The selective autophagy receptors Atg19 and Atg32 interact with two proteins of the core autophagic machinery: the scaffold protein Atg11 and the ubiquitin-like protein Atg8. We found that the Pichia pastoris pexophagy receptor, Atg30, also interacts with Atg8. Both Atg30 and Atg32 interactions are regulated by phosphorylation close to Atg8-interaction motifs. Extending this finding to Saccharomyces cerevisiae, we confirmed phosphoregulation for the mitophagy and pexophagy receptors, Atg32 and Atg36. Each Atg30 molecule must interact with both Atg8 and Atg11 for full functionality, and these interactions occur independently and not simultaneously, but rather in random order. We present a common model for the phosphoregulation of selective autophagy receptors.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Introduction Venetoclax (VEN) is a selective BCL-2 inhibitor that has demonstrated activity against acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and has been shown to be effective when used in combination with hypomethylating agents (HMAs) or low-dose cytarabine (LDAC) for treatment-naïve, elderly AML patients unfit for intensive chemotherapy. Data on its use in the relapsed/refractory setting is limited. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed among 12 relapsed or refractory AML patients treated with VEN combination therapy at the University of California Los Angeles from 2018-2019. Seven patients received VEN in combination with azacitidine (75 mg/m2 x 7 days), 4 patients with decitabine (20 mg/m2 x 5 days), and 1 patient with low-dose cytarabine (20 mg/m2 x 10 days). Results The median patient age at time of VEN therapy was 58 years (range 41-79). Four patients (33.3%) had secondary AML. The majority (9 patients, 75.0%) had adverse cytogenetics. Three patients (25.0%) had received an allogeneic stem cell transplant prior to VEN therapy, and 5 patients (41.7%) had failed HMA therapy prior. Notable molecular mutations present were TP53 (4 patients, 33.3%), FLT3 (3 patients, 25.0%), and IDH2 (1 patient, 8.3%). Eight patients (66.7%) had grade 3 or greater neutropenia at time of VEN initiation, and 9 patients (75.0%) had grade 3 or greater thrombocytopenia. Four patients (33.3%) had a grade 3 or greater infection prior to VEN therapy. Dosing of VEN was by physician discretion with a median starting dose of 150 mg (range 100-800) and a median maintenance dose of 450 mg (range 200-800). The median number of cycles of VEN combination therapy was 2 (range 1-5). Seven patients (58.3%) had decreased VEN dosage due to concomitant azole for antifungal prophylaxis. Four patients (33.3%) were on an additional small molecular inhibitor while receiving VEN therapy (sorafenib in 3 patients, ruxolitinib in 1 patient). The majority (10 patients, 83.3%) had an interruption in VEN dosing for the following reasons: bone marrow functional delay (7 patients), inability to tolerate oral pills (4 patients), infection (3 patients), and bleeding (2 patients). The objective response rate (ORR) was 41.7% with 3 patients (25.0%) achieving complete remission with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi) and 2 patients (16.7%) achieving partial remission (PR) (Table 1). Three patients (25.0%) experienced early death within 30 days due to the following: pneumonia (1 patient), multi-organ failure from infection and graft-versus-host disease (1 patient), and intracranial hemorrhage (1 patient). The median time to first and best response was 56 days (range 27-101) or after approximately 2 cycles of VEN combination therapy. During VEN therapy, all patients (100%) had grade 3 or greater neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, and 10 patients (83.3%) had grade 3 or greater anemia. The nadir of most cytopenias occurred during cycle 1. Six patients (50.0%) developed a grade 3 or greater infection following VEN therapy, and 2 patients (16.7%) developed a grade 3 or greater intracranial hemorrhage. The only other notable grade 3 or greater side effects noted during VEN therapy were dizziness (1 patient, 8.3%) and diarrhea (1 patient, 8.3%). After a median follow-up time of 3.14 months (range 1.22-13.48), 2 patients (16.7%) progressed, and the 1-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate was 71.11% (95% CI 43.40-100.00) (Figure 1). Eight out of 12 patients died as a result of infection (6 patients, 50.0%), disease progression (1 patient, 8.3%), and bleeding (1 patient, 8.3%). The median overall survival (OS) was 4.74 months (range 1.18-9.15), and the 1-year OS rate was 14.60% (95% CI 2.54-83.80) (Figure 2). VEN was discontinued in all patients because of no response (5 patients, 41.7%), adverse effects (4 patients, 33.3%), transition to donor lymphocyte infusion (1 patient, 8.3%), or transition to allogeneic stem cell transplant (2 patients, 16.7%). Conclusions We present our institutional experience with VEN combination therapy for the treatment of relapsed/refractory AML with a particularly high-risk patient cohort, predominantly characterized by adverse genetic features and grade 3 cytopenias prior to start of therapy. Overall, the response rate was modest, but not inferior to that with conventional salvage chemotherapy. Adverse events were primarily due to pre-existing bone marrow failure, likely exacerbated by treatment. Disclosures Schiller: Agios: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Other, Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Biomed Valley Discoveries: Research Funding; Bristol Myer Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Constellation Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Eli Lilly and Company: Research Funding; FujiFilm: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; J&J: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; Pfizer Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership, Research Funding; Sangamo Therapeutics: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Venetoclax is a BCL-2 inhibitor approved for use in combination with azacitidine or decitabine or low-dose cytarabine for the treatment of newly-diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia in adults who are age 75 years or older, or who have comorbidities that preclude use of intensive induction chemotherapy. It does not currently have an approved use for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia in the relapsed/refractory setting.

Background: To provide Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guideline-recommended practices for patients on long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) including individualized decisions about opioid dose reduction, we developed the Power Over Pain (POP) Clinic.Objective: To describe frequency and reasons for opioid dose reduction and pre–post adherence to CDC guideline-recommended practices.Design: Retrospective chart review with qualitative and pre–post analysis.Patients and setting: Patients at an urban internal medicine teaching practice-prescribed LTOT were seen at POP Clinic at least once.Methods: Opioid dose reduction was defined by reduction in morphine-equivalent daily dose (MEDD) at 6 and 12 months after the first POP Clinic visit compared to baseline using paired t-tests. Among patients with a dose reduction, reasons documented in POP Clinic notes were qualitatively examined. Dichotomous measures of receiving four CDC guideline-recommended practices (controlled substance agreement [CSA], urine drug testing [UDT], prescription monitoring program review, and naloxone dispensing) at baseline versus 6 and 12 months were compared using McNemar's tests.Results: Of the 70 patients, most were female (66 percent) and Hispanic (54 percent). Forty-three patients (61 percent) had an opioid dose reduction in 12 months after the first POP Clinic visit. The most frequent reason was low or unclear benefit of continuing the current dose (49 percent). Mean MEDD was reduced from 69 mg to 57 mg at 6 months (p 0.01) and to 56 mg at 12 months (p 0.01). Completing a CSA, UDT, and naloxone distribution increased at 6 and 12 months (p 0.01). Conclusions: Individualized risk assessment in a primary care-based opioid management clinic is feasible and can result in opioid dose reduction and guideline adherence.