Citations

e15131 Background: Elimusertib is a highly selective oral inhibitor of the Ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3 related (ATR) kinase, which is required for efficient end-joining repair of double-stranded breaks, particularly during DNA replication. Many pediatric cancers involve potential ATR susceptibilities such as increased replication stress due to oncogenic fusions, specific DNA damage repair (DDR) deficiencies, oncogenic activation of DNA damage and nucleases such as PGBD5, as well as alternative lengthening of telomeres. We report the initial phase 1 results of PEPN2112 (NCT05071209), an ongoing pediatric phase 1/2 clinical trial of elimusertib monotherapy. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) included children, adolescents, and young adults with relapsed or refractory tumors with: (1) Ewing sarcoma or related EWSR1 fusion positive tumors (EWS), (2) alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma, PAX3-FOXO1 fusion positive (aRMS), or (3) non-CNS primary tumors exhibiting specific DDR pathway defects anticipated to sensitize to ATR inhibition. For pts < 18 years (yrs), a rolling-six design was used to evaluate elimusertib administered BID x3 days/week of a 28-day cycle starting at the adult equivalent recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of 24 mg/m2/dose (max 40 mg) with a potential de-escalation to 18 mg/m2/dose (max 30 mg). The pediatric RP2D determination was based upon dose limiting toxicity (DLT) criteria (CTCAEv5) during cycle 1. Pharmacokinetic (PK) studies were performed. Pts > 18 yrs could enroll onto the phase 2 cohorts at the adult RP2D simultaneously with the pediatric phase 1. Once the pediatric RP2D was defined, pts < 18 yrs accrued to the phase 2 cohorts and a PK expansion for pts < 12 yrs was opened. Results: 8 eligible pts were enrolled (4 males) on the phase 1 part of the study. 2 pts were inevaluable for DLT as they received < 75% of protocol therapy. Median (range) age was 13 (10-17) yrs. Diagnoses included: EWS (n = 4) and 1 pt each with aRMS, adrenocortical carcinoma, clear cell sarcoma, and osteosarcoma. At 24 mg/m2/dose, no DLTs were observed. Toxicities were hematologic, with grade 3 toxicities including anemia (n = 3), neutropenia (n = 4), and decreased white blood cells (n = 1). One pt experienced grade 4 lymphopenia. There were no grade 3/4 non-hematologic toxicities. Day 1 mean ± SD values of Tmax, Cmax, AUC0-8h and t1/2 were 1.6 ± 0.5 h, 1532 ± 385 ng/mL, 5863 ± 1841 h*ng/mL and 3.6 ± 0.9 h, respectively. Conclusions: Elimusertib-related toxicities were primarily hematologic. The RP2D for elimusertib monotherapy in pediatric pts is 24 mg/m2/dose (max 40 mg) orally BID x3 days/week continuously, analogous to dosing in adults with similar PK. Phase 2 and PK expansion cohorts as well as pharmacodynamic studies are ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT05071209 .

1533 Background: FDA-approved chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) and bispecific T cell engager (TCE) therapy are most commonly managed inpatient. Here we report our experience with hospital-based outpatient (HBO) management of patients (pts) receiving FDA-approved CAR-T or TCE and a predictive model for increased risk of early hospitalization (≤3 days post CAR-T). Methods: We reviewed the outcomes of pts who received FDA-approved CAR-T (axi-cel, brexu-cel, ide-cel, cilta-cel) or TCE (teclistamab) in the HBO unit between 3/2021 and 1/2023 at Mayo Clinic, Rochester. Results: HBO is closely integrated with inpatient practice and includes the same specialty trained clinical team. It is the first point of contact 24/7 for pts and triage evaluations. CAR-T and TCE are given on HBO followed by monitoring per REMS and as clinically needed until admission criteria is met. Remote patient monitoring (RPM) tools were used as part of outpatient monitoring. Out of 169 CAR-T pts, 87 (51%) were dosed with new indication/products (follicular lymphoma, mantle cell lymphoma, myeloma). Among those, 80 (92%) pts were dosed outpatient, among whom 21 (27%) were never hospitalized. CRS and ICANS incidences were comparable to that reported in registration studies. Median time to first admission from CAR-T infusion was 1 day (range, 0-9), with 31% (n=18/59) of admissions after day 3 post infusion. The most common cause of hospitalization was fever (n=40, 59%). Median length of hospital stay was 4 days (range, 1-49). Median time to tocilizumab (n=45, 80%), steroid (n=1, 2%), escalation of oxygen support (n=7, 12%), vasopressor (n=2, 3%), ventilator (n=1, 2%), hemodialysis (n=1, 2%) and ICU transfer (n=3, 5%) was 1 day (range, 0-31) after first admission. Use of bridging therapy, elevated CRP and LDH were predictive of early admission (ROC AUC 0.62). Four pts received teclistamab on HBO and enrolled in RPM. Data from more pts will be reported at ASCO. Conclusions: Our expanded study in CAR-T and TCE confirms that HBO is feasible and that CAR-T and TCE can be safely dosed outpatient. Approximately 31% of pts were admitted after 3 days from CAR-T infusion, and 27% of our pts were never admitted. Variables associated with aggressive disease can predict early hospitalization in pts receiving FDA-approved CAR-T. Extension of HBO practice to TCE is feasible.[Table: see text]

