Citations

Primary resistance to BCMA-directed bispecific antibodies (BCMA-BsAb) is a major clinical hurdle despite their outstanding efficacy for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Primary resistance has been linked clinically to patient characteristics including tumor burden. Our previous work in the immunocompetent Vk*MYC model of MM credentialed that tumor burden also correlates with resistance to a murine BCMA-BsAb, which we addressed through drug combinations with MM backbone agents. Pairing the BsAb with cyclophosphamide (Cy) was well-tolerated, reversed primary resistance, reshaped an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME) and led to durable responses with immunosurveillance in all but the most aggressive settings. Here, we aimed to improve the BCMA-BsAb and Cy combination strategy with a goal of curing models representing clinically relevant Cy-refractory aggressive settings, by adding T cell checkpoint blockade. Despite a lack of single agent activity of checkpoint inhibitors in MM (and in our models), PD1 and TIGIT are relevant targets as their expression on T cells correlates with both primary and acquired resistance to BCMA-directed cell therapies. Our team hypothesized that blockade of either PD1 or TIGIT with concurrent BCMA-BsAb and Cy would deepen anti-MM responses and provide a more durable immunotherapy regimen by sustaining activation of the T cell repertoire. Methods: We preclinically tested the ability of two weeks of concurrent dosing of BCMA-BsAb with Cy, checkpoint inhibitors targeting either PD1 or TIGIT, or the triple combination to overcome primary resistance and improve survival in a Cy-resistant transplantable Vk*MYC model of MM. We followed the response longitudinally in the blood, and in the bone marrow and spleen after complete responses were achieved at five weeks. Results: The double combination of a checkpoint inhibitor to the BCMA-BsAb was well-tolerated and abolished primary resistance, yet, failed to provide curative responses. Whereas the triple combination with either PD1 or TIGIT blockade remained safe, provided robust initial responses that overcame primary resistance and resulted in durable complete and curative responses in the entire cohort. These survival benefits represent significant improvements over control combinations tested here but also over all historical preclinical anti-MM therapy tested in our models to date. Both PD1 and TIGIT blockade with Cy/BCMA-BsAb triple combinations delivered a similar multiphasic potent anti-tumor response. This response was first characterized by highly effective T cell-mediated lysis of the tumor, as evidenced by deep reduction of M-spike after two weeks of treatment. As we previously published, the addition of Cy to BCMA-BsAb rapidly reshapes the TME by depleting Tregs and exhausted T cells and brings naive T cells to the tumor. However, we observed elevated T cell checkpoint expression at times of BsAb-relapse in aggressive models, suggesting that blockade of these pathways may help sustain T cell activation. Indeed, the ensuing T cell response in the triple combination gradually builds and encourages a pool of less terminally differentiated T cells to proliferate to allow for a more sustained response with repeat dosing. For the first time, we observe that the triple combination significantly engages the CD4 T cell compartment, which can be essential for a complete anti-tumor response. At the time of complete response, single cell analysis displays that T cells retained in the BM were less exhausted and defined by elevated CCR2 expression, a known marker of activated memory T cells, suggestive of ongoing immunosurveillance. Conclusions: Here we demonstrated through controlled in vivo experimentation how the addition of Cy reverts primary resistance to BCMA-BsAb by reshaping the TME in our Cy-insensitive preclinical model. Adding checkpoint inhibitors targeting TIGIT or PD1 further improves the durability of BsAb and Cy combination to cure all mice in these cohorts, by critically lysing the tumor, resetting the suppressive TME, and instigating a gradual, multiphasic, and sustained anti-MM T cell response. The concurrently delivered triple combination is well tolerated and provides optimal temporal control of MM especially in a preclinical model reflecting primary resistance mediated by high tumor burden and may have translational benefit to MM patients.

