Hanson, Curtis A.

Abstract Deletion 5q in Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML): a Clinicopathological Description of 79 Cases From a Single Institution Rafael Santana-Davila, Shernan G. Holtan, Rhett P. Ketterling, Ryan A. Knudson, David P. Steensma, Dong Chen, James D. Hoyer, Curtis A. Hanson, Ayalew Tefferi. Background: Deletion 5q (del(5q)) is a lenalidomide-sensitive cytogenetic abnormality commonly seen in patients with myeloid disorders. In this study we analyze the clinicopathological characteristics of patients with AML and del(5q). Methods: Patients with del(5q) and AML were identified through a database query of our institutional cytogenetic database from May, 1992 through December, 2005. Both peripheral blood and bone marrow specimens from each patient were morphologically examined by a hematopathologist (DC, JDH and/or CAH). A morphologic diagnosis was given based on current WHO criteria. A critical review of the patient history was performed for each patient. Results: A total 79 patients were identified. Median age was 71 (range 39–87) years, 56% (n=43)were female. The most common subtype according to the FAB classification was M2 (n=23, 29%). In 35 (44%) patients AML developed a median of 9.4 (range 1–294) months since the diagnosis of a pre-existing myeloid malignancy, of which myelodysplastic syndrome accounted for 24 (9 cases of MDS NOS, 6 of RA, 6 of RAEB1, 2 of RAEB-2, and a single RARS), a myeloproliferative neoplasm in 10 (4 cases of a CMPD NOS, 4 cases of PV and a single case of ET and PMF each) and 1 case of a prior history of AML with a t(8;21). The del(5q) was documented in 7 of this 24 patients in the antecedent hematologic disorder. Neither a history of prior exposure to cytotoxic agents nor a prior myeloid disorder was found in 44% (n=35) of the patients. Del(5q) was commonly associated with a complex karyotype (n=67), however in 9 patients it was found to be the sole abnormality. The most frequent breakpoint was q13q33 (n=47) followed by q15q33 (n=12). Initial pathological description did not identify any morphological abnormalities in 6 cases, in contrast myelodysplasia involving at least two cell lines was appreciated in 58% (n=46) of the patients. The median survival was 2.8 months. The majority of the subjects (n=51, 65%) received palliative treatment, 7 patients were lost to follow up and no treatment information was available for review and the remaining 21 received induction chemotherapy with a curative intent, in this group median survival was 8.8 months with 52% (n=11) of patients achieving a complete response. Surprisingly the only factor that appeared to alter survival in the whole group was the presence of the breakpoint in chromosome 5 being distal to q15 (median 2.8 vs 4.1 months, p=0.025) Conclusions: This study constitutes the largest review of del(5q) in AML, its presence is currently associated with advanced age and a poor survival. Close to half of the patients in our series were classified as de novo AML. Although more commonly encountered as part of a complex karyotype it can also be present as a single abnormality. The different cytogenetic characteristics of the del(5q) may impact survival and this deserves further investigation. Figure. Survival of patients with AML and del(5q) in which the breakpoint was found to be distal to q15 (straight line) compared with patients in which the breakpoint was proximal to q13 (dotted line). Figure. Survival of patients with AML and del(5q) in which the breakpoint was found to be distal to q15 (straight line) compared with patients in which the breakpoint was proximal to q13 (dotted line).

Abstract Background: The 2001 WHO classification of myeloid neoplasms distinguished 2 forms of MDS associated with >=15% ring sideroblasts and <5% marrow blasts: refractory cytopenia with multilineage dysplasia and with ring sideroblasts (RCMD-RS) vs. refractory anemia with ring siderblasts (RARS, erythroid-restricted dysplasia). However, the real prognostic value of separating RCMD-RS from RCMD with <15% ring sideroblasts and from RARS is uncertain, and the WHO has proposed merging RCMD-RS and RCMD in the 2008 classification revision. Furthermore, the WHO-based Prognostic Scoring System (WPSS), proposed by Malcovati and colleagues in 2005 as a dynamic system that overcomes some of the limitations of the 1997 International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS), has undergone limited independent external validation to date and its applicability to sideroblastic MDS in particular is unclear. We assessed the validity of the 2008 WHO reclassification and the WPSS for MDS cases associated with >=15% ring sideroblasts and a normal blast proportion. Methods: We reviewed WPSS and IPSS component parameters at diagnosis and the clinical outcomes of 465 patients (68% males, median age 72) evaluated at our institution over a 13-year period: 140 with RARS, 114 with RCMD-RS, and 211 with RCMD. Patients were assigned a WPSS score and risk category (very low-risk group=0 points; low=1; intermediate=2, high=3 or 4) by summing 3 subscores: 2001 WHO classification (0 for RARS, 1 point for RCMD or RCMD-RS), IPSS cytogenetic risk group (0=good, 1=indeterminate, 2=poor), and red cell transfusion dependence (0=no, 1=yes). Survival was assessed