Citations

Abstract Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) remains incurable, though key advances such as chimeric antigen receptor T-cells (CAR-T) and immunomodulatory agents, now evolving toward cereblon E3 ligase modulatory drugs (CELMoDs), have substantially improved the longevity and quality of life for patients (pts). Idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) is a CAR-T targeting B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA), now US FDA-approved for pts who have received ≥2 prior lines of therapy including a proteasome inhibitor, immunomodulatory agent, and CD38 monoclonal antibody. Ide-cel was initially FDA-approved for ≥4 prior lines of therapy based on the KarMMa-1 study, which demonstrated a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 8.8 months across all cell doses and median overall survival (OS) of 19.4 months (Munshi et al., New Eng J Med 2021). Although promising, the fact that virtually all pts relapse post-ide-cel indicates that further progress is needed. To that end, iberdomide is an investigational CELMoD that in combination with dexamethasone has demonstrated a 30% response rate in early phase studies of triple class-refractory MM (Lonial et al., Lancet Haem 2022). Additionally, in laboratory-based correlative studies, iberdomide, at doses of ≤1 mg (well below the recommended phase 2 dose of 1.6 mg) was shown to augment immune function, including enhanced T-cell activation and cytotoxicity, and modulation of the cytokine milieu (Amatangelo et al., Cell Rep Med 2024). Iberdomide's combined properties of direct MM cytotoxicity and T-cell potentiation have clear, potential relevance to CAR-T clinically, providing the conceptual basis for the CADMIUM study (NCT06179888), exploring the effects of iberdomide as post-ide-cel maintenance therapy in MM. Study Design and Methods: This is a randomized phase II trial with a safety run-in to evaluate if treatment with iberdomide maintenance post-ide-cel can significantly improve PFS vs. standard of care (SOC) observation without therapy, in pts with relapsed/refractory MM with ≥4 prior lines of therapy, who have received ide-cel within 3 months of registration, and no evidence of MM progression or additional MM therapy since ide-cel. Pre-ide-cel iberdomide exposure is permissible but refractoriness is not. The safety run-in will confirm tolerability of the iberdomide dose to be carried forward, where doses to be tested include: iberdomide 1 mg orally on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle (dose level 1; DL1) and iberdomide 0.7 mg on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle (DL2). Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) include any of the following during the DLT period of a pt's first three months on iberdomide: prolonged Grade 3 non-hematologic toxicities, Grade 4 non-hematologic toxicities, prolonged Grade 4 neutropenia or thrombocytopenia, or any adverse event requiring iberdomide interruption for >4 weeks. Six pts will be enrolled onto DL1; if at most 1 of these pts has a DLT, DL1 will be carried forward to the randomized part of the study. Otherwise, 6 pts will be enrolled onto DL2. The randomized part of the trial will randomize 60 pts 1:1 to either iberdomide or SOC observation without therapy. A 1-sided log-rank test with α=0.15 has 81% power to detect a true hazard ratio (iberdomide/SOC) of 0.55 or less, corresponding to an improvement in median PFS to 16 vs. 8.8 months with SOC. One interim analysis for futility is planned. Secondary outcomes include OS, best response by International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria, and deepening of response, particularly conversion to complete response with a bone marrow minimal disease-negative state by Adaptive clonoSEQ (sensitivity 1e-6). Robust correlative studies will include CAR-T persistence, assays of T- and other immune cell function, and pathological analyses of whether BCMA expression on MM cells (prior to enrollment or at relapse) or other markers predict clinical outcomes. Study status: To date, 12 pts have been screened, with 7 pts enrolled on study as part of the safety run-in (1 patient replaced). Enrollment data will be updated at presentation. Notably, an amendment is forthcoming which will enhance correlative studies and broaden eligibility criteria to include patients who have received ≥2 prior lines of therapy, conforming with ide-cel's current FDA label. Study COI: BMS is supporting correlative studies. Study Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; BMS; U10CA180868 (NRG Oncology); http://acknowledgements.alliancefound.org

