Citations

Abstract Improved understanding of how chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) and endogenous T‐cell phenotypes associate with progression‐free survival (PFS) is needed to individualize and improve immunotherapy outcomes in multiple myeloma (MM). We characterized and investigated the prognostic value of immune dynamics defined with multidimensional and computational flow cytometry in 258 bone marrow aspirates from 107 MM patients treated with idecabtagene vicleucel in the KarMMa trial. At screening, there was an association between longer PFS and increased percentages of PD1 + cytotoxic T cells and ICOS − TIGIT + Tregs. At Month 1 after infusion, the presence of >1% CAR‐T cells, a CD4/CD8 CAR‐T‐cell ratio >0.09, and greater abundance of non‐activated non‐cytolytic CAR‐T cells identified patients with longer PFS. Notably, 47 of the 115 endogenous T‐cell clusters were prognostic at the latest assessment performed after CAR‐T infusion. Lower percentages of ICOS + TIGIT − Tregs showed the strongest association with longer PFS. Altogether, this large dataset of dynamic immune profiling throughout treatment with anti‐B‐cell maturation antigen (anti‐BCMA) CAR‐T cells uncovered that the T‐cell composition prior to apheresis as well as CAR‐T and endogenous T‐cell phenotypes after infusion associates with PFS. These findings have potential for translation into routine laboratory practice for improved understanding of response and resistance to CAR‐T cells in relapsed/refractory MM.

7569 Background: MAIA and CEPHEUS trials demonstrated that daratumumab (Dara) with standard of care (SOC) VRd or Rd significantly improved clinical outcomes versus SOC in TIE NDMM. Here we describe efficacy and safety in TIE pts from both trials by age and baseline (BL) frailty using the latest data cuts. Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1 to DRd (n=368) or Rd (n=369) in MAIA and 1:1 to DVRd (n=144) or VRd (n=145) in CEPHEUS. Progression-free survival (PFS), complete response or better (≥CR), overall MRD negativity (neg) at 10 -5 with ≥CR, sustained MRD neg with ≥CR (confirmed MRD neg ≥12 ± 1 months [mo] apart without MRD positivity in between), and safety were assessed by age (<70, 70–<75, or ≥75 years [y]) and BL frailty (assessed by IFM simplified frailty score: 0–1, non-frail; ≥2, frail). Results: Median follow-up was 64.5 mo in MAIA and 76.0 mo in CEPHEUS. In MAIA, 155 (21%) pts were <70 y, 261 (35%) 70–<75 y, and 321 (44%) ≥75 y; 341 (46%) pts were frail, 88.0 % of whom were ≥70 y. In CEPHEUS TIE pts, 70 (24%) pts were <70 y, 133 (46%) 70–<75 y, and 86 (30%) ≥75 y; 83 (29%) pts were frail, 86% of whom were ≥70 y. DRd or DVRd improved PFS, MRD neg rates, sustained MRD neg rates, and ≥CR rates vs Rd or VRd arms across age and frailty subgroups in both trials (Table). Safety was consistent with established individual drug profiles, and adverse event rates were generally comparable across treatment arms and subgroups within both trials. Additional data on patient-specific factors relevant to these subgroups will be presented. Conclusions: Dara-based regimens improved efficacy outcomes across subgroups in MAIA and CEPHEUS trials, reinforcing Dara-based regimens as SOC in TIE NDMM regardless of age or frailty. These data offer clinically relevant insights to help guide treatment selection for TIE pts. Clinical trial information: NCT03652064 ; NCT02252172 . PFS, hazard ratio (95% CI) ≥CR rate, % MRD neg with ≥CR (10 -5 ) rate, % Sustained MRD neg with ≥CR (10 -5 ) rate, % Age/ Frailty status MAIA* CEPHEUS** MAIA* CEPHEUS ** MAIA* CEPHEUS** MAIA* CEPHEUS ** <70 y 0.35 (0.21–0.56) 0.60 (0.31–1.18) 56.4 vs 31.2 85.7 vs 68.6 35.9 vs 11.7 74.3 vs 42.9 25.6 vs 3.9 62.9 vs 28.6 70–<75 y 0.64 (0.45–0.89) 0.60 (0.37–0.99) 56.2 vs 31.3 77.9 vs 69.2 36.2 vs 12.2 55.9 vs 47.7 20.8 vs 5.3 45.6 vs 38.5 ≥75 y 0.59 (0.44–0.79) 0.46 (0.22–0.94) 44.4 vs 28.6 80.5 vs 44.4 26.9 vs 9.9 58.5 vs 26.7 13.8 vs 3.1 43.9 vs 15.6 Frail 0.64 (0.48–0.85) 0.62 (0.32–1.18) 44.8 vs 33.1 72.9 vs 54.3 25.6 vs 13.0 56.3 vs 34.3 15.7 vs 4.1 39.6 vs 17.1 Non-frail 0.48 (0.36–0.64) 0.51 (0.34–0.78) 56.6 vs 27.5 84.4 vs 63.6 37.8 vs 9.5 63.5 vs 41.8 21.4 vs 4.0 54.2 vs 32.7 *MAIA: DRd vs Rd; **CEPHEUS: DVRd vs VRd.

