Kumar, Shaji

Background and Methods: IEC-HS is a hyperinflammatory state with high morbidity and mortality. Effective interventions to reverse the process early in the clinical course may be critical to improve outcomes. We previously examined cytokine differences between IEC-HS and other secondary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, and found significant differences in the patterns and outcomes.(1) This study examines cytokine profiles (CP) of patients treated with CAR-T from 9/2019 to 3/2024 who developed CRS, MAS-L and IEC-HS. Demographics and lab results were compared among the three groups and correlated with outcomes. Results: CP was tested in 113 of 366 CAR-T patients: 74 with CRS, 19 with MAS-L, and 20 with IEC-HS. The racial distribution was 93% White/Caucasian, 2% Black or African American, 1% Asian, 1% Native American and 3% other or unavailable. No differences were seen in demographics between groups except a higher percentage of patients with ECOG performance status ≥2 in IEC-HS (p=0.037). Incidence of IEC-HS by disease: 3.6% (7/193) in lymphoma, 5% (8/159) myeloma and 28.5% (4/14) B-acute lymphoblastic leukemia (p=0.0002). Incidence of IEC-HS by CAR-T product: 3% (4/150) in Axi-cel, 23% (6/26) in Brexu-cel, 8% (1/13) in Tisa-cel, 5% each (3/60) in Cilta-cel and Ide-cel, and 0/17 in Liso-cel (p=0.001). Prior to lymphodepletion, labs were already different among the CRS, MAS-L, and IEC-HS groups: hemoglobin (g/dL: 11.1, 9.6, 8.45); platelets (x109/L: 168, 116, 52.5); ferritin (µg/L: 115, 946, 1944). CP was started when patients needed a second dose of tocilizumab or concern for developing MAS-L/IEC-HS, and continued daily until clinical improvement or resolution of inflammatory state. Tocilizumab and dexamethasone use were similar across groups. Other therapies used were vasopressors (3%, 10.5%, 45%; p<0.0001), Methylprednisolone (20%, 31.6%, 50%; p=0.027), Anakinra (12%, 63%, 85%; p<0.0001), Siltuximab (9.5%, 16%, 30%; p=0.06), Basiliximab (30% of IEC-HS), and continuous veno-venous hemofiltration (30% of IEC-HS). Among the first CP, the CRS group had lower levels of cytokines (in pg/mL) compared to MAS-L and IEC-HS groups: TNF (31, 62.9, 47.7), IL-10 (29.3, 97.7, 169), IL-18 (794, 1353, 2011), IFN-gamma (74, 281, 250), MCP-1 (689, 2722, 2485.5), MIP-1 alpha (220, 234, 247.5), IL-6 (>315: 45%, 79%, 70%), soluble IL-2R alpha (>4000: 45%, 84%, 70%). The percentage of patients who received anakinra before CP1 were 4% (CRS), 21% (MAS-L) and 25% (IEC-HS) (p=0.007). IL-1 beta was below threshold among all patients who received anakinra in CRS and MAS-L and 75% in IEC-HS, suggesting rapid and effective IL-1 suppression by anakinra except in IEC-HS. Cytokines trends 24 hours and 48 hours after the first CP differed between MAS-L and IEC-HS. MAS-L had decreased TNF (62.9, 40.4, 18.5) and MCP-1 (2722, 355, 104) while these cytokines remained elevated or increased in IEC-HS (TNF: 47.7, 105.5, 62.6; MCP-1: 2486, 2276, 1585). IL-18 was minimally elevated in MAS-L (1353, 1955, 3068) and significantly increased in IEC-HS (2011, 2420, 4048). Notably, CP2 and CP3 levels of these cytokines in IEC-HS were statistically significantly higher than corresponding CPs among CRS and MAS-L. In addition, patients who died with persistent E. faecium bacteremia had higher IL-18 on CP3. Infections occurred in 43%, 58%, and 85% respectively (p=0.002), including E. faecium bacteremia (3%, 5%, 35%; p=0.0004), CMV viremia (30% of IEC-HS patients vs. 11% of non-IEC-HS; p=0.025), and invasive fungal infections (15% of IEC-HS patients; p=0.0001). Between the IEC-HS and non-IEC-HS groups, day 100 non-relapse mortality was 35% vs. 0 (p<0.0001), day 100 all-cause mortality was 45% vs. 3% (p<0.0001), and E. faecium bacteremia-related deaths were 50% vs. 1% (p<0.0001). Conclusions: CRS, MAS-L andIEC-HS are known complications of CAR-T. Cytokine-directed therapy can modify the cytokine milieu and control the inflammatory process. However, excess immunosuppression may result in life-threatening infections. Further studies are needed to identify optimal biomarker-guided immunosuppressive strategies to control the inflammatory cascade, while avoiding excess immunosuppression. References: 1. Leung, Nelson, et al. “Outcomes of patients who received CAR T cell therapy and developed IEC-HS treated with cytokine directed therapy.” (2024): 7516-7516.

