Chhabra, Saurabh

Background: Venetoclax (Ven), a BCL2 inhibitor, has shown promising responses in multiple myeloma (MM) patients with t(11;14) and/or BCL2 expression. However, consistent benefit in clinical trials remain elusive. This report evaluates the efficacy and safety of Ven combination therapies, including in the non-t(11;14) subgroup, and examines the impact of secondary cytogenetic abnormalities (SGA) on outcomes. Methods: This retrospective study included multiple myeloma (MM) patients without concurrent AL amyloidosis treated with Ven-based combinations at Mayo Clinic sites from January 2015 to December 2023. FISH data was collected at diagnosis and before venetoclax initiation to assess SGAs. Refractoriness was defined by progression on or within 60 days of stopping treatment. Patients refractory to at least one proteasome inhibitor (PI), immunomodulatory drug (ImiD), and anti-CD38 antibody were considered triple-class refractory (TCR). Ven combinations were grouped as: Daratumumab/CD38 antibody (Dara)-Ven based if received Dara ± other drugs, PI-Ven-based without Dara, Ven-dexamethasone (Ven-d), and other combinations (Ven-Misc). BCL2 expression in patients without t(11;14) was determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Progression-free survival (PFS) was calculated from treatment initiation to disease progression or last follow-up. Results: We included 232 patients in this study. The median age at diagnosis of MM was 62 years (range 32-87), and the median age at initiation was 68 years (range 35-89). The median time from diagnosis of MM to initiation of Ven was 55 months (95% CI 28, 89 months), and the median follow-up from initiation of Ven-based treatment was 17.2 months (95% CI: 14, 22). Patients had received a median of 3 lines (IQR 4-6); 65% (n=152) of patients were TCR, 71% (n=163) had received autologous stem cell transplant and 7% (n=16) patients had received prior immune effector therapy prior to initiation of Ven-based therapy. The majority (83%, n=190) of the patients harbored a t(11;14); in the patients without t(11;14), a BCL2 expression by IHC was tested in 18 patients and positive in 17 patients. The most common Ven-based combinations included: Dara-Ven-d (19%, n=44), PI-Ven-d (30.2%, n=70), Ven-d (48.3%, n=112), Ven-misc (2.6%, n=6). The overall response rate for the entire cohort was 57% [64% for t(11;14) and 26% for non t(11;14), p<0.0001]. The median PFS for the entire cohort was 9.5 months (95% CI 8.5,13), and the duration of response was 18 months (95% CI 15.2-23.3). The median PFS was 11.8 months (95% CI 9.5-16.7) for patients harboring a t(11;14) compared to 2.9 months (95% CI 1.8, 8.4) for patients without a t(11;14), p<0.0001. Among the non-t(11;14) cohort with BCL2 expression, the median PFS was 1.8 months (95% CI: 1.2-4.2). Among the 190 patients with t(11;14), 18% (34/190) harbored deletion 17p and 32% (60/193) harbored a 1q gain/amplification (referred hereforth as 1q21+) at initiation of Ven-based therapy. In the cohort of patients with t(11;14), the presence of either del17p or 1q21+ (n=85/190) was associated with a significantly inferior PFS [median PFS 8.2 months (95% CI: 5.5,13)] vs. 15.1 months (95% CI: 11.6, 22), p=0.03. At the last follow-up,42 patients had ongoing treatment with ven-based combination. Most common reasons for discontinuation were progression (77% N=140), adverse effect (12%, n=22), patient/provider preference(9%, n=17); 2% (n=4) patients died without progression (3 infection, 1 unclear). The most commonly utilized maximum dose of venetoclax was 400 mg (42%); 15% (n=35) of patients required a dose reduction, and 23% (n=54) received a ramp-up. Tumor lysis syndrome was not noted in any patient. Infectious complications were noted in 23% (n=52). The estimated median OS from initiation of ven-based Rx was 34 months (95%CI 25-47). The estimated median OS for patients without a t(11;14) was 6.2 months (95% CI: 3.3-11.3) compared to 46 months (31.4-54.1), p<0.0001. In the t(11;14) subgroup, the 18-month OS rate was 79% for patients without 1q21+/del17p vs. 50% for patients with a 1q21+/del17p (p=0.002). Conclusion: Venetoclax-based regimens represent an important treatment option for patients harboring a t(11;14). The PFS in patients with BCL2 expression without t(11;14) was poor suggesting lack of efficacy of venetoclax-based regimens for that subgroup. Presence of concurrent del17p and/or 1q21+ with t(11;14) portends an inferior PFS.

