High response rates and transition to transplant after novel targeted and cellular therapies in adults with relapsed/refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia with Philadelphia-like fusions.

Philadelphia (Ph)-like acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is associated with a poor response to standard chemotherapy. However, outcomes with novel antibody and cellular therapies in relapsed/refractory (r/r) Ph-like ALL are largely unknown. We conducted a single-center retrospective analysis of adult patients (n = 96) with r/r B-ALL and fusions associated with Ph-like who received novel salvage therapies. Patients were treated with 149 individual novel regimens (blinatumomab = 83, inotuzumab ozogamicin [InO] = 36, and CD19CAR T cells = 30). The median age at first novel salvage therapy was 36 years (range; 18-71). Ph-like fusions were IGH::CRLF2 (n = 48), P2RY8::CRLF2 (n = 26), JAK2 (n = 9), ABL-class (n = 8), EPOR::IGH (n = 4) and ETV6::NTRK2 (n = 1). CD19CAR T cells were administered later in the course of therapy compared to blinatumomab and InO (p < .001) and more frequently in recipients who relapsed after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) (p = .002). Blinatumomab was administered at an older age compared to InO and CAR T-cells (p = .004). The complete remission (CR)/CR with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi) rates were 63%, 72%, and 90% following blinatumomab, InO and CD19CAR, respectively, among which 50%, 50%, and 44% of responders underwent consolidation with alloHCT, respectively. In multivariable analysis, the type of novel therapy (p = .044) and pretreatment marrow blasts (p = .006) predicted the CR/CRi rate, while the Ph-like fusion subtype (p = .016), pretreatment marrow blasts (p = .022) and post-response consolidation with alloHCT (p < .001) influenced event-free survival. In conclusion, novel therapies are effective in inducing high remission rates in patients with r/r Ph-like ALL and successfully transitioning the responders to alloHCT.

Extramedullary disease relapse and progression after blinatumomab therapy for treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Blinatumomab has demonstrated encouraging activity in relapsed/refractory (r/r) and minimal residual disease-positive (MRD+) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Extramedullary disease (EMD) relapse or relapse with CD19- disease has been observed after blinatumomab therapy in patients with r/r or MRD+ ALL. However, the pathophysiology and risk factors of treatment failure are not fully understood. METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of adult patients with B-cell ALL treated with blinatumomab (n = 132) for either r/r (n = 103) or MRD+ disease (n = 29) at the authors' center (2013-2021) and analyzed factors associated with treatment response and EMD failure. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 64%. A lower marrow blast burden before blinatumomab (P = .049) and no history of previous EMD (P = .019) were significantly associated with a higher response. Among the patients who responded to blinatumomab, 56% underwent consolidation with allogeneic transplantation. Blinatumomab failure was observed in 89 patients; 43% of these patients (n = 38) either progressed or relapsed at extramedullary sites. A history of extramedullary involvement (53% vs 24%; P = .005) and retention of CD19 expression at the time of relapse/progression (97% vs 74%; P = .012) were associated with a higher risk for extramedullary failure. Central nervous system (CNS) failure after blinatumomab was encountered in 39% of the patients with EMD. CONCLUSIONS: A history of EMD predicted an inferior response to blinatumomab therapy with a higher risk for relapse/progression at extramedullary sites (particularly CNS). Consolidation with allogenic transplantation in patients who primarily responded to blinatumomab did not abrogate the risk of extramedullary relapse. The incorporation of extramedullary assessment and the intensification of CNS prophylaxis may help in addressing extramedullary failure. LAY SUMMARY: Extramedullary failure is common during blinatumomab therapy for relapsed/refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia. A history of extramedullary disease predicts an inferior response to blinatumomab therapy and a higher risk for relapse/progression at extramedullary sites. Most extramedullary failure cases retain CD19 expression.

Total Body Irradiation and Fludarabine with Post-Transplantation Cyclophosphamide for Mismatched Related or Unrelated Donor Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation.