Abstract Obesity is a major and growing driver of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in the United States, contributing to hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, and structural cardiac changes that elevate the risk of ischemic heart disease, heart failure, and stroke. After decades of declining CVD mortality, recent national trends show a concerning reversal, coinciding with record-high obesity prevalence. We quantified national trends and disparities in obesity-related CVD mortality from 1999–2020 using de-identified death certificate data from the CDC WONDER database for U.S. residents aged 15–84 years, including deaths with circulatory disease (ICD-10 I00–I99) as the underlying cause and obesity (E66.0–E66.9) as a contributing cause. Age-adjusted mortality rates (AAMR) standardized to the 2000 U.S. population were analyzed using joinpoint regression to estimate annual percent change (APC) and detect inflection points. From 1999–2018, AAMR rose from 2.75 to 6.61 per 100,000 (APC 4.79%; 95% CI 4.60–4.98), followed by a significant post-2018 acceleration (APC 11.05%; 95% CI 6.76–15.51) to 8.36 in 2020. Mortality was highest among adults 65–74 years, males, Black Americans, and nonmetropolitan residents, with a 5.1-fold state variation. Young adults (15–24 years) had the largest relative increase (+210%). The 2020 surge was independent of COVID-19 mortality, indicating gaps in chronic disease management. These results highlight a growing obesity-related CVD mortality burden, with widening disparities by age, sex, race, and geography, emphasizing urgent, equity-focused prevention and targeted interventions.

Background: Studies have suggested a synergism between lenalidomide (LEN) and ibrutinib (IBR) in multiple myeloma (MM). Both downregulate IRF4, a key target and master transcriptional factor regulating myeloma cell survival. Method: A 3 + 3 phase I trial was conducted 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 one prior line of therapy. Three dose levels (DLs) were planned. The cycle length was 28 days. IBR was administered orally daily in doses of 560 mg on DL1-2 and 840 mg on DL3, LEN was administered orally on days 1–21 in doses of 15 mg on DL1 and 25 mg on DL2-3, and DEX was administered orally on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 in a dose of 40 mg if age < 75 years or in a dose of 20 mg if it was ≥75 years for DL1-3. Patients with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) <60 but ≥30 mL/min were treated in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions with LEN 10 mg. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) included the following: grade 4 neutropenia lasting more than 5 days, thrombocytopenia, febrile neutropenia, nausea, vomiting or diarrhea; grade 3 thrombocytopenia with bleeding or platelet transfusion; and grade 3–4 hyperglycemia or a thrombotic/embolic event, and other nonhematologic toxicities. The overall response rate (ORR) was defined as the percentage of patients with a partial response (PR), very good partial response (VGPR), or complete response (CR) according to IMWG criteria on two consecutive evaluations at least 4 weeks apart. The clinical benefit rate (CBR) was defined as the percentage of patients with stable disease (SD) or a better outcome on two consecutive evaluations at weeks apart. Results: Fourteen patients (DL1: six patients; DL2: three patients; DL3: five patients) were registered for the study from March 2019 to May 2023, prior to its closure due to limited accrual. Thirteen patients are included in the summary of toxicities and response as one patient on DL3 halted participation prior to the start of the treatment. Two patients on DL3 were excluded from the determination of MTD: one having discontinued cycle 1 treatment due to COVID-19 infection and the another having mistakenly taken 280 mg/day of IBR instead of the assigned 840 mg/day dose during cycle 1. Only one patient developed a DLT, on DL1 with grade 3 non-viral hepatitis. The median number of cycles administered was 4 (range: 1–56). Severe toxicities reported included grade 4 lymphocytopenia (1), grade 4 thrombocytopenia (1), and grade 5 sepsis in the setting of PD (1). Disease responses included a VGPR on DL1 and CR on DL3. Thus, the ORR was 15.4% (90% CI: 2.8–41.0%). One patient on DL1 maintained SD for 4.6 years before discontinuing the treatment to undergo an alternative therapy. Another five patients maintained SD for ≥ 2 consecutive cycles. Thus, the CBR was 61.5% (90% CI: 35.5–83.4%). Conclusions: The combination of LEN with IBR in RR MM proved feasible, with manageable toxicities and the majority of discontinuations being due to disease progression.

PURPOSE The combination of the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib with bendamustine-rituximab for first-line treatment of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) prolonged progression-free survival (PFS), but without improvement in overall survival (OS), likely because of toxicity. Acalabrutinib was shown to be efficacious and less toxic than ibrutinib in a head-to-head trial in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and therefore might lead to better outcomes in MCL. METHODS Patients 65 years and older with previously untreated MCL received acalabrutinib (100 mg twice daily) or placebo (until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity), plus six cycles of bendamustine (90 mg/m 2 once daily; days 1 and 2) and rituximab (375 mg/m 2 as a single dose; day 1) followed by rituximab maintenance in responding patients for 2 years. Crossover to acalabrutinib at disease progression was permitted. The primary end point was PFS per the independent review committee; overall response rate and OS were secondary end points. RESULTS In total, 598 patients were randomly assigned, with 299 in each arm. At a median follow-up of 49.8 months using the reverse Kaplan-Meier method, the median PFS was 66.4 months in the acalabrutinib arm and 49.6 months in the placebo arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.94]; P = .0160). Benefit was seen across all subgroups, including those with high-risk features. Overall response/complete response rates were 91.0%/66.6% and 88.0%/53.5% in the acalabrutinib and placebo arms, respectively. OS was not significantly different (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.65 to 1.13]; P = .27). Grade 3 or greater adverse events were reported in 88.9% and 88.2% in the acalabrutinib and placebo arms, respectively. CONCLUSION The combination of acalabrutinib with bendamustine-rituximab significantly improved PFS. Clinical benefit of acalabrutinib with bendamustine-rituximab was achieved with manageable toxicity.

