Abeykoon, Jithma P.

Abstract IgM MGUS and Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia (WM) represent a disease spectrum with highly dissimilar therapeutic management ranging from observation to chemoimmunotherapy. The current classification relies solely on clinical features and does not explain the heterogeneity that exists within each of these conditions. To shed light on the biology that may account for the clinical differences, we used bone marrow (BM) CD19+/CD138+ sorted cells and matched BM plasma from 32 patients (pts) (7 IgM MGUS, 25 WM) and 5 healthy controls to perform the first comprehensive multiomics approach including whole exome sequencing, RNA seq, proteomics and metabolomics. Applying principal component analysis to gene expression profiling, most of WM pts clustered together, while a small subset of them grouped separately with MGUS pts, suggesting a biologic dichotomy within WM. The healthy controls formed a distinct group from most WM and MGUS. We then applied a non-negative matrix factorization consensus clustering to the gene expression data and identified three robust clusters. Cluster 1 (C1) included only WM pts, cluster 2 (C2) included both WM and MGUS pts, and cluster 3 (C3) included all controls as well as a small number of WM and MGUS pts. When mutations commonly identified in WM were analyzed, there was no difference among the three groups (excluding controls) in mutation burden of MYD88 L265P and CXCR4. Interestingly, aberrant expression of TNFAIP3 seemed a distinct feature of C1 as deletion of 6q (which encodes for TNFAIP3) and TNFAIP3 mutations were each significantly enriched in C1 (47%) compared to C2 (0%) and C3 (20%; p=0.04). Individual clusters associated with specific transcriptional signature and clinical features. While C1 displayed enrichment of cell growth, downregulation of inflammatory pathways (eg IL6 and IL8 signaling) and aggressive behavior, C2 showed increased inflammatory signaling and cell survival with indolent behavior. C3 had an intermediate feature with combined proliferative and inflammatory signatures. In accordance with the transcriptomic data, the hallmark of C1 was upregulation of proliferation-associated proteins (eg AKT, MAPK) and downregulation of inflammatory proteins (eg IL4, IL10) while the opposite was observed in C2. Once more, C3 confirmed intermediate features with combined upregulation of proliferation and inflammatory proteins. The metabolism was rewired towards fatty acid catabolism in C1, glycolysis in C2 and anabolism in C3. Accordingly, C1 showed undetectable concentration of 3-hydroxybutyric acid as opposed to C2 which had increased levels of malic and lactic acids, as end products of fatty acid oxidation and glycolysis respectively. Those metabolites had intermediate levels in C3. In conclusion, we identified three molecular clusters with distinct clinical, proteomic and metabolomic features, suggesting a potential biologic classification that may have therapeutic implications. Citation Format: Patrizia Mondello, Jonas Paludo, Joseph Novak, Kerstin Wenzl, Shahrzad Jalali, Jordan Krull, Esteban Braggio, Surendra Dasari, Michelle Manske, Jithma Abeykoon, Asher Chanan-Khan, Robert Kyle, Morie Gertz, Zhi Zhang Yang, Anne Novak, Stephen Ansell. Molecular clusters and functional drivers of IgM monoclonal gammopathies [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr 3487.

SummaryBelantamab mafodotin (BLMF) is a B‐cell maturation antigen‐directed antibody‐drug conjugate, recently approved for advanced multiple myeloma (MM). The impact of BLMF‐induced ocular toxicity on patient outcomes is unknown. We studied a cohort of 38 consecutively seen patients treated with BLMF outside of trials. Of those, 75% experienced ocular toxicity, with 69% developing keratopathy. Among patients requiring ocular toxicity‐related permanent BLMF discontinuation (14%) or dose reduction (11%), 70% had progression of MM within a median of 3 months (95% confidence interval: 0.2–not reached) following BLMF interruption or dose reduction. Ocular toxicity is a major deterrent to the continuous use of BLMF in routine clinical practice. Measures to successfully prevent and mitigate ocular toxicity should be developed to achieve the full potential of this agent.