Introduction: Cyclin D1, encoded by the CCND1 gene, is primarily known as a major regulator of cell cycle progression. Emerging studies have demonstrated a role for cyclin D1 in regulating gene transcription. In mantle cell lymphoma with t(11;14), cyclin D1 strongly binds to the promoters of highly transcribed genes and its overexpression led to genome-wide transcriptional downregulation. However, the transcriptional role for cyclin D1 in t(11;14) MM remains undefined. This study aims to elucidate the global chromatin and transcriptional changes induced by cyclin D1 in t(11;14) MM. Methods: Knockout (KO) of CCND1 in U266B1, a MM cell line carrying t(11;14), was performed by the Synthego (Redwood City, CA) using CRISPR/Cas9, which generated a frameshift insertion of base pair (bp) “A” after 69,641,478 bp within exon 1. Two independent KO clones were used for downstream analysis. ChIP-seq and ATAC-seq were performed for KO (n=2) and wild-type clones (WT, n=2). ChIP-seq used antibodies against H3K4me3 (promoter) and H3K4me1 and H3K27ac (enhancer). Libraries were sequenced to 2x51 bp on the Illumina NextSeq 2000 platform. Total RNA libraries (in triplicate) were sequenced to 2x150 bp. ChIP-seq and ATAC-seq reads were mapped to hg38 with BWA, and peaks were identified by MACS2 at FDR 0.01. RNA-seq reads were mapped to hg38 with STAR and gene raw counts were estimated using featureCounts. Differential peaks and differentially expressed genes between KO and WT were identified using edgeR at FDR 0.05 and fold-change 2. Only peaks present in at least 2 samples and genes having reads-per-million value 0.1 in at least 1 sample were included, excluding those from chrY. Pathway analysis was performed with the Enrichr package. Results: Differential expression analysis identified 2-fold more genes that were down-regulated than up-regulated in KO compared to WT (467 vs. 233). Pathway analysis revealed an enrichment of TNF-alpha signaling via NF-kappaB, inflammatory response, and apoptosis in association with down-regulated genes, while up-regulated genes are enriched in myogenesis, KRAS signaling, and epithelial mesenchymal transition pathway. In parallel, differential chromatin analysis identified 2.5% (1,161) of the peaks from H3K27ac and 0.5-1% (359-610) of the peaks for the other 3 marks that showed significant changes of signal levels between KO and WT. For the promoter mark H3K4me3, there are largely a comparable number of peaks showing increased (191 peaks) and decreased (168 peaks) signals, respectively, in KO compared to WT. However, for ATAC-seq and H3K4me1, about 70% of the differential peaks showed an increased signal in KO, in contrast with H3K27ac for which 60% of differential peaks showed decreased signal in KO. The preferential loss of H3K27ac occupancy is consistent with the observation of a higher proportion of genes being down-regulated in KO. These results indicated that knockout of CCND1 led to a global increase of chromatin accessibility, but a reduction of H3K27ac and gene expression. Further annotation revealed that, for H3K27ac and H3K4me1/ATAC-seq, 92% and 97% of the differential peaks were located >2kb away from the transcription start sites (TSSs) of expressed genes. Even for H3K4me3, 88% of the differential peaks are >2kb away from TSSs. The results suggest that the changes of chromatin upon CCND1 knockout predominantly occurred at distal regulatory regions. For up- and down-regulated genes, we estimated ChIP-seq and ATAC-seq signals in the TSS 2kb regions, revealing that up-regulated genes were overall associated with increased signals. Further analysis found that, for ATAC-seq and H3K4me3, 44% and 59% of the differential peaks located in the promoter regions were associated with differentially expressed genes, which dropped to ~20% for the two enhancer marks. These data indicate that changes in chromatin state impact the expression of the associated genes. Conclusion: Knockout of CCND1 impacts local chromatin state, particularly at enhancer regions, and the transcriptional program. In promoter-proximal regulatory regions, the changes of chromatin accessibility and H3K4me3 are strongly correlated with the expression changes of nearby genes. Further studies will identify the genes targeted by the differential enhancers and their possible roles in MM pathogenesis mediated by cyclin D1 following the t(11;14) event.