Introduction: Phase I trials are designed to evaluate the safety and tolerability of new treatments. Review of adverse events (AEs) experienced by trial participants is a critical aspect of these early phase trials. Current practice for safety and tolerability data collection is for clinicians to evaluate AEs using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). Past work has demonstrated that clinicians may miss or underreport symptomatic AEs. The Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the CTCAE (PRO-CTCAE) is an item library of questions for patients to self-report symptomatic AEs in clinical trials that is complementary to the CTCAE. PRO-CTCAE offers a patient-centric method for capturing symptomatic AEs, which may be missed or underreported by clinicians. The PRO-CTCAE library includes questions using patient friendly terms to assess frequency, severity, and interference of symptomatic AEs on 0-4 verbal descriptor scales (e.g., severity is rated by patients as none, mild, moderate, severe, or very severe). The goal of the current work was to demonstrate how to incorporate AE information from PRO-CTCAE and CTCAE into a Phase I dose review report. Methods: We used data from a Phase I clinical trial of patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia. Therapy was administered on 28-day cycles. Patients completed questionnaires on an electronic device on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of the first cycle of treatment. Through iterative feedback from clinicians and statisticians, we developed an example dose review report. The report summarized data for one dose level in which 4 patients were treated. These 4 patients comprised the first patient cohort enrolled in the available Phase I clinical trial. The report was intended to be representative of the type of report that would be reviewed to make a decision about the next dose level for a new cohort of patients. Results: The final dose review report included narratives for each patient generated by the statistical team based on patient-reported and physician-graded AEs in cycle 1, tabular summaries integrating CTCAE and PRO-CTCAE, and novel graphical presentation of PRO-CTCAE and CTCAE, including swimmer plots and butterfly plots for symptoms listed as dose limiting toxicity criteria. In this cohort, 3/4 (75%) patients had at least one grade 3+ AE, as assessed by CTCAE, and 4/4 (100%) patients had at least one score 3 symptomatic AE, as assessed by PRO-CTCAE. All 4/4 (100%) patients had at least one reported symptom on the PRO-CTCAE that was not captured by CTCAE or was reported at a lower grade by CTCAE. Multiple versions of the example dose review report were presented to the study team and iterative feedback was solicited from clinicians and statisticians. Feedback highlighted the usefulness of narratives and patient-level graphical displays. Narratives within the dose review report were refined to focus on treatment emergent AEs, minimizing text and succinctly presenting baseline symptoms where relevant. Symptom-level graphics of combined PRO-CTCAE scores and CTCAE grades were preferred over graphics consolidating data for multiple symptoms. Final graphics and report will be presented. Conclusions: We demonstrated that PRO-CTCAE, which captures patient-reported symptoms, complements traditional AE reporting and that reporting PRO-CTCAE and CTCAE jointly in a Phase I dose level report can provide a more complete picture of safety and tolerability in the Phase I setting.

Background The International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) defines progression of disease (PD) in multiple myeloma by the increase in serum or urine paraprotein beyond a certain threshold. With more common use of serial bone marrow-based measurable residual disease (MRD) assessment, some patients will evolve with increase in MRD burden without meeting IMWG criteria for PD and no consensus exist on the best approach for this circumstance. Understanding the implication of increasing MRD burden is particularly relevant in patients with NDMM treated with quadruplet therapy (QUAD, consisting of a PI, an IMiD, an anti-CD38 mAb and dexamethasone) and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), since most will reach MRD negativity. Methods We analyzed a large dataset of patients with NDMM patients treated with QUADs + ASCT +/- QUAD consolidation +/- single or dual-agent maintenance and monitored with serial MRD assessment by next-generation sequencing (clonoSEQ®) at end of induction, post ASCT, post consolidation and at least yearly thereafter. The dataset was built from clinical trial participants and from patients receiving standard care under an institutional guideline. MRD progression (MRD-P) was arbitrarily defined as quantitative increase in MRD burden by at least 1 log10 above the nadir. Treatment modification in the event of MRD-P without IMWG-defined PD was at discretion of treating physician. For patients with MRD-P without concomitant PD we describe cumulative incidence of PD after MRD-P. To contextualize the clinical implications of MRD-P, we describe survival free of failure of second line therapy (SFF2T), defined as time from progression event (MRD-P or PD not preceded by MRD-P) until occurrence of IMWG-defined PD or death on second line therapy, regardless of whether second line was initiated due to MRD-P or subsequent IMWG-defined PD. Results Among the 216 patients, 113 (52%) were clinical trial participants, median age was 61 years (IQR 56-68), 21% age 70 or older, 32% were non-White, 57% male, 38% had MM with 1 high risk chromosome abnormality [HRCA, gain/amp 1q, t(4;14), t(14:16), del(17p)], 15% had 2+HRCA. Median duration of follow up is 39.5 months, and 966 MRD datapoints were assessed. Overall, 83% of patients achieved sCR, 78% achieved MRD negativity at 10-5, 68% at the 10-6 threshold, and 56% ceased therapy after confirmed MRD negativity. Forty-nine patients had MRD-P(N=19) or PD not preceded by MRD-P (N=30). Patients with MRD-P or PD not preceded by MRD-P often had 1 or more HRCA (73.7% and 82.8%), International staging system III (36.8% and 30.0%), and high LDH at diagnosis (31.6% and 23.3%). Median time from onset of therapy to MRD-P was 24.4 mo (IQR 12.6-35.8) and to PD not preceded by MRD-P was 23.2 mo (IQR 18.4-29.4). Among the 19 patients with MRD-P, 12 (63%) were on observation at time of MRD-P, 2 were receiving single agent lenalidomide, 5 were receiving a QUAD, 17 (89%) had previously obtained MRD negativity at <10-5 including 10 (53%) who had also achieved MRD negativity at 10-6. Upon detection of MRD-P, 12 (63%) pts changed therapy, all to a monoclonal antibody-containing triplet or quadruplet regimen. Yet, median time from MRD-P to PD was 10.1 months. Patients with MRD-P had 1-year SFF2T of 55.6%, in contrast to 35.0% for patients with PD not preceded by MRD-P. OS 2-year from progression event was 78.0% for MRD-P and 53.9% for PD not preceded by MRD-P. Conclusions In the context of NDMM treated with QUAD + ASCT, MRD-P indicates imminent IMWG-defined PD, and is driven by a thriving plasma cell population unlikely to be controlled by reinstitution of anti-CD38 mAb-based combinations. Outcomes of patients with MRD-P are similar to those of patients with IMWG-defined PD. These findings challenge the paradigm of IMWG-defined PD and paraprotein measurability as minimal parameters for change in therapy and introduction of agents with new mechanisms of action.

