Citations

Background: Oral decitabine/cedazuridine (ASTX727) is a fixed dose combination of decitabine (35 mg) and the cytidine deaminase inhibitor cedazuridine (100 mg) given once daily X 5 days on a 28-day cycle producing pharmacokinetic (PK) exposure equivalent to the standard intravenous (IV) decitabine regimen of 20 mg/m 2 daily X 5 days on a 28-day cycle. This was demonstrated in the pivotal ASCERTAIN study (Garcia-Manero, et al, ASH 2019) as it provided a PK bridge to existing decitabine data and demonstrated median OS was 31.7 mo. (Savona,et al. Intl. MDSF International Congress on MDS, 2021). Subjects were initially classified by the International Prognosis Scoring System (IPSS) for historical reasons, however IPSS-R and IPSS-M are enhancements to IPSS that provide dynamic risk assessment for predicting clinical outcomes in MDS. Here, the objective was to re-classify the MDS subjects enrolled on the ASCERTAIN study by IPSS-R and IPSS-M and measure the impact of informing patient outcomes based on re-calculated risk assessment. Methods: One hundred thirty-three subjects with MDS/CMML (chronic myelomonocytic leukemia) were enrolled in ASCERTAIN and were randomly assigned either IV decitabine for cycle 1 and oral decitabine/cedazuridine for cycle 2 or the opposite treatment sequence. All subjects continuing beyond cycle 2 received oral decitabine/cedazuridine for all subsequent cycles until treatment discontinuation for disease progression, toxicity, patient's decision, or HSCT. Whole blood collected prior to treatment was used for DNA isolation and molecular abnormalities identified using next-generation sequencing (NGS) hematologic malignancy panel of 179 genes including all genes commonly mutated in MDS. In the initial analysis of clinical outcomes, subjects were classified by IPSS with response assessment by IWG 2006 IPSS low and Int-1 risk levels were categorized as lower-risk MDS (LR-MDS), whereas IPSS Int-2 and high-risk categories were categorized as higher-risk MDS (HR-MDS). Subjects with sufficient data based on (e.g., available heme parameters, cytogenetics, NGS etc.) were reclassified by IPSS-R and IPSS-M. Subjects with IPSS-R score of ≤3.5 or IPSS-M of either very low, low, or moderate low were categorized as LR-MDS. Similarly subjects with IPSS-R score of >3.5 or an IPSS-M categorization of either moderate high, high, or very high were categorized as HR-MDS. Reclassified subjects were reassessed for CR (Complete Response), OS, and LFS and Harrell's concordance index (c-index) was used to describe the level of agreement between each scale and outcomes. Results: Based on the available data, the number of MDS subjects in the different risk classifications were the following: IPSS: 117, IPSS-R: 104, and IPSS-M: 105. Thirteen and 12 subjects on the IPSS could not be reclassified in the IPSS-R and IPSS-M, respectively, including 5 Int-1 and 2 low-risk MDS cases. CMML subjects were excluded from these analyses. Re-classification generally resulted in the upgrade of the subjects from LR-MDS to HR-MDS (Fig. 1). Thirty-one (26.5%) subjects from IPSS were reallocated in the IPSS-R to different risk categories; 3 (9.7%) were downgraded and 28 (90.3%) were upgraded. Similarly on reclassification with IPSS-M 34 (32.4%) of the patients reclassified; 5 (14.8%) were downgraded and 29 (85.3%) were upgraded. For IPSS LR-MDS, 23.2% of patients achieved CR, and 22.9% in the IPSS HR-MDS. Similarly, 21.6% patients achieved CR in the IPSS-R LR-MDS, and 23.9% in the IPSS-R HR-MDS; 26.3% patients achieved CR in the IPSS-M LR-MDS, and 20.9% in the IPSS-M HR-MDS. The c-index for the IPSS was .64 (OS) and .67 (LFS), IPSS-R was .70 (OS) and .71 (LFS), and .75 (OS) and .78 (LFS) for the IPSS-M (Table1). Conclusion: Reclassification from IPSS to IPSS-R or IPSS-M upgraded multiple subjects from a LR to a HR category, describing the ASCERTAIN patient population as a majority higher risk population with worse prognosis than previously assumed based on the IPSS. The efficacy as measured by the CR rates did not change when the LR and HR categories were defined by the different risk stratification systems. In contrast, the c-index improves with migration from IPSS to IPSS-R to IPSS-M, indicating an increased discriminatory ability of IPSS-M score in comparison to IPSS and IPSS-R, to predict patient outcomes.

