Byrd, John C.

Abstract Abstract 2406 The outcome for a given CLL patient is difficult to predict. While there are promising models, they require collation of multiple clinical and laboratory parameters, and it remains to be seen whether they will apply to typical CLL patients in the community. To further dissect out explanations for this dramatic clinical heterogeneity, we sought to understand genomic complexity of clonal B-cells as a possible explanation of clinical variability with specific application to genomic complexity as a predictor of therapeutic response and clinical outcome in CLL. Thus we wished to identified global gains and losses of genetic material in order to define copy-number abnormalities (CNA) in 48 clinically progressive CLL patients who were about to be treated on a chemoimmunotherapy protocol. This protocol was previously reported by us (Blood. 109:2007) and had an induction phase with pentostatin (2 mg/m2), cyclophosphamide (600 mg/m2) and rituximab (375 mg/m2) given every 3 weeks for 6 cycles and then responding patients were followed ever three months until relapse. In order to estimate CNA, we employed array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) using a one-million oligonucleotide probe array format on the leukemic B-cells from the 48 patients entering this trial. In those same patients, the aCGH data were compared to a) FISH detecxtable data using a panel for the common recurring genetic defects seen in CLL and b) to their clinical outcome on this trial. With aCGH we found that 288 CNA were identified (median of 4 per patient; range 0–32) of which 215 were deletions and 73 were gains. The aCGH method identified most of the FISH detected abnormalities with a complete concordance for 17p13.1- deletion (17p-) between aCGH and FISH. We also identified chromosomal gain or loss in ≥6% of the patients on chromosomes 3, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 17. We found that CLL patients with ≥15 CNA had a significantly worse progression free survival (PFS) than patients with <15 CNA (p=0.004)(figure). Patients with ≥15 CNA also had a shorter duration of response than those with <15 CNA (p=0.0726). Of interest, more complex genomic features were found both in patients with a 17p13.1 deletion and in more favorable genetic subtypes such as 13q14.1. Thus, for 5 patients with >15 CNAs the following FISH patterns were seen: +12/13q14.1-x1/13q14.1 -x2, 13q14.1 ×1 (n=2), and 17p13.1 (n=2). In addition, a 17p- by FISH was positively associated with the number of CNA and total deletion size. The odds of having an overall response decreased by 28% (95% CI: 5–55%; p=0.015) with each additional CNA for the 17p13.1- patients. In addition to defining genomic complexity as the total number of CNA for each patient, we also defined complexity as the sum of the lengths of all interstitial chromosomal gains and losses. When defined as the total size of chromosomal gains or losses, genomic complexity was significantly associated with 17p13.1 and worse overall clinical response. In summary, this analysis utilized the global assessment of copy number abnormalities using a high-resolution aCGH platform for clinically progressive CLL patients prior to initiation of their treatment. One outcome was that we found higher genomic complexity was associated with shorter progression-free survival, reduced duration of response and predicted a poor response to treatment. In addition since we did find genomic complexity in more traditionally favorable FISH categories, such as 13q14.1 type defects, this may explain why some of the latter patients do not fare as well as might be expected even with aggressive chemoimmunotherapy approaches. This study adds information on the association between inferior trial response and increasing genetic complexity as CLL progresses. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Pentostatin. Kipps: GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding; Memgen: Research Funding; Igenica: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi Aventis: Research Funding; Abbott Laboratories: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 2441 Background: CLL patients with mutated IGHVs (M-CLL) have clinical outcomes better than patients with unmutated BCRs (U-CLL). It is believed that this difference stems from the fact that somatic mutations have altered the structure of the BCR such that it no longer binds stimulatory (auto)antigens and therefore cannot deliver trophic signals to the leukemic cells. We sought to determine if this belief could be corroborated by analyzing the types (silent vs. conservative vs. non-conservative) and locations (FRs v CDRs) of mutations that occurred in IGHVs of M-CLL clones and then comparing the time to first therapy (TTFT) in patients with different IGHV features. Methods: Using IGMT software, we analyzed the IGHV sequences of 1560 cases and characterized their mutations in several respects: first, if IGHV mutations altered amino acid structure (silent vs. replacement); second, if mutations occurred in CDRs (antigen binding domains) or FRs (scaffolds of the BCR); third, if mutations were conservative or non-conservative (as determined by charge, hydropathy, size). TTFT for patients was correlated with various combinations of the above parameters. Differences in TTFT were estimated by the method of Kaplan and Meier; differences were assessed using the log rank test. Results: First we compared TTFT in patients who had only silent mutations (n=32) to those with no mutations (n=563) and found a trend toward longer TTFT in patients with silent mutations (3.0 vs. 3.6 yrs, p=0.09). Because the statistical significance of this result was likely influenced by the small