Background In 2014, the IMWG updated the criteria for diagnosing multiple myeloma (MM) and added three additional criteria to the traditional CRAB criteria. The new criteria called the SLiM criteria, include clonal bone marrow plasma cells ≥60%, involved to uninvolved free light chain ratio (rFLC) ≥100 (involved FLC must be ≥ 100 mg/L), and > one focal lesion on MRI studies (each lesion ≥ 5 mm). These criteria were deemed myeloma-defining events (MDE) in the absence of CRAB criteria. Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has been used for treating MM for over three decades and is safe and efficacious. We report on outcomes of outpatient ASCT in a cohort of patients with MM where therapy was initiated solely based on SLiM criteria. Methods We conducted a retrospective study of all patients diagnosed with MM based on SLiM criteria at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. We compared this cohort to a matched cohort of newly diagnosed MM patients whose MDE was CRAB and who underwent an ASCT. For every patient whose MDE was SLiM, we matched two patients whose MDE was CRAB. The matching was done by age, gender, and melphalan dose. Results Between 2013 and 2022, 30 patients received an ASCT due to SLiM criteria at Mayo Clinic, Rochester (Durie Salmon Stage IA). The median age of our cohort was 63 (range 46-75) years, and 60% had an ISS of 1. Seventeen percent of the cohort was treated with DVRd induction. The median time from diagnosis to ASCT was 6.5 months (IQR 6-7), and all but one received full intensity conditioning with melphalan 200 mg/m2. 53% of patients completed the ASCT without requiring hospitalization, and 47% (n=14) of patients required hospitalization with a median duration of hospital admission of 6 days (IQR 5-14). Bacteremia was confirmed in 7 patients (23%). The matched cohort included 60 patients. Baseline characteristics were similar, with the exception of lower hemoglobin levels in the control group, as expected (13.1 vs 12, P=0.0017). No differences were seen in the number of cells collected (3.4 vs 3.67 X106 cells/kg, P=0.19) or the use of Plerixafor (80% vs 78%, P=0.8). The SLiM cohort had a shorter median time to neutrophil (15 vs 16 days, P=0.049) and platelet (15 vs 17 days, P=0.0004) engraftment. Similar hospitalization and bacteremia rates were seen. The overall response rate was 100%, with a complete response or better (sCR/CR) seen in 30% of patients. The matched cohort had an ORR of 98%, with sCR/CR of 37%. The MRD- rate was the same in both groups. More patients in the SLiM cohort achieved VGPR (50%) than in the CRAB cohort (27%). None of the patients died within 100 days of transplant. The 36-month OS was 100% in the SLiM group and 93.3% in the control group (95% CI 83.1%-97.4%), with a trend towards higher OS in the SLiM cohort (P=0.065). The 36-month PFS was 91.61% in the SLiM cohort (95% CI 69.93-97.87%) and 65.95% in the control group (95% CI 52.31%-76.53%). There was no difference in the PFS between the cohorts (P=0.414). Conclusion ASCT is efficacious and safe in MM patients transplanted only due to SLIM criteria. Improved MRD- and longer PFS were not seen despite lower ISS stage disease in the SLiM group.

Introduction: Light chain multiple myeloma (LCMM) is a distinct subtype of multiple myeloma (MM) characterized by the exclusive production of immunoglobulin light chains, unlike the common form of MM that produces the complete immunoglobulin. There is a paucity of literature on the specific tumor cell alterations leading to light chain-only disease as opposed to the typical presentation in MM. Additionally, data on treatment response and outcomes in this subgroup of patients is sparse. This study explores the differences in baseline characteristics, including cytogenetic abnormalities and treatment response between LCMM and multiple myeloma with heavy chain involvement. Materials and Methods: We reviewed patient charts to obtain clinical and laboratory information for individuals diagnosed with LCMM and those with heavy chain MM (comparison cohort) from 2004 to 2022. Patients were matched for age, sex, and year of diagnosis. Data collected included treatment assessment, overall survival, and progression-free survival (PFS). Associations between outcomes and categorical variables were analyzed using the chi-square test, while the Mann-Whitney U test was employed to compare medians. Progression-free survival following initiation of initial therapy and overall survival were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. The Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved the study. Results: We identified 848 patients, representing 17.1% of newly diagnosed MM cases. The median age of the LCMM cohort was 63 years (range 16-92), with a female-to-male ratio of 1:5. The LCMM cohort had higher levels of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), beta-2 microglobulin (p<0.0001), higher baseline creatinine (p<0.0001) and calcium (p<0.0001). The two cohorts had no significant difference in the International Staging System (ISS) or revised ISS (R2-ISS). Additionally, hemoglobin (Hb) and white blood cell count at presentation were higher in the LCMM cohort. Chromosome 1 abnormalities were lower in the LCMM cohort: 1q gain (OR-0.7; 95% CI: 0.6-0.9) and 1p deletion (OR-0.7; 95% CI: 0.6-0.9, p=0.02). Likewise, the frequencies of trisomies and hyperdiploidy were lower in the LCMM cohort, with odds ratios of 0.32 (p=0.012) and 0.37 (p<0.001), respectively. The frequencies of translocations t(4;14) (OR-0.35, p<0.001) and t(14;16) (OR-0.6, p=0.03) were lower in LCMM compared to heavy chain MM. In contrast, the frequencies of t(11;14) (OR-3.4) and t(6;14) (OR-4.9) and deletion of 13q(OR-1.3) was higher in the LCMM cohort. There was no significant difference in the occurrence of del(17p)/TP53 abnormalities. The median PFS after the first regimen was shorter in the LCMM cohort (23 months vs. 27 months, p=0.03), and this difference remained significant after adjusting for baseline adverse prognostic indices and treatment regimen. Median PFS in LCMM patients with monoclonal antibody (Mab) as part of their treatment was 37 months vs. 23 months (Proteasome Inhibitor or immunomodulator-based regimen without Mab), though this difference is not statistically significant p=0.87. No significant difference was found in overall survival between the two groups. Conclusion: This study highlights unique features of light chain multiple myeloma, including increased frequencies of specific cytogenetic abnormalities. Further evaluation of observed differences in cytogenetic abnormalities may enhance our understanding of LCMM and potentially guide baseline treatment choices to improve outcome.