Abstract Both the phase 3 MAIA and ALCYONE studies demonstrated significant survival benefit with the addition of daratumumab to standard-of-care Rd (Revlimid [lenalidomide] and dexamethasone; D-Rd) or to VMP (Velcade [bortezomib], melphalan, and prednisone; D-VMP), respectively, vs Rd or VMP alone in transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Patients with NDMM are highly susceptible to infection; therefore, gaining a greater understanding of infection incidence may help to mitigate future risk. We conducted a pooled analysis of infection incidence, timing, and management strategies from MAIA and ALCYONE. The median (range) age of the pooled population was 72 (40-93) years. Incidence was higher with D-Rd/D-VMP vs Rd/VMP for grade 3/4 (36.9% vs 22.4%) and grade 5 (3.0% vs 1.5%) infections; however, exposure-adjusted incidence rates were generally comparable between groups. Any-grade infections led to the discontinuation of study treatment in ∼2% of patients across treatment groups. Of the timing intervals explored, the highest incidence of grade 3/4 infection occurred within the first 6-month interval of study treatment initiation in both groups. Median time to the first onset of grade 3/4 infections (per Kaplan-Meier estimates) was 83.3 months and not estimable in the D-Rd/D-VMP and Rd/VMP groups, respectively. Although the rates of D-Rd/D-VMP treatment discontinuation due to infection remained low in MAIA and ALCYONE, clinicians should remain vigilant about infections throughout treatment and follow local guidelines and International Myeloma Working Group recommendations to minimize the risk of infection. These trials were registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02252172 (MAIA) and NCT02195479 (ALCYONE).

Introduction Individuals with inborn errors of immunity (IEI) are increasingly reaching reproductive age, yet guidance on fertility preservation, genetic counseling, medication adjustments in pregnancy and breastfeeding, monitoring for complications, and multidisciplinary coordination is lacking. This joint effort between two committees of the Clinical Immunology Society (CIS), the Women of the Clinical Immunology Society (WCIS) and the Adult Immune Deficiency Committee (AID) survey aimed to characterize current reproductive care practices for IEI patients. Methods A survey was disseminated to 809 CIS members. The response rate was 6.43% (52 respondents). The 24-item questionnaire addressed management of pregnancy in IEI, medications adjustment, participation in hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) care and fertility preservation, and maternal/neonatal outcomes. Results Because survey items were optional, the number of respondents varies by question. Forty-two participants completed core items: 64% (27/42) allergists/immunologists, 71% (30/42) practicing at academic centers, and 48% (20/42) with &gt;50% immunology-focused practices. Most respondents (78%, 41/52) currently or previously cared for pregnant/planning IEI patients. Preconception counseling was common (90%, 37/41), yet only 2% (1/41) have access to a formal reproductive multidisciplinary team. Among clinicians involved in HSCT care, 45% (13/29) referred patients for fertility preservation. More than half, 52% (22/42), observed reduced fertility in IEI patients, and 56% (20/36) observed adverse maternal outcomes. Medication management varied: 61% (24/39) discontinued known teratogenic medications, and 64% (25/39) adjusted dosing during pregnancy. Regarding immunoglobulin replacement therapy, 79% adjusted dosing based on IgG levels and 42% increased dosing by trimester. Conclusions This CIS survey reveals practice variability and notable gaps in reproductive health support for individuals with IEIs. Due to the relatively low response rate, generalizability across providers and practice settings is challenging. However, the results of this survey suggest that although most clinicians provide preconception counseling and manage IgG and immunomodulatory therapy during pregnancy, formal multidisciplinary structures are rare. High rates of reported fertility concerns and maternal complications underscore the need for enhanced collaboration with obstetrics/gynecology and the development of structured, evidence-based, multidisciplinary guidelines for reproductive care in IEI. Tabular data are included as downloadable supplement files.

