Hogan, William J.

Abstract The reduced-intensity conditioning regimen, fludarabine and melphalan, is frequently used in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Melphalan and the active metabolite of fludarabine, F-ara-A, are excreted via the kidneys. Existing methods to assess clearance in this setting are based on serum creatinine, which has known limitations for glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimation in patients with malignancy. Measured GFR (mGFR) may better predict drug dosing to mitigate toxicity and increase the chances of successful engraftment. The primary objective of this study was to assess the association between mGFR and risk for nonrelapse mortality (NRM) in patients who have undergone allogeneic HSCT receiving conditioning with fludarabine and melphalan. In the 109 included patients, mGFR <65 mL/min/1.73 m2 predicted a significantly higher rate of overall NRM (hazard ratio [HR], 2.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-4.35; P = 04) and 1-year incidence of infection (HR, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.54-4.55; P < .001) in addition to a significantly lower 2-year survival (P = .019). Kidney function estimated via estimated GFR (eGFR) and estimated creatinine clearance did not correlate with posttransplant outcomes. These results suggest that mGFR is a promising approach for assessing clearance in patients who have undergone allogeneic HSCT and may be preferred to standard creatinine-based eGFR strategies.

Abstract Introduction: There is evidence that lack of a social network is a link to inferior outcomes in cancer patients. Mayo clinic performs all its stem cell transplants for multiple myeloma patients as an outpatient. This requires a full-time chaperone or caregiver for the duration of the transplant. Patients who do not have a caregiver are hospitalized for the duration of the transplant. In this study we compared outcomes between patients hospitalized for the entire transplant and those who have a caregiver and are initially managed as an outpatient.Materials and methods: All patients with multiple myeloma transplanted at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester Minnesota between 1/1/2000 and 12/31/2019 were included for analysis. Patient had to have been transplanted within 12 months of the original diagnosis. The definition of inpatient transplantation was hospitalization prior to day 0 of transplantation for conditioning and continued hospitalization until evidence of neutrophil engraftment occurred.Results: There were 41 patients who were considered inpatient transplants and 2103 that were outpatient transplants. The patients were well balanced for age, sex, serum creatinine, and international stage at diagnosis. For inpatient transplants the median days in the hospital was 21 (interquartile range 18 to 28). For outpatient transplants the median number of days in the hospital was 0 (interquartile range 0 to 6). Relapse free survival was not significantly different between the 2 groups, but overall survival was 95 versus 58 months favoring those that had transplantation as an outpatient (p=.0008). Conclusion: There appears to be in association between myeloma patients that lack a caregiver and require inpatient stem cell transplantation and overall survival.

Abstract Background: Venetoclax, a small-molecule inhibitor of B cell leukemia/lymphoma-2, in combination with hypomethylating agents (HMA) has shown improved efficacy and survival benefit compared to HMA alone (DiNardo et al, 2020) in elderly/unfit patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Since FDA-approval of this regimen for elderly/unfit AML patients, it is frequently utilized both in the upfront and relapsed/refractory setting. Cardiac events with venetoclax are not well described. In the VIALE-E trial, which included patients ineligible for standard induction chemotherapy due to congestive heart failure or stable angina, 15% of patients receiving azacitidine plus venetoclax experienced atrial fibrillation as a serious adverse event, vs. 1% in the azacitidine plus placebo group (DiNardo et al, 2020). Our objective was to provide an estimate of the prevalence of and a description of all cardiac events that occurred in AML patients undergoing treatment with venetoclax + HMA. Methods: 170 consecutive patients with AML who received venetoclax +HMA (azacitidine or decitabine) outside the context of a clinical trial between 1/2017-11/2020 at the Mayo Clinic were included. Patients received venetoclax + HMA either as upfront treatment or for relapsed/refractory disease. Patients with relapse following allogeneic stem cell transplant were excluded. We evaluated all cardiac events that occurred while treatment with venetoclax + HMA was ongoing. Baseline patient and treatment characteristics were compared using the Mann-Whitney U-test and the Fisher's exact test. All statistics were computed using EZR (Version 1.53). Results: 1. Patient characteristics A total of 170 patients who received venetoclax + HMA (median age 69 years [range 17-91], 63% males) were included. ELN risk category was either adverse risk (48%, 82/170) or intermediate risk (48%, 82/170) in the majority of patients. 64% (109/170) of patients received venetoclax + HMA as upfront treatment. Characteristics including age, ELN cytogenetic risk, cardiovascular risk factors, and upfront vs relapsed therapy were similar among patients with or without cardiac events. The only exception was a higher incidence of CEBPA mutation amongst those with cardiac events (12% vs 2%, p=0.03). The majority (83%, 141/170) of patients underwent an echocardiogram prior to initiation of therapy. 