numbers of clones with only silent mutations, we expanded the group to include IGHVs with replacement mutations of only the conservative type (n=83) since these would be unlikely to havemajor impact on BCR structure. Comparison of this group with those with no mutations for differences in TTFT was significant (3.0 vs. 3.9 yrs, p=0.0007). Furthermore, comparisons of patients with silent plus conservative mutations in FRs only (n=123) versus patients with no mutations showed a clear difference in TTFT (3.0 vs. 4.1, respectively; (p<0.003). In both of the above instances, non-conservative replacement mutations do not have a significantly greater impact on TTFT than the silent plus conservative combination. Conclusions: It is assumed that M-CLL patients have a clinical course superior to U-CLL patients because IGHV somatic mutations change the structure of the M-CLL BCR such that it no longer binds stimulatory antigens. For this theory to be correct, only replacement mutations and in particular non-conservative replacement mutations that would alter amino structure of the IGHV/D/J rearrangements would have relevance. Silent mutations, which by definition do not change amino acid structure, should be irrelevant in this regard, and conservative mutations, which substitute amino acids with similar chemical properties to the original amino acid, would be unlikely to result in major changes in the BCR. Therefore, the fact that the combination of only silent plus conservative mutations, which probably would not result in changes in BCR structure and therefore antigen binding, is associated with a lengthened TTFT militates against a loss of antigen binding as a reason for improved clinical course. Therefore, we suggest that another explanation for the enhanced survival of M-CLL patients should be sought. One possibility is that the cells that have the capacity to mutate their IGHVs are different in origin and/or biologic properties from those that cannot, and these account for the differences in survival between M- and U-CLL patients. (This work was supported NIH grant PO1-CA81534 of the CLL Research Consortium.) Disclosures: Byrd: Genzyme Corporation: Research Funding. Kipps: GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: CLL is a disease of the elderly and at least half of the patients requiring therapy are over age 70. While chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) has dramatically improved response rates in patients with CLL, some CIT regimens are not well tolerated by elderly patients. The MD Anderson group has reported that the fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, rituximab (FCR) regimen is not well tolerated in individuals ≥age 70 (Ferrajoli Leuk Lymph 46:S86). The German CLL Study Group has postulated that physiologic health is more important than chronologic age and have conducted a trial of FCR that permits enrollment of patients ≥age 70 provided they have a creatinine clearance (CrCl) ≥70 and good performance status (PS). While this approach expands the number of individuals who can receive CIT, it still excludes large percentages of CLL patients in need of treatment. Here, we examine how age, CrCl, and PS relate to the efficacy and tolerability of the pentostatin, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (PCR) regimen. Methods: We treated 64 previously untreated CLL patients meeting NCI 96 criteria for treatment with pentostatin (2mg/m2), cyclophosphamide (600 mg/m2) and rituximab (375mg/m2) (Kay ASH 2006). All medications were administered on day 1 of every 3 week cycle with the intent of administering 6 cycles. We measured ECOG PS at study entry and used age, weight, and baseline creatinine to calculate the CrCl of all patients at study entry using the Cockroft-Gault equation. Results: Eighteen of 64 patients (28%) were ≥age 70. Although individuals ≥age 70 were more likely to have a dose delay of >1 week at some point during the trial (7% vs. 28%; p=0.03), there was no difference in the average number of cycles administered, the number of patients requiring dose reductions, or the number of patients with grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity, infectious complications, or other non-hematologic toxicity. No difference in OR (93% vs 83%; p=0.34) or CR (41% vs. 39%; p=0.86) was observed between patients <age 70 compared to those ≥70. We next evaluated whether CrCl related to the efficacy and tolerability of PCR. 25 patients (39%) had a CrCl<70, including 15 (23%) with a CrCl<60 and 5 (8%) with CrCl<50. Although individuals with CrCl<70 were more likely to have a dose reduction (5% vs. 24%; p=0.05), there was no difference in the average number of cycles administered, the number of patients requiring a dose delay, or the number of patients with grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity, infectious complications, or other non-hematologic toxicity. No difference in OR (89% vs 92%; p=1.0) or CR (45% vs. 36%; p=0.60) was observed between patients with CrCl≥70 and those with CrCl<70. We next evaluated how PS related to the efficacy and tolerability. 34 patients (53%) were PS 0 and 30 (47%) were PS≥1. This analysis suggested PCR was well tolerated among those with PS≥1. Again no difference in the OR or CR was observed between patients with PS 0 and those with PS≥1. Conclusions: In this phase II clinical trial, the PCR regimen was well tolerated by patients ≥age70, those with higher PS, and the 25 individuals with CrCl≤70 (range 34–67). The efficacy of PCR was also not significantly affected by age, renal function, or performance status. These findings suggest the PCR regimen may be superior to the FCR regimen for elderly patients and those with decreased renal function.