Abstract Background: Endocrine therapy (ET) with aromatase inhibitors (AI) plus ovarian function suppression (OFS) is standard for premenopausal women with ER+/HER2- breast cancer. However, many premenopausal women are intolerant of AI + OFS, leaving tamoxifen (with or without OFS) as their only option. Extensive studies have demonstrated that premenopausal women treated with neoadjuvant ET whose tumors exhibit Ki-67 ≤ 10% following 4 weeks of therapy (defined as endocrine sensitive disease (ESD)) achieve 5-year distant disease-free survival &gt; 96%. Problematically, only 41% of patients reach this ESD threshold with tamoxifen compared to 78% with AI+OFS (Nitz JCO 2022). (Z)-endoxifen (ENDX) is a potent selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) that inhibits ERα at plasma concentrations of 3-5 ng/ml and dually targets PKCβ1, a suspected oncogene in breast tumors, at concentrations ≥ 500 ng/ml. We therefore developed the EVANGELINE study (NCT05607004) is an open label, randomized neoadjuvant phase II study that includes a pharmacokinetic (PK) Run-in, aiming to evaluate whether ENDX +/- goserelin is non-inferior to exemestane plus goserelin with respect to ESD rate. Following the completed PK run-in portion of the study, where 40mg/day or 80mg/day ENDX were assessed, the 40 mg/day dose was selected for further evaluation in the second part of the trial. The second part is comprised of a randomized treatment cohort, for patients with a Ki-67% &gt;10% at preregistration randomized to either 40mg (Z)-endoxifen + goserelin or exemestane + goserelin neoadjuvant treatment and a Single Arm Treatment Cohort for patients who have a Ki-67 ≤ 10% at pre-registration assigned to 40mg/day (Z)-endoxifen monotherapy neoadjuvant treatment. Methods: To investigate ENDX further in premenopausal women, a multicenter study in the United States, was designed(EVANGELINE; NCT05607004). This phase 2, open-label, randomized, neoadjuvant trial includes a PK run-in phase designed to assess whether the 4-week ESD rate with (Z)-endoxifen + goserelin is non-inferior to that of exemestane + goserelin in premenopausal women with Stage IIA or IIB ER+/HER2- breast cancer with diagnostic Ki67 &gt; 10%. Additionally, a single arm Phase 2, open-label neoadjuvant Cohort was designed to assess the 4-week ESD rate with ENDX monotherapy in premenopausal women with Stage IIA or IIB ER+/HER2- BC with diagnostic Ki67 ≤10%. Subjects will undergo neoadjuvant treatment for six months before receiving surgical treatment in the involved breast. This study will additionally assess safety, tolerability, response rates, surgical outcomes, and monitor disease progression. Comprehensive biomarker evaluations will be conducted using paired tumor biopsies and blood samples collected at baseline and week four, as well as 6 month surgical specimens. Enrollment in the PK run-in phase (n-22) was completed in Fall 2024 with the second portion of the trial slated to begin early in 2025. Citation Format: Matthew P. Goetz, Vera J. Suman, Claudia Lopez, Hayley Erickson, Lonnissa Nguyen, Sandra S. Hammer, Lida Mina, Pooja Advani, Roberto Leon-Ferre, Karthik Giridhar, Felipe Batalini, Daniel Flora, Jason M. Jones, Nusayba A. Bagegni, Katie N. Hunt, Mara Piltin, Amy Degnim, James N. Ingle, Judy C. Boughey, Sarah A. Buhrow, Joel M. Reid, Matthew Schellenberg, John R. Hawse, Steven C. Quay. A randomized phase 2 non-inferiority trial of (Z)-endoxifen + goserelin and exemestane + goserelin as neoadjuvant treatment for premenopausal women with ER+/HER2- breast cancer (EVANGELINE) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025; Part 2 (Late-Breaking, Clinical Trial, and Invited Abstracts); 2025 Apr 25-30; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(8_Suppl_2):Abstract nr CT237.

