Intralesional Bleomycin for Treatment of a Recalcitrant Wart in an Immunocompromised Patient: A Safe, Effective, and Underutilized Therapy

Injectable bleomycin is infrequently used for recalcitrant warts despite its efficacy, acceptable safety profile, and high patient satisfaction compared to other treatment modalities. We present an immunocompromised patient with a large recalcitrant wart successfully treated with intralesional bleomycin to provide greater clinical exposure, training, and practice with intralesional bleomycin.

First-line (1L) nivolumab (NIVO) plus chemotherapy (chemo) versus chemo in advanced gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction cancer/esophageal adenocarcinoma (GC/GEJC/EAC): Expanded efficacy and safety data from CheckMate 649.

4002 Background: CheckMate 649 is the largest randomized, global phase 3 study of 1L programmed death (PD)-1 inhibitor–based therapy in GC/GEJC/EAC. 1L NIVO + chemo demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) vs chemo, with progression-free survival (PFS) benefit and an acceptable safety profile in pts whose tumors expressed PD-ligand (L)1 at combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 5 and ≥ 1, and in all randomized pts (Moehler et al. Ann Oncol 2020). We report additional data for all randomized pts. Methods: Eligible pts had previously untreated, unresectable advanced or metastatic GC/GEJC/EAC. Known HER2-positive pts were excluded. Pts were randomized to receive NIVO (360 mg Q3W or 240 mg Q2W) + chemo (XELOX Q3W or FOLFOX Q2W), NIVO + ipilimumab, or chemo. Dual primary endpoints for NIVO + chemo vs chemo were OS and PFS by blinded central review in PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 pts. Hierarchically tested secondary endpoints were OS in PD-L1 CPS ≥ 1 and all randomized pts. Results: At 12-month minimum follow-up for 1581 randomized pts, NIVO + chemo had a statistically significant OS benefit vs chemo (HR 0.80 [99.3% CI 0.68–0.94; P = 0.0002]) in all randomized pts; PFS benefit was also seen (HR 0.77 [95% CI 0.68–0.87]). OS benefit was observed in multiple prespecified subgroups, consistent with the primary population. Grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 59% (NIVO + chemo) and 44% (chemo) of pts. TRAEs with potential immunologic etiology (select TRAEs; sTRAEs) are shown in the table. Pts in the NIVO + chemo arm had decreased risk of symptom deterioration on treatment vs those in the chemo arm (HR 0.77 [95% CI 0.63–0.95; P = 0.0129]). Tolerability as measured by the FACT-Ga GP5 item was similar in both treatment groups. Conclusions: The addition of NIVO to chemo demonstrated improved OS and PFS benefit in all randomized pts, along with an acceptable safety profile and maintained tolerability as well as QoL, providing further support for NIVO + chemo as a standard 1L treatment for advanced GC/GEJC/EAC. Clinical trial information: NCT02872116. [Table: see text]

Novel Use of Bromelain and Acetylcysteine (BromAc®) for Pleural Involvement in Pseudomyxoma Peritonei

Pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) is a rare mucinous disease most commonly arising from the appendix. Pleural involvement arising from established PMP is seen in a small number of cases. Combined cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intrathoracic chemotherapy is the treatment of choice when managing intra-thoracic PMP. In cases of recurrence, surgical intervention may be technically challenging and carry higher rates of complications, morbidity, and mortality. Bromelain and acetylcysteine (BromAc^®) is a novel treatment modality that has demonstrated mucolytic properties. When injected directly into mucinous disease, it facilitates tumour dissolution and allows it to be aspirated. It has recently been tested in the treatment of inoperable peritoneal mucinous disease, with an acceptable safety profile and positive objective response. Here we describe the first two cases of BromAc^® administered directly into pleural adenomucinosis, with striking differences in response between the two patients likely due to differences in tumour hardness.

Outcomes of Non-anesthesiologist-Administered Propofol in Pediatric Gastroenterology Procedures

Background and Aims: Non-anesthesiologist-administered propofol (NAAP) has been found to have an acceptable safety profile in adult endoscopy, but its use remains controversial and pediatric data is limited. Our aim was to examine the safety and efficacy of NAAP provided by pediatric hospitalists in pediatric endoscopy.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 929 esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), colonoscopy, and combined EGD/colonoscopy cases in children aged 5–20 years between April 2015 and December 2016 at a large children's hospital. We analyzed the data for adverse events in relation to demographics and anthropometrics, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical classification score, presence of a trainee, comorbid conditions, and procedure time.Results: A total of 929 cases were included of which 496 (53%) were completed with NAAP. Seventeen (3.4%) of NAAP cases had an adverse event including the following: 12 cases of hypoxia, 2 cardiac, and 3 gastrointestinal adverse events. General anesthesia cases had 62 (14.3%) adverse events including the following: 54 cases of hypoxia, 1 cardiac, 7 gastrointestinal, and 1 urologic adverse event. No adverse events in either group required major resuscitation. NAAP vs. general anesthesia had a lower overall adverse event rate (3.4 vs. 14.3%, p < 0.0004) and respiratory adverse event rate (2.4% vs. 12.5%, p < 0.0004). Overall, cardiac and gastrointestinal adverse event rates between the two groups were comparable. When accounting for all captured factors via logistic regression, both younger age (P < 0.001) and general anesthesia (P < 0.0001) remained risk factors for an adverse event.Conclusion: The overall adverse event rate of NAAP was low (3.4%) with none requiring major resuscitation or hospitalization. This is comparable to studies of NAAP in adult endoscopy and suggests that NAAP provided by pediatric hospitalists has an acceptable safety profile.

