Sidana, Surbhi

Introduction: Anti-BCMA CAR-T therapies like idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) and ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) have revolutionized RRMM treatment. However, the 6-8-week manufacturing period often leads to disease progression and/or death in up to 25% of patients (pts), necessitating effective bridging strategies. Talquetamab (talq), a bispecific antibody targeting GPRC5D, is approved for RRMM pts with four prior lines of therapy and offers rapid disease debulking without impacting BCMA. This study assesses the safety and efficacy of a short course of talq as a bridging therapy for pts receiving cilta-cel or ide-cel. Methods: This multicenter retrospective study involved 14 US academic medical centers within the US Multiple Myeloma Immunotherapy Consortium. We included pts with RRMM who underwent leukapheresis and received talq bridging therapy with the intent to proceed to commercial cilta-cel or ide-cel. We assessed the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of talq bridging therapy. Safety outcomes included cytokine release syndrome (CRS), immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), talq-related unique toxicities, and delayed neurotoxicity (NT). Efficacy outcomes included response rates to talq and CAR-T therapies. Results: Between June 2023 and May 2024, 77 pts received talq bridging therapy after apheresis with the intention to proceed to CAR-T. The median age was 66 years (range, 58-73); 14% were Black and 10% Hispanic. Poor prognostic features, including high-risk cytogenetics, were present in 45%, extramedullary disease (EMD) in 43%, and 72.7% were triple-class refractory. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 5 (range 3-11) and 10 pts (13%) had prior BCMA targeted therapy. Out of 77 pts, 10 pts were pending CAR-T infusion at the time of last follow up; 6 pts could not receive CAR-T infusion due to manufacturing failures. Of the remaining 61 patients who underwent successful CAR-T manufacturing, 58 (95%) pts were successfully infused with CAR-T therapy following talq bridging. Three (5%) pts died due to disease progression prior to CAR-T infusion. Talq was given 0.8 mg/kg biweekly in 59 (76%) pts and the median time on talq was 22 days (IQR: 10-41 days). Following talq bridging, none of the pts had grade >=3 CRS and 2 (2.5%) had grade 3 ICANS. Skin toxicities occurred in 32 (41%), nail toxicities in 19 (25%), and oral toxicities in 43 (56%) pts mainly grade 1. Most oral, skin, and taste changes resolved at the last follow-up (60%). Response to talq was evaluable in 72 out of 77 patients. An overall response was noted in 45/72 (62%) pts including unconfirmed CR in 14, VGPR in 10 and PR in 21 pts. There was no association of AEs and response to talq with high-risk cytogenetics, EMD and high baseline ferritin levels. Out of the 58 patients who went on to receive CAR-T therapy following talq bridging (45 cilta-cel and 13 ide-cel), 38 (65%) experienced CRS, with grade 3 CRS noted in 2 (3%) pts. ICANS occurred in 5 (8.6%) pts, with 1 (1.7%) grade 3 ICANS. Only 1 pt had delayed NT (facial nerve palsy) at the last follow up. No treatment related deaths were observed. Of these 58 pts, response was evaluable in 40 pts and a response at day +30 was noted in 39/40 (97.5%) pts (14 in CR, 10 in VGPR, 15 in PR). The median follow-up from CAR-T was 61 days (28-113). For the 58 pts who received CAR-T, the median time from the last talq dose to CAR-T infusion was 25 days (IQR: 19-36), and to lymphodepletion was 24 days (IQR: 18-33). There was no difference in the CAR-T related AEs by the duration of Talq washout (>4 weeks vs. =< 4 weeks). Conclusions: Talquetamab is an excellent bridging option before BCMA-targeted CAR-T therapy, showing high response rates even with short-term use and enabling most pts to receive CAR-T. Most oral, skin, and taste changes resolved post CAR-T. These findings underscore the effectiveness of a short course of talq bridging to maintain disease control and improve outcomes post CAR-T. Updated data with longer follow-up will be presented at the meeting.

