 0.1. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), adverse events (AE), serious adverse events (SAE) and OS. Response was assessed using the IMWG 2009 criteria. Results: S1211 enrolled 103 evaluable patients, RVd n=54, RVd-Elo n=49. 74% had ISS II/III, 48% amp1q21, 38% del(17p), 11% t(14;16), 9% GEPhi, 7% pPCL, 5% t(14;20) and 4% elevated LDH (17% >1 feature). With median follow-up of 72 months (mos.), no difference in median PFS was observed [RVd-Elo=29 mos., RVd= 34 mos., HR = 1.11 (80% CI=0.82, 1.49, p=0.66]. No difference in OS was observed [RVd-Elo = median not reached (NR), RVd= 68 mos., HR = 0.85 (80% CI: 0.59, 1.23), p-value = 0.58]. 76% pts had >Grade 3 AEs, no differences in the safety profile were observed. Amongst patients with gain/amp 1q21, median PFS was [RVd-Elo=31 mos., RVd= 37 mos., HR = 1.48 (80% CI= 0.95, 2.31), p=0.25], median OS was [RVd-Elo = 61 mos., RVd= 68 mos., HR = 1.23 (80% CI: 0.72, 2.10), p-value = 0.63]. In patients with del(17p), median PFS was RVd-Elo=41 mos., RVd= 30 mos.[HR = 0.98 (80% CI= 0.60, 1.58), p=0.95], median OS RVd-Elo = NR, RVd= 72 mos., [HR = 0.77 (80% CI: 0.40, 1.48), p-value = 0.61]. Conclusions: In the first randomized HRMM study reported to date, the addition of Elo to RVd induction and maintenance did not improve PFS and OS with a median follow-up of 6 years. Although the median PFS for Del17p subgroup on RVd-Elo arm is higher than RVd, it did not achieve statistical significance. The PFS and OS observed for gain/amp 1q21 and del17p in the RVd control arm may serve as important benchmarks for future enrichment design HRMM clinical trials. The PFS and OS in both arms of the study exceeded the original statistical assumptions and support the role for PI/IMiD combination induction/maintenance therapy for this population. Clinical trial information: NCT01668719.

e20001 Background: High dose melphalan followed by autologous stem cell transplant (HDM-ASCT) remains the standard of care for transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) despite advances in treatments. Achievement of complete response (CR) is associated with improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS); Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) negativity (-) using next generation flow cytometry with a sensitivity of 10-5 is strongly associated with improved PFS and OS. We investigated the rates of conversion to MRD(-), especially MRD(-) CR following HDM-ASCT in patients with NDMM. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients with NDMM who underwent early HDM-ASCT at Mayo Clinic Rochester from May 2018 to July 2019. Response assessment was conducted after induction and within 100 days post-ASCT based on 2016 IMWG criteria, except for using Mass-Fix instead of immunofixation. MRD was assessed in bone marrow using the established Euro Flow protocol with sensitivity of 10-5. The FISH assay was used to risk-stratify patients as high-risk (HR) and standard risk (SR) cytogenetics as per the mSMART guidelines. Primary outcome measure was the conversion to MRD(-) CR after ASCT. Secondary outcomes include the overall conversion to MRD(-) irrespective of IMWG response, the impact of HR cytogenetics and pre-ASCT IMWG response on conversion to MRD(-) CR. Results: Two-hundred and ten patients were included; 126 (60%) were male and median age 62 years (range 32–77 years). There were 78 (44%) patients with HR cytogenetics. Pre-ASCT, 23 patients (11%) achieved MRD(-) CR, and 66 (31%) patients achieved MRD(-) CR post ASCT. Of 187 patients not in MRD(-) CR pre-ASCT, 45 (24%) converted to MRD(-) CR. Table provides a breakdown of the conversion rate of pre-ASCT IMWG response category to MRD(-) CR post ASCT and patients with MRD(+) CR had the highest rate (78%) of conversion. The presence of HR cytogenetics did not impact rates of MRD(-) CR achievement post ASCT irrespective of pre-ASCT IMWG response (p = 1.0). Overall, irrespective of IMWG response, 43 (20%) patients were MRD(-) pre-ASCT (19 in VGPR, 24 in CR or better) and 102 (49%) patients were MRD(-) post-ASCT (36 in VGPR, 66 in CR or better). Among 85 patients in VGPR post-ASCT, 36 were MRD(-) of which 8 (22%) progressed, while 49 were MRD(+) of which 24 (49%) progressed (p = 0.014). Conclusions: Upfront HDM-ASCT in patients with NDMM leads to deeper responses with 24% converting to MRD(-) CR and more than doubling of the total rate of MRD(-) irrespective of IMWG response. [Table: see text]