Background: Proven salvage therapies for pts with triple-class refractory MM who progress on BCMA-targeted therapies are lacking.Fc receptor-homolog 5 (FcRH5) is a type I membrane protein that is expressed exclusively in the B-cell lineage. Cevostamab is a FcRH5xCD3 BsAb that facilitates T cell-mediated killing of MM cells. In an initial Phase I study (GO39775), cevostamab monotherapy was clinically active and had manageable toxicity in pts with heavily pretreated relapsed/refractory MM (Trudel et al. ASH 2021). In Cohort A1 of the subsequent Phase I/II CAMMA 2 study (CO43476; NCT05535244), cevostamab was highly active and had manageable safety at the 160mg target-dose (TD) level in pts with triple-class refractory MM who had received a prior BCMA-targeted antibody-drug conjugate (ADC; overall response rate [ORR]: 60%, 6/10 pts) or chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy (ORR: 73%, 8/11 pts) but had not received a prior BCMA-targeted BsAb (Kumar et al. EHA 2024). We present initial results from Cohort A2, which enrolled pts with triple-class refractory MM who had received prior BCMA-targeted therapies, including ≥1 BCMA-targeted BsAb. An exploratory analysis of baseline patient and tumor-related factors is also presented. Methods: Cevostamab was initiated with step dosing (Cycle [C] 1 Day [D] 1: 0.3mg; C1D2, D3, or D4 depending on the emergence of cytokine release syndrome [CRS] after the initial administration: 3.3mg) and continued at the 160mg TD on C1D8 and on D1 of each subsequent 21-day cycle until disease progression (PD) or unacceptable toxicity. Cytokine, tumor antigen, T-cell function/activation, and inhibitory immune checkpoint expression were assessed in blood and tumor samples collected at baseline and during treatment. Results: As of February 23, 2024, 21 pts (median age: 64 years, range: 46-84) had been enrolled into Cohort A2. Seven pts (33%) had extramedullary disease and 5/12 pts (42%) with a conclusive assay result had high-risk cytogenetics (t(4;14), t(14;16), or del(17p)). All pts were heavily pretreated (median prior lines of therapy: 8, range: 5-14); 62% had received ≥2 prior BCMA-targeted therapies (median time since last: 122 days, range: 68-558) and 33% had received ≥2 prior BsAbs (median time since last: 139 days, range: 68-782). Most pts (86%) were refractory to their last line of therapy; 62% were penta-drug refractory. Median follow-up was 173 days (range: 20-360). Grade (Gr) 3-4 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 71% of pts (15/21). Gr 3-4 AEs in >3 pts were neutropenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia (38% each), and infections (29%). CRS occurred in 76% of pts (16/21) and was mainly Gr 1 (43%) or Gr 2 (29%); 1 patient had Gr 3 CRS. One treatment-related Gr 5 (fatal) AE of pneumonia was reported in the context of PD. No treatment-related AEs leading to cevostamab discontinuation occurred. Objective responses (partial response [PR] or better) were observed in 2/21 pts (ORR: 10%). Both pts achieved a very good PR and had ongoing responses at cut-off. Stable disease was observed in 10 pts (48%). Pts in the prior BsAb group had received more prior lines of therapy than those in the prior ADC and CAR-T groups (median 8 vs 5 and 6, respectively) and more prior BCMA-targeted therapies (median 2 vs 1 and 1). The percentage of pts with low levels (<4.5 ng/mL) of soluble BCMA in plasma was also higher in the prior BsAb group (47% vs 0% and 18%). At baseline, inhibitory immune checkpoint expression across T-cell subsets was more common in the prior BsAb group. Notably, the median frequency of PD1+CD8+Tnaive and TIGIT+CD8+Tnaive cells in blood was higher in the prior BsAb group (21% and 29%, respectively) than in the prior ADC (3% and 6%) and CAR-T groups (4% each). Peak median IL-6 and IFN-γ levels were delayed until the first TD in the prior BsAb group, suggesting a different pharmacodynamic profile. Conclusions: Cevostamab has manageable safety in pts with triple-class refractory MM who have received prior BCMA-targeted therapies, including ≥1 BCMA-targeted BsAb. Clinical responses were less frequent in the prior BsAb group than in the prior ADC and CAR-T groups, which could be explained by the higher number of prior lines of therapy and T-cell exhaustion due to multiple prior exposures to BsAbs. Notably, the high frequency of CD8+ T-cell subsets expressing inhibitory immune checkpoints in the prior BsAb group suggests a level of T-cell dysfunction that could prevent effective T-cell activation.