Abstract Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) was approved in 2022 for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We report outcomes with cilta-cel in the standard-of-care setting. Patients with RRMM who underwent leukapheresis for cilta-cel manufacturing between 1 March 2022 and 31 December 2022 at 16 US academic medical centers were included. Overall, 255 patients underwent leukapheresis and 236 (92.5%) received cilta-cel, of which 54% would not have met CARTITUDE-1 eligibility criteria. In treated patients (N = 236), cytokine release syndrome was seen in 75% (grade ≥3, 5%), immune effector cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome in 14% (grade ≥3, 4%), and delayed neurotoxicity in 10%. Overall and complete response rates were as follows: all patients who received cilta-cel (N = 236), 89% and 70%; patients receiving conforming cilta-cel (n = 191), 94% and 74%; and conforming cilta-cel with fludarabine/cyclophosphamide lymphodepletion (n = 152), 95% and 76%, respectively. Nonrelapse mortality was 10%, most commonly from infection. After a median follow-up of 13 months from cilta-cel, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was not reached, with 12-month estimate being 68% (95% confidence interval, 62-74). High ferritin levels, high-risk cytogenetics, and extramedullary disease were independently associated with inferior PFS, with a signal for prior B-cell maturation antigen–targeted therapy (P = .08). Second primary malignancies excluding nonmelanoma skin cancers were seen in 5.5% and myeloid malignancies/acute leukemia in 1.7%. We observed a favorable efficacy profile of standard-of-care cilta-cel in RRMM, despite more than half the patients not meeting the CARTITUDE-1 eligibility criteria.

Introduction: Lymphodepletion (LD) chemotherapy is critical for the efficacy of CAR-T therapy by eradicating immunosuppressive cells, inducing costimulatory molecules, and promoting expansion and persistence of CAR-T cells. It also can contribute to an increased risk of infections, cytopenia, and other toxicities. We evaluated the utilization of varying LD regimens used in standard-of-care (SOC) autologous B-cell maturation antigen-directed (BCMA) CAR-T therapy with ide-cel or cilta-cel for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) and the effect on outcomes and toxicity. Methods: Data were retrospectively collected from patients with RRMM who underwent LD and CAR-T cell infusion by December 31, 2022, from 13 US academic institutions with SOC ide-cel or cilta-cel. Response rates and other categorical variables, specifically LD regimen, were tested for association using Wilcoxon rank-sum (or Kruskal-Wallis for three or more groups) or Fisher's exact tests, respectively. Results: A total of 523 patients were infused at the time of data cut-off with 489 patients evaluable for safety and survival analyses; 368 (75%) were infused with ide-cel and 121 (25%) with cilta-cel. The median age was 65 years old (range 30-90) with 206 females (42%) and 283 males (58%), and 13% with ECOG performance status ≥ 2 at time of LD. Fludarabine and cyclophosphamide (Flu/Cy) LD was used in 422 patients while 67 patients received other LD regimens including bendamustine-based (n = 35, 52%), cladribine-based (n = 25, 37%) or cyclophosphamide alone (n = 7, 10%). The primary reason for use of Flu/Cy LD was institutional guidance or SOC in 378 patients (90%), while the primary reason for use of other LD regimens was due to the fludarabine shortage in 65 patients (97%) with 3% citing physician's choice or institutional guidance. No significant difference was identified among response outcomes, with those receiving Flu/Cy LD achieving an ORR of 84% compared to 81% with other LD regimens (p = 0.59) and no difference observed in rates of ≥ VGPR (66% Flu/Cy LD vs 60% other LD; p = 0.48). Of those evaluable for MRD at 1 and 3 months, the MRD negative rate at 10 -6 for those with Flu/Cy LD was 77% (n= 137) and 77% (n=113) and with other LD regimens was 66% (n=35) and 79% (n=28), respectively. At a median follow-up of 9.7 months, no statistically significant difference was noted in median progression free survival (mPFS) with Flu/Cy vs other LD regimens (9.3 mos vs NR) or overall survival (OS) (19.4 mos vs NR). When stratified by type of CAR-T therapy, treatment with bendamustine-based LD was associated with an inferior mPFS compared to those receiving Flu/Cy LD in patients treated with ide-cel (3.8 vs 8.5 mos; p=0.0056), though not by multivariate analysis. Univariate analysis of patients treated with ide-cel between Flu/Cy and bendamustine LD did not reveal any significant differences in age, gender, ECOG, R-ISS stage, extramedullary disease, high-risk cytogenetics or renal dysfunction (Cr < 45 ml/min). LD regimen was not a predictor for PFS on multivariable analyses amongst patients treated with ide-cel, while ECOG ≥ 3 (hazard ratio [HR]= 4.44, 95% confidence interval [CI]= 1.40, 14.08) and t(4,14) (HR= 2.02, 95% CI=1.14, 3.59) were associated