Citations

Introduction: BTK inhibitors (BTKis) are approved for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM), mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), and marginal zone lymphoma (MZL). Disease that progresses on BTKis often has BTK mutations that lead to treatment (tx) resistance; novel BTK-targeting agents that overcome BTKi resistance are needed. BGB-16673 is a heterobifunctional small molecule that binds to BTK and E3 ligase, resulting in BTK degradation via ubiquitination. In preclinical models, BGB-16673 degraded wild-type (WT) BTK and known covalent and noncovalent BTKi-resistant mutant proteins, leading to tumor suppression. Methods: Pts with R/R CLL, WM, MCL, MZL, non-germinal center B-cell diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), follicular lymphoma (FL), or Richter transformation (RT) were eligible for this open-label, first-in-human, phase 1 trial (BGB-16673-101; NCT05006716). Pts must have received ≥2 prior therapies (≥1 for RT) and have an ECOG performance status of 0-2 and adequate end-organ function. In the US and Australia, pts must have received a covalent BTKi (cBTKi) if approved for their disease. BGB-16673 was dosed daily by mouth in 28-day cycles. Escalation using a Bayesian optimal interval design with 6 dose levels (50-600 mg once daily) is planned. Primary objectives are to assess safety/tolerability and establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose. Key secondary objectives are to assess pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics (PD), and preliminary antitumor activity. Safety was assessed according to CTCAE v5.0 (all pts) and iwCLL hematologic toxicity criteria (pts with CLL). Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were assessed in the first 4 weeks. Response was assessed per Lugano criteria for all except CLL (iwCLL 2018 criteria) and WM (iwWM-6 criteria). Results: As of May 26, 2023, 26 pts (10 CLL, 4 MCL, 2 MZL, 4 WM, 4 FL, 1 DLBCL, 1 RT) were enrolled at 5 dose levels (50 mg, 4; 100 mg, 9; 200 mg, 9; 350 mg, 3; 500 mg, 1). Median age was 70.5 y (range, 25-83). Median number of prior therapies was 3.5 (range, 2-9), including cBTKis (n=21; 10 CLL, 4 WM, 4 MCL, 1 MZL, 1 RT, 1 DLBCL), BCL2 inhibitors (n=12; 9 CLL, 2 WM, 1 RT), and noncovalent BTKis (ncBTKis; n=4; 2 CLL, 1 WM, 1 FL). In CLL, del17p/ TP53 mutation (n=8) and unmutated IGHV (n=7) were frequent. Median follow-up was 3.5 mo (range, 0.2-13.9). MTD was not reached. Treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were reported by 88.5% of pts (grade [gr] ≥3, 46.2%; serious, 38.5%). The most common TEAEs were contusion (30.8%; no gr ≥3), pyrexia (23.1%; no gr ≥3), neutropenia/neutrophil count decreased (23.1%; gr ≥3, 15.4%), and lipase increased (23.1%; gr ≥3, 3.8%; all transient and asymptomatic). No hypertension or atrial fibrillation was observed. One pt died from sepsis with possible disease progression. No discontinuations due to AEs occurred. Two pts had dose reductions due to TEAEs (gr 3 hematuria with urinary tract infection and recurrent urothelial carcinoma and gr 2 arthralgia). One DLT occurred in 1 pt at 200 mg (gr 3 maculopapular rash on day 27; after 5-day dose hold, assigned dose was recommenced with persistent gr 1 rash). BGB-16673 exposure increased in a dose-dependent manner. At steady state with doses ≥50 mg daily, BGB-16673 exposure exceeded the calculated half maximal degradation concentration for WT and cysteine 481-mutated BTK for the dosing interval. Preliminary PD data showed deep, sustained reductions in BTK protein levels in peripheral blood and tumor tissue, even at the lowest dose. Most CLL pts experienced lymphocytosis during the first 3 cycles of tx. Twenty of 26 pts (77%) remain on therapy (discontinuation: 4 progressive disease, 2 withdrawal). Of 18 response-evaluable pts, 12 (67%) responded (5/6 CLL, 1/3 MCL, 2/2 MZL, 3/4 WM, 1/2 FL, 0/1 DLBCL; 1 CR in MCL, all others had PR; Figure), including pts who received a cBTKi (n=10) and an ncBTKi (n=2). Responses started at the lowest dose level. All responders remain in response, the longest responder remaining on tx for 60 weeks. Conclusions: Preliminary data from this ongoing, first-in-human study of the novel BTK degrader BGB-16673 demonstrate a tolerable safety profile and clinical responses in heavily pretreated pts with B-cell malignancies, including those with BTKi-resistant disease. Substantial reductions in BTK protein levels in peripheral blood and tumor tissue were also observed, demonstrating proof-of-concept of a strong, on-target effect.

