Citations

Introduction: Multiple myeloma (MM) is a genetically complex and clinically heterogeneous disease. Disease biology and phenotype is heavily influenced by the tumor microenvironment and the interaction between the immune milieu and malignant plasma cell population. Understanding the molecular profile of tumor along with the immune ecosystem can provide insights into key pathways that are important in disease pathobiology. Therefore, in this study, we have used single-cell RNA-Seq (scRNA-Seq) to compare the detailed maps of the bone marrow microenvironment of patients with rapid progressing disease (PFS < 18 months) with those whose disease had not progressed at the time of analysis (PFS < 4 years) Methods: MM patients (n=18) with rapid and no progression were identified from the Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation (MMRF) CoMMpass study, a longitudinal genomic study of patients with newly diagnosed, active multiple myeloma (NCT01454297). To generate a robust scRNA-Seq profile with minimal false positive, we profiled multiple technical replicates/aliquots of viably frozen CD138-negative bone marrow cells from each patient at three medical centers/universities (Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Washington University in St. Louis and Mount Sinai School of Medicine, NYC using droplet-based single-cell barcoding technique. After batch correction and normalization, the cellular clusters were identified using principal component analysis and Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection (UMAP) approach (Becht et al, 2018). Differential expression, pathways and systems biology analysis between rapid and non-progressors revealed differences for specific cell clusters (Panigrahy, Gartung et al. 2019). To determine association of plasma cell overexpressed genes with survival in CoMMpass study, survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier (K-M) approach. Results: In this study, comparative analysis was performed of the bone marrow microenvironment of patients with aggressive and indolent disease by generating single-cell profiles of ~102,207 cells from 48 samples of 18 patients with MM. The UMAP approach identified multiple transcriptionally diverse clusters of plasma (CD138+), immune (PTPRC+) and erythroid (GYPA1/2+) cells (Fig 1a). Interestingly, the analysis identified CD138+ plasma/tumors cells clusters in a subset of samples from patients with rapid -progression and these clusters depicted a high degree of inter-patient heterogeneity (Fig 1a). Further characterization of plasma tumor cells depicted significant activation (Z score >2 and P-value <.001) of pathway related to "Unfolded protein response", epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT), and "p38 MAPK Signaling". These rapid progressions associated with plasma cells overexpressing multiple genes (e.g., Hazard ratio (HR) CCL3=1.9 95% CI= (1.5-3.9) log-rank P=0.0004, HSPA5 HR=1.4 (1-2.6), P=0.03) that are associated with poor outcome in multiple myeloma based CoMMpass data. The bone marrow microenvironment cells formed 22 clusters, comprising of cells from myeloid, macrophages, T cells, B cells, dendritic cells, Natural Killer T (NKT) cells, and erythroid lineages. The Non-progressive patients depicted enrichment of GZMB+ T and NKT cells with overexpression of genes associated with "Natural Killer Cell Signaling", "CD28 Signaling in T Helper Cells", "NF-kB Signaling" and "Th17 Activation Pathway" (Fig1b, c). Systems biology analysis depicted significant activation of TNF, STAT4, and NFATC2 regulatory signatures in NKT cells. The analysis also observed enrichment of macrophages, several types of monocytes, and myeloid cells in the samples from patients with non-progressive disease (Fig 1d). The myeloid/monocytes cluster depicted significant activation of multiple metabolic (i.e., Glycolysis, Gluconeogenesis) and immune response (i.e. IL8) pathways (Fig 1e). In summary, this multi-site study provides insights into potentially significant differences in the transcriptomic landscape of multiple myeloma patients with rapid and non-progression of disease. The non-progressive patients depict significant enrichment of activated T cells and myeloid lineage populations, suggesting their role toward better outcomes. These findings will be further expanded by ongoing single cell analyses of the CoMMpass tissue bank under the MMRF Immune Atlas initiative. Figure 1 Disclosures Bhasin: Canomiiks Inc: Current equity holder in private company, Other: Co-Founder. Dhodapkar:Roche/Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Lava Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other. Kumar:Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Genecentrix: Consultancy; Tenebio: Other, Research Funding; Celgene/BMS: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Genentech/Roche: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Other: Independent Review Committee; IRC member; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectar: Other; Carsgen: Other, Research Funding; Dr. Reddy's Laboratories: Honoraria; Janssen Oncology: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Takeda: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; AbbVie: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments, Research Funding.