by Kaplan-Meier estimates, and prognostic factors examined by proportional hazards analysis. Results: The median time until death or last followup was 26 months, and 70% of patients were known to have died. The median survival by WHO MDS subtype was 75 months for RARS, 25 months for RCMD-RS, and 26 months for RCMD (Log-Rank p<0.0001 for RARS vs. either RCMD-RS or RCMD; p=0.60 for RCMD vs. RCMD-RS ). Both the WPSS and IPSS predicted overall survival in patients with ring sideroblasts. Median survival for the patients grouped by WPSS risk category was 89 months for very low risk (n=95), 41 for low risk (n=198), 31 for intermediate risk (n=82), and 11 for high risk (n=91) (p<0.0001, except for low risk vs. intermediate risk, p=0.31). (Very high risk WPSS scores cannot be achieved without excess marrow blasts, and such patients were excluded from this analysis.) Median survival by IPSS was 73 months for low-risk, 33 months for intermediate-1, and 8 months for intermediate 2 (p<0.0001). The IPSS’ predictive power was unchanged if patients with secondary MDS were included or excluded (the IPSS was based on a review of 816 patients with apparently de novo MDS). Conclusions: These data support the WHO’s proposal to merge RCMD and RCMD-RS, and suggest that the adverse prognostic significance of multilineage dysplasia renders the presence of ring sideroblasts unimportant. The WPSS is a valid prognostic tool in patients with MDS associated with ring sideroblasts, but in this subgroup both the WPSS and IPSS stratify patients into 3 risk groups, and the WPSS does not offer additional value over the IPSS. Figure Figure

Abstract BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of monoclonal B-cell lymphocytosis (MBL) is used to characterize patients who have a circulating population of clonal B-cells, a total B-cell count of <5 x 109/L, and no other features of another B-cell lymphoproliferative disorder. In most patients the immunophenotype is similar to that of chronic lymphocytic leukemia with co-expression of CD19 and CD5. The natural history of CLL-phenotype MBL is unclear. We used the Mayo Clinic hematopathology database to identify patients with CLL-phenotype MBL and abstracted clinical information on natural history and prognostic parameters from clinical and research records. METHODS: Using hematopathology records, we identified a cohort of 1820 patients seen at Mayo Clinic between August 1998 and May 2006 who underwent investigation using peripheral blood flow cytometry and who were found to have a clonal B-cell population of CLL phenotype. After elimination of patients with advanced stage (Rai I-IV), previously treated CLL, and individuals with an established diagnosis of CLL/MBL >1 year prior to flow, 636 unique patients with isolated lymphocytosis were identified. Based on our prior analysis (Leukemia Research 32:1458) demonstrating that nearly all patients with an ALC >10x109/L have a B-cell count >5x109/L, we focused the remaining analysis on the 405/636 patients who had an ALC <10x109/L and the necessary raw data from flow cytometry analysis to determine the B-cell count. RESULTS: Among the 405 individuals with an ALC <10x109/L, 306 (76%) had a B-cell count <5x109/L at the time of flow and met the current criteria for the diagnosis of MBL (BJH 130:325). Median age at the time of MBL diagnosis was 70 years (range 34 – 93). A slight male preponderance was observed (59% male). B-cell counts ranged from 0.02 to 4.99x109/L and ALC ranged from 0.3–9.6 x109/L. CD38 status was available for 268 (88%) MBL patients of whom 20% were CD38 positive using the 30% threshold. Cytogenetic analysis by fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) was available in 130 (42%) MBL patients. Using the hierarchical classification system of Dohner and colleagues, 57 (44%) were 13q-, 23 (18%) were trisomy 12, 5 (4%) were 11q-, 4 (3%) were 17p-, and 39 (30%) had no defect detected. ZAP-70 status was available for 77 (25%) patients of whom 13% were ZAP-70+ positive. Patients underwent sequential monitoring with a median follow-up of 1.7 yrs (range 0–8.1 yrs). Time from diagnosis to treatment for patients meeting criteria for MBL (n=306) as compared to Rai stage 0 CLL patients with B-cell counts between 5.0 and 10.0 x109/L (n=99) was not significantly different and is shown in Figure 1 (p=0.87). For individuals with MBL, survival free of treatment was 98% (95%CI: 96–100%) at 1 year, 93% (95%CI: 89–98%) at 2 years, and 77% (95%CI: 67–89%) at 5 years. While gender (p=0.10), and B-cell count as a continuous variable (p=0.15) were not found to be associated with time to treatment (TTT) among MBL patients, age (p=0.02, HR=0.94, 95% CI: 0.89–0.99) and CD38 status (p<0.02, HR: 3.3, 95% CI: 1.2–9.2) did show a relationship with TTT. CONCLUSIONS: Although we observed a low rate of progression among individuals meeting criteria for MBL, TFS was similar to individuals meeting current criteria for Rai stage 0 CLL who had B-cell counts between 5.0 – 10.0 x109/L . Among individuals meeting criteria for MBL, younger patients and those who were CD38 positive had a shorter time to treatment. Additional studies are needed to determine what B-cell count or other characteristics should be used to distinguish between MBL and Rai stage 0 CLL. FIGURE: FIGURE:.