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) remains the sole curative treatment for most patients with hematologic malignancies. A well-matched donor (related or unrelated) remains the preferred donor for patients undergoing allogeneic HCT; however, a large number of patients rely on alternative donor choices of mismatched related (haploidentical) or unrelated donors to access HCT. In this retrospective study, we investigated outcomes of patients who underwent mismatched donor (related or unrelated) HCT with a radiation-based myeloablative conditioning MAC regimen in combination with fludarabine, and post-transplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy) as higher-intensity graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis. We retrospectively assessed HCT outcomes in 155 patients who underwent mismatched donor HCT (related/haploidentical versus unrelated [MMUD]) with fractionated-total body irradiation (fTBI) plus fludarabine and PTCy as GVHD prophylaxis at City of Hope from 2015 to 2021. Diagnoses included acute lymphoblastic leukemia (46.5%), acute myelogenous leukemia (36.1%), and myelodysplastic syndrome (6.5%). The median age at HCT was 38 years, and 126 patients (81.3%) were an ethnic minority. The Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Comorbidity Index was ≥3 in 36.1% of the patients, and 29% had a Disease Risk Index (DRI) of high/very high. The donor type was haploidentical in 67.1% of cases and MMUD in 32.9%. At 2 years post-HCT, disease-free survival (DFS) was 75.4% and overall survival (OS) was 80.6% for all subjects. Donor type did not impact OS (hazard ratio [HR], .72; 95% confidence interval [CI], .35 to 1.49; P = .37) and DFS (HR, .78; 95% CI, .41 to 1.48; P = .44), but younger donors was associated with less grade III-IV acute GVHD (HR, 6.60; 95% CI, 1.80 to 24.19; P = .004) and less moderate or severe chronic GVHD (HR, 3.53; 95% CI, 1.70 to 7.34; P < .001), with a trend toward better survival (P = .099). The use of an MMUD was associated with significantly faster neutrophil recovery (median, 15 days versus 16 days; P = .014) and platelet recovery (median, 18 days versus 24 days; P = .029); however, there was no difference in GVHD outcomes between the haploidentical donor and MMUD groups. Nonrelapse mortality (HR, .86; 95% CI, .34 to 2.20; P = .76) and relapse risk (HR, .78; 95% CI, .33 to 1.85; P = .57) were comparable in the 2 groups. Patient age <40 years and low-intermediate DRI showed a DFS benefit (P = .004 and .029, respectively). High or very high DRI was the only predictor of increased relapse (HR, 2.89; 95% CI, 1.32 to 6.34; P = .008). In conclusion, fludarabine/fTBI with PTCy was well-tolerated in mismatched donor HCT, regardless of donor relationship to the patient, provided promising results, and increased access to HCT for patients without a matched donor, especially patients from ethnic minorities and patients of mixed race.

Comparing transplant outcomes in ALL patients after myeloablative conditioning in mismatch-related or unrelated donor settings.

The optimal myeloablative conditioning regimen for ALL patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) with an alternative donor is unknown. We analyzed HCT outcomes ALL patients (n = 269) who underwent HCT at our center from 2010 to 2020 in complete remission (CR) after FTBI-etoposide and CNI-based GvHD prophylaxis for matched donor HCT (ETOP-package; n = 196) or FTBI-Fludarabine and post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy)-based prophylaxis for HLA- mismatched (related or unrelated) donors (FLU-package; n = 64). Patients in FLU-package showed a significant delay in engraftment (p < 0.001) and lower cumulative incidence (CI) of any and extensive chronic GVHD (p = 0.009 and 0.001, respectively). At the median follow up of 4.6 years (range 1-12 years); non-relapse mortality, overall or leukemia-free survival and GVHD-free/relapse-free survival were not significantly impacted by the choice of conditioning. However, in patients at CR2 or with measurable residual disease (MRD+), there was a trend towards higher relapse after FLU-package (p = 0.08 and p = 0.07, respectively), while patients at CR1 regardless of MRD status had similar outcomes despite the package/donor type (p = 0.9 and 0.7, respectively). Our data suggests that FLU-package for alternative donors offers comparable outcomes to ETOP-package for matched donor HCT to treat ALL. Disease status and depth of remission at HCT were independent predictors for better outcomes.

WT1-mutated acute myeloid leukemia is sensitive to fludarabine-based chemotherapy and conditioning regimens.

