Ansell, Stephen M.

8043 Background: The mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) signal pathway controls cell proliferation and survival. The trial's goal was to determine the anti-tumor activity and safety of single-agent everolimus (TORC1 inhibitor) in patients with relapsed/refractory Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia (WM). Methods: Eligible patients had measurable disease (IgM monoclonal protein >1000 mg/dL with >10% marrow involvement or nodal masses >2 cm), a platelet count ≥75,000 x 106/L, a neutrophil count ≥1,000 x 106/L. Patients received everolimus 10 mg PO daily. Tumor response was assessed after cycles 2 and 6 and then every 3 cycles until progression. Results: 60 pts were treated. The median age was 64 years (range, 43-85). The median number of prior therapies was 3 (range, 1-11). All but two patients (97%) had received prior rituximab based therapy and 64% of patients had received prior alkylator based therapies. The overall response rate (complete response CR+ partial response PR+ minimal response MR) was 73% (95% CI: 60-84%), with a PR of 50% and 23% MR. The median time to progression (TTP), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) for the entire study population is 28 months (mos), (95% CI: 18-not reached (NR)), 22 mos (95% CI: 12 0-NR), and 55 mos (95% CI: 55-NR), respectively. The estimated PFS at 12 and 24 months is 62% (95%CI: 51-75%), and 48% (95%CI: 37-63%), respectively. The 30 patients who achieved a PR responded after a median of 2 months (range, 1-26) of treatment. The median duration of response (DR) for these patients has not yet been reached and 19 of these patients remain in response after a median follow up of 31 months (range, 3-54). All but two patients had a decrease in their serum IgM. Grade 3 or higher related toxicities were observed in 67% of patients. The most common were hematological toxicities with cytopenias. Pulmonary toxicity occurred in 5% of patients. Dose reductions due to toxicity occurred in 63% of patients. Conclusions: Everolimus has high single-agent activity with an overall response rate of 73% and manageable toxicity in patients with relapsed WM, and offers a potential new therapeutic strategy for this patient population.

TPS8612 Background: Brentuximab vedotin, a CD30-targeted antibody-drug conjugate, has conditional approval in Europe for relapsed/refractory (RR) CD30-positive HL following autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) or following ≥2 prior therapies when ASCT or multi-agent chemotherapy is not a treatment option. ABVD, a common front-line regimen for advanced HL, achieves complete response (CR) rates of 70–80%. However, 10–20% of patients (pts) are refractory to front-line treatment and up to 35% relapse after front-line multi-modality therapy. In pts with relapsed HL post-ASCT, single-agent brentuximab vedotin yields an objective response rate of 75% (CR, 33%; Chen ASH 2012). In a phase 1 study in treatment-naïve HL pts, A+AVD was associated with manageable toxicity and a CR rate of 96%; brentuximab vedotin + ABVD was contraindicated due to pulmonary toxicity (Ansell ASH 2012). We hypothesized that substituting bleomycin with brentuximab vedotin would eliminate bleomycin-associated pulmonary toxicity and improve progression-free survival (PFS) compared to a standard ABVD regimen. Methods: This ongoing, open-label, randomized, multicenter study (NCT01712490) will compare A+AVD vs ABVD in 1040 pts with stage III/IV classical HL. Primary endpoint: modified (m) PFS (death, progression, and receipt of chemotherapy or radiotherapy by pts not in CR after completing A+AVD or ABVD will count as progression event). Key secondary endpoint: overall survival. Key inclusion criteria: histologically-confirmed previously untreated stage III/IV classical HL. Pts will be stratified by region and International Prognostic Score, and will be randomized 1:1 to receive A+AVD (brentuximab vedotin 1.2 mg/kg with each dose of AVD) or ABVD administered intravenously on Days 1 and 15 of 28-day cycles, for up to 6 cycles. Disease status and survival will be evaluated regularly until study closure. Safety assessments: incidence and severity of adverse events, changes to physical and laboratory tests. Clinical trial information: NCT01712490.

8060 Background: ENKL is a rare and aggressive subtype of peripheral T-cell lymphoma. Due to its geographic predilection there is a paucity of data on clinical experiences from non-Asian countries. The purpose of this study was to analyze characteristics and outcomes of patients (pts) with ENKL identified from major academic centers in NA. Methods: Pts with newly diagnosed CD56+ ENKL were retrospectively identified. Analyses included disease characteristics, ethnicity, therapy, and outcomes. Results: 115 pts (63.5% Caucasian, 20% Asian, 16.5% other) were identified across 10 centers diagnosed between 5/1990-5/2011 (Era 1: pre-2000, n=16; Era 2: 2000-2005, n=45; Era 3: post-2005, n=54). Median age was 52 years (19-88). 75 (65%) had stage I/II disease and were treated with combined modality therapy (CMT) n=48, chemotherapy (CT) n=14 or radiotherapy (RT) n=14. 40 pts had stage III/IV disease and were treated with CT (n=23), CMT (n=12) or RT (n=5). CT regimens used alone or in CMT were either anthracycline-based (n=68) or other (n=29). 63% of stage I/II pts and 40% with stage III/IV achieved complete remission (CR). 30 pts underwent a stem cell transplant (SCT); 14 in first CR and 16 at progression/relapse (autologous, n=21; allogeneic, n=9). Pts with stage I/II disease had a better progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared with stage III/IV (12 vs 5.2 months (p=0.003) and 41.5 vs 8.9 months (p<0.0001), respectively). For all stages, treatment with CMT compared with CT or RT alone was also associated with better PFS and OS, 18.0 vs 3.9 months (p<0.0001), and 41.5 vs 10.2 months (p=0.002) respectively. Non-anthracycline-based regimens were associated with better PFS (p=0.001) and OS (p=0.045). No survival differences were seen between Asian and non-Asian pts. Conclusions: This series represents one of the largest experiences of ENKL in NA. Our data are consistent with Asian studies in: 1) majority of pts present with early stage disease; 2) overall poor outcome; 3) superiority of CMT and non-anthracycline regimens. Advances in understanding biology and international collaborative efforts are required to improve outcome in this rare entity.