Abstract BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of CLL among asymptomatic patients without lymphadenopathy or cytopenias has historically been based on documenting a characteristic lymphocyte clone and the presence of lymphocytosis. Currently, there are no data regarding what lymphocyte type (absolute lymphocyte count [ALC] or B-cell count) or threshold should be used for this diagnosis. We analyzed the relationship of these lymphocyte counts to clinical outcome in a cohort of 459 patients to determine whether the CLL diagnosis: should be based on ALC or B-cell count what lymphocyte threshold should be used for diagnosis whether any lymphocyte counts has independent prognostic value after accounting for molecular prognostic markers. METHODS: We used the Mayo Clinic CLL database to identify all Rai stage 0 patients diagnosed with CLL between 1/1/00 and 12/31/07 who were evaluated and had flow cytometry at Mayo within 12 months of diagnosis. All patients had lymphocytosis (ALC ≥5 x 109/L) and fulfilled the 1996 criteria for CLL. Raw data from the peripheral blood flow analysis was used in conjunction with blood counts to determine ALC and absolute B-cell count at diagnosis. Estimates of survival were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: To assess whether B-cell count or ALC more strongly related to clinical outcome, we evaluated the relationship of these variables with treatment free survival (TFS) and overall survival (OS; n=459). When treated as continuous variables (i.e. measuring risk of each 1.0 x 109/L increase in cell count), both ALC and B-cell count were related to TFS (hazard ratio [HR] ALC=1.02; p<0.0001; HR B-cell count=1.02; p<0.0001) and OS (HR ALC=1.02; p=0.04; HR B-cell count=1.02; p=0.02). Because B-cell count and ALC related to TFS and OS as a continuous variables, we next evaluated what threshold (nearest 1.0 x109/L) at diagnosis best related to an individual’s risk of requiring chemotherapeutic treatment and/or dying of CLL using the HR (log rank statistic) and c-statistic [c=1 indicates perfect discrimination between poor survivors and good survivors; c=0.5 equivalent to chance]. The B-cell threshold that best predicted OS was 11 x 109/L (HR=2.36, p=0.01; c=0.60). This threshold also predicted TFS (HR=3.02; p<0.0001; c=0.64). With respect to ALC, a threshold of 12 x 109/L was able to predict TFS (HR=2.28, p=0.003; c=0.62) but not OS (HR=1.62, p=0.12; c=0.56). The B-cell threshold used in the current diagnostic criteria (5 x 109/L) was able to predict TFS (HR=3.24, p<0.0001; c=0.63), but not OS (HR=1.64, p=0.13; c=0.55) Finally, we evaluated the ability of B-cell count to predict TFS independent of IGHV mutation status, ZAP-70 status, CD38 status, and FISH. Since not all patients had all prognostic tests performed, the predictive value of B-cell count (< or ≥11 x 109) independent of the other prognostic variable was assessed for each variable independently. B-cell count retained prognostic value independent of IGHV mutation status, ZAP-70 status, CD38 status, and FISH (all p≤0.001) [Table]. CONCLUSIONS: Although B-cell count and ALC have similar ability to predict TFS and OS as continuous variables, B-cell count may be a better predictor of TFS and OS when a defined lymphocyte threshold is used. These findings provide evidence to justify the recent proposal by Hallek et al (Blood 111:5446) to base the diagnosis of CLL on B-cell count rather than ALC. The results also provide justification for retaining the size of the B-cell count as part of the diagnostic criteria even in the era of molecular/biologic prognostic markers, but imply a threshold of 11 x 109 is the B-cell count that best predicts patient’s TFS and risk of death. Differentiating between CLL and MBL based on a patient’s likelihood of developing clinical symptoms and dying of disease could minimize unnecessary psychologic distress caused by labeling asymptomatic individuals at low risk for adverse clinical consequences as having leukemia. TABLE: TREATMENT FREE SURVIVAL HR p-value CD38 + 3.20 0.0002 B-cell ≥11 3.10 0.0001 ZAP + 8.33 < 0.0001 B-cell ≥11 6.86 < 0.0001 Unmutated 5.26 < 0.0001 B-cell ≥11 3.06 0.001 FISH (17p- or 11q-) 3.97 0.01 B-cell ≥11 3.67 < 0.0001

