Outcomes of Anti-PD1 Treatment for Relapsed/Refractory Hodgkin Lymphoma: A German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) Multi-Center Real-World Analysis

Background: Immune-checkpoint inhibition with antibodies targeting programmed death protein 1 (PD1) was well tolerable and highly effective in pivotal phase II and III trials in relapsed or refractory (r/r) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). We aimed to evaluate emerging therapeutic sequences and the safety and efficacy of anti-PD1 antibodies in the rapidly changing routine care of r/r cHL. Methods: GHSG-affiliated hemato-oncology departments and practices in Germany were invited to participate in this retrospective study. Patients ≥18 years of age receiving anti-PD1 antibodies for r/r cHL in routine care were eligible. Patient, disease and treatment characteristics were documented by the treating physicians with standardized case report forms. Locally assessed response rates were reported as complete (CR) or partial (PR) remission, stable (SD) or progressive (PD) disease and summarized as objective response rate (ORR: CR + PR). Progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed according to Kaplan-Meier from the start of anti-PD1 treatment in routine care to PD (PFS) or death from any cause (PFS + OS). All analyses were done descriptively and conducted in SAS V9.4. Results: A total of 58 r/r cHL patients (pts.) with a median age of 48 years (range 19-89 years) and male predominance (57%) initiated anti-PD1 treatment between 11/2014 and 01/2021 at 15 sites. Median time from 1 st-line to anti-PD1 treatment was 5.5 years (0.8-26.0). The majority had received prior brentuximab vedotin (BV, 86%) or an autologous stem-cell transplantation (autoSCT, 62%) and 16% undergone prior alloSCT. Relevant co-morbidities including HIV, pre-existing autoimmune conditions, cardiovascular diseases and dialysis-dependent kidney failure were documented in 49% of patients. An impaired ECOG performance status of ≥1 was present in 57% of patients (ECOG 2: 12%, ECOG 3: 4%). At initiation of anti-PD1 treatment, 74% of patients presented with stage III/IV disease and 35% did not achieve a response to their latest prior therapy. The median duration of anti-PD1 treatment was 18.1 (0.5-79.3) months and 50% of patients still received an anti-PD1 antibody at data collection. One third (31.6%) of patients experienced grade III/IV treatment-related toxicities and a treatment delay of >6 weeks due to toxicity occurred in 15.5% of patients. Investigator-assessed ORR was 66.7% with 20.4% of patients achieving a CR and 46.3% a PR as best response (Figure 1A). With a median follow-up of 19.1 (0-74.7) months and 26.7 (0-74.7) for PFS and OS, respectively, median PFS (mPFS) and OS were 12.3 months and 32 months, respectively (Figure 1B+C). Corresponding 2-year PFS and OS estimates were 38.3% (95%CI 24.4-52.2) and 78.5% (95%CI 67.2-89.8). Median PFS was more favorable in patients achieving either a CR (30.1 months) or PR (24.9 months) compared to SD (9.3) or PD (3.4, Figure 1D), with similar trends also observed for OS. Two thirds (67%) of the 29 patients eventually experiencing PD, continued anti-PD1 treatment beyond progression at least once, with a median duration of 9.9 (3.0-25.8) until 2 nd PD. Overall, 28% patients received concomitant add-on treatments with radiotherapy (62.5%) and chemotherapy (25%) administered simultaneously most commonly. Best response to combination treatment was PR in 84.6% and SD in 15.4% of patients, and 75% of patients receiving add-on treatments achieved their best response only thereafter. Most common consecutive treatments were allogeneic stem-cell transplantation (N=5), BV-based therapy (N=5), Gemcitabine-based regimens (N=4) radiotherapy (N=4) and N=13 patients did not receive further treatment after anti-PD1 failure. Most common cause of death was cHL (58% of deaths reported), followed by non-anti-PD1 treatment-related causes (16%), infections and cardiac diseases (11% each) and second neoplasms (5%). Conclusions: In this multicenter cohort of older and frailer r/r cHL patients receiving anti-PD1 antibodies in routine care, safety and efficacy data including ORR, mPFS and mOS was similar to data reported from pivotal phase II trials. Anti-PD1 treatment for r/r cHL thereby appears feasible and able to induce meaningful clinical benefit in a broad range of patients. Despite various concomitant and subsequent treatments administered, however, cHL or subsequent treatments are by far the leading cause of death. Failure of anti-PD1 in r/r cHL hence constitutes an unmet need. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Trautmann-Grill: GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kobbe: Celgene: Research Funding. Heinrich: Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Eisai: Consultancy; Lilly: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Astra: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding. Schmidt: Incyte: Honoraria; Biotest: Honoraria; Alexion: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; Sanofi-Aventis: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Hüttmann: Celgene: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Lead Discovery Center GmbH: Consultancy; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Fuchs: Lukon: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; MSD: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. von Tresckow: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: congress and travel support, Research Funding; Kite-Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: congress and travel support, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pentixafarm: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS-Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: congress and travel support; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Other: congress and travel support; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Other: congress and travel support. Borchmann: Gilead Sciences: Honoraria; BMS/Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Miltenyi Biotech: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Engert: MSD: Honoraria; Hexal: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Tessa Therapeutics: Consultancy; Amgen: Honoraria; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy. Bröckelmann: BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding.