Background: Despite effective front-line therapies, DLBCL & MM have high relapse rates. Novel therapies like CAR-T & bispecific antibodies (BsAb) offer deep & durable remission compared to salvage therapies, but have a unique toxicity profile (TP) that requires monitoring. With no head-to-head trials, the rationale for therapy selection may vary. This study explores provider choices, sequencing preferences, & access barriers. Methods: Two anonymous surveys (MM and DLBCL) of US-based Hematologists were conducted from 2/2024 to 6/2024, on practice settings, CAR-T & BsAb availability, treatment preferences & barriers. Responses were analyzed to assess preferences across clinical scenarios. Results: Surveys were completed by 37 MM & 45 DLBCL providers. Most were at centers offering both CAR-T & BsAb. Most gave CAR-T inpatient, & BsAb outpatient. CAR-T was given by 73% MM providers & 66% DLBCL (92% used Cilta-cel, 96% used Ide-cel; 100% used Axi-cel, 90% used Liso-cel & 73% Tisa-cel). In MM, 78% used Teclistamab, 60% Talquetamab & 24% Elranatamab. In DLBCL, 62% used Epcoritamab & 40% Glofitamab. Providers preferred CAR-T over BsAb in MM after 4+ prior lines of therapy (LOT) (89%), & in DLBCL after 2+ prior LOT (93%). CAR-T was favored more among academic providers & those at CAR-T centers. Practice volume did not impact selection. Among providers at centers with BsAb-only, CAR-T was preferred by 60% (MM) and 50% (DLBCL). Providers at centers without both favored CAR-T (MM: 75%, DLBCL: 86%). CAR-T was chosen for better outcomes, short treatment, center choice, & prior experience. Other factors that influenced decisions were lower incidence of cytopenia/infection & “BsAb effective post-CAR-T, less so vice versa” (MM), & “curative potential of CAR-T” (DLBCL). Logistical barriers & institutional constraints influenced BsAb selection: CAR-T unavailability, access to specialized centers, referral complexity, insurance delay, manufacturing delay & hospitalization needs. In MM, 78% providers preferred Cilta-cel over Ide-cel, especially academic providers & those with CAR-T experience. CAR-T volume did not impact selection. Cilta-cel was preferred due to perceived better response rate (RR), more experience, “progression-free survival (PFS) benefit”, center choice, & logistical issues with Ide-cel. Ide-cel was selected due to center choice, favorable TP & insurance preference. Teclistamab was preferred by 78% due to more experience, better RR, TP & center choice, Elranatamab by 11% (better TP, RR, & “PFS”), & Talquetamab by 11% due to having a non-BCMA target. Academic providers preferred Teclistamab (89% vs 50%), & nonacademic providers preferred Talquetamab (38% vs 4%) and Elranatamab (13% vs 8%). In DLBCL after 2+ LOT, 69% favored Axi-cel due to prior experience, RR, center choice, & logistical issues with other products. Liso-cel & Tisa-cel were chosen by 27% & 2%, respectively, due to favorable TP. Axi-cel was also preferred 2nd line by 73% for similar reasons, while 24% favored Liso-cel for its favorable TP. Epcoritamab was preferred by 56% (subcutaneous injection, more experience & center choice) & Glofitamab by 42% (shorter treatment duration, easy administration, more experience, & center choice). Practice setting & volume did not impact selection between products in DLBCL. InBCMA-naïve MM pts, majority (97%) chose an anti-BCMA agent over GPRC5D due to better RR, TP, prior experience, & center choice. InBCMA-exposed pts, most (92%) favored an anti-GPRC5D agent. In contrast in DLBCL, 80% chose CD19 CAR-T after prior CD19-directed therapy, & 18% chose CD20 BsAb. Therefore, antigen escape was less of a concern in DLBCL vs MM. For relapse after 2nd line CAR-T in DLBCL, 78% preferred BsAb over other salvage options due to better RR, TP, & more experience. Providers prioritized RR, survival, & TP in decision making. Treatment logistics, duration, frequency, & cost were less crucial. MM providers also prioritized quality of life, which was less so in DLBCL. There were no differences in priority based on practice setting & experience with CAR-T. Conclusion: The study highlights factors influencing therapy choices in MM & DLBCL. Despite CAR-T's potential for better outcomes, significant access barriers exist. Efforts to streamline referral pathways, logistics, & expanding availability are crucial to improve outcomes. Understanding these preferences & barriers can guide future management strategies.

