Witzig, T. E.

7073 Background: The Optimized HLH Inflammatory (OHI) index (Zoref-Lorenz et al., Blood , 2022), based on serum soluble CD25 (sCD25) and ferritin, is a prognostic tool identifying inflammation in the hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) spectrum and early mortality risk. Prior studies were retrospective and enriched with HLH-suspected cases. We hypothesized that the OHI index would predict outcomes in unselected diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Methods: 670 newly diagnosed DLBCL patients from a prospective cohort (2002–2015) were analyzed: 335 for discovery and 335 for validation. Pre-treatment serum sCD25 and ferritin levels were quantified via ELISA, and we evaluated original thresholds (sCD25 ≥ 3,900 U/mL; ferritin ≥ 1,000 ng/mL) and developed DLBCL-optimized thresholds (using receiver operator curves) for predicting 500-day mortality. We also evaluated event-free survival (EFS), EFS at 24 months (EFS24), and overall survival (OS). Results: The median age was 64, and 51% were male. Using original thresholds, 4.2% (n=14) of patients were OHI+, with a 5.6-fold higher risk of 500-day mortality (95% CI 1.6–17; p<0.001). Optimized thresholds identified 23.6% (n=78) as OHI+ with a 9.2-fold higher 500-day mortality risk (95% CI 4.0–24; p<0.001). Optimized OHI+ also had a higher risk of EFS24 failure and inferior EFS and OS (Table). OHI+ patients had higher rates of B symptoms (35% vs. 20%; p=0.027), elevated LDH (76% vs. 34%; p<0.001), worse performance status (ECOG ≥2: 38% vs. 12%; p<0.001), and advanced-stage disease (Stage IV: 57% vs 38%; p<0.001), though IPI scores (3–5) were not significantly different (44% vs 36%; p=0.28). Adjusting for age and IPI, OHI+ independently predicted 500-day mortality (OR=5.0; CI 1.9–13; p=0.001), EFS24 failure (OR=3.2; CI 1.5–6.5; p=0.0018), and inferior long-term EFS (HR=2.2; CI 1.1–4.3; p=0.030) and OS (HR=2.0; CI 1.0–4.0; p=0.040) at a median follow up of 9.8 years in living patients. In validation, optimized OHI predicted 500-day mortality, EFS24 failure, and long-term OS and EFS (Table). Cytokine profiling revealed elevated inflammatory markers in OHI+ patients, including IL1a (p=0.008), CCL2 (p=0.03), CXCL10 (p<0.001), and CXCL9 (p<0.001), reflecting systemic hyperinflammation. Conclusions: The OHI index is a powerful predictor of early and long-term outcomes in DLBCL patients. Optimized thresholds identify a larger OHI+ group, highlighting hyperinflammation’s critical role in poor outcomes. These findings support its use in routine management and clinical trial design for novel therapies. Odds ratios or hazard ratios and p-values for optimized OHI+ and DLBCL prognosis. Outcome Discovery Validation OR for 500-day mortality 9.2; p<0.001 4.0; p=0.002 OR for EFS24 failure 5.2; p <0.001 6.3; p<0.001 HR for OS 2.3; p<0.001 1.8; p=0.006 HR for EFS 2.4; p<0.001 2.5; p<0.001

Introduction: Outcomes from multidisciplinary lymphoma tumor boards in the molecular era are limited, and the effects of transitioning to virtual formats during the COVID-19 pandemic are not well-documented. This study evaluates how the transition of the Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Tumor Board to a virtual format has impacted its effectiveness and operations. The board, part of the International Mayo Clinic Care Network (MCCN), involves case presentations, subspecialist reviews, and collaborative recommendations. Methods: The Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Tumor Board, an integral part of the Mayo Clinic Care Network (MCCN), conducted a comprehensive review of lymphoma cases from 2014 to 2024. The board's review process involves a structured approach including the presentation of clinical case details, radiology and hematopathology findings, proposed treatment options, relevant literature review, and discussions. From 2014 to 2024, the Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Tumor Board reviewed a total of 722 patients. The review process involves a multidisciplinary team, including physicians, pharmacists, clinical research associates, and trainees. Recommendations and changes related to radiology interpretation, pathologic diagnosis, and treatment approaches were documented and tracked prospectively. In March 2020, the board transitioned to a virtual format due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This shift allowed for remote participation and continued collaborative review while maintaining the board's structured approach and documentation practices. Results: In a total of 722 patients, changes in care were identified in 423 patients, including 287 with newly diagnosed lymphoma and 136 with relapse or refractory disease. Among those who experienced changes, 94 had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, 49 had follicular lymphoma, 39 had marginal zone lymphoma, 36 had classical Hodgkin lymphoma, and 29 had mantle cell lymphoma. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, 431 patients were analyzed, with 217 (50.3%) experiencing changes. A total of 268 changes were documented among these patients. Changes in radiologic interpretation occurred in 9 patients (2.1% of 431 total patients). Pathologic diagnosis changes were noted in 42 patients (9.7%). Additional testing was recommended for 73 patients (16.9%), and clinical management was altered for 144 patients (33.4%). After transitioning to a virtual format, 291 patients were reviewed post-COVID, with 206 (70.8%) having recommended changes. The total number of change recommendations was 322, reflecting increases across all components compared to previous data, with adjustments for varying numbers of patients reviewed. Specifically, radiologic interpretation changes occurred in 21 patients (7.2%), pathologic diagnosis changes in 57 patients (19.6%), additional testing recommendations for 85 patients (29.2%), and clinical management alterations in 159 patients (54.7%). Conclusion: Transitioning to a virtual format in the Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Tumor Board's continued to demonstrate the effectiveness, with increased changes in diagnostic interpretations and clinical management. These results illustrate the potential of virtual tumor boards to improve collaborative decision-making and adapt to evolving clinical needs.