BACKGROUND Several studies have highlighted the poor clinical outcomes observed among patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM), particularly those with triple-class refractory (TCR; refractory to at least one protease inhibitor [PI], one immunomodulatory drug [IMiD], and one anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody [mAb]) disease. The aim of this study was to describe the longitudinal changes in quality of life (QOL) and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs) among TCR MM patients who initiated a new line of therapy in real-world clinical practice. METHODS A prospective, multi-site observational study was conducted through the Mayo Clinic system. Patients with TCR MM initiating a new line of therapy (defined as the index date) were followed for a 12-month observation period. For patients initiating a CAR-T therapy, PRO survey assessments were conducted at apheresis, lymphodepletion chemotherapy, and every month after T-cell infusion until Month 6. All other patients received a survey assessment before index and every month thereafter until Month 6. PRO measures included the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30; including the Global Health Score [GHS]), the EORTC Multiple Myeloma Questionnaire (QLQ-MY20; including the Disease Symptoms [DS] domain score), the EORTC QLQ for Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy (CIPN20), the EuroQoL-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), the Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGIS), and the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). PRO surveys were supplemented with retrospective chart reviews conducted at 3 months and 12 months following the index date to obtain clinical information. Descriptive data were reported at each timepoint separately for patients who received CAR-T and non-CAR-T index therapies. The study is ongoing and this abstract reflects all patient data collected as of May 2024. RESULTS This interim analysis included 77 patients (58% male, 95% White, mean age 66 years). The median time interval between becoming TCR and the index date was 5.6 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 1.8, 18.2). Most patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score of 0 or 1 (48% and 45%, respectively) and were Revised International Staging System (R-ISS) I or II (27% and 36%, respectively); 42% of patients had high-risk cytogenetics and 14% had extramedullary disease. The median (IQR) number of prior treatment lines was 4 (4, 5). Forty-two patients initiated a CAR-T therapy as their index therapy (12 and 30 treated with ide-cel and cilta-cel, respectively); the remaining 35 patients predominantly initiated a treatment regimen containing an IMiD (51%), a PI (54%), an anti-CD38 antibody (40%), or an alkylating agent (37%). Among these non-CAR-T patients, common regimens used were pomalidomide + elotuzumab + corticosteroids (26%), carfilzomib + cyclophosphamide + corticosteroids (20%), and pomalidomide + carfilzomib + corticosteroids (17%). Among CAR-T patients, QOL generally remained stable from apheresis (mean GHS and EQ-5D VAS were 62.3 and 66.4, respectively) to lymphodepletion (61.2 and 65.9) to Month 6 (64.2 and 68.9). Disease symptoms improved (mean DS domain scores at apheresis, lymphodepletion, and Month 6 were 25.7, 24.1, and 20.1, respectively) though pain, specifically, plateaued/worsened (mean pain domain scores were 24.5, 32.1, and 32.6). Based on the PGIC, 76% of patients reported being “a little better” or “much better” as early as Month 1, which stabilized over time (75% at Month 6). Among non-CAR-T patients, QOL largely remained stable (GHS and EQ-5D VAS was 62.9 and 68.4, respectively, at baseline and 64.9 and 67.7 at Month 6), though disease symptoms, including pain, improved over time (DS was 28.0 at baseline and 22.8 at Month 6; pain was 40.8 at baseline and 28.1 at Month 6). Based on the PGIC, 30.7% of patients reported being “a little better” or “much better” at Month 1, which improved to 52.7% by Month 6. CONCLUSIONS In this interim analysis of an ongoing prospective observational study, baseline values suggest a significant QOL burden among TCR patients. QOL generally remained stable for both CAR-T and non-CAR-T patients over the first several months post-therapy with some select improvements in disease symptoms. However, the patients (particularly CAR-T patients) directly reported some holistic improvement based on the PGIC as early as Month 1.

Introduction: Teclistamab (Tec) is the first approved BCMA x CD3 bispecific antibody for the treatment of triple-class-exposed patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) based on the pivotal MajesTEC-1 study. Tec was associated with high overall response rate (ORR) of 63% in heavily pretreated patients. After a longer follow-up of 30.4 months, CR rate was 46.1%, median duration of response (DOR) was 24 months (95% CI, 17.0 - not estimable), and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 11.4 months (95% CI, 8.8 - 16.4). Herein, we present updated analysis of real-world outcomes and safety with tec in RRMM with extended follow-up of more than 12 months. Methods: This is an international multicenter retrospective study of patients with RRMM treated with tec on-label at 9 academic centers from 5 countries (United States, United Kingdom, Greece, Spain, and Canada) through the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) Immunotherapy Committee. Patients with RRMM treated with commercial tec at the respective institutions between May 24, 2022 to January 4, 2024 were included. Median follow-up was 14 months with data collected until July 15, 2024. High-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HRCA) was defined as 1q+, t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), and/or del(17p). Response was assessed using the IMWG consensus criteria. Patient characteristics were summarized by frequency (percentage) or median (interquartile range [IQR] or range). PFS, overall survival (OS), DOR were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: There were 223 patients included in this analysis with the following characteristics: median age of 67 (range 33-91) with 24% ≥75 years; 45% female; 74% White, 10% Black, 9% Asian, and 7% other/unknown; 86 of 176 (49%) with high risk cytogenetics, including del(17p), t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), and gain/amp 1q; 29.4% (37/126) with known extramedullary disease; 14% with creatinine clearance ≤30 ml/min. Patients received a median of 6 (IQR, 4-8) prior lines of therapy with 52% (107/206) being penta-drug refractory. Among 212 patients with available data, 161 (75.9%) patients would have been ineligible for MajesTEC-1. There were 94 (42%) patients who received prior BCMA-directed therapy (29.8% antibody-drug conjugate [ADC] alone; 45.7% CART alone; 6.3% bispecific antibody alone; 17.0% ADC and CART). Median time from diagnosis to tec initiation was 6.1 (range 0.6-29.2) years. For the 206 response-evaluable patients, ORR was 66%, including 25.2% ≥CR, 33.5% VGPR, and 7.3% PR. ORR for the 90 response-evaluable patients with prior BCMA-directed therapy was 54.5% (21.1% ≥CR, 26.7% VGPR, 6.7% PR). After a median follow-up of 14 (95%CI, 13-14) months, median PFS and OS were 8.8 (95% CI, 5.5-14) and 20 (95% CI, 18-not reached [NR]) months, respectively. 