A Phase I Trial of iPSC-Derived MSCs (CYP-001) in Steroid-Resistant Acute GvHD

Abstract Introduction Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) isolated from donated tissue have been widely investigated as a treatment for acute graft versus host disease (GvHD), but with mixed results. Factors including MSC donor variability and the effects of prolonged MSC culture expansion may have contributed to inadequate outcomes. Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) can proliferate indefinitely without loss of pluripotency. The novel Cymerus™ manufacturing process facilitates a virtually limitless supply of well-defined and consistent MSCs from a single donation. Production is achieved by differentiating iPSCs into MSCs using proprietary clonogenic progenitor-based technology. This avoids both donor to donor variability and the need for excessive culture expansion once MSCs are formed. We are undertaking a Phase I clinical trial of Cymerus iPSC-derived MSCs (CYP-001) in steroid-resistant acute GvHD (NCT02923375). We believe this will be the first completed clinical trial involving iPSC-derived cells. Methods This is a multi-center, open label, dose escalation study to assess the safety, tolerability and efficacy of CYP-001 in adults with grade II-IV steroid-resistant acute GvHD, following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. All subjects had failed to respond to at least three days of steroid treatment (≥1 mg/kg/day), administered in accordance with standard management at each center. The first eight subjects enrolled in Cohort A received two intravenous (IV) infusions of CYP-001 one week apart, at a dose of 1 x 106 cells/kg, in addition to standard of care medications. After an independent data and safety monitoring board review, the next eight subjects entered Cohort B, in which the MSC cell dose was doubled. Primary evaluation was performed over eight study visits to day 100. Subjects then entered a follow-up phase of up to two years. Data for subjects in Cohort A with a minimum of six months follow-up are presented here. GvHD was staged and graded according to the 1994 Consensus Conference on Acute GvHD Grading. A Partial Response (PR) was defined as improvement in the severity of GvHD by at least one grade compared to baseline, while a Complete Response (CR) was defined as the absence of any GvHD signs or symptoms. The Overall Response (OR) rate was defined as the proportion of subjects showing either a PR or CR. The primary objective was assessment of the safety and tolerability of two infusions of CYP-001. The secondary objective was efficacy, assessed by best response to treatment, by Day 28 and Day 100 and overall survival at Day 28 and Day 100. Results Four males and four females, with an average age of 57 years (range: 45-66) were enrolled in Cohort A during 2017. At baseline, subjects had Grade II (n=3) or Grade III (n=5) steroid-resistant acute GvHD. One subject had skin, gastrointestinal (GI) and liver involvement; four subjects had skin and GI involvement; two subjects had GI involvement only; and one subject had skin involvement only. The treatment was well tolerated in all cases, and there were no treatment-related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) reported. Three subjects experienced SAEs that were not considered to be study drug related: (i) febrile neutropenia, hypokalemia and parainfluenza, each of which resolved; (ii) a lower respiratory tract infection, which resolved; (iii) pneumonia, which was fatal. All eight subjects showed at least a PR. Four subjects achieved a CR by Day 100. In all four cases where a CR was achieved, it was then sustained until Day 100. The median GvHD grade at Day 100 was 0 (range: 0-II), compared to a median grade of III (range: II-III) at baseline. Disease progression (an increase in the severity of GvHD by at least one grade compared to baseline) was not observed in any subject at any study visit. Overall survival was 7/8 (87.5%) six months after the first infusion of CYP-001. The best response rates by Day 28 and Day 100 are summarized in Table 1, while the maximal response by individual subject is illustrated in Figure 1. Conclusion Infusion of CYP-001 at 1 x 106 iPSC-derived MSCs/kg was safe and well tolerated in this patient cohort. Treatment response and overall survival rates are encouraging compared to previously published outcomes. The Cohort B primary evaluation period is expected to be completed by September 2018, and progression to a Phase II trial in this clinically challenging disease will then be considered. Disclosures Bloor: AbbVie: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Radia:Mallinckrodt: Research Funding. Yeung:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Specialised Therapeutics Australia: Honoraria. Slukvin:Cynata Therapeutics Limited: Consultancy, Equity Ownership. Kelly:Cynata Therapeutics Limited: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rasko:Gilead: Honoraria; Abbvie: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; International Society for Cellular Therapy: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Cynata: Consultancy, Honoraria; bluebird bio: Honoraria, Other: Clinical trials ; Spark: Consultancy; FSHD Global Research Foundation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Current Cure The Future Foundation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria; Genea: Equity Ownership; IMAGO Biosciences: Consultancy; Rarecyte: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Gene Technology Technical Advisory, OGTR, Australian Government: Other: Chair; Advisory Committee on Biologics, Therapeutics Goods Administration, Australian Government: Other: Past Chair.

Download Full-text

Final Analysis of Overall Survival from the Phase 3 Panorama 1 Trial of Panobinostat Plus Bortezomib and Dexamethasone Versus Placebo Plus Bortezomib and Dexamethasone in Patients with Relapsed or Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v126.23.3026.3026 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 126 (23) ◽

pp. 3026-3026 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Jesús F. San-Miguel ◽

Vania T.M. Hungria ◽

Sung-Soo Yoon ◽

Meral Beksac ◽

Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Overall Survival ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Final Analysis ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Study Therapy