Background: Cure rates for children, adolescents, and young adults with cHL are high, but patients with a slow early response (SER) to front-line chemotherapy are at an increased risk of relapse compared with patients who have a rapid early response (RER). To avoid long-term toxicity while optimizing outcomes, treatment for pediatric cHL is now shifting to a response-adapted approach. KEYNOTE-667 (NCT03407144) is an open-label phase 2 study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy consolidation with or without radiotherapy (RT) followed by pembrolizumab maintenance in patients with cHL and SER to front-line chemotherapy. The study includes 2 groups of patients: those with low-risk cHL (stage IA, IB, and IIA without bulky disease) and those with high-risk cHL (stage IIEB-IVB cHL). Prior analysis of the low-risk group showed that consolidation with pembrolizumab plus doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (AVD) and RT followed by maintenance pembrolizumab had manageable safety and promising antitumor activity in patients with low-risk cHL and SER to front-line doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD). We present updated results for patients with low-risk cHL and SER to ABVD. Methods: Patients eligible for the low-risk group were aged 3-25 years and had newly diagnosed stage IA, IB, or IIA cHL without bulky disease, measurable disease, and a Lansky Play-Performance Scale score of ≥50 (aged <16 years) or a Karnofsky Performance Status score of ≥50 (aged ≥16 years). All patients in the low-risk group received 2 cycles of ABVD followed by early response assessment (PET and CT/MRI). Patients with a RER (ie, Deauville score [DS] 1-3) received nonstudy therapy. Patients with SER (ie, DS 4 or 5) received consolidation with pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg up to 200 mg (aged 3-17 years) or 200 mg (aged 18-25 years) IV Q3W plus 2 cycles of AVD. Patients then underwent late response assessment (LRA; PET and MRI/CT). All patients with SER received involved-site RT: 21.6 Gy for complete PET response (ie, DS 1-3) or 30.6-36 Gy for partial PET response (ie, DS 4 or 5). All patients received maintenance pembrolizumab for up to 17 cycles. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) by blinded independent central review (BICR) per Cheson 2007 IWG criteria. Secondary end points included PET negativity after consolidation and safety. Results: 78 patients with low-risk cHL received front-line ABVD. As of the data cutoff date (February 29, 2024), 10 of 78 patients had SER to ABVD and received consolidation with pembrolizumab plus AVD; 4 had completed consolidation and maintenance, 1 was continuing to receive treatment, and 5 had discontinued because of complete response (CR). Median time from allocation to data cutoff was 19.9 months (range, 5.6-44.8). Patients had received a median of 11.5 doses of pembrolizumab (range, 5-17) and the median time on pembro was 7.4 months (range, 3.5-11.3). The median age of patients was 16 years (range, 7-20), 6 (60%) were male, and 8 (80%) had Ann Arbor stage II disease. Of 10 patients who received consolidation, all (100%) had an LRA. The ORR was 100% (95% CI, 69-100; 9 CR and 1 partial response). Six patients (60%) were PET negative by BICR. Seven patients (70%) were PET negative by investigator review, all of whom received a reduced dose of RT. During consolidation, treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were reported in 8 patients (80%); grade 3 or 4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 4 patients (40%). No patients discontinued or died due to treatment-related AEs. Seven patients (67%) had pembrolizumab-related AEs, 3 of whom (30%) had a grade 3 event (vomiting, lymphocyte count decreased, white blood cell count decreased). Immune-mediated AEs occurred in 3 patients (30%; all grade 1 or 2 hypothyroidism). Conclusion: After additional follow-up, consolidation withpembrolizumab plus AVD and RT followed by pembrolizumab maintenance continued to demonstrate promising activity and manageable safety in patients with low-risk cHL and SER to ABVD. Of patients with a LRA, 60% were PET negative by BICR; 70% of patients were PET negative by investigator review and received a reduced dose of RT. These results support further evaluation of pembrolizumab plus AVD consolidation as a treatment option for patients with low-risk CHL and SER to front-line ABVD.