Abstract Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains a major public health challenge that contributes greatly to mortality and morbidity worldwide. Although it has long been recognized that the epithelium is altered in COPD, there has been little focus on targeting it to modify the disease course. Therefore, mechanisms that disrupt epithelial cell function in patients with COPD are poorly understood. In this study, we sought to determine whether epigenetic reprogramming of the cell-cell adhesion molecule E-cadherin, encoded by the CDH1 gene, disrupts epithelial integrity. By reducing these epigenetic marks, we can restore epithelial integrity and rescue alveolar airspace destruction. We used differentiated normal and COPD-derived primary human airway epithelial cells, genetically manipulated mouse tracheal epithelial cells, and mouse and human precision-cut lung slices to assess the effects of epigenetic reprogramming. We show that the loss of CDH1 in COPD is due to increased DNA methylation site at the CDH1 enhancer D through the downregulation of the ten-eleven translocase methylcytosine dioxygenase (TET) enzyme TET1. Increased DNA methylation at the enhancer D region decreases the enrichment of RNA polymerase II binding. Remarkably, treatment of human precision-cut slices derived from patients with COPD with the DNA demethylation agent 5-aza-2′-deoxycytidine decreased cell damage and reduced air space enlargement in the diseased tissue. Here, we present a novel mechanism that targets epigenetic modifications to reverse the tissue remodeling in human COPD lungs and serves as a proof of concept for developing a disease-modifying target.

Abstract Background Antitachycardia pacing (ATP) found in most implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) is an important therapy for painless termination of ventricular tachycardias (VT). In ICDs programmed to guideline-recommended detection and therapy settings typical ATP success rates are 50-70%.[1-3] The first closed-loop, automated ATP (AATP) algorithm, introduced in 2021, applies an S1 train derived from the detected VT, followed by an S2 derived initially from a refractory period estimator and then adjusted using analysis of the post-pacing interval if ATP fails. The termination efficacy of AATP in the real-world population is unknown. Purpose To assess the effectiveness AATP in a large real-world population. Methods A database of de-identified ICD transmissions from subjects in the United States, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand was queried for AATP treated episodes. ICDs were randomly sampled, biased toward ICDs with multiple treated VT episodes. For rhythms classified as monomorphic ventricular tachycardia, each AATP pulse train was reviewed for: rhythm at delivery, effect of ATP, and any non-capturing pulses. Acceleration was defined as a post-ATP decrease in MVT cycle length (VTCL) of at least 10% and at least 30ms. Acceleration to polymorphic VT or ventricular fibrillation (PVT/VF) was assessed. Rates of termination and acceleration were calculated for all MVT and dichotomized using a 320ms VTCL cutoff. The method of generalized estimating equations (GEE) was used to correct event rates for multiple episodes from a single patient. Results There were 2281 episodes of MVT in 340 patients; 63% of patients had 2 or more episodes. There were 724 episodes with initial VTCL <320ms and 1557 episodes with VTCL ≥320ms. The rate of termination of MVT by AATP was 78% for all VTCL [95% CI: 74%-81%]. In 300 patients (88%) AATP terminated at least one MVT. For MVT with VTCL ≥320ms the termination rate was 80% [95% CI: 75%-83%] and for VTCL <320ms the termination rate was 75% [95% CI: 69%-80%]. The rate of acceleration was 3.6% [95% CI: 2.7%-4.9%], with a 0.8% rate of acceleration to PVT/VF [95% CI: 0.4%-1.8%]. Acceleration led to shock therapy in 63% of accelerated episodes. All MVT accelerated to PVT/VF either spontaneously terminated (4/14) or were successfully converted by a single shock therapy (10/14). All accelerations that remained MVT were successfully treated by the device with either subsequent ATP (35%) or shock therapy (61%), or spontaneously terminated (4%). Conclusion In this large, real-world cohort analysis, automated ATP’s termination rate exceeded the typical success rate of burst ATP, particularly for MVT <320ms. Acceleration to PVT/VF was low and effective first-shock defibrillation was consistent. Subsequent ATP for accelerated MVT had incremental benefit, leading to successful termination one-third of the time. Additional data are currently being prospectively collected in a separate post-approval study.