Abstract Introduction: Panobinostat is a potent pan-deacetylase inhibitor (pan-DACi) that targets key aberrations in multiple myeloma (MM) cell biology, including epigenetics and protein metabolism. In the phase 3 clinical trial PANORAMA 1, panobinostat in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone (PAN-BTZ-Dex) led to a statistically significant and clinically relevant increase in progression-free survival of approximately 4 months compared with that with placebo plus bortezomib and dexamethasone (Pbo-BTZ-Dex). Further analyses of patient outcomes by prior treatment demonstrated that the magnitude of PFS benefit was greatest among patients who received at least 2 prior regimens, including bortezomib and an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD; PAN-BTZ-Dex [n = 73]: 12.5 months [95% CI, 7.3-14.0 months]; Pbo-BTZ-Dex [n = 74]: 4.7 months (95% CI, 3.7-6.1 mo; HR 0.47 [95% CI, 0.32-0.72]). These data supported the regulatory approvals of PAN-BTZ-Dex for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma who received at least 2 prior regimens, including bortezomib and an IMiD. Here we present the final analysis of overall survival (OS) for the entire patient population and among patients who received at least 2 prior regimens, including bortezomib and an IMiD. Methods: The study design for the PANORAMA 1 trial was described previously (San-Miguel. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:1195-206). The key secondary endpoint was OS. As of June 29, 2015, the 415 events required to conduct the final analysis of OS had been observed. Kaplan-Meier estimation was utilized for OS analyses for the entire population (N = 768), the pre-specified subgroup of patients who received prior bortezomib and IMiD (n = 193), and patients who received at least 2 prior regimens including bortezomib and an IMiD (n = 147). Results: The median OS of patients who received PAN-BTZ-Dex in the overall population was 40.3 months (95% CI, 35.0-44.8 months) vs 35.8 months (95% CI, 29.0-40.6 months) for the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm with HR 0.94 [95% CI, 0.78-1.14], P = .5435 (Fig 1A). The percentage of patients in each arm who received post-study therapy was 37.7% in the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm and 48.8% in the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm. The median OS of patients who received at least 2 prior lines, including bortezomib and an IMiD, was 25.5 months (95% CI, 19.6-34.3 months) in the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm vs 19.5 months (95% CI, 14.1-32.5 months) in the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm (Fig. 1B). The proportion of patients in this subgroup who received post-study therapy was 35.6% in the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm and 66.2% in the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm. Conclusion: For the overall PANORAMA 1 study population, patients in the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm demonstrated an increase in median OS of 4.5 months vs patients in the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm, but this result was not statistically significant (P = .5435). Median OS was also slightly longer for the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm among the more heavily pretreated subgroup of patients who received at least 2 prior regimens, including bortezomib and an IMiD. A higher percentage of patients on the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm received post-study therapy vs the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm, which may have confounded the OS results. In summary, PAN-BTZ-Dex demonstrates statistically significant increases in PFS vs Pbo-BTZ-Dex in patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory MM; however, this did not translate to a statistically significant increase in OS. Future trials will plan to focus on further optimization of dose and schedule of panobinostat and bortezomib to improve outcome, as well as novel combinations with other agents, including IMiDs and next-generation proteasome inhibitors. Figure 2. Figure 2. Disclosures Beksac: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Dimopoulos:Janssen: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Onyx: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Genesis: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Jedrzejczak:Onconova: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Siritanaratkul:Pfizer: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Research Funding. Schlossman:Millennium: Consultancy. Hou:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Moreau:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lonial:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Sopala:Novartis Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership. Bengoudifa:Novartis: Employment. Corrado:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Richardson:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Outcomes By Best Response with Hypomethylating Agent Plus Venetoclax in Adults with Previously Untreated Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-149782 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 2292-2292

Author(s):

Virginia Olivia Volpe ◽

Akriti G Jain ◽

Onyee Chan ◽

Eric Padron ◽

David A. Sallman ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Acute Myeloid Leukemia ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Myeloid Leukemia ◽

Research Funding ◽

Free State ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Best Response ◽

Baseline Characteristics ◽

Acute Myeloid

Abstract Background: Venetoclax plus hypomethylating agents (HMA) (HMA+VEN) is a standard of care treatment for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who are unfit for intensive chemotherapy. In the phase 3 VIALE-A trial, azacididine (aza)+VEN compared to aza alone demonstrated an improved overall survival of 14.7 months versus 9.6 months, respectively. A common toxicity with HMA+VEN is myelosuppression. The prognostic implications of incomplete count recovery despite leukemia free state after HMA+VEN treatment in AML is unclear. We aimed to compare the outcomes of those who achieved complete remission (CR), complete remission with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi), or morphologic leukemia-free state (MLFS) in AML patients treated frontline with HMA+VEN. Methods: Patients seen at Moffitt Cancer Center between 2019 and 2021 diagnosed with AML and treated with frontline HMA+VEN were retrospectively evaluated and included for analysis. Patients were stratified by best response; either CR, CRi, or MLFS. Baseline characteristics were compared by chi square (categorical variables) and t- test (continuous variables). Survival estimates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method from date of diagnosis and groups were compared using log-rank test. Results: Of the 102 patients treated with HMA+VEN in the frontline setting, 48% (n=49) had blast clearance with a best response of CR in 27/102 (26.4%), CRi in 16/102 (15.7%), or MLFS in 6/102 (5.9%). The remainder had residual disease. Baseline characteristics were similar among the three response groups (Table 1) as was mutational distribution (Table 2). There was no difference between AML WHO classification subtype (p= .148). Decitabine or aza was used at the discretion of the treating physician did not significantly impact responses (p= .225). In those who achieved CR, 14% had prior therapy related AML compared to 37.5% in CRi and 33.3% in MLFS (p= .314). Antecedent MDS or MPN with transformation to AML was seen in 22.2%, 18.8%, and 66.7% of CR, CRi, and MLFS respectively (p= .029). Of those, 3.7% in CR group had HMA use for prior MDS/MPN compared to 0% in CRi and 50% in MLFS (p= .000). The median relapse free survival was not reached for CR, CRi, and MLFS (Figure 1), it is important to note that 3 of the 6 MLFS patients died without relapse . At median follow up of 23 months, median overall survival (OS) in the CR group was significantly longer, 31 months, compared to 18 months in the CRi group and 8.5 months in the MLFS group (p=0.0415) (Figure 2). Transplant was achieved in 26% of CR and 6.3% of CRi and 0% of MLFS and was not significant among the groups (p = .124). Conclusion: Patients who received frontline HMA+VEN for AML directed therapy and achieved CR/CRi had better survival compared to those who achieved MLFS. Our data suggest that incomplete recovery of blood counts plays a significant role in overall survival regardless of leukemia free state. Further, the data demonstrate significantly higher secondary AML with antecedent MDS or MPN in the MLFS group compared to CR and CRi groups. Of those, prior HMA therapy was also identified as significantly higher in the MLFS group compared to CR and CRi groups which may contribute to the prolonged cytopenias and worse OS. While the limitation to this study is overall small number of patients, it suggests that a goal of CR over CRi or MLFS is desirable for superior OS. In the future, it would be of interest to incorporate the rates of responses and variables that may have an impact such as therapy dose adjustment, time to response, and delays in therapy due to cytopenia. Additional studies identifying dose adjustments or other ways to improve hematologic recovery would be valuable to potentially improve outcomes in this difficult to treat population. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Padron: Stemline: Honoraria; Taiho: Honoraria; BMS: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Blueprint: Honoraria; Kura: Research Funding. Sallman: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy; Shattuck Labs: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Intellia: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aprea: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syndax: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Magenta: Consultancy; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Komrokji: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy; Acceleron: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Geron: Consultancy; BMSCelgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Taiho Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PharmaEssentia: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lancet: AbbVie: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Millenium Pharma/Takeda: Consultancy; ElevateBio Management: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy; BerGenBio: Consultancy. Sweet: AROG: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Higher Incidence of Hemorrhagic Cystitis after Haploidentical Compared to Matched Sibling Donor Transplantation