12-month PFS estimate was 46% (95% CI, 40%-54%), and 12-month OS rate was 65% (95% CI, 59%-72%). Median DOR was 17 (95% CI, 17-NR) months with 12-month estimate of 68% (95% CI, 60%-77%). Tec step-up dosing occurred in the outpatient setting for 57 (25.6%) patients. CRS occurred in 119 out of 222 (53.6%) patients with almost all being grade 1-2, except for 1 grade 4 event. ICANS occurred in 18 out of 216 (8.3%) patients (grade 1-2: 5.1%; grade 3-4: 2.8%). Any grade infection occurred in 130 (58.3%) patients; 25.1% of patients had grade ≥3 infection, including 10 patients with grade 5 infection. While receiving teclistamab, 79 (35.4%) patients had ≥2 infections. IVIG was given in 114 out of 164 (69.5%) patients. Conclusion: In this multicenter international real-world analysis of outcomes and safety associated with tec, ORR was high at 66% with 25.2% of patients achieving ≥CR. CR rates may be underestimated due to infrequent bone marrow confirmation in the real-world datasets. Encouragingly, ORR was 54.5% in BCMA exposed RRMM patients, including 21.1% with ≥CR. After a median follow-up of 14 months, heavily pretreated patients including patients with prior BCMA therapy had durable responses with median PFS of 8.8 months and median DOR of 17 months. There were no new safety signals noted in this real-world study. This is the largest real-world study to date of teclistamab with long-term follow-up of more than 12 months. Additional data including more patients, longer follow-up and results from difficult to treat subgroups will be presented at the meeting.

Background Emerging evidence has demonstrated rare subacute to late neurological toxicities (NTs) after BCMA CAR T-cell therapy (CAR-T) in multiple myeloma (MM). These adverse events can be categorized as: 1) Parkinsonism (PD), 2) cranial nerve (CN) palsies, and 3) peripheral neuropathies/Guillan Barré syndrome (GBS). These toxicities can cause significant morbidity, but given their relative rarity in clinical trials, there is limited data regarding evaluation and treatment. To our knowledge, this is the largest and only global registry of delayed NTs after BCMA CAR-T. Methods We retrospectively established a registry of NTs via the Immune Therapy Working Committee of the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG). We gathered data pertaining to demographics, MM characteristics, MM response, NT signs/symptoms, diagnostic workup, and treatment. Result A total of 52 patients with delayed neurotoxicity were included from 14 institutions and 6 countries; 92% received ciltacel, 4% idecel, and 4% investigational CAR-T. Median age at CAR-T infusion was 65 years; 69% were male and 88% were Caucasian. Median bone marrow plasma cell (PC) burden was 15% prior to CAR-T (range 0-95%). Patients received a median of 4 prior lines of therapy (LOT), with 67% progressing on last LOT. Seventeen percent had pre-existing neurological diagnoses (including stroke, epilepsy, migraines). We identified sixteen cases of PD (94% with movement disorder, 69% with cognitive impairment, 75% with personality changes), occurring at a median of 26 days (range: 15-87) after CAR-T. Ninety four percent had CRS (grade (G)1 50%, G2 38%, G3 6%, G4 0%), while 19% had ICANS (G1 13%, G2 6%, G3-G4 0%). Median peak absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) was 9.5 x 109/L, peak C-reactive protein (CRP) 60.9 mg/L, and peak ferritin 1893.5 ug/L within the first 30 days. Concurrently, 3 upper respiratory infections (URIs) and 2 low-level HHV7 in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) were detected. A median of 73% of T-cells in the CSF were CAR-T, based on a flow cytometry assay. Ten patients received steroids (median 19 days after symptoms, 70% partial response, 20% no response, 10% unknown), 2 received intrathecal (IT) methotrexate-based therapy (median 32 days after symptoms, 1 with no response, 1 unknown), 5 received intravenous (IV) cyclophosphamide (median 31 days after symptoms, 40% full response, 20% partial response, 40% no response), 4 received high-dose IVIG ≥1g/kg for one or more dose (50% partial response, 50% no response), and 6 received dopamine agonists. There were 37 CN palsies (76% CN7, 15% CN6, 7% CN5, 2% CN3), occurring at a median of 37.5 days (range: 7-482) after CAR-T. Eighty one percent had CRS (G1 68%, G2 14%, G3-G4 0%); 11% had G1 ICANS (G2-G4 0%). Median peak ALC was 4.1 x 109/L, CRP 25.4 mg/L, and ferritin 543 ug/L within the first 30 days. We identified 2 concurrent URIs, 4 CMV viremia (50% with viral load >1500 IU/mL), 1 HHV6 viremia, and 1 HSV in the CSF. Thirty-two (86%) received steroids for a median duration of 12 days, 50% with full response, 3% with no response, and 47% with partial response (of which 43% had later full recovery without further intervention). One received IT methotrexate and another received IV cyclophosphamide without response. Thirteen (41%) received IVIG, of which 38% was high-dose IVIG. Four patients with CN palsies developed peripheral neuropathy/GBS. Eight patients (15%) in this cohort were not heavily pre-treated (≤1 prior LOT); 7 developed CN palsies (6 after ciltacel, 1 after investigational CAR-T) and 1 PD (after idecel). These patients had median <5% PC; none had extramedullary disease. Median ALC was 4.14 x 109/L, CRP 33 mg/L, and ferritin 448.5 ug/L within the first 30 days. Conclusions Delayed NT requires prompt recognition, evaluation for alternative causes, and treatment. In our cohort, the majority of patients were male and Caucasian, suggesting that sex and race may impact the likelihood of developing NT. Individuals with PDs had greater inflammatory response (CRS, ALC, CRP, ferritin) compared to those with CN palsies. CN palsies responded to steroids and/or IVIG, whereas PD had at best partial response to steroids, prompting additional therapy. These toxicities notably did occur in less heavily pre-treated patients, perhaps driven by immune fitness and greater circulating T-cells rather than MM burden. At the time of the annual meeting, data will be updated with additional NTs from less heavily pre-treated patients.