Introduction Multiple myeloma (MM) is considered incurable. Despite improved outcomes with novel agents, including BCMA-targeted chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies, antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), and bispecific antibodies, patients with relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) often have poor prognoses. LINKER-MM1 (NCT03761108) is a global, single-arm, Phase 1/2 study of linvoseltamab, a BCMA×CD3 bispecific antibody, in patients with RRMM who were either triple-class exposed (TCE; previously treated with a proteasome inhibitor, immunomodulatory drug, and anti-CD38 antibody) during ≥3 prior lines of therapy (LOTs), or triple-class refractory to these therapies. Here, we present comparisons of clinical outcomes from LINKER-MM1 with those of a current, international, real-world (RW) external control arm (ECA; NCT05673967). Methods The ECA was derived from 16 academic sites of the International Myeloma Foundation International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) (N=203; 309 eligible LOTs) and compared with linvoseltamab (N=105; Phase 2 200 mg cohort). Patients in the ECA initiated ≥1 anti-MM therapy after meeting key LINKER-MM1 eligibility criteria. Weighted random sampling and inverse probability of treatment weighting were used to select 1 LOT per patient and balance the ECA and trial populations on prespecified prognostic factors (Kumar S, et al. IMS 2023). The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR; IMWG criteria) determined by an independent central review committee (ICRC) based on myeloma laboratories. An independent data review committee reviewed comparability of cohorts and endpoint assessments prior to conducting comparative analyses. Results Median follow-up was 14.3 months for the linvoseltamab cohort (data cutoff: Jan 6, 2024) and 13.4 months for the ECA. After weighting, 15 prognostic factors were balanced between cohorts. Patients in the ECA received 68 distinct regimens, most commonly CAR T-cell therapies (11.3%) and ADCs (10.3%). After balancing the cohorts, patients in the ECA evaluable for response had ICRC-assessed ORR of 46.3% (40.8% by treating physician assessment), among whom 24.0% had very good partial response or better (≥VGPR). When including patients who died without evaluable response, ECA ICRC-assessed ORR was 44.2%. Linvoseltamab induced significantly higher ICRC-assessed ORR (69.5% vs 46.3%, odds ratio [OR] 2.65 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.66-3.69]) and rate of ≥VGPR (62.9% vs 24.0%, OR 5.37 [95% CI 3.61-8.49]) compared with ECA regimens. Conclusion Despite current use of novel therapies, there is no well-established RW standard of care (SOC) for patients with TCE RRMM treated at IMWG sites. To our knowledge, this is the first RW ECA study in MM with a high percentage of anti-BCMA therapies and response ascertainment for all patients by ICRC. Linvoseltamab induced significantly higher response rates, including rate of ≥VGPR, compared with current RW SOC therapies, highlighting its potential as a highly effective treatment in patients with TCE RRMM.

Abstract Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are associated with treatment outcomes in multiple myeloma (MM) in the clinical trial setting. However, most PRO tools are time consuming, which hinders use in routine practice. Our institution incorporated a “Hematology Patient-Reported Symptom Screen” (HPRSS), a 3-item questionnaire for fatigue, pain, and quality of life (QOL). The main objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of these symptoms on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in a real-world cohort of patients with newly diagnosed MM. This retrospective study included patients with MM diagnosed between April 2011 and December 2017, seen at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN), who completed the HPRSS. Patients rated their symptoms on a scale from 0 to 10. Clinically relevant symptoms were defined as scores ≥5 for pain and fatigue, and ≤5 for QOL. At diagnosis, 735 patients had scores for all domains. The median follow-up was 8.1 years. Age was associated with increased odds of fatigue and decreased QOL. Female sex and comorbidities were associated with fatigue and pain. Higher disease stage, anemia, lytic lesions, and increased plasma cell burden were associated with fatigue, pain, and decreased QOL. Clinically relevant fatigue, pain, and decreased QOL were associated with decreased PFS and OS. On multivariate analysis including age, International Staging System III, high-risk cytogenetics, and postinduction transplantation, fatigue and decreased QOL were independently associated with decreased OS. A composite HPRSS score stratified patients into 3 groups with distinct OS. Patient-reported symptoms are prognostic in patients with newly diagnosed MM. The prognostic values of fatigue and decreased QOL are independent of age, disease stage, and transplant status.