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-119612 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 3380-3380

Author(s):

Srinivasa Reddy Sanikommu ◽

Olivia Copelan ◽

Jiaxian He ◽

Candace M. Butler ◽

Michael R. Grunwald ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Acute Gvhd ◽

Hemorrhagic Cystitis ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Conditioning Regimens ◽

Matched Sibling ◽

Donor Source ◽

Severe Grade

Abstract Introduction: Hemorrhagic cystitis (HC) causes significant morbidity following allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Reactivation of BK polyoma virus frequently occurs following transplantation and appears to be the most commonly associated factor, although high dose cyclophosphamide, other viruses, and numerous other factors contribute. A higher incidence of BK HC was reported with the use of matched unrelated or cord blood donors compared to HLA-matched siblings (El-Zimaity M, et al. Blood. 2004), however, the intensity of GVHD prevention regimens varied according to cell source complicating interpretation of these data. The effect of HLA-mismatched donors on the incidence of BK HC has been disputed and a large study of mismatched donors detected no association of HC with mismatched compared to matched donors (Giraud G, et al. Bone Marrow Transplant, 2008; Gilis L, et al. Bone Marrow Transplantation, 2014.) We analyzed a cohort of patients biologically assigned to matched sibling (MSD) or haploidentical family donor (based on presence of a suitable MSD donor) who received identical myeloablative or nonablative conditioning regimens and identical PTCy-based GVHD prevention to directly analyze the association of donor source with HC. Methods : To evaluate the role of haploidentical vs MSD donor source, we analyzed all patients undergoing haploidentical or MSD HCT at the Levine Cancer Institute between March 2014 and June 2018. Patients received identical myeloablative (BuCy) or nonmyeloablative (Flu/Cy/TBI) conditioning regimens followed by peripheral blood stem cell grafts and identical PTCy-based regimens which included tacrolimus and mycophenolate for GVHD prevention. The cumulative incidence of HC was calculated in a competing risk setting with death from any cause as a competing event. Group comparisons of incidences were determined by a Gray's test. Cox regression was conducted to evaluate risk factors for the development of HC. It was also used to evaluate HC as a time-dependent risk factor for overall survival. Fisher's exact test was used to analyze categorical patient characteristics, and two-sample t-test was employed for continuous variables. Results : From March 2014 to June 2018, 39 patients (32%) underwent MSD transplantation and 84 patients (68%) received transplants from haploidentical donors. Baseline characteristics were similar except for younger donor age of haploidentical donors (median 40 yrs vs 54 yrs P< .001). The rates of acute GVHD, Chronic GVHD, NRM and overall survival were similar between the two groups. The cumulative incidence of HC was higher in patients who received cells from haploidentical donors when compared to matched related donors (p=0.05). In multivariate analysis of risk factors associated with HC (Table 1), haploidentical donor (HR: 1.80, 95% CI 0.95-3.44, P= .07) and, grade III-IV acute GVHD (HR: 4.93, 95% CI 1.01-23.93 P = .05), were associated with development of HC. 33/53 HC patients (62%) were tested positive for BK virus. The intensity of the conditioning regimen, disease status at transplant, donor and recipient age were not associated with development of HC. For patients who received cells from haploidentical donors, there was a trend towards severe (grade 3-4) HC, but this did not reach statistical significance (HR 2.71, 95% CI 0.59-12.24 P=.19). The incidence of HC was not associated with overall survival (HR 0.58 95% CI 0.3-1.15 P=0.12), even when severe (grade III-IV) HC events were evaluated (HR 1.79 95% CI 0.75-4.3 P=0.19). Conclusions: In adults undergoing allogenic transplantations using identical conditioning regimens and PTCy based GVHD prevention, the use of a haploidentical donor results in a higher incidence of HC than does a MSD. Disclosures Grunwald: Cardinal Health: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Forma Therapeutics: Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Alexion: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Medtronic: Equity Ownership; Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Research Funding. Jacobs:Genentech: Honoraria. Usmani:Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Genmab, Merck, MundiPharma, Janssen, Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, Pharmacyclics,Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Blocking JAK1/JAK2 While Sparing JAK3 Not Only Prevents GvHD but Also Promotes Damaged Tissue Repair

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-126167 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 4420-4420

Author(s):

Kidist Ashami ◽

Sena Kim ◽

Ravi Vij ◽

Julie K. Ritchey ◽

Srikanth Santhanam ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

T Cells ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Tissue Repair ◽

Egfr Signaling ◽

Gi Tract ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Intestinal Organoids ◽