Abstract Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) is primarily characterized by the presence of leukemic B lymphocytes resistant to the process of apoptosis. Causes for this resistance include aberrant expression of multiple anti-apoptotic proteins, perhaps including Tcl-1 (1). Tcl-1 is expressed during normal development of both B and T cells and activates Akt to provide a survival signal through phosphorylation and inactivation of apoptotic pathway components. Overexpression of Tcl-1 in the B cells of transgenic mice results in a B-cell leukemia phenotype typical of human CLL, suggesting a primary role for Tcl-1 in CLL tumorigenesis. A recent report showed that Tcl-1 protein expression in CLL cells correlated with other biological parameters, but no data were available as to its clinical relevance (2). We therefore examined Tcl-1 expression in relation to clinical outcome using 51 peripheral blood mononuclear cell samples from a Phase II clinical trial testing the combination of pentostatin, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab in previously untreated CLL patients (Kay et al., ASH 2006). Tcl-1 protein expression was measured by immunoblot using GAPDH as a normalization control across lanes and lysate from a single Tcl-1 transgenic mouse spleen as a normalization control across immunoblots. All samples were run at least in duplicate and digital quantitation was performed using a ChemiDoc instrument (BioRad). Tcl-1 expression in patient cells was calculated in comparison to Tcl-1 expression in the mouse lysate, arbitrarily set to 1.0. Data were analyzed as a continuous measure as well as by specific cutoffs. Higher Tcl-1 expression was associated with failure to achieve a minimal residual disease-negative state after treatment. Specifically, Tcl-1 expression (measured as a continuous variable) was associated with residual disease measured by post-treatment CD5+/CD19+ cell percentages (continuous variable as well as dichotomized by cutpoint of 1.0% for CD5+/CD19+; p=0.03 for both comparisons). For the dichotomized Tcl-1 expression with the cutpoint of 0.275 (second tertile), this variable was marginally significantly associated with whether or not post-treatment CD5+/CD19+ was less than 1.0%. Using this same cutoff, there was also a suggestion that patients with reduced Tcl-1 were more likely to achieve a complete response. Finally, progression-free survival was shorter in patients with increased Tcl-1 expression, although these data did not reach statistical significance in this sample set. Tcl-1 < 0.275 Tcl-1≥ 0.275 p value CD5/CD19≥ 1% 15 10 0.046 CD5/CD19 < 1% 16 2 CR 17 3 0.064 No CR 18 13 Median PFS (mos.) 36.5 17.1 0.137 Statistically significant associations with other parameters including Rai stage, IgVH mutation status, ZAP-70 expression, CD38 expression, and interphase cytogenetics categories were not detected in this sample set. These data further support the clinical relevance of the Tcl-1 mouse model to human CLL, and provide preliminary evidence that Tcl-1 protein expression correlates with clinical outcome of CLL patients treated with chemoimmunotherapy. If validated in larger studies, Tcl-1 expression may serve as a novel prognostic factor.

Abstract Background: Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients exhibit variable times from diagnosis to the need to initiate therapy. Previous studies have demonstrated that the rates of CLL cell proliferation (birth) and elimination (death plus recirculation to solid tissues) could be estimated using the incorporation of deuterium (2H), taken in the form of heavy water (2H2O), into the DNA of dividing cells. In a cross-sectional study of patients with early and late stage CLL, birth rates above 0.35% per day were associated with more aggressive disease. The NIH-sponsored CLL Research Consortium (CRC) conducted a prospective study on patients with early stage disease to assess the relationship between CLL-cell birth rate and the length of time to initiation of initial therapy. Methods: Eligible patients had untreated early stage (Rai 0, 1 or 2) disease, and were no more than 3 years from diagnosis. Additional clinical parameters included age at diagnosis, gender, mutational status of the immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region (IGHV), 70-kD zeta-associated protein (ZAP-70) (binary split at 20%) and CD38 (binary split at 30%) expression, and FISH cytogenetics by the Dohner hierarchy. Heavy water was administered daily for 6 weeks, and peripheral blood was obtained for kinetic measurements at the end of weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, and 16. CLL birth rates for blood samples were measured at the same facility (KineMed, Inc, Emeryville, CA) by quantifying deuterium incorporation into the deoxyribose moiety of DNA of tumor cells, using isotope ratio mass spectrometry (IRMS). Subjects were followed for time to administration of therapy; subjects still without treatment at time of analysis were censored, as were subjects who exited the study to receive treatment outside of the established criteria. To assess the impact of birth rate and other factors on time to first therapy, Kaplan-Meier curves were compared using the logrank test for univariable analyses; stepwise Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to build multivariable models. Results: Between July 2005 and February 2009, 119 subjects were enrolled through the CRC. 107 subjects were eligible. For 10 eligible patients, exit from the study prior to completion of protocol-mandated heavy water consumption (n=5) or technical issues (n=5) made it impossible to obtain estimates of birth rate. The 97 eligible subjects for whom birth rates were available form the basis of this report. 60% of subjects were male; median age 57 years (range 40-85). Median birth rate was 0.32%/day (range 0.07-1.31%/day). 43 subjects (44%) had birth rates higher than the previously reported threshold of 0.35%/day. With a median follow up of 4 years, 33 eligible subjects (34%) required treatment. IGHV status (31 subjects unmutated), elevated ZAP-70 (31 subjects), elevated CD38 (21 subjects), and hierarchical categorization of FISH anomalies (4 del(17p), 5 del(11q), 8 tri(12), 50 del(13q)) were examined for association with differential time to first therapy in univariable analyses. All were associated with earlier need for therapy (p <0.001) except for genomic aberrations defined by FISH (p = 0.96). Birth rate > 0.35%/day was also significantly associated with shorter time to first therapy (p < 0.001). In multivariable modeling, only birth rate and IGHV status met the criteria for inclusion (Wald p-value < 0.05). Hazard ratios were 3.51 (p = 0.002) for birth rate above 0.35%/day and 5.0 for unmutated IGHV status (p < 0.001). The association between elevated birth rate and shorter time to first treatment was observed within subjects with both unmutated and mutated IGHV (see Figure 1). Conclusion: An increased birth rate of CLL cells early in the disease course is a strong predictor of an earlier need for treatment in univariable analysis, as are unmutated IGHV, elevated ZAP-70 expression and elevated CD38 expression. However, only unmutated IGHV and an increased birth rate contribute significantly to the multivariable model. This adds a direct measure of B-cell kinetics to the array of biomarkers available to subjects with CLL. Figure 1 Time to treatment by birth rate and IGHV status Figure 1. Time to treatment by birth rate and IGHV status Disclosures Murphy: KineMed, Inc: Equity Ownership. Emson:KineMed, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Li:KineMed, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. McConnel:KineMed, Inc.: Equity Ownership. Turner:KineMed, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Busch:KineMed, Inc.: Equity Ownership. Hellerstein:KineMed Inc: Consultancy, Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Chiorazzi:KineMed, Inc.: Stock options Other.