Background: Non-transplant treatment options in myelofibrosis (MF) are palliative in scope and include JAK2 inhibitors (JAKi): ruxolitinib, fedratinib, pacritinib, and momelotinib. All four JAKi are effective in reducing spleen size and alleviating symptoms. In addition, pacritinib and momelotinib exhibit erythropoietic effect, attributed to alleviation of ineffective erythropoiesis through inhibition of activin A receptor type-I. In the current study, we sought to identify molecular or clinical predictors of response to pacritinib in MF patients treated outside of clinical trials. Methods: The current study was conducted under an institutional review board approved minimum risk protocol that allowed retrospective collection and analysis of data from patient records (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Scottsdale, AZ; and Jacksonville, FL). Anemia response assignment was restricted to patients with baseline hemoglobin level of <10 g/dL and required, for transfusion dependent cases, achieving transfusion independence and, for transfusion-independent cases, an increase in hemoglobin of ≥1.5 g/dL, both sustained for a minimum 2 months; spleen response was clinically vetted but was also supported by radiologic imaging when available and required a ≥50% decrease in palpable splenomegaly for spleen size >10 cm or the spleen becoming not palpable for a spleen size 5-10 cm at base line. Symptom response was adjudicated by central review and required a marked or moderate improvement to qualify as response; because of the retrospective nature of the study, symptom burden assessment by formal criteria was not attempted. Leukocyte cutoff level used for response analysis was determined by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Conventional statistical methods were applied using JMP Pro 16.0.0 software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). Results: We identified 36 NGS-annotated patients with MF who received pacritinib therapy between April,2022 and June,2023 (median age 66 years; 56% males). Twenty-five (69%) patients had failed previous JAKi therapy while 11 (31%) were JAKi-naïve. Eighteen (50%) patients were transfusion-dependent while the median (range) counts were 106 x 10(9)/L (14-578) for platelets, 6.6 x 10(9)/L (1.2-112.8) for leukocytes, and 9 x 10(9)/L (5-12.4) for hemoglobin; leukocyte count was ≥15 x 10(9)/L in 11 (31%) patients and hemoglobin <10 g/dL in 29 (81%). Karyotype was unfavorable in 12 (34%) patients. Driver mutation distribution was JAK2 55%, CALR 27%, MPL 11%, and triple-negative 5%. NGS revealed mutations involving ASXL1 36%, U2AF1 13%, IDH1 13%, SF3B1 13%, K/NRAS 5%, SRSF2 8%, and EZH2 5%. Pacritinib was started at 200 mg BID in 9 (25%) patients and at lower doses in the remaining. Median duration of pacritinib therapy was 4 months (range 1-15). Anemia response was documented in 5 (17%) of the 29 patients with baseline hemoglobin <10 g/dL, spleen response in 12 of 28 evaluable (42%) and symptom response in 18 (50%). Improvement in symptoms was always accompanied by both anemia (p=0.008) and spleen (p=0.01) response; by contrast, there was no significant correlation between anemia and spleen responses (p=0.9) (Table 1). Significant correlations with molecular or clinical variables were mostly apparent for spleen response, which was more likely to occur in the absence of ASXL1 mutation (61% vs 10%; p=0.006), with leukocyte count <15 x 10 (9)/L (55% vs 0%; p=0.005), and in JAKi-naïve vs previously-exposed cases (75% vs 30%; p=0.03; Table 1); significance was sustained by all three risk factors during multivariable analysis; the prognostic impact of ASXL1 (p=0.02 vs 0.01) and leukocytosis (p=0.01 vs 0.07) was apparent in both JAKi-naïve vs JAKi-exposed cases. Anemia response was non-significantly (p=0.27) higher in transfusion-independent (27%) vs dependent (11%) cases, at baseline, and was more likely (p=0.04) to occur in patients starting at lower dose levels. Treatment-emergent adverse events included diarrhea 44%, nausea/vomiting 19%, and grade-3/4 thrombocytopenia 38% or neutropenia (11%). Conclusions: ASXL1 mutation and leukocytosis (>15 x 10 9/L) are independently associated with inferior spleen response to pacritinib, in both JAKi-naïve and JAKi-exposed myelofibrosis. These observations are important for individualized treatment selection.