Equity Ownership

The therapeutic benefits of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) are primarily derived from graft-versus-leukemia (GvL) that is mediated by mature T cells in donor grafts. Unfortunately, graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) results from immune reactions of these same donor T cells against host tissues and organs after allo-HSCT. Due to this strong association between GvHD and the beneficial GvL, our lab and others have been working on developing effective therapeutic strategies to selectively prevent and treat GvHD without abrogating GvL. Recently we have reported that pharmacologic inhibition of Janus kinases 1/2 (JAK1/JAK2) prevents GvHD by blocking IFNGR and IL6R signaling. Although baricitinib (BARI) and ruxolitinib (RUX) are both JAK1/JAK2 inhibitors with similar potency, BARI was found to be superior to RUX in prevention of GvHD in our mouse models of allo-HSCT. One of our proposed mechanistic pathways by which BARI prevents GvHD is via a robust increase in regulatory T cells (Tregs) which play a pivotal role in controlling GvHD. Since the proliferation and survival of Tregs are mediated through the IL2-JAK1/JAK3-STAT5 signaling pathway and that RUX is a more JAK3 inhibitor, we hypothesized that sparing JAK3 by BARI is critical for this increase of Tregs. To test this hypothesis, we administered BARI to allo-HSCT recipient mice with or without JAK3-specific inhibitor and monitored them for GvHD signs. The mice treated with BARI and iJAK3 had significantly lower Tregs and overall survival rates compared to the mice treated with BARI alone. This data suggests that BARI prevents GvHD by retaining JAK3, thereby increasing Tregs. We have also previously reported that BARI treats established GvHD. However, the mechanisms by which BARI reverses ongoing GvHD remain unclear. Consequently, we hypothesized that BARI not only modulates immune cell functions as we previously reported, but also promotes restoration of GvHD damaged tissues. To test our hypothesis, we delayed the administration of BARI until mice developed clinically apparent GvHD and treated them starting on days 10, 17, or 24 after allo-HSCT. Despite this latency, the day 10 group showed significantly better overall survival (p<0.001, n=14) and lower histopathological grades (p<0.001, n=5) in comparison with all other groups (Fig. A). Since the gastrointestinal (GI) tract is the one of most frequently diagnosed and severely damaged GvHD target organs, we tested the possible mechanistic pathways by which BARI reverses GvHD in the GI tract. We found that Paneth cells and intestinal stem cells which are both involved in maintaining the intestinal barrier integrity are substantially increased in day 10 (p<0.0001, n=13) and 17 (p<0.001, n=29) groups compared to the vehicle control (Fig. B). To understand the molecular mechanisms underlying BARI-mediated reversal of established GvHD, we treated human intestinal organoids with BARI and RUX. Upon observing an increased proliferation in organoids treated with BARI and RUX, we then performed RNA-seq analyses on them to determine the specific genes that are differentially regulated by the treatment of BARI and RUX. Thirteen genes were found to be significantly upregulated in the RUX and BARI treated samples and three of these genes (TFF1, ABCB1, and IGFBP3) have been shown to be positively associated with EGFR signaling while negatively associated with TNFR signaling. Once we confirmed the expression levels of these genes in the human organoids using real-time PCR, we then generated an in vitro established GvHD model by treating mouse intestinal organoids with inflammatory cytokines (IFNγ, TNFα, and IL-1β). Two days later, we treated these organoids with BARI and RUX to evaluate expressions of IGFBP3, TFF1 and ABCB1 (Fig. C). We found that BARI significantly upregulates expression of TFF1, ABCB1, and IGFBP3 RNA levels in those cytokine damaged intestinal organoids compared to RUX. Collectively, these data suggest that BARI possibly reverses established GvHD by promoting damaged tissue repair by activating EGFR signaling while inhibiting inflammation and crypt apoptosis by TNFR1 signaling through TFF1, IGFBP3, and ABCB1. Lastly, the increase of Tregs by sparing JAK3 and the upregulation of these three genes in BARI-treated groups may explain the superiority of BARI over RUX in both prevention and treatment of GvHD. Figure Disclosures DiPersio: Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; RiverVest Venture Partners Arch Oncology: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amphivena Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Macrogenics: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; WUGEN: Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Magenta Therapeutics: Equity Ownership; Cellworks Group, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bioline Rx: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; NeoImmune Tech: Research Funding. Choi:Daewoong Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Reduced Severe aGVHD and Improved Survival Using Post Transplant Cyclophosphamide/Tacrolimus/Methotrexate Graft Versus Host Disease Prophylaxis in AML Patients Receiving Myeloablative Fractionated Busulfan Conditioning Regimen

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-125996 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 3296-3296

Author(s):

Uday Popat ◽

Rima M. Saliba ◽

Rohtesh S. Mehta ◽

Amanda L. Olson ◽

Julianne Chen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Acute Gvhd ◽

Chronic Gvhd ◽

Similar Proportion ◽

Myeloablative Conditioning ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Post Transplant ◽

Gvhd Prophylaxis

Background: Myeloablative conditioning can be given safely to older patients by simply administering busulfan over a longer period (fractionated busulfan regimen) than the standard four day regimen. (Popat et al Lancet Haematology 2018). Subsequently, we added post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) GVHD prophylaxis to our fractionated regimen with a hypothesis that it will reduce GVHD and improve outcomes. Herein, we report the results of our retrospective analysis comparing outcomes of patients with AML who received fractionated busulfan myeloablative conditioning and PTCy versus standard tacrolimus (Tac) and methotrexate (Mtx) GVHD prophylaxis. Methods: Patients with AML between 18-70 years of age with adequate organ function and 8/8-HLA matched related or unrelated donor, who were treated on 4 consecutive protocols using fractionated busulfan were included in the analysis. All patients received two fixed doses of busulfan 80mg/m2 as outpatient either on days -13 and -12, or on days -20 and-13 followed by busulfan on day -6 to -3 dosed to achieve target area under the curve (AUC) of 20,000 mol/min for the whole course based on pharmacokinetic studies. Fludarabine ± cladribine were given on day -6 to -3. GVHD prophylaxis was PTCy 50mg/kg on days 3 and 4 and Tac ± mycophenolate mofetil in PTCy cohort (n=53), or standard Tac+ Mtx (n=53). Patients in both the cohorts were matched 1:1 by propensity score. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between the PTCy and Tac/Mtx cohorts. The median age was 60 (range, 18-70) and 58 (range, 24-70) years, respectively, (P=0.3). Forty-nine percent were in CR, and 30% had comorbidity index >3 in each arm. Similar proportion of patients had ELN adverse risk in both arms (43% vs 40%, respectively P=0.7). The median follow up was 19 months (range, 3-36) in the PTCy and 46 months (range, 14-73) in Tac/Mtx cohort. Overall survival at 2-year was 78% vs 58% (P=0.03), non-relapse mortality was 6% vs 13% (P=0.2), incidence of grade 3-4 acute GVHD at 1-year was 6% vs 19% (P=0.07) and chronic GVHD at 2-year was 10% vs 29% (P=0.03) [Table 1 and figure 1]. The median time to neutrophil engraftment was prolonged by 3 days (15 vs 12 days; P<0.001) and platelet engraftment by 9 days (22 vs 13 days; P<0.001) in the PTCy cohort. Full donor chimerism at day 30 was noted in 79% vs 28% in the PTCy and Tac/Mtx cohorts respectively, (P<0.001). Conclusion: As compared to Tac/Mtx, PTCy-based GVHD prophylaxis not only reduced severe acute GVHD and chronic GVHD, but also improved overall survival in AML patients up to the age of 70 years who received myeloablative fractionated busulfan conditioning. Prospective randomized trial is warranted to validate these findings. Disclosures Popat: Bayer: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy. Bashir:Imbrium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Spectrum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; StemLine: Research Funding; Acrotech: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Ciurea:Kiadis Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: stock holder; MolMed: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Spectrum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Miltenyi: Research Funding. Kebriaei:Kite: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy. Nieto:Astra-Zeneca: Research Funding; Affimed: Consultancy; Affimed: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Oran:Astex pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; AROG pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Qazilbash:Genzyme: Other: Speaker; Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Board; Autolus: Consultancy; Bioclinical: Consultancy. Molldrem:M. D. Anderson & Astellas Pharma: Other: Royalties. Champlin:Johnson and Johnson: Consultancy; Actinium: Consultancy; Sanofi-Genzyme: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Influence of Karyotype On Overall Survival in Patients with Higher-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndrome Treated with Azacitidine or a Conventional Care Regimen.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v114.22.1755.1755 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 114 (22) ◽