Abstract Deep learning has advanced digital pathology and multi-omics data analysis. However, there is still a critical need to integrate these modalities to better understand complex diseases. Deep learning models, such as Prov-Gigapath, a state-of-the-art pathology foundation model, have been developed for analyzing whole-slide images (WSI). Our previously published deep-learning framework, OmicsFootPrint (OFP), transforms high-dimensional multi-omics data into intuitive genomically-arranged circular images and utilizes transfer learning to overcome the challenges of high-dimensional, low-sample-size data. In this study, we aimed to combine WSI and multi-omics data to develop a framework capable of distinguishing between invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) and invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC), which is clinically significant as it may help explain differential responses to therapies, such as tamoxifen versus letrozole. We enhanced the performance of our OFP model by dividing each multi-omics circular image (1024x1024x3 pixels) into 16 equal-sized patches (256x256x3 pixels). Each patch was trained using a separate EfficientNetV2 architecture with pre-trained ImageNet weights. The probability outcomes from these 16 models were subsequently combined through a meta-learner model using the AutoGluon framework. Concurrently, WSI images corresponding to the same patients were independently trained, maintaining consistent train/validation/test splits. The Prov-Gigapath model, which was trained using a dataset from the Providence Health System, was employed to extract patch-level embeddings from the WSI data. These embeddings were fine-tuned using a LongNet-based masked autoencoder to predict outcomes. Finally, predictions from the OFP model and the WSI-based Prov-Gigapath model were integrated through a meta-learner, preserving the original train/validation/test split. Model performances (AUC) were evaluated using the held-out test set. The gold standard used for the analysis was histological identification of IDC versus ILC, against which the performance of omics data alone, WSI data alone, and the multi-modal integration approach were compared. We evaluated our integrated model as a proof-of-concept using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) breast cancer cohort, comprising 92 ILC and 391 IDC samples. Multi-omics data, including gene expression, microRNA, copy number variation, and RPPA, were analyzed using the OFP framework, while WSI data were processed using the Prov-Gigapath method. The results demonstrated that the multi-modal integration approach significantly outperformed individual modalities, achieving an AUC of 0.98 compared to 0.87 for OFP (original), 0.95 for OFP (16-patches), and 0.92 for WSI. Integrating WSI and multi-omics data improves predictive accuracy, significantly improving the classification of breast cancer subtypes over histology alone. Citation Format: Naresh Prodduturi, Xiaojia Tang, Hamid R. Tizhoosh, Kevin J. Thompson, Richard Weinshilboum, Karthik V. Giridhar, Judy C. Boughey, Eric W. Klee, Liewei Wang, Matthew P. Goetz, Vera Suman, Krishna R. Kalari. A multi-modal learning framework to integrate digital pathology image and multi-omics data in breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2025 Apr 25-30; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(8_Suppl_1):Abstract nr 2429.

Abstract Objectives: Radiologist participation in multidisciplinary tumor board can be time-consuming and demanding, requiring substantial preparation. Anecdotally radiologist participation is felt to help identify discrepancies in previous interpretations; however, there are limited data assessing the actual impact of their tumor board review on patient management. This prospective study aims to evaluate how the reinterpretation of outside imaging and review at hepatobiliary tumor board (HBTB) affects the diagnosis and management of patients with hepatobiliary neoplasms. Methods: This prospective analysis included all patients presented at the weekly HBTB between 6/13/2023 - 6/25/2024. One radiologist reviewed the available reports of outside imaging, the local reinterpretation of outside imaging, the updated local imaging, and documented conclusions from discussion of the case at HBTB. HBTB included 4 radiologists who had reviewed each case. Discrepancies (presence/absence, number, and reasons for) were recorded. When discrepancies occurred, the impact on patient management (5-point Likert scale) was determined by two of the radiologists present at the HBTB in consensus, with input from clinicians if needed. A six-month follow-up was performed to confirm suspected diagnoses. Results: 208 cases (128 males, 104 chronic liver disease patients) were presented at HBTB. Disagreements in the detection or characterization of lesions were found in 59/208 (28.4%) of cases. A change in management occurred in 38/59 (64.6%) of these discrepant cases. In cases with recorded discrepancies in which follow-up confirmation was available, the final interpretation was confirmed in 34/41 (82.9%) of cases. Conclusion: Our study found a discrepant interpretation in nearly one-third of cases presented at a weekly HBTB and a resultant change in management in 65% of those cases. These findings highlight the importance of reinterpretation of prior imaging studies and the presence of radiologists at HBTB to guide optimal patient management.

