Search

Background Multiple myeloma (MM) is considered an incurable hematologic malignancy despite a plethora of standard and novel agents. There is no consensus on the optimal sequencing of available therapies in relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM), even in the second line setting. Novel agents such as selinexor (XPOVIO [X]), an oral, first-in-class selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE) compound that blocks XPO1, or those that target B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA), have shown significant activity in RRMM. X is approved with bortezomib (V) and dexamethasone (XVd) in patients (pts) with at least 1 prior therapy and is not associated with known long-term clinically significant toxicities such as visual loss, cardiac dysfunction, renal failure, neuropathy, irreversible bone marrow suppression, second malignancies, venous thromboembolism, or rash. Currently, BCMA-targeting agents include 1 form each of chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T cell) and antibody drug conjugate (ADC) therapy approved in RRMM: idecabtagene vicleucel and belantamab mafodotin, respectively. BCMA-refractory MM represents an area of unmet need in MM without known standards for best treatment. Various novel combinations with X have demonstrated strong benefit in RRMM after 1 or more lines of therapy and activity even in CAR-T cell BCMA-refractory MM (N=7): 1 pt stringent complete (sCR), 3 very good partial (VGPR), 2 partial (PR), and 1 minimal (MR) response (Chari BJH 2020). Here we report on the outcomes of heavily pretreated RRMM pts, a majority of whom had received ADC-BCMA, and who were treated with X-containing regimens on the STOMP trial. Methods STOMP (NCT02343042) is a phase 1b/2, multi-arm, open-label trial of various combinations of X with backbone agents for pts with RRMM or newly diagnosed MM. Here we report on all pts in STOMP with prior anti-BCMA treatment who were treated on STOMP with X+pomalidomide +dexamethasone (XPd); XVd; X+carfilzomib+d (XKd); XPVd; and XPd+elotuzumab (E) (XPEd). Results In total, 11 pts with prior anti-BCMA therapy (6 pts with belantamab mafodotin; 1 each with MEDI2228, SEA-BCMA, BCMA BITE; 2 with idecabtagene vicleucel) were treated with 5 X-containing regimens (Table 1): 9 pts were treated with triplets XPd (4), XVd (3), or XKd (2) and 2 pts with quadruplets XPVd (1) or XPEd (1). Median age was 71 years (range 46-85), 7 pts (63.6%) were women, 11 pts were white. Median duration from MM diagnosis to treatment with a STOMP regimen was 6.9 years (range 2.3-12.8). Five pts (45.5%) had high-risk cytogenetics; pts received median of 6 prior therapies (range 4-10). Eight pts (72.7%) received anti-BCMA in their immediate prior line of therapy. Ten pts (90.9%) were previously treated with all backbone drugs of the STOMP treatments (i.e., X was the only new drug). The overall response rate (ORR) and clinical benefit rate (CBR) for the prior anti-BCMA-containing regimens were 40.0% (2 pts VGPR, 2 PR, 5 stable disease [SD], 1 progressive disease, 1 unknown). Median progression free survival (PFS) was 1.8 months (95% CI: 1.5, NE), and the 6-month PFS probability was 12.5% (95% CI: 2.1, 76.2). ORR for the X-based treatments was 54.5% and CBR was 81.8%: 1 pt VGPR, 5 PR, 3 MR, 2 SD. Median PFS was not reached (95% CI: 5.9, NE) and the 6-month PFS probability was 68.6% (95% CI: 40.3, 100.0). Median overall survival was 10.5 months (95% CI: 9.6, NE) and median time to discontinuation was 8.1 months (95% CI: 6.1, NE). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were nausea and thrombocytopenia. Nausea was Grade (G) 1/2 (n=8, 72.7%); thrombocytopenia G1-4 in 8 pts (72.7%), 4 with ≥G3; there were no concurrent bleeding events. One pt on XPEd died of pulmonary nocardiosis considered to be associated with the 4-drug regimen. No new safety signals or long-term toxicities due to X were reported. Conclusions In this follow-up cohort of heavily pretreated pts, a majority of whom with MM refractory to ADC-BCMA, we demonstrate impressive potency and durability of the X-based treatments, particularly as compared to that of their prior anti-BCMA therapies. These data support the rationale for the development of novel regimens containing X plus immunomodulatory drugs or proteasome inhibitors in earlier lines of therapy, including first relapse, and further suggest their strong value in the emerging BCMA RRMM space. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Baljevic: Exelixis: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Research: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gasparetto: Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gsk: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Oncopeptide: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Schiller: Sangamo: Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celator: Research Funding; Geron: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; PrECOG: Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; Pfizer: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding; Genentech-Roche: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; Deciphera: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Regimmune: Research Funding; FujiFilm: Research Funding; Gamida Cell Ltd.: Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Mateon: Research Funding; Astellas: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Arog: Research Funding; Delta-Fly: Research Funding; Tolero: Research Funding; Samus: Research Funding; Actuate: Research Funding; Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; Trovagene: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Elevate: Research Funding; Bio: Research Funding; Ono-UK: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pharma: Consultancy; Johnson & Johnson: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Biomed Valley Discoveries: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Research Funding; ASH foundation: Other: Chair-unpaid; Sellas: Research Funding; Ono: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Ariad: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Kaiser Permanente: Consultancy; Cyclacel: Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding; Ambit: Research Funding; Leukemia & Lymphoma Society: Research Funding; Bluebird Bio: Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingleheim: Research Funding; Cellerant: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Research Funding; National Marrow Donor Program: Research Funding; NIH: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Pharmamar: Research Funding; UC Davis: Research Funding; UCSD: Research Funding; Evidera: Consultancy; NCI: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Tuchman: Caelum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi / Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Shattuck Labs: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy. Lentzsch: Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celularity: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Caelum Biosciences: Consultancy, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company; Ossium Health: Consultancy; Magenta Therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Kadmon: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Monge: Karyopharm: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy. Kotb: Celgene: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company; Pfizer: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Akcea: Honoraria. Bahlis: GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy. White: Forus: Consultancy, Honoraria; Antengene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Chen: BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astrazeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Beigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy. Sutherland: GSK: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy. Madan: Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau. Leblanc: Celgene/BMS: Research Funding; BMS/Celgene Canada: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Canada: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen Canada: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi Canada: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda Canada: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sebag: Janssen: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Venner: Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Bensinger: BMS, Janssen, Poseida, Regeneron, Trillium: Research Funding; Amgen, BMS, Janssen, Sanofi: Speakers Bureau. DeCastro: Karyopharm: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Van Domelen: Karyopharm: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Bentur: Karyopharm Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Zhang: Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Shah: Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Shacham: Karyopharm: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Patents & Royalties: (8999996, 9079865, 9714226, PCT/US12/048319, and I574957) on hydrazide containing nuclear transport modulators and uses, and pending patents PCT/US12/048319, 499/2012, PI20102724, and 2012000928) . Kauffman: Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Lipe: Seagen Inc.: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; sanofi: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; amgen: Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Harpoon: Research Funding.