2. Cardiac events Of 170 patients treated with venetoclax + HMA during the study period, 34 (20%) patients experienced a total of 48 cardiac events. Of patients experiencing cardiac events, 32% (11/34) had no pre-existing cardiac disease and 12% (4/34) had no cardiovascular risk factors (Table 1). The majority of events occurred early in treatment course: 41% during cycle 1, 26% during cycle 2 and 15% during cycle 3 (Table 1). The most frequently occurring cardiac event (21%, 10/48 events) was a decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction on echocardiography, which was associated with symptoms in all ten patients. Second most frequent was atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response at 17% (8/48 events), followed by troponin elevation without electrocardiogram changes at 15% (7/46 events). Of patients with troponin elevation, 57% (4/7 events) occurred in the setting of another inciting factor such as severe anemia, while 43% represented a troponin elevation without explanation (Table 1). Other cardiac events included heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (n=4), other symptomatic arrhythmia (n=4), and symptomatic pericardial effusion or pericarditis (n=3). In addition, 2 of 34 (6%) patients experienced fatal cardiopulmonary arrest. The majority (88%) of cardiac events required either inpatient admission (62%, 21/34 patients) or intensive care unit (ICU) care (26%, 9/34 patients). 77% of patients required new cardiac medications or procedural intervention (n=4). In 27% of cases (9/34 patients), the cardiac event directly contributed to death (Table 1). Conclusions: Cardiac complications were observed in one-fifth (20%) of AML patients treated with venetoclax + HMA, despite the absence of preexisting cardiac disease in a third of cases; moreover 27% of events were fatal. Further comparative studies are required to identify salient clinical features predictive of cardiac complications in these patients. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Al-Kali: Novartis: Research Funding; Astex: Other: Research support to institution. Litzow: Astellas: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; AbbVie: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Pluristem: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee. Patnaik: Kura Oncology: Research Funding; StemLine: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a well-described entity and known to carry a worse prognosis, compared to de novo AML. In the current study, we sought to describe the presenting features and outcome of patients with AML, in the setting of previous history of cancer with or without exposure to chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Methods: A Mayo Clinic database of patients with AML was queried to identify patients with a previous history of cancer, both hematologic and solid tumors. A comparative analysis of presenting features, treatment details and survival were performed between patients with therapy-related AML (Group A) and those with AML and a history of cancer that had been managed with surgery alone (Group B). Results: A total of 250 patients (median age 68 years, range 19-90; 60% males) with AML and a previous history of cancer (both hematologic and solid) were identified; 182 (73%) cases were determined to be therapy-related AML (Group A) while the remaining 68 (27%) did not receive chemotherapy or radiotherapy for their antecedent cancer (Group B) (Table). Among group A patients 106 (58%) were exposed to chemotherapy, 37 (20%) to radiotherapy and 39 (22%) to combination chemotherapy and radiotherapy for their cancer. At the time of AML diagnosis, adverse karyotype was noted in 91 (51%) group A and 12 (19%) group B patients (p<0.0001); the incidence of adverse karyotype in patients exposed to chemotherapy vs radiotherapy alone vs combined chemoradiotherapy was 54% (57/106), 30% (11/37), and 59% (23/39) respectively (p=0.04). Group A patients, compared to those in group B, included more females (46% vs 24%; p=0.001), and more preceding hematologic malignancies (p=<0.0001). Next generation sequencing was performed in 74 patients and the results showed no significant difference between groups A and B (Table). Treatment and outcome in Groups A and B: Intensive and less intensive AML-directed chemotherapy were given to 100 (55%) and 44 (24%) patients in group A and 38 (56%) and 14 (21%) patients in group B (P=0.8). 79 (65%) remissions (complete remission (CR) 42 (29%) and CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi) 37 (26%) were documented in Group A and 37 (71%) remissions (CR: 21 (40%) and CRi=16 (31%) in Group B (P=0.2). After a median follow-up of 8.4 months (range: 0.9-217), 184 deaths were documented: 132 (72.5%) in Group A and 52 (76.5%) in Group B (P=0.5). 52 (36%) patients from Group A and 25 (48%) from Group B relapsed (P=0.1). The median (range) overall survival (OS) rates of patients from Group A was 13 (9-17) months and that of Group B was 14 (10-35) months (P=0.6). The 1-, 3- and 5-year OS rates were 52%, 28%, and 24% in Group A; and 62%, 33%, and 24% in Group B patients (Fig 1). Multivariable analysis identified relapse (HR 2.8, 95% CI 1.7-4.7) and failure to achieve CR/CRi (HR 2.8 95% CI 1.9-4.7) as risk factors for inferior survival (Fig 2a and 2b). The median (range) relapse free survival of patients in Group A was 28 (17 -81) and that of Group B was 27 (14 - 76) months (P=0.9) (Fig 2c). 28 patients underwent allogenic stem-cell transplant (25 in CR1 and 3 in CR2), 23 in Group A and 5 in Group B; the 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS of patients who underwent allogenic stem cell transplant were 88%, 72%, and 72% regardless of the group (Fig 2d). Conclusion: The current study did not find significant differences between AML patients with previous history of cancer with or without exposure to chemo/radiotherapy, in terms of either response to AML-directed therapy or overall or relapse-free survival, despite a higher prevalence of adverse karyotype in therapy-related AML. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Patnaik: Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Stemline Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Al-Kali: Astex: Other: Research support to institution; Novartis: Research Funding. Litzow: Pluristem: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee.