Abstract Background: Patients (pts) with CLL/SLL that have del11q tend to have relatively short remission durations and shorter overall survival (OS) with standard chemotherapy regimens. Ibrutinib (ibr), a first-in-class, oral, once-daily inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) is indicated by the US FDA for the treatment of pts with CLL/SLL and allows for treatment without chemotherapy. In phase 3 studies, treatment with single-agent ibr was superior to treatment with ofatumumab (ofa) in relapsed/refractory (R/R) CLL/SLL (RESONATE; Byrd, N Engl J Med 2013) or chlorambucil (clb) in treatment-naïve (TN) CLL/SLL (RESONATE-2; Burger, N Engl J Med 2015); treatment with ibr + bendamustine/rituximab (BR) was also superior to treatment with BR in R/R CLL/SLL (HELIOS; Chanan-Khan, Lancet Oncol 2016). We examined the outcome of pts in these 3 studies who did or did not have del11q to determine the impact of del11q on clinical outcomes. Methods: In RESONATE, pts with R/R CLL/SLL received ibr 420 mg/day until progressive disease (PD) or unacceptable toxicity (tox) vs ofa for up to 24 weeks (300 mg week 1, 2000 mg weekly for 7 weeks, 2000 mg every 4 weeks for 16 weeks). In RESONATE-2, pts ≥65 years of age with TN CLL/SLL (excluding del17p) received ibr 420 mg/day until PD or tox vs clb 0.5 mg/kg (up to max of 0.8 mg/kg) on days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle (≤12 cycles). In HELIOS, pts with R/R CLL/SLL (excluding del17p) received BR (≤6 cycles) with or without ibr 420 mg/day (starting on day 2 of cycle 1) followed by single-agent ibr or placebo continued until PD or tox. Data from pts in the 3 studies were pooled (ibr pool, comparator pool) and analyzed based on whether or not their CLL/SLL had del11q. We performed a multivariate analysis to examine for risk factors prognostic for survival (del11q del17p, age, sex, race, current Rai stage, baseline ECOG PS, number of prior therapies, cytopenias; no multiplicity adjustment). Results: A total of 1210 pts with del11q data were included in the analysis: 609 in the ibr pool (179 with del11q, 430 without del11q) vs 601 in the comparator pool (149 with del11q, 452 without del11q). Demographics and baseline characteristics were generally similar in pts regardless of del11q status; differences of more than 10% included proportions with bulky disease ≥5 cm (63% vs 49%) and unmutated IGHV (88% vs 72%) in pts with or without del11q, respectively. Median lymphadenopathy and absolute lymphocyte counts were also higher in pts with del11q. At the time of the primary analysis, median treatment durations in the ibr pool were 20.0 mo with del11q and 18.7 mo without del11q; in the comparator pool 5.3 mo with del11q and 8.5 mo without del11q. Overall, ibr-treated pts had higher overall response rate (ORR) and complete response (CR) rates and longer progression-free survival (PFS, Figure) and OS than comparator-treated pts regardless of del11q status. In the ibr pool, the presence of del11q was associated with a trend of longer PFS and OS while in the comparator pool, pts with del11q had shorter PFS (Figure, Table), as compared to pts without del11q. Results were similar when excluding pts with del17p (10% of ibr pool [6%/11% with/without del11q] and 9% of comparator pool [8%/10% with/without del11q]; Table). By multivariate analysis, in the comparator pool, del11q, male sex, >1 prior therapy, presence of cytopenias, and unmutated IGHV (in R/R only) were associated with shorter PFS. However, these differences were not found in the ibr pool. The presence of del11q did not unfavorably impact the tempo of reductions in lymphadenopathy for ibr-treated pts, but did for comparator-treated pts. Adverse events leading to discontinuation were similar in ibr- and comparator-treated pts (12% [9% vs 13% with/without del11q] vs 13% [12% vs 13% with/without del11q]). Deaths within 30 days of last dose occurred in 31 pts (5% [3% vs 6% with/without del11q]) in the ibr pool and 28 pts (5% [6% vs 4% with/without del11q]) in the comparator pool. Conclusions: Treatment with ibr was superior to comparator regardless of del11q status; the benefit of ibr was most marked for pts with CLL/SLL with del11q. Presence of del11q was associated with a trend of longer PFS and OS in ibr-treated pts and shorter PFS and lower ORR in comparator-treated pts. By multivariate analysis, presence of del11q was a prognostic factor for shorter PFS for comparator-treated pts, but not for ibr-treated pts. Disclosures Kipps: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Hillmen:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding. Demirkan:Amgen: Consultancy. Coutre:Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Barrientos:Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Barr:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy. O'Brien:Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Fraser:Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Jaeger:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses. Cramer:Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Astellas: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Roche: Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Gilead: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding. Stilgenbauer:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Hoffman La-Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Salman:Janssen Research & Development: Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses. Solman:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; AbbVie: Equity Ownership. Cheng:Johnson & Johnson: Equity Ownership; AbbVie: Equity Ownership; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment. Phelps:Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ninomoto:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment; Amgen, Inc.: Equity Ownership; AbbVie: Equity Ownership. Howes:Janssen: Employment, Other: Leadership; Johnson & Johnson: Equity Ownership. James:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment; AbbVie: Equity Ownership. Hallek:Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; F. Hoffmann-LaRoche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Abstract Background: Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is primarily a disease of the elderly, with the majority of patients (pts) older than 65 y at diagnosis (US SEER). Historically, younger, more fit pts were eligible for aggressive chemoimmunotherapy treatments, but older age and comorbid conditions can limit options due to tolerability concerns. Ibrutinib (ibr), a first-in-class, oral, once-daily inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase, is indicated by the US FDA for the treatment of pts with CLL/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) and allows for treatment without chemotherapy. Results from the phase 3 RESONATE (PCYC-1112) and RESONATE-2 (PCYC-1115) trials established ibr as a standard option in relapsed/refractory (R/R) and treatment-naïve (TN) CLL/SLL. This analysis examines safety and efficacy from these studies by age. Methods: RESONATE randomized 391 pts with R/R CLL/SLL to receive ibr (n=195; 420 mg once daily) until progressive disease (PD) or unacceptable toxicity or intravenous ofatumumab (n=196; 300 mg at week 1, 2000 mg weekly for 7 w and then every 4 w for 16 w). RESONATE-2 randomized TN pts aged ≥65 y to receive ibr (n=136; 420 mg once daily) until PD or chlorambucil (clb; n=133; 0.5 mg/kg to a maximum of 0.8 mg/kg) on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle for up to 12 cycles. Pt data from both studies were grouped by age (ibr and comparators [comp]) and analyzed for effect of age on outcome. Results: Ibr group included 136 TN pts: 65 to <75 y (termed mid, n=90) and ≥75 y (termed old, n=46), and 195 R/R pts: <65 y (termed young, n=77), 65 to <75 y (mid, n=75), and ≥75 y (old, n=43). Table 1 lists key baseline pt characteristics. For ibr, median follow-up was 28.6 mo for TN and 36.1 mo for R/R pts. PFS is shown in Figure 1. For TN ibr pts, the 24-mo PFS rates were 88% (mid) and 89% (old), whereas clb pts aged ≥75 y did worse than those aged 65 to <75 y (23% vs 40%). For R/R pts, the 24-mo PFS was 75% (young), 77% (mid), and 62% (old). For ibr, median OS was not reached for any age subgroup (R/R or TN). The CR+CRi rates for TN ibr pts were 19% (mid) and 17% (old) and for R/R pts were 6% (young), 9% (mid), and 9% (old). Median treatment duration and the most common grade ≥3 AEs are listed in Table 2. The most frequent any-grade adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea, fatigue, cough, upper respiratory tract infection, nausea, pyrexia, and anemia for all pts and age subgroups. For ibr, grade ≥3 AEs occurred in 64% (mid) and 83% (old) of TN pts, and 70% (young), 84% (mid), and 84% (old) of R/R pts. The prevalence of common grade ≥3 AEs was typically highest in the first 12 mo of ibr therapy, and decreased thereafter for all age groups. Pts ≥75 y had a higher rate of grade ≥3 neutropenia and urinary tract infection in both TN and R/R populations. R/R ibr pts <65 y experienced a lower frequency of grade ≥3 pneumonia and atrial fibrillation (AF) than older subgroups. Any grade AF occurred in 11% (mid) and 9% (old) of TN ibr pts, and 1% (young), 20% (mid), and 14% (old) of R/R ibr pts. For ibr, dose reduction due to AE occurred in 9% (mid) and 22% (old) of TN pts and 6% (young), 20% (mid), and 12% (old) of R/R pts. 107 (79%) TN ibr pts remain on treatment: 81% (mid) and 74% (old); 99 (51%) R/R pts remain on treatment: 49% (young), 59% (mid), and 40% (old). For ibr, discontinuation due to AE occurred in 11% (mid) and 13% (old) of TN pts, and 6% (young), 11% (mid), and 19% (old) of R/R pts. The most common AE leading to discontinuation of ibr was infection(TN: n=4, RR: n=5). Conclusions: The PFS rate for TN ibr pts was similar regardless of age subgroup, whereas it was shorter for clb-treated pts ≥75 y compared with those 65 to <75 y. In the R/R population, ibr pts ≥75 y tended to have shorter PFS compared to those <75 y. There was no perceivable difference in CR rate by age within the TN and R/R ibr populations. The rates of grade ≥3 AEs tended to be higher in pts ≥75 y for both ibr and comp arms. Age did not impact discontinuation rates due to AE for TN pts treated with ibr, but increased with age for R/R pts. This study is limited by the number of pts ≤65 y who were only eligible for the R/R trial. This analysis supports single-agent ibrutinib as a treatment option regardless of pt age, but reinforces the need for close toxicity monitoring, especially in older pts. Disclosures Woyach: Karyopharm: Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding. Hillmen:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding. Brown:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Infinity: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sun Biopharma: Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, or other expenses. Coutre:Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding. Barr:AbbVie: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding. O'Brien:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Devereux:Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Speakers Bureau. Reddy:KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GILEAD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; INFINITY: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mulligan:GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Zhou:AbbVie: Equity Ownership; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment. Ninomoto:AbbVie: Equity Ownership; Amgen: Equity Ownership; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment. James:Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment; AbbVie: Equity Ownership. Burger:Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Portola: Consultancy; Gilead: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Research Funding; Roche: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses.