with worse PFS. No difference in mPFS by LD regimen was observed in patients receiving cilta-cel, which was a smaller cohort (mPFS: Flu/Cy 11.7 mos, bendamustine-based NR, cladribine-based NR, cyclophosphamide NR). Rates of all grade CRS (81% vs 70%), Grade ≥ 3 CRS (3% vs 3%), all grade ICANS (19% vs 12%, and Grade ≥ 3 ICANS (4% vs 2%) were similar among those receiving Flu/Cy or other LD regimens, respectively. Patients receiving Flu/Cy LD were less likely to have any grade cytopenia at 1 month (33% vs 55%, p < 0.001) and 3 months (52% vs 69%, p < 0.001), with no observed difference in infection rate. Conclusions: The fludarabine shortage experienced in the US in late 2022 necessitated the use of alternative LD regimens with BCMA-directed CAR-T therapy with most centers relying on bendamustine- or cladribine-based regimens. Use of bendamustine-based LD was associated with inferior PFS in patients receiving ide-cel on univariate analysis, but not on multivariate analysis after adjusting for other prognostic factors. In summary, there is no clear difference in efficacy or safety between Flu/Cy and non-Flu/Cy LD in patients receiving BCMA-directed CAR-T therapy. *Authors contributed equally

Abstract Idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) was the first chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy to gain US Food and Drug Administration approval for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The clinical outcomes of standard of care (SOC) ide-cel in racially and ethnically diverse populations have been understudied. This study pooled data from 207 patients with RRMM (28% patients of racial and ethnic minority groups) treated with SOC ide-cel across 11 institutions to examine racial and ethnic differences in the incidence of toxicities and adverse events, response to ide-cel, and survival. This study included 22 (11%) Hispanic, 36 (17%) non-Hispanic Black, and 149 (72%) non-Hispanic White patients with RRMM. Compared with Hispanic and non-Hispanic White patients, non-Hispanic Black patients had higher median levels of C-reactive protein (1.0, 0.8, and 3.5 mg/dL, respectively; P = .02) and baseline ferritin (362.0 vs 307.0 vs 680.5, respectively; P = .08) and were more likely to develop cytokine release syndrome (77%, 85%, and 97%, respectively; P = .04). Although best overall response rate was lower among Hispanic patients (59%) than among non-Hispanic Black (86%) and White patients (86%; P = .01), there were no racial and ethnic differences in progression-free or overall survival. We provide, to our knowledge, the first and largest investigation of clinical outcomes of SOC ide-cel by race and ethnicity. Despite differences in safety and response to ide-cel, our findings encourage the use of ide-cel in all patients with RRMM. These findings should be confirmed in larger samples of diverse patients with RRMM, with longer follow-up time.

AbstractBackgroundLenalidomide maintenance after autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in multiple myeloma (MM) results in superior progression‐free survival and overall survival. However, patients with high‐risk multiple myeloma (HRMM) do not derive the same survival benefit from lenalidomide maintenance compared with standard‐risk patients. The authors sought to determine the outcomes of bortezomib‐based maintenance compared with lenalidomide maintenance in patients with HRMM undergoing ASCT.MethodsIn total, the authors identified 503 patients with HRMM who were undergoing ASCT within 12 months of diagnosis from January 2013 to December 2018 after receiving triplet novel‐agent induction in the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research database. HRMM was defined as deletion 17p, t(14;16), t(4;14), t(14;20), or chromosome 1q gain.ResultsThree hundred fifty‐seven patients (67%) received lenalidomide alone, and 146 (33%) received bortezomib‐based maintenance (with bortezomib alone in 58%). Patients in the bortezomib‐based maintenance group were more likely to harbor two or more high‐risk abnormalities and International Staging System stage III disease (30% vs. 22%; p = .01) compared with the lenalidomide group (24% vs. 15%; p < .01). Patients who were receiving lenalidomide maintenance had superior progression‐free survival at 2 years compared with those who were receiving either bortezomib monotherapy or combination therapy (75% vs. 63%; p = .009). Overall survival at 2 years was also superior in the lenalidomide group (93% vs. 84%; p = .001).ConclusionsNo superior outcomes were observed in patients with HRMM who received bortezomib monotherapy or (to a lesser extent) in those who received bortezomib in combination as maintenance compared with lenalidomide alone. Until prospective data from randomized clinical trials are available, post‐transplant therapy should be tailored to each patient with consideration for treating patients in clinical trials that target novel therapeutic strategies for HRMM, and lenalidomide should remain a cornerstone of treatment.