Abstract Background: The biology, pathology and clinical course of CD5+ chronic B cell lymphoproliferative disorders (CD5+ B-CLPD) excluding chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL) and mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) are poorly defined. These patients could either have a leukemic variant of a known B cell malignancy or a novel disease entity. Objective: To define the clinical features and pathology of CD5+ B-CLPD, compare these features to CLL, and test the hypothesis that at least some of these patients have a unique B cell malignancy. Methods: The study was conducted with Institutional Review Board permission. We studied 231 patients evaluated in the Division of Hematology at Mayo Clinic Rochester between 1996 and 2008 who had CD5+ monoclonal B cell population in the peripheral blood and/or bone marrow, and in whom CLL and MCL was not diagnosed after flow cytometry, histology and interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) examinations. Data were abstracted from patient records and from the Mayo Clinic CLL database. Statistical analysis: To compare differences in characteristics between CD5+ and CLL patients, χ2 statistics were used for qualitative variables (gender, treatment, vital status) and t-tests were used for quantitative variables (age). We performed survival and time to treatment analyses with results displayed using Kaplan-Meier curves and p-values calculated using a log-rank test. Results: We analyzed data on 231 CD5+ B-CLPD patients diagnosed between 7/1/1976 and 5/2/2008 and 1572 CLL patients diagnosed in the same time period. Median follow-up from diagnosis was 2.5 years (range 0 to 25.1 years) for the CD5+ patients and 5.2 years (range 0 to 29.9 years) for CLL patients. CD5+ B-CLPD patients had a median age at diagnosis of 68 years (range 30–94 years) with male predominance (61.5%). One hundred and nine of 231 (52.4%) patients received treatment for their CD5+ B-CLPD and 162 (70.1%) patients were alive at the time of last follow-up. As a group, CD5+ B-CLPD patients had a similar male predominance to CLL but were older at diagnosis. CD5+ B-CLPD patients required their first treatment significantly sooner than CLL patients (median 2.0 years vs. 6.8 years, (p< 0.001) and a higher percentage of CD5+ B-CLPD patients required treatment (52.4% vs. 37.5%, p<0.0001). In addition, CD5+ B-CLPD patients had a shorter survival from diagnosis than CLL patients (median 8.4 years vs. 12.5 years, p<0.001). In 60 patients the CD5+ B-CLPD disease was the leukemic phase of a known lymphoma (lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma, n=34; nodal marginal zone lymphoma, n=6; splenic marginal zone lymphoma, n=16; MALT lymphoma, n=4), 46 patients had incomplete data, and 125 patients did not have pathological and flow cytometry features of a known lymphoid malignancy. Next we compared clinical outcome among the 125 patients with unclassifiable CD5+ B-CLPD to the CLL patients. The unclassifiable CD5+B-CLPD patients were older at diagnosis (median 69 vs. 65 years, p=0.0003) but there were no significant differences in time to treatment (median 9.0 years vs. 6.8 years, p=0.93) or the proportion of patients receiving treatment (30% vs. 37.5%, p=0.11). The survival from diagnosis was shorter for unclassifiable CD5+ B-CLPD patients (median 6.3 vs. 12.5 years, p<0.001). Conclusions: In this large series of CD5+ B-CLPD patients we found that a large subset did not meet diagnostic criteria for known B-cell malignancies and could have a novel disease. This will need to be investigated further. We reviewed the pathology of all available archived tissue and intend to examine additional clinical and prognostic information including molecular prognostic markers. Our data provide a clinical rationale for the careful differentiation between patients with CLL and CD5+ B-CLPD.