Background: Cemsidomide (formerly CFT7455) is a novel, rationally designed, highly potent Ikaros Family Zinc Finger Protein 1/3 (IKZF1/3) MonoDACTM cereblon-based degrader. Cemsidomide has demonstrated best-in-class activity in multiple myeloma (MM) preclinical models and has also been shown to stimulate immune activation, providing combination rationale for various novel and standard of care therapies in MM. Methods: CFT7455-1101(NCT04756726) is an open-label, phase 1/2, multi-center, first-in-human study evaluating safety, efficacy, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics (PD) of cemsidomide in patients (pts) with MM and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma who have relapsed from and/or are refractory to standard of care options. Eligible MM pts must have received lenalidomide, pomalidomide, a proteasome inhibitor, and an anti-CD38 antibody. The primary objective of the MM phase 1 portion of the study is to characterize the safety and tolerability of cemsidomide alone and in combination with dexamethasone (DEX) and to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and/or recommended doses for phase 2. Secondary objectives include assessments of antitumor activity according to the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) response criteria, PK, and PD. Dose escalation is guided by a Bayesian logistic regression model with an initial cohort size of 3-6 pts and a provision for additional pts to be enrolled in expansion cohorts at doses deemed safe. We report initial results from our ongoing cemsidomide plus DEX dose escalation arm. Results: As of July 3rd, 2024, 32 pts have been treated with cemsidomide at various doses plus DEX (20 or 40 mg weekly) in the ongoing dose escalation portion of the study. The median age was 64 (range 40-82) and pts had received a median of 6 prior lines of therapy (range 3-17). 21/32 (66%) of pts received prior treatment with a CAR-T or a bispecific antibody. 9/32 (28%) of pts had high-risk disease at screening and 6/32 (19%) of pts had extramedullary disease. Cemsidomide doses explored in dose-escalation and expansion cohorts included 50 µg MWF (n=6), 37.5 µg QD (n=12), 62.5 µg QD (n=10), and 75 µg QD (n=4), all on a 14 day on/14 day off dosing schedule. Systemic exposure of cemsidomide increased dose proportionally. At all dose levels, cemsidomide produced expected degradation of IKZF1 and IKZF3. To date only one dose-limiting toxicity has been observed (one pt in the 62.5 µg QD cohort experienced Grade 4 neutropenia lasting >7 days). 59% of pts experienced a grade ≥3 TEAE. Grade 3-4 TEAEs occurring in ≥10% of patients included neutropenia (34%), anemia (28%), infections (19%), lymphopenia (16%), and thrombocytopenia (13%). No pts experienced grade 3/4 fatigue, nausea, or vomiting. 5 pts have had treatment-related SAEs and 3 pts had an AE resulting in treatment discontinuation. As of the July 25th, 2024 efficacy cutoff, IMWG responses have been observed at all dose levels. The overall response rate among the 32 pts treated in dose escalation and expansion cohorts is 22% (1 sCR, 1 VGPR, and 5 PRs) with an additional 5 pts achieving minimal response (MR) for a clinical benefit rate of 38% (MR or better). To date, 2/4 (50%) pts in the 75 µg cohort have had a PR with expansion at 75 µg ongoing. Conclusions: Initial results from this ongoing phase 1 trial of cemsidomide in combination with DEX demonstrate encouraging efficacy and tolerability as an all-oral therapy in a heavily pre-treated MM population, with the majority of pts having received a CAR-T or bispecific antibody. As anticipated in MM, grade 3-4 toxicities consist largely of myelosuppression, which has been manageable. Given a favorable emerging safety profile and promising anti-myeloma activity, cemsidomide is potentially well suited to combine with other modalities, including proteosome inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies, antibody drug-conjugates and bispecific antibodies. Dose escalation will continue until an MTD and/or the recommended phase 2 doses are identified. Updated data will be presented at the conference.