Introduction Multiple myeloma (MM) is an increasingly treatable but still incurable hematologic malignancy. Prognosis has improved significantly over recent years, although further advances remain urgently needed, especially for patients with heavily pre-treated and resistant disease for whom there are limited options. Selinexor is a first-in-class, oral, selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE) compound that triggers apoptosis in malignant cells by inducing nuclear retention of oncogene messenger RNAs (mRNAs) and reactivation of tumor suppressor proteins (TSPs). In clinical studies of patients with relapsed and/or refractory MM, selinexor has demonstrated both manageable toxicity and encouraging efficacy. Areas covered This review will provide an overview of the mechanism of action of selinexor as well as the efficacy and safety data from clinical studies using selinexor for the treatment of multiple myeloma. Expert opinion Long-term outcomes for patients with MM will continue to improve due to numerous recent and imminent therapeutic advances, although critical areas of unmet need remain. Oral selinexor is likely to contribute to the meeting of these needs and the further advancement of MM therapy in a meaningful way.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a heterogeneous hematologic malignancy associated with several risk factors including genetic aberrations which impact disease response and survival. Thorough risk classification is essential to select the best clinical strategy to optimize outcomes. The SKY92 molecular signature classifies patients as standard- or high-risk for progression. The PRospective Observational Multiple Myeloma Impact Study (PROMMIS; NCT02911571) measures impact of SKY92 on risk classification and treatment plan. Newly diagnosed MM patients had bone marrow aspirates analyzed for SKY92. Physicians completed a questionnaire for each patient capturing risk classification, hypothetical treatment plan, and physician confidence in the treatment plan, before and after unblinding SKY92. One hundred forty seven MM patients were enrolled. Before unblinding SKY92, physicians regarded 74 (50%) patients as clinical standard-risk. After unblinding SKY92, 16 patients were re-assigned as high-risk by the physician, and for 15 of them treatment strategy was impacted, resulting in an escalated treatment plan. For the 73 (50%) clinical high-risk patients, SKY92 indicated 46 patients to be standard-risk; for 31 of these patients the treatment strategy was impacted consistent with a de-escalation of risk. Overall, SKY92 impacted treatment decisions in 37% of patients (

High-dose therapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is considered the standard of care for transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). With new treatment combinations offering the advantage of improved clinical outcomes of MM patients, the utilization of ASCT is again being addressed in the evolving treatment landscape. In this article, we review the role of frontline ASCT in the management of patients with MM.