BACKGROUND: In severely affected patients with catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia, beta-blockers are often insufficiently protective. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether flecainide is associated with a lower incidence of arrhythmic events (AEs) when added to beta-blockers in a large cohort of patients with catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia. METHODS: From 2 international registries, this multicenter case cross-over study included patients with a clinical or genetic diagnosis of catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia in whom flecainide was added to beta-blocker therapy. The study period was defined as the period in which background therapy (ie, beta-blocker type [beta1-selective or nonselective]), left cardiac sympathetic denervation, and implantable cardioverter defibrillator treatment status, remained unchanged within individual patients and was divided into pre-flecainide and on-flecainide periods. The primary end point was AEs, defined as sudden cardiac death, sudden cardiac arrest, appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator shock, and arrhythmic syncope. The association of flecainide with AE rates was assessed using a generalized linear mixed model assuming negative binomial distribution and random effects for patients. RESULTS: A total of 247 patients (123 [50%] females; median age at start of flecainide, 18 years [interquartile range, 14–29]; median flecainide dose, 2.2 mg/kg per day [interquartile range, 1.7–3.1]) were included. At baseline, all patients used a beta-blocker, 70 (28%) had an implantable cardioverter defibrillator, and 21 (9%) had a left cardiac sympathetic denervation. During a median pre-flecainide follow-up of 2.1 years (interquartile range, 0.4–7.2), 41 patients (17%) experienced 58 AEs (annual event rate, 5.6%). During a median on-flecainide follow-up of 2.9 years (interquartile range, 1.0–6.0), 23 patients (9%) experienced 38 AEs (annual event rate, 4.0%). There were significantly fewer AEs after initiation of flecainide (incidence rate ratio, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.38–0.83]; P =0.007). Among patients who were symptomatic before diagnosis or during the pre-flecainide period (n=167), flecainide was associated with significantly fewer AEs (incidence rate ratio, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.31–0.77]; P =0.002). Among patients with ≥1 AE on beta-blocker therapy (n=41), adding flecainide was also associated with significantly fewer AEs (incidence rate ratio, 0.25 [95% CI, 0.14–0.45]; P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia, adding flecainide to beta-blocker therapy was associated with a lower incidence of AEs in the overall cohort, in symptomatic patients, and particularly in patients with breakthrough AEs while on beta-blocker therapy.

This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) Oncology focuses on considerations for the comprehensive care of AYA patients with cancer. Compared with older adults with cancer, AYA patients have unique needs regarding treatment, fertility counseling, psychosocial and behavioral issues, and supportive care services. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) Oncology addresses additional aspects of caring for AYA patients, including risk factors, screening, diagnosis, and survivorship.

Abstract Basket, umbrella, and platform trial designs (master protocols) have emerged over the last decade to study precision medicine approaches in oncology. First-generation trials like NCI-MATCH (Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice) have proven the principle that studying targeted therapies on a large scale is feasible both from the laboratory and clinical perspectives. However, single-agent targeted therapies have shown limited ability to control metastatic disease, despite careful matching of drug to target. As such, newer approaches employing combinations of targeted therapy, or targeted therapy with standard therapies, need to be considered. The NCI has recently embarked on three second-generation precision medicine trials to address this need: ComboMATCH, iMATCH, and myeloMATCH. The design of these trials and necessary infrastructure are discussed in the following perspective.