11536 Background: Ripretinib is a switch-control tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for patients (pts) with gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) who received prior treatment with ≥3 kinase inhibitors, including imatinib. Exploratory baseline circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis from INTRIGUE showed pts with second-line advanced GIST with primary KIT exon 11 mutations and secondary resistance mutations exclusively in KIT exons 17/18 derived clinical benefit from ripretinib but not sunitinib (Bauer S et al. J Clin Oncol. 2023; Abs 397784). Outcomes in pts with advanced GIST with ctDNA not detected (ctDNA-ND) had not been evaluated. Here, we present exploratory data from INTRIGUE in pts who had baseline ctDNA-ND vs ctDNA detected (ctDNA-D). Methods: INTRIGUE is an open-label, phase 3 study that enrolled pts with advanced GIST who had disease progression on or intolerance to imatinib (NCT03673501). Pts were randomized 1:1 to ripretinib 150 mg once daily (QD) or sunitinib 50 mg QD (4 wks on/2 wks off) and stratified by mutation according to local pathology report. Baseline peripheral whole blood was analyzed by Guardant360, a 74-gene ctDNA NGS-based assay. Pts with ctDNA-D had ≥1 somatic alteration in the 74 genes analyzed. Results: Pts with ctDNA-ND (82/362, 22.7%) were younger (median: 55.5 vs 62.0 years) and had smaller sums of longest diameters of target lesions (median [range]: 57.6 [11–459] vs 108.8 [15–418] mm) vs ctDNA-D (280/362, 77.3%). Progression-free survival (PFS) was longer in pts with ctDNA-ND vs ctDNA-D and numerically higher with ripretinib vs sunitinib in pts with ctDNA-ND (Table). Pts with ctDNA-ND categorized as not having a KIT exon 9 mutation at randomization ( KIT exon 11, other KIT/PDGFRA, or KIT/PDGFRA wild-type; n = 71) had longer PFS with ripretinib vs sunitinib (median not estimable [NE] vs 11 months; HR = 0.56; 95% CI 0.28 to 1.12). Objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS) were higher with ctDNA-ND vs ctDNA-D. Safety was similar between groups and consistent with the primary analysis. Conclusions: Pts with ctDNA-ND had better efficacy outcomes vs pts with ctDNA-D in both treatment arms; PFS was numerically higher with ripretinib vs sunitinib in pts with ctDNA-ND. Although little is known about the biology driving ctDNA in GIST, these data suggest pts may have improved outcomes and different treatment sensitivity based on ctDNA detectability. Clinical trial information: NCT03673501 . [Table: see text]