Compared with traditional bulk sequencing technologies, single-cell technologies have advantages to evaluate cellular heterogeneity and investigate the evolution of cellular subpopulations from the tumor and microenvironment. Application of single-cell sequencing in Multiple Myeloma (MM) is especially beneficial given MM is a highly heterogeneous disease with uncontrolled clonal expansion of plasma cells. Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) has been previously utilized to understand this hematopoietic malignancy in both tumor and immune populations in MM (Ledergor G. et al., 2018, Zavidij, O. et al., 2020). Mass cytometry (CyTOF) has also been used to identify the expansion of novel memory B cells in MM. (Hansmann, L. et al., 2015). Among the various single cell techniques, cellular indexing of transcriptomes and epitopes by sequencing (CITE-seq) is a multimodal approach with simultaneous quantification of single-cell transcriptomes and surface proteins. Since these three single-cell approaches enable the identification of cell types, cell states and characterization of cellular heterogeneity at transcriptomic and/or protein levels, understanding the concordance of the measurements among these three modalities is of great interest. We applied scRNA-seq, CyTOF and CITE-seq on four baseline samples of CD138-negative 'immune cell' fractions from patients enrolled in the MMRF CoMMpass study (NCT01454297). Two subjects were fast progressors (PFS < 18 months) and two subjects were non-progressors (PFS not reached). With multi-center collaboration coordinated by Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation (MMRF), each sample was subject to scRNA-seq and CyTOF by 3 independent centers. All sites received aliquots of the same sample. On average, 1,060 immune cells were detected in each sample using scRNA-seq and >64K CD45+ cells were detected using CyTOF. CITE-seq was performed in one center and 4,805 CD138-negative immune cells were identified on average. To compare cell type abundance between scRNA-seq, CyTOF and CITE-seq, we calculated the cell subset frequency of each immune population relative to the CD45+ populations. Overall, all three approaches were concordant while there is a stronger concordance between scRNA-seq and CyTOF. Cell type abundance is especially consistent for B cells, monocytes/macrophages, and plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDC) among the 3 methods. For the same patient of interest, natural killer (NK) cell frequency was detected at the lowest level in CyTOF relative to scRNA and CITE-seq. The T cell population showed the highest discrepancy among techniques, with highest abundance in scRNA-seq followed by CyTOF and lowest abundance in CITE-seq. Interestingly, CITE-seq detected far less CD4 T cells compared to the other two techniques while CD8 T cell frequency did not show drastic differences. In addition to cell type abundance, we further examined the concordance of expression of cell type signature genes between scRNA-seq and CyTOF. Overall, expression between RNA-level and protein-level is positively correlated with typical cell type markers highly expressed in both techniques, especially in the following cell populations: CD8+ T cells (CD3, CD8), NK cells (CD56, GranzymeB/GZMB, NKG2A/KLRC1), B cells (CD19, CD38), Monocytes (CD14, CD11c/ITGAX, CD33). To note, although the concordance in CD4+ T cells is generally good, we found the expression of CD4 is higher in CyTOF compared to scRNA-seq whereas CD127/IL7R tends to be overexpressed in scRNA-seq. This could explain why IL7R is often identified as a differentially expressed gene (DEG) in CD4+ T cell population while CD4 is barely seen in DEG list in scRNA-seq analysis. It is also interesting to notice that the expression of most NK cell markers has strong concordance between scRNA-seq and CyTOF except NKG2D/KLRK1, which has much higher expression in CyTOF relative to scRNA-seq. Our preliminary results suggested good concordance of immune cell type abundance identified in CyTOF, scRNA-seq and CITE-seq as well as concordant expression of some canonical cell type markers between RNA level and protein level. This work provides the field with reference data sets and shows more detailed examination of NK and T cell subsets is needed when handling single cell sequencing with different modalities. Disclosures Dhodapkar: Roche/Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Lava Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other. Kumar:MedImmune: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments, Research Funding; AbbVie: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Janssen Oncology: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Carsgen: Other, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Celgene/BMS: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Genentech/Roche: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Other: Independent Review Committee; IRC member; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Takeda: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Tenebio: Other, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genecentrix: Consultancy; Cellectar: Other; Dr. Reddy's Laboratories: Honoraria. Gnjatic:Neon Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; OncoMed: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Agenus: Research Funding; Janssen R&D: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bhasin:Canomiiks Inc: Current equity holder in private company, Other: Co-Founder.

Abstract Purpose: LV305 is a modified, third-generation, nonreplicating, integration-deficient lentivirus-based vector designed to selectively transduce dendritic cells in vivo. LV305 induces expression of the New York Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma-1 (NY-ESO-1) cancer testis antigen in dendritic cells, promoting immune responses against NY-ESO-1–expressing tumors. This phase I study evaluated the safety, immunogenicity, and preliminary efficacy of LV305 in patients with sarcoma or other solid tumors. Patients and Methods: Adults with previously treated, advanced, NY-ESO-1–positive solid tumors and limited tumor burden were eligible. LV305 was administered every 3 weeks by intradermal injection in four dose cohorts (Cohort 1: 108 vector genomes (vg) x 3 doses; Cohorts 1A, 2, and 3: 108 vg, 109 vg, 1010 vg x 4 doses). Results: Thirty-nine patients were enrolled: 3 patients each in Cohorts 1, 1A, and 2, and 30 patients in Cohort 3. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. Tumor types included sarcoma (n = 24), ovarian (n = 8), melanoma (n = 6), and lung cancer (n = 1). All treatment-related adverse events were grade 1 or 2. Common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (49%), injection site reactions (46%), and myalgia (21%). The disease control rate was 56.4% in all patients and 62.5% in sarcoma patients. One patient with synovial sarcoma achieved a partial response lasting >36 months. Anti–NY-ESO-1-specific CD4+ and/or CD8+ T cells were induced in 57% of evaluable sarcoma patients. Induction of an anti–NY-ESO-1 immune response was associated with improved 1-year survival in an exploratory analysis. Conclusions: This first-in-class, first-in-human study of LV305 demonstrated a favorable safety profile, induction of antigen-specific responses, and potential clinical activity in patients with advanced cancer.

