Porrata, Luis F.

Abstract Background In myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), we have previously shown the adverse prognostic effect of ALC <1.2 x 10(9)/L (Nisha et al. Am J Hematol 2010;85:160). In the current larger study of 889 patients with MDS, we sought to validate and expand on our previous observations and also examine the effect of lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR). Methods We retrospectively recruited 889 consecutive patients with primary MDS who were untreated at the time of referral to our institution, and in whom ALC and absolute monocyte count (AMC) at time of referral was documented. The diagnosis of MDS and leukemic transformation (LT) was according to WHO criteria (Blood. 2009;114:937). Complete follow-up information was updated in January 2015. Comparison of laboratory and clinical features was made between patients with subnormal and normal ALC; patients with above normal ALC were considered separately. Overall and leukemia-free survivals of patients with normal ALC was compared to those with either subnormal ALC or, in order to validate our previous observation, with ALC <1.2 x 10(9)/L. Results Patient characteristics: Median (range) values for the 889 study patients (69% males) included: age 72 (18-98), hemoglobin 9.6 g/dL (5.4-15.7), leukocyte count 3.4 x 10(9)/L (0.4-35), AMC 0.2 x 10(9)/L (0-1.7), platelet count 106 x 10(9)/L (2-1804), circulating blasts 0% (0-18) and bone marrow blasts 3% (0-19). Transfusion need was documented in 33% of patients and abnormal karyotype in 49%. Risk stratification by the revised international prognostic scoring system (IPSS-R) was very high in 10%, high in 16%, intermediate in 20%, low in 36% and very low in 16%. The median (range) ALC for the entire study population of 889 patients was 1.16 x 10(9)/L (0.02-8.9). The normal range of ALC at our institution was 0.9-2.9 x 10(9)/L; the number of patients with subnormal, normal and above normal ALC was 261 (29%), 598 (67%) and 30 (4%), respectively. In addition, 442 (50%) and 417 (47%) patients had ALC below 1.2 x 10(9)/L and ALC between 1.2 and the upper limit of normal, respectively. After a median follow-up of 27 months, 712 (80%) deaths and 116 (13%) leukemic transformations were documented. Comparison of patients stratified by absolute lymphocyte count Compared to patients with normal ALC, patients with subnormal ALC displayed lower hemoglobin (p=0.002), higher red blood cell transfusion need (p=0.0003), lower leukocyte count (p<0.0001), lower monocyte count (p=0.002) and lower platelet count (p<0.0001), whereas borderline association was also apparent for older age (p=0.06). In univariate analysis, survival was adversely affected by lower ALC, treated as a continuous variable (p=0.01). Similarly, when compared to patients with normal ALC, patients with subnormal ALC (p=0.001; HR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.5) and those with ALC <1.2 x 10(9)/L (p=0.0002; HR 1.3, 95% CI 1.2-1.6) experienced significantly shortened survival. There was no difference in survival between patients with above normal ALC and those with either subnormal (p=0.58) or normal (p=0.41) ALC; accordingly, patients with above normal ALC were excluded from subsequent analysis. In multivariable analysis, the adverse effect of subnormal ALC was shown to be independent of age, gender, anemia, thrombocytopenia, neutropenia , circulating blast percentage, bone marrow blast percentage or cytogenetic risk stratification by and IPSS; the same held true for ALC <1.2 x 10(9)/L. The association with IPSS-R was of borderline significance for both ALC <1.2 x 10(9)/L (p=0.06) and subnormal ALC (p=0.1). The adverse effect of ALC was most apparent in patients with very low or low risk disease per IPSS-R (p=0.0007 for subnormal ALC and 0.0003 for ALC <1.2 x 10(9)/L), compared to those with higher risk status (p=0.67 and 0.7, respectively). Neither subnormal ALC (p=0.4) nor ALC <1.2 x 10(9)/L (p=0.1) affected leukemia free survival. Analysis using LMR in place of ALC showed similar but not necessarily superior results. Conclusions Compared to those with normal ALC, MDS patients with either subnormal ALC or with ALC below 1.2 x 10(9)/L experienced shorter overall, but not leukemia-free, survival; this adverse effect was most apparent in lower risk patients and was independent of most of the currently established