Abstract Introduction: Therapy-related myeloid neoplasm (t-MN) includes acute myeloid leukemia (AML), myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), and myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms (MDS/MPN) that occur as a complication of DNA-damaging therapies. The World Health Organization recommends considering t-MN as a single entity. Whether t-MDS and t-AML have distinct characteristics and outcomes is not known. The aim of this study was to compare clinicopathological characteristics and outcomes of t-MDS and t-AML. Methods: All patients diagnosed with t-MN based on the World Health Organization criteria were identified. Bone marrow biopsies, cytogenetic, and next-generation sequencing (NGS) were obtained at the treating physician's discretion. Pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PV) were called based on the standard criteria. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the time of t-MN diagnosis until the last follow up using Kaplan-Meier analysis using Wilcoxon test. For survival analysis comparing chemotherapy to best supportive care (BSC) only, patients were censored at the time of allogeneic stem cell transplant (SCT). Multivariate analysis was performed using Cox proportional hazard method and corrected using false discovery rate (FDR). Statistical analysis was performed using JMP (v14.1, SAS Institute) and significance was defined as P<0.05. Results: We identified 554 patients, of which 180 (32.4%), 365 (65.8%), and 9 (1.6%) presented as t-AML, t-MDS, and t-MDS/MPN respectively. t-MDS/MPN patients were excluded from further analysis due to a small number. Clinical and laboratory characteristics of the t-AML and t-MDS cohorts is shown in Table 1. t-AML patients were significantly more anemic and thrombocytopenic at presentation. As expected, t-AML had a higher peripheral blood and BM blast count. There was no difference in proportion of patients with chromosomal abnormalities, though a statistically significantly higher proportion of t-MDS patients had chromosome 5 abnormality, 5q deletion, monosomy 5, chromosome 7 abnormality, monosomy 7 compared to t-AML patients. On other hand, 11q23 (mixed lineage leukemia, MLL) rearrangement was more common in t-AML compared to t-MDS (9.3% vs. 2.8%, P=0.005). A higher proportion of t-MDS patients had PV detected by NGS compared to t-AML (92.9% vs. 85.6%, P=0.038). A higher proportion of t-MDS patients had PV in TP53 (37.6% vs. 21.4%, P=0.004) and ASXL1 (23% vs. 11.7%, P=0.016) genes; whereas a higher proportion of t-AML patients had PV in RAS (18.9% vs. 9.1%, P=0.013) and WT1 (8.1% vs. 2.9%, P=0.05) genes. One hundred twenty-eight (35%) of 365 t-MDS patients progressed to t-AML. The presence of any chromosomal abnormality at t-MDS diagnosis predicted a higher risk of transformation to t-AML (χ 2 3.9, P=0.03). t-AML patients had a significantly shorter OS compared to t-MDS (9.2 vs. 19.7 months, P<0.0001, Figure A). This difference persisted when stratified by no disease modifying therapies (BSC only) 2 vs. 17 months (P<0.0001, Figure B), as well as among those who received at least one line of chemotherapy (14 vs. 24.6 months, P<0.001). Finally, a higher proportion of patients with t-AML underwent SCT and there was a trend towards improved survival for t-AML patients (vs. t-MDS 52.9 vs. 20.7 months, P=0.07) from the time of transplant. Multivariate analysis for OS performed to control for all the variables that were different at presentation (except for blast count), showed that t-MDS (as opposed to t-AML) phenotype at diagnosis, and undergoing SCT were independent predictors of improved survival (Table 2). Conclusion: t-MDS and t-AML have distinct clinical, cytogenetic, and genetic features at presentation. In the absence of disease modifying therapies, t-AML is a more aggressive phenotype, consistently associated with a shorter survival. Even after controlling adverse risk features, t-AML phenotype had a shorter survival compared to t-MDS. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Litzow: AbbVie: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Pluristem: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee. Hiwase: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.