Background: T cell redirection with agents such as Chimeric Antigen Receptor T cells or bispecific T cell engagers is remarkably effective in relapsed multiple myeloma (MM), however, they are not curative. Translational studies suggest that T cell exhaustion, characterized by upregulation of immune checkpoints LAG-3 and TIGIT, is a potential resistance mechanism to T cell redirection. These findings support the hypothesis that checkpoint inhibition with anti-LAG-3 or anti-TIGIT mAbs may restore anti-myeloma T cell activity. There is an unmet need to assess the feasibility and safety of checkpoint blockade in this malignancy. Patients and Methods: MyCheckpoint (NCT04150965) is a phase 1/2 platform trial for relapsed MM patients who have received ≥3 lines of therapy, including a proteasome inhibitor, immunomodulatory drug, and anti-CD38 mAb. Primary objectives were safety and tolerability of the investigational agents alone and in combination with pomalidomide (Pom) and dexamethasone (Dex) and overall response rates in each arm. In the phase 1 portion subjects were randomized to Arm B (anti-LAG-3) or Arm C (anti-TIGIT mAb). Subjects received one cycle (C1) of mAb therapy alone, with the addition of Pom and Dex starting with cycle 2 (C2) onward. Bone marrow aspirates and peripheral blood were obtained at screening, C2D1, C3D1, and end of study for correlative analysis. Results: Fourteen (14) eligible subjects were enrolled (seven subjects in Arm B dose level (DL) 1, one not evaluable; six subjects in Arm C DL1, and 1 subject Arm C DL2 not evaluable). The most common adverse events (AE) were anemia and dyspnea. Grade 3-4 AEs related to therapy in the anti-LAG-3 arm were dyspnea and neutropenia; those in anti-TIGIT arm were neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia. There was 1 death due to progression of disease unrelated to the study treatment. There was 1 death due to a serious adverse event of pneumonia (unrelated). There was one adverse event of special interest in Arm B DL1 (grade 1 AST elevation). No autoimmune AEs were reported. Best overall responses for Arm B DL1 were 1 very good partial response (VGPR), 1 partial response (PR), 4 stable disease (SD); for Arm C DL1, 1 VGPR, 2 PR, and 3 SD. Eight subjects withdrew from treatment for disease progression, 2 for AE, and 2 for patient decision. Two subjects continue in Arm C DL1 as of December 2022, 1 PR as of C16D1 and 1 VGPR (C23D1). Conclusion: Anti-LAG-3 and anti-TIGIT mAb alone and in combination with Pom are safe, feasible and clinically active in relapsed MM after Pom and anti-CD38 mAb. These data provide the first evidence of clinical activity of TIGIT and LAG-3 blockade in MM. Translational results utilizing serial analyses with mass cytometry suggest evidence of immune activation following combination therapy. Citation Format: Hearn J. Cho, Shambavi Richard, Alex Lesokhin, Noa Biran, Barry Paul, Ravi Vij, Matthew Pianko, Deon Doxie, Mercedes Martillo, Katie Wozniak, Kavita Dhodapkar, Madhav Dhodapkar. Durable responses following anti-TIGIT (BMS-986207) and anti-LAG3 (BMS-980616) in combination with pomalidomide in relapsed myeloma: MMRF MyCheckpoint trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 2 (Clinical Trials and Late-Breaking Research); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(8_Suppl):Abstract nr CT262.

We assessed the safety, efficacy, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of selinexor, a first in class oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export (100 mg once weekly [QW] or 60 mg twice weekly), in combination with daratumumab (16 mg/kg per label) and dexamethasone (40 mg QW) (SDd) in patients with relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Thirty-four patients (median prior therapies, 3 [range, 2-10]) were enrolled; MM was refractory to proteasome inhibitor (PI) in 85%, immunomodulatory agent (IMiD) in 76%, both in 74%, and daratumumab in 6% of patients. Two dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were reported in the selinexor 60 mg twice-weekly cohort with no DLTs in the 100 mg QW cohort, making 100 mg QW the MTD and RP2D. Common treatment-related adverse events included thrombocytopenia (70.6%), nausea (70.6%), fatigue (61.8%), anemia (61.8%), and neutropenia (50.0%). Overall response rate was 73% and median progression-free survival 12.5 months in daratumumab-naïve patients. SDd was well tolerated and its promising efficacy suggests that further study of this PI- and IMiD-free regimen in RRMM patients who had at least one prior line of therapy including a PI and an IMiD but whose disease is naïve to daratumumab is warranted.

Patients with high-risk multiple myeloma (hrMM) relapse after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) with a median progression free survival (PFS) of 8-14 months without lenalidomide maintenance and 24-39 months with lenalidomide maintenance. We hypothesized that Pembro-Rd will prolong PFS post-ASCT in patients with hrMM compared to historical controls. This Phase II study enrolled hrMM patients with primary objective to assess the efficacy of the combination of Pembro-Rd for a total of 2 cycles and then an additional 2 cycles without dexamethasone. There were 12 evaluable subjects, as enrollment was stopped after an FDA hold. With a median follow-up of 50.7 months, the median PFS was 27.7 months. The PFS rates at years 1 and 2 are 90.9% and 63.6%, respectively. The most common adverse events were neutropenia (grade 1-3), cough, diarrhea and constipation, all grade 1 or 2. The PFS rate with fixed duration therapy was comparable to that seen with continuous dose lenalidomide, potentially offering a new post-ASCT therapeutic strategy. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Background Selinexor is an oral, selective nuclear export inhibitor. STORM was a phase 2b, single-arm, open-label, multicenter trial of selinexor with low dose dexamethasone in patients with penta-exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) that met its primary endpoint, with overall response of 26% (95% confidence interval [CI], 19 to 35%). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was a secondary endpoint measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy – Multiple Myeloma (FACT-MM). This study examines impact of selinexor treatment on HRQoL of patients treated in STORM and reports two approaches to calculate minimal clinically important differences for the FACT-MM. Methods FACT-MM data were collected at baseline, on day 1 of each 4-week treatment cycle, and at end of treatment (EOT). Changes from baseline were analyzed for the FACT-MM total score, FACT-trial outcome index (TOI), FACT-General (FACT-G), and the MM-specific domain using mixed-effects regression models. Two approaches for evaluating minimal clinically important differences were explored: the first defined as 10% of the instrument range, and the second based on estimated mean baseline differences between Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) scores. Post-hoc difference analysis compared change in scores from baseline to EOT for treatment responders and non-responders. Results Eighty patients were included in the analysis; the mean number of prior therapies was 7.9 (standard deviation [SD] 3.1), and mean duration of myeloma was 7.6 years (SD 3.4). Each exploratory minimal clinically important difference threshold yielded consistent results whereby most patients did not experience HRQoL decline during the first six cycles of treatment (range: 53.9 to 75.7% for the first approach; range: 52.6 to 72.9% for the second). Treatment responders experienced less decline in HRQoL from baseline to EOT than non-responders, which was significant for the FACT-G, but not for other scores. Conclusion The majority of patients did not experience decline in HRQoL based on minimal clinically important differences during early cycles of treatment with selinexor and dexamethasone in the STORM trial. An anchor-based approach utilizing patient-level data (ECOG PS score) to define minimal clinically important differences for the FACT-MM gave consistent results with a distribution-based approach. Trial registration This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov under the trial-ID NCT02336815 on January 8, 2015.