Abstract When using real-world data to construct an external comparator arm for a single-arm trial, there may be differences in how and when patients are assessed for disease between trial and real-world settings. Such differences can generate outcome measurement error when comparing time-to-event endpoints and lead to biased findings. Recent methods have been developed to mitigate measurement error bias in real-world endpoints; however, they rely on the existence of a validation sample, ie, data on a set of patients where both the “true” trial-like and “mis-measured” real-world measures are collected. We demonstrate how novel statistical methods can be leveraged as quantitative bias analyses (QBA) to contextualize real-world evidence findings when outcome measurement error is of concern, but validation samples are infeasible to collect. Quantitative bias analyses allow researchers to set plausible ranges for the amount of error when not directly measurable. We highlight how to conduct QBA with two recent methods, cumulative incidence curve correction and survival regression calibration, and illustrate how to generate plausible parameter values through simulation. We provide an illustrative QBA example in a cohort of real-world patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and provide practical guidance to apply QBA for outcome measurement error and interpret results.

Abstract Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy enriched for a memory-like phenotype may persist and function longer than a nonenriched product, thereby improving duration of response (DOR). We conducted a phase I study with bb21217 (NCT03274219), an anti–B-cell maturation antigen CAR T-cell therapy manufactured in the presence of the phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibitor bb007 to enrich for T cells with a memory-like phenotype, in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (N = 72). No new safety concerns were raised with bb21217 therapy (three cases each of grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome and grade ≥3 neurotoxicity were observed). The objective response rate was 69.4% and the median DOR was 23.8 (95% confidence interval, 16.8–34.8) months. Analysis of the drug product established an association between early memory phenotype and robust expansion and depth of response. Examination of baseline characteristics indicated that tumor burden and prior therapies influenced DOR. The data indicate that generation of CAR T cells early in a disease course when tumor burden is lower and source material exhibits a more naïve phenotype may maximize the clinical benefit potential of the drug product.