Background: The Optimized Hemophagocytic Lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) Inflammatory (OHI, Zoref-Lorenz et al, Blood, 2022) index, defined by the combined elevation in serum soluble CD25 (sCD25) and ferritin, has emerged as a promising prognostic tool for patients with newly diagnosed hematologic malignancies, demonstrating superior performance in predicting 500-day mortality compared to HLH-2004 criteria. However, previous studies were retrospective, with a substantial proportion (65%) of patients suspected clinically to have HLH. We evaluated the performance of the OHI index in an unselected, prospective cohort of newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients. Methods: We analyzed the predictive utility of the OHI index in 331 newly diagnosed DLBCL patients enrolled from 2002-2015 in the prospective Iowa/Mayo Molecular Epidemiology Resource cohort. Ferritin and sCD25 levels were quantified in pre-treatment serum samples using R&D ELISA kits. OHI values were also optimized based on 500-day mortality in the cohort using receiver operating curve analysis with internal validation. Patients were classified as OHI+ using the original and newly optimized thresholds for sCD25 and ferritin. The primary endpoint was 500-day survival, and the secondary endpoints were event-free survival (EFS) at 24 months (EFS24), EFS, and overall survival (OS). The predictive capability of the OHI index was evaluated using logistic regression to determine odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for 500-day mortality and EFS24, as well as Cox regression to calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs for EFS and OS. Results: The median age at diagnosis of the 331 patients was 63.5 years (interquartile range, 54.5-74), and 168 (51%) were male. Using the original thresholds (sCD25 3,900 U/mL and ferritin 1,000 ng/mL), 4.2% of patients were OHI+, with a more than 5-fold higher 500-day mortality risk compared to OHI- patients (OR=5.6; CI 1.6-17, p&lt;0.001). After optimizing thresholds for sCD25 (2,400 U/mL) and ferritin (250 ng/mL) to predict 500-day mortality, 23.6% were OHI+ and the OHI+ group had a 9-fold higher 500-day mortality risk (OR=9.2; CI 4.0-24, p&lt;0.001), with 31% mortality in the OHI+ vs 5% in the OHI- group. OHI+ patients exhibited more B-symptoms (35% vs 20%, p=0.027), elevated LDH levels (76% vs 34%, p&lt;0.001), poorer performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 2+: 38% vs 12%, p&lt;0.001), and more advanced stage disease (Stage IV: 57% vs 38%, p&lt;0.001), although the frequency of a high International Prognostic Index (IPI) was not statistically different between the groups (IPI 3-5: 44% vs 36%, p=0.28). After adjusting for age and IPI, OHI+ remained a strong predictor of 500-day mortality (OR=5.0; CI 1.9-13, p=0.001). Further adjustment for the cell of origin did not impact the results. The association of OHI+ status with 500-day mortality was similar in IPI 0-2 (OR=5.8; CI 1.2-29, p=0.033) and 3-5 (OR=6.8; CI 0.6-73, p=0.11). OHI+ patients were also more likely to not achieve EFS24 (45% vs 13%), with a 3-fold greater risk after adjusting for age and IPI (OR=3.2; CI 1.5-6.5, p=0.0018). The OHI index also retained its predictive ability over longer-term follow-up (median 9.8 years for living patients) for both OS (HR=2.0; CI 1.0-4.0, p=0.040) and EFS (HR=2.2; CI 1.1-4.3, p=0.030) after adjusting for age and IPI. Cytokine profiling using multiplex ELISA identified elevated inflammatory markers in OHI+ patients, underscoring the role of systemic inflammation in prognosis. The distribution of cytokines was significantly different between the groups, with consistently higher means in the OHI+ vs OHI- group, including IL1a (1,628 vs 759 pg/ml, p=0.008), CCL2 (1,020 vs 724 pg/ml, p=0.028), CXCL10 (165 vs 53 pg/ml, p&lt;0.0001), and CXCL9 (380 vs 150 pg/ml, p&lt;0.0001). Conclusions: While the original OHI index for prediction of 500-day mortality was validated in this unselected cohort of newly diagnosed DLBCL patients, optimization of the OHI thresholds identified a larger OHI+ group (24%), enhanced the identification of hyperinflammation, improved predictive ability for early (500-day) mortality, and predicted EFS24 status and long-term OS. This underscores the clinical relevance of the OHI index, supports the need to evaluate disease-specific thresholds, and suggests its potential for use in routine management and as enrollment criteria in clinical trials for novel therapies.