PURPOSE: Patients' concerns regarding clinical trial (CT) participation include apprehension about side effects, quality of life (QoL), financial burden, and quality of care. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated the experience of patients with multiple myeloma or lymphoma who were treated on CTs (CT group, n = 35) versus patients treated with standard approaches (non-CT group, n = 88) focusing on QoL, financial burden of care, and patients' perception of quality of care over a 1-year period. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in any of the patient-reported outcomes in CT versus non-CT groups. We observed an initial decline in overall QoL in the first 3 months across both groups, driven primarily by physical and functional well-being. QoL gradually improved and was above baseline by month 12. Patients reported highest improvement in the functional well-being subdomain. Patients in both groups reported high satisfaction with the quality of care received, and there were no differences in overall satisfaction, communication with team, or access to care. At baseline, 16%-19% of patients reported financial burden, which increased to a peak of 33% in the CT group and to 49% in the non-CT group over the course of 1 year. There was no significant difference in financial burden in the two groups overall. Most of the patients reported getting all the care that was deemed medically necessary in both groups. However, a significant proportion of patients reported having to make other kinds of financial sacrifices because of their cancer (CT group: 33% of patients at baseline and 21%-40% over 1 year; non-CT group: 19% at baseline and 25%-36% over 1 year). CONCLUSION: Patients treated on CTs reported comparable QoL and quality of care with the non-CT group. A high proportion of patients reported financial burden over time in both groups. Our findings can serve as a guide to educate patients regarding CT participation and highlight the need to address the significant financial burden experienced by patients with cancer.

Abstract Background Allogeneic (off the shelf) chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy addresses the logistical challenges, availability (including insufficient T-cell yields from low baseline absolute lymphocyte count), and variable product quality of autologous CAR T therapy. ALLO-715 is a genetically modified anti-BCMA AlloCAR T™ cell which uses Cellectis TALEN ® technology to disrupt the T-cell receptor alpha constant gene (TRAC) and the CD52 gene to reduce the risk of graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) and permit the use of ALLO-647, an anti-CD52 monoclonal antibody (mAb), for selective and transitory host lymphodepletion (LD). Methods UNIVERSAL is an open-label, Phase 1 trial (NCT04093596) in adults with relapsed/refractory (R/R) multiple myeloma who have received ≥3 prior lines of therapy including a proteasome inhibitor, immunomodulator, and anti-CD38 mAb. Patients (pts) must be refractory to their last treatment line. Pts receive LD followed by ALLO-715 at 1 of 4 dose levels (DLs) in a 3+3 dose escalation design: 40, 160, 320, and 480 x 10 6 CAR+ T cells. Several LD regimens are being evaluated: FCA39; FCA60; FCA90; and CA39; with fludarabine [F] 90 mg/m 2, cyclophosphamide [C] 900 mg/m 2, and ALLO-647 [A] 39, 60, or 90 mg divided over 3 days. Results As of June 21, 2021 data-cut, 47 subjects were enrolled; 42 were treated with ALLO-715; 5 progressed prior to treatment. Median time from enrollment to LD was 5 days and no treated pts required bridging therapy. Pts were heavily pretreated with a range of 3-11 prior lines of therapy; 42.9% were penta refractory. There were 19% ISS Stage III at screening, 34% had high risk cytogenetics, and 19% had extramedullary disease. The most common Grade (Gr) 3+ adverse events (AEs) included anemia, neutropenia, lymphopenia, and thrombocytopenia. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) occurred in 52.4%, all Gr 1/2 except 1 pt with Gr 3. CRS was treated with tocilizumab (21.3%) and corticosteroids (12.8%). One pt (with Gr 2 CRS) experienced Gr 1 neurotoxicity that resolved. Gr 3+ infections occurred in 12.8% of pts, including 2 previously reported Gr 5 events (fungal pneumonia and adenovirus hepatitis). Early results from this trial have been presented previously (ASH 2020) and therefore the efficacy analysis on pts (n=26) treated at DL3 and DL4 with FCA LD, which are considered a more relevant cell dose and LD, is presented here (Table). In pts who received DL3 or DL4 (320 or 480 x 10 6 CAR T cells) (n=26), the ORR was 61.5% (95% CI: 40.6, 79.8); very good partial response or better (VGPR+) rate was 38.5% (95% CI: 20.2, 59.4). Median time to 1 st response was 16 days. The median follow-up for the DL3/DL4 pts was 7.4 months (95% CI: 3.6, 9.9) with a median duration of response of 8.3 months (95% CI: 1.5, not reached). Of the 10 pts with a best response of VGPR+, 8 were found to be negative by minimal residual disease (MRD) analysis. Conclusions UNIVERSAL demonstrates proof of concept for allogeneic CAR T therapy in multiple myeloma. ALLO-715 showed CAR T cell dose response relationship with higher doses (DL3/DL4) leading to clinically meaningful efficacy, including high VGPR+ rate of 38.5% and high MRD negativity without requiring leukapheresis or bridging therapy. ALLO-715 following LD with FCA has a tolerable safety profile. FCA induces a deep and durable window of lymphocyte depletion allowing CAR T cell expansion and persistence. A study using the next generation anti-BCMA CAR (ALLO-605) which supplies cytokine signaling to the CAR bearing cells is ongoing (IGNITE). The current UNIVERSAL trial continues to enroll, including a cohort with consolidation, and updated data will be presented at the meeting. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Mailankody: Allogene Therapeutics: Research Funding; Plexus Communications: Honoraria; Fate Therapeutics: Research Funding; Physician Education Resource: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb/Juno: Research Funding; Jansen Oncology: Research Funding; Legend Biotech: Consultancy; Evicore: Consultancy; Takeda Oncology: Research Funding. Liedtke: Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kura Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alnylam: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Clinical Trial Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sidana: BMS: Consultancy; Magenta Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Allogene: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Chhabra: GSK: Honoraria. Oluwole: Janssen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Curio Science: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kumar: Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Antengene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Roche-Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Carsgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Tenebio: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Nath: Actinium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria. Anwer: Janssen pharmaceutical: Honoraria, Research Funding; Allogene Therapeutics: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; BMS / Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Raje: Caribou: Other; Janssen: Other; bluebird bio: Other; Amgen: Other; Celgene: Other; BMS: Other. Siegel: Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celularity: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Amgen Inc.: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Karski: Allogene Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Crispr Therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Nektar Therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Lovelace: Allogene Therapeutics, Inc.: Current Employment. Lourbakos: Allogene Therapeutics, Inc.: Current Employment. Hari: Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Oncopeptides: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Adaptive Biotech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene-BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Abstract Background: MGTA-145, a CXCR2 agonist, has shown promising activity for hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) mobilization with plerixafor in pre-clinical models and healthy volunteers. It has the potential to become the first GCSF free regimen for HSC mobilization/apheresis in preparation for transplant, with fewer side effects, better patient experience and optimal resource utilization. Methods: We conducted a single center phase 2 trial of MGTA-145 + plerixafor for HSC mobilization in patients with multiple myeloma (MM), NCT04552743. Primary endpoint was collection of ≥2 x 10 6 CD34+ cells/kg in up to 2 days of mobilization/apheresis. Secondary endpoints were collection of 4 and 6 x 10 6 CD34+ cells/kg, safety and engraftment. Patients with MM, 18-70 years of age, within 1 year of starting treatment & CrCl &gt; 30 ml/min were eligible. Patients received plerixafor 0.24 mg/kg (0.16 mg/kg if renal dysfunction) SQ, followed 2 hours later by MGTA-145 (0.03 mg/kg) IV over 3-10 minutes and apheresis within 30 minutes. Mobilization and collection were repeated for a second consecutive day if day 1 yield was &lt; 6 x 10 6 CD34+ cells/kg. The study was open-label single arm trial of 15 patients. If 13 or more patients met primary endpoint, an expansion cohort of 10 patients was planned. The trial has 85% power at a 5% one-sided type I error rate. Our analysis is based on aggregated results from total cohort of 25 patients. Results: Median age was 62 years, 52% were female, 24% had ISS stage 3, 57% had high-risk FISH (primarily gain1q). Induction therapy was VRD in 68% (17), daratumumab VRD in 24% (6), CyBorD in 8% (2) patients. Median duration of induction was 4 months (3-6) and median lenalidomide exposure was 5 cycles (1-8), with &gt; VGPR in 88% of patients. (Table 1) Plerixafor 0.24 mg/kg was given in 24 (96%) patients. Median pre-apheresis CD34 count was day 1, 24/uL (3-99) & day 2, 15/uL (5-46). Median total HSC cell yield (CD34+ cells/kg x 10 6) was 5.0 (1.1-16.2), day 1 yield was 3.4 (0.3-16.2) and day 2 yield was 1.9 (0.5-4.6) (Fig1). 