Introduction: Hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) is a group of rare diseases characterized by persistent hypereosinophilia in the blood and/or tissues, causing organ damage and dysfunction. This retrospective observational cohort study described the real-world disease burden and clinical characteristics of patients with idiopathic HES (I-HES) or lymphocytic HES (L-HES). Methods: Records of patients with I-HES or L-HES were collected from the TriNetX Linked Electronic Health Records (EHR) plus Claims Network, a database of de-identified EHR-derived data linked to closed claims data from healthcare organizations throughout the United States. Included patients had a first diagnostic record of HES (ICD-10-CM D72.11) between January 1st 2022 and September 12th 2023 and had continuous 12-month enrollment prior to their first HES diagnosis (index date), with gaps of up to 45 days permitted. Patients were excluded if they had myeloprolifertive or secondary reactive variant of HES, or an eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis diagnosis after their HES diagnosis. Baseline was defined as the 12-month period prior to the index date, and Year 1 was defined as the 12-month period after the index date. Analyses were descriptive. Results: At the index date, patients with I-HES or L-HES (N=53) had a mean (standard deviation [SD]) age of 41.6 (21.4) years, with nine (17.0%) patients aged less than 18 years, 15 (28.3%) of Black or African American race, and 27 (50.9%) of White race. The proportion of males was 60.4% (n=32). Prior to receiving an I-HES or L-HES diagnosis, 47.2% of patients either had an asthma diagnosis or were receiving inhaled corticosteroids or short-acting β2-agonist treatment but without a diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Other common morbidities prior to I-HES/L-HES diagnosis were dorsalgia (28.3%), gastroesophageal reflux disease (20.8%), and hypertensive disease (20.8%). Amongst eosinophilic conditions, unspecified eosinophilia was recorded in 35.8% of patients and eczema was recorded in 18.9% of patients. In patients at baseline (N=53) and during Year 1 (n=19), the mean (SD) number of organ systems with HES signs and/or symptoms was 3.2 (2.3) and 2.7 (1.8), respectively. At baseline, 15.1% and 37.7% of patients had 3 or ≥4 organ systems, respectively, with I-HES or L-HES signs and/or symptoms; during Year 1, the proportion of patients with 3 or ≥4 organ systems with I-HES or L-HES signs and/or symptoms was 31.6% each. At baseline, I-HES and L-HES signs, symptoms and morbidities were most prevalent in the pulmonary system (60.4%), followed by the ears, nose and throat (41.5%), cardiovascular (35.8%), gastrointestinal (34.0%), cardiac (30.2%), and cutaneous (30.2%) systems. Compared with baseline, the proportion of patients during Year 1 with I-HES or L-HES signs, symptoms and morbidities was slightly higher for the pulmonary (63.2%) and cutaneous (36.8%) systems, and lower in the ears, nose and throat (36.8%), cardiovascular (31.6%), gastrointestinal (21.1%), and cardiac (26.3%) systems. Common I-HES and L-HES signs, symptoms and morbidities at the index date included: runny nose (34.0%), chest pain (32.1%), cough (32.1%), asthma (30.2%), dyspnea (28.3%), abdominal pain (24.5%), arthralgia (22.6%), eczema (18.9%), and heart palpitations (18.9%). Conclusion: I-HES and L-HES were associated with multiple morbidities and organ system involvement, indicating a high disease burden at the time of diagnosis. While I-HES and L-HES are primarily hematological disorders of hypereosinophilia, many other clinical specialties may diagnose and manage patients with these disorders.

Background Venetoclax + hypomethylating agent (Ven-HMA) therapy has demonstrated improved outcomes in elderly/unfit patients with newly-diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (ND-AML) (N Engl J Med 2020;383). However, ~50% of patients who respond to Ven-HMA, eventually relapse (Am J Hematol 2024;99). In the current study we examined the prognostic contribution of gene mutations, karyotype, measurable residual disease (MRD) status and clinical risk factors for relapse in patients with ND-AML treated with Ven-HMA therapy. Methods Our study population of ND-AML was retrospectively recruited from Mayo Clinic (MN, AZ, FL), after institutional review board approval and based on documentation of complete remission with/without count recovery (CR/CRi) following Ven-HMA therapy. Relapse-free survival was determined from the time of remission to relapse or last follow-up. Survival analysis was censored for transplant. The 2022 European LeukemiaNet (ELN) criteria was used to assign cytogenetic risk and classify treatment response (Blood 2022;140). Standard statistical analyses were performed using JMP Pro (Version 17.0.0). Results 247 ND-AML patients treated with Ven-HMA (median age 73 years, 62% male, 64% de novo) who achieved CR (n=153), or CRi (n=94) were included. MRD by multiparameter flow cytometry (sensitivity 0.01%) performed at the time of CR/CRi, was negative in 117 (70%) of 166 informative cases. ELN cytogenetic risk categories at diagnosis included favorable 2%, intermediate 