risk factors for survival in MDS. The observations from the current study suggest the possible therapeutic value of augmenting host immunity in lower risk MDS. Disclosures Al-Kali: Onconova Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Immune suppression is a major component of lymphoma pathogenesis. Recent advances in lymphoma treatment have been immunotherapy. We present the preliminary results of our clinical trial testing 2 vaccine strategies in patients with indolent B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). The primary objective is to determine the safety and feasibility of the vaccine approaches and secondary objectives are to describe clinical responses and identify corresponding immune changes. Methods: Autologous mature dendritic cells (mDC) were manufactured from leukapheresed cells of NHL pts. For patients with tumor lymph nodes deemed amenable to cryoablation by interventional radiologist (arm A), they received cryoablation of a node and injection of mDC into the cryoablated node followed by another 1 to 7 intratumoral mDC injections. Remaining patients had a tumor excised to generate tumor lysate ex vivo. mDC were pulsed with tumor lysate during DC maturation (arm B; DC-TL). The DC-TL vaccines were injected intradermally for 4 to 8 doses. Patients are monitored for one year after vaccines for adverse events and systemic tumor response. Correlative studies include cellular immune phenotype of peripheral blood and T cell intracellular cytokine productions. Planned accrual is 10 patients per arm (total = 20). Results: To date, 10 patients have accrued to arm A and 5 patients to arm B (Table 1). All pts tolerated vaccine treatments without major adverse events. Of the 10 evaluable patients, there were 1 CR (arm B: 1 / 4; total: 1/6) and 4 PR (arm A: 3/6; arm B: 1 / 4; total: 4/10) for an ORR of 50% for both arms (Figure 1). Time to next treatment ranged from 6.5 to 25 months (Figure 2). Correlative studies suggest that immune changes can be used as prognostic biomarkers to predict response. These include changes in vaccine induced cytokine secretion, and in the number and composition of the immune system. In addition, preliminary analysis of >40 immune phenotypes using flow cytometry and hierarchical clustering suggest there are characteristic immune system responses in patients responding to vaccine. Conclusions: Both cryoablation and intratumoral mDC vaccination are feasible and safe in NHL. Treatment responses may correlate with immune system changes. Biosystems analysis method can be used to develop novel assays as predictive biomarkers of treatment response and used to develop novel protocols that allow treating to response. Table 1. Patient Demographics Arm A (n = 10) Arm B (n = 5) Total (n = 15) Age (median, rage) 64 (55 – 80) 60 (31 – 86) 63 (31 – 86) Gender (M/F) 6/4 2/3 8/7 Histology (n, %) Follicular Marginal zone DLBCL 10 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (60%) 1 (20%) 1(20%) 13 (86.6%) 1 (6.7%) 1 (6.7%) Stage (N, %) II III IV 1 (10%) 1 (10%) 8 (80%) 2 (40%) 1 (20%) 2 (40%) 3 (20%) 2 (13.3%) 10 (66.7%) No of prior Tx (mean, range) 2.4 (0-8) 3.2 (0-7) 2.7 (0-8) FLIPI (n, %) 0-1 2 ≥ 3 1 (10%) 2 (20%) 7 (70%) 1 (20%) 2 (40%) 2 (45%) 2 (13.3%) 4 (26.7%) 9 (60%) Positive GELF criteria (n, %) 4 (40%) 1 (20%) 5 (30%) Figure 1. Waterfall plot. Figure 1. Waterfall plot. Figure 2. Time to next treatment. Figure 2. Time to next treatment. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Introduction Outcomes have improved in treating lymphoid malignancies but relapse remains an ongoing issue. The mTOR inhibitor, everolimus (RAD) and lenalidomide (LEN) have both shown clinically significant activity as single agents in patients with relapsed and refractory (R/R) Hodgkin (HL) and non-Hodgkin (NHL) lymphomas. The low toxicity and differing mechanisms of action were explored further by combining these active agents. A phase I/II clinical trial of the mTOR inhibitor everolimus (RAD) and lenalidomide (LEN) was designed to explore the tolerability, toxicity and to determine the MTD of this combination for Phase II study. The phase I data is reported here. Methods This Phase I/II trial for patients with R/R lymphoid malignancy opened at Mayo Clinic between January 2011 and May 2013 and utilized a standard cohort of 3+3 design to determine the MTD of the combination. Eligibility required