Introduction: Preclinical studies have suggested synergism between lenalidomide (LEN) and ibrutinib (IBR) in multiple myeloma (MM). Both downregulate IRF4, a master transcriptional factor that regulates myeloma cell survival. Single agent oral IBR combined with dexamethasone proved well tolerated and active in advanced, steroid refractory relapsed MM as part of a large Phase1/2 study in 60 patients, with durable stabilization and minimal response seen in most evaluable patients (Richardson PG et al, BJH 2018). LEN is considered a standard of care in newly diagnosed MM, as maintenance and in relapsed disease, and a backbone of oral therapy in the MM treatment paradigm (Laubach JP et al, Leukemia 2016). Methods: We therefore conducted a 3+3 phase I trial to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of IBR in combination with LEN + dexamethasone (DEX) in patients with relapsed/refractory (RR) MM who had at least 2 prior lines of therapy. Three dose levels (DL) were planned. Cycle length was 28 days. IBR was administered orally daily at 560mg on DL1-2 and 840mg on DL3, LEN orally days 1-21 at 15mg on DL1 and 25mg on DL2-3, and DEX orally days 1, 8, 15, and 22 at 40 mg if age < 75 or 20 mg if ≥75 for DL1-3. Patients with GFR ≥ 30 and < 60 were treated according to manufacturer's instructions with lenalidomide dosed at 10mg/d. Dose limiting toxicities (DLT) included grade 4 thrombocytopenia; grade 4 neutropenia lasting more than 5 days or febrile neutropenia; grade 4 nausea, vomiting or diarrhea; grade 3 thrombocytopenia with bleeding or platelet transfusion; grade 3-4 hyperglycemia or thrombotic/embolic event, treatment delays ≥ 21 days for toxicity; and treatment related death. Due to changes in standard of care during the study, eligibility was modified to allow the enrollment of patients with RRMM who had at least 1 prior line of therapy. Response was assessed using IMWG/Uniform Criteria. Results: Fourteen patients (DL1-6 pts; DL2-3 pts; DL3-5 pts) registered to the study from March 2019 to May 2023, prior to its closure due to slow accrual. One patient on DL3 cancelled participation prior to start of treatment due to disease progression (PD). The remaining 13 patients are included in summary of toxicities and response but 2 patients on DL3 are excluded from determination of MTD due to discontinuing cycle 1 treatment due to COVID and receiving 280 mg/day of IBR instead of assigned 840 mg/day dose during cycle 1, respectfully. Twelve patients were evaluable for response. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 3 (range: 2-9), reflecting a heavily pretreated relapsed and refractory population. One of the 6 patient on DL1 developed a DLT, grade 3 non-viral hepatitis. None of the 3 patients on DL2 or the 2 patients on DL3 had a DLT. One patient on DL1 remains on treatment with stable disease for 42+ cycles. The median number of cycles administered was 3 (range: 1-42+). Severe toxicities reported included grade 3 lymphocytopenia (3), anemia (2), alanine aminotransferase increase (1), aspartate aminotransferase increase (1), blood bilirubin increase (1), hypocalcemia (1), hypokalemia (1) hypophosphatemia (1), febrile neutropenia (1), chronic kidney disease (1), non-viral hepatitis (1), soft tissue infection (1), and fatigue (1); grade 4 lymphocytopenia (1), and grade 5 sepsis (1). End of treatment reasons included: PD (7), toxicity (2), death [soft tissue infection that turned into sepsis considered to be likely related to DEX] (1), and concomitant conditions (2). Stable disease (SD) or better was achieved in 10 of 12 evaluable patients (83%), including one patient who achieved disease control for over 3.5 years. One patient (8%) on DL3 had a complete response (CR) but stopped treatment after 2 cycles due to reversible toxicity and comorbid conditions, based upon physician advice and patient choice. Conclusions: The combination of lenalidomide with Ibrutinib as an all-oral approach in RR MM proved feasible and generally tolerable, with the majority of discontinuation seen in this Phase I study due to disease progression. No COVID related - mortality was seen. SD or better was achieved in 83% of patients, including one CR. Potential future directions include combination approaches with next generation IMids such as pomalidomide, as well as other orally bioavailable novel agents with potent immune activating properties, such as CelMoDs. Support: AFT; Pharmacyclics; Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03702725