11529 Background: To evaluate clinical characteristics and patterns of treatment failure in patients with localized Ewing sarcoma (ES) treated on AEWS1031 according to local control (LC) strategies, tumor size, and tumor site. Methods: AEWS1031 was a phase 3 randomized trial comparing two interval compressed chemotherapy regimens. Patients who completed LC on AEWS1031 were analyzed. LC was with surgery alone (S), definitive radiation therapy (RT), or surgery plus radiation (S+RT), and determined by the treating investigator. Local failure (LF) and distant failure (DF) were defined as recurrence at primary tumor site or distant site, respectively. Fine and Gray method was used to estimate cumulative incidence of LF and DF from time LC was completed. P-values were calculated using logrank or Gray’s test, as appropriate. A two-sided p-value of ≤0.05 was considered significant. Results: 588 patients completed LC. Median age at enrollment was 13.0 years (range: 0.6- 33.9 years). Tumor sites were categorized as extremity (230; 39%), axial (142; 24%), extraosseous (110; 19%), and pelvis (106; 18%). At diagnosis, tumor volume (TV) was ≥200 mL in 170 patients (31%) and maximum tumor dimension (MTD) was ≥8 cm in 289 patients (52%). LC was with S in 320 patients (54%), RT in 160 (27%), and S+RT in 108 (18%). Eight patients received preoperative RT. Fifty-three patients (13.1%) who received S±RT had an R1 resection. LC with S was more likely for extremity (58%), RT for pelvis (38%) and S+ RT for axial (36%) and extraosseous (34%) primary tumors (p <0.01). With median follow up of 67.6 months from LC, the 5-year cumulative incidences of LF and DF for the entire cohort were 6.0% (95% CI, 4.3-8.3%) and 11.0% (95% CI, 8.6-13.9%), respectively. Eleven patients experienced simultaneous LF and DF. LF incidence was 5.0% for S, 8.4% for RT, and 5.6% for S+RT (p=0.47). DF incidence was 11.8% for S, 6.4% for RT, and 15.1% for S+RT (p=0.16). LF incidence by tumor site was 3.6% for extremity, 8.7% for pelvis, 7.3% for axial, and 6.8% for extraosseous (p=0.08). LF incidence was higher for primary tumors ≥200 mL (11.3%) compared to tumors < 200 mL (3.9%; p<0.01) and for tumors ≥8 cm (7.8%) compared to tumors < 8 cm (4.4%; p=0.02). Tumor size was associated with a higher LF incidence for S and RT, but not for S+RT (Table). LF incidence was 4.0% for R0, 7.5% for R1 with RT, and 16.7% for R1 without RT (p=0.02). Conclusions: We report the lowest LF incidence to date for prospective ES trials conducted. Both larger TV and MTD were associated with higher LF. Future investigations will aim to evaluate the impact of chemotherapy dose-intensity on LC and identify risk-stratification variables for improved LC. Five-year LF incidence by LC and tumor size. Clinical trial information: NCT01231906 . [Table: see text]

11524 Background: Ripretinib is a switch-control tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for patients (pts) with gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) who received prior treatment with ≥3 kinase inhibitors, including imatinib. Sunitinib is approved for advanced GIST after imatinib failure. In the first interim analysis (IA) for overall survival (OS) in the INTRIGUE trial, data were immature (OS event rate, 22.3%), and median OS was not reached in either arm for the KIT exon 11 intent-to-treat (ITT) and all-patient (AP) ITT populations (S Bauer, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2022). Additionally, ripretinib had a more favorable safety profile with fewer grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) than sunitinib. Here, we present the second IA of OS and updated safety from INTRIGUE. Methods: INTRIGUE is a global, open-label, phase 3 study that enrolled adult pts with advanced GIST who had disease progression on or intolerance to imatinib (NCT03673501). Randomization was 1:1 to ripretinib 150 mg once daily (QD) or sunitinib 50 mg QD (4 wks on/2 wks off) and was stratified by KIT mutational status and imatinib intolerance. OS was a key secondary endpoint; data cutoff for the second IA was Sept 1, 2022. Results: Of 453 pts in the AP ITT population, 444 received treatment; 51 remain on treatment (33/223 [14.8%] with ripretinib and 18/221 [8.1%] with sunitinib). Common reasons for treatment discontinuation were progressive disease (PD) assessed by independent radiologic review (55.4%), PD assessed by investigator (10.6%), clinical PD (5.9%), withdrawal of consent (5.4%), and adverse event (AE; 4.5%); fewer pts discontinued due to an AE for ripretinib vs sunitinib (2.7% vs 6.3%). Following study treatment discontinuation, 58 pts (25.6%) from the sunitinib arm received ripretinib; 139 pts (61.5%) from the ripretinib arm later received sunitinib. There were 185 OS events (40.8%) in the AP ITT population; median duration of follow-up was 28.7 and 28.5 months for ripretinib and sunitinib, respectively. OS was similar with ripretinib vs sunitinib in the AP ITT (median 35.5 vs 30.9 months; HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.18; nominal P = 0.39) and KIT exon 11 ITT populations (median 34.0 vs 31.5 months; HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.48; nominal P = 0.77). The updated safety profile was consistent with the primary analysis; fewer pts had grade 3/4 TEAEs with ripretinib vs sunitinib (95 [42.6%] vs 149 [67.4%]). Dose interruptions and reductions were lower with ripretinib vs sunitinib. The median (range) treatment duration was 7.9 (0.2–38.2) months for ripretinib and 6.5 (0.2–38.3) months for sunitinib. Conclusions: In the second IA from INTRIGUE, OS was similar between treatment arms. The safety profile remained consistent with additional data, and results demonstrate favorable safety with ripretinib in pts with advanced GIST previously treated with imatinib. Clinical trial information: NCT03673501 .