Abstract Background: Deletion 5q is a lenalidomide-sensitive cytogenetic abnormality seen usually in myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). In the current study, we looked into the occurrence and clinicopathologic correlates of del(5q) in myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) defined according to the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. Methods: Patients with del(5q)-positive MPN were identified through database query involving over 2000 patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPD) including no less than 500 patients with primary myelofibrosis (PMF), 600 patients with essential thrombocytosis (ET), 500 patients with polycythemia vera (PV), and the remaining comprised of patients with molecularly-undefined chronic eosinophilic leukemia, hypereosinophilic syndrome, systemic mastocytosis (SM), chronic neutrophilic leukemia, and “MPN, unclassifiable”. Results: A total of 23 patients with del(5q) were identified (12 at time of initial diagnosis), suggesting an overall prevalence rate of 1%. A central pathological review was conducted to confirm the diagnosis in each instance. Specific diagnoses included PMF (n=14; estimated prevalence of 3%), MPN, unclassifiable (n=4), PV (n=2), ET (n=1), post ET-myelofibrosis (n=1) and SM (n=1). Del(5q) was a sole abnormality in 5 patients, accompanied by one other abnormality in 6 patients, and part of a complex karyotype in 12 patients. The most common breakpoint was q13q33 (n=10) followed by q15q33 (n=6). Based on sample size adequacy, we focused on del(5q)-positive PMF patients and compared their bone marrow histological and clinical features with their del(5q)-negative counterparts seen at the Mayo Clinic during the same period of time (n=311). There was no difference in gender or age distributions. Histopathological review did not show the typical tight clusters of megakaryocytes seen in classic PMF. The megakaryocytes were not the predominate feature of the biopsy, in general were less lobulated and smaller in size, and had a higher grade of fibrosis (med = 3+) than classic PMF. Furthermore, del(5q)-positive PMF patients presented with significantly lower hemoglobin level (p=0.0009) and platelet count (p=0.0003). The percentage of patients presenting with a hemoglobin level of < 10 g/dL or a platelet count of < 100 × 109/L were 70% and 92% in del(5q)-positive patients as opposed to 43% and 18% in del(5q)-negative patients. However, the presence of del(5q) did not significantly affect either overall survival (Figure) or leukemic transformation in PMF (14% vs 9%). Conclusions: Del(5q) is generally rare in MPNs but might occur in as much as 3% of patients with PMF. The presence of del(5q) does not appear to affect overall survival in PMF despite its clustering with adverse prognostic features for the disease including anemia and thrombocytopenia. Finally, megakaryocyte morphology and distribution in del(5q)-associated PMF are characteristically different from classic PMF. Figure Figure

Abstract Background: In childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), a rapid decline of circulating blasts in response to induction chemotherapy or prednisone is one of the most important prognostic factors for achieving remission and for relapse-free survival (RFS). However, in AML parameters of chemosensitivity have been restricted to the assessment of residual bone marrow (BM) blasts during aplasia. We hypothesized that time to peripheral blood (PB) blast clearance would have prognostic relevance with respect to RFS in AML. Methods: From 1994 to 2006 outcomes of 86 adults (47 males; median age 52 y) with previously untreated AML (non- acute promyelocytic leukemia) achieving CR and receiving high-dose cytarabine (HDAC)-based consolidation have been included in this retrospective analysis. The median and range of white blood cell count (WBC), platelet count and PB blast percent were 5.3 × 109/L (0.9–267), 59 ×109/L (5–361) 22.5% (0–97), respectively. A 100 cell manual slide differential count was done in all with PB blasts unless the WBC was less than 0.5 ×109/L. Karyotype was classified as favorable, intermediate and unfavorable in 10, 63 and 12 cases, respectively and failed in one. Induction consisted of idarubicin at 12 mg/m2/ d (n=70) or daunorubicin at 45 mg/m2/d (n=16) on days 1–3 with infusional cytarabine at 100 mg/m2/ d on days 1–7 and repeated in those with persistent BM blasts on day 14 (n=17). The first consolidation was the same as that used to achieve CR. Thereafter, 3 courses of HDAC at 3g/m2 (1.5 g/m2 if ≥ 60 y) q12 h on days 1, 3 and 5 were planned. Results: At the time of analyses, 43% had died, primarily of relapse (97%). Median overall survival (OS) and RFS were 30.2 m (5.5–133) and 14 m (2–131.5), respectively. The median time to PB blast clearance was five days (range: 2–10). For this analysis, only those with PB blasts at initiation of induction (n=73) were included. We defined the day of PB blast clearance as the first day after commencing induction that PB blasts were absent. Separation according to blast clearance on or before day 5 resulted in the most balanced distribution and strongest significant difference between each subgroup of 45 and 28 patients, with significantly different rates of relapse of 33% and 79%, respectively (p<0.0001). We also defined three “blast risk groups” as good, intermediate and poor, according to PB blast clearance on or before day 3, on days 4 or 5, or on day 6 or beyond, respectively. This provided 3 well-balanced groups (good, intermediate and poor) of 16, 30 and 27 patients with significantly different and escalating relapse rates of 12.5%, 47% and 78%, respectively (Fig 1). Univariate analysis of several variables identified PB blast clearance day (p<0.0001), number of inductions to CR (p =0.0043) and cytogenetic risk group (p=0.028) as being significantly associated with RFS. On multivariable analysis, only the first sustained its significance. The results were similar for OS. Conclusion: In adults who achieve CR after induction chemotherapy for non-APL AML, early PB blast clearance predicts superior RFS and OS. Figure Figure