69%, or adverse 29%. Mutations involved TET2 21%, SRSF2 21%, TP53 19%, ASXL1 18%, DNMT3A 18%, NPM1 17%, IDH2 15%, RUNX1 15%, K/NRAS 12%, IDH1 8%, FLT3-ITD 7%, and DDX41 in 6% of informative cases. Relapse was documented in a total of 99 (40%) patients who achieved CR (39%) or CRi (41%) after a median remission duration of 6 months (1-31). Patients that relapsed within the first-year vs those that did not, were more likely to be males (75% vs 55%), MRD positive (44% vs 24%), and harbor TP53 mutations (23% vs 16%). Univariate analysis for RFS identified male gender (12 vs 29 months; p=0.02), secondary AML (10 vs 21 months; p<0.01), adverse karyotype (9 vs 22 months; p<0.01), TP53 mutations (6 vs 18 months, p<0.01) and MRD positive remission (13 months vs not reached; p<0.01) as risk factors for relapse; on the other hand, IDH2 mutations (not reached vs 15 months; p<0.01) were associated with a lower risk of relapse. Multivariable analysis confirmed male gender (HR 2.2), TP53 mutations (HR 3.0) and MRD positive remission (HR 1.7) as unfavorable predictors of relapse. Subsequently, in a three-tiered relapse prediction model, RFS was significantly inferior in the presence of three risk factors (male gender, TP53 mutations, MRD positive remission) (n=10, median 4 months), vs two (n=34, median 10 months) vs ≤ 1 risk factor (n=122, median 31 months) (p<0.01); 1-year cumulative incidence of relapse was 100%, 56%, and 26% in the presence of three, two and ≤ 1 risk factors, respectively. 50 of 99 (65%) patients received salvage therapy which included cladribine-cytarabine-Ven (n=19), intensive induction chemotherapy (n=9), FLT3 inhibitors (n=5), Ven-HMA-FLT3 inhibitor (n=1), IDH1/2 inhibitors (n=5), glasdegib-cytarabine (n=4), gemtuzumab (n=3), lenalidomide (n=1), or investigational therapies (n=3); in addition, Ven-HMA was resumed in 14 patients in whom treatment had been discontinued for a median of 5 months (2-12). Overall, 20 (31%) of patients achieved second CR/CRi and response rates were similar with intensive vs less intensive therapy (CR/CRi; 44% vs 29%; p=0.37). Median follow up after relapse was 3.4 months (1-66), during which 73 (74%) deaths, and 4 (5%) ASCT were recorded. Median transplant-censored survival was 4.2 months (1-year; 22%), and inferior in patients with adverse karyotype (median 4.6 vs 3.4 months; p=0.02), and TP53 mutations (3.6 vs 4.4; p=0.11); on the other hand, male gender (3.5 vs 6.8 months; p=0.51), MRD positive remission (4.6 vs 4.2; p=0.56), and IDH2 mutations (6.7 vs 4.2; p=0.28), did not influence post-relapse survival. Conclusions The current study identifies male gender, TP53 mutations, and MRD status as powerful predictors of relapse and proposes a relapse prediction model for ND-AML patients receiving Ven-HMA therapy. Furthermore, relapse following Ven-HMA was associated with uniformly poor outcomes, regardless of salvage treatment strategy.

Introduction: DDX41, DEAD-box RNA helicase 41 gene located on chromosome 5q25.3, is one of the most mutated genes in patients with germline predisposition to myeloid neoplasms. Germline and somatic mutations often have different locations and patterns of mutation, with some hot-spots displaying diversity based on ethnicity. We aimed to explore clinical outcomes in patients with various DDX41 hot-spots. Methods: A retrospective study of patients at Mayo Clinic with DDX41 mutation identified through Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) between 2016 and 2024. Patients classified as germline DDX41 variants or somatic variants based on confirmed germline testing results. Data regarding mutations recorded at time of patients' first in-house NGS. We completed unadjusted comparisons using continuous or categorical variables, and survival rates assessed using Kaplan-Meier method and cox regression analysis. Median overall survival calculated from time of NGS to last follow-up or death using BlueSky Statistics V.10.3.4 Results: Clinical Characteristics: Eighty-two patients analyzed, predominantly male (69.5%), with median age of diagnosis of 68 years (IQR 62-75). Most common diagnosis was MDS (50%), followed by AML (22%) and myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) (7.3%). Fourteen percent were DDX41 mutation carriers, 4.9% clonal cytopenia of undetermined significance (CCUS), and 1.2% chronic neutrophilic leukemia (CNL). MDS-IB2 was the prevalent MDS subtype (56.1%), and 83.3% of AML patients were intermediate risk. Cytogenetics normal in 73.8% of patients, with del20 being the most common abnormality (7.5%). Twenty-five (30.5%) of patients underwent allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT). Forty-nine patients (59.8%) had pathogenic DDX41 mutation only, 15 (18.3%) had only VUS, and 18 (22.0%) had both. Molecular Characteristic s: Mutation hot-spots included 12.2% with p.Arg525His only, 28% p.M1I only, 9.8% p.Asp140GlyFs*2 only, 9.8% p.Arg525 with co-mutation other than p.M1I/p.Asp140. Two patients (2.4%) had p.M1I co-mutation with non-p.Arg525 and p.Asp140, while 1 patient (1.2%) had p.M1I and p.Arg525, and 1 patient (1.2%) had p.Asp140 and p.Arg525. Lastly, 33 patients (40.2%) had mutations in hot-spots other