Abstract Background: Contemporary approaches to non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) incorporate chemo-immunotherapy, biologic combinations, and immune modulating agents; toxicities in elderly pts (³65 years) receiving these therapies are not well studied. Further, clinical and biologic factors predicting these toxicities in pts receiving biologic therapy remain undefined. Methods: We reviewed data on NHL and/or CLL pts treated prospectively on 14 studies by the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology from 2004-2014 (Table 1). Toxicity was assessed per the NCI CTCAE at the time of trial enrollment, and the probabilities of experiencing grade 3 and grade 4 hematologic (hem) and non-hematologic (non-hem) toxicities were modeled as a function of age (³65 years vs. < 65), time on study, treatment (biologics only vs. biologic + chemotherapy), gender, race, LDH, performance status (PS), stage, and an age-by-treatment interaction using logistic regression. Results: A total of 1199 pts (409 age ³ 65; 790 age < 65; 736=CLL and 463=NHL) were included. Among these patients, 493 received only biologic therapy (166 age ³ 65; 327 age < 65; 104 CLL; 389 NHL), and 706 received biologic + chemotherapy (243 age ³ 65; 463 age < 65; 632 CLL; 74 NHL). Among CLL pts (259 pts ³ 65), the effect of age on the probability of experiencing a grade 3 heme toxicity differed by treatment type (age-by-treatment interaction p = 0.047). Specifically, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) (age ³ 65 vs. < 65) for pts receiving only biologic therapy was 3.075 (95% CI: 1,15-8.25), and that for pts receiving biologic + chemotherapy was 1.044 (95% CI: 0.69 - 1.57). Similar results were seen in CLL pts for grade 4 heme toxicities (age-by-treatment interaction p = 0.033; biologic OR 6.937, 95% CI: 1.76-27.35; biologic + chemo OR 1.484, 95% CI: 1.04-2.13). No such interactions were found in CLL pts for grade 3 and 4 non-hem toxicities; however, older pts had significantly higher odds of experiencing a grade 3 non-hem toxicity than younger pts (adjusted OR 1.40; p = 0.047; 95% CI: 1.004-1.96). No age group differences were found in CLL pts for grade 4 non-hem toxicity. Similar analyses were performed for NHL pts (150 pts ³ 65), but no significant age group differences were found. Among CLL pts, women had significantly higher odds of experiencing a grade 3 heme toxicity than men (OR 2.01; p = 0.0007); no difference in grade 3 non-hem or any grade 4 toxicity was noted. Non-Caucasian CLL pts had higher odds of experiencing a grade 4 non-hem toxicity than Caucasians (OR 2.892; p = 0.0029), but no other toxicity differences were found. Worse PS was associated with increased toxicities (OR 1.871; p = 0.0009: grade 3 heme; OR 1.647; p = 0.0025: grade 3 non-hem; OR 1.410; p = 0.0448: grade 4 heme, and OR 1.931; p = 0.0252: grade 4 non-hem). CLL pts with advanced stage disease had higher odds of experiencing a heme toxicity (grade 3: OR 1.95; p = 0.0007, grade 4: OR 1.451; p = 0.0329), but no stage associations were found for non-hem toxicities. Among NHL pts, men had significantly higher odds of experiencing a grade 4 hematologic toxicity than women (OR 4.351; p = 0.0169), but no other toxicity differences were found. An increase in LDH was associated with significantly higher odds of experiencing grade 3 non-hem and grade 4 heme toxicities (grade 3 non-heme: OR 1.633; p = 0.021, grade 4 heme: OR 2.039, p = 0.0182), but no such effect was found for grade 3 heme or grade 4 non-hem. Worse PS was associated with higher odds of experiencing grade 3 toxicities (heme: OR 2.025; p = 0.0344, non-hem: OR 2.458; p = 0.0013), but no such differences were found for grade 4 toxicities. No significant stage or race effects were found in NHL patients. Conclusion: In pts ³65 years who have CLL or NHL, we identified several clinical and disease-related factors as potential predictors of developing grade 3 and/or 4 heme and non-hem toxicities (Table 2). A prognostic model is being constructed to predict toxicities in these under-studied pts to guide management and monitoring. Further, the impact of these toxicities on outcomes is being analyzed and will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Hurria: Celgene: Other: Research; Optum Health Care SOlutions: Consultancy, Other: Conference panel, research; Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Carevive: Consultancy; Novartis: Other: Research; GTx, Inc: Consultancy. Bartlett:Gilead: Consultancy. Cheson:Gilead: Research Funding; Acerta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Nabhan:Infinity: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Cardinal Health: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Ibrutinib (Imbruvica®), an oral, first-in-class covalent BTK inhibitor, is a new treatment option approved by FDA for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients (pts) with ≥1 prior therapy. We previously reported results from the phase III trial, in which ibrutinib (ibr) significantly improved progression-free and overall survival vs ofatumumab (ofa) in pts with relapsed/refractory CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) (Byrd