Abstract Background: Most experts agree that iron chelation therapy is unlikely to benefit myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients with a bone marrow (BM) blast percentage of ≥ 5% because of the associated short life expectancy. In contrast, using a serum ferritin of 1,000 ng/mL as a surrogate for iron overload, a recent study suggested a negative impact of iron overload on overall survival in MDS patients with < 5% BM blasts including those with refractory anemia with ringed sideroblasts (RARS) (Malcovati et al. JCO2005:23:7594). In the current retrospective study, we examined the validity of this observation in a large group of RARS patients seen at a single institution. Methods: The diagnosis of RARS was based on the French-American-British cooperative group criteria. Serum ferritin levels obtained both at diagnosis and during follow-up as well as total number of packed red blood cells transfused were recorded. Standard statistical methods were used for survival and other analyses. Results: A total of 126 RARS patients (median age 73 years, range 44-90; 67% males) were seen at our institution over the last several years. At diagnosis, median (range) values were 9.4 g/dL (5.7-13.4) for hemoglobin (Hgb), 2.8 × 109/L (0.3-13.7) for absolute neutrophil count (ANC) and 214× 109/L (22-819) for platelet count; 38% of the patients had received red blood cell (RBC) transfusions at the time of initial diagnosis. International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) risk distributions in evaluable patients were 66% for low, 28% for intermediate-1 and 6% for intermediate-2 risk. Median follow-up was 36 months and during this time 83 patients (66%) had died and leukemic transformation was documented antemortem in 8 patients (6%). As expected, IPSS was highly predictive of survival outcome (p<0.0001). In addition, history of RBC transfusions at diagnosis (p=0.001) but not the total number of RBC transfusions received during the entire disease course (p=0.17) carried an independent prognostic value for inferior survival. There were no significant correlations between overall survival and serum ferritin level at either diagnosis (median 567 ng/mL, range 16-3,475; p=0.24) or the maximum value during follow-up (median 1,108 ng/mL; range 238-43,500; p=0.72). Similarly, Kaplan-Meier plots of 77 evaluable patients stratified by serum ferritin levels of < or ≥1000 ng/mL at diagnosis or 107 evaluable patients stratified by maximal serum ferritin levels of < 1000, 1000-5000, or > 5000 ng/mL during follow-up revealed similar curves (Figure). Conclusions: The current study suggests no significant association between transfusional hemosiderosis and survival even in good risk patients with MDS. The study also undermines the utility of serum ferritin as a surrogate for assessing the value of therapeutic iron chelation. Figure Figure Figure Figure

BACKGROUND: Chemoimmunotherapy with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR) has been the standard therapy for younger patients with CLL. FCR therapy is particularly effective in patients with immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region (IGHV) mutated CLL. Approximately half of IGHV mutated patients are progression free 8 years after FCR therapy. At the ASH 2018 meeting, we reported the initial results of the ECOG 1912 (E1912) trial, a phase 3 trial comparing the FCR regimen to the combination of ibrutinib and rituximab (IR) for previously untreated CLL patients age 70 or younger who required therapy. With median follow-up of approximately 34 months, the trial demonstrated both a progression-free survival (PFS) and an overall survival (OS) benefit relative to FCR. On sub-set analysis by IGHV mutation status, the difference in PFS was statistically significant for IGHV unmutated patients but, with current follow-up, not IGHV mutated patients. Here, we present updated results for PFS in the E1912 trial. METHODS: As previously reported, eligible patients were treatment-naive individuals with CLL age 70 or younger. Patients with deletion 17p- were excluded from participating in the E1912 trial given their known poor response to FCR therapy. Patients were randomly assigned in a two-to-one ratio to receive ibrutinib (420 mg/day until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity) and rituximab (50 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 2, 325 mg/m2 on day 2 of cycle 2, and then 500 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycles 3-7) or six courses of intravenous fludarabine (25 mg/m2 days 1-3), cyclophosphamide (250 mg/m2 days 1-3) and rituximab (50 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1, 325 mg/m2 on day 2 of cycle 1, and then 500 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycles 2-6) every 28-days. Adverse events (AEs) were graded according to the NCI Common Toxicity Criteria (version 4). Dose adjustments for cytopenias were based on the IWCLL CLL Working Group grading scale. The primary endpoint of the trial was PFS with OS a secondary endpoint. Analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS: With median follow-up of 45 months, 257 (73%) of 354 patients randomized to IR remain on ibrutinib. With extended follow-up, grade 3 and above treatment-related AEs were observed in 70% of IR and 80% of FCR treated patients (OR=0.56; 95% CI 0.34 - 0.90; p=0.013). Among IR-treated patients, the median time on treatment is currently 43 months (range=0.2-61). Among the 95 patients who have discontinued ibrutinib, the reason for discontinuation was progression or death in 23 (7% of patients who started IR; 24% of