e19562 Background: Considerable healthcare resource utilization and financial burden have been associated with the treatment of Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia (WM); however, the impact of health insurance status on patient outcomes has not been explored. We aimed to assess the insurance-based outcome relationship in WM using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Methods: We analyzed patient-level data obtained from the NCDB, a database representing more than 70% of newly diagnosed cancer cases nationwide. All newly diagnosed WM cases (n = 8540) between 2004 to 2017 were identified. Only patients who underwent treatment were included. Insurance status was recorded by assessing the primary payer at the time of diagnosis. Due to Medicare eligibility criteria, age-based (< 65 and ≥65 years) stratified analysis was conducted. Cox proportional hazards model was utilized to analyze survival. Time-to-event analysis was conducted based on date-of-diagnosis using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Results: Analysis was conducted on 3878 patients after meeting inclusion criteria, with a median follow-up time of 54.6 months. Among patients < 65 years (n = 1249; median age: 58 years; male: 62.4%), those with non-private insurance had inferior survival on multivariate analysis (Table) after adjusting for patient demographics, comorbidities, income, education, treatment center characteristics, and treatment start time. Significant overall survival (OS) differences were seen in those < 65 years (log-rank p < 0.001), with 5-year OS highest among patients with private insurance 91.2%, compared to Medicaid 79.8%, uninsured 77.4%, and Medicare 70.2%. In patients < 65 years, compared to private insurance, uninsured patients were more likely to be of Black race, reside in lower income areas, and be treated at non-academic centers (all p < 0.05). Both Medicaid and Medicare patients < 65 years were more likely to have a higher Charlson-Deyo comorbidity index (> 1) and live in areas of lower educational attainment and household income compared to private insurance (all p < 0.05). In patients ≥65 years (n = 2629; median age: 75 years; 60.6% males), no insurance-based OS (log-rank p = 0.096) differences were seen. Conclusions: Based on our study, significant insurance-based disparities exist in WM, where patients < 65 years old who are uninsured, or non-privately insured are at a higher risk of mortality. While the root cause of these differences is not fully elucidated, efforts should focus on ensuring that all patients have equal access to care regardless of primary payer status.[Table: see text]

e19533 Background: Pneumocystis pneumonia (PJP) is a catastrophic infection seen in the context of low CD4 counts. Brentuximab vedotin (BV) is a drug antibody conjugate targeting CD30 and is used to treat patients with Hodgkin’s lymphoma (HL) and T-cell lymphoma (TCL). PJP prophylaxis is not currently recommended for patients receiving BV-based treatment despite co-expression of CD30 on CD4 cells. The frequency of PJP following BV remains poorly defined. Methods: We evaluated patients who received BV between January 1, 2011 and October 31, 2021 at Mayo Clinic for the development of PJP. Patient demographics and clinical characteristics including underlying disease, chemotherapy regimen, absolute lymphocyte count (ALC), and steroid exposure were collected. Patients who developed PJP more than 3 months after their last BV exposure were excluded. Results: Of 402 BV recipients identified, 63 received PJP prophylaxis and were omitted. Fourteen of the 339 (4.1%) not on prophylaxis developed PJP following BV. Those infected had a median age of 61 (22-87), 71% were male. The most common diagnoses were HL, TCL, and primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma at rates of 57%, 21%, and 14% respectively. Therapy regimens included BV monotherapy, BV-CHP, and BV-AVD at rates of 43%, 21%, and 14% respectively. BV represented median 2nd line of therapy (1-10) and patients received median of 3 doses (1-10) prior to PJP diagnosis. Patients with PJP had median ALC of 620 (370-3500). 71.4% (10/14) had an ALC less than 750 and among those with ALC greater than 1000, 75% (3/4) had underlying diagnosis of HL. Three patients had CD4 count measured at time of PJP diagnosis with median value of 157 (5-175). 57.1% (8/14) had no steroid exposure beyond the treatment regimen. 14.3% (2/14) were on chronic doses of 5mg prednisone for autoimmune conditions. Short bursts of steroids (prednisone 40 mg) prior to PJP were seen in 21.4% (3/14) with median exposure of 8 days (7-10). One patient had prolonged steroid exposure but was weaned off 17 days prior to PJP diagnosis. 71.4% were older than 50 years at time of PJP. Conclusions: We observed rates of PJP above the commonly accepted threshold of 3.5% for recommending prophylaxis. Among patients with an ALC greater than 1000, 75% had HL raising the question of a qualitative defect in immunity. Close ALC monitoring is recommended for patients receiving BV with a low threshold to institute PJP prophylaxis, especially amongst those older than 50 or with a diagnosis of HL.[Table: see text]