Updated Results of Pivotal Phase 2 Trials of Olverembatinib (HQP1351) in Patients (Pts) with Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor (TKI)-Resistant BCR-ABL1 T315I-Mutated Chronic- and Accelerated-Phase Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CML-CP and CML-AP)

Background: Management of CML with TKIs is constrained by treatment resistance, which portends a poor prognosis particularly in pts failing 2 nd-generation TKIs. Cells with BCR-ABL1 T315I mutations are insensitive to 1 st- and 2 nd -generation TKIs, and compound BCR-ABL1 mutations complicate management with all TKIs (including 3 rd-generation ponatinib). Olverembatinib is a novel, potent, 3 rd-generation, orally active BCR-ABL1 TKI with promising activity against CML , largely irrespective of genotype and has a preliminary favorable safety profile. Methods: HQP1351-CC201 and HQP1351-CC202 are Chinese open, single-arm, multicenter phase 2 trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of olverembatinib in adults with TKI-resistant (BCR-ABL1 T351-mutated) CML-CP and CML-CP, respectively. Olverembatinib was administered at 40 mg orally on alternate days for 28-day cycles. The primary outcome measure is major cytogenetic response (MCyR) and major hematologic response (MaHR) by the end of Cycle 12 in CML-CP and CML-AP, respectively. Secondary study endpoints include : complete CyR (CCyR), complete hematologic response (CHR), major molecular response (MMR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety, including treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and serious AEs (SAEs). Results: Baseline characteristics Study CC201 （CML-CP ） On the study cutoff date of August 25,2020, 41 pts were enrolled, of whom 32 (78%) completed ≥ 12 cycles and 21 (51.2%) were male. The median (range) follow-up was 13 (3.1-16.3) months, age was 47 (22-70) years, and interval from CML diagnosis to first olverembatinib dose was 5.31 (0.6-23.2) years. In all, 32 (78.1%) pts had received ≥ 2 prior TKIs and 9 pts withdrew because of progressive disease (PD), intolerance, or consent withdrawal before Cycle 12. Study CC202 （CML-AP ） On the cut-off date of July 27, 2020, 23 pts were enrolled, of whom 14 (61%) had completed ≥ 12 cycles and 18 (78.3%) were male. The median (range) follow-up was 13.5 (1.4-15.2) months, age was 41 (21-74) years, and interval from CML diagnosis to first olverembatinib dose was 4.96 (0.4-10.2) years. In all, 18 (78.3%) pts had received ≥ 2 prior TKIs, and 11 pts withdrew because of PD or intolerance before Cycle 12. Efficacy Study CC201 （CML-CP ） After ≥ 12 treatment cycles in pts without responses at baseline, all 31 (100%) experienced CHR (10 other pts had CHR at baseline); 31/41 (75.6%) MCyR; 28/41 (68.3%) CCyR; and 23/41 (56.1%) MMR (Figure 1). The median time to CHR was 1 (95% CI = 1.0-1.9) month, the median time to MCyR was 2.8 (95% CI = 2.8-5.6) months, and the median time to MMR was 6.5 (95% CI = 2.8 to not reached [NR]) months. At 12 months, the PFS rate was 89.3% (95% CI = 73.9%-95.8%), and the OS was 100% (95% CI = 100%-100%). Study CC202 （CML-AP ） After ≥ 12 treatment cycles in pts without responses at baseline, 17/23 (73.9%) experienced MaHR (65.2% CHR and 8.7% no evidence of leukemia [NEL]); 12/23 (52.2%) MCyR; 11/23 (47.8%) CCyR; and 9/23 (39.1%) MMR (Figure 1). The median time to MaHR was 2.8 (95% CI = 1.0-4.7) months, the median time to MCyR was 5.6 (95% CI = 2.00-NR) months, and the median time to MMR was 13.1 (95% CI = 5.6-NR) months. At 12 months, the PFS rate was 74.1% (95% CI = 48.2%-88.4%), and the OS was 91.3% (95% CI = 69.5%-97.8%). Safety Study CC201 （CML-CP ） Frequent TRAEs (all grades; grade 3-4; SAEs) included thrombocytopenia (70.7%; 48.8%; 7.3%), followed by anemia (61%; 26.8%; 2.4%), leukopenia (43.9%; 17.1%; 0), and neutropenia (36.6%; 19.5%; 0). Common nonhematologic TRAEs (all grades; G3-4) included skin pigmentation (56.1%, 0%) and elevations in creatine kinase (51.2%, 14.6%), ALT (39%, 2.4%) and AST (34.1%, 0) (Table 1). No deaths occurred. Study CC202 （CML-AP ） Common TRAEs (all grades; G3-4; SAEs) included thrombocytopenia (73.9%; 56.5%; 17.4%), anemia (60.9%; 34.8%; 13.0%), leukopenia (56.5%; 30.4%; 0), and neutropenia (26.1%; 21.7%; 0). Common nonhematologic AEs included skin pigmentation (69.6%), hypocalcemia (52.2%), proteinuria (47.8%), hypertriglyceridemia (56.5%), hyperphosphatemia (47.8%), hyperuricemia (21.7%), and arthralgia (34.8%), of which most were grade 1-2 (Table 2). Conclusions: Olverembatinib was efficacious and well tolerated when administered as monotherapy in pts with TKI-resistant CP-CML and AP-CML and the BCR-ABL1 T315Imutation. Internal study identifiers: HQP1351-CC201-CC202. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT03883087 and NCT03883100. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Chen: Ascentage Pharma (Suzhou) Co., Ltd: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Niu: Ascentage Pharma (Suzhou) Co., Ltd: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Men: Ascentage Pharma (Suzhou) Co., Ltd.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Yang: Ascentage Pharma (Suzhou) Co., Ltd: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: Leadership and other ownership interests, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding. Zhai: Ascentage Pharma Group Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: Leadership and other ownership interests, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Ascentage Pharma (Suzhou) Co., Ltd.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: Leadership and other ownership interests, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding.