Background: Anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CART) therapy is a standard of care in patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory (RR) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). However, it remains underutilized in elderly pts due to limited efficacy and safety data. We therefore evaluated real world outcomes of CART in such pts. Methods: Seven academic centers participated in this retrospective study. Pts aged ≥65 years with RR LBCL who received a commercial CART product were included. Baseline characteristics, treatment data, CART toxicity, and clinical outcomes were collected. Progression-free survival (PFS; time from infusion to disease progression or death) and overall survival (OS; time from infusion to death from any cause) were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method. Cumulative incidences of non-relapse mortality (NRM) and disease relapse/progression were estimated accounting for competing risks. Statistical analyses were performed in JMP v15 and XLSTAT v2022.1.2. Results: 209 pts were identified. Baseline characteristics and treatment pattern are shown in Table. Median age at infusion was 71 years (range 65-89), and 25 (12%) were ≥80 years. 131 (63%) were male, 188 (90%) were white, and 27 (13%) had ECOG PS of ≥2. The median HCT-CI was 1 (range 0-6), and 39 (22%) pts had a score of ≥3. 165 (84%) had stage III-IV disease, 131 (70%) had extranodal involvement, 24 (18%) had bulky disease, and 24 (11%) had high grade B-cell lymphoma (HGBL; double- or triple-hit lymphoma, n=15; HGBL, NOS, n=9). The median number of prior lines of therapy was 2 (range 1-8), and 99 (48%) pts had ≥3 prior lines of therapy, 45 (22%) had prior bendamustine, and 44 (21%) had prior stem cell transplant (SCT; auto-SCT, n=41; allo-SCT, n=2; both auto- and allo-SCT, n=1). Bridging therapy was given to 100 (52%) pts; among those, 57 had chemotherapy, 20 had radiotherapy, 6 had both chemotherapy and radiotherapy, 10 had lenalidomide-based regimen, and 7 had CD20 antibody and/or corticosteroids. Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) was most frequently used (63%, n=131), followed by lisocabtagene maraleucel (liso-cel) (24%, n=49) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) (13%, n=27). Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) occurred in 75% of pts, and a minority (6%) had grade ≥3. Immune effector cell associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) occurred in 55%, and 29% had grade ≥3. The management of CRS and ICANS included corticosteroids in 101 (49%) pts, tocilizumab in 116 (56%) pts, and other biologic agents (anakinra, siltuximab, basiliximab) in 8 (4%) pts. Day 30 response was evaluable in 195 pts with an objective response rate (ORR) of 84%, and a complete response rate (CR) of 52%. 82% of the responders continued to have a response at 3 month follow up. The ORR/CR rates were 86%/53% for axi-cel, 64%/44% for tisa-cel, and 89%/52% for liso-cel, respectively. At a median follow up of 19.1 months (95% CI 16.1-23.6) after infusion, the median PFS was 6.7 months (95% CI 5.1-11.5), with 6- and 12-month PFS rates of 54% (95% CI 47-61) and 43% (95% CI 35-50), respectively. The median OS was 16.5 months (95% CI 13.2-26.7), and the 6-and 12-month OS rates were 70% (95% CI 64-77) and 61% (95% CI 54-68), respectively. The NRM rate was 17% (95% CI 11-24) at 1 year, primarily due to infections including 5 COVID-19 related deaths. In univariate analysis, ECOG PS ≥2, bulky disease, elevated LDH, and the need for bridging therapy were associated with inferior PFS and OS. No significant difference in PFS and OS was seen based on age at infusion with a median PFS of 6.4 vs 9.6 vs 6.4 vs 6.0 months ( P=0.93) (Figure) and OS of 16.4 vs 19.2 vs 28.5 vs 12.7 months ( P=0.85) in age groups ≥65-69 vs ≥70-74 vs ≥75-79 vs ≥80-89. In addition, there was no statistically significant difference in PFS and OS based on type of CART with a median PFS of 6.4 vs 5.6 vs 12.7 months ( P=0.16) and OS of 15.1 vs vs 16.1 vs NR months ( P=0.24) in pts treated with axi-cel vs tisa-cel vs liso-cel. Conclusions: In this large multicenter study of elderly pts with RR LBCL, CART therapy demonstrated favorable efficacy and safety profile comparable to that in pivotal registration trials. Survival outcomes appeared similar regardless of patient age, including those aged ≥80 years, and type of CART product used. Similar to younger pts, high tumor burden and poor performance status at CART infusion were associated with inferior survival. This analysis confirms that older pts should not be excluded from receiving CART therapy solely due to chronological age.