7566 Background: Parenteral limited-duration BR chemoimmunotherapy and continuous orally administered Ibr, a Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor, dominate the treatment landscape of WM, a rare B cell lymphoma. No trials have assessed the comparative effectiveness of these 2 vastly different approaches. We conducted a multiinstitutional, international, collaborative study to compare BR and single-agent Ibr in patients (pts) with treatment naïve (TN) WM. Methods: Data from 347 pts with active TN WM, seen between 2011 and 2021 in the US and Europe, were analyzed. The pts on rituximab maintenance were excluded. The modified IWWM-6 criteria (based on IgM alone) were used for response assessment. All time-to-event analyses were performed from the frontline therapy initiation, using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: The median age of the pts treated with BR (n=208) and Ibr (n=139) was 66 (range 40-86) years (y) and 69 (39-97) y, respectively, (p=0.005). With a median follow up of 4.2 y (95% CI 3.8-4.5), the 4-y progression free survival (PFS) was 73% in each group, p=0.6, and 4-y overall survival (OS) was 94% (95% CI 91-98) in the BR group versus ( v) 82% (95% CI 75-90) in the Ibr group, p=0.01. In a bivariate analysis adjusting for age and the treatment type, only age emerged as a predictor for OS (HR 7.2, p=0.0001). Therefore, a 1:1 age-matched analysis of 246 pts who received Ibr (n=123) or BR (n=123) was performed. Pts with a known MYD88WT status who had received Ibr and their age matched controls on BR were excluded. The international prognostic scoring system (IPSS) WM was comparable between the 2 groups (Table). A higher proportion of pts on BR attained very good partial or deeper response (≥VGPR) as the best response in comparison to the pts on Ibr (Table). The 4-y PFS for the BR and Ibr groups was similar [72% (95% CI 63-82) v 78% (95% CI 70-87), p=0.14] and 4-y OS was 95% (95% CI 91-99) with BR v 86% (95% CI 80-93) with Ibr (p=0.3). Premature discontinuation, during active treatment, due to adverse effects (AEs) or lack of response was noted in 13% and 33% of pts on BR and Ibr, respectively. A detailed assessment of the AEs will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: Both BR and Ibr lead to comparable outcomes in pts with TN WM, although deeper responses are attained with BR. These findings require confirmation in prospective studies. For pts who harbor MYD 88L265P mutation, selection between the 2 approaches should be dictated by their potential toxicities, pt comorbidities, pt/clinician preference (parenteral fixed-duration v continuous oral) and access to therapies. [Table: see text]

Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) is an indolent lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma. Recent strides made in the genomic profiling of patients with WM have led to the identification of many novel therapeutic targets. Patients with WM can present with asymptomatic disease and not all patients require treatment. When criteria for initiating systemic therapy are met, the choice of therapy depends on the tumor genotype ( MYD88 and CXCR4 mutation status), patient preference (fixed versus continuous duration therapy, oral versus intravenous route, cost), associated medical comorbidities, and adverse effect profile of the treatment. In the absence of head-to-head comparison between chemoimmunotherapy and Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitors in otherwise fit patients with a MYD88 L265P mutation, our preference is fixed duration therapy with four to six cycles of chemoimmunotherapy with bendamustine–rituximab. In this review, we discuss the role of MYD88 and CXCR4 mutation in treatment selection, and current data for frontline and salvage treatment options in patients with WM.

AbstractErdheim–Chester disease (ECD) is a histiocytic neoplasm that predominantly harbors mitogen‐activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway variants. MAPK inhibitors typically are effective treatments, but mutations outside the MAPK pathway, such as CSF1R variants, may cause refractory ECD. We describe a patient with a novel somatic mutation in CSF1R (CSF1RR549_E554delinsQ) that resulted in refractory ECD affecting the central nervous system. Cell model studies, RNA sequencing analysis, and in silico protein modeling suggested that she had a gain‐of‐function mutation occurring in a region critical for autoinhibition. The patient was treated with pexidartinib, a CSF1R inhibitor, and has had a complete clinical and metabolic response lasting more than 1.5 years to date. To our knowledge, this is the first report to describe successful treatment of a patient with ECD by using an agent that specifically targets CSF1R. This case also highlights the critical role of individualized molecular profiling to identify novel therapeutic targets in ECD.