Introduction Patients (pts) with multiple myeloma (MM) eventually become refractory to current treatments. There is an unmet need for new therapies with durable efficacy, favorable safety, and simplified dosing schedules. ABBV-383 is a unique BCMA x CD3 bispecific antibody T-cell engager comprising bivalent high-avidity BCMA binding domains, a low-affinity CD3-binding domain designed to minimize cytokine release and the risk for cytokine release syndrome (CRS), and a silenced Fc tail for extended half-life enabling dosing convenience. In an ongoing first-in-human (FIH) study (NCT03933735) in heavily pretreated pts with relapsed or refractory (RR) MM, ABBV-383 monotherapy (60 mg Q4W) resulted in deep and durable responses. Introduction of a modified dexamethasone (Dex) premedication (premed) schedule in cycle (C) 1 lowered incidence and severity of CRS (43% overall; 5% grade ≥2) vs pts treated with low Dex (71% overall; 20% grade ≥2) (JCO 2024;42[suppl 16]:7531). We now report results of Arm A of the open-label, phase 1b study (NCT05650632) evaluating 1 step-up dose (SUD) of ABBV-383 as a strategy to mitigate the risk of severe CRS and further assess ABBV-383 activity in pts with RRMM. Methods This study is enrolling pts with RRMM, ECOG performance status ≤2, and documented evidence of progression during or after the last treatment. Pts must have received ≥3 prior lines of therapy, including a proteasome inhibitor, an immunomodulatory drug, and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. Arm A consists of a dose-optimization (DO) and a dose-expansion (DE) part. During DO, pts received a single SUD of intravenous ABBV-383 (2/4 mg) on C1 day (D) 1, followed by the target dose of 60 mg on D4. In the DE, based on DO findings, pts received the recommended ABBV-383 SUD on C1D1, followed by 60 mg on D4. The modified premed schedule that lowered incidence and severity of CRS in the FIH study was also introduced prior to target dose on C1D4. After C1, pts received 60 mg ABBV-383 Q4W on D1 of each cycle for DO and DE until disease progression, withdrawal, or discontinuation. Primary endpoint was grade ≥2 CRS events during C1. Other endpoints included any grade CRS events, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), immune pharmacodynamics, and clinical activity. Results As of April 2024, 70 pts were enrolled in Arm A: 47 in DO (2 mg SUD, n=26; 4 mg SUD, n=21) and 23 in DE. Median age was 69 years (range: 40-84), 59% were male, and 76% were triple-class refractory. Median prior lines of therapy was 4 (range: 3-10). Median follow-up time (months [mo]) was 6.5, 7.5, and 2.8 for 2 mg DO, 4 mg DO, and DE, respectively. Any grade CRS was reported in 10 (39%) and 11 (52%) pts during DO at 2 and 4 mg SUD; CRS grade ≥2 occurred in 3 (12%) pts in the 2 mg SUD and in 6 (29%) pts in the 4 mg SUD, leading to selection of 2 mg SUD for DE. In the DE, 7 (30%) pts experienced CRS; 1 (4%) pt experienced grade 2 CRS, there were no grade ≥3 events, and only 2 (9%) pts received tocilizumab to treat CRS. Overall, median time to CRS onset and resolution was 14.7 and 9 hours, respectively; no pts had CRS after C1. Immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome occurred in 7 (10%) pts (grade 1: 4%; grade 2: 6%; grade 3: 4%). Most common TEAEs were CRS (40%), neutropenia (37%), diarrhea (29%), anemia (24%), and fatigue (20%); most common grade 3/4 TEAEs were neutropenia (31%), anemia (19%), thrombocytopenia (13%), and leukopenia (11%). Grade 5 TEAEs occurred in 5 pts; 1 event was deemed possibly related to ABBV-383 (COVID-19 pneumonia). In the efficacy-evaluable population (n=68), the objective response rate was 62% (95% CI: 49.2, 73.3); 35 (52%) pts had a VGPR or better. Median time to response was 1.1 mo (range: 1-4) and median duration of follow-up was 5.8 mo (range: 1-12). Response rates are expected to improve with longer follow-up. Maximum reduction in peak levels of CRS-related cytokines, including IL-6, were observed in DE compared with DO and 60 mg Q4W without SUD (FIH study). Peak activation and proliferation of CD8 T cells was comparable with ABBV-383 in DO, DE, and 60 mg Q4W-treated pts. Conclusions Introduction of 1 SUD of 2 mg on D1 followed by full dose of 60 mg on D4 in C1 combined with modification to the Dex premed schedule reduced the incidence and severity of CRS in pts with RRMM, further optimizing the safety profile of ABBV-383. Preliminary efficacy data show early and high response rates, consistent with outcomes from other ABBV-383 studies.