Introduction HMAs are the only approved therapy for CMML. In order to improve response rates and survival, the addition of VEN has been utilized in both CMML and after blast transformation (CMML-BT) with conflicting results in small single center studies. To clarify the role of upfront HMA+VEN in CMML and CMML-BT, we performed a large multicenter analysis. Methods We included patients with HMA-naïve CMML and CMML-BT treated with combination HMA and VEN from 4 academic centers. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) with secondary outcomes including overall response rate (ORR) by 2015 MDS/MPN IWG criteria for CMML and 2022 ELN criteria for CMML-BT. To better appreciate the benefit of adding VEN to HMA treatment, we also performed 1:1 propensity score matched (PSM) analysis of patients treated with HMA alone as upfront therapy for CMML or CMML-BT. Matching was based on age, sex, ECOG performance status, CPSS-Mol, blood counts, peripheral and bone marrow blasts. Results Eighty-nine patients were treated with frontline HMA+VEN, 51 CMML and 38 CMML-BT (5 had received HMA alone for prior CMML). The median age was 71 years, 70% were male, and 83% had ECOG 0-1. Among CMML patients, 55% had MP-CMML subtype, 65% had CMML-2 and 12%, 30%, 58% were CPSS-mol intermediate-1, intermediate-2 and high risk, respectively. In the entire cohort, ASXL1 (63%), TET2 (47%), SRSF2 (39%) and RUNX1 (27%) were the most commonly mutated genes and 55% of patients harbored a RAS mutation ( KRAS [20%], NRAS [18%], CBL [13%], NF1 [11%], PTPN11 [9%]). For HMA combination partner, 46 (52%) were treated with azacitidine, 35 (39%) with decitabine, and 8 (9%) with both during their VEN course. During a median follow-up time of 15.8 months (mos) 52 patients (58%) died: 23 (45%) with CMML and 29 (76%) with CMML-BT. Among CMML patients, the ORR was 90%, including complete remission (CR) in 22%, complete cytogenic remission (CCR) in 4%, optimal marrow response (CMR) in 50%, and partial marrow response (PMR) in 6%. The OS of CMML patients was 25.1 mo (95% CI 15.7 - NR). A PSM population of HMA patients matched to HMA+VEN treated patients showing similar baseline characteristics. ORR was significantly higher with HMA+VEN (95%) as compared those treated with HMA alone (46%), p < 0.001. However, there was no significant OS difference between HMA+VEN vs HMA alone (19.1 mos vs 19.1 mos, p = 0.85, Figure 1). For CMML-BT patients, the ORR of HMA+VEN was 81% including CR in 17%, CR with partial hematologic recover (CRh) in 3%, CR with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi) in 28%, morphologic leukemia-free state (MLFS) in 22% and partial response (PR) in 11%. The OS of CMML-BT patients was 8 mos (95% CI 4.6 - 26.2). A PSM population of CMML-BT patients treated with HMA alone showed a significantly increased ORR with HMA+VEN (82% vs 40%, p = 0.039). However, there was no difference in OS (7.49 mos vs 9.26 mos, p = 0.83, Figure 2). Among HMA-VEN treated patients, achievement of a CR was associated with an improved OS in the CMML (HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.13 - 0.75) and CMML-BT (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.19 - 0.74). No predictors of response were identified, including the presence of a RAS mutation. In terms of safety, 7 patients (7.9%) had a grade 3/4 (G3/4) neutropenic infection and 2 patients (2.2%) had a G3/4 hemorrhagic event while being treated with HMA+VEN. A total of 29 patients went on to receive allogeneic transplant (alloSCT): 22 (43%) with CMML and 7 (18%) with CMML-BT. CMML patients who underwent alloSCT after HMA+VEN were younger as compared to non-transplanted patients (64 vs 74 years, p < 0.0001), but had otherwise similar baseline characteristics including stage, CPSS-mol category and prevalence of RAS mutations. Similarly, CMML-BT patients bridged to alloSCT were younger (66 vs 74 years, p < 0.002) and had a better ECOG performance status (p = 0.047). Of patients who received alloSCT, 10 patients (34%) died, 5 with CMML and 5 with CMML-BT. The median OS after alloSCT was 26.7 mo. Conclusions Although the use of VEN with HMA in the upfront treatment of CMML and AML secondary to CMML results in higher response rates compared to HMA alone, this combination does not improve survival based on this multi-center PSM analysis. The current sample size of CMML-BT may limit detection of OS differences between treatment groups. The role of VEN to reduce blasts and serve as a bridge to alloSCT, particularly after HMA failure, requires further investigation in larger studies in both the CMML and CMML-BT populations.