pp. 1755-1755 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Ghulam J Mufti ◽

Steven D. Gore ◽

Valeria Santini ◽

Pierre Fenaux ◽

Lewis R. Silverman ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Conventional Care ◽

Complex Karyotype ◽

Trisomy 8 ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Cytogenetic Abnormalities ◽

Equity Ownership

Abstract Abstract 1755 Poster Board I-781 Background Karyotypic abnormalities are common in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), and specific chromosomal abnormalities are associated with poor prognosis. The phase III AZA-001 study (Lancet Oncol, 2009) showed azacitidine (AZA) prolonged overall survival (OS) regardless of IPSS cytogenetic risk category. This analysis assessed the effects of specific cytogenetic abnormalities on OS in patient (pt) subgroups treated with AZA or a conventional care regimen (CCR). Methods Pts with higher-risk MDS (FAB RAEB, RAEB-t, or CMML and IPSS Int-2 or High) were enrolled and randomized to receive AZA or CCR. CCR comprised 3 treatments: best supportive care only, low-dose ara-C, or induction chemotherapy. Erythropoietins were prohibited. OS was determined in subgroups of pts with del 5/5q-, del 7/7q-, or trisomy 8, each as part of a non-complex karyotype (<3 cytogenetic abnormalities) or as part of a complex karyotype (≥3 cytogenetic abnormalities). OS was also analyzed in pts with combinations of del 5/5q- and/or del 7/7q- as part of non-complex or complex karyotypes (Table). Pt karyotype was determined at baseline. OS was assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods. A stratified Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results A total of 358 pts were enrolled (AZA 179, CCR 179). Of them, 153 had normal karyotypes (AZA 77, CCR 76). Median OS in pts with normal karyotypes was not reached at 21.1 months with AZA vs 17.2 months (95%CI: 15.2 – 24.1 months) with CCR; HR = 0.63 (95%CI: 0.39 – 1.03). Of remaining pts, 136 had del 5/5q-, del 7/7q-, and/or trisomy 8 as part of a non-complex or complex karyotype. AZA was associated with longer OS vs CCR in all subgroups of pts with non-complex cytogenetics, with HRs ranging from 0.20 (95%CI: 0.06 – 0.65) to 0.51 (95%CI: 0.05 – 4.74) (Table). In both the AZA and CCR treatment groups, pts in all subgroups with non-complex karyotypes had substantially longer OS than pts with complex karyotypes. Pts with complex karyotypes in some subgroups had longer OS with AZA vs CCR: median OS in pts with del 5/5q-, del 5/5q- WITHOUT del 7/7q-, or trisomy 8 as part of a complex karyotype treated with AZA survived 5.1, 8.0, and 12.4 months longer, respectively, than their counterparts who received CCR. HRs with AZA vs CCR in pts with complex cytogenetics ranged from 0.42 (95%CI: 0.10 – 1.69) to 0.55 (95%CI: 0.29 – 1.05). Conclusions These findings support earlier data showing effectiveness of AZA in higher-risk MDS pts with complex or non-complex karyotypes. Major gains in OS were obtained with AZA vs CCR (12-18 months longer OS with AZA) for the following categories: del 7/7q- (non-complex), del 7/7q- WITHOUT del 5/5q- (non-complex), and trisomy 8 (non-complex and complex). Pts with trisomy 8 treated with AZA experienced a 3-fold increase in median OS compared with similar pts who received CCR. Longer OS (AZA 15.3 vs CCR 7.3 months) was also obtained for pts with del5/5q- WITHOUT del7/7q- as part of a complex karyotype. The worse cytogenetic categories, del 7/7q- and del 5/5q- AND del 7/7q-, both with complex karyotype, were associated with the poorest OS regardless of treatment. Pt subgroups in this post hoc analysis were small and heterogeneous; confirmation of these findings in larger pt samples is warranted. Disclosures Mufti: Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Gore:Celgene: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding. Santini:Celgene: Honoraria. Fenaux:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ortho Biotech: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Cephalon: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; MSD: Honoraria, Research Funding; Epicept: Honoraria, Research Funding. Skikne:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hellstrom-Lindberg:Celgene: Research Funding. Seymour:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Beach:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Backstrom:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fernando:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Download Full-text

Aberrant a-to-I RNA Editing and Prognostic Impact of Adar in Multiple Myeloma Patients with 1q Amplification

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.357.357 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 357-357

Author(s):

Alessandro Lagana ◽

Deepak Perumal ◽

Violetta V Leshchenko ◽

Pei-Yu Kuo ◽

Brian Kidd ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Rna Editing ◽

Copy Number ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cox Regression ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Cox Regression Analysis ◽