age≥18, biopsy proven relapsed or refractory NHL or HL, ECOG PS 0, 1 or 2, measurable disease, Hb >9g/dl, ANC ≥1200/uL, platelet ≥ 50,000/uL, creatinine ≤1.5xULN and willingness to sign informed consent. Women of child bearing potential had pregnancy testing and all patients followed recommendations for contraception. Dose limiting toxicity was defined in cycle 1 as Gr 4 neutropenia ≥7days or platelets ≤ 25,000 ≥7days, grade 4 infection or grade ≥3 non-Heme toxicity at least possibly related to treatment per CTCAE v4.0. The starting dose (level 0) was RAD 5mg daily + LEN 10 mg/d X 21d in a 28-day cycle. Results Twenty-five patients were enrolled on the phase I portion and 23 are evaluable for analysis. The median age was 63 years (23-82) and 18 (78%) were male. Sixty-five percent had stage IV disease and 43% had 4 or more prior treatments (1- ≥5) including stem cell transplantation in 39%. Histologies included HL (n=3) and NHL (n=20)(DLBCL = 11, FL-III = 2, LPL = 3, MCL = 1, MF = 1, and other = 2). Two DLTs (rash, Gr4 neutropenia) were reported at the starting dose (level 0) and the protocol was amended for DLT definition change. At dose level -1 (RAD 5mg daily + LEN 5mg/d X 21d) a DLT (Gr4 neutropenia) was seen in only 1 of 6 patients so the study was re-opened to dose level 0 and 3 additional patients were treated without developing a DLT. At dose level +1 (RAD 5 mg daily + LEN 15mg/d X 21d) 1 Gr3 rash occurred and 2 patients experienced Gr4 neutropenia. Therefore the MTD was determined to be RAD 5mgdaily + LEN 10 mg/d X 21d. At least 1 Gr≥3 adverse event was seen in 91% of patients. The most common Gr≥3 toxicities were neutropenia (57%), leucopenia (52%), thrombocytopenia (39%), fatigue (22%), and anemia (13%). Eight of 23 patients (35%) had Gr≥3 infection. Five patients discontinued study due to adverse events. One death on study occurred due to disease progression. Three patients continue on therapy. Responses have been seen in 4 patients and 10 patients have stable disease, encouraging signs in this heavily pretreated population. Conclusions This phase I/II trial of everolimus and lenalidomide in malignant lymphoma shows the combination to be tolerable with neutropenia as the main dose limiting toxicity. The MTD of this combination is RAD 5mg daily and LEN 10 mg/d X 21 d. Encouraging responses were seen. The phase II study has opened with 2 patients accrued to date. Updated results will be presented. This trial is sponsored by Novartis and Celgene Disclosures: Reeder: Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding. Off Label Use: lenalidomide and everolimus are not approved for treatment of lymphoma. Nowakowski:Celgene: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Witzig:Celgene: Research Funding.

Abstract The peripheral blood absolute lymphocyte/monocyte ratio at diagnosis (ALC/AMC-DX) predicts survival in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). However, a limitation of the ALC/AMC-DX is its inability to sequentially assess the host/tumor interaction during treatment. Therefore, we studied the ALC/AMC ratio, as a surrogate marker of host immunity (i.e., ALC) and tumor microenvironment (i.e., AMC), at each RCHOP treatment cycle as a predictor for clinical outcomes. From 2002 until 20011, 107 DLBCL patients originally diagnosed, treated with six cycles of RCHOP, and followed at Mayo Clinic qualified for the study. Using the receiver operating characteristic and internally validated using the k-fold cross validation; an ALC/AMC ratio ≥ 1.1 was identified as the cut-off value at each RCHOP treatment cycle to discriminate for the binary clinical outcome of death/survival. Univariate analysis revealed the ALC/AMC ratio ≥ 1.1 at each RCHOP treatment cycle was a predictor for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). To explore whether the patterns of ALC/AMC ratio recovery during the RCHOP treatment cycles had a prognostic value, we performed an unsupervised hierarchical clustering on the studied ALC/AMC ratio and identified four patient clusters, A-D. Eighty percent of patients in cluster C had an ALC/AMC ratio ≥ 1.1 during all the cycles, the other 20% had an ALC/AMC ratio ≥1.1 in one cycle; in cluster D patients, the ALC/AMC ratio was ≥ 1.1 between cycles 2 and 5 and none had an ALC/AMC ratio < 1.1; in cluster A patients, 73% of patients only had an ALC/AMC ratio ≥ 1.1 in one cycle and 