those who discontinued treatment), AE or complication in 48 (14% of patients who started IR; 51% of those who discontinued treatment), and withdrawal of consent or other reasons in 24 (7% of patients who started IR; 25% of those who discontinued treatment). On multivariable Cox regression adjusting for Timed Up and Go test score, Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS) score, age, gender, ECOG performance status, creatinine clearance, and baseline anemia/thrombocytopenia, only CIRS score (range 0 - 14) predicted discontinuation of ibrutinib for a reason other than progression or death (HR=1.13 per unit increase; 95% CI 1.03 - 1.23; p=0.009). Among the 72 patients who discontinued ibrutinib for a reason other than progression or death, the median time on ibrutinib was 15.1 months (range 0.2-58.2 months). The median time from ibrutinib discontinuation to disease progression or death was 23 months. With current follow-up, we observed 110 PFS events. The hazard ratio (HR) for PFS favored IR over FCR (HR=0.39; 95% CI 0.26-0.57; p<0.0001). Updated analysis of OS will be presented. On sub-group analysis by IGHV mutation status, IR was superior to FCR for IGHV unmutated patients (HR=0.28; 95% CI 0.17-0.48; p<0.0001). With current follow-up the difference is not significant in IGHV mutated patients (HR=0.42; 95% CI 0.16-1.16; p=0.086). Kaplan-Meier estimates for PFS are shown in Figure 1. CONCLUSIONS: Although less than 7% of ibrutinib treated patients progressed while on therapy, roughly 1 in 5 patients have discontinued ibrutinib for a reason other than progression or death. The only parameter significantly associated with discontinuation for a reason other than progression was increased baseline CIRS score. With extended follow-up, the combination of ibrutinib and rituximab continues to provide superior PFS compared to FCR for younger patients with previously untreated CLL. Disclosures Shanafelt: Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Patent: Patents & Royalties: US14/292,075 on green tea extract epigallocatechin gallate in combination with chemotherapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia; Polyphenon E International: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Glaxo-SmithKline: Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding. Kay:MorphoSys: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Other: DSMB; Celgene: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board; Agios: Other: DSMB. O'Brien:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astellas: Consultancy; Aptose Biosciences, Inc: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy; Acerta: Research Funding; Eisai: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Vaniam Group LLC: Consultancy; Regeneron: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding. Barrientos:AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Janssen: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sandoz: Consultancy; Oncternal Therapeutics: Research Funding. Coutre:Astellas: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Acerta: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; BeiGene: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses & Data Safety Monitoring Committee; Genentech: Consultancy. Barr:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Cashen:Celgene: Other: Speaker's Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Other: Speaker's Bureau; Novartis: Other: Speaker's Bureau. Mato:AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: DSMB member , Research Funding; LOXO: Consultancy, Research Funding; DTRM Biopharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Acerta: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Erba:Amgen: Consultancy; MacroGenics: Consultancy, Other: Lecture fees, Research Funding; MacroGenics: Consultancy, Other: Lecture fees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; ImmunoGen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Consultancy; Astellas Pharma: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; GlycoMimetics: Consultancy, Other: Chair, data and safety monitoring board, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: chair, AML Registry Scientific Steering Committee, Speakers Bureau; ImmunoGen: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: Chair, IRC for phase III studies, Research Funding; GlycoMimetics: Consultancy, Other: Chair, data and safety monitoring board, Research Funding; Covance: Other: Fees for serving as chair on an independent review board for AbbVie Phase III studies; Covance: Other: Fees for serving as chair on an independent review board for AbbVie Phase III studies; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: Chair, IRC for phase III studies, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: chair, AML Registry Scientific Steering Committee, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding. Stone:Arog Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Otsuka-Astex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Fujifilm: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Celator Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ono Pharmaceutical-Theradex Oncology: Consultancy; Cornerstone Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Takeda: Other: Fees for serving on a data and safety monitoring board ; Orsenix: Consultancy; MacroGenics: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Fees for serving on a steering committee, and fees for serving on a data and safety monitoring board; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Actinium Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Argenx: Other: Fees for serving on a data and safety monitoring board ; Roche: Consultancy. Tallman:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncolyze: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Initial therapy for MCL is effective, but