Gamero, Sonia Fortin

Background Burkitt NHL (BL) is a rare hematologic malignancy that occurs in younger adults and is highly curable with aggressive chemoimmunotherapy induction regimens. Unfortunately, patients that are refractory or relapse after these regimens fare poorly and treatment guidelines are not well established. The typical approach is with standard platinum-based salvage regimens; those who obtain a complete remission (CR) become eligible for autologous or allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT). Chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy and bispecific antibodies offer potential novel approaches for these patients, especially those who are unable to achieve remission in order to proceed with SCT; however, CAR-T therapy is not approved nor even tested in BL other than promising single case reports (Avigdor A, Bone Marrow Transplant. 2018 May 24). The goal of this study was to learn the clinical features and outcome of R/R BL in order to design a prospective strategy for novel therapy use in relapsed/refractory (R/R) BL patients. Methods We reviewed the Mayo Clinic Lymphoma database to find cases of BL diagnosed and treated between 1/1/2000 - 9/30/2018. Forty-two cases were identified and 32 (76%) entered CR and never relapsed; 10 (24%) did not respond or relapsed and are the focus of this report. Demographic, clinical response to treatment regimens, and long-term outcomes were extracted from the Mayo Clinic electronic medical record. Results The 10 patients with R/R BL had a median age of 41 years (range, 28-59); all had received aggressive chemoimmunotherapy induction regimens; 7 were primary refractory and 3 relapsed within 3 months (2-4) of achieving first CR. All 3 patients that relapsed did so in the central nervous system (CNS) despite receiving CNS prophylaxis with their induction therapy regimen. The response to salvage therapy was 30% (3/10) with 10% CR and 30% (3/10) proceeded to autologous SCT (no patients made it to allogenic SCT). The median progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from diagnosis of all 10 patients was 4 months (1-9) and 70% (7/10) died within 6±4 months from date of relapse. The 3 patients with relapsed BL survived 7, 10, and17 months from date of relapse. The 3 patients who did survive to receive a SCT lived 2, 4, and 13 months from date of SCT. None of the 10 patients survived past 26 months from date of diagnosis. Conclusions Patients with R/R BL represent an uncommon and unique subset of aggressive NHL that require a new therapeutic approach such as CAR-T. Our study demonstrates the very poor outcome with traditional salvage therapies and the very short OS of these young, otherwise healthy patients. We recommend that these patients be considered as emergencies and referred promptly for novel therapies such as CAR-T trials at the very first sign of treatment failure. Waiting with the intent of attaining response to traditional therapies is futile. Insurance approval initiation and harvesting of T-cells should be rapidly performed, preferably prior to initiating salvage therapy, given the rapid clinical deterioration and demise of these patients. Disclosures Kenderian: Lentigen: Research Funding; Novartis: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Tolero: Research Funding; Humanigen: Other: Scientific advisory board , Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Research Funding. Bennani:Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Nowakowski:Selvita: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; NanoString: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Recent guideline statements approve the performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with non-conditional cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) under certain closely monitored conditions. Data from current registries may have lower power to discern changes that may occur in the CIED after the MRI. Objective We aimed to systematically review the literature to identify the adverse events and significance of changes in device function associated with performing MRI in patients with CIEDs Methods A comprehensive literature search of the databases was performed between 1980- 2017. Two independent reviewers selected studies and extracted data. A random-effects model was used for meta-analysis. Results A total of 7,422 patients underwent 8,865 MRI studies. No death occurred post MRI. Clinical adverse events were extremely rare (mostly less than 1%) and are summarized in Table 1. No significant changes in the pooled mean effect size estimate was noted for the changes in the lead parameters (pacing threshold, sensing and impedance) Binary outcomes post magnetic resonance imaging in patients with non-conditional cardiac implantable electronic devices Outcome Sample size Number of patients Rate SE LL of CI UL of CI Death 7401 0 0 0 0 0 Atrial arrhythmia 7173 10 0.001 0.0004 0.0007 0.0024 Ventricular arrhythmia 7371 9 0.0012 0.0004 0.0006 0.0022 Oversensing 4981 17 0.0034 0.0008 0.0020 0.0053 Inhibition of pacing 7371 6 0.0008 0.0003 0.0003 0.0016 Lead Failure/Generator Failure 7475/7475 2/8 0.0002/0.0011 0.0001/0.0004 0.0001/0.0005 0.0009/0.002 Power on Reset 1388 105 0.0131 0.0014 0.0107 0.0161 Did not complete scan 6851 13 0.0019 0.0005 0.0011 0.0031 Chest pain 7080 11 0.0021 0.0004 0.0008 0.0027. Lead threshold rise (>0.5v/>50%-A/V) 5076/6246 12/16 0.0024/0.0026 0.0007/0.0006 0.0013/0.0015 0.0040/0.0041 Change in Battery voltage >0.04V 7132 42 0.0061 0.0009 0.0043 0.0079 Sensing decrease >50%-A/V 5087/5834 17/9 0.0033/0.0015 0.0008/0.0005 0.0020/0.0008 0.0052/0.0028 Impedance changes >50ohms/>50% 5810 22 0.0038 0.0008 0.0024 0.0057 Rise in cardiac enzymes 1703 26 0.0152 0.0030 0.0102 0.0219 A, atrial; V, ventricular; SE, standard Error; LL, lower limit; UL, upper limit; CI, Confidence intervals. Conclusions MRI in patients with non-conditional CIEDs can be performed with high degree of safety and low rate of clinical events when performed under standardized protocols Acknowledgement/Funding None