Citations

Abstract Introduction: Multiple myeloma (MM) accounts for nearly 20% of all hematologic cancers in the US and remains a substantial clinical burden, with patients (pts) requiring multiple lines of therapy (LOT). While advances such as BCMA-directed CAR T-cell therapy have improved outcomes, challenges persist, including disease relapse, treatment toxicities (CRS, ICANS, and non-ICANS neurotoxicities), and access. AZD0120 (formerly GC012F) is a first-in-class autologous BCMA/CD19 dual-targeting CAR T-cell therapy using the FasTCAR rapid manufacturing platform that preserves the naive and central memory T-cell phenotypes with marked in vivo proliferative capacity. Phase 1 investigator-initiated trials in China demonstrated deep, durable responses and a favorable safety profile following single-infusion AZD0120 in newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) (Du J, et al. EHA 2024 and ASCO 2023). Here, we report for the first time preliminary phase 1b results from DURGA-1, an ongoing phase 1b/2 clinical trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of AZD0120 in pts with RRMM. Methods: This open-label, single-arm, US-based, multicenter study (NCT05850234) evaluated the safety/tolerability of 2 dose levels (DL) of AZD0120 in pts with RRMM along with preliminary efficacy. Eligible ptswere aged ≥18 y with RRMM (3+ prior LOT [pLOT] including a proteasome inhibitor, immunomodulatory drug, and anti-CD38 antibody), ECOG PS 0–1, and documented evidence of progressive disease. Exposure to BCMA-directed therapy ≥6 mo with best response of PR or better was permitted. Pts underwent lymphodepletion followed by a single infusion of AZD0120. Pts in DL1 received 1x105 cells/kg; DL2 received 3x105 cells/kg. Dose escalation and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) were determined by a safety review committee. Phase 1b primary objectives included safety/tolerability and RP2D determination; secondary objectives included efficacy, cellular kinetics (CK), and pharmacodynamics. Results: As of data cutoff (DCO) on 18 July 2025, a total of 25 pts received infusion of AZD0120 (n=12 DL1; n=13 DL2). The median age was 64 y (range 44–78), median pLOT was 4 (range 3–7), 72% were triple-class refractory, 20% had prior BCMA CAR T-cell therapy, 4% had prior teclistamab, 28% had high-risk cytogenetic features [del(13q), del(17p13), t(4;14), t(14;16), amp(1q)], and 8% had extramedullary plasmacytomas. The median time from apheresis to release was 14 d (range 10–30). Median time from apheresis to infusion was 28 d (range 19–44) with 5 pts receiving bridging therapy. Median follow-up was 1.4 mo (range 0–19.3). No dose-limiting toxicities were reported for either dose. The most common treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs, any grade) were CRS (64%), neutrophil count decreased (56%), and anemia (32%). The most common grade ≥3 TEAEs were neutrophil count decreased (52%), lymphocyte count decreased (32%), and white blood cell count decreased (32%). CRS was reported in 75% of pts at DL1 (all grade 1) and 54% at DL2 (46% grade 1; 8% grade 2), with no cases of grade ≥3 CRS. Median time to CRS onset (DL1/DL2) was 9 d (range 2–11), with a median duration of 2 d (range 1–4); 12 pts (48%) received tocilizumab for CRS management and 12% received dexamethasone. No cases of ICANS, related non-ICANS neurotoxicity, IEC-colitis, or secondary primary malignancies have been reported. There have been no deaths. For efficacy-evaluable patients (n=15), ORR was 100% (33% sCR, 47% VGPR, 20% PR). CR rates in evaluable pts were 30% in DL1 (n=10) and 40% in DL2 (n=5); median time to response was 0.9 mo for both DLs (range 0.9–1.9 DL1; 0.6–1.8 DL2). All MRD-evaluable pts (n=5 DL1; n=3 DL2; DCO 01 July 2025) were MRD-negative by NGS at a sensitivity of 10-5. Three pts in DL1 with ≥12 mo follow-up maintained MRD negativity. Consistent with robust in vivo expansion, CK analysis from 16 evaluable pts (DCO 12 June 2025) demonstrated a median Tmax of 13 d post-infusion with a median Cmax of 85,266 copies/mg gDNA. Median persistence was 42 d (range 13–273). Updated clinical data with additional follow-up will be presented. Conclusion: Preliminary phase 1b results demonstrated AZD0120 was well tolerated, with a low incidence of serious AEs, no grade ≥3 CRS, and no ICANS. FasTCAR-manufactured AZD0120 had expectedin vivo expansion, which may have resulted in the predictable CRS profile. A single infusion of AZD0120 achieved early, deep responses with 100% MRD negativity from 4L+ triple-class‒exposed pts with RRMM.