Kaplan Meier ◽

Equity Ownership

Abstract Amplification of 1q is observed in 40% of Multiple Myeloma (MM) patients and is associated with a more aggressive clinical course of the disease. The frequency of 1q21 amplifications has been shown to increase significantly in the transition from monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) to overt myeloma and to relapse. Previous studies have reported genes on 1q such as ANP32E and CSK1B that have significant impact on survival. However, the biological mechanisms underlying disease aggressiveness associated to 1q amplification still remain unclear. ADAR (Adenosine Deaminase Acting on RNA) is an enzyme responsible for A-to-I editing, a post-transcriptional modification of double stranded RNA consisting in the conversion of specific Adenosines (A) into Inosines (I) by deamination. As Inosine is structurally similar to Guanosine (G), editing events can result in functional consequences in RNA and protein structure, including non-synonymous changes in protein coding sequences and creation/disruption of miRNA binding sites on UTRs. Dysregulation of A-to-I editing by ADAR has been recently linked to cancer. Since the ADAR gene is located in 1q21.3 (the critical minimally amplified region in MM), we asked whether 1q amplification affected ADAR expression, RNA editing and overall prognosis in MM patients. We identified 44 patients with 1q amplification from the IA6 release of the MMRF CoMMpass dataset. As a control group (wt), we selected an equal number of patients from CoMMpass without any 1q alteration. Gene expression analysis showed significantly higher expression of ADAR in 1q-amp patients compared to wt (q = 3.64e-7) (Fig. 1) and significant correlation between ADAR copy number and its expression (Spearman ρ=0.69, p = 4.52e-14). To evaluate the functional impact of ADAR up-regulation, we applied a computational pipeline based on the tool REDItools and our in-house scripts to detect A-to-I edited sites in RNA-Seq samples. The pipeline identified candidate A-to-G mutations in RNA sequences using corresponding Whole-Exome Sequencing data to filter out actual DNA mutations. We calculated sample-wise mean editing frequency across all edited sites and found significantly increased editing in 1q-amp patients compared to wt (p = 4.3e-5) (Fig. 2). Mean editing frequency was significantly correlated with ADAR expression (ρ = 0.62, p < 2e-16) and ADAR copy number (ρ= 0.5, p= 4.32e-7). Our analysis identified 3,286 sites residing in Alu sequences and 1,303 in non-Alu regions. A-to-I editing has been shown to occur predominantly in Alu elements, repetitive sequences abundantly interspersed throughout the human genome, mostly within introns and untranslated regions (UTRs). As expected, most sites were reported within 3' UTRs (66%) and introns (12%). Overall, at the site level, we observed increased editing in 1q-amp vs wt (p < 2e-16). We found that 2,173 sites (47%) had significant differential editing frequency between 1q-amp and wt patients (FDR < 20%). Next, we sought to assess the prognostic implications of ADAR activity. Cox regression analysis revealed a trend toward higher risk in terms of EFS (Event Free Survival) for 1q-amp vs wt (HR = 1.7, 95% CI = 0.83-3.59, p = 0.13), as well as for patients with higher expression of ADAR (HR = 2.4, 95% CI = 0.79-7.15, p = 0.11) and higher mean editing frequency (HR = 2, 95% CI = 0.72-5.59, p = 0.17). Since survival data in the CoMMpass dataset is not yet mature, we evaluated the effects of ADAR expression on survival on an independent dataset consisting of 559 samples from newly diagnosed patients pre-TT2 and -TT3 treatments (GSE2658, Shaughnessy et al, Blood 2007; 109:2276-84). Cox regression analysis showed a significant difference in terms of overall survival between patients with low and high ADAR expression, the latter being correlated with higher risk (HR = 2, 95% CI = 1.18-3.66, p = 0.01) (Fig. 3). In conclusion, we found a significant increase in ADAR expression and aberrant A-to-I RNA editing in MM patients with amplification of 1q. These results demonstrate a novel mechanism by which 1q amplification can contribute to MM pathogenesis via induction of A-to-I RNA editing by ADAR. Figure 1 ADAR expression in 1q-amp vs wt patients. Figure 1. ADAR expression in 1q-amp vs wt patients. Figure 2 Difference in mean RNA editing frequency between 1q-amp and wt patients. Figure 2. Difference in mean RNA editing frequency between 1q-amp and wt patients. Figure 3 Kaplan-Meier curves of overall survival in the Shaughnessy cohort stratified by ADAR expression (GSE2658) Figure 3. Kaplan-Meier curves of overall survival in the Shaughnessy cohort stratified by ADAR expression (GSE2658) Disclosures Chari: Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Array Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Cho:Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agenus, Inc.: Research Funding; Genentech Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Barlogie:Signal Genetics: Patents & Royalties. Jagannath:Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Dudley:NuMedii, Inc.: Patents & Royalties; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Ontomics, Inc.: Equity Ownership; NuMedii, Inc.: Equity Ownership; Ecoeos, Inc.: Equity Ownership; Ayasdi, Inc.: Equity Ownership; Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Personalis: Patents & Royalties.

Download Full-text

Safety, Clinical Activity, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics from a Phase I Study of PF-06863135, a B-Cell Maturation Antigen (BCMA)-CD3 Bispecific Antibody, in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-121805 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 1869-1869 ◽

Cited By ~ 13

Author(s):

Noopur S. Raje ◽

Andrzej Jakubowiak ◽

Cristina Gasparetto ◽

Robert F. Cornell ◽

Heike I. Krupka ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Phase I ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Dose Escalation ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase I Study ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Best Response ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Dose Levels

