Baughn, Linda

Abstract Solitary bone plasmacytoma (SBP) and SBP with minimal marrow involvement (SBPmm) are treated similarly with definitive radiation therapy (RT) followed by observation. However, differences in the natural disease course after RT between the two, are not well described. We performed a multicenter study assessing outcomes after RT in 141 patients with SBP and 102 with SBPmm diagnosed between January 2010 and December 2024. About 92% of patients with SBPmm progressed to multiple myeloma (MM) vs 76% of those with SBP (P = .01). Among patients with SBP, 21% progressed with a second solitary bone lesion vs 4% with SBPmm (P< .01). Patients with longer time to progression (TTP) after initial RT could achieve durable responses with RT to a second solitary plasmacytoma in the absence of other myeloma-defining events (MDE). Multifocal lytic bone lesions were the most common MDE, occurring in 89% and 81% of patients with SBPmm and SBP, respectively. Patients with SBPmm had a median TTP of 15 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 14-21) compared to 43 months (95% CI, 34-55) for those with SBP (P< .0001); 67% with SBPmm progressed within 2 years of diagnosis. Del(17p) and 1q+ (gain or amplification) were associated with shorter TTP to MM in SBPmm, with 2-year progression rates of 100% and 82%, respectively. We report significant differences in risk and modes of progression between SBP and SBPmm. Patients with SBPmm are at particularly high risk for early progression to MM, with most developing bone disease as the MDE. These findings support prospective studies incorporating frontline systemic therapy for SBPmm.

Abstract Monoclonal antibodies targeting CD38 are a therapeutic mainstay in multiple myeloma (MM). Although they have contributed to improved outcomes, most patients still experience disease relapse, and little is known about tumor-intrinsic mechanisms of resistance to these drugs. Antigen escape has been implicated as a mechanism of tumor-cell evasion in immunotherapy. Yet, it is unknown whether MM cells can develop permanent resistance to anti-CD38 antibodies by acquiring genomic events leading to biallelic disruption of the CD38 gene locus. Here, we analyzed whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing data from patients 701 newly diagnosed MM, 67 patients at relapse with naivety to anti-CD38 antibodies, and 50 patients collected at relapse after anti-CD38 antibodies. We report a loss of CD38 in 10 of 50 patients (20%) after CD38 therapy, 3 of whom exhibited a loss of both copies. Two of these cases showed convergent evolution in which distinct subclones independently acquired similar advantageous variants. Functional studies on missense mutations involved in biallelic CD38 events revealed that 2 variants, L153H and C275Y, decreased binding affinity and antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity of the commercial antibodies daratumumab and isatuximab. However, a third mutation, R140G, conferred selective resistance to daratumumab, while retaining sensitivity to isatuximab. Clinically, patients with MM are often rechallenged with CD38 antibodies after disease progression and these data suggest that next-generation sequencing may play a role in subsequent treatment selection for a subset of patients.

AbstractBackgroundAlthough the prognosis of core‐binding factor (CBF) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is better than other subtypes of AML, 30% of patients still relapse and may require allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT). However, there is no validated widely accepted scoring system to predict patient subsets with higher risk of relapse.MethodsEleven centers in the US and Europe evaluated 247 patients with t(8;21)(q22;q22).ResultsComplete remission (CR) rate was high (92.7%), yet relapse occurred in 27.1% of patients. A total of 24.7% of patients received alloHCT. The median disease‐free (DFS) and overall (OS) survival were 20.8 and 31.2 months, respectively. Age, KIT D816V mutated (11.3%) or nontested (36.4%) compared with KIT D816V wild type (52.5%), high white blood cell counts (WBC), and pseudodiploidy compared with hyper‐ or hypodiploidy were included in a scoring system (named I‐CBFit). DFS rate at 2 years was 76% for patients with a low‐risk I‐CBFit score compared with 36% for those with a high‐risk I‐CBFit score (P < 0.0001). Low‐ vs high‐risk OS at 2 years was 89% vs 51% (P < 0.0001).ConclusionsI‐CBFit composed of readily available risk factors can be useful to tailor the therapy of patients, especially for whom alloHCT is not need in CR1 (ie, patients with a low‐risk I‐CBFit score).