Light chain amyloidosis (AL) is a rare, progressive, and often fatal protein misfolding disease. AL is caused by aberrant clonal plasma cell proliferation, where excess amounts of amyloidogenic monoclonal Free Light Chain (FLC) are produced, secreted into the circulation, misfolded and deposted as amyloid fibrils in various vital organs, such as the heart, kidney, liver, and nerves. The involed lambda (λ) FLC accounts for ~75% of all AL cases. Amyloidogenic FLCs (aFLCs) are believed to be the toxic species contributing to AL disease pathology. Specific quantification of aFLCs can provide critical guidance in clinical practice but has been hampered by the LCs sequence diversity as well as the lack of tests that are able to differentiate between circulating normal polyclonal FLCs and aFLCs. Contrary to non-amyloidogenic, aFLCs are kinetically and oftentimes thermodynamically unstable. aFLCs are prone to misfolding and formation of pathogenic conformations such as non-native structures, proteolytic fragments, soluble aggregates, and amyloid fibrils. We exploited such characteristics of aFLCs by applying limited proteolysis using Proteinase K, where less stable λ aFLC proteins readily yield a 23KDa fragment composed of the homodimeric LC constant domain (dLCCD) linked by a disulfide bond. Formation of the dLCCD fragment reveals a highly conserved, novel, cryptic epitope at the N-terminus of the fragment. We have generated monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that explicitly bind to such novel epitope and developed immunoassays for the specific detection and sensitive quantification of λ aFLCs in biological samples. Western blot or Meso Scale Discovery (MSD) analyses were employed to detect and quantify dLCCD signal using the dLCCD mAbs on plasma samples from randomly selected, treatment naïve and λ-restricted cases with biopsy-proven AL amyloidosis before and after exposure to optimized proteolytic conditions. Tissue amyloid deposits of λ-type were confirmed in most AL cases. Informed consent for data and plasma sample collections were obtained from the Institutional Review Boards and in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Multiple myeloma (MM) plasma samples of unknown LC restriction type, treatment or amyloid deposits status and normal volunteer control samples were purchased from BioIVT (USA). A set of representative results based on three runs are shown in Fig. 1. As little as 2 µL of biofluid was used for each assay. Upon limited proteolysis, dLCCD signal was detected in 32 of 35 AL plasmas, including two samples from patients with AL-associated IgM lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma (LPL). Of the three dLCCD negative AL samples, one presented with monoclonal IgAλ, and two cases were bi-clonal on serum immunofixation electrophoresis. dLCCD signal was not detected in 18 of 19 MM plasma samples. Similarly, dLCCD signal was undetectable in 23 normal plasmas. Overall, the dLCCD signals detected in AL plasmas were 10x-200x above that of normal control and most MM samples (Fig. 1). The low limit of quantification of the MSD assay was ~0.4 ng/dL (1.4 pM), with >500x dynamic range, enabling sensitive and robust quantification of λ aFLCs in biosamples. Analysis of Proteinase K recognition potential of the cleavage site of 389 λ LC sequences from the AL-Base, a database of amyloidogenic LC sequences (https://wwwapp.bumc.bu.edu/BEDAC_ALBase/) predicted that the dLCCD assay can detect λ aFLCs in up to 99% of λ AL patients, irrespective of the FLC sequences. This was confirmed with the 100% detection rate of the dLCCD signal in a validation cohort of 35 additional monoclonal λ-restricted AL samples. In summary, we have developed a quantitative blood-based immunoassay that is sensitive and highly specific for λ aFLC irrespective of the protein sequences. The preliminary data demonstrates the potential of our assay for AL diagnostics. Additional clinical applications for future exploration will include (i) monitoring and early detection of AL amyloidosis in plasma cell dyscrasias (monoclonal gammopathy of unknown significance, MM, and smoldering MM) and lymphoproliferative disorders, including LPL; and (ii) clinical management of patients with AL amyloidosis via the assessment and monitoring of minimal residual disease and therapeutic responses. The utility of the dLCCD assay in the quantification of λ aFLCs in bi-clonal AL cases warrants further investigation.

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.