Background Proteasome inhibitors (PIs), including carfilzomib, potentiate the activity of selinexor, a novel, first-in-class, oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE) compound, in preclinical models of multiple myeloma (MM). Methods The safety, efficacy, maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of selinexor (80 or 100 mg) + carfilzomib (56 or 70 mg/m2) + dexamethasone (40 mg) (XKd) once weekly (QW) was evaluated in patients with relapsed refractory MM (RRMM) not refractory to carfilzomib. Results Thirty-two patients, median prior therapies 4 (range, 1–8), were enrolled. MM was triple-class refractory in 38% of patients and 53% of patients had high-risk cytogenetics del(17p), t(4;14), t(14;16) and/or gain 1q. Common treatment-related adverse events (all/Grade 3) were thrombocytopenia 72%/47% (G3 and G4), nausea 72%/6%, anaemia 53%/19% and fatigue 53%/9%, all expected and manageable with supportive care and dose modifications. MTD and RP2D were identified as selinexor 80 mg, carfilzomib 56 mg/m2, and dexamethasone 40 mg, all QW. The overall response rate was 78% including 14 (44%) ≥ very good partial responses. Median progression-free survival was 15 months. Conclusions Weekly XKd is highly effective and well-tolerated. These data support further investigation of XKd in patients with MM.

A regimen of escalating doses of thalidomide, in combination with bortezomib and high-dose melphalan (mel/vel/thal), was evaluated as a conditioning regimen for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in multiple myeloma (MM) patients with a prior transplant who had relapsed or achieved less than a complete remission following a prior ASCT. Thalidomide was dose escalated starting from 600 mg to 1000 mg on days −5 to −1 in a 3 × 3 design, bortezomib was administered at 1.6 mg/m2 intravenously on days −4 and −1 and melphalan 200 mg/m2 was administered on day −2. No dose-limiting toxicity was seen in the phase I portion of the trial. An additional 20 patients were enrolled at the maximum tolerated dose of thalidomide of 1000 mg daily. The overall response rate was 69% with 38% complete remission. Median PFS and OS were 9.3 and 65.4 months, respectively, with a median follow-up of 17.8 months. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) were neutropenic fever (58.6%), mucositis (6.9%), and diarrhea (6.9%). Serious AEs included somnolence (13.8%) and tumor lysis syndrome (3.4%). The addition of high-dose thalidomide to bortezomib and melphalan as conditioning for salvage ASCT was well tolerated and was an effective conditioning regimen.

Twice-weekly carfilzomib (27 mg/m2 ) with lenalidomide-dexamethasone (KRd) is a standard-of-care in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). This phase 1b study evaluated KRd with once-weekly carfilzomib in RRMM. Patients received carfilzomib (30-minute infusion; 56 or 70mg/m2 ) on days 1, 8, and 15; lenalidomide 25 mg on days 1-21; and dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 (day 22 omitted for cycles 9+) of 28-day cycles. Primary objective was safety/tolerability; efficacy was a secondary objective. Fifty-six RRMM patients enrolled: 22 during dose evaluation (56-mg/m2 , n = 10; 70-mg/m2 , n = 12) and 34 during dose expansion (all initiated dosing at 70 mg/m2 ). After 2 fatal adverse events (AEs) during 70-mg/m2 dose expansion, dosage reduction to 56 mg/m2 was permitted. Results are presented for carfilzomib 56-mg/m2 (n = 10) and 70-mg/m2 groups (dose evaluation/expansion; n = 46). Median carfilzomib dose was 53.2 mg/m2 (56-mg/m2 group) and 62.4 mg/m2 (70-mg/m2 group). Grade ≥3 AE rates were 70.0% (56 mg/m2 ) and 69.6% (70 mg/m2 ). Overall response rates were 90.0% (56 mg/m2 ) and 89.1% (70 mg/m2 ); ≥very good partial response rates were 50.0% (56 mg/m2 ) and 73.9% (70 mg/m2 ). Once-weekly KRd was active with acceptable toxicity in RRMM, supporting further evaluation of this regimen.