Introduction: Ven is a BCL2 inhibitor that has shown clinical efficacy in RRMM patients (pts) particularly those that harbor t(11;14). Ven has been evaluated in clinical trials as a single agent, in combination with dexamethasone (dex), immunomodulatory drugs (IMiD), proteasome inhibitors (PI), and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (MAb) yet its place in the therapeutic landscape remains in question. In this retrospective analysis, we aim to evaluate the real-world efficacy of Ven-based regimens in RRMM pts treated outside of a clinical trial across the 3-site MCCC. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of pts with RRMM treated with Ven-based regimens between January 2015 and October 2023 at the MCCC. Refractoriness was defined by progression on or within 60 days of stopping treatment. Categorical variables were compared with Chi-square tests and continuous variables were compared with t-tests. Outcomes were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and curves were compared between the groups using log-rank tests. Results: 83 pts were included in the analysis. The median age was 71 (39-93), 63% were male, 93% were white, 27% had ISS III, 18% had high risk cytogenetics (HRCyto), 76% had t(11;14), the median prior lines of therapy (LOT) was 4 (1-15), 68% received ≥ 4 prior LOT, 87% received prior autologous transplant, 58% were triple-class refractory (TCR), 64%/23% were penta-drug exposed/refractory (PDE/R), 8% received prior BCMA-directed therapies (BDT), 58% received Ven+dex, 25% received Ven+PI +/-dex, 6 % received Ven+anti-CD38 MAb+/-dex and 11% received Ven+other. The median follow-up time from start of a Ven-based regimen was 29 months (mo). The median Ven dose was 800mg (20-1600) with 25% of pts receiving Ven ramp-up dosing. The overall response rate (ORR) to a Ven-based regimen was 58% and was 64% for pts with t(11;14) and 40% for pts without t(11;14); p=0.06. Ven-treated pts with HRCyto had inferior PFS (3mo) and OS (8mo) compared to patients who did not have HRCyto who had a PFS of 9mo (p=0.020) and OS of 80mo (p<0.001). The ORR for TCR and PDR pts were 52% and 42%, respectively. No significant ORR differences were noted across the different Ven-based regimens (p=0.32). The median PFS for pts with t(11;14) was 10mo compared to 2mo for pts w/o t(11;14); p=<0.001. The median OS for pts with t(11;14) was 80mo compared to 10mo for pts without t(11;14); p=0.001. Ven-treated pts who received 1-3 prior LOT has superior ORR, median PFS, and median OS; 89%, 25mo, and 99mo, respectively, compared to pts who received ≥4 prior LOT who achieved an ORR of 43% (p<0.001), median PFS of 5mo (p<0.001) and median OS of 25mo (p<0.001). Ven-treated pts that were TCR had inferior PFS (5mo) and OS (26mo) compared to pts who were not TCR who achieved a PFS of 12mo (p<0.001) and a median OS of 80mo (p=0.02).Ven-treated pts that were PDR had inferior PFS (4mo) and OS (22mo) compared to pts who were not PDR who achieved a PFS of 9mo (p<0.001) and a median OS of 80mo (p=0.02).Ven-treated pts who received prior BDT (n=7) achieved an ORR of 29% and had a median PFS and OS of 2mo and 6mo, respectively on a Ven-based therapy. 59 pts received additional therapy in the post Ven-progression setting. The ORR to post-Ven progression therapies was 53% (n=31/59), the median PFS was 9mo and median OS was 35mo. The most common post-Ven progression regimens used were PI-based (n=16; ORR=56%), anti-CD38 MAb-based (n=14; ORR=50%), BDT (n=12; ORR=83%), selinexor-based (n=3; ORR=0%) with BDT resulting in highest ORR (p=0.048) and PFS (p=0.005). Conclusions: Ven-based regimens are effective in heavily pre-treated pts with RRMM however they are more effective when used within 1-3 prior LOT, in pts with t(11;14), and in pts without HRCyto, TCR or PDR MM. BDT appear to be the most efficacious therapies in the post-Ven progression setting.