The role of idecabtagene vicleucel in patients with heavily pretreated refractory multiple myeloma

The development of several treatment options over the last 2 decades has led to a notable improvement in the survival of patients with multiple myeloma. Despite these advances, the disease remains incurable for most patients. Moreover, standard combinations of alkylating agents, immunomodulatory drugs, proteasome inhibitors, and monoclonal antibodies targeting CD38 and corticoids are exhausted relatively fast in a proportion of high-risk patients. Such high-risk patients account for over 20% of cases and currently represent a major unmet medical need. The challenge of drug resistance requires the development of highly active new agents with a radically different mechanism of action. Several immunotherapeutic modalities, including antibody–drug conjugates and T-cell engagers, appear to be promising choices for patients who develop resistance to standard combinations. Chimeric antigen-receptor-modified T cells (CAR-Ts) targeting B-cell maturation antigen have demonstrated encouraging efficacy and an acceptable safety profile compared with alternative options. Multiple CAR-Ts are in early stages of clinical development, but the first phase III trials with CAR-Ts are ongoing for two of them. After the recent publication of the results of a phase II trial confirming a notable efficacy and acceptable safety profile, idecabtagene vicleucel is the first CAR-T to gain regulatory US Food and Drug Administration approval to treat refractory multiple myeloma patients who have already been exposed to antibodies against CD38, proteasome inhibitors, and immunomodulatory agents and who are refractory to the last therapy. Here, we will discuss the preclinical and clinical development of idecabtagene vicleucel and its future role in the changing treatment landscape of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.

OR26-08 Efficacy and Safety of Higher Dulaglutide Doses (3.0 MG and 4.5 MG) When Added to Metformin in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Parallel ARM Study (Award-11)

Dulaglutide (DU) approved at doses of 0.75 and 1.5 mg once-weekly is an effective glucose lowering agent for treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D). We hypothesized that higher investigational DU doses may provide further improvements in glucose control and body weight (BW) with an acceptable safety profile. The primary objective was to demonstrate superiority of once-weekly DU 3 mg and/or 4.5 mg to DU 1.5 mg for A1C change from baseline (BL) at 36 weeks (wks) in patients (pts) with inadequately controlled T2D on metformin therapy. Secondary objectives (controlled for multiplicity) included change in BW and % of pts achieving A1C <7% at 36 wks. Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to once-weekly DU 1.5 mg (n=612), DU 3 mg (n=616), and DU 4.5 mg (n=614). All pts initiated once-weekly DU 0.75 mg for 4 wks, followed by step-wise dose escalation every 4 wks to the randomized dose of 1.5 mg, 3 mg, or 4.5 mg. Two estimands were defined for efficacy analyses: an efficacy estimand (data on-treatment without rescue medication) and a treatment-regimen estimand (all data regardless of adherence or initiation of rescue). At BL, patients had a mean of: age 57.1 yrs, T2D duration 7.6 yrs, and A1C 8.6%, BW 95.7 kg, and BMI 34.2 kg/m2. Using the efficacy estimand, the DU 3 mg and 4.5 mg doses were superior to the DU 1.5 mg dose for A1C change from BL (1.5 mg, 1.53%; 3 mg, 1.71% [p=0.003]; 4.5 mg, 1.87% [p<0.001]), % of patients achieving HbA1c <7% (1.5 mg, 57%; 3.0 mg, 65% [p=0.006]; 4.5 mg, 71% [p<0.001]) and BW change from BL (1.5 mg, 3.1 kg; 3 mg, 4.0 kg [p=0.001]; 4.5 mg, 4.7 kg [p<0.001]). Using the treatment-regimen estimand, DU 4.5 mg was superior to DU 1.5 mg for A1C change, while the DU 3 mg dose did not achieve statistical significance (1.5 mg, 1.54%; 3.0 mg, 1.64% [p=0.096]; 4.5 mg, 1.77% [p<0.001]). Using the treatment-regimen estimand, more patients achieved A1C <7% with higher DU doses (1.5 mg, 50%; 3 mg, 56%; 4.5 mg, 62%) and results for BW change were similar to the efficacy estimand (1.5 mg, 3.0 kg; 3 mg, 3.8 kg; 4.5 mg, 4.6 kg), but the approach for type I error control did not permit formal statistical comparisons of these secondary objectives using this estimand. The safety profile for the higher DU doses was consistent with that known for 1.5 mg. The most commonly reported adverse events were nausea (DU 1.5 mg, 13.4%; DU 3 mg, 15.6%; DU 4.5 mg, 16.4%), vomiting (DU 1.5 mg, 5.6%; DU 3 mg, 8.3%; DU 4.5 mg, 9.3%), and diarrhea (DU 1.5 mg, 7.0%; DU 3 mg, 11.4%; DU 4.5 mg, 10.7%). Treatment discontinuation due to adverse events through 36 wks was low and similar across dose groups (DU 1.5 mg, 4.2%; DU 3 mg, 5.5%; DU 4.5 mg, 5.0%). In pts with T2D and inadequate glycemic control on metformin, escalation from DU 1.5 mg to DU 3 mg or DU 4.5 mg once-weekly provided clinically relevant, dose-related improvements in glycemic control and BW with an acceptable safety profile.