Tapinarof Cream 1% Once Daily for the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis in Children and Adults: The Pivotal Phase 3 ADORING Clinical Program

N/A

CTNI-09. TRIDENT PHASE 3 TRIAL (EF-32): FIRST-LINE TUMOR TREATING FIELDS (TTFields; 200 KHZ) CONCOMITANT WITH CHEMO-RADIATION, FOLLOWED BY MAINTENANCE TTFIELDS/TEMOZOLOMIDE IN NEWLY-DIAGNOSED GLIOBLASTOMA

INTRODUCTION Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields; 200 kHz; non-invasive, loco-regional antimitotic treatment) is approved for newly-diagnosed glioblastoma (ndGBM). In the Phase 3 EF-14 trial, post-surgical radiotherapy/temozolomide, followed by maintenance TTFields/temozolomide significantly increased overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with ndGBM versus TMZ alone. Addition of maintenance TTFields did not increase systemic toxicity; and related adverse events (AEs) were mainly dermatological. In preclinical models, addition of TTFields increased the benefit of radiotherapy. Two pilot studies showed that TTFields concomitant with radiotherapy/temozolomide is feasible and well-tolerated. The benefit of TTFields concomitant with radiotherapy/temozolomide will be investigated in the TRIDENT trial. METHODS TRIDENT (EF-32; NCT04471844) is an international, pivotal, phase 3 randomized trial comparing triple-combination of TTFields/radiotherapy/temozolomide versus standard radiotherapy/temozolomide. Patients in both arms will receive maintenance TTFields/TMZ. Arrays of the Optune® System will be used to deliver TTFields (200 KHz) for ≥18 hours/day concomitant with radiotherapy. TTFields treatment will be continued until second disease progression (RANO) or 24 months, whichever occurs first. Patients with pathologically-confirmed ndGBM, ≥ 18 years of age (≥ 22 years of age; US), KPS ≥ 70, post-surgery/biopsy, and amenable for radiotherapy/temozolomide will be stratified by extent-of-resection and MGMT promoter methylation status. The primary endpoint is median OS. Secondary endpoints include median PFS (RANO), 1-year and 2-year survival rates, overall radiological response (ORR; RANO), PFS (PFS-6M, PFS-12M, PFS-2Y), severity and frequency of AEs (CTCAE V5.0), pathological post-treatment changes in resected GBM tumors, quality-of-life (EORTC QLQ-C30), and OS correlation to TTFields duration-of-usage. The hypothesis is that first-line TTFields/RT/TMZ triple-combination will significantly improve OS compared to radiotherapy/temozolomide; each followed by maintenance TTFields/temozolomide. Sample size (N=950; 475/arm) was powered for a HR < 0.8 with 5% type I error. Survival will be measured from time-of-randomization. The TRIDENT trial is currently enrolling patients. RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS N/A TiP.