e13543 Background: In February of 2020, Integra Connect (IC) released a machine learning (ML) risk prediction model called Integra Predict (IP) to predict End-of-Life (EOL) in active chemotherapy patients within the next six months. Pilot Study: Regional Cancer Care Associates (RCCA) physicians rated of likelihood of EOL in the next six months to compare concordance with the IP model predictions. Part 2 (April 2022): Patient date of death updated at the end of the six-month period will undergo post-hoc comparisons. Physician Prediction vs Actual Outcome. Integra Prediction vs Actual Outcome. Methods: A stratified random sample of 265 active chemotherapy patients from 33 RCCA providers was securely emailed via pdf documents or excel sheets to RCCA for each provider. Worksheets contained provider name, patient name, age, cancer type, and the risk of dying in the next six months (Low, Medium, High). The sample included patients from the top 10 cancer types: breast, carcinoma in situ of breast, chronic leukemia, gastro/esophageal, lung, lymphoma, multiple myeloma, pancreatic, prostate, and small intestine/colorectal cancers. The sample was comprised of patients with active chemotherapy in the care of RCCA between July 2021 through September 2021. RCCA emailed the study documentation to each provider and asked providers securely emailed risk assessments to IC. Provider responses for EOL in the next six months were scored categorically - low risk (1), medium risk (2), and high risk (3). Concordance between provider responses and IP risk predictions was determined. E.g., a provider rating of low compared to a risk model rating of high would result in a difference of 1-3 = -2. Results: Forty-two percent (14/33) providers responded to our request to rate patient specific EOL which corresponds to 40% (106/265) patients sampled. Current results have a large standard deviation (0.235) resulting in a large confidence interval (.175, .64) or (18% to 64% concordance). Ninety-five percent of the time concordance will fall in this range. Table: As displayed in Table, provider estimates matched the IP risk score estimates 41.3% of the time. The average concordance between provider risk estimate and IP risk estimate was -0.7, which is almost one risk level lower, range (-1.4, -0.3). Conclusions: Study hypothesized that risk estimates would not be 50% concordant at an alpha of 0.05. 41% are concordant with a large standard deviation of 0.235, which resulted in overlapping confidence intervals. There is no significant difference in the two risk estimates.

8055 Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is characterized by somatic mutations involving cancer-associated genes. The most commonly mutated genes are N- and K-Ras, which increase in prevalence as the disease progresses. Case reports and retrospective data suggest efficacy of targeting the MAPK pathway in N/K-Ras mutated MM. The MyDRUG trial was initiated to explore the efficacy of specific molecularly-targeted therapies in combination with standard therapies in MM. Methods: MyDRUG (NCT03732703) is a genomically-guided umbrella trial for patients with functional high-risk MM, defined as early relapse following primary therapy (3 years for transplant with maintenance, 18 months without), with specific genetic abnormalities. Subjects undergo molecular profiling of their MM cells and are assigned to a targeted arm if a variant allele frequency (VAF) over 25% is identified. The targeted mutated genes and respective agents (approved for non-MM indications and with a known phase 2 dose) are: KRAS/NRAS/BRAF (cobimetinib), FGFR3 (enasidenib), IDH (erdafitinib), CDKN2C (abemaciclib), t(11;14) (venetoclax). Patients receive the investigational drug for 2 cycles as a single agent followed by addition of an active MM combination (ixazomib, pomalidomide and dexamethasone, IPd). Limited dose escalation was performed with the single agent followed by dose assessment in combination with IPd. Here we present the results of the dose escalation portion of C1 arm exploring cobimetinib in patients with N/K-RAS or BRAF mutations. Cobimetinib was administered at 40 mg daily in combination with standard doses of IPd. Results: Eleven subjects with BRAF/RAS mutations were screened between August 2019 and October 2020, with 4 screen failures. Seven were enrolled, 5 males, median age 65 years, and median time from diagnosis of 30 months. N-RAS, K-RAS or BRAF mutations were seen in 4, 2, and 1 subject(s), respectively, with VAF ranging from 33-93%. Median number of prior lines of therapy was 1 (1-3), 3 patients had extramedullary disease, and 1 patient had high risk cytogenetics. Median duration of therapy was 12 months. One patient was not evaluable for dose limiting toxicity. All but 1 patient had at least one cycle delayed due to adverse events (AEs), but no dose reductions were required. No dose limiting toxicities were observed across the cycles, either during single agent therapy (Cycles 1-2) or in combination with IPd (Cycles 3 and 4). Six patients responded to therapy (4 PR, 2 VGPR). One patient was not response evaluable. Fatigue was the most common non-hematological AE followed by diarrhea. Conclusions: Here we report on the feasibility of genomically-guided, precision medicine therapy in K/N-RAS/BRAF-mutated MM. The MEK inhibitor cobimetinib in combination with IPd appears safe in functionally high-risk patients. Ongoing study will provide more information regarding the efficacy of this approach. Clinical trial information: NCT03732703.