We conducted a retrospective analysis of WT1-mutated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients who underwent allogeneic stem cell transplant. Thirty-seven patients with WT1-mutated AML were identified. Primary induction failure (40%) and early relapse rate (18%) after idarubicin/cytarabine (7 + 3) chemotherapy were observed. All patients with induction failure subsequently achieved CR with additional chemotherapy. There was no significant difference between outcomes after myeloablative vs. reduced intensity (Fludarabine/Melphalan [Flu/Mel]) conditioning regimens. RFS but not OS was significantly better in patients who received FLAG-IDA prior to transplant and/or a fludarabine-containing conditioning. In an independent ex vivo study, WT1-mutated AML samples exhibited greater sensitivity to fludarabine (p = 0.026) and melphalan (p = 0.0005) than non-WT1-mutated AML samples while there was no difference between sensitivity to cytarabine. Our data favor using a fludarabine-based induction for AML with WT1 mutation instead of 7 + 3. Fludarabine conditioning regimens for alloHCT showed better RFS but not OS.

Post-Transplantation Sinusoidal Obstruction Syndrome in Adult Patients with B Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Treated with Pretransplantation Inotuzumab.

Sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS) is a potentially life-threatening complication that can be observed after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Inotuzumab ozogamicin is an anti-CD22 monoclonal antibody-drug conjugate that has demonstrated high efficacy in relapsed/refractory (R/R) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) but is associated with an increased risk of SOS in HCT recipients. Here we aimed to examine the incidence and outcomes of SOS in 47 adult patients with R/R ALL who received inotuzumab therapy and subsequently underwent HCT at our institution. All patients received prophylactic therapy with ursodiol, and continuous low-dose heparin also was administered to patients receiving myeloablative conditioning (MAC). SOS occurred in 12 patients (26%) post-HCT, at a median onset of 11 days (range, 3 to 41 days). SOS was graded as very severe in 50% (n = 6), severe in 25% (n = 3), and mild in 25% (n = 3). All patients diagnosed with SOS received treatment with defibrotide for a median of 21 days (range, 3 to 34 days), with resolution of SOS occurring in 8 patients (67%). Mortality from SOS was 33% (n = 4) and occurred at a median of 10 days from diagnosis (range, 3 to 31 days) in patients graded as very severe (n = 3) or severe (n = 1). There were no significant differences between patients who developed SOS and those who did not develop SOS in the median time from the last dose of inotuzumab to transplantation (46 days versus 53 days; P = .37), use of an MAC regimen (42% versus 49%; P = .75), number of lines of therapy prior to inotuzumab (P = .79), median number of administered cycles of inotuzumab (2 versus 2; P = .14), or receipt of inotuzumab as the last therapy prior to HCT (67% versus 66%; P = 1.0). Sirolimus-based graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis was used more frequently in the SOS group (75% versus 29%; P < .01), but there was no between-group difference in the peak sirolimus level (P = .81) or the median time to peak sirolimus level (7 days versus 3.5 days; P = .39). In univariable analysis, only the use of sirolimus-based GVHD prophylaxis was significantly associated with an increased risk of SOS (hazard ratio [HR], 7.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7 to 33.6; P < .01). In the SOS group, the 100-day mortality rate was 33% (n = 4), and median overall survival (OS) post-HCT was 4.3 months (range, 0.2 to 57.2 months). In the group without SOS, the 100-day mortality rate was 14% (n = 5) and the median OS post-HCT was 10.7 months (range, .52 to 39.6 months). In this study cohort, SOS was prevalent in HCT recipients who had been treated with inotuzumab prior to transplantation, and sirolimus-based GVHD prophylaxis was a risk factor for SOS in inotuzumab recipients.

Tocilizumab for Cytokine Release Syndrome Management After Haploidentical Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation With Post-Transplantation Cyclophosphamide-Based Graft-Versus-Host Disease Prophylaxis.

Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) is a common complication after haploidentical hematopoietic cell transplantation (HaploHCT). Severe CRS after haploHCT leads to higher risk of non-relapse mortality (NRM) and worse overall survival (OS). Tocilizumab (TOCI) is an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor and is commonly used as first-line for CRS management after chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy, but the impact of TOCI administration for CRS management on Haplo HCT outcomes is not known. In this single center retrospective analysis, we compared HCT outcomes in patients treated with or without TOCI for CRS management after HaploHCT with post-transplantation cyclophosphamide- (PTCy-) based graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) prophylaxis. Of the 115 patients eligible patients who underwent HaploHCT at City of Hope between 2019 to 2021 and developed CRS, we identified 11 patients who received tocilizumab for CRS management (TOCI). These patients were matched with 21 patients who developed CRS but did not receive tocilizumab (NO-TOCI) based on age at the time of HCT (≤64 years or >65 years or older), conditioning intensity (myeloablative versus reduced-intensity/nonmyeloablative), and CRS grading (1, 2, versus 3-4). Instead of 22 controls, we chose 21 patients because there was only 1 control matched with 1 TOCI treatment patient in 1 stratum. With only 11 patients in receiving tocilizumab for CRS treatment, matching with 21 patients who developed CRS but did not receive tocilizumab, we had 80% power to detect big differences (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.4 or higher) in transplantation outcomes using a 2-sided 0.05 test. The power would be reduced to about 20% to 30% if the difference was moderate (HR = 2.0) using the same test. No CRS-related deaths were recorded in either group. Median time to neutrophil engraftment was 21 days (range 16-43) in TOCI and 18 days (range 14-23) in NO-TOCI group (HR = 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.28-1.06, P = .08). Median time to platelet engraftment was 34 days (range 20-81) in TOCI and 28 days (range 12-94) in NO-TOCI group (HR = 0.56; 95% CI = 0.25-1.22, P = .19). Cumulative incidences of day 100 acute GvHD grades II-IV (P = .97) and grades III-IV (P = .47) were similar between the 2 groups. However, cumulative incidence of chronic GvHD at 1 year was significantly higher in patients receiving TOCI (64% versus 24%; P = .05). Rates of NRM (P = .66), relapse (P = .83), disease-free survival (P = .86), and overall survival (P = .73) were similar at 1 year after HCT between the 2 groups. Tocilizumab administration for CRS management after HaploHCT appears to be safe with no short-term adverse effect and no effect on relapse rate. However, the significantly higher cumulative incidence of chronic GvHD, negates the high efficacy of PTCy on GvHD prophylaxis in this patient population. Therefore using tocilizumab for CRS management in the HaploHCT population with PTCy maybe kept only for patients with severe CRS. The impact on such approach on long term outcome in HaploHCT with PTCy will need to be evaluated in a larger retrospective study or a prospective manner.

Outcomes of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in adults with fusions associated with Ph-like ALL.

Allogenic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) is a well-established curative modality for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), yet large amounts of data describing alloHCT outcomes in Philadelphia (Ph)-like ALL are lacking. We retrospectively analyzed archived DNA samples from consecutive adults with B-cell Ph-negative ALL who underwent alloHCT in complete remission (CR) (n = 127) at our center between 2006 and 2020. Identification of fusions associated with Ph-like ALL was performed using cumulative results from RNA-seq, conventional cytogenetics, fluorescence in situ hybridization, and whole genome array studies. Fusions associated with Ph-like ALL were detected in 56 (44%) patients, of whom 38 were carrying CRLF2r. Compared with other non-Ph-like ALL (n = 71), patients with fusions associated with Ph-like ALL were more frequently Hispanic (P = .008), were less likely to carry high-risk cytogenetics (P < .001), and were more likely to receive blinatumomab prior to HCT (P = .019). With the median followup of 3.5 years, patients with Ph-like ALL fusions had comparable posttransplant outcomes compared with other B-cell ALL: 3-year relapse-free survival (RFS) (41% vs 44%; P = .36), overall survival (OS) (51% vs 50%; P = .59), and relapse (37% vs 31%; P = .47). In multivariable analysis, age (P = .023), disease status at the time of transplant (P < .001), and donor type (P = .015) influenced OS. RFS (primary endpoint) was significantly influenced by disease status (P < .001) and conditioning regimen intensity (P = .014). In conclusion, our data suggest that alloHCT consolidation results in similarly favorable survival outcomes in adult patients with Ph-like fusions and other high-risk B-cell ALL.

AL Amyloidosis Complicated by Persistent Oral Bleeding.

A case of amyloid light chain (AL) amyloidosis is presented here with uncontrolled bleeding after a nonsurgical dental procedure, most likely multifactorial in nature, and consequently treated with a multidisciplinary approach.