97. Tetravalent Dengue Vaccine (TAK-003) Development Program: A Bird’s Eye View

Background Dengue fever is a mosquito-borne viral disease endemic in 128 countries. An unmet clinical need remains for an effective vaccine that can be used more broadly than the vaccine presently available. A clinical development program has evaluated the long-term safety, immunogenicity, and vaccine efficacy (VE) of TAK-003, a live attenuated tetravalent dengue vaccine with a DENV-2 backbone engineered to elicit immune responses to all 4 dengue serotypes. Methods 18 clinical trials in 13 countries have involved 28,175 seropositive/seronegative participants aged from 1.5-60 years from endemic/non-endemic regions. In the ongoing pivotal phase III study, 4–16-year-old healthy children (N=20,099) were randomized 2:1 to receive two doses of TAK-003 or placebo, 3 months apart for an evaluation of VE and safety over a multi-year period stratified pre-vaccination dengue serostatus. Active surveillance throughout the trial detected symptomatic dengue. The trial will continue up to 4–4.5 years post 2nd dose, and for another 25 months after a booster dose. Data up to 3 years after the second vaccination are currently available. Results Safety and immunogenicity data from Phase I/II studies established the final formulation and dosing schedule. Overall VE in the pivotal phase III study was 80.2% [95% CI: 73.3–85.3] against virologically confirmed dengue (VCD) at 12 months post 2nd dose. At 18 months, VE was 66.2% (95% CI: 49.1–77.5) in dengue-naive and 76.1% (95% CI: 68.5–81.9) in dengue pre-exposed participants, with VE of 90.4% (95% CI: 82.6–94.7) and 85.9% (95% CI: 31.9–97.1) for prevention of hospitalized VCD and dengue hemorrhagic fever, respectively. Cumulative VE against VCD from first dose to 3 years post 2nd dose was 62.0% (95% CI: 56.6–66.7) and 83.6% (95% CI: 76.8–88.4) in prevention of hospitalized VCD. Some decline in VE was observed over time mainly driven by outpatient dengue. Two doses of TAK-003 3 months apart were well-tolerated with no important safety risks identified up to 3 years after completion of the vaccination schedule. Conclusion TAK-003 is immunogenic against all 4 dengue serotypes and continues to be efficacious, well-tolerated, and with no evidence of disease enhancement in seronegative population up to 3 years post-vaccination. Disclosures Vianney Tricou, D Phil, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International (Employee) Shibadas Biswal, MD, Takeda Vaccines, Inc (Employee) Sanjay S. Patel, PhD, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International AG (Employee) Olaf Zent, MD, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International AG (Employee) Martina Rauscher, PhD, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International AG (Employee) Gonzalo Perez, MD, Takeda group companies (Employee) Walid Kandeil, MD, Takeda Pharmaceuticals International AG (Employee) Nicolas Folschweiller, PhD, Takeda (Employee)

A contemporary review of rearranged during transfection-selective inhibitors

Objective Rearranged during transfection genes are present in 1−2% of patients who have non-small cell lung cancer and 10−30% of patients with papillary thyroid cancer. The objective of this article is to review the current rearranged during transfection inhibitors indicated for patients with rearranged during transfection-mutated cancers and their future directions. Data sources: The pivotal phase I/II studies for selpercatinib and pralsetinib were evaluated. Current studies on rearranged during transfection inhibitors were searched on ClinicalTrials.gov using the key word “RET.” Data summary: Selpercatinib and pralsetinib were the first two U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved rearranged during transfection-selective inhibitors for advanced or metastatic rearranged during transfection fusion-positive non-small cell lung cancer, rearranged during transfection-mutant medullary thyroid cancer, and rearranged during transfection fusion-positive thyroid cancer. Both agents showed promising efficacy with objective response rate ranging from 60% to 73% in all aforementioned rearranged during transfection-mutated cancers. Additionally, benefits were seen even in patients with intracranial metastasis at baseline. Both showed favorable safety profiles. Some common class adverse events included elevated liver function tests and hypertension. Hematologic side effects such as anemia and neutropenia were more common with pralsetinib. Selpercatinib had interactions with acid suppressive therapy and specific instructions when used concomitantly. Conclusions While the rearranged during transfection inhibitors are generally well-tolerated, each agent possesses slightly different efficacy, side-effect profile, and drug−drug interactions.