Timed sequential therapy with high-dose cytarabine and mitoxantrone as an induction regimen for acute myeloid leukemia: An update on adverse events.

e18524 Background: Traditionally, patients eligible for induction chemotherapy for AML are treated with the “7+3” regimen, standard doses of infusional cytarabine and an anthracycline, with historical CR rates of 50-60%. We present a retrospective analysis of an alternate induction regimen. Based on timed sequential therapy, it consists of a 2-day treatment with high dose cytarabine, which improves remission rates when used in induction, and dose intensified anthracycline therapy, which improves outcomes while maintaining an acceptable safety profile. Methods: 200 patients were treated from 2010-2015. Patients received 2 doses of cytarabine 2 gm/m2 (1.5 gm/m2 age > 70 years) IVPB over 3 hours, 12 hours apart followed by 1 dose of mitoxantrone 30 mg/m2 IVPB over 1 hour on days 1 and 5. Cytogenetics and adverse events data were collected. IWG remission criteria were used to determine remission status. Results: Median age 57.6 years (range 23-79); 105 (53%) age > 60. 119 male; 81 female. Risk stratification: 12 favorable; 108 intermediate; 80 unfavorable . Overall CR rate (CRR: CR+CRi+CRp) for all patients was 68.5%. CR rates based on risk karyotypes: favorable 100%, intermediate 76.8%, unfavorable 52.5%. Most common G3-4 adverse events: anemia (60% G3, 40% G4), neutropenia (1% G3, 99% G4), thrombocytopenia (0.5% G1, 99.5% G4). 196 patients (98%) had neutropenic fever; 134 (67%) documented infections (100 with G3/4), 62 (31%) neutropenic fever with no source. 52 (26%) experienced bleeding (15 G1, 31 G2, 4 G3, 1 G4, 1 G5). G3/4 renal or hepatic toxicity was rare. No cerebellar toxicity occurred during induction. 30 day mortality 0.5%; 60 day mortality 3%. 62 (31%) patients are still alive; 122 died, 16 lost to follow-up. Conclusions: This two-day induction regimen is an effective treatment for AML with an acceptable safety profile including patients age >60. There is a high response rate, particularly for favorable and intermediate risk karyotypes, with a low rate of early mortality. The high response rates and tolerability with this regimen provides a platform for further clinical trials to enhance outcome by combining with novel targeted therapies for AML.

ECOG-ACRIN EAA172: Phase 1/2 study of daratumumab, bortezomib, dexamethasone (DVd) with or without venetoclax in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) with assessment for t(11;14) status.

TPS8052 Background: The most common translocation in multiple myeloma (MM) is t(11;14)(q13;q32), present in approximately 20% of cases. MM cells with t(11;14) usually have a favorable high BCL-2 level and inferior outcomes compared to standard risk MM. Venetoclax (VEN) is a potent, selective, orally available small-molecule BCL-2 inhibitor that induces cell death in MM cell lines and primary samples. VEN has single agent activity in relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) with an acceptable safety profile, especially in t(11;14) MM; however, non- t(11;14) MM patients may benefit from single agent VEN and VEN incorporated in multi-agent RRMM regimens. Dexamethasone (d) promotes Bcl-2 dependence in MM resulting in sensitivity to VEN and this combination with bortezomib (Vd-VEN) has an acceptable safety profile with high response rates in heavily pre-treated MM. Combination therapy with daratumumab and bortezomib (DVd) has become a standard of care in RRMM. Our hypotheses are that the addition of VEN will improve upon this standard and be most effective in the t(11;14) positive subset. Methods: Eligibility criteria include RRMM with measurable disease, not bortezomib refractory, platelet count > 100K. t(11;14) is an integral biomarker with status (positive or negative) established at registration. After a Ph1 study to determine the recommended phase 2 VEN dose, patients are randomized to DVd +/- VEN [stratified by prior lines of therapy and R-ISS]. The primary Ph2 objectives are to compare 8-cycle minimal residual disease (MRD) negative rate and to inform the role of t(11;14) as a biomarker. The Ph2 design proposed by Freidlin et al. follows a decision algorithm as outlined in the table below. Simulations were run to establish an optimal sample size given various parameters including biomarker prevalence and power to make appropriate decisions for a Ph3 design. Target Ph2 accrual is 240 patients with a 1/3 positive:2/3 negative t(11;14) split. Clinical trial information: NCT03701321. [Table: see text]