110 Background: Sarcopenia or a loss of muscle mass increases with aging and is associated with increased overall mortality in patients with cancer. Recent advances in machine learning–based CNN algorithms have allowed for the rapid processing of digital images to produce image classifications of body composition. Since incidence of MM is highly associated with aging, we sought to determine if the presence of sarcopenia, as determined by utilizing this machine learning–based CNN algorithm on CT images, had prognostic value in patients with NDMM. Methods: We identified all patients with NDMM from January 2003 to July 2019 who had a standard-dose CT scan that included the L3 vertebral level performed within 6 months of diagnosis. Using a machine learning–based CNN-algorithm, abdominal CT images were analyzed to measure muscle area. These measurements were normalized by dividing the area values by the height of the patient squared (m2) to obtain skeletal muscle index (SMI) values. Patients were categorized as sarcopenic according to international gender-specific consensus cutoffs for SMI (male: < 55 cm2/m2 and female: < 39 cm2/m2). Patients with the following FISH cytogenetics were considered high risk (HR): t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), and deletion 17p/monosomy 17 whereas the remainder were standard risk (SR). Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared via the log-rank method. Results: The study cohort consisted of 344 patients. 68 (20%) were categorized as HR based on FISH cytogenetics.187 (54%) patients were sarcopenic based on their peri-diagnosis standard-dose CT scan. Sarcopenic patients were more likely to have ISS-3 disease (45% vs. 30%; p =.023), be male (73% vs. 48%; p <.001), and be ≥ age 75 (27% vs. 14%; p =.002) compared to non-sarcopenic patients. The median OS for patients with HR FISH and ISS 2 / 3 disease was 40 months and 57 months respectively compared to 90 months and 119 months for those with SR FISH and ISS-1 disease respectively (FISH: p <.004; ISS: p <.001). The median OS for sarcopenic patients was 44 months compared to 90 months for those not sarcopenic (p <.001). The time to next therapy (TTNT) for sarcopenic patients was 39 months compared to 45 months for those not sarcopenic (p =.05). In a multivariable model, the presence of sarcopenia (HR 1.64, 95% CI, 1.05–2.56; p =.03) retained significance in the presence of HR FISH, ISS 2 / 3 disease, and age ≥ 75. Conclusions: Gender-specific sarcopenia identified by a machine learning–based CNN algorithm significantly affects OS in patients with NDMM and is independent of age, ISS stage, and cytogenetic status. Future studies utilizing this machine learning–based methodology of assessing sarcopenia in larger prospective clinical trials are required to validate these findings.

TPS9595 Background: There is a need for novel immunotherapies to address the patient population that never or no longer responds to immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI). VV1 is an oncolytic vesicular stomatitis virus engineered to express human interferon beta (IFNβ) to enhance cellular anti-tumor immune responses and tumor selectivity. Phase 1 studies demonstrated VV1 anti-tumor activity in several malignancies with or without a CPI. We are exploring ways to optimize VV1 efficacy in combination with cemiplimab, an anti-PD1 antibody approved for lung, basal and squamous cell skin cancers. Recent clinical data support a 5-fold higher dose of VV1 than was previously explored, and pre-clinical data show synergy between the oncolytic and an anti-CTLA4 antibody, in addition to cemiplimab, supporting exploration of a triplet. What was originally a five-arm study of intravenous (IV) VV1 in combination with IV cemiplimab has been amended to focus on 2 means of optimizing efficacy: use of a higher dose of VV1 and triplet combination in proof-of-concept populations. Methods: We are now enrolling pts with advanced melanoma (after progression on anti-PD1) and plan to include 1 st -line NSCLC pts with PD-L1 expression ≥50%. The study is first exploring the preliminary anti-tumor activity, safety, and immunogenic activity of the combination of IV VV1 at a dose of 1.0 x 10 11 TCID 50 once on D1 followed by IV cemiplimab Q3W starting on D8, or the same regimen with an additional intratumoral injection of VV1 1.0 x 10 9 TCID 50 once on D1 for pts with accessible lesions. Pts receive IV cemiplimab Q3W until confirmed disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Once at least 6 pts have been treated with acceptable safety across the 2 melanoma doublet cohorts using this higher dose of VV1, a 3 rd melanoma cohort will open to add a single dose of ipilimumab 50 mg on D1 (all IV triplet). Once 6 melanoma pts have received the triplet safely, the 1 st -line NSCLC cohort will open. All cohort decisions are guided by a Data Review Committee. Cohorts will be expanded based on a Simon 2-stage design using a type I error rate of 0.05 and power of 85%. Null ORR is 10% with a target of 35% for 2 nd line melanoma and null ORR is 40% in 1 st line NSCLC with a target of 70%. Each melanoma cohort will require a response in ≥2 of 10 pts in the 1 st stage to add 11 more in the 2 nd stage, while NSCLC will first need 5/9 evaluable pts to respond, then an additional 13 to complete the design. Response is assessed at week 7 then Q9W per RECIST v1.1. The study includes serial biopsies in ≥3/10 pts in Stage 1 of each of the IV melanoma cohorts (doublet and triplet therapy), all pts in Stage 2 of these IV melanoma cohorts, and all pts in both Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the IV/IT melanoma cohort, to permit a thorough investigation of the impact of the 3 immunotherapies under investigation. The study is currently ongoing in the USA. Clinical trial information: NCT04291105.