Introduction: Despite the development of advanced treatment options, multiple myeloma (MM) remains an incurable disease. Most MM patients relapse and require further treatments. B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) targeted immunotherapy is a novel MM therapy class that is now available to heavily pre-treated relapse/refractory MM (R/R MM) patients, who were triple class exposed (TCE) to proteasome inhibitors (PIs), immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs), and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies. As BCMA therapies continue to be further utilized and become an integral part of MM treatment, the proportion of TCE patients who are also BCMA exposed (TCE+BCMA exposed) is expected to grow. However, the clinical outcomes of TCE+BCMA exposed RRMM patients have not been previously assessed. The objective of this study was to evaluate the real-world outcomes of TCE+BCMA exposed MM patients who started a subsequent LOT, describing their characteristics, treatment patterns, and clinical outcomes. Subgroups of penta-drug exposed (at least two PIs, at least two IMiDs, and at least one anti-CD38) patients, as well as White and African American patients were also evaluated as penta-drug exposure status and race were known to impact clinical outcomes. Methods: Adult patients with MM who were TCE+BCMA exposed and started a subsequent LOT starting from July 03, 2019 (when additional new treatment options became available) were selected from the Komodo Healthcare Map (a US claims dataset) and were followed until the earliest of death, last claim, or end of study period (December 31, 2022). Index date was defined as the start date of the subsequent LOT following TCE and BCMA exposure. Descriptive statistics were provided for patient characteristics and treatment patterns. Clinical outcomes including time to treatment discontinuation or death (TTD) and time to next treatment or death (TTNT) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: A total of 344 TCE+BCMA exposed patients, who received the next LOT were included in the study, including 152 (44.2%) patients who were penta-drug exposed before index, 57 (16.6%) African American, and 185 (53.8%) White patients. Key baseline demographic characteristics and treatment history for the overall group and the three subgroups are listed in Table 1. The mean (SD) and median number of prior LOTs for the overall group before index date were 5.7 (1.7) and 6.0, respectively. The most prevalent prior treatments before the index date for the overall group were daratumumab (99.1%), belantamab mafadotin (91.9%), pomalidomide (84.3%), carfilzomib (83.1 %), bortezomib (76.2%) and lenalidomide (72.1%). Excluding corticosteroids, the most frequently used index treatments (i.e., treatment used post TCE+BCMA exposure) were carfilzomib- (21.9%), bortezomib- (20.8%), pomalidomide- (18.3%), and belantamab mafadotin- (18.3%) based regimens. The median (95% confidence interval [CI]) TTD was 3.7 (3.3, 4.4) months, and the median (95% CI) TTNT was 6.4 (5.5, 7.6) months. TTD and TTNT estimates for the three subgroups are listed in Table 2. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first real-world study of treatment patterns and outcomes for TCE+BCMA exposed MM patients who started a subsequent LOT. The findings showed that this group of heavily pretreated MM patients were often retreated with the same therapies or therapies in the same classes, as they have limited effective treatment options. TCE+BCMA exposed patients exhibited poor clinical outcomes, as demonstrated by the rapid treatment discontinuation and moving on to the next treatment shortly after initial treatment. Many patients were already penta-drug exposed, and they appear to have worse clinical outcomes than the overall patient group. A shorter TTD was observed, and a trend for shorter TTNT was observed among African American patients than White patients. The findings highlight the continued need for effective treatments for heavily treated MM patients and particularly those with poor outcomes.

Background: According to the international consensus classification (ICC), diagnosis of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) with del(5q) requires presence of i) del5q, alone or associated with no more than one other cytogenetic abnormality, exclusive of -7/del(7q), ii) <5% bone marrow (BM) and <2% circulating blasts, and iii) the absence of “multi-hit” TP53 ( Arber et al. Blood 2022;140: 1200). We have recently reported on TP53 variant allele frequency (VAF) ≥22% being the sole genetic predictor of inferior survival in MDS-del(5q) (Fleti. et al. AJH 2023;98:E76). In the current study, we examined the additional prognostic impact of therapy-related setting, in the context of TP53 VAF and other risk factors. Methods : The current study included patients with MDS-del(5q) who were seen at the Mayo Clinic or Moffitt Cancer Center, USA. Diagnosis of MDS-del(5q) and therapy-related qualification was according to ICC criteria ( Arber et al. Blood 2022;140: 1200), with the exception that patients with biallelic or multi-hit TP53 were included to allow unbiased analysis of impact on prognosis. Patient selection was based on availability of mutation information from next-generation sequencing (NGS). The latter was assessed either at diagnosis or at different time points during the disease course, but at least 3 months before leukemic transformation. Otherwise, all analyses, including estimation of overall and leukemia-free