Introduction: Frailty is known to be an important risk factor for adverse outcomes in multiple myeloma (MM) and is often under-represented in clinical trials. Frail patients are known to have increased toxicity, high rates of treatment discontinuation rates and decreased efficacy including worse overall survival in MM. Teclistamab (TEC) is a bispecific BCMA-CD3 directed T-cell antibody (BsAb) that was approved based upon the pivotal MajesTEC-1 study showing high overall response rates in patients with R/R MM. In MajesTEC-1, the median age was 63, and patients with ECOG ≥ 2 were excluded, suggesting that the vast majority of patients in the trial were fit. There is a paucity of data both in clinical trials as well as in the real-world regarding the outcomes of patients, particularly frail patients, with BsAb. This data is needed to both understand current outcomes of frail patients as well as devise strategies for future optimization with BsAb treatment. We performed a retrospective analysis utilizing the International Myeloma Foundation (IMF) immunotherapy database with the objective of understanding the outcomes of older adults (age ≥ 70) including frail patients treated in the real-world with teclistamab. Methods: Data was collected from 7 individual academic sites for patients aged ≥ 70 years treated with teclistamab in the real-world. Data collected include patient demographics, disease characteristics, as well as efficacy and toxicity associated with teclistamab. Frailty score was retrospectively calculated using the simplified/IFM frailty index which includes chronological age, ECOG PS and Charlson Comorbidity Index categorizing the patients into fit (score 0-1) or frail (≥ score 2). Fisher's exact tests were performed to evaluate differences in outcomes between fit and frail patients. Results: A total of 81 pts were included in our total cohort. The median age was 76 year (range 70-91). Among them, 44 (54%) were > age 75 and 23 (28%) > age 80. Twenty-eight (35%) patients had an ECOG performance status of ≥2. Using the simplified/IFM frailty index, 22 (27%) were classified as fit and 59 (73%) were frail. In the frail subgroup, a high proportion of patients (42%) would be classified as ultra frail (frailty score of ≥3). Selected baseline patient and disease characteristics are as follows: high risk cytogenetics including 1q gain/amp (fit 67% vs frail 43%), median prior lines (fit 7 vs frail 5), triple class refractory (fit 81% vs frail 88%), CrCl <30 (fit 5% vs frail 15%). For patients hospitalized for step-up dosing, median number of hospital days was 8 both in the fit and frail group. All grade CRS was noted in 12 (55%) fit and 28 (47%) frail patients. Among the fit patients, only 1 of the 12 patients (8%) had grade 2 CRS, whereas 8 of 28 (29%) frail patients had grade 2 (p-value=0.23). ICANS was reported in 2 (9%) fit patients and 8 (14%) frail patients (p=0.72). The majority of ICANS was grade 1 in both groups, but among the frail group, there was one grade 3 and two grade 4 ICANS cases reported. Infections were reported in 10 (45%) fit patients and 35 (59%) frail patients (p=0.32), with 2 (9%) and 14 (23%) being grade≥3 (p-value=0.21). IVIG was administered in most patients (fit 50% vs frail 58%, p=0.62). Grade 3/4 neutropenia was reported in 10 (45%) fit patients and 19 (32%) frail patients (p=0.30). The overall dosing interval was changed in 32% of fit patient and 34% of frail patients (p=1.00). The overall response rate was 50% for fit patients versus 66% for frail patient (p=0.61). The type of responses noted in the fit patient were as follows: sCR/CR 18%, VGPR 27%, PR/MR 5%, SD 18%, PD/NE 32% and for frail patients : sCR/CR 18%, VGPR 43%, PR/MR 9%, SD 5%, PD/NE 25%. The median follow-up time was 13.1 months. 12-month PFS for fit pts was 47.6% (95% CI 25.7% - 66.7%) and for frail pts 42.4% (29.0% - 55.3%). 12-months OS for fit pts was 64.9% (95% CI 39.9% - 81.6%) and for frail 61.5% (47.0% -73.1%). Conclusions: This is the first real-world study to evaluate the outcomes of teclistamab in frail older adults. With regards to toxicity, frail older adults showed a trend towards higher rates of ≥ grade 2 CRS, ≥ grade 2 ICANS as well as ≥3 grade infections. Efficacy was maintained in both fit and frail older adults similar to the MajesTEC-1 study. Our study highlights that BCMA BsAb can be safely utilized in older adults including frail older adults; however, additional proactive supportive care may be required to further optimize outcomes.

Introduction: Recent efforts have shed light on the clinical and laboratory factors associated with toxicity and response to BCMA-directed CAR-T therapy in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). However, a major limitation of current scoring systems lies in their assessment at time of lymphodepletion. Because they are not determined before apheresis, they are ill-equipped to guide patient selection, anticipate level-of-care, or plan pre-emptive toxicity management strategies. We therefore aimed to characterize early predictors of CAR-T toxicity and response. Study Design: In this multicenter observational study, we examined demographic, clinical, and laboratory data across three distinct timepoints: indication (e.g., treatment decision), apheresis, and pre-lymphodepletion (LD). CRS and ICANS were graded according to ASTCT criteria. Hematotoxicity (ICAHT) was graded using EHA/EBMT criteria. Early infections (day 0-100) were defined based on microbiologic data or as a clinical infection syndrome, and graded per Hill et al, Blood 2018. Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared by log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard models were applied to explore associations between pre-apheresis risk factors and key toxicity and survival outcomes. The CAR-HEMATOTOX (HT) score - encompassing markers of inflammation (e.g., CRP, ferritin) and marrow reserve (e.g., hemoglobin, ANC, platelet count) - was determined at each timepoint (Rejeski et al, Blood 2021). Results: We included 530 RRMM patients treated with standard-of-care cilta-cel (n=184) or ide-cel (n=346) across nine centers. Median age was 65 (range 31-88), median ECOG was 1 (IQR 0-1), and patients received a median of 5 prior lines of therapy (IQR 4-7). The median time from indication to apheresis was 16 days (IQR 7-52), while the median time from apheresis to infusion was 56 days (IQR 46-69). The proportion of high-risk patients by HT score did not change between the pre-apheresis and LD timepoints (19% vs. 20%, p=0.82). Most patients stayed either low-risk (n=388, 73.2%) or high-risk (n=68, 12.8%). However, 35 patients (6.6%) shifted from high-to-low risk, while 39 patients (7.4%) progressed from low-to-high risk - reflecting their response to bridging therapies. We noted considerable differences in morbidity and mortality based on the pre-apheresis HT score. Compared to their low-risk counterparts (score 0-2, n=427), high-risk patients (score ≥3, n=103) were hospitalized longer (12 vs. 15 days, p=0.009) and required more frequent ICU admissions (6% vs. 12%, p=0.05). They exhibited more severe early cytopenias (G3+: 8% vs. 25%, p<0.001) and late cytopenias (G3+: 7% vs. 21%, p<0.001), resulting in increased use of TPO agonists and stem cell boosts. Grade 3 or higher ICANS was also more common in HThigh patients (3% vs. 11%, p=0.006), as were severe infections (14% vs. 27%, p=0.007). We found increased non-relapsed mortality in HThigh patients (1-yr NRM 4.6% vs. 16.1%, p<0.001), but no significant difference in the occurrence of secondary malignancies (p>0.9). With a median follow-up of 12.4 months, HThigh patients showed inferior PFS (1-yr PFS 29% vs. 63%, p<0.0001) and OS (1-yr OS 49% vs. 83%, p<0.0001). Transitioning from a low-to-high score was linked to poor survival (1-yr PFS 26%), while the shift from high-to-low risk was associated with favorable outcomes (1-yr PFS 51%). In a multivariable Cox regression model of pre-apheresis features, a high HT score (aHR 2.52, p<0.0001), prior anti-BCMA therapy (aHR 1.55, p=0.04), history of extramedullary disease (aHR 1.42, p=0.02), and penta-refractoriness (aHR 1.45, p=0.02) were independently associated with PFS. Notably, the presence of more than 3 of these high-risk features defined an ultra-high-risk cohort of 28 patients (5.3%) with particularly dismal survival (1-year PFS 15%). Conclusions: Leveraging granular pre-apheresis data from a large international cohort, we identify early markers of toxicity and response in CAR-T-treated RRMM patients. The HT score - reflecting baseline inflammation and hematopoietic reserve - identified high-risk patients likely to benefit from pre-emptive toxicity mitigation strategies such as prophylactic stem cell collection. Most importantly, we characterize a small yet ultra-high-risk group of RRMM patients in need of more effective bridging and therapeutic options.

Introduction QUADs with an anti-CD38 mAb, an IMiD, a proteasome inhibitor and dexamethasone followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) led to substantial improvements in depth of response, including minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity, and progression-free survival. The therapeutic success of QUAD + ASCT has reinvigorated an interest in fixed-duration therapy, yet optimal short term efficacy endpoint for treatment cessation is unknown. We used a large dataset of patients (pts) treated with QUAD + ASCT, monitored with serial MRD assessment and managed with MRD-adapted treatment duration to determine the best short term efficacy endpoint to identify pts at low risk of treatment failure. Methods We analyzed 221 pts with NDMM treated with QUAD + ASCT and monitored with serial marrow-based MRD by next-generation sequencing. Based on trial design (N=116) and institutional practice (N=105) most pts received post ASCT QUAD consolidation followed by treatment cessation if MRD<10-5 in two consecutive datapoints. Pts were monitored with MRD post induction, ASCT and consolidation, and at least yearly thereafter. We utilized Cox regression to build parallel models of predictors of disease progression or MRD resurgence utilizing the same patient and disease features and one distinct short term efficacy endpoint per model, inputted as time-varying covariate. Efficacy endpoints tested were IMWG-defined stringent complete response (sCR), MRD<10-5 (single datapoint), MRD<10-6, sustained MRD (S-MRD, two consecutive assessments at least 1 year apart) <10-5and S-MRD<10-6. Best fitting models were determined using Akaike's information criterion (AIC, lower value indicates better fitting model), an information theory approach, and Heagerty & Zheng C index. Results Median age of the 221 pts. was 61 years (IQR 55-68), 21% age 70 or older, 37% had MM with 1 high risk chromosome abnormality [HRCA, gain/amp 1q, t(4;14), t(14:16), del(17p)], 16% had 2+HRCA, 30% were non-White and 58% male. We followed pts for a median of 40.6 mo. and performed 979 MRD assessments. One hundred and eighty-three pts (83%) achieved sCR, 170(77%) MRD<10-5, 146 (66%) MRD<10-6 , 110 (50%) S-MRD<10-5 and 90 (41%) S-MRD<10-6. Average time to achieve the endpoint was 7.8 mo for sCR, 7.1 mo. for MRD <10-5, 9.4 mo. for MRD<10-6, 19.3 mo. for S-MRD<10-5 and 20.5 mo. for S-MRD<10-6. We first tested models to predict PFS among all 221 pts. Predictive models included same covariates (ISS, high LDH and number of HRCA) other than the efficacy endpoint. The best fitting model (AIC 417.2, C-stat 0.757) was based on S-MRD<10-5 (HR=0.23, 95% C.I. 0.11-0.47) and included presence of 1 HRCA (HR=2.93, 95% C.I. 1.31-6.52), 2+ HRCA (HR=7.60, 95% C.I. 3.31-17.43), high LDH (HR=1.64, 95% C.I. 0.81-3.33), ISS2 (HR 1.31, 95% C.I. 0.62-2.77) and ISS3 (HR 1.96, 95% C.I. 0.90-4.28). The model with S-MRD<10-6 had similar, but not better performance (AIC 419.4, C-stats 