Abstract Background Teclistamab (Tec) and Talquetamab (Tal) are the two first FDA approved bispecific antibodies (BsAb) for the treatment of patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Both Tec and Tal should be initiated with step-up dosing (SUD) in an inpatient (IP) setting to mitigate the risk of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), per US label. However, standard of care practice continues to evolve and more pts receive SUD as an outpatient (OP) to reduce healthcare resource utilization and improve pt convenience. While most real-world evidence has focused on clinical and safety outcomes of pts treated with Tec and Tal, pt experience associated with these novel BsAb therapies is relatively unexplored. Methods HealthTree Foundation, a multiple myeloma pt advocacy group which provides enrolled pts with information on treatments, community groups, and research participation, surveyed RRMM patients who have received Tec or Tal. Eligible pts who completed the treatment experience survey had at least 4 months of follow-up after starting BsAb. The survey was fielded from May 2024 through June 2025. Data collection followed IRB-exempt protocols with informed consent. Results A total of 32 patients (24 Tec, 8 Tal) completed the survey. The median age was 70 years, 50% were male, and 84% were white. Most pts (n=24; 75%) received SUD at their primary oncology clinic (n=19, 59% at an academic center; n=5, 16% at local community center), and 8 (25%) at an academic center which was not their primary oncology clinic. All pts who received SUD at an academic center that was not their primary oncology clinic later transitioned to their local community clinic post-SUD and reported being satisfied or very satisfied with their transition of care experience. Overall, most pts (n= 21; 66%) received their entire step-up dosing during a single hospitalization, while some (n=6; 19%) received all doses of the SUD during separate hospitalizations for each dose. About 13% (n=4) received all SUD in an OP setting, and 3% (n=1) received SUD in a hybrid setting (mix of IP and OP). Although 85% (n=27) of the pts received IP SUD, 66% (n=21) would have preferred IP SUD in one hospitalization, while the remaining 34% (n=11) would have preferred OP or hybrid SUD. Among pts who received IP SUD (n=27), almost a quarter reported a preference for either OP (n=4; 15%) or hybrid SUD (n=2; 7%) and 78% (n=21) preferred one IP hospitalization for SUD. The factors influencing their preference for the setting of SUD in this IP sub-group were feeling more secure with IP monitoring (78%), convenience (26%), less worry about staying near healthcare centers (15%), being able to stay with their local physician (11%), staying closer to home (7%), and lower costs to the pt (4%). Among pts receiving OP SUD (n=4), 75% (n=3) preferred fully OP SUD and 25% (n=1) preferred hybrid SUD because of convenience (n=2; 50%), lower cost to pt (n=1; 25%), flexible dosing schedule (n=1; 25%), and feeling of security with IP monitoring (n=1; 25%). All the pts receiving hybrid SUD (n=1) preferred fully OP SUD due to convenience. Although Tec and Tal are subcutaneous (SC) injections, when patients were asked to compare the options of BsAbs with comparable efficacy and safety profile, they favored SC injection (n= 22; 69%) over intravenous infusion (n = 3; 9%), while 22% (n=7) had no preference for mode of drug administration. The challenges that impacted pt experience with Tec or Tal were treatment side effects (Tal pts: n=6, 75%; Tec pts: n=9, 38%) and distance or travel time to the treatment facility (Tal pts: n=2, 25%; Tec pts: n=4; 17%). Other reasons included caring for others, continuing to work, cost and insurance, lack of caregiver/care partner, being away from home, unavailability of the therapy in community setting near home, and eligibility criteria. Conclusions Most pts in this study received SUD at their primary oncology clinic. While most pts received IP SUD and preferred a single planned IP visit, one third preferred OP or hybrid SUD due to convenience. As the field moves toward OP-only SUD, this study underscores the need to consider pt preferences. There is an unmet need for community clinics providing SUD options closer to pt homes.

Abstract Introduction The treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) has rapidly evolved. Quadruplet induction combining an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, lenalidomide, a proteasome inhibitor, and dexamethasone has become a standard of care. In this prospective randomized phase 2 trial, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of induction with a four-drug combination of daratumumab (Dara), lenalidomide (R), ixazomib (I), and dexamethasone (d) (Dara-RId) in older, transplant ineligible or deferred patients, followed by maintenance with Dara RI versus R for up to 2 years. We hypothesized that this quadruplet would offer improved tolerability with less peripheral neuropathy in this older population as well as the convenience of largely oral therapy. Herein, we present the initial results of the induction phase of the study. Methods Transplant-ineligible or deferred patients with NDMM were eligible to participate. This was a multicenter trial sponsored by the Alliance Foundation Trials, LLC, AFT-41 (NCT04009109). Each cycle of treatment was 28 days. All patients received 12 cycles of induction therapy with daratumumab 1800 mg subcutaneously on the conventional schedule, lenalidomide 15 mg orally (po) on days 1-21, ixazomib 4 mg po on days 1, 8, 15, and dexamethasone weekly. After 12 cycles, patients received maintenance based on prior randomization (1:1) to Dara-RI or R for up to 2 years. In maintenance, R was reduced to 10 mg and I was reduced to 3 mg. Randomization assignment occurred prior to starting induction. Stratification was based on presence of high-risk features defined as ISS stage III or high-risk FISH cytogenetics (del 17, t (14;16), t (14;20), t (4;14), del (1p), or gain (1q)). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR) and adverse events. Results We enrolled 79 patients across 7 sites from October 2020 until December 2023. Accrual was affected by the COVID19 pandemic, leading to early closure to accrual in December 2023. Median age was 74 years (range 63-86); ≥75 years of age (45.6%); female (59.5%); white (83.5%), African American (7.6%), Asian (1.3%), and Hispanic ethnicity (6.3%). Additional baseline characteristics included ISS staging I (41.8%), II (35.4%), and III (22.8%) with high-risk features in 37% by ISS stage III and/or high-risk FISH. The 12-month PFS was 92% (95% confidence interval [CI] 86.1-98.4%). The ORR (≥ partial response [PR]) during induction was 92.4% (PR 22.8%; very good partial response [VGPR] 46.8%; complete response 15.2%; stringent complete response 7.6%). Notable grade ≥3 adverse events included neutropenia (16.5%), infections (11.4%), anemia (10.1%), thrombocytopenia (8.9%), and syncope (7.6%). There was no grade ≥3 peripheral neuropathy (grade 1, 15%; grade 2, 14%). No treatment-related mortality was reported. Sixty-one patients went on to maintenance therapy and seven patients discontinued treatment for adverse events during induction (8.9%). Conclusions Dara-RId therapy in NDMM appears to be efficacious with an ORR of 92.4%; VGPR or better of 69.6% and 12-month PFS of 92%. The combination was generally tolerated well with manageable toxicity, despite 45.6% of patients being ≥75, offering the convenience of an oral proteasome inhibitor, ixazomib, that minimizes the risk of peripheral neuropathy for older, transplant-ineligible or deferred patients. Follow-up is ongoing to determine the benefit of maintenance with Dara-RI v. R alone in this population. Support: AFT, Celgene, Janssen, Takeda.