most patients eventually relapse. Validated intermediate biomarkers for MCL are important to provide early assessment of treatment efficacy, prognostic information and potentially guide consolidation. The US-Canadian Intergroup trial E1411 randomly assigned patients (pts) to receive induction with BR ± bortezomib (V), followed by consolidation with R ± L. As a planned correlative, MRD was assessed after cycle 3 (I3), end of induction (EOI) and after 4 cycles of consolidation (C4) by two methods: a research version of clonoSEQ® a next generation sequencing (NGS) MRD assay, (Adaptive Biotechnologies, Seattle, WA) that leverages multiplex PCR followed by NGS to identify and track rearrangements of IgH, V-J, D-J and IgK/L loci as well as translocations in Bcl1/2-IgH, and flow cytometry (FC) (I3 and EOI only) at a central laboratory (Mayo Clinic). While outcomes by treatment arm remain blinded, we report here the results of the MRD assessments by each method and the associated progression free survival (PFS). In E1411, 373 pts, accrued between May 2012 - Sept. 2016, were randomly assigned (stratified by MIPI and age (</≥60)) to receive BR induction x 6 followed by R for 2 years, BVR followed by R, BR followed by LR or BVR followed by LR. Eligible pts were ≥ age 18 and had untreated MCL, ECOG PS 0-2, and adequate hematologic and organ function. Of the 373 pts, 296 (79%) consented to correlatives. Of these, 255 (86%) had baseline NGS samples, and 214 were analyzable. Excluded were 6 patients that were protocol ineligible, 20 without clinical follow-up; only 7 (2.7%) patients were ineligible due to inability to identify a dominant clone necessary to follow MRD by the NGS method. At baseline pre-treatment, NGS detected a dominant clone in bone marrow (BM) or peripheral blood (PB) in 92%, with only 17 (8%) requiring study of biopsy tissue. Of the 296, 240 had baseline FC data, 9 were protocol exclusions, leaving 231 analyzable. FC detected a non-MCL monoclonal B cell lymphocytosis clone in a small number of cases. While NGS may have higher sensitivity, as FC sensitivity is 10-4, for this analysis we used that cutoff for both NGS and FC. Cohen's Kappa statistic compares concordance between MRD pairs, and p-value is from exact McNemar's test. BR-based initial MCL therapy achieved early MRD negativity (< 10-4) in a high proportion of patients. Analyzing PB at mid-induction (I3): by NGS 89% MRD-, 9% MRD+ and 2% indeterminate, whereas by FC 87% MRD-, 12% MRD+ and 1% indeterminate. Concordance was high with 127 MRD- by both methods, 13 MRD+ by both, and 6 NGS-/FC+ (Kappa Statistic = 0.79, p-value = 0.031). By NGS, of 12 pts MRD+ at I3, 7 became MRD- at EOI, and 4 remained MRD+ (1 indeterminate). Analyzing at EOI: MRD- rates were 91% by NGS analysis of PB (147/161) and 90% in BM (96/107), vs 95% (174/183) by FC in PB. As some were indeterminate, only 7% were MRD+ by NGS in BM, 3% by NGS in PB and 5% by FC. In 88 informative samples with EOI NGS in both BM and PB, concordance was high, with 81 negative in both, 1 positive in both and 6 BM+/PB- (Kappa Statistic = 0.23, p-value = 0.031). Of 101 pts with data at all 3 timepoints, I3, EOI, and C4: 7 were MRD+ at I3, 5 of these were MRD- at EOI, but 2 of these 5 were again MRD+ at C4. Of 2 MRD+ EOI, 1 became MRD- at C4. By FC, of 17 patients MRD+ at I3, 11 (65%) became MRD- at EOI. MRD status correlated with progression-free survival (PFS). Due to the low MRD+ rate at EOI and C4, we focus here on MRD status at I3 (10-4 cutoff for both NGS and FC), using a landmark analysis of 4 months on study. Median PFS (Figure) for pts MRD- at I3 mid-induction was 58.9 months by either NGS or FC, while for those MRD+ by NGS it was 26.9 months, vs 29.9 months MRD+ by FC. Conclusions: Both NGS and FC were feasible to assess MRD status in this multi-center trial. Results of NGS and FC are concordant at the 10-4 cutoff. NGS can be more sensitive when adequate material is available, and analysis of this subgroup is ongoing. The high MRD- rate (≥ 90%) at EOI in this BR-based trial and MRD correlation with PFS supports its use as a platform for MCL trials, although consolidation may confound PFS. Early interim MRD testing at cycle 3 identifies a high-risk population who may benefit from alternative treatment strategies. Analysis by treatment arm with longer follow-up, as well as comparison with centrally reviewed PET/CTs included in this study, will help define the most informative method(s), cutoff values, and timing for assessing degree of response in MCL. Figure. Disclosures Smith: Astra-Zeneca: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; EUSA: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Parekh:Foundation Medicine Inc.: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Karyopharm Inc.: Research Funding. Martin:Sandoz: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Teneobio: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; I-MAB: Consultancy. Till:Mustang Bio: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding. Leonard:Gilead: Consultancy; Akcea Therapeutics: Consultancy; Bayer Corporation: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc./F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Akcea Therapeutics: Consultancy; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Consultancy; Sutro Biopharma: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc./F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy; Epizyme, Inc: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Epizyme, Inc: Consultancy; Bayer Corporation: Consultancy; Miltenyi: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; Miltenyi: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Sutro Biopharma: Consultancy. Friedberg:Bayer: Honoraria, Other: Data & Safety Monitoring Committee; Acerta: Other: Data & Safety Monitoring Committee. Kahl:TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy.