Citations

Introduction While chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy has transformed the management of hematologic malignancies, it requires frequent monitoring for acute toxicities, almost universally achieved through mandatory hospitalizations, therefore utilizing a significant amount of healthcare resources. At Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN, our standard practice is administering CAR-T cell therapy in the outpatient setting through a multi-disciplinary hospital-based outpatient (HBO) unit and remote patient monitoring (RPM) program. Our CAR-T RPM program consists of in-home, electronic health record-integrated technology to monitor vital signs and neurologic symptoms for 30 days post CAR-T infusion. Here we report the healthcare utilization outcomes of CAR-T patients managed in the outpatient setting enrolled in the RPM program. Methods Patients undergoing FDA-approved CAR-T cell treatment in the outpatient setting and participating in the CAR-T RPM program at Mayo Clinic Rochester were included in this IRB-approved study. Patient characteristics, healthcare utilization metrics, inpatient interventions, and patient satisfaction data regarding the RPM program were reviewed. Length of stay (LOS) includes any hospitalizations for which the admission date falls within the RPM monitoring period (CAR-T cell infusion to day +30), even if the hospitalization continued past day +30. Results A total of 123 patients participated in the CAR-T RPM program and underwent treatment in the outpatient setting. Median age at CAR-T infusion was 63 years (range 22 - 83), and most patients were male (n=78, 63%). Non-Hodgkin lymphoma was the most common diagnosis (n=74, 60%), followed by multiple myeloma (n=47, 38%), ALL (n=1, 1%) and other (n=1, 1%). During the PRM monitoring period, 19 (16%) patients were managed entirely in the outpatient setting. The remaining 104 (84%) patients required at least one hospitalization, with most patients (n=70, 57%) hospitalized only once [26 (21%) patients were hospitalized twice, and 7 (6%) patients were hospitalized 3 times, and 1 (1%) patient hospitalized 4 times during the monitoring period]. When considering the first hospitalization post CAR-T infusion, the median LOS was 6 days (range 2 - 47). When considering all hospitalizations post CAR-T, the median LOS was 8 days (range 2 - 47). Only 7 (6%) patients required an ICU stay, with a mean ICU stay of 0.2 days (standard deviation 0.9). Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) was noted in 92 (75%) of patients at a median of 3 days (range 0 - 18) post CAR-T infusion. All patients with CRS received tocilizumab, at a median of 4 days post CAR-T infusion. Steroids for CRS were administered in 63 (68%) of these patients. Neurotoxicity was reported in 45 (37%) patients at a median of 7 days (range 1 - 19) post CAR-T infusion. During the RPM monitoring period, patients were seen in our HBO unit with a median of 18 outpatient visits (range 4 - 30). Patient survey data, obtained at the end of the RPM monitoring period, were available from 37 patients. The majority of patients felt that the RPM program helped them feel comfortable managing their health at home, were able to reach a team member, and receive an appropriate response promptly. The majority of patients felt comfortable using the RPM equipment and interacting with providers virtually. Overall, 83% of patients were satisfied with the RPM program and 6% were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied. When asked about the reason for disappointment, technical difficulties/issues with the devices were the themes mentioned by the few patients (11%) who were unsatisfied with the RPM program. Conclusion: Despite the complexities and frequent monitoring associated with CAR-T cell therapy, outpatient CAR-T cell treatment is a feasible model of care. As the standard practice at our institution, the CAR-T RPM program was part of the management of nearly all patients undergoing an FDA-approved CAR-T product in the outpatient setting. RPM in the acute setting post CAR-T infusion is a well-received practice initiative by the majority of patients, including a high level of comfort utilizing the RPM equipment and virtual interaction with the RPM providers.

Background: Patients (pts) receiving FDA-approved chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy or Bispecific antibody Teclistamab (Tec) are commonly managed in the inpatient setting given the common adverse events such as cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome ICANS. We have previously reported that hospital-based outpatient (HBO) management of pts receiving CAR-T is feasible and safe (Bansal et al, ASH2022). In 2023, HBO management at our institution began incorporating home health visits and management of grade 1 CRS in outpatient setting for select pts receiving standard of care (SOC) CAR-T. Here, we report outcomes of our updated practice. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed medical records and remote monitoring data of adult pts who received SOC CAR-T or Tec between 10/2020 and 7/2023 at Mayo Clinic, Rochester under an IRB approved protocol. Results: In 3/2023, pts deemed to be low risk for severe CRS (fever onset >= 3 days from infusion, CRP<100) received HBO management for grade 1 CRS, including outpatient administration of tocilizumab. If CRS improved or resolved, outpatient monitoring was continued. If CRS persisted within the observation period on HBO, pts were admitted. Recurrent CRS after the first episode were all managed inpatient. Nine pts met these criteria for HBO CRS management and their outcomes were compared to those who received initial inpatient (INPT) CRS management (INPT, n=17) during the same timeframe, as well as the outcome of 164 pts who had CRS management INPT prior to our practice change (Table 1). Two-third of the pts with initial management of CRS outpatient did not require hospitalization. Median time to hospitalization trended later than those managed inpatient at the onset of CRS. The duration of hospitalization was comparable for all pts admitted between initial HBO and INPT CRS management. However with fewer admissions in the initial CRS HBO group, the average hospitalization days (LOS) per patient treated for that group was lower compared to initial INPT CRS management. Data on additional pts will be presented at ASH. In 1/2023, pts on RPM with no ongoing CRS symptoms, no language barriers, and no compliance concerns received home health visits during weeks 3 and 4 post CAR-T infusion in place of clinic visits on HBO. Home health visit team communicated with HBO staff to review assessment and plan. Changes in HBO utilization will be presented. Finally, 24 pts received 223 Tec infusions on HBO. Median age was 66 years, 15 (61%) were males, 9 (38%) had high risk cytogenetics. The median prior lines of therapy was 5. Among these pts, 220/223 (99%) doses were performed on HBO and 204/220 (93%) infusions never required admission for management. Twenty pts enrolled in RPM (Figure 1). An average of 2 alerts were generated per patient during the 2 week period and median time from infusion to alert was 1.5 days. Majority of alerts were resolved over a phone call and only 13/114 (11%) alerts required a physician visit/hospital admission. Of the 16 Tec infusions resulting in admission, 4/16 (25%) required re-admission resulting in a total of 20 hospitalizations. Admissions mostly occurred during step-up dosing (18/20; 90%). Most common reason for first admission was fever (13/16, 85%) and median time to admission was 1 day from infusion. Median LOS was 1.5 days (range, 0-12). In terms of CRS, majority were Grade 1 (12/13, 93%) which were managed with steroids (dexamethasone/ prednisone) alone. One patient had CRS grade 4 event, in the setting of concurrent decompensation during dialysis, and was treated with steroids, tocilizumab, vasopressor, CRRT, thoracentesis, intubation and mechanical ventilation. The rate of second CRS event after management of first CRS with steroid (dexamethasone/ prednisone) was 15% (2/13). These second CRS episodes also resolved with steroid alone. Data on additional pts receiving Tec will be presented at ASH. Conclusion: Our data showed that additional advances in outpatient practice, including initial outpatient management of CRS and outpatient administration of Tec step up dosing are feasible, safe and reduce hospital resource utilization.

Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is characterized by somatic mutations involving cancer-associated genes. The MyDRUG trial was initiated to explore the efficacy of specific molecularly-targeted therapies in combination with a standard triplet combination in MM. Methods: MyDRUG (NCT03732703) is a genomically-guided umbrella trial for patients with functional high-risk MM, defined as early relapse following primary therapy (3 years for transplant with maintenance, 18 months without), with specific genetic abnormalities. Patients with no actionable mutation or mutations with allelic burden below 30% were randomly assigned to one of the “non-actionable” arms. Here we present the data for the Y3 arm which combines selinexor (60mg po days 1,8,15), ixazomib (4mg po days 1,8,15), pomalidomide (3mg po days 1-21) and dexamethasone (40mg po weekly) (Seli-IPD), given on a 28-day cycle. The primary objective of the Y3 sub-protocol was to evaluate the overall response rate (ORR) according to the International Myeloma Working Group consensus criteria. Secondary objectives included assessment of adverse events (AEs). Results: 17 patients were enrolled into the Y3 arm. The average age was 62 (51-79), 65% were male with a median of 29 months since initial diagnosis and a median of 2 prior lines of therapy. The ORR (> PR) was 52.9% with a clinical benefit rate (> MR) of 58.8%. The median progression free survival was 10.2 months ( 95% CI: 3.9; 12.9) with a median overall survival which has not yet been reached; with all 17 patients still alive at the current data cutoff. No dose-limiting toxicities were seen. Eight patients (47.1%) experienced a serious AE with 2 patients (11.8%) experiencing an AE leading to treatment discontinuation. Two patients (11.8%) required dose reductions. The most common non-hematologic AEs were fatigue, nausea and constipation; all of which were grade 1 and 2. Conclusions: In this platform study of patients with relapsed, functionally high-risk MM, patients who received Seli-IPd exhibited significant efficacy and a manageable AE profile. Furthermore, this provides an all-oral option for patients wishing to minimize their office visits and parenteral therapy administrations.

Background: Dex is a key component of induction regimens for NDMM despite common toxicities including insomnia and anxiety. The E4A03 randomized trial (Rajkumar, Lancet Oncol 2010) demonstrated that dex dosed at 40 mg weekly outperformed higher-intensity dex and established this regimen as the standard of care for NDMM. In standard practice as well as clinical trials, however, dex doses are often reduced to 20 mg weekly or lower (if not stopped entirely) among older patients or among patients experiencing toxicities. As a first step toward establishing the equipoise of planned dex dose reductions in NDMM, we investigated outcomes with patients from two previous SWOG trials to understand the impact of dex dose reductions on post-induction outcomes. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of data from two completed NDMM studies, S0777 (comparing VRd vs Rd) and S1211 (comparing Elo-VRd vs VRd). For this secondary analysis, we analyzed the subset of patients who completed all eight 3-week cycles of induction (or six 4-week cycles in the S0777 Rd arm). As shown in Figure 1A, we defined DEX fullDose as patients for whom the starting dex dose (either 40 mg once per week or 20 mg on Days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12 of 21-day cycles) did not change during induction. In contrast, DEX lowered was defined as patients for whom the end-of-induction dex dose and/or frequency were lower than their starting values. As an exploratory analysis, we also compared PFS and OS between the DEX fullDose (no changes to dex strength during induction) and DEX veryLow (dex dosing reduced ≥50% during induction) subgroups. All analyses were landmarked from the end of induction, defined as 24 weeks from registration, to account for the time-dependent nature of dex treatment received. Survival curves were based on the Kaplan-Meier method and comparisons were made using the log-rank test. Results: Of 541 evaluable patients ( n = 441 from S0777, n = 100 from S1211), dex was reduced during induction in 76% ( n = 410). Compared to DEX fullDose patients, DEX lowered patients were more likely to be anemic (37% vs 26%, p = 0.02) but had similar distributions of age ≥70 (24% of DEX lowered vs 26% of DEX fullDose), Performance Status > 1 (15% vs 12%), ISS stage 3 disease (33% vs 27%), ≥ 60% bone marrow plasma cell burden (37% vs 31%), M-spike > 3 g/dL (48% vs 48%) platelets < 150,000 cells/mm 3 (18% vs 14%), baseline LDH ≥ 190 U/L (36% vs 41%), and baseline CRP ≥ 8 mg/L (27% vs 30%). PFS (Figure 1B) was comparable between DEX lowered (median 36 months, 95% CI 29 to 39 months) and DEX fullDose (median 33 months, 95% CI 24 to 48 months) with p = 0.90. Similarly, OS (Figure 1C) was comparable between DEX lowered [median 77 months, 95% CI 68 months to not reached (NR)] and DEX fullDose (median 92 months, 95% CI 65 months to NR) with p = 0.93. In the DEX veryLow subgroup with ≥50% reduction in dex dosing during induction, median PFS was 39 months (95% CI 34 to 50 months) and median OS was NR (95% CI NR to NR). As shown in Figure 1D and Figure 1E, PFS and OS were comparable between these patients and DEX fullDose patients. Discussion: To our knowledge, this is the first analysis of dex dosing strength in NDMM since E4A03. In two separate randomized trials, over half of patients required dex reductions below a starting dose of ~40 mg weekly. Dex dose reductions during induction had no impact on post-induction PFS and OS, even in the subset of patients who required significant dose reductions. Limitations of our post hoc analysis include heterogeneity between dex dosing schedules and lack of cytogenetic data for all patients. We could not discern specifically why dex was lowered, and it is possible that dex might have been lowered disproportionately commonly in patients who had achieved early responses and thus independently did better. Regardless, these results strongly suggest that maintaining dex 40 mg weekly for the entirety of NDMM induction may be unnecessary in the modern era. Cooperative efforts to study a planned dex de-escalation protocol (i.e., once no longer needed for symptom management or as a pre-medication) alongside patient-reported outcome assessments of symptom burden are being planned. Funding: NIH/NCI/NCTN grants U10CA180888, U10CA180819, U10CA180821, U10CA180820; and in part by Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (now part of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company), and by Celgene.

Background: Liver involvement in light chain amyloidosis (AL) is seen in up to 20% of patients and is typically encountered as part of multi-organ involvement. Liver involvement is associated with a poor prognosis. The goal of this study was to assess the prognostic impact of the hepatic response criteria, which were published in 2005 and were not broadly assessed for their prognostic value. Patients and methods: Ten centers across the USA and Europe participated in this study.AL amyloidosis patients who were diagnosed between 2010 and 2015, had liver involvement with serum alkaline phosphatase (AP) >1.5 upper reference limit (URL), and achieved hematologic response to therapy were included in this study. Hepatic response was assessed at 6, 12, and 24 months from therapy initiation and at best response. Based on a receiver operation characteristic analysis, a 50% reduction in AP was set as the optimal cut point for discrimination of 5-year overall survival (OS) in the 12-months response assessment landmark (area under the curve 0.67). Therefore, hepatic response was defined as a reduction in AP >50% from baseline value in addition to AP normalization, regardless of AP percentage reduction. Hepatic progression was defined as >50% increase in serum AP. OS was assessed from therapy initiation until death or last follow-up and was plotted using the Kaplan-Meier method. The log-rank test used to compare survival between groups. For fixed-time point survival analysis, patients who died before the landmark were excluded. Hepatic response at a fixed time points, when missing, was imputed based on available data from adjacent time points (imputation of hepatic response was performed in 15%, 23%, and 22% of evaluable patients at 6-, 12-, and 24-month landmarks, respectively). Multivariate Cox proportional models were set to determine independent prognostic factors for OS using variables with p-value <0.1 in a univariate analysis. P-values <0.05 were considered significant. Results: One hundred and sixteen patients (n=116) are included. The median age was 60 years, and the median serum AP was X2.6 URL. Concomitant kidney involvement was present in 63.8% of patients, while coexisting heart involvement was seen in 56% of patients. Hematologic VGPR or better was achieved in 69% of patients. AP decrease deepened with time, with a median reduction at 6-, 12-, 24-months and best response being 22%, 34%, 53%, and 56%, respectively. Overall, 65% of patients (n=75) achieved hepatic response, of whom 71 patients based on reduction in AP >50% and 4 patients for reaching AP within normal reference but not meeting >50% reduction in AP (40- 46% reduction in AP). The median time to hepatic response was 13.8 months, longer for patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) as their primary therapy compared to non-transplant therapies (24 vs 12.6 months, P=0.1). With a median follow-up of 105 months, 42 patients died (36.2% of the study cohort). The 2-, 5- and 10-year OS rates were 83%, 67%, and 61%, respectively. Achievement of hepatic response as early as 12 months and at best response was associated with a longer survival (Figure). Hepatic response was an independent prognostic factor in a multivariate analysis, after adjusting for other known prognostic factors (age, cardiac stage, hematologic response, and primary therapy). Predictors of hepatic response include higher baseline AP level, lower total bilirubin, hematologic ≥VGPR, and cardiac and renal responses, when applicable. Hepatic progression was borderline associated with inferior OS (5-year OS 47% vs 70% among non-progressors, P=0.08). Conclusions: Hepatic response and progression measured by the change in alkaline phosphatase are prognostic in AL amyloidosis. These criteria are independent of other prognostic markers, and thus may have clinical implications for patients' care.

Background Teclistamab, the first-in-class B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) x CD3 bispecific therapy was recently approved by the FDA for the treatment of triple-class exposed relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM) after ≥ 4 prior lines of therapy. Because of the risk of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS), the step-up dosing (SUD) of teclistamab is commonly administered in an inpatient setting among early users. Mayo Clinic has a well-established hospital-based outpatient program for novel immunotherapies. Since the FDA approval, teclistamab SUD has been administered as part of this program. Each dose of the SUD is administered in an outpatient setting, and the patient is given a remote monitoring kit to regularly measure vital signs and stay connected with the command center for signs and symptoms of CRS and ICANS throughout the entire SUD period. This study aimed to evaluate early safety outcomes and healthcare resource utilization during SUD in real-world (RW) patients who initiated teclistamab under the outpatient administration model across 3 Mayo Clinic locations (Rochester, MN, Phoenix/Scottsdale, AZ, Jacksonville, FL). Methods This was a retrospective study using Mayo Clinic's electronic medical records from October 26, 2022 to June 12, 2023. Eligible patients were adults diagnosed with MM who had initiated commercial teclistamab at any of the 3 Mayo Clinic locations. Patient characteristics, rates and severity of CRS and ICANS, as well as healthcare resource utilization during SUD were described. Time between teclistamab administration and patient check-out was reported for SUD and treatment doses, respectively. Results At the time of data cutoff, 39 patients received at least 1 teclistamab dose across the 3 locations (median age 67.2 years; male: 74%; White: 87%; non-Hispanic: 92%), including 36 patients who initiated teclistamab SUD directly in an outpatient setting. A total of 8 (21%) patients had MM with high-risk cytogenetics and 14 (36%) had prior exposure to other BCMA-targeted therapies. Prevalent comorbidities prior to receiving teclistamab included anemia (77%), hypertension (56%), lytic bone lesions (51%), neutropenia (49%), and hypogammaglobulinemia (41%). Renal impairment or failure was observed in 31% of the patients (Table 1). Almost all patients received acetaminophen (95%), diphenhydramine (95%), and dexamethasone (92%) as pre-medications on the same day as teclistamab administrations during SUD. Of the teclistamab doses with clinic time data, the majority (62%) of doses during SUD required 30 minutes to 1 hour of clinic time for monitoring between administration and check-out. After SUD, the clinic time for weekly treatment doses decreased to less than 30 minutes for most (79%) doses (Figure 1). In patients who completed SUD by data cutoff (n = 37), most patients (70%) received the SUD on a 3-day dose interval (i.e., day 1, 4, 7). The mean time between the first and third doses was 6.3 days. Among the 37 patients with complete SUD, 12 (32%) developed CRS. The highest CRS grade was grade 1 for 10 patients; 1 patient had a grade 2 CRS, and 1 patient had a grade 4 CRS. The patient with grade 4 CRS concurrently decompensated during a dialysis session and all symptoms were considered for CRS grading. A total of 6 patients had recurrent CRS, including 1 patient with 3 events during SUD. All patients who developed CRS during SUD (n=12) were admitted to the hospital for treatment, with a total of 19 admissions across all patients and a median length of stay of 1.7 days per admission. Among patients who were admitted for CRS (n=12), the majority were treated with acetaminophen (92%), diphenhydramine (83%) and dexamethasone (83%); tocilizumab was given to the 2 patients with CRS grade 2 or higher. Only 1 ICANS event (grade 2) was observed in 1 patient during SUD, after dose 3, and the patient was admitted to the hospital for treatment. Conclusion This study evaluated early RW safety outcomes of teclistamab under an outpatient administration model and found the CRS rate and severity to be comparable with other RW evidence generated from various data sources. Outcomes related to teclistamab SUD from Mayo Clinic supported the safety and feasibility of outpatient administration model as a potential option to reduce healthcare resource utilization and improve treatment experiences.

Background: Cytopenias are a common complication of and prolonged (beyond month 3 post CAR-T infusion), severe (grade 3 or higher) cytopenias can be difficult to manage. Stem cell boosts have been reported to restore hematopoiesis; however, stem cells would need to be available prior to CAR-T therapy for potential use post CAR-T. Most lymphoma patients and limited number of myeloma patients may have pre-collected stem cells in storage. Identifying patients at high risk for prolonged and severe cytopenia post CAR-T at the time of CAR-T evaluation (baseline), before leukapheresis, can help identify the patients for coordination of stem cell collection during CAR-T manufacturing and increase the likelihood that the collected stem cells would be used. In this study, we aim to identify clinical variables at the time of CAR-T evaluation, prior to leukapheresis, that are associated with severe cytopenias at month 3 post CAR-T infusion and identify patients who could be considered for pre-emptive stem cell collection prior to CAR-T therapy. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) who received CAR-T products at Mayo Clinic from 01/2016 to 06/2022. Patients with progressive disease in the first year post CAR-T were excluded from the analysis. Baseline (at CAR-T evaluation, prior to leukapheresis) variables were compared between those with and without severe cytopenia at month 3 post CAR-T. Severe cytopenias were defined as hemoglobin (Hg) < 8 g/dL, absolute neutrophil count (ANC) < 0.5 x 10 9/L, and/or platelet count (PLT) < 50 x 10 9/L. Statistically significant variables (p<0.05) by analysis were examined for statistical significance in multivariate analysis (MVA). Results: Among the 166 patients who received CAR-T (88 NHL, 78 MM) during the study period, 31 (18.67%) had a severe cytopenia at month . Twenty baseline variables were examined; HGB, PLT, ANC, and c-reactive protein (CRP) We devised a cytopenia risk score using 1 point each for Hg<10 or PLT<100k at baseline, with a range of 0 to 2. Demographics and clinical outcome by cytopenia risk score is shown in Table 1B. A higher percentage of patients with a score of 1 or 2 had a severe cytopenia at month 3 (Figure 1). In particular, there was a . In addition Conclusion: Baseline cytopenias before leukapheresis may identify patients with increased risk for severe cytopenias at month 3 post CAR-T. These patients can have continued slow hematopoietic recovery in the first year. Stem cell collection, if feasible, could be considered before CAR-T to alleviate post-CAR-T severe prolonged cytopenias.

Introduction: BCMA-directed CAR-T and Bispecific T-cell engager (BiTE) therapies have shown remarkable overall response rates in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). This has led to the approval of idecabtagene vicleucel, ciltacabtagene autoleucel and teclistamab by the FDA, EMA and other regulatory agencies. We performed a global survey on accessibility, practice patterns, and toxicity management of commercially available CAR-T and BiTE therapies. Methods: An online survey was completed by clinicians attending the International Myeloma Society's Immune Effector Cell Therapies in Multiple Myeloma Workshop, in-person or virtually, made available for 30 days after the meeting held in March 2023, Boston, MA. Results: 87 clinicians from 16 countries completed the survey, most practicing in an academic practice (86%) and in an urban environment (89%). Sixty-four percent of the respondents practice in North America followed by Europe (25.3%) including Germany, United Kingdom, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, France, Greece, and Cyprus, and 6.9% from Asia and 3.4% from Australia. Seventy-seven percent reported CAR-T cell therapy was approved in their country with 44.8% treating 1-5 patients and 14.9% treating >5 patients per month; 67% reported BiTE therapy was approved in their country with 14.9% treating >5 patients per month. Of evaluable responses (n = 40), 62% administered CAR-T therapy inpatient and 15% administered CAR-T therapy outpatient ≥ 50% of the time. Length of time between decision to treat with CAR-T therapy to infusion was 6-12 weeks for 42% of responders and <6 weeks for only 20%. Most (75%) reported inpatient administration of BiTE therapy step-up dosing; 17.5% reported outpatient step-up dosing administered ≥ 50% of the time. Use of institutional or practice SOPs for CAR-T and BiTE therapy patient selection was reported by 85% and 58%, respectively, with the factors influencing SOP outlined in Table 1. Of available CAR-T therapies, 53% prefer cilta-cel and 23% reported CAR-T therapy preference depended most on patients' co-morbidities/frailty (89%), timing of next available apheresis (67%), age (56%), CNS disease (44%) and other factors. Maintenance therapy after CAR-T therapy was reportedly used by 25% and 5% of respondents in 1-10% and 11-50% of their patients, respectively, to “maintain level of response achieved” (50%) or “achieve a deeper level of response” (25%). About half (43%) of the respondents reported using an SOP or particular criteria for secondary Hemophagocytic Lympho-Histiocytosis/Macrophage Activation Syndrome/CAR-related-HLH (sHLH/MAS/CarHLH) management that varied between the use of ASTCT Working Group IEC associated HLH-like syndrome Criteria (47%) (Hines 2023), CARTOX HLH Criteria (24%) (Neelapu 2017) and HLH-2004 criteria (6%). Tocilizumab was used as cytokine release syndrome (CRS) prophylaxis only by one responder. Keppra neurologic prophylaxis was used by 47.5% and 15% of responders for CAR-T and BiTE therapy, respectively. Delayed neurotoxicity with CAR-T was reported in 1-5% of patients by 57.5% of responders and 6-10% of patients by 15% of responders; most common manifestations were other movement/neuromuscular disorder (62%), nerve palsy (55%), and Parkinsonism (45%). Infectious prophylaxis was used to protect against HSV (92.5%), PJP (90%), bacterial pathogens (55%), fungal pathogens (60%), and IVIG (77.5%). However, criteria for infectious prophylaxis use varies widely incorporating IgG levels, infectious history, CD4+ count, B-cell aplasia and cytopenias (48.1 - 88.9%). Most respondents (46.3 - 86.5%) reported completing an infectious work-up including CMV, EBV, Hep B/C, and HIV ( Table 2). Conclusions: Trends of CAR-T and BiTE therapy use and patterns of concurrent prophylactic and supportive care in MM vary widely among academic centers across the globe, demonstrating a need for further understanding of toxicity pathogenesis, toxicity management and consistent guidelines. This survey also demonstrates the great unmet need for access beyond urban centers among the international myeloma community. Prospective studies and claims data analysis should be utilized to evaluate the longitudinal cost of care, quality of life, duration of response and management of infectious disease, neurological or related complications of CAR-T and bispecific TCE therapies.

Introduction Lymphoid malignancy (LM) is a heterogenous neoplasm with respect to biology, aggressiveness, and treatment with over 100 subtypes, including Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), and multiple myeloma (MM). Genome-wide association studies have identified common variants associated with risk of specific LM subtypes, but less is known about the contribution of rare inherited pathogenic variants (PV) in the genetic architecture of LM risk. Rare PV have been shown to contribute to the genetic architecture of solid tumor cancer risk, many of which have been found in genes that are important to the DNA-damage repair (DDR) pathway (e.g., BRCA1, BRCA1, ATM). Here, we investigated the prevalence of PV in cancer predisposition genes regularly included on multi-gene panel testing based on NCCN guidelines and correlated with risk of LM overall and by common subtypes. Methods In this association study, cases were newly diagnosed lymphomas (excluding chronic lymphocytic leukemia) from Mayo Clinic who were enrolled between 2002 and 2015 in the Lymphoma SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) and MM from Mayo Clinic enrolled primarily between 1998 and 2022 in a clinical registry. Controls were from the Mayo Clinic Biobank who were enrolled between 2009 and 2016, from which we excluded individuals with a history of hematologic malignancy. All participants provided a blood sample for whole exome sequencing, performed by Regeneron on an Illumina NovaSeq panel (mean coverage of 48X). Variants were called using GATK v4 and variant annotation was performed using BioR. All loss-of-function variants (i.e., nonsense, frameshift, and consensus splice sites) and pathogenic missense in 19 cancer predisposition genes with a minor allele frequency < 0.5% were included in the analyses. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between mutation status by gene (burden test) and risk of LM overall, and by subtype that had more than 5 mutation carriers. All analyses were adjusted for age (at diagnosis for cases and at enrollment for controls) and sex. Results A total of 6990 cases and 42432 controls were included. Median age was 63 years for both cases and controls (case range 18-94 years, control range 18-99 years). Males accounted for 58.5% (n=4090) of the cases and 41.7% (n=17762) of the controls. MM accounted for 31% (n=2138) of the cases, followed by diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL, n=1146) and follicular lymphoma (FL, n=1132) each accounting for 16% of cases. CHEK2 (1.0%), ATM (0.4%), BRCA2 (0.4%), and BRCA1 (0.3%) had the most PV carriers in controls; these frequencies are in the range of published control populations. A total of 1816 (3.7%) individuals had a PV across the 19 genes, with 4.7% of cases and 3.5% of controls carrying any PV (OR=1.34, 95% CI: 1.18-1.51). ATM (OR=1.86, 95% CI: 1.36-2.49), CHEK2 (OR=1.74, 95% CI: 1.42-2.13) and TP53 (OR=9.07, 95% CI: 4.51-18.87) were all significantly associated with increased risk of LM overall (Figure 1). When investigating subtypes (Table 1), CHEK2 (OR=1.93, 95% CI: 1.23-2.89) and TP53(OR=10.97, 95% CI: 3.06-31.43) were significantly associated with DLBCL. ATM (OR=2.22, 95% CI: 1.13-3.90) was significantly associated with FL. ATM (OR=1.97, 95% CI: 1.16-3.12), CHEK2 (OR=1.75, 95% CI: 1.24-2.41) and TP53 (OR=7.67, 95% CI: 2.43-20.72) were significantly associated with MM and ATM (OR=8.62, 95% CI: 4.47-15.12), NBN (OR=6.94, 95% CI: 2.41-15.76) and TP53 (OR=38.30, 95% CI: 10.27-116.69) were significantly associated with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). When subset to LM cases overall, there was no evidence of enrichment for young onset (age <60 years), male sex, or family history of hematologic malignancy between PV carriers and non-PV carriers. However, FL cases with an ATM PV tended to be less than 60 years (OR=3.21, P=0.09) compared to non- ATM PV carriers. Similarly, MM cases with a TP53 PV tended to be less than 60 years of age (OR=7.39, P=0.07) compared non-carriers. Discussion In this large case-control study, PV in established cancer predisposition genes were associated with increased risk of LM overall, demonstrating that rare inherited variants may play an important etiologic role. This study also suggests that PV in cancer predisposition genes may be subtype specific. These results will help inform LM risk for individuals who undergo genetic testing of cancer predisposition genes.

Introduction: Improvements in outcomes of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) depend on the use of regimens approved based on results from large phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrating their efficacy. However, many real-world (RW) patients would not have met the stringent RCTs inclusion criteria. Therefore, the effectiveness of these drugs in the RW setting is unknown. Understanding this efficacy-effectiveness gap is important to contextualize the expected outcomes in the current RW setting. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective population-based study to compare the efficacy versus effectiveness of registration RCTs with RW patients using standard of care (SoC) MM regimens for the primary outcomes of 1) progression free survival [PFS]; 2) overall survival [OS] and 3) serious adverse events (AEs). Methods: RW data was obtained from the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, an administrative database capturing all health records in the publicly funded health care system in Ontario, Canada. Adult patients treated between Jan 2007 to Dec 2020 with SoC regimens were included. Only regimens with corresponding registrational phase III RCTs which led to the public reimbursement in Ontario were included (lenalidomide/dex [Rd] and bortezomib/Rd [VRd] for newly diagnosed transplant ineligible patients, and relapsed MM (RRMM) regimens included carfilzomib/Rd [KRd], carfilzomib/dex [Kd], daratumumab/Rd [DRd], daratumumab/bortezomib/dex [DVd], pomalidomide/dex [Pd]). In the RW cohort, PFS was defined as the time from initiation of index regimen to death, initiation of subsequent MM treatment, or last follow-up, and patients remaining on the index regimen as last follow up were censored. Kaplan-Meier curves from pivotal phase 3 RCTs were manually digitized to provide individual patient-level estimates of PFS and OS. Meta-analyses were performed to compare the gap of PFS and OS outcomes of RW versus RCT patients, and effect estimates were summarized using hazard ratios (HR). The frequency of serious AE data was abstracted from published RCTs. Given that serious AEs in RCTs would have resulted in hospitalization, hospital admission during treatment with the index regimen was used as a surrogate for serious AEs in the RW cohort. Differences in RW and RCT safety outcomes were reported descriptively. Results & Discussion: A total of 3951 RW MM patients, treated with 7 standard of care MM regimens, were included. Baseline characteristics of patients in the RW and RCT cohorts are shown in table 1. Overall, patients in the RW cohort were older than in the RCTs. For relapsed regimens, there was a longer time between MM diagnosis and start of the regimen in the real-world versus RCT. With regards to the efficacy-effectiveness gap, MM patients treated in routine practise in the RW had a worse PFS despite overestimated of RW PFS compared to highly selected RCT patients for 6 of the 7 MM regimens evaluated, with a pooled HR of 1.44 (95% CI 1.34-1.54) in the meta-analysis (Figure 1A). Similarly, RW patients had a worse OS compared to RCT patients treated with 6 of the 7 regimens, with a pooled HR of 1.75 (95% ci 1.63-1.88) in the meta-analysis (Figure 1B). RRMM patients in the RW had higher rates of prior lenalidomide exposure compared to RCT patients. The only regimen which showed a trend towards performing better in the RW as compared to RCTs was Pd. The reason for this is likely multifactorial but perhaps patients included in the MM-003 RCT may have had more refractory MM (given the higher prior immunomodulatory drug exposure and longer time from diagnosis to treatment among Pd RCT patient) compared to RW patients in this study. With regards to safety, the percentage of patients with inpatient hospitalization during treatment in the real-world cohort and reported serious AEs in RCT were comparable (VRD 57% vs not reported [NR]; Rd 64% vs NR; Kd 57% vs 59%; KRd 53% vs 60%; DVd 36% vs NR; DRd 46% vs 49%; Pd 59% vs 61%). Conclusion: This is one the largest population-level studies highlighting the significant efficacy-effectiveness gap between registrational RCTs and RW usage of these regimens, with RW patients experiencing 44% worse PFS and 75% worse OS compared to RCT patients. Our data emphasize the importance of ongoing evaluation of RW data to contextualize effectiveness and toxicity of selected regimens in the clinic, and better inform both clinicians and patients for shared treatment decision making.