than specified in this study. Median hemoglobin (Hg) was lowest in patients with p.Arg525 hotspot mutation (9.9 g/dl), compared to median Hg of 11.2 g/dl in group with p.M1I and 10.4 g/dl in p.Asp140 only group (p=0.87). The most common cytogenetics in patients with only p.Arg525 and only p.M1I hot-spot mutation was normal cytogenetics (70% and 90.9%, p=0.5). In the 16 patients with proven germline DDX41 mutation, 7 (43.8%) had mutations in only p.M1I. Lastly, median (m) VAF was significantly lower in the group with only p.Arg525 hot-spot mutation (9.5%, IQR 5.5-13.8), compared to mVAF of 48% in patients with only p.M1I (IQR 48.0-49.5, p<0.001). Co-mutations: The most frequent co-mutation was DNMT3A (11.0%), followed by JAK2 (9.8%).Mean number of co-mutations in p.Arg525 only was 0.6, 0.3 in p.M1I only, and 0.5 in p.Asp140 only (p=0.8). Most common co-mutation in p.M1I was ASXL1, with 13.0% of patients with p.M1I only having ASXL1 co-mutation (p=0.062). The most common co-mutation in p.Asp140 was DNMT3A (p=0.7). Survival: Median overall survival (mOS) was 21.5 months (IQR 12.4-38.6). mOS for p.Arg525 only group was 31.3, compared to 41.2 months in p.M1I only (p=0.197). At 12- and 24-months, survival rate was 88.9% and 59.3% in the p.Arg525 only group, compared to p.M1I group with 100% survival rate at 12 months and 89.5% at 24 months. p.Asp140 had 87.5% survival rate at both 12 months and 24 months. Males in p.M1I group had lower survival rate at 24 months (81.8%), compared to 100% survival in females. p.M1I only group with alloHCT also had lower 24 month survival at 60% compared to 100% in group who did not undergo alloHCT. Conclusions: The p.M1I hot-spot was commonly seen in patients with germline DDX41 mutation, likely resulting in significantly higher VAF percentage. Co-mutations frequency differed by hot spot mutation while p.Arg525 as second mutation was seen mainly in cases other than p.M1I/pArg140Gly. Overall survival appears to be higher in p.M1I/pArg140Gly compared to p.Arg525His hot-spot mutation, though males with p.M1I and those who underwent alloHCT had lower survival. Findings suggest implications for clinical outcomes based on DDX41 mutation hot-spots.

Background: The prognosis of patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory B ALL (r/r B-ALL) treated with CAR T-cells and receive a 2nd CART infusion is unknown. Few reports with limited numbers of patients suggest that 2nd CART infusion is feasible with questionable efficacy. This GoCART coalition registry study aimed at compiling data to investigate the indications, efficacy, and toxicity of CART2 infusion in pts with r/r B-ALL. Methods: This is a multicenter, retrospective registry study that included pediatric and adult patients with r/r B-ALL who received autologous CD19-targeted CAR T-cell therapy (CART1) and subsequently were treated with a second administration of CD19 and/or CD22-targeted CAR-T cell therapy (CART2) from 2017 to 2023. Baseline features, prior stem cell transplant (SCT), indications for CART2 and outcomes were collected. Relapse incidence (RI) was defined as overt recurrence, non-relapse mortality (NRM) as death without relapse occurrence, leukemia free survival (LFS) as being alive without occurrence of relapse and overall survival (OS) as being alive. RI and NRM were estimated using cumulative incidence function and OS and LFS Kaplan-Meier estimation. Results: Out of 345 pts who received CART1, 39 (2y cumulative incidence of second CART: 12.4% (95%CI: 8.8-16.6)) received CART2. Reasons for CART2 were overt relapse (n= 26; 66.7%), molecular relapse by measurable residual disease (MRD+) (n=5; 12.8%), and B-cell recovery (BCR) in the absence of relapse (n=8; 20.5%). Seventeen pts (43.6%) were female and median age at CART2 infusion was 19 yrs (range: 6.9-67.1), including 19 children and 20 adults. 74.4% of the pts had received a prior SCT, 25 pts (64%) before CART1, 2 (5.1%) only between CART1 and CART2, and 2 (5.1%) before CART1 and between CART1 and CART2. Among the 31 pts who received CART2 for relapse, this was CD19+ in 24 (92.3%), CD19- in 2 (7.7%), and unknown in 5. CART1 products were varnimcabtagene autoleucel (ARI-0001) (23), tisagenlecleucel (13), brexucabtagene autoleucel (1), and other experimental (2). All CART2 products targeted CD19 except 2 (1 CD22 and 1 dual CD19-CD22). Median time between CART1 and CART2 was 11.0 months. For patients who received CART2 for BCR, median time between CART1 and CART2 was shorter than for those who received it for relapse: 2.4 (IQR: 2.3-3.3) months vs. 12.4 (IQR:6.4-19.3) months. Regarding leukemic burden at the time of CART2 infusion, 19 pts (48.8%) were in overt relapse (14/19 with extramedullary disease, including 7 in CNS), 12 (30.1%) were in complete remission (CR) MRD+ and 8 (20.5%) CR MRD-. With a median follow-up time of 2.3 yrs [95% CI: 1.2-3.4], the 2-yr OS and LFS after CART2 were 47.1% [95% CI: 27.8-64.3] and 39.9% [95% CI: 24-55.3], respectively. 2-yr RI was 54.5% (95% CI: 36.5-69.4) and NRM was 5.6% (95% CI 1-16.8). 2-yr OS, LFS and RI for pts in CR at CART2 infusion irrespective to MRD were 76.1%, 63.3% and 25.6% while for those not in CR these outcomes were 17.7%, 15% and 85%, respectively (p= 0.007, 0.006 and 0.002). 2-yr LFS (71.4% [95% CI 25.8-92]) and RI (0%) was significantly better for pts receiving CART2 for BCR than in those who received it for relapse (31.6% [15.6-48.9] and 68.4% [46.7-82.8]; p= 0.036, p=0.002). Conclusion: This is a large registry study describing indications and outcome of CART2 in patients with r/r B-ALL. At 2-yrs after CART2, the LFS was of 39.9% and for patients receiving CART2 due to B-cell recovery was of 71.4%. These results show that CART2 is associated with low NRM and might be a bridge to SCT or other additional therapies. Updated results with data about subsequent therapies after CART2 will be presented at ASH meeting.