We evaluated changes in patient-reported outcomes and cognitive function from pre- to 3-6 months post-treatment among 42 newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma undergoing transplant with complete data using PROMIS-29. There were statistically significant improvements in physical (

Background Relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) is a bone marrow cancer that requires systemic treatment, which often results in severe symptom burden. Recent studies have found that electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) interventions implemented in the clinic setting have had positive outcomes for other oncology populations. Evidence of the efficacy of a similar approach is lacking for patients with RRMM. Objective Recent recommendations for digital health interventions call for the publication of descriptions of iterative development processes in order to improve reproducibility and comparability. This study is an implementation pilot aiming to evaluate the acceptability and appropriateness of an ePRO intervention for patients with RRMM and to explore its impact on clinic workflow. Methods A total of 11 patients with RRMM were recruited from the John Theurer Cancer Center in Hackensack, New Jersey. Patients used a mobile app to report on 17 symptoms at 4 sessions, each a week apart. Patients could also report symptoms ad hoc. When reports met predefined thresholds, the clinic was alerted and patients received automated guidance. Study end points were assessed using qualitative and quantitative methods. Results A total of 9 patients (mean age 69.7 years) completed the study. Overall, 83% (30/36) of weekly sessions were completed. Patients found the frequency and time required to complete reporting acceptable. All patients agreed that the app was easy to use and understand. Providers felt the alerts they received required refinement. Patients and providers agreed it would be beneficial for patients to report for longer than 4 weeks. Patients felt that the training they received was adequate but contained too much information for a single session. All patients found the symptoms tracked to be appropriate; providers suggested shortening the list. All patients understood how to use the app for weekly reporting but had confusion about using it ad hoc. Providers felt the ad hoc feature could be removed. Neither patients nor providers viewed the in-app data reports but agreed on their potential value. Patients reported benefitting from symptom reporting through increased awareness of their symptoms. Clinic staff reported that app alerts were too numerous and redundant. They had difficulty responding to alerts within their existing workflow, partially because the data were not integrated into the electronic medical record system. Conclusions Overall, the intervention was found to be acceptable and appropriate for patients with RRMM. Points of friction integrating the intervention into the clinic workflow were identified. Clinic staff provided recommendations for addressing these issues. Once such modifications are implemented, ePRO data from patients with RRMM could be used to inform and improve clinical research and care. This study underlines the importance of an iterative approach to implementation that includes all stakeholders in order to ensure successful adoption.

Summary Background Tocilizumab, a monoclonal antibody directed against the interleukin-6 receptor, has been proposed to mitigate the cytokine storm syndrome associated with severe COVID-19. We aimed to investigate the association between tocilizumab exposure and hospital-related mortality among patients requiring intensive care unit (ICU) support for COVID-19. Methods We did a retrospective observational cohort study at 13 hospitals within the Hackensack Meridian Health network (NJ, USA). We included patients (aged ≥18 years) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who needed support in the ICU. We obtained data from a prospective observational database and compared outcomes in patients who received tocilizumab with those who did not. We applied a multivariable Cox model with propensity score matching to reduce confounding effects. The primary endpoint was hospital-related mortality. The prospective observational database is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04347993 . Findings Between March 1 and April 22, 2020, 764 patients with COVID-19 required support in the ICU, of whom 210 (27%) received tocilizumab. Factors associated with receiving tocilizumab were patients' age, gender, renal function, and treatment location. 630 patients were included in the propensity score-matched population, of whom 210 received tocilizumab and 420 did not receive tocilizumab. 358 (57%) of 630 patients died, 102 (49%) who received tocilizumab and 256 (61%) who did not receive tocilizumab. Overall median survival from time of admission was not reached (95% CI 23 days–not reached) among patients receiving tocilizumab and was 19 days (16–26) for those who did not receive tocilizumab (hazard ratio [HR] 0·71, 95% CI 0·56–0·89; p=0·0027). In the primary multivariable Cox regression analysis with propensity matching, an association was noted between receiving tocilizumab and decreased hospital-related mortality (HR 0·64, 95% CI 0·47–0·87; p=0·0040). Similar associations with tocilizumab were noted among subgroups requiring mechanical ventilatory support and with baseline C-reactive protein of 15 mg/dL or higher. Interpretation In this observational study, patients with COVID-19 requiring ICU support who received tocilizumab had reduced mortality. Results of ongoing randomised controlled trials are awaited. Funding None.

Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is a standard-of-care treatment for many hematologic malignancies. Progression of disease after ASCT is the primary cause of treatment failure. In this Phase Ib trial, we studied the safety and clinical effect of combined checkpoint inhibition therapy (CPIT) with ipilimumab and nivolumab as a consolidation strategy after ASCT for patients with high-risk diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL), mature T cell lymphoma (TCL), and multiple myeloma (MM). Starting at 14 to 28 days after ASCT, patients received ipilimumab (1 mg/kg i.v. on day 1 of weeks 1, 4, 7, 10, 16, and 22) and nivolumab (3 mg/kg i.v. on day 1 of weeks 1, 4, 7, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, and 26). Patients received a median of 5 doses of ipilimumab and 8 doses of nivolumab. Thirty-five patients were included in the intent-to-treat population. Ninety-four percent of the patients experienced immune-related adverse events (irAEs) of any grade. Ninety-seven percent of irAEs resolved spontaneously or after holding study drugs and instituting high-dose corticosteroid therapy. Progression-free and overall survival at 18 months post-ASCT for each disease cohort were 85.7% and 100% for primary refractory DLBCL, 28.6% and 57.1% for relapsed DLBCL, not evaluable and 80% for frontline TCL, 25% and 75% for relapsed TCL, 57.1% and 87% for high-risk transplant-naive MM, and 40% and 100% for MM relapsed within 3 years of first ASCT. We conclude that combined CPIT appears to be tolerable as a consolidation strategy after ASCT and in addition to the potential clinical efficacy observed in some subsets of disease, T cell receptor repertoire, T regulatory cell phenotype, and gut microbiota profiles provide a biologic rationale warranting further study of this approach.