TPS7073 Background: Despite improved outcomes with azacitidine (AZA) and venetoclax (VEN) in frontline unfit AML (CR 37% and CR/CRi 66%), long-term survival for these patients remains inadequate (mOS < 15m, DiNardo NEJM 2020). CD123 is expressed on the majority of AML blasts and leukemic stem cells while minimally expressed on normal hematopoietic stem cells (Kovtun Blood Adv 2018). Pivekimab sunirine (PVEK, IMGN632) is an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) comprising a high-affinity CD123 antibody, cleavable linker, and an indolinobenzodiazepine pseudodimer (IGN) payload. The IGN payload alkylates DNA and causes single strand breaks without crosslinking. IGNs are designed to have high potency against tumor cells, while demonstrating less toxicity to normal marrow progenitors than other DNA-targeting payloads. Clinical data in relapsed/refractory (R/R) AML (Daver ASH 2022) supported the continued clinical exploration of the PVEK+AZA+VEN triplet. The current enrolling dose expansion cohorts (Regimen C; Cohorts 1 and 2) in frontline AML will evaluate antileukemia activity and MRD levels in the combination of PVEK+AZA+VEN. Regimen E will enroll patients with R/R AML to evaluate the safety and antileukemia activity of PVEK in combination with magrolimab. Methods: This is an open-label, multicenter, Phase 1b/2 study of PVEK administered in combination regimens in patients with frontline and R/R CD123-positive AML. Patients will receive the established recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of PVEK 0.045 mg/kg IV, as a < 30-minute outpatient infusion. In Regimen C, patients will receive PVEK 0.045 mg/kg IV on D7 + azacitidine 75 mg/m 2 SC or IV daily on days 1 to 7, and venetoclax up to 400 mg PO daily for at least 14 days (Cohort 1) or for up to 28 days (Cohort 2) in a 28-day cycle. In Regimen E, R/R AML patients will receive PVEK 0.045 mg/kg IV on D1 of the 28-day cycle in combination with magrolimab at 30 mg/kg Q2W, after the standard ramp up schedule. Regimen C will enroll adults with untreated AML, CD123+ by flow cytometry or IHC and no prior HMA treatments. The primary endpoints for Regimen C are composite CR rate, overall response rate (ORR), duration of remission (DOR), MRD levels and key secondary endpoints are safety, PK and immunogenicity. Regimen E will enroll adult patients with relapsed or refractory CD123+ AML with up to 2 prior lines of therapy. The primary endpoint for Regimen E is dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) and key secondary endpoints are safety, antileukemic activity, PK and immunogenicity. The PVEK+AZA+VEN triplet (Regimen C) is currently enrolling frontline unfit patients across sites in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, UK and USA. The PVEK+Magro doublet (Regimen E) is planned to be open for enrollment mid-2023 at sites in the USA. Clinical trial information: NCT04086264 .