Abstract Introduction Histiocytic disorders pose significant diagnostic and management challenges for the clinicians due to diverse clinical manifestations and often non-specific histopathologic findings. Herein, we report the tumor board experience from the first-of-its-kind Histiocytosis Working Group (HWG). Materials and Methods The HWG was established in June 2017 and consists of experts from 10 subspecialties that discuss cases in a multidisciplinary format. We present the outcome of tumor board case discussions during the first 2 years since its inception (June 2017-June 2019). Results Forty cases with a suspected histiocytic disorder were reviewed at HWG during this time period. Average number of subspecialties involved in HWG case discussion was 5 (range, 2-9). Histiocytosis Working Group tumor board recommendations led to significant changes in the care of 24 (60%) patients. These included change in diagnosis (n = 11, 27%) and change in treatment (n = 13, 33%). Conclusion Our report highlights the feasibility of a multidisciplinary tumor board and its impact on outcomes of patients with histiocytic disorders.

Abstract Background: Activation of extracellular-signal regulated kinase (ERK) is almost universal in histiocytic disorders and is driven by genomic alterations in the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) and phosphoinositide 3-kinases (PI3K) pathways. While BRAFV600E mutations are well described in histiocytic disorders, less is known about BRAF fusions. The goal of our study is to describe the frequency and clinical characteristics of patients harboring BRAF fusions. Methods: We included patients with a diagnosis of histiocytic disorder seen at our institution from November 2016-June 2021. Only those who had adequate BRAF testing were included. The following were considered adequate BRAF testing: 1) unequivocally positive BRAF V600E immunostain with or without molecular confirmation; 2) successful multigene next generation sequencing (mostly Tempus â or FoundationOne â) if BRAF V600Eimmunostain was equivocal or negative. We also searched the literature for similar cases and compared BRAF fusions found in histiocytic disorders to those found in solid tumors and other hematologic conditions. Results: One hundred and twenty-six patients were included in this study. BRAF fusions were detected in 7 (6%) patients. The median follow-up for these patients was 1.4 years (95% CI: 0.4-not reached). The frequency according to disease subtypes is as follows: Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD; 2/46 [4%]), Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH; 1/41 [2%]), adult or juvenile xanthogranuloma (AXG/JXG; 4/7 [57%]), and histiocytic or Langerhans cell sarcoma (HS/LCS; 0/9 [0%]). The median age at diagnosis for our study cohort was 34 years (range, 7-81 years) and 5 were females. The clinical characteristics and nature of BRAF fusions of our 7 patients plus additional 13 cases from the literature are shown in Table 1. For the final cohort of 20 patients with BRAF-fusions, the median age was 16 years (range, 0.5-81 years) and most (56%) were females. The distribution by histiocytic subtypes is as follows: AXG/JXG (45%), LCH (40%), ECD (10%), HS/LCS (5%). Two patients received cobimetinib as frontline treatment in our cohort and achieved partial responses. Of these two patients, one completed 12 cycles (12 months) of cobimetinib and had a sustained PR while the other patient received 2 cycles before having to hold therapy due to intolerable adverse effects despite dose reduction. From literature review, another patient (LR-12) received cobimetinib as second line treatment and achieved complete response. We found 15 unique BRAF gene fusions with 4 being recurrent. Except for AGAP3-BRAF, none of these BRAF fusions in histiocytosis has been reported in solid tumors or hematologic conditions to date. Conclusions: BRAF gene fusions occur rarely (&lt;5%) in histiocytic disorders. The only exception is AXG/JXG where more than half of the patients harbor BRAF gene fusions. These gene fusions are mostly distinct to histiocytosis and not found in solid tumors or other hematologic conditions. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Bennani: Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory Board; Daichii Sankyo Inc: Other: Advisory Board; Kyowa Kirin: Other: Advisory Board; Vividion: Other: Advisory Board; Kymera: Other: Advisory Board; Verastem: Other: Advisory Board.