Objectives/HypothesisHuman papillomavirus (HPV)‐positive and HPV‐negative oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) are distinct disease entities. Prognostic factors specific to each entity have not been adequately explored. Goals for this study were: 1) to determine whether HPV‐positive and HPV‐negative OPSCCs have distinct prognostic factors, and 2) to explore the prognostic significance of sex and race in OPSCC after HPV stratificationStudy DesignRetrospective case series.MethodsA retrospective review of 239 incident OPSCC patients from 1995 to 2012, treated at Johns Hopkins and University of California–San Francisco was conducted. Women and nonwhite races were oversampled. All analyses were stratified by tumor HPV in situ hybridization status. The effects of sex and race on survival were considered in Kaplan‐Meier and unadjusted and adjusted Cox regression models.ResultsOne hundred thirty‐four (56.1%) OPSCC patients were HPV positive. On univariate analysis, women had better overall survival than men among HPV‐positive (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.20‐1.07; P = .06) but not HPV‐negative (HR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.43‐1.24; P = .24) OPSCCs. On multivariate analysis, women with HPV‐positive OPSCCs remained at lower risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.12‐0.96; P = .04). Survival did not vary significantly by race among HPV‐positive patients. Among HPV‐negative patients, Hispanic patients had significantly better survival in unadjusted (HR: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.08‐0.91; P = .04) but not adjusted (aHR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.11‐7.36; P = .94) analysis.ConclusionsWomen with HPV‐positive OPSCC may have improved overall survival compared to men. Sex does not play a prognostic role in HPV‐negative OPSCC. There are no differences in prognosis by race among HPV‐positive or HPV‐negative patients.Level of Evidence4 Laryngoscope, E288–E296, 2018

Purpose Recent advances in DNA sequencing have led to the development of breast cancer susceptibility gene panels for germline genetic testing of patients. We assessed the frequency of mutations in 17 predisposition genes, including BRCA1 and BRCA2, in a large cohort of patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) unselected for family history of breast or ovarian cancer to determine the utility of germline genetic testing for those with TNBC. Patients and Methods Patients with TNBC (N = 1,824) unselected for family history of breast or ovarian cancer were recruited through 12 studies, and germline DNA was sequenced to identify mutations. Results Deleterious mutations were identified in 14.6% of all patients. Of these, 11.2% had mutations in the BRCA1 (8.5%) and BRCA2 (2.7%) genes. Deleterious mutations in 15 other predisposition genes were detected in 3.7% of patients, with the majority observed in genes involved in homologous recombination, including PALB2 (1.2%) and BARD1, RAD51D, RAD51C, and BRIP1 (0.3% to 0.5%). Patients with TNBC with mutations were diagnosed at an earlier age (P < .001) and had higher-grade tumors (P = .01) than those without mutations. Conclusion Deleterious mutations in predisposition genes are present at high frequency in patients with TNBC unselected for family history of cancer. Mutation prevalence estimates suggest that patients with TNBC, regardless of age at diagnosis or family history of cancer, should be considered for germline genetic testing of BRCA1 and BRCA2. Although mutations in other predisposition genes are observed among patients with TNBC, better cancer risk estimates are needed before these mutations are used for clinical risk assessment in relatives.