Despite significant improvements in survival of patients with multiple myeloma (MM), outcomes remain heterogeneous, and a significant proportion of patients experience suboptimal outcomes. Importantly, traditional prognostic factors based on data from patients treated with older therapies no longer capture prognosis accurately in the contemporary era of novel triplet or quadruplet therapies. Therefore, risk stratification requires refinement in the context of available and investigational treatment options in routine practice and clinical trials, respectively. The current identification of high-risk MM (HRMM) in routine practice is based on the Revised International Staging System, which stratifies patients using a combination of widely available serum biomarkers and chromosomal abnormalities assessed via fluorescence in situ hybridization. In recent years, a substantial body of evidence concerning additional clinical, biological, and molecular/genomic prognostic factors has accumulated, along with new MM risk stratification tools and consensus reports. The International Myeloma Society, along with the International Myeloma Working Group, convened an Expert Panel with the primary aim of revisiting the definition of HRMM and formulating a practical and data-driven consensus definition, based on new evidence from molecular/genomic assays, updated clinical data, and contemporary risk stratification concepts. The Panel proposes the following Consensus Genomic Staging (CGS) of HRMM which relies upon the presence of at least one of these abnormalities: (1) del(17p), with a cutoff of >20% clonal fraction, and/or TP53 mutation; (2) an IgH translocation including t(4;14), t(14;16), or t(14;20) along with 1q+ and/or del(1p32); (3) monoallelic del(1p32) along with 1q+ or biallelic del(1p32); or (4) β2 microglobulin ≥5.5 mg/L with normal creatinine (<1.2 mg/dL).

CARTITUDE-1 evaluated ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) in patients with heavily pretreated relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We describe overall survival (OS), ≥5-year progression-free outcomes, associated biomarkers, and safety, with a median study follow-up of 61.3 months. For the 97 treated patients, median OS was 60.7 months (95% CI, 41.9 to not estimable). One third (32/97) of patients remain alive and progression-free for ≥5 years after a single cilta-cel infusion, without maintenance treatment. Twelve of these patients treated at a single center underwent serial minimal residual disease (MRD) and positron emission tomography-computed tomography assessments, and all (100%) were MRD-negative (at least 10 −5 threshold) and imaging-negative at year 5 or later after cilta-cel. Baseline characteristics, including the presence of high-risk cytogenetics and extramedullary disease, were generally comparable for the 32 patients who were progression-free for ≥5 years versus patients who had progressive disease by year 5. A trend of lower baseline tumor burden, higher fraction of naïve T-cells in the cilta-cel drug product, higher T cell-to-neutrophil ratio, higher hemoglobin and platelets at baseline, and higher effector-to-target ratio were associated with ≥5-year progression-free status. The safety profile of cilta-cel remained consistent with previous reports. To our knowledge, our data provide the first evidence that cilta-cel is potentially curative in patients with RRMM.