Introduction: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has been considered by many to be an oncologic emergency often leading to hospital admission for expeditious evaluation and treatment. Previous studies reported that time from diagnosis to treatment (TDT) does not impact outcomes (Sekeres, Blood, 2009), (Bertoli, Blood, 2013), (Rollig, Blood, 2020), however these analyses were restricted to intensively treated and/or non-United States (US) patients (pts). We report on a multi-center, retrospective analysis of TDT in adults with newly diagnosed AML receiving Hypomethylating agent (HMA) + venetoclax (Ven) using real-world data from the COMMAND. Methods: Eight US academic medical centers with AML expertise performed a review of adult pts within their center treated with HMA+Ven for newly diagnosed AML. TDT was defined as days from diagnosis of AML to initiation of treatment with HMA+Ven. Cytoreduction with hydroxyurea or leukapheresis was included to control for the effects of severity of presentation on TDT. The primary outcome was impact of TDT on overall survival (OS) (defined as date of diagnosis to date of death). TDT was treated continuously for time-to-event analyses. Secondary outcomes included measurable residual disease (MRD) by flow cytometric analysis (sensitivity <0.1%), complete response (CR), complete response with incomplete count recovery (CRi), defined by European LeukemiaNet (ELN) 2022 Guidelines (Dohner, Blood,2022), and early mortality (death within 30 and 60 days of initiation of HMA+Ven). Pre-planned subgroup analyses included those based on disease biology (FLT3 ITD, IDH1/2, TP53 mutation, ELN 2022 risk), HMA used (azacitidine vs decitabine) and age (<75 vs ≥75 years). For those analyses where TDT was significant in univariable analysis (P=0.1), multivariable analysis was conducted controlling for the following: ECOG performance status (PS), age, receipt of cytoreduction, ELN 2022 risk, and presence of individual pathogenic variants detected on broad myeloid gene next generation sequencing panels used at each institution. All analyses were conducted by a central statistician using RStudio statistical package. Results: 488 pts were included in the analysis. Median age was 76 (interquartile range: 70-80) and the majority of pts had an ECOG PS of 0 or 1 (56%). Most pts (67.6%) had adverse risk with 9.4% and 18.6% of pts having favorable and intermediate risk disease by ELN 2022, respectfully. The most common mutations identified were TP53 (27.5%), IDH1/2 (19.3%), NPM1 (16.4%), DNMT3A (16.8%), ASXL1 (15.4%), and FLT3-ITD (13.7%). Twenty-eight percent of pts received cytoreduction prior to initiation of HMA+Ven. Azacitidine+Ven was the most common regimen utilized (53.9%). Median number of cycles of HMA+Ven was 3 (IQR: 1-6). MRD (-) CR, MRD (+) CR, and CRi was achieved in 21.5%, 10.5%, and 16.4% of pts after one cycle of HMA+Ven. Median OS for the cohort was 10.4 months (95% CI: 9.4-12.6). Median TDT for the cohort was 9 days (IQR: 5-17). In univariate Cox model, longer TDT was associated with improved OS (HR: 0.989, 95% CI: 0.981 to 0.998; p = 0.013). In multivariable analysis, longer TDT was still associated with improved OS (HR: 0.987; 95% CI: 0.973-0.999; p=0.049). TDT and presence of bZIP in-frame CEBPA mutations were the only factors associated with improved OS, while ECOG PS of 2 or 3-4, when compared to ECOG PS=0 (p=0.035 and 0.0002, respectively) and therapy-related AML (p=0.002), were associated with worse OS. Notably, ELN 2022 risk and IDH1/2 or NPM1 mutation status did not impact OS. Discussion: In this real-world, multi-center, US-based analysis of pts with newly diagnosed AML treated with HMA+Ven we show that longer TDT is associated with improved OS even when controlling for severity of presentation, ELN 2022 risk score, ECOG PS, and age. This finding is consistent with data in pts treated with 7+3. Similar to results published in an electronic medical record-based analysis out of Germany (Baden, Haemotologica, 2024) in pts treated with lower-intensity Ven regimens, our results show that pts with newly diagnosed AML eventually treated with HMA+Ven are best served with a complete appraisal of disease biology and treatment planning before initiation of induction therapy. Given the consistent negative impact of ECOG PS and the findings of our study, future consideration for potential patient optimization strategies to improve ECOG PS prior to therapy initiation are warranted.