27% in two cycles; and cluster B patients had 85% of patients with an ALC/AMC ratio < 1.1 during all the cycles. Inferior OS and PFS were progressively observed in clusters of patients with fewer cycles achieving an ALC/AMC ratio ≥ 1.1. Patients in clusters C had superior outcomes compared with patients in clusters B. Thus, we dichotomized patients into patients with an ALC/AMC ratio ≥ 1.1 during any cycle versus patients with an ALC/AMC ratio < 1.1 during all cycles. By multivariate analysis, the stratification of patients into ALC/AMC ≥ 1.1 during any cycle versus ALC/AMC < 1.1 during all cycles was an independent predictor for OS [Hazard ratio (HR) = 0.02, 95% CI (0.006-0.08), p< 0.0001], and PFS [HR = 0.06, 95% CI (0.02-0.15, p< 0.0001] when compared with the International Prognostic index The median OS for patients with an ALC/AMC ratio ≥ 1.1 during any cycle versus patients with an ALC/ACM ratio < 1.1 during all cycles was not reached versus 1.7 years with 5 years OS rates of 97% (95% CI, 90%-99%) versus 0%, p< 0.0001, respectively. The median PFS for patients with an ALC/AMC ratio ≥ 1.1 during any cycle versus patients with an ALC/AMC ratio < 1.1during all cycles was not reached versus 0.9 years with 5 years PFS rates of 83% (95% CI, 72%-90%) versus 0%, p< 0.0001, respectively. The ALC/AMC ratio during RCHOP treatment cycles is a predictor for survival and provides a platform to develop therapeutic modalities to manipulate the ALC/AMC ratio during chemotherapy to improve clinical outcomes in DLBCL. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract The lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio at diagnosis (LMR-D) has been reported to be a prognostic factor for clinical outcomes in both T-cell and B-cell lymphomas. However, there are no reports testing the prognostic ability of LMR-D in patients diagnosed with de novo double/triple hit diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Thus, we set out to investigate if the LMR-D is a prognostic factor for survival in de novo double/triple hit lymphomas. From 10/5/1998 until 1/16/2015, thirty-four patients with de novo double/triple hit DLBCL were identified for this study. Double and triple hit were defined by interphase FISH evaluating three fusion signals to identify the BCL2 translocation and IGK/MYC D-FISH probe to identify whether the partner is IG or non-IG. Interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was performed on paraffin sections using probes that included 8q24 (5'MYC, 3'MYC); t (2;8), IGK/MYC; t(8,14), MYC/IGH; t(8;22), MYC/IGL; 3q27 (3'BCL6, 5'BCL'6); and 18q21 (3'BCL2, 5'BCL2). The cohort included 14 females and 20 males. The median follow-up for the cohort was 9.0 months (range: 0.4-72.6 months). Using the median for the LMR-D as the cut-off value, patients with a LMR-D ≥ 1.2 experienced superior overall survival (OS) [Hazard ratio (HR) of 0.127, 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.019-0.530, p < 0.004] and progression-free survival (PFS) [HR of 0.107, 95 CI of 0.024-0.335, p < 0.0001]. The median follow up for OS for patients with a LMR-D ≥ 1.2 was not reached with a 5-year OS rate of 82% (95% CI of 49%-95%) compared with a median follow-up of 10 months for patients with a LMR-D < 1.2 with a 0% 5 year OS rate, p < 0.003 (Figure 1A). The median PFS for patients with a LMR-D ≥ 2 was not reached with a 5 years PFS of 74% (95%CI, of 43%-91%) compared with a median follow-up of 4.7 months for patients with a LMR-D < 1.2 and 0% 5 year PFS rate, p < 0.0001 (Figure 1B). After adjusting for the International Prognostic Index, multivariate analysis showed that the LMR-D remained an independent prognostic factor for OS [HR = 0.180, 95% CI of 0.254-0.784, p < 0.02] and for PFS [HR of 0.127, 95%CI of 0.029-0.409, p < 0.0003]. In spite of the small cohort of de novo double/triple hit DLBCL, the LMR-D was identified as a prognostic factor for clinical outcomes for this specific set of aggressive lymphomas. Further studies are warranted to confirm our findings. Table.LMR-D ≥ 1.2, N = 18Events = 2LMR-D < 1.2, N = 16Events = 8P < 0.003LMR-D ≥ 1.2, N = 18Events = 3LMR-D < 1.2, N = 16Events = 14P < 0.0001Figure 1AB Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Maurer: Kite Pharma: Research Funding. Ansell:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding. Off Label Use: New agent in a combination regimen..