Introduction Linvoseltamab is an investigational, BCMA×CD3 bispecific antibody designed for the treatment of RRMM. High objective response rates (ORR) to linvoseltamab 200 mg in the LINKER-MM1 trial (NCT03761108) were demonstrated across high-risk subgroups, including patients aged ≥75 years, patients with high-risk cytogenetics, and patients with penta-class refractory status. The aim of this study was to compare ORR, overall and in key subgroups, between patients in Phase 2 of the LINKER-MM1 trial and patients in an international RW SOC external control arm (ECA). Methods The ECA was derived from a chart review of 16 academic sites across 10 countries that are part of the International Myeloma Foundation (IMF)-International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) and 2 US electronic health record databases (COTA and Guardian Research Network [GRN]). Included patients initiated ≥1 anti-MM treatment after meeting key eligibility criteria of LINKER-MM1. Weighted random sampling and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were used to select 1 line of therapy (LOT) per patient and balance the overall ECA and trial populations on prespecified prognostic factors (Kumar S, et al. IMS 2023). For ORR assessment, LINKER-MM1 and IMF-IMWG used independent central review committees per IMWG criteria, COTA used algorithmic assessment based on IMWG criteria, and GRN used physician-assessed responses. Prior to conducting comparative analyses, an independent committee of epidemiology and oncology experts reviewed the comparability of the cohorts and endpoint assessments, and approved study continuation. ORR among patients in LINKER-MM1 and patients in the ECA was compared overall and across prespecified subgroups (≥10 patients per subgroup), including age, race, cytogenetic risk score, international Staging System (ISS), presence of extramedullary plasmacytoma (EMP), refractory class, bone marrow plasma cell (BMPC) proportion, and number of prior LOTs. Results Median duration of follow-up was 14.3 months (data cut-off: January 6, 2024) for patients receiving linvoseltamab (n=105) and 13.6 months for the ECA (n=307; n=194, n=72, and n=41 from IMF-IMWG, COTA, and GRN, respectively). Following IPTW, 13 prognostic factors with <30% missingness were balanced between cohorts, with an effective sample size in the ECA of 197. After adjustment, ORR was significantly higher in patients who received linvoseltamab compared with patients in the ECA (69.5% vs 45.7%, odds ratio [OR] 2.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6-4.1]) and in key subgroups with age 65-74 years (76.9% vs 48.3%, OR 3.6 [1.6-8.6]), age ≥75 years (72.4% vs 48.5%, OR 2.8 [1.1-7.4]), Black or African American race (82.4% vs 25.0%, OR 14.0 [3.0-85.4]), White race (68.9% vs 49.7%, OR 2.2 [1.3-4.0]), standard cytogenetic risk (72.3% vs 51.3%, OR 2.5 [1.3-4.8]), ISS stage III (58.8% vs 19.7%, OR 5.8 [1.5-25.2]), absence of EMP (71.6% vs 49.3%, OR 2.6 [1.5-4.6]), triple-class refractory status (68.2% vs 45.7%, OR 2.6 [1.5-4.4]), quadruple-class refractory status (66.7% vs 45.9%, OR 2.4 [1.3-4.3]), 4-5 prior LOTs (65.1% vs 40.4%, OR 2.8 [1.3-6.0]), and >5 prior LOTs (75.7% vs 36.1%, OR 5.5 [2.4-13.6]). Numerically higher (not statistically significant) or similar ORR was observed for patients receiving linvoseltamab compared with patients in the ECA with age <65 years (59.5% vs 46.8%, OR 1.7 [0.79-3.6]), high-risk cytogenetics (65.0% vs 63.1%, OR 1.1 [0.41-2.9]), ISS stage I (73.3% vs 64.6%, OR 1.5 [0.62-3.7]), ISS stage II (67.6% vs 53.5%, OR 1.8 [0.72-4.7]), presence of EMP (58.8% vs 56.9%, OR 1.1 [0.32-3.8]), penta-class refractory status (64.3% vs 48.5%, OR 1.9 [0.78-4.8]), BMPC <50% (77.0% vs 67.2%, OR 1.6 [0.61-4.3]), BMPC ≥50% (41.7% vs 36.0%, OR 1.3 [0.36-4.7]), and ≤3 prior LOTs (68.0% vs 66.4%, OR 1.1 [0.43-2.9]). Separate findings will be presented for IMF-IMWG and COTA/GRN data at the congress. Conclusions Linvoseltamab induced better ORR vs RW SOC treatments overall, and better or similar ORR in the key subgroups assessed, highlighting its therapeutic value across a range of patients with RRMM with heterogeneous risk profiles and levels of disease burden.