11006 Background: CMB305 is an active immunotherapy regimen designed to generate and expand anti-NY-ESO-1 T cells. It consists of LV305, a dendritic cell targeting lentiviral vector encoding NY-ESO-1, and a boost with G305, an NY-ESO-1 recombinant protein plus GLA-SE, a TLR-4 agonist. An LV305 phase 1 study demonstrated a 1-yr survival of 81% and induction of anti-NY-ESO-1 T cells in sarcoma patients (pts). This first-in-human study of CMB305 examined safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy in pts with NY-ESO-1 positive (+) solid tumors. Methods: Adults with previously treated NY-ESO-1+ sarcomas, NSCLC, ovarian cancer were enrolled in a 3+3 dose-escalation with an expansion phase 1 study. The CMB305 regimen included 4 intradermal injections of LV305 at 109 or 1010 vector genomes, alternating with 3 intramuscular G305 injections at 250 µg for 3 months, then bimonthly G305 injections up to 1 yr. Results: As of 31Dec2016, 25 pts with STS (15 synovial (SS), 8 myxoid/round cell liposarcoma (MRCL), 2 other) were evaluable for safety; 23 SS/MRCL pts were evaluable for immune response (IR) and efficacy. All SS and MRCL pts received prior therapy for locally advanced/metastatic disease, 67% > = 2 prior chemo regimens. No DLTs were observed; treatment related AEs were grade 1 and 2, except 1 pt with grade 3 SAE (prostatic pain). Of 11 SS/MRCL pts tested, 64% pts developed NY-ESO-1 specific T cells and 72% pts anti-NY-ESO-1 antibodies. T cell receptor sequencing indicated increased clonality, and antigen spreading after CMB305. Best response by immune related response criteria was stable disease in 8/15 (53%) SS pts and 6/8 (75%) MRCL pts. The 3 month PFS rate was 74% and 75% for SS and MRCL pts. Median survival has not been reached with 1-yr survival rate of 86% and 100% for SS and MRCL pts. Conclusions: CMB305 is safe, well tolerated, and demonstrates a survival rate that is favorable when compared with approved agents for recurrent STS. CMB305 resulted in a stronger and broader integrated IR than LV305, including antigen spreading. These data warrant further investigation of CMB305 as a monotherapy in a randomized clinical study in STS. A randomized study of CMB305 in combination with atezolizumab in SS/MRCL pts is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT02387125.

3090 Background: The correlation of immune response (IR) and clinical benefit in patients (pts) who receive active immunotherapy remains controversial. CMB305 is an active immunotherapy designed to generate and expand anti-NY-ESO-1 T cells, consisting of LV305 (a DC targeting lentiviral vector encoding NY-ESO-1) and a boost (NY-ESO-1 recombinant protein plus GLA-SE, a TLR-4 agonist). Phase 1 studies of LV305 and CMB305 evaluated the IR and survival of pts with NY-ESO-1 positive tumors. Methods: 62 pts with recurrent NY-ESO-1 expressing (by IHC) solid tumors were enrolled in 2 Phase 1 trials (31 pts each: 43 sarcomas, 12 ovarian, 4 melanomas, and 3 NSCLC). Peripheral blood was assessed pre and post therapy for anti-NY-ESO-1 T cell responses (IFNγ ELISPOT) and antibodies (Ab) (ELISA) (n = 62), TCR-β CDR3 repertoire and conserved (public) TCR (n = 28), and antigen spreading (ELISA, ELISPOT) (n = 23). Relationship between progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and up to 15 biomarkers were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Preexisting anti-NY-ESO-1 T cells and Ab were identified in 34% and 40% of pts. LV305 and CMB305 induced (de novo or increased) anti-NY-ESO-1 T-cells in 51% and 65% pts, and anti-NY-ESO-1 Ab responses in 13% and 68% pts, respectively. LV305 and CMB305 induced antigen spreading in 17% and 36% pts. TCR clonality increased after CMB305 as compared to LV305. The TCRβ-CDR3 amino acid sequences of three NY-ESO-1 specific TCR clones in a patient with a > 2-year response were fully conserved in 20/28 patients. Biomarkers showing the strongest association with OS and PFS were pre-existing anti-NY-ESO-1 T-cell response and Ab, integrated IR (T cells and antibodies), and NY-ESO-1 expression level. Presence of public TCRs was associated with longer survival, particularly in pts with high ( > 50%) NY-ESO-1 expression. Conclusions: While LV305 and CMB305 are both immunogenic, CMB305 resulted in a stronger and broader integrated IR, including antigen spreading. The three identified survival variables, preexisting and treatment-induced NY-ESO-1 IR and the presence of public TCRs, warrant validation in randomized studies of CMB305.