Introduction: PF-06863135 (PF-3135) is a bispecific, humanized, monoclonal antibody (mAb) consisting of BCMA- and CD3-targeting arms paired on an IgG2a backbone by hinge-mutation technology. PF-3135 binds BCMA+ myeloma cells and CD3+ T cells with affinities of 20 pM and ~40 nM, respectively (Panowski et al. Blood 2016). We report here findings from the dose-escalation portion of an ongoing, multi-center, open-label, phase I study (NCT03269136) of PF-3135 in patients with RRMM. Methods: Adult patients (≥18 years of age) with RRMM, previously treated with a proteasome inhibitor, an immunomodulatory drug, and an anti-CD38 mAb, received escalating, intravenous (IV) doses of PF-3135, once weekly. Prior BCMA-targeted bispecific T-cell engager or chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CART) treatment was allowed by protocol. Patients had measurable disease per the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) updated criteria 2014. A modified toxicity probability interval method (mTPI), targeting a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) rate of 25% (equivalence interval ± 5%) was used for dose escalation. The primary study objectives are to assess PF-3135 safety and tolerability, to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and select the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Secondary objectives include evaluation of anti-myeloma activity, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity of PF-3135. Results: As of April 9, 2019, 17 patients had received once weekly, non-continuous, IV infusion of PF-3135 in 6 dose-escalation groups. The majority were men (71%). The median age was 61 yrs (range, 47-82 yrs) and median disease duration since onset was 7 yrs (range, 1.1-13.3 yrs). Ten (59%) patients had ≥1 chromosomal abnormality and 5 (29%) had a normal karyotype (status not known for 2 [12%] patients). The median number of prior anti-myeloma therapies was 11; 5 (29%) patients had received prior BCMA-targeted therapy. Eight (47%) patients had relapsed MM and 8 (47%) had refractory disease (recurrence type not known for 1 [6%] patient). Ten (59%) patients experienced treatment-related (TR) AEs of any grade. Most TRAEs were grade 1-2, including cytokine release syndrome (CRS, 24%), thrombocytopenia (24%), anemia (18%), and pyrexia (18%). Three (18%) patients had grade 3 TRAEs (increased alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase, leukocytopenia, neutropenia, and lymphopenia). One patient treated at the highest dose level, who had received prior BCMA CART therapy, developed treatment-related febrile neutropenia, a DLT, which may have been related to CRS and borderline/low neutrophil count at baseline. None of the patients had grade 4-5 TRAEs or discontinued treatment due to a TRAE. The median duration of treatment was 4 (range, 2-12) actual dosing days. Sixteen of the 17 patients were evaluable for response. At the time of data cut-off, one (6%) patient had a minimal response and 6 (35%) patients had stable disease (SD) across dose levels, as best response by investigator IMWG assessment; 9 (53%) patients experienced disease progression. The clinical benefit rate (defined as best response ≥SD) was 41% (95% CI: 18.4%, 67.1%). Conclusions: Treatment with IV PF-3135 was well tolerated at the dose levels evaluated. The observed CRS events were moderate and dose-dependent. Additional dose cohorts are accruing. The latest clinical, biomarker, and PK data will be presented for this ongoing study. Disclosures Raje: Medscape: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Research Funding. Jakubowiak:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Honoraria; Juno: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; SkyLineDx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; KaryoPharm Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gasparetto:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed . Cornell:KaryoPharm: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy. Krupka:Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Navarro:Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Forgie:Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Udata:Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Basu:Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Chou:Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Leung:Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lesokhin:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Serametrix Inc.: Patents & Royalties; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy, Honoraria; GenMab: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: PF-06863135, investigational agent

Download Full-text

Impact of Gene Mutations on Overall Survival in Older Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) Treated with Azacitidine (AZA) or Conventional Care Regimens (CCR)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.2859.2859 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 2859-2859 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Lin Tang ◽

Anna Dolnik ◽

Kyle J. MacBeth ◽

Hervé Dombret ◽

John F. Seymour ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Dna Methylation ◽

Overall Survival ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Older Patients ◽

Research Funding ◽

Gene Mutations ◽

Molecular Heterogeneity ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership

Abstract Background: AML is characterized by molecular heterogeneity and specific mutations are prognostically important (Papaemmanuil, Gerstung et al, NEJM,2016). Mutational analysis of NPM1, CEBPA, and FLT3 is included in the 2010 European LeukemiaNet recommendations for AML (Döhner et al, Blood, 2010). Additional recurrently mutated genes have since been identified with potential value for prognosis and prediction of treatment (Tx) response. The phase 3 AZA-AML-001 study showed AZA prolonged median overall survival (OS) vs CCR (10.4 vs 6.5 months [mos]; P=0.101) and improved 1-year survival (46.5% vs 34.2%) in older patients (pts) with AML (Dombret et al, Blood, 2015). Aim: To investigate relationships between gene mutations and OS in the subpopulation of AZA-AML-001 pts with available baseline bone marrow (BM) for molecular analyses ("biomarker" cohort). Methods: Eligible pts were age ≥65 years with newly diagnosed AML (>30% BM blasts), ECOG performance status (PS) score 0-2, WBC count ≤15x109/L, and NCCN-defined intermediate- or poor-risk cytogenetics. Pts received AZA (75 mg/m2/day [d] x 7d/28d cycle) or a preselected CCR: intensive chemotherapy (7 + 3 regimen), low-dose ara-C, or best supportive care only. DNA was isolated from BM mononuclear cells and targeted sequencing of 39 genes was performed with Haloplex target enrichment (Agilent) on Illumina HiSeq 2500 using 2x100bp read lengths. FLT3 tyrosine kinase domain (TKD) mutations were determined by next-generation sequencing (NGS) and internal tandem duplications (ITD) were determined by capillary electrophoresis sizing of PCR amplicons. Target regions varied by gene from all exons to hot-spots. Log-rank test, stratified by ECOG PS score (0-1 vs 2) and cytogenetic risk (intermediate vs poor) at baseline, was used to assess OS of pts with mutations (mut) in genes detected in ≥5 pts vs OS in pts with wild-type (wt) genes within the AZA and CCR arms. Median OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. Results: The biomarker cohort comprised 156 of all 488 pts in AZA-AML-001 (32%; AZA n=83, CCR n=73). Baseline characteristics and hematologic response rates were well-matched between biomarker and non-biomarker pts. Mutations were detected in 33 of 39 sequenced genes. The most frequently mutated genes were DNMT3A (27%), TET2 (25%), IDH2 (23% [R140 15%, R172 8%]), TP53 (21%), RUNX1 (18%), NPM1 (16%), NRAS (12%), FLT3 (12% [-ITD 10%, -TKD 5%]), ASXL1 (11%), and STAG2 (10%). Stratified log-rank tests showed that median OS was significantly reduced for CCR pts with TP53mut (2.4 vs 12.5 mos with TP53wt; P=0.026) and with NRASmut (4.3 vs 10.3 mos with NRASwt; P=0.020). In the AZA arm, median OS was not significantly different between pts with TP53mutor TP53wt (7.2 vs 12 mos; P=0.40) or between pts with NRASmut or NRASwt (11.8 vs 8.9 mos; P=0.95), but was reduced in pts with FLT3mut (5.4 vs 12.0 mos with FLT3wt; P=0.017). Compared with similar pts treated with CCR, pts with TP53mut and/or NRASmut treated with AZA had nominally better median OS (7.2 vs 2.4 mos for TP53mut; 11.8 vs 4.3 mos for NRASmut), and pts with FLT3mut had nominally worse OS (5.4 vs 6.4 mos) (Table). Median OS was similar for pts with or without mutations in each of the genes known to influence DNA methylation (DNMT3A, IDH1, IDH2, and TET2); however, there was a statistical difference in OS within the AZA arm for pts with TET2mut (P=0.005) despite similar median OS for pts with TET2mut vs TET2wt (9.6 vs 9.5 mos) that was not observed within the CCR arm (P=0.45). Median OS for pts with a mutation in any 1 of the DNA methylation genes listed above was similar in the AZA and CCR arms (Table). Conclusion: These exploratory analyses suggest older AML pts with TP53 or NRAS mutations have a better prognosis when treated with AZA than with CCR. Mutations in genes that regulate DNA methylation did not impact median OS with AZA Tx, although the potential negative effects of TET2mut and FLT3mut warrant further evaluation. Prognostic implications of isolated gene mutations can vary due to co-mutations; larger pt cohorts are needed to establish the influence of recurring co-mutational patterns in AZA-treated pts. Disclosures Tang: Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. MacBeth:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding. Dombret:Agios: Honoraria; Sunesis: Honoraria; Ambit (Daiichi Sankyo): Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Kite Pharma.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Menarini: Honoraria; Menarini: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Roche/Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Ariad: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding. Seymour:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Stone:Pfizer: Consultancy; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; ONO: Consultancy; Jansen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celator: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Xenetic Biosciences: Consultancy. Beach:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Download Full-text