Introduction: High-risk smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) is an asymptomatic precursor disorder to active multiple myeloma (MM) without approved treatment options. However, recent evidence suggests patients at high risk of progression to MM may benefit from early treatment. Daratumumab (DARA) is a human IgGκ monoclonal antibody targeting CD38 with direct on-tumor and immunomodulatory mechanisms of action. DARA is approved as monotherapy for relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) and in combination with standard-of-care regimens for RRMM and newly diagnosed MM. Based on the encouraging activity and tolerability observed with DARA monotherapy in patients with intermediate- or high-risk SMM in the phase 2 CENTAURUS study, the phase 3 AQUILA study sought to determine if DARA could delay progression to MM versus active monitoring. Here we report the primary analysis from the AQUILA study. Methods: Eligible patients had a confirmed diagnosis of high-risk SMM for ≤5 years, defined as clonal bone marrow plasma cells (BMPCs) ≥10% and ≥1 risk factor (serum M protein ≥30 g/L, IgA SMM, immunoparesis with reduction of 2 uninvolved Ig isotypes, serum involved:uninvolved free light chain ratio ≥8 and <100, and/or clonal BMPCs >50% to <60%). Focal and lytic lesion assessment was performed in screening by CT and MRI and centrally reviewed prior to study enrollment. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive DARA SC versus active monitoring. DARA (QW in Cycles 1 and 2, Q2W in Cycles 3-6, and Q4W thereafter) was given in 28-day cycles until cycle 39, 36 months, or disease progression, whichever came first. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), defined as progression to active MM as assessed by an independent review committee and according to IMWG diagnostic criteria for MM (SLiM-CRAB) or death. Major secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), PFS on first-line MM treatment (PFS2), and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 390 patients (DARA, n = 194; active monitoring, n = 196) were randomized. Median (range) age (64 [31-86] years) and time from initial SMM diagnosis to randomization (0.72 [0-5.0] years) were balanced between treatment groups. Median treatment duration in the DARA group was 38 cycles (35.0 months). At a median (range) follow-up of 65.2 (0-76.6) months, PFS was significantly improved with DARA versus active monitoring (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.36-0.67; P <0.0001). Median PFS was not reached in the DARA group versus 41.5 months for active monitoring; estimated 60-month PFS rates were 63.1% versus 40.8%, respectively. Prespecified analyses showed generally consistent PFS improvement with DARA versus active monitoring across subgroups. ORR was 63.4% with DARA versus 2.0% with active monitoring (P <0.0001). As of the clinical cutoff, 64 (33.0%) patients in the DARA group and 102 (52.0%) patients in the active monitoring group had started first-line MM treatment. Median time from randomization to the date of first-line MM treatment was not reached with DARA versus 50.2 months with active monitoring (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.33-0.62; nominal P <0.0001). There was a positive trend in favor of DARA for PFS2 (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.35-0.96) and OS (60-month OS rates: DARA, 93.0%; active monitoring, 86.9%; HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.27-0.98). A total of 41 deaths were observed, 15 for the DARA group and 26 for the active monitoring group. Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 40.4% and 30.1% of patients in the DARA and active monitoring groups, respectively. The most common (≥5% in either group) grade 3/4 TEAE was hypertension (DARA, 5.7%; active monitoring, 4.6%). The frequency of TEAEs leading to DARA discontinuation was low (5.7%), as was the incidence of fatal TEAEs in both groups (DARA, 1.0%; active monitoring, 2.0%). Conclusions: DARA monotherapy was well tolerated and demonstrated a clinically meaningful and significant benefit in preventing or delaying progression to active MM compared with active monitoring in patients with high-risk SMM. ORR was significantly higher and time to first-line MM treatment was prolonged with DARA compared with active monitoring. This was accompanied by positive trends for PFS2 and OS in favor of DARA. These results strongly support the benefit of early intervention with DARA monotherapy versus active monitoring, the current standard of care, in patients with high-risk SMM.