survival, were based on variables collected at time of initial diagnosis of MDS-del(5q). TP53 mutation VAF threshold of 22% was considered based on our previously published report cited above. Age cutoff at 67 years was determined by ROC analysis. Conventional statistical methods were applied using JMP Pro 16.0.0 software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). Results: A total of 210 patients (median age 72 years; 65% females), meeting the above-stipulated criteria for MDS-del(5q), were considered: 172 primary and 38 therapy-related. Table 1 outlines clinical and laboratory characteristics obtained at the time of diagnosis: 42% were transfusion-dependent, 69% had hemoglobin level <10 g/dL, 30% platelet count <150 x 10(9)/L, and 15% carried additional cytogenetic abnormality. NGS data performed either at diagnosis or at least 3 months prior to leukemic transformation was available in 146 patients; the most frequent mutations were TP53 (21%), SF3B1 (16%), DNMT3A (12%), TET2 (12%), ASXL1 (10%), and JAK2 (7%) (Table 1). At a median follow-up of 3.9 years (range 0.002-18.5) for living patients, 95 (45%) deaths and 34 (16%) leukemic transformations were recorded; treatment undertaken included lenalidomide in 162 (77%) cases. NGS data-exclusive multivariable analysis that included all 210 patients identified therapy-related setting (p<0.01; HR 2.9; Figure 1a), age >67 years (p=0.01; HR 1.8), transfusion-dependency (p=0.04; HR 1.5), and platelet count <150 x 10(9)/L (p=0.03; HR 1.6), as independent predictors of inferior survival. The significant effect of age and platelet count was sustained when analysis was limited to patients with primary MDS-del(5q) but lost when applied to therapy-related disease. NGS data-inclusive multivariable analysis, which was applicable to the subset of 146 patients, identified, as risk factors, therapy-related setting (p<0.01; HR 2.3) and TP53 VAF ≥22% (p<0.01; HR 2.4; Figure 1b) while age >67 years sustained borderline significance (p=0.07; HR 1.8). Figure 1c depicts survival data based on the presence or absence of TP53 VAF ≥22% and therapy-related qualification; low-risk with no risk factors (N=112; median survival 11.7 years; 5/10-year survival 73%/52%) and high-risk with one or both risk factors (N=34; median survival 4 years; 5/10-year survival 42%/14%); leukemia-free survival was affected by TP53 VAF ≥22% (p<0.01) but not therapy-related setting (p=0.13). Conclusions : The current study highlights TP53 VAF and therapy-related setting as the most prominent risk factors for survival in MDS-del(5q) and proposes a simple risk model that distinguishes patients with a projected 10-year survival that exceeds 50%, in the absence of both risk factors, and plummets to 14%, in the presence of one of the two risk factors. Accordingly, allogeneic stem cell transplant might be deferred in the former instance while it should be pursued sooner than later, in the latter instance.

Purpose/Introduction: Patients with cancer and venous thromboembolism (VTE) have higher complication rates including thrombosis recurrence and bleeding. Real world prospective clinical outcome estimates of VTE management comparing cancer and non-cancer patients are limited. To assess VTE recurrence, major bleeding, and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB) in patients with cancer and without cancer, the prospective Mayo Clinic Thrombophilia Clinic Registry was analyzed. Methods: Upon recruitment, consecutive patients with confirmed acute VTE (03/01/2013 - 04/30/2023) were treated in a standardized, guideline-sanctioned, protocol driven strategy incorporating shared patient-decision making. Patients were divided into groups based on cancer status. After enrollment, patients were actively followed at 3 month intervals, in person whenever feasible, by mailed questionnaire or scripted phone interview to assess vital status, medication compliance, VTE recurrence, major bleeding and CRNMB. Results: Over the study time-frame, 2,064 patients (53.8% male, 46.2% female) with a cancer and 2,647 patients (54.9% male, 45.1% female) without cancer were enrolled. The most common cancers were gastrointestinal (n=423, 20.5%), pancreatic (n=287, 13.9%), genitourinary (n=198, 9.6%), hematologic (n=171, 8.3%), and lung cancer (n=170, 8.2%). Patients with cancer were older, had lower weight and lower platelet counts compared to non-cancer patients (Table1). Pulmonary embolism (PE, 52.6% vs 43.7%, p<0.001), upper extremity DVT (9.1% vs 6.0%, p<0.001), and splanchnic DVT (11.1% vs 6.9%, p<0.001) were more frequent among cancer patients. In contrast, leg DVT was more frequent among non-cancer patients (65.4% vs.47.2%, p<0.001). While mean duration of anticoagulation was similar between groups, notable differences in 3 month and > 9 month durations were evident as were initial anticoagulant choices (Table 1). Despite a well-organized protocol driven and guideline sanctioned management strategy, patients with active cancer experienced a 2.2-fold higher rate of VTE recurrence (p<0.001) and a 1.8 fold higher rate of major bleeding (p<001) compared to non-cancer patients (Table 2). CRNMB rates did not differ by cancer status. Conclusions: In this large prospective, guideline-driven and patient-centric registry of VTE management, patients with cancer had significantly higher rate of VTE recurrence and major bleeding, compared to non-cancer patients. These data provide important estimates for power calculations for future randomized trials of VTE treatment.