0.752). We subsequently analyzed the 121 (55%) pts who reached MRD-guided treatment cessation for the best fitting model to predict progression or MRD resurgence in absence of continuous therapy. Among these pts, 117(97%) achieved sCR, all (by definition) MRD<10-5, 116 (96%) MRD<10-6 , 95 (79%) S-MRD<10-5 and 81 (67%) S-MRD<10-6. The best fitting model (AIC 197.2, C-stat 0.766) was based on S-MRD<10-5 (HR 0.01, 95% C.I. 0.002-0.05) and included presence of 1 HRCA (HR=1.41, 95% C.I. 0.49-4.07), 2+ HRCA (HR=5.43, 95% C.I. 1.75-16.84), high LDH (HR=3.19, 95% C.I. 0.98-10.40), ISS2 (HR 1.25, 95% C.I. 0.53-2.96) and ISS3 (HR 0.73, 95% C.I. 0.23-2.37). The model with S-MRD<10-6 did not perform better (AIC 232.4, C-stat 0.727). Among the 94 pts who achieved S-MRD<10-5 and were monitored off therapy, the risk of MRD resurgence or progression 2.5 years after cessation of therapy was 6.1%, 15.0% and 22.2% and risk of progression was 3.0 %, 12.0% and 11.1% for patients with 0, 1 and 2+ HRCA, respectively Conclusion In the setting of QUAD therapy + ASCT, no short term conventional or MRD-based efficacy parameter negates the cumulative impact of HRCA on prognosis. S-MRD<10-5 is the best predictor of PFS and yields the best predictive models for risk of MRD resurgence or progression in the setting of fixed duration therapy. This analysis validates S-MRD<10-5 as efficacy parameter for treatment cessation in trials exploring fixed duration therapy in NDMM.

Background: Light chain (AL) amyloidosis is a rare and understudied plasma cell disorder. It is caused by abnormal misfolding of monoclonal immunoglobulin light chains, leading to extracellular deposition of amyloid, ultimately resulting in organ dysfunction and death. Since AL amyloidosis is uncommon, therapies are adapted from the more common plasma cell disorders like multiple myeloma. Daratumumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting CD38, was first tested in several prospective and retrospective studies in AL patients with relapsed refractory disease. The ANDROMEDA study (Kastritis E et al, NEJM 2021) established daratumumab in combination with CyBorD (Cyclophosphamide-Bortezomib-Dexamethasone) followed by daratumumab maintenance as the new standard of care compared to CyBorD alone for newly diagnosed patients. Consequently, daratumumab maintenance has become universally offered to all newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis patients. Notably, there was no second randomization before the initiation of maintenance therapy in ANDROMEDA. Hence, a critical question that remains is whether the superior efficacy observed in the investigational arm of the ANDROMEDA trial is solely a result of the addition of daratumumab during the induction phase or if the maintenance phase contributed to the favorable outcomes in the investigational arm. We hypothesize that a shorter duration of maintenance would prove non-inferior to the standard duration of daratumumab maintenance in patients with AL amyloidosis that have responded to Daratumumab-CyBorD induction. To answer this question we are conducting a pragmatic phase 2 randomized trial assessing the optimal duration of daratumumab maintenance in patients with AL amyloidosis who have responded to Daratumumab-CyBorD induction. Study Design, Patients and Methods: We use broadened eligibility criteria consistent with pragmatic trial design. The estimated total enrollment is up to 96 patients. The main eligibility criteria are patients with biopsy-proven AL Amyloidosis who have completed 6 cycles of Dara-CyBorD-based induction treatment and achieved an adequate response to induction (defined as hematological complete response (CR), hematological very good partial response (VGPR), or hematological partial response (PR) with at least one organ response). Patients in whom bortezomib and/or cyclophosphamide were omitted from induction due to toxicity concerns or adverse effects are allowed. The major exclusion criteria are patients who were concomitantly diagnosed with multiple myeloma based on International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria. This phase II, open-label, multicenter trial (NCT05898646) randomizes patients who have attained an adequate response to 6 cycles of Dara-CyBorD-based induction in a 1:1 ratio, using a dynamic allocation procedure that balances the marginal distributions of the stratification factors (age, cardiac stage, and t(11;14) status). Randomization is to either single-agent daratumumab maintenance of 6 cycles duration (experimental arm) or 18 cycles of daratumumab maintenance (control arm) (cycle = 28 days). Treatment is allowed to be given at a local facility After completing maintenance treatment, patients will follow up every 3 months for up to 36 months from registration. The primary endpoint of the trial is to evaluate the non-inferiority of a shorter (6 cycles) daratumumab maintenance measured by event-free survival (EFS) compared to the standard maintenance of 18 cycles in newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis who receive 6 cycles of daratumumab-CyBorD based induction. EFS in this study is defined as time from registration to any of the following events: hematological progression, organ progression, subsequent anti-plasma cell therapy in the absence of hematological progression but with persistent organ dysfunction or death, whichever occurs first. Secondary endpoints are depth of hematological and organ response, bone marrow measurable residual disease negativity rate, duration of response, quality of life, and survival. By investigating whether a shorter duration of maintenance is non-inferior to the standard duration, we aim to inform clinical practice and potentially reduce the toxicities associated with prolonged maintenance therapy, including hypogammaglobulinemia, recurrent infections, the need for intravenous gammaglobulin replacement, and financial toxicity.