88% (n=22) of patients met the primary endpoint of collecting sufficient HSCs in &lt; 2 days of mobilization + apheresis to proceed to transplant, 68% (17) in 1 day (2 x 10 6 CD34+ cells/kg). 3 patients who did not meet primary endpoint successfully collected HSCs with standard GCSF + plerixafor dosing & 2-3 apheresis sessions. Secondary endpoints of 4 and 6 x 10 6 CD34+ cells/kg in &lt; 2 days were met in 68% (17) and 40% (10) patients. MGTA-145+plerixafor was well tolerated. At least 1 treatment emergent AE (TEAE) with MGTA-145 was seen in 60% of patients (grade 1, n= 14, grade 2, n=1). Pain (all grade 1) was most common, seen in 44% (11), with 38% (9) patients experiencing acute onset transient bone pain with MGTA-145 (duration: 7 minutes, range: 3-28). Using the validated Brief Pain Inventory, 56% (14) patients self-reported pain with mobilization vs 40% (10) at baseline. 7/15 patients without baseline pain reported pain with mobilization. An increase for worst pain was seen on mobilization day 1, that returned to the baseline, but no difference for aggregate score of pain severity/interference (linear mixed effects model). At last follow-up, 18 patients have completed transplant with MGTA-145 mobilized graft, with melphalan 200 mg/m 2 in 15 (83%) patients. Median of 3.5 (2.2-8.1) x 10 6 CD34+ cells/kg were infused. All patients have engrafted. Median time to neutrophil engraftment of 12 days (range: 11-15) & platelet engraftment (platelets &gt; 20,000, no transfusion in 7 days) of 17.5 days (15-33) are comparable to historical data (DiPersio et al. 2009). RBC transfusion was needed in 3 (17%) patients. 14 patients have day 100 follow-up, all with durable engraftment. MGTA-145 + plerixafor mobilized grafts had a favorable graft composition. We observed high enrichment for CD90+CD45RA- among CD34+ cells, a CD34 subset of long term engrafting HSCs (median: 36% of CD34+ cells, range 10-66%, N=25). 74% (17 of 23) grafts were minimal residual disease negative with next generation flow cytometry. Conclusions: This is the first study to evaluate the novel G-CSF-free regimen of MGTA-145 + plerixafor for HSC cell mobilization & collection for hematologic malignancies. The study cohort was representative of transplant eligible patients with MM, with 88% patients meeting the primary endpoint. The regimen was well tolerated. Patients achieved timely & durable engraftment. Our data support further development of this regimen for rapid HSC mobilization. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Sidana: Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Allogene: Research Funding; Magenta Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy. Kumar: Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Carsgen: Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Tenebio: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy; Antengene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche-Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Muffly: Pfizer, Amgen, Jazz, Medexus, Pfizer: Consultancy; Astellas, Jasper, Adaptive, Baxalta: Research Funding; Adaptive: Honoraria, Other: fees for non-CME/CE services: , Research Funding. Arai: Magenta Therapeutics: Research Funding. Meyer: Indee, Jura: Consultancy; Orca Biosystems: Research Funding; GigaImmune: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company; Triursus Therapeutics: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Rezvani: US Department of Justice: Consultancy; Kaleido: Other: One-time scientific advisory board; Nohla Therapeutics: Other: One-time scientific advisory board; Pharmacyclics-Abbvie: Research Funding. Weng: Kite Pharma: Research Funding. Frank: Kite-Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Allogene Therapeutics: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding. Shiraz: Kite Pharma-Gilead: Research Funding. Girgenti: Magenta Therapeutics: Current Employment. Goncalves: Magenta Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Patents & Royalties. Schmelmer: Magenta Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Patents & Royalties. Davis: Magenta Therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Ended employment in the past 24 months. Shizuru: Jasper Therapeutics, Inc.: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Chair of scientific advisory board; Forty seven Inc: Other: Inventor on a patent licenses by Forty Seven. Forty seven was acquired by Gilead in 2020. Miklos: Pharmacyclics: Patents & Royalties; Kite, a Gilead Company, Amgen, Atara, Wugen, Celgene, Novartis, Juno-Celgene-Bristol Myers Squibb, Allogene, Precision Bioscience, Adicet, Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Takeda, Adaptive Biotechnologies and Miltenyi Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics, Amgen, Kite, a Gilead Company, Novartis, Roche, Genentech, Becton Dickinson, Isoplexis, Miltenyi, Juno-Celgene-Bristol Myers Squibb, Allogene, Precision Biosciences, Adicet, Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies, Novartis, Juno/Celgene-BMS, Kite, a Gilead Company, Pharmacyclics-AbbVie, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, AlloGene, Precision Bioscience, Miltenyi Biotech, Adicet, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.