LBA612 Background: I-SPY2 is a multicenter, phase 2 trial using response-adaptive randomization within biomarker subtypes including MammaPrint (MP) status to evaluate novel neoadjuvant agents in high-risk breast cancer. The primary endpoint is pathologic complete response (pCR). Oral Paclitaxel and encequidar (OPE) is an oral combination of paclitaxel (P) with a p-glycoprotein pump inhibitor, encequidar. Dostarlimab (D) is an intravenous (IV) PD-1 inhibitor. Methods: Women with tumors ≥ 2.5cm and MP high risk cancers (MP1 = MP high; MP2 = MP ultra-high) were treated starting Oct 5, 2020. Treatment included OPE (Oral P 205mg/m2 + encequidar 12.9mg) on days 1-3 weekly x 12 and D 500 mg IV given q 3 weeks x 4, followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) q 2-3 weeks x 4. Patients with HER2+ disease received IV weekly trastuzumab (T) during the first 12 weeks. The control arm was weekly IV P x 12 with or without trastuzumab followed by AC q 2-3 weeks x 4. OPE + D was eligible to graduate [85% chance of success in a 300-person phase 3 neoadjuvant trial with a pCR endpoint] in any of the pre-defined signatures. Results: 113 (78 HR+HER2-, 17 HR-HER2- and 18 HER2+ patients) received OPE + D +/- T. The control arm included 388 historical controls (201 HR+Her2-, 156 HR-HER2-, 31 HER2+). 77 patients (70 HR+ and 7 HR-) were MP1 and 36 patients (24 HR+ and 12 HR-) were MP2. Safety events of note for OPE + D versus IV P include increased rates of nausea (85% vs. 72%) diarrhea (77% vs. 41%). There was no significant difference in rates of neutropenia (23% vs.17%). Peripheral neuropathy (37% vs. 64%) and alopecia (59% vs. 66%) were significantly decreased. Immune related adverse events (irAEs) were lower than expected. Conclusions: Although both OPE and D have both been shown to have efficacy in other settings, combination therapy with OPE + D did not graduate in any of the predefined subtypes. In the HR+ signature where we would not expect a benefit of D, we see equal response to OPE with decreased rates of peripheral neuropathy and alopecia, which suggest this oral agent may be an attractive alternative to IV P in this subgroup and is under consideration in ISPY 2.2. We did not observe the expected improvement in pCR rates seen with PD-1 inhibitors in the HR- or MP2 subtypes (over P alone historic control). In addition, the irAEs were less than expected. Together these findings suggest interference of OPE with D. A potential mechanism of interference could be change in microbiome with the use of OPE vs. IV P, as the microbiome is known to influence the efficacy of immunotherapy. The source of interference is being investigated. Clinical trial information: NCT01042379 . [Table: see text]

LBA520 Background: I-SPY 2 is a multicenter trial using response-adaptive randomization within biomarker subtypes including MammaPrint (MP) risk to evaluate novel neoadjuvant agents in high-risk breast cancer. Oral paclitaxel and encequidar (OPE) is an oral combination of paclitaxel (P) with a p-glycoprotein pump inhibitor, encequidar, to enhance gastrointestinal (GI) absorption. Dostarlimab (D) is an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody. Methods: Women with tumors ≥ 2.5cm and MP high-risk cancers were screened and treated starting Oct 5, 2020. Treatment included Oral Paclitaxel 205mg/m2 and encequidar 12.9 mg on days 1-3, Carboplatin (Cb) AUC 1.5 on day 1 weekly x 12, and Dostarlimab (D) 500 mg every 3 weeks x 4, followed by doxorubicin/ cyclophosphamide (AC) every 2-3 weeks x 4. The control arm was IV P weekly x 12 followed by AC every 2-3 weeks x 4. For patients with HER2+ disease, weekly Trastuzumab (T) was administered during the first 12 weeks. The arm was eligible for graduation [> 85% chance of success in a 300-person phase 3 neoadjuvant trial with a pathologic complete response (pCR) endpoint] in 10 predefined signatures. Results: 106 patients (44 HR+HER2-, 56 HR-HER2- (TN), 6 HER2+) received OPE/Cb/D ± T. The control arm included 388 historical controls (201 HR+HER2-, 156 TN, 31 HER2+). 22 patients (20 HR+, 2 HR-) in OPE/Cb/D were MP1 (MP high) and 84 patients (29 HR+, 55 HR-) were MP2 (MP ultra-high). OPE/Cb/D graduated in the TN signature and accrual was stopped. Conclusions: OPE/Cb/D graduated in the TN signature with a higher predicted pCR rate compared to control. OPE and D have been, individually, shown to have efficacy in other settings. The lower-than-expected pCR rate and lower irAEs with triplet therapy (taxane, platinum, immune checkpoint inhibitor [ICI]) in TN compared to prior IV chemo + ICI arms on I-SPY 2 suggests a possible interference of OPE with ICI. Changes in gut microbiome is being investigated as an explanation. Clinical trial information: NCT01042379 . [Table: see text]