Abstract Abstract 689 Background: Lenalidomide was demonstrated to have significant single agent activity in relapsed aggressive B cell lymphoma (J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:4952–7, Ann Oncol. 2011;22:1622–7). In a phase I study, we previously demonstrated that Lenalidomide 25 mg day 1–10 of the cycle can be combined with RCHOP21 and this combination does not result in dose delays or increased toxicity (Leukemia 2011;12:1877–81). We now present phase 2 results of R2CHOP in treatment of patients with aggressive B-cell lymphoma. Methods: Eligible patients were adults with newly diagnosed CD20 positive diffuse large B cell (DLBCL) or grade 3 follicular lymphoma (FL). The response was evaluated using PET/CT by standard criteria (J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:579–586). The progression free survival (PFS) was defined as time from diagnosis to disease progression or death. Results: 51 patients - 6 enrolled at the MTD in phase 1 portion of the study and 45 in phase 2 portion were included in the analysis. The median age was 65 years (range, 19–87). 35% of patients were 70 and older. 63% (32/51) were males. 47 patients (92%) had DLBCL and 4 (8%) patients had FL grade 3. The international prognostic index (IPI) was low, low-intermediate, high-intermediate and high in 8 (15%), 18 (35%), 18 (35%) and 7 (14%) patients respectively. 31 patients (60%) had stage 4 disease. Hematological toxicities were: grade 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia (20% and 20% of patients respectively); grade 3 and 4 neutropenia (18% and 71% of patients respectively). Overall 27% of patients experienced a grade 3 or higher non-hematological toxicity at least possibly related to treatment. The most frequent were febrile neutropenia (10%), nausea (4%), urinary tract infection (4%), vascular access complication (4%), and dehydration (4%). 1 patient (2%) developed thrombosis. There was one death (2%) secondary to bowel perforation/sepsis. For 47 patients evaluable for response, the overall response (ORR) and complete response (CR) rates were 98% and 83% respectively. The PFS was 73% at 12 months (Figure). Since the enrolled patients represented a relatively high-risk group (49% intermediate high or high IPI, significant proportion of elderly male patients), the PFS in R2CHOP was compared to PFS in a contemporary cohort of 87 consecutive patients with DLBCL participating in Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Database and treated with standard RCHOP alone. The PFS was 62% at 12 months in this cohort and was inferior to R2CHOP (Figure). Conclusion: Lenalidomide combined with standard R-CHOP21 chemotherapy (R2CHOP) demonstrates predictable safety profile. The ORR and CR rates and PFS are encouraging in elderly high IPI patients, and compared favorably to the R-CHOP treated historical cohort with similar clinical characteristics. A randomized trial will be needed to confirm the benefits of this novel combination. Disclosures: Off Label Use: lenalidomide in treatment of NHL. Reeder:Celgene: Research Funding. Ansell:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy.

Abstract Infused autograft absolute lymphocyte count (A-ALC) is a prognostic factor for survival post-autologous peripheral hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (APHSCT) for lymphoma. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) affect tumor growth by suppression of host anti-tumor immunity. Thus, we set out to investigate if the infused autograft lymphocyte /monocyte ratio (A-LMR), as a biomarker of host immunity (i.e., lymphocytes) and MDSCs (i.e., monocytes), affects survival post-APHSCT in patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). Only patients that collected their stem cells through the peripheral blood were included in the study. From 1994 to 2012, 183 cHL patients qualified for the study. The 183 patients were randomly divided into a training set (n = 122) and a validation set (n = 61). Receiver operating characteristic and area under the curve (AUC) identified an A-LMR ≥ 1 as the best cut-off value (AUC = 0.8, p < 0.01) and validated by the k-fold cross-validation (AUC = 0.8) in the training set. Multivariate analysis showed A-LMR to be an independent prognostic factor for survival in the training set. Patients with an A-LMR ≥ 1.0 experienced a superior overall survival (OS) versus patients with an A-LMR < 1.0 (median OS was not reached vs 40.4 months, 5-year OS rates of 86% (95 CI, 72%-93%) vs 43% (95 CI, 28-58 %), p < 0.0001, respectively) in the training set. In the validation set, an A-LMR ≥ 1 showed a median OS of not reached vs 41.8 months for an A-LMR < 1, 5 year OS rates of 90% (95 CI, 73%-97%) vs 48% (95 CI, 29-68%), p < 0.0001, respectively. A-LMR provides a platform to engineer an immunocompetent autograft to improve clinical outcomes in cHL patients undergoing APHSCT. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 600 Background: Both MM and AL are plasma cell neoplasms. The underlying clone in both diseases appears to be different not only in terms of “tumor burden” but also in terms of their underlying biology. The overall “fitness” of patients with these two diseases is also different, with AL patients having more major organ dysfunction. Therapy for both diseases is directed at killing the underlying clone. ASCT is one method of reducing the clone size and thereby improving overall survival. Post-ASCT outcomes between the two diseases have never been formally compared. Methods: We compiled all patients with a diagnosis of AL or MM who received ASCT at the Mayo Clinic Rochester between June 1996 and January 2011 to compare outcomes. Patients were retrieved from two prospectively maintained clinical transplant data bases (M.A.G.). Differences between groups were compared using Fisher's exact and Wilcoxon tests. Survival was calculated using the method of Kaplan-Meier, and differences between survival outcomes were calculated by log rank. Cox regression modeling was done to determine how non-disease specific variables—i.e. age, time period of ASCT, number of prior regimens, time to ASCT from diagnosis and acquisition of complete response (CR)—affected outcomes. All statistical analyses were performed using JMP (SAS, NC) software. This study was approved by the Mayo IRB. Results: The data set was comprised of 454 patients with AL and 1116 patients with MM. There were significant differences between the two respective groups of patients in terms of number of prior regimens (0 vs 1, p<0.0001), time to ASCT (3.95 months vs 7.20 months, p<0.0001), intensity of conditioning regimen (non-attenuated in 69.4% vs 89.1%, p<0.0001), serum creatinine (1.1mg/dl vs 1mg/dl p<0.0001), creatinine clearance (72.5 ml/minute vs 80 ml/minute p<0.0001), albumin (2.61g/dl vs 3.50g/dl, p<0.0001) CRP (0.40mg/dl vs 0.63mg/dl p<0.0001), LDH (196 U/l vs 182U/l, p<0.0001), and bone marrow plasmacytosis at transplant (6% vs 9%, p<0.0001). Hematologic response rates were also significantly different between the groups, with higher overall hematologic response in the MM group (90.9% vs 79.5%, p<0.0001) and higher complete response (CR) rates (40.1% vs 29.4%, p<0.0001) in the AL group. With a median follow-up of surviving patients of 68 months, the respective median overall survival (OS) for the AL and MM patients was 113 and 59.5 months, p<0.0001. Notably, the 5-year OS of AL and MM patients achieving CR were 91.4% and 57.7%, respectively, p<0.0001. If only those patients who were transplanted within 1 year of their diagnosis are included in the analysis, the respective 5-year OS of AL and MM patients achieving CR were 90.4% and 61.3%, p<0.0001 (Figure 1). To correct for imbalances in non-disease specific parameters, 3 multivariate analyses were performed using: 1) all patients; 2) only those achieving CR; and 3) only those who achieved a CR and were transplanted within 12 months of their diagnosis (Table 1). Among those patients achieving CR, MM patients had nearly a 4-fold risk of death as compared to patients with AL. Conclusion: Although ASCT is not available to all patients with either AL or MM, there is a significant difference in outcomes based on the diagnosis. Patients with AL who undergo ASCT enjoy a superior survival as compared MM patients undergoing the same procedure. This difference is most notable among those patients who achieve CR suggesting very different plasma cell biology between the two diseases. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

SummaryThe diabetes mellitus (DM) drug metformin targets mechanistic/mammalian target of rapamycin and inhibits lymphoma growth in vitro. We investigated whether metformin affected outcomes of newly diagnosed diffuse large B‐cell (DLBCL, n = 869) and follicular lymphoma (FL, n = 895) patients enrolled in the Mayo component of the Molecular Epidemiology Resource cohort study between 2002 and 2015. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, prognostic index and treatment were used to estimate the association of metformin exposure (No DM/No metformin; DM/No metformin; DM/Metformin) with event‐free (EFS), lymphoma‐specific (LSS) and overall (OS) survival. Compared to No DM/No metformin DLBCL patients, there was no association of DM/Metformin (n = 48; HR = 1·05, 95% CI 0·59–1·89) or DM/No metformin(n = 54; HR = 1·41, 95% CI 0·88–2·26) with EFS; results were similar for LSS and OS. Compared to No DM/No metformin FL patients, there was no association of DM/Metformin (n = 37; HR = 1·16, 95% CI 0·71–1·89) or DM/No metformin (n = 19; HR = 1·16, 95% CI 0·66–2·04) with EFS; results were similar for LSS. However, DM/Metformin was associated with inferior OS (HR = 2·17; 95% CI 1·19–3·95) compared to No DM/No metformin. In conclusion, we found no evidence that metformin use was associated with improved outcomes in newly diagnosed DLBCL and FL.