Background: Latinas with mammographic dense breasts are at increased risk of breast cancer. This randomized controlled trial tests the effectiveness of three breast density (BD) educational approaches on adherence to subsequent mammography screening among Latinas receiving care at a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC). Measure(s): Adherence was ascertained using electronic health record and survey responses. Kaplan–Meier estimates of the time to subsequent mammogram were used to obtain adherence rates at 1- and 2-years post baseline mammogram. Cox modeling assessed whether adherence differed by patient characteristics or group assignment. Results: This analysis was limited to Latinas enrolled between October 27, 2016, and December 21, 2018 ( n = 946; 66.1% <50 years of age, 53.5% with dense breasts). Adherence rates at 1 year was 24.8% increasing to 51.7% by year 2. Latinas randomized to the Promotora + brochure + letter arm (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.09 [95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.87 to 1.36]) or brochure + letter (HR: 1.03 [95% CI 0.82 to 1.29]) arm were not more likely to be adherent to subsequent mammography compared to the letter only arm ( p = 0.76) . Adjusting for age and study group, having more prior mammograms, being “extremely likely” to get an annual mammogram, and having more confidence to get an annual mammogram at baseline were significant drivers of subsequent adherence. Conclusion: Informational interventions targeting BD education alone are unlikely to significantly improve adherence to subsequent mammography among Latinas receiving care in FQHCs.

AbstractBackgroundLate Onset Alzheimer’s Disease (LOAD) is the most common neurodegenerative disorder. Carriers of an ɛ4 allele of the apolipoprotein E gene (APOE) have significantly increased risk of developing LOAD. LOAD is also strongly sex biased. Besides the well‐established role of sex hormones, the impact of genetic sex combined with APOE genotypes has not been studied. Sex chromosome dosage (SCD) is the main genetic difference between females (XX) and males (XY). Despite dosage compensation by X chromosome inactivation (XCI), some X‐linked genes remain expressed from the inactive X (Xi) and are female biased in expression. Many of these genes are related to neurological and immune functions and could contribute to neuroinflammation in AD.MethodTo understand the genetic interactions between autosomal risk (APOE) and sex‐bias in AD, we are generating isogenic sets of hiPSCs with various sex chromosome complements and APOE genotypes. We have derived XXY/XY, XY/X, and XX/X isogenic pairs by reprogramming cells from naturally mosaic individuals or by selective removal of the Xi in vitro. These lines uniquely position us to differentiate the effects of X chromosome dosage and/or presence of a Y chromosome, while minimizing genetic variability and environmental or hormonal confounders. Currently, we are also constructing APOE ɛ3 and ɛ4 alleles in our paired hiPSC lines with differing sex chromosome content using gene editing.ResultStarting from an XXY/XY isogenic pair, we have generated an hiPSC series with six different genotypes of APOE ɛ3/ɛ3, ɛ3/ɛ4 or ɛ4/ɛ4 alleles with either the XXY or XY genotype. Preliminary results in differentiated neural precursor cells show differential expression of sex‐linked genes in relation to SCD. We also observed genome‐wide changes in gene expression and DNA methylation. Subsets of autosomal sex‐biased genes were differentially affected either by X chromosome dosage, presence of a Y, or both.ConclusionThe new hiPSC lines are being differentiated to AD‐relevant cell types, including neurons, microglia, and cortical organoids, for transcriptomic and functional analyses to elucidate how APOE alleles and genetic sex interact to modulate risk in LOAD pathology.

Abstract Immune reactions to medical implants often lead to encapsulation by fibrotic tissue and impaired device function. This process is thought to initiate by protein adsorption, which enables immune cells to attach and mount an inflammatory response. Previously, several antifibrotic materials have been either designed to reduce protein adsorption or discovered via high‐throughput screens (HTS) to favorably regulate inflammation. The present work introduces antifouling immunomodulatory (AIM) copolymer coatings, which combine both strategies to effectively enhance implant protection. AIM copolymers synergistically integrate zwitterionic moieties to resist protein fouling, HTS‐derived antifibrotics for immunomodulation, and silane monomers for grafting to diverse substrates including elastomers, ceramics, and metals. Interestingly, simply combining these monomers into conventional random or block copolymer architectures yielded no significant advantage over homopolymers. By contrast, an unusual polymer chain architecture — a zwitterionic block flanked by a mixed zwitterionic immunomodulatory segment — showed superior fibrosis resistance in both peritoneal and subcutaneous sites over one month in immunocompetent mice. This architecture also improved the performance of two different HTS‐derived antifibrotic monomers, suggesting that tailoring AIM architectures may broadly complement immunomodulatory chemistries and provide a versatile approach to improving implant longevity.