The water use of societies results in multiple environmental and social impacts and is a fundamental component of sustainability. Correspondingly, water footprint studies have grown significantly in numbers over the last decade. However, these studies mostly account for the human appropriation of freshwater resources, while overlooking various alternative water resources. This paper responds to the growing need for a complete water footprint accounting and presents an extended framework of the blue water footprint, comprised of seven water types. A case study shows spatially-explicit and use-specific analysis of Israel's diverse water system. Israel's freshwater use accounts for only 40% of its total water use. Desalinated seawater and reused wastewater contribute 52% and 45% to the country's municipal and agricultural water use, respectively. The “original” blue water footprint assumes only freshwater use; thus, it overestimates the appropriation of natural water resources by humans. The extended blue water footprint accounts for seawater, brackish water, runoff, and reused wastewater along with surface water and fresh groundwater. It, therefore, estimates the human water use more accurately. Alternative water types' use has some adverse environmental and health impacts. These include high energy intensity due to desalination, soil salinization from brackish water irrigation, and human exposure to traces of pharmaceutical in drinking water due to treated wastewater irrigation. By acknowledging the water mix of different sectors and regions, the extended blue water footprint contributes to advancing a water-energy nexus analysis or accounting for various environmental and health impacts of water use.

Purpose To describe a case of primary lacrimal sac adenocarcinoma treated primarily with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with good clinic response. Observations An 82-year-old male presented with a painless right orbital mass. Pathology following partial resection was consistent with primary lacrimal sac adenocarcinoma positive for androgen receptors (AR). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan showed an orbital mass with extension into the nasolacrimal apparatus and intraconally between the medial and inferior recti. Staging positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) showed one hypermetabolic right sided lymph node in addition to the known orbital mass. Orbital exenteration and external beam radiation therapy were offered as the primary treatment modality however the patient refused. He subsequently received four years of androgen deprivation monotherapy, before stopping due to sexual side effects, with no progression of local or metastatic disease and some local regression documented on MRI at 5 years. Conclusions and Importance Lacrimal sac adenocarcinoma is commonly found to be AR positive on pathology. Our case shows that ADT can serve as an effective treatment modality for those patients that defer primary surgical management.

The primary cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) is an infection. Therefore there is great concern about the susceptibility to the outcome of COVID-19 infected patients with multiple myeloma.This retrospective study describes the baseline characteristics and outcome data of COVID-19 infection in 650 patients with plasma cell disorders (98 outpatinets and 538 hospitilized patinets), collected from 10 countries by the International Myeloma Society to understand the initial challenges faced by Myeloma patients during COVID-19 pandemic. Descriptive statistics, univariate logistic regression, and multivariate analysis were performed for hospitalized MM patinets.The median age was 69 years, and nearly all patients (96%) had MM. Approximately 36% were recently diagnosed (2019-2020), and 54% of patients were receiving first-line therapy. Thirty-three percent of patients have died, with significant geographic variability, ranging from 27% to 57% of hospitalized patients. Univariate analysis identified age, ISS3, high-risk disease, renal disease, suboptimal myeloma control (active or progressive disease), and one or more comorbidities as risk factors for higher rates of death. Neither history of transplant, including within a year of COVID-19 diagnosis nor other anti-MM treatments were associated with outcomes. Multivariate analysis found that only age, high-risk MM, renal disease, and suboptimal MM control remained independent predictors of adverse outcome with COVID-19 infection.The management of MM in the era of COVID-19 requires careful consideration of patient and disease-related factors to decrease the risk of acquiring COVID-19 infection, while not compromising the disease control through appropriate MM treatment. This study provides the data to develop recommendations for the management of MM patients at risk of COVID-19 infection.Key PointsHigh but variable mortality for hospitalized MM patients (27% to 57%)Optimal MM control was associated with COVID-19 associated death for MM patinetsExplanation of noveltyThis study investigated the risk and outcome of COVID-19 infection in MM patients globally (10 countries)

Background Advances in the management of multiple myeloma (MM) have extended survival and reduced painful skeletal-related events. As MM is evolving toward a chronic disease, we sought to determine the prevalence of self-reported symptom burden and psychological distress, and to determine the association of distress with survival. Methods The CPASS-7 patient-reported outcome instrument was administered to a convenience sample of MM patients at 7 outpatient cancer centers. Results A total of 239 patients completed the CPASS-7 between September 2015 and October 2016%; 57% of respondents were male, and median age was 67 years. Forty-eight percent were concerned that they could not do the things they wanted to do, with 33% reporting decreased performance status. Financial toxicity concerns were self-reported by 44%, with family burdens noted in 24%. Although depression was reported by only 15%, 41% noted lack of pleasure. Pain was a concern in 36%. With a median follow-up of 316 days since CPASS-7 completion, 13% of patients had died. A high total distress score was noted in 57 (24%) and trended toward an association with a decreased survival rate compared to the 182 patients (76%) with a low total distress score (P = .066). The 6-month survival rates for patients with high and low distress scores were 86% and 96%, respectively, and 12-month survival rates were 76% and 87%, respectively. Conclusion Despite dramatic improvements in survival among patients with MM, symptom, financial, and psychosocial concerns continue to be major patient concerns. As MM becomes a chronic disease, additional attention to addressing these issues is required.