e19504 Background: Patients with diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who are not cured with R-CHOP or high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell rescue have a dismal prognosis. A recent phase II trial (NHL-002) of lenalidomide in patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) demonstrated a 19% overall response rate (ORR) with a 7-month median duration of response (DR) in the subset of patients with DLBCL. A supporting international phase II trial (NHL-003) of single-agent lenalidomide was initiated for patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive NHL that had received at least one prior treatment and had measurable disease. Herein, we report the data from the DLBCL patients enrolled in this trial. Methods: Patients received 25 mg oral lenalidomide once daily on days 1–21 of every 28-day cycle and continued therapy until disease progression or toxicity. The 1999 IWLRC methodology was used to assess response and progression. Results: One hundred-three DLBCL patients were enrolled and were evaluable for response assessment. The median age was 66 years (21–87) and 70 patients (68%) were male. Median time from diagnosis was 2 years (0.4–18.6), patients had received a median of 3 prior treatment regimens (1–10) and 46 of the patients (45%) had received a prior stem cell transplant (DLBCL-stem cell). Response rates are shown in the Table . Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurring in more than 5% of patients were neutropenia (34%), thrombocytopenia (18%), asthenia (9%), anemia (8%), leucopenia (7%), back pain (6%) and dyspnea (6%). Conclusions: This international study demonstrates that lenalidomide is active in heavily pre-treated patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL and has manageable side effects. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

Background:We have previously reported that ∼50% of CLL patients (pts) experience rapid flare of disease when they discontinue ibrutinib therapy due to progression of disease (CLL or Richter's transformation [RT]) (Hampel et al, JCO suppl, 2018). This lead to the clinical practice of overlapping venetoclax with ibrutinib for combination therapy in this setting to prevent ibrutinib withdrawal.Aims:To evaluate the role of continuing ibrutinib beyond the start of salvage venetoclax in pts who have progression of disease on ibrutinib monotherapy, both in preventing ibrutinib withdrawal associated with ibrutinib discontinuation and in disease response.Methods:We identified all CLL pts at Mayo Clinic (3/2017–11/2018) who had disease progression on ibrutinib therapy, where venetoclax was added as subsequent treatment while ibrutinib was continued. CLL‐specific characteristics, treatment timeline and toxicities, and disease course following combination therapy were ascertained. All pts started venetoclax according to the weekly ramp‐up per the package instructions.Results:Eighteen pts treated with the addition of venetoclax to ibrutinib therapy were identified; indications were CLL progression (n = 13) and RT (n = 5). BTK or PLCG2 mutations were present in 8/13 pts. Median duration of follow‐up was 9.6 months after the start of combination therapy.The target venetoclax dose was reached by 5 weeks in 13 pts; reasons for delaying or stopping dose escalation included diarrhea (n = 2), sepsis (n = 2), and neutropenia (n = 1). No patient experienced a disease flare during venetoclax ramp‐up.The median duration of combination ibrutinib and venetoclax therapy was 3 months (range, 0–14 months). Of 18 pts who started combination therapy with ibrutinib and venetoclax, ibrutinib was discontinued in 10 pts. Reasons included hematopoietic stem cell transplant (n = 2), planned stop after adequate disease control (n = 4), financial reasons (n = 1), toxicity (neutropenia n = 1, immune thrombocytopenia/bleeding risk n = 1), and death (n = 1). Only 1 patient experienced ibrutinib withdrawal, which occurred following planned discontinuation after clinical complete response (CR) with a 41 day overlap and toleration of venetoclax 400 mg daily; management with re‐initiation of ibrutinib was effective in regaining disease control. Of 9 pts who stopped ibrutinib, 4 pts had a slow taper over 2–8 weeks, and 2 pts also received corticosteroids at the time of ibrutinib discontinuation.Among the other 8 pts who did not discontinue ibrutinib, 6 pts remain on the combination with venetoclax (median duration 6.5 months, range 3–14 months), and 2 pts continued on ibrutinib following venetoclax discontinuation due to disease progression (both pts received further combination of ibrutinib with multi‐agent chemotherapy).The overall response rate (ORR) to combination therapy with ibrutinib and venetoclax was 81% (CR/clinical CR n = 9, partial response n = 4, stable disease n = 1, and primary refractory disease n = 2). The duration of combination therapy was <4 weeks in 2 pts, precluding response assessment. The estimated 12‐month event‐free survival was 54% (95% CI 33–87%), and the estimated 12‐month overall survival from start of combination therapy was 79% (95% CI 60–100%); see Figure 1.Summary/Conclusion:Among CLL pts who develop progression of disease on ibrutinib monotherapy, continued ibrutinib therapy with addition of venetoclax was feasible, ameliorated ibrutinib withdrawal, and was associated with high ORR.image