Azacitidine (AZA) Prolongs Overall Survival in Older Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) with Poor Prognostic Karyotypes Compared with Conventional Care Regimens (CCR)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.1638.1638 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 1638-1638 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Hartmut Döhner ◽

Paresh Vyas ◽

John F. Seymour ◽

Valeria Santini ◽

Richard M. Stone ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Older Patients ◽

Research Funding ◽

Complex Karyotype ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Cytogenetic Abnormalities ◽

Poor Risk ◽

Equity Ownership

Abstract Background: Karyotype is the strongest independent prognostic factor for survival in AML. The randomized phase 3 AZA-AML-001 study of older patients with AML showed AZA prolonged overall survival (OS) compared with CCR (10.4 vs 6.5 months, respectively; P=0.101) (Dombret et al, Blood, 2015). In a prospective subanalysis of the study, AZA was shown to meaningfully prolong OS by 3.2 months compared with CCR (P=0.0185) in the subgroup of patients with NCCN-defined poor-risk cytogenetics (Döhner et al, Blood, 2014: Abstract 621). Aim: This analysis evaluates treatment effects of AZA vs CCR on OS in subgroups of patients with specific cytogenetic abnormalities as well as in patient subgroups defined by cytogenetic risk per modified European LeukemiaNet (ELN) recommendations (not considering molecular markers) (Döhner et al, Blood, 2010). Methods: Patients aged ≥65 years with newly diagnosed AML (>30% bone marrow [BM] blasts), ECOG performance status score ≤2, intermediate- or poor-risk cytogenetics per NCCN 2009 criteria, and WBC count ≤15x109/L were randomized to receive AZA (75 mg/m2/day [d] x7d/28d) or CCR: intensive chemotherapy (cytarabine 100-200mg/m2IV x7d + anthracycline IV x3d induction), low-dose ara-C (20mg SC BID x10d/28d), or best supportive care only. Karyotypes obtained from BM were reviewed centrally by an independent cytogeneticist. OS was evaluated in subgroups of patients with frequent specific abnormalities, including -5/del(5q), -7, -7/del(7q), abnormal (17p) or complex karyotype (based on specific abnormalities, patients may have been evaluated in more than one category). OS was also assessed for patients in ELN-defined karyotype risk subgroups: Intermediate (Int)-I (normal karyotype), Int-II (all abnormalities not classified as Favorable or Adverse), and Adverse karyotype. OS was assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods and compared using a weighted log-rank test. Results: Centrally reviewed cytogenetic data were available for 485/488 patients (99.4%). In all, 220 patients (45.4%; AZA n=114, CCR n=106) had Int-I karyotype, 111 patients (22.9%; AZA n=53, CCR n=58) had Int-II karyotype, and 154 patients (31.8%, AZA n=73, CCR n=81) had Adverse karyotype (Figure 1). OS was comparable between AZA and CCR in patients with Int-I karyotype (14.1 vs 10.1 months, respectively; hazard ratio [HR] 0.83, 95%CI 0.60, 1.1; P=0.44) and patients with Int-II karyotype (8.9 vs 9.6 months; HR 1.19, 95%CI 0.79, 1.8; P=0.78). There was a significant 2.4-month median OS difference in favor of AZA in patients with Adverse karyotype (5.3 vs 2.9 months with CCR; HR 0.71, 95%CI 0.51, 0.99; P=0.046; Figure 2), with 1-year survival rates of 29.1% vs 14.7% for AZA and CCR, respectively. AZA was associated with longer median OS and higher 1-year survival compared with CCR for all subgroups of patients with the specific cytogenetic abnormalities under study: -5/del(5q), -7, -7/del(7q), abnormal (17p), and complex karyotype, with HRs ranging from 0.54 to 0.69(Table). Median OS in the CCR arm was less than 3 months for each of these subgroups. Similar to what has been reported in MDS (Ravandi et al, Cancer, 2009), AML patients with chromosome 7 abnormalities responded particularly well to AZA, with an improvement in median OS of 4.1 months over CCR. Patients with complex karyotypes also had meaningful improvements in OS, with ~15% more AZA-treated patients alive at 1 year than CCR patients. Conclusions: Prognosis is dismal for older AML patients with adverse karyotypes, and is especially poor for patients with complex karyotypes. Median OS and 1-year survival in patients with ELN-defined Adverse karyotype treated with AZA were almost double those of patients treated with CCR. AZA-treated patients with the specific cytogenetic abnormalities and/or complex karyotype in this analysis had a 31-46% reduction in risk of death vs CCR, and proportions of patients alive at 1 year were 11-22% greater with AZA. These data suggest AZA should be the preferred treatment for older patients with AML and adverse karyotypes. Disclosures Seymour: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Santini:Astex: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Onconova: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Stone:Celator: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Xenetic Biosciences: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Jansen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; ONO: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Al-Ali:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Morrill:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Songer:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Weaver:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Skikne:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Beach:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dombret:Agios: Honoraria; Ambit (Daiichi Sankyo): Honoraria; Menarini: Honoraria; Menarini: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Sunesis: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Kite Pharma.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astellas: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Roche/Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Ariad: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Download Full-text