Triple-class-refractory multiple myeloma (MM) describes MM refractory to proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory agents, and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies. In the Phase IIb STORM study (NCT02336815), oral selinexor plus low-dose dexamethasone (Sel-dex) demonstrated a 26.2% overall response rate in triple-class-refractory MM. Here, we compare overall survival (OS) of 122 patients with triple-class-refractory MM who received Sel-dex in STORM Part 2 with that of 64 similar patients treated with other available therapies in a Flatiron Health Analytic Database (FHAD) cohort. OS from the date that the patients' MM became triple-class-refractory was longer in STORM versus FHAD, with an unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.43 (

Here, we report on a phase IIa study to determine the intubation rate, survival, viral clearance, and development of endogenous Abs in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia treated with convalescent plasma (CCP) containing high levels of neutralizing anti–SARS-CoV-2 Abs. Radiographic and laboratory evaluation confirmed all 51 treated patients had COVID-19 pneumonia. Fresh or frozen CCP from donors with high titers of neutralizing Abs was administered. The nonmechanically ventilated patients (n = 36) had an intubation rate of 13.9% and a 30-day survival rate of 88.9%, and the overall survival rate for a comparative group based on network data was 72.5% (1625/2241). Patients had negative nasopharyngeal swab rates of 43.8% and 73.0% on days 10 and 30, respectively. Patients mechanically ventilated had a day-30 mortality rate of 46.7%; the mortality rate for a comparative group based on network data was 71.0% (369/520). All evaluable patients were found to have neutralizing Abs on day 3 (n = 47), and all but 1 patient had Abs on days 30 and 60. The only adverse event was a mild rash. In this study on patients with COVID-19 disease, we show therapeutic use of CCP was safe and conferred transfer of Abs, while preserving endogenous immune response., Patients with COVID-19 pneumonia receiving high-titer convalescent plasma showed antibody transfer with preservation of endogenous production, and database survival comparison is promising for the early group.

OBJECTIVESTo determine the rate of intubation, overall survival, viral clearance, and the development of endogenous antibodies in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia treated with convalescent plasma containing high levels of neutralizing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We also aimed to describe the laboratory parameters of the plasma products.DESIGNThis was a phase IIa, single institution, prospective study in adults hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia.SETTINGHackensack University Medical Center, a 770-bed research and teaching hospital located in Bergen County NJ, 11 km from New York City. The study was conducted between April 15 and June 18, 2020.PARTICIPANTS47 hospitalized adult patients were treated: 32 in the non-mechanically ventilated group and 15 in the mechanically ventilated group. All patients had confirmed SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia by radiographic and laboratory evaluation.INTERVENTIONFresh or frozen convalescent plasma from donors with high titers of viral neutralizing antibodies was administered.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURESIncidence of intubation, overall survival, and discharge rate of patients divided in cohorts based on severity of disease. Description of infused plasma characteristics. Evaluation of recipients’ pre-treatment viral immunity, immunity transfer from convalescent plasma administration, and late immunity 30 and 60 days after treatment. Rates of viral clearance by nasopharyngeal PCR at 10 and 30 days. Outcomes of patients with no pre-treatment immunity. Survival comparison with institutional data for each cohort.RESULTSAnalysis for the non-mechanically ventilated patients showed an intubation rate of 15.6% (95% CI: 5.3%-32.8%) and a day-30 survival rate of 87.5% (28/32; 95% CI:70.2%-96.4%). The overall survival for a comparative group based on institutional data was 66% (675/1023; p=0.012). The rates of negative nasopharyngeal swab by PR-PCR on day+10 and +30 post treatment were 42.9% (95% CI: 24%-63%) and 78% (95% CI: 56%-93%) respectively. Patients mechanically ventilated had a day-30 mortality of 46.7% (95% CI:21.3%-73.4%); the mortality for a comparative group based on institutional data was 68.5% (217/317; p=0.093). The rates of negative nasopharyngeal swab by PR-PCR at day+10 and +30 was 85.7% (95% CI: 42-100%; n=7) and 100% (95% CI: 63-100%; n=8). Seven patients (15%) had no pre-infusion immunity, and all were found to have anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing titers three days post infusion. All evaluable patients were found to have neutralizing antibodies on day+30 (n=30) and on day+60 (n=12) post treatment. There was no difference in outcomes within the ranges of high antiviral neutralizing titers used, mostly greater than 1:1000. There was also no difference between fresh or frozen plasma. The only adverse event was a mild rash in one patient.CONCLUSIONIn this study of adult patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, convalescent plasma was safe and conferred effective transfer of immunity while preserving endogenous immune response. Intubation rates, survival rates compared with institutional data, and viral clearance rates, support the continued evaluation of this antiviral modality.STUDY REGISTRATIONClinicalTrials.gov NTC04343755