et al. NEJM, 2014). Here, we report measures of patient well-being, including hematologic, immunologic, and quality of-life parameters, at interim analysis (IA). Methods: Pts with CLL/SLL after ≥1 prior therapy were randomized 1:1 to ibr 420 mg/day until progression or unacceptable toxicity, or to ofa for up to 24 weeks. At IA, secondary efficacy endpoints of hematologic improvement (sustained improvement ≥56 days without transfusions or growth factors) and FACiT-Fatigue (FACiT-F) outcomes were analyzed, along with exploratory endpoints assessing disease-related symptoms (DRS), serum immunoglobulin, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) by EORTC QLQ-C30, and medical resource utilization (MRU). Results: Of 391 enrolled pts (ibr n=195; ofa n=196), 63% had cytopenia(s) at baseline: 45% had anemia (hemoglobin ≤11 g/dL), 35% thrombocytopenia (platelets ≤100×109/L), and 20% neutropenia (absolute neutrophil counts [ANC] ≤1.5×109/L). On the ibr arm, 69% of pts with baseline cytopenias experienced sustained improvement in blood counts compared to 43% on ofa (P<0.0001, table). There was no decrement in serum immunoglobulins (IgA, IgG, IgM) during follow-up. IgA levels increased on the ibrutinib arm only (mean change from baseline: 41% at week 24). Immune cells CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell and NK-cell levels remained relatively stable during treatment. Mean change in FACiT-F score from baseline are shown in the figure for ibr and ofa arms. At week 24, clinically meaningful (≥3 points) improvement in FACiT-F occurred in more pts on ibr than ofa (59% vs 46%, P=0.06); clinically meaningful deterioration was reported by 14% vs 24% (P=0.08), respectively. A larger proportion of ibr vs ofa pts showed clinically meaningful improvement on EORTC-QLQ-C30 global health scores (46% vs 40%). Clinically meaningful improvement (≥10 points) from baseline to week 24 in ibr vs ofa pts was observed for fatigue (median 11 vs 0). A 50% reduction in lymph node based on IRC-assessed CT was observed in 93% (177/190 evaluable) of ibr pts compared with 17% (29/174 evaluable) of ofa pts (P< 0.0001). Splenic response based on IRC-assessed CT was reported for 85% (138/163 evaluable) of ibr pts compared with 54% (82/151 evaluable) of ofa pts. Baseline DRS were comparable between groups; however, improvement by at least 1 grade (G) post-baseline was observed in ibr relative to ofa pts for weight loss (100% vs 93%), fatigue (88% vs 72%), night sweats (95% vs 86%), and anorexia (100% vs 64%), respectively. Cumulative MRU was comparable for growth factors and transfusions, with ibr pts having longer median treatment duration: 8.6 months for ibr vs 5.3 for ofa. Hospitalizations in the first 30 days occurred in 2% ibr vs 15% ofa pts. After adjusting for treatment exposure duration, diarrhea, grade 1-2 bleeding events (e.g petechiae), and atrial fibrillation were among those noted to be more frequent on the ibrutinib arm while events such as fatigue, infusion reaction, and peripheral sensory neuropathy were seen more commonly with ofa. Major hemorrhage events were uncommon, observed in 2 patients on the ibr arm vs 3 on ofa arm without adjusting for exposure time. Exposure-adjusted analysis showed no difference in any-grade infection and a 43% relative reduction for grade 3 or higher infections for ibr. Conclusions: Ibr compared to ofa when administered to previously treated CLL/SLL pts led to improvements in hematologic function and disease burden. A survival benefit with ibr, together with sustained improvements in hematologic endpoints and PRO suggest that ibr enhances quality of life while prolonging survival. Table. Sustained hematologic improvement Parameter, n (%) ITT population Pts with cytopenias at baseline Ibr n=195 Ofa n=196 P value Ibr n=195 Ofa n=196 P value Platelets 60 (31) 19 (10) <0.0001 53/74 (72) 14/64 (22) <0.0001 ANC 52 (27) 19 (10) <0.0001 26/41 (63) 12/38 (32) 0.0047 Hemoglobin 42 (22) 32 (16) 0.1883 42/89 (47) 32/86 (37) 0.1815 Figure. Improvement in FACiT-F by treatment arm. Figure. Improvement in FACiT-F by treatment arm. Disclosures Barrientos: Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Brown:Sanofi, Onyx, Vertex, Novartis, Boehringer, GSK, Roche/Genentech, Emergent, Morphosys, Celgene, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, Gilead: Consultancy. Kay:Genetech: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Coutre:Janssen, Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding. Tam:Pharmacyclics and Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mulligan:Roche, Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Jaeger:Janssen Cilag: Honoraria. Devereux:Pharmacyclics, Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Robak:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Schuh:Roche, Gilead, GSK, NAPP, Celgene: Honoraria. Bloor:GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dearden:Roche, GSK, Gilead, Janssen, Napp: Honoraria. Jones:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kierschniak:Pharmacyclics, GmbH: Employment. Eckert:Pharmacyclics: Employment. Suzuki:Pharmacyclics: Employment. Hsu:Pharmacyclics: Employment. James:Pharmacyclics: Employment. Byrd:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Hillmen:Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Gilead, Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract In chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), it is recognized that germinal center experience by the cell-of-origin has an influence on the malignant phenotype and impacts clinical behavior. Measurement of the mutational status of the IGHV locus is a commonly used approach that subgroups patients according to this natural history. Other biomarkers correlating with these subgroups, such as ZAP70 expression and ZAP70 DNA methylation, are also used. Recently, we and others have found vast differences in global DNA methylation profiles among CLL cases that classifies distinct subgroups related to their natural history. Here we systematically evaluate various markers of natural history of the cell-of-origin for their ability to discriminate clinical outcomes. IGHV mutational status and ZAP70 expression are currently the most widely used prognostic markers of germinal center experience. These markers are generally concordant, with IGHV-unmutated associating with ZAP70 positivity. To compare their relative prognostic impact, we selected CLL cases from a large sample cohort collected as a prospective study maintained by the CLL Research Consortium that were discordant (IGHV-mutated and ZAP70(+) or IGHV-unmutated and ZAP70(-); n=192). We found a significant difference in time-to-first-treatment (TTFT; P=0.002) and overall survival (OS; P=0.032) between discordant groups, with curves separating according to IGHV as opposed to ZAP70 (Fig.1A). DNA methylation-based classification of CLL according to their natural history has not been compared to IGHV status. This classification strategy subgroups the majority of cases into low-programmed CLL (LP-CLL) or high-programmed (HP-CLL) subgroups that generally correlate with IGHV-unmutated/ZAP70(+) and IGHV-mutated/ZAP70(-), respectively, along with a minority of cases in an intermediate (IP-CLL) subgroup. We used our previously-described DNA methylation assay, based on MassARRAY interrogating 7 genomic loci including ZAP70, to group the 192 samples with discordant IGHV/ZAP70 results with 327 samples analyzed previously from the same cohort. DNA methylation (LP-CLL vs. HP-CLL) outperformed IGHV classification (unmutated vs. mutated) in terms of separating TTFT curves (n=432; LP-CLL vs. HP-CLL median difference=4.8 years, unmutated vs. mutated IGHV median difference=2.9 years) and OS curves (n=491; LP-CLL vs. HP-CLL median difference=12.9 years, unmutated vs. mutated IGHV median difference=6.8 years). To evaluate whether DNA methylation subgroups provide additional prognostic information to IGHV, we compared TTFT and OS within IGHV subtypes. We found that the ability of DNA methylation subgrouping to separate OS curves was maintained in the IGHV-unmutated subtype (P<0.001; Fig.1B) and TTFT in both IGHV-unmutated and mutated subtypes (P<0.001 and P=0.016, respectively). Conversely, IGHV subtypes did not significantly separate outcomes within DNA methylation subgroups (P>0.5 for all). Further investigation of the features of DNA methylation subgroups as defined revealed a strong bias in the frequency of several recurrent adverse prognostic somatic mutations. In particular 17p deletions and EGR2, SF3B1 and XPO1 mutations occurred frequently within the LP-CLL subgroup. We next explored whether the presence of each mutation correlated with clinical outcome within its corresponding DNA methylation subgroup, and found heterogenous results. EGR2 mutations separated TTFT in the LP-CLL subgroup (P=0.0009), but 17p, XPO1 and SF3B1 did not (P>0.3). This suggests that the cell-of-origin should be taken into account to accurately assess the clinical impact of somatic mutations. In summary, we demonstrate that among discordant cases for IGHV/ZAP70, IGHV appears to be a stronger prognostic factor for both TTFT and OS. When then evaluating the relative importance of DNA methylation subgrouping and IGHV status on TTFT and OS, we find that DNA methylation subgrouping is the more powerful prognostic factor. Among the markers of the cell-of-origin, DNA methylation is a strong tool for risk-stratifying patients and should be considered in development of risk prediction models. Figure 1. A) Kaplan-Meier analysis of TTFT of IGHV-mutated and ZAP70(+) versus IGHV-unmutated and ZAP70(-) (P=0.002, median difference=4.4 years). B) Kaplan-Meier analysis of OS in patients with unmutated IGHV separated by DNA methylation subgroup (P<0.001). Figure 1. A) Kaplan-Meier analysis of TTFT of IGHV-mutated and ZAP70(+) versus IGHV-unmutated and ZAP70(-) (P=0.002, median difference=4.4 years). B) Kaplan-Meier analysis of OS in patients with unmutated IGHV separated by DNA methylation subgroup (P<0.001). Disclosures Wierda: Acerta: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding. Brown:Infinity: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Sun BioPharma: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy. Kipps:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.