2017 Background: Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria for high-grade and low-grade glioma (HGG and LGG) were developed to improve reliability of response assessment in glioma trials. Several limitations of the original RANO criteria have been reported. Methods: To address limitations of the original RANO criteria, a large cohort of patients with newly diagnosed and recurrent glioblastoma were evaluated comparing RANO-HGG with modified RANO (mRANO) and immunotherapy RANO (iRANO) criteria to inform the following proposed updates (RANO 2.0). Results: Based on the 2021 WHO classification of glioma, we recommend a single common set of criteria for all gliomas regardless of WHO grade and IDH mutational status. These criteria will be used for all trials regardless of the treatment modalities being evaluated. In newly diagnosed glioblastoma, the post-radiotherapy MRI, usually obtained approximately 4 weeks after completion of radiotherapy, rather than the post-surgical MRI as proposed in original RANO criteria, will be used as the baseline for comparison of subsequent scans. Since the incidence of pseudoprogression is high in the first 3 months following radiotherapy, confirmation of progression during this period with a repeat MRI (in 4-8 weeks) will be required for determining radiographic progression of disease (PD) if the patient is clinically stable. However, confirmation scans are not mandatory after this period nor for recurrent tumors since these scans do not appear to improve reliability in determining progression. For agents with a high likelihood of producing pseudoprogression such as viral therapies and some other immunotherapies, mandatory confirmation of progression with a repeat MRI is an option. The primary measurement will remain the 2-dimensional maximum cross-sectional area of tumor as the simplest method, but where resources are available, volumetric measurements are an option. For IDH wild-type tumors with contrast enhancement, non-enhancing tumor will no longer be evaluated with the possible exception of patients receiving antiangiogenic therapies. However, in tumors with a significant non-enhancing component, both the contrast enhancing and non-enhancing components will be evaluated as target lesions. Conclusions: We hope that these and other proposed changes by the RANO working group will improve response assessment in glioma clinical trials and help the development of more effective therapy for patients.

Abstract Objectives Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is associated with significant postoperative complications. Early detection of at-risk patients may lead to improved outcomes. The role of C-reactive protein (CRP) in predicting postoperative complications has only been recently investigated. Methods Postoperative complications were categorized according to Clavien-Dindo classification and further divided into minor (Grade <3) and major complications (Grade ≥3A). Absolute CRP counts (mg/L) on postoperative days (POD) 1–7, and proportional change in CRP was compared and the area under (AUC) receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve was calculated. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed. Significant findings were externally validated. Results Twenty-five percent of patients experienced one or more major complications. A CRP level of ≥106 mg/L on POD 2 and 65.5 mg/L on POD 4 were significantly associated with an increased risk of major complications with an AUC of 0.658 and 0.672, respectively. The proportional increase in CRP between POD 1 and 4 (ΔCRP POD 1/4) at a cut-off of 30 % had the best AUC of 0.744 and was the only independent risk factor for major complications (p<0.0001) on multivariate analysis. ∆CRP had an AUC of 0.716 (p=0.002) when validated in an independent database. Conclusions CRP can be used in a variety of ways to predict major complications after CRS and HIPEC. However, the ∆CRP POD 1/4>30 % is the best indicator of major complications. Serial CRP measurements in the early postoperative period may lead to early detection of patients at risk of major complications allowing for alternative management strategies to improve outcomes.

Background: Alcohol-associated hepatitis (AH) is among the deadliest liver diseases, but its incidence is poorly defined. The aim of our study was to define the incidence of AH meeting the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism criteria and to identify risk factors for AH. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the Rochester epidemiology project database on adult patients hospitalized with AH between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2018. Patients were screened using ICD-9 codes and then included if they met the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism criteria on manual chart review. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, access to care, liver-related complications, and outcomes were obtained. The HOUsing-based index of SocioEconomic status index was used to measure socioeconomic status. Incidence rates were calculated in cases per 100,000 person-years of follow-up. Results: Among 204 patients, the cumulative AH incidence was 6.8 per 100,000 person-years. Between 2000–2004 and 2015–2018, AH incidence among males increased from 8.4 to 14.7 per 100,000 py, whereas AH incidence among females increased by 7-fold from 0.8 to 5.9 per 100,000 py. Such increases among females were accompanied by increases in comorbid depression and anxiety. The proportion of patients with AH in the lower socioeconomic status quartiles increased from 62.9% between 2000 and 2004 to 73.3% between 2015 and 2019. Conclusions: The incidence of AH is increasing rapidly, especially among females and individuals of lower socioeconomic status. There are areas of unmet need in preventative measures and treatments for comorbid psychiatric disorders in patients at high risk of AH.