7623 Background: Survival for patient with primary CNS lymphoma (PCNSL), in general, is poor with patients requiring frequent chemotherapy treatments or receiving whole-brain radiation therapy, which can potentially result in significant neurologic decline and dementia. Because of the improved survival of high risk patients with aggressive lymphoma undergoing autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), we began ASCT for patients with PCNSL in first or later remission with chemotherapy sensitive disease. We now report on outcomes of patients who have had at least 1 year follow up post ASCT. Methods: Between June, 2000 and September, 2004, 11 patients underwent ASCT for PCNSL. The medical records of consenting patients were abstracted for the following information. Median age at transplant was 47 years old (range 30–67). Median number of prior treatments 1 (range 1–3). Median time from diagnosis to transplant was 7.5 months (range 2.9 to 75.8). Median International Extranodal Working Study Group Prognostic Score: 2 (range 0–3). Disease status at transplant: First CR 5 patients, later CR or PR 6 patients. Results: Eleven patients underwent ASCT for PCNSL and have a minimum of 1 year follow-up. All patients received BEAM conditioning. Median follow up was 28.3 months. Four patients have relapsed at a median of 200 days (range 40–523). Of the patients who relapsed, one has died of disease progression and the remaining three are alive after additional therapy. Median overall survival and progression free survival from transplant have not been reached. Two year overall and event free survival are 89% and 61%, respectively. Conclusions: Although limited by patient selection and retrospective biases, this review suggests that ASCT for PCNSL demonstrates improved overall survival when compared to historical controls with similar PCNSL Prognostic Scores (2 year survival for patients from diagnosis with PS 2–3 was 48% in a prior published study). ASCT in first remission in patients with PCNSL appears promising and may limit the need for additional therapy which can be myelosuppressive or result in neurologic decline. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

7586 Background: The immunologic mechanisms of action of rituximab have been described as complement mediated lysis, vaccine like effect, antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) and the cellular microenvironment. We hypothesized that in the treatment of follicular grade 1 lymphoma (FL), the presence of a stronger host immune status prior to rituximab therapy would result in a prolonged time to progression (TTP). As a surrogate marker for immune status, we evaluated the absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) prior to rituximab treatment. Methods: Between 1996 and 2002, 1,104 consecutive FL patients were evaluated at Mayo Clinic Rochester. Of these patients, we retrospectively analyzed a group of all FL patients who received rituximab (375 mg/m2 once a week for four weeks) alone at any time during their lymphoma treatment at the Mayo Clinic (n=79). The primary end-point was to assess the impact of ALC just prior to rituximab therapy on TTP for FL. Results: The median age of the cohort was 56.6 years (range: 25–98 years). The median follow-up was 12.5 months (range: 1–76 months). An ALC count of ≥ 890 cells/μL prior to rituximab therapy predicted a longer TTP compared with an ALC < 890 cells/μl (25 months versus 8 months, respectively, p < 0.0124). A higher complete response rate was observed in the ALC ≥ 890 cells/μL group compared with the ALC < 890 cells/μL group [15/40 (38%) vs 5/39 (13%), p < 0.035]. The groups were balanced regarding the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI) (p = 0.794). Multivariate analysis demonstrated ALC ≥ 890 cells/μL prior to rituximab therapy as an independent prognostic factor for TTP when compared to hemoglobin, LDH, and Ann Arbor stage. The ALC was independent of the FLIPI in multivariate analysis. Conclusions: This data supports the hypothesis that a higher lymphocyte count, as a marker of the immune status of the patient, predicts for a longer TTP following rituximab therapy. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

7532 Background: Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL) is characterized by t(11;14) resulting in over expression of cyclin D1, a member of the phosphatidylinosital 3-kinase (PI3K) pathway. Temsirolimus is a novel inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) kinase. Previous studies with weekly temsirolimus at a dose of 250mg demonstrated a 38% overall response rate in 35 patients (JCO 23 (23); 5347–56, 2005). Thrombocytopenia was frequently observed and was dose limiting. The current study tested whether low-doses (25mg) of temsirolimus could produce a similar overall response rate (ORR) with less toxicity. Methods: Eligible patients had biopsy proven cyclin D1 positive MCL and had relapsed or were refractory to therapy. Patients received temsirolimus 25mg IV weekly as a single agent. Patients were restaged after 1 cycle (4 doses), after 3 cycles, and every 3 cycles thereafter. Patients with a tumor response after 6 cycles were eligible to continue drug for a total of 12 or 2 cycles after complete remission (CR) and then were observed without maintenance. The goal was to achieve an ORR of at least 20%. Results: Twenty-nine patients were enrolled between March and August 2005. Twenty-two patients have completed therapy. One patient with a major protocol violation on cycle-1 and one ineligible patient were excluded, leaving 27 evaluable patients. The ORR was 41% (11/27), with 1 CR and 10 PRs. Early evaluation of TTP showed a median of 5.5 months (95% CI: 3.3–7.7) and the duration of response for the 11 responders was 6.2 months (95% CI: 3.6 to not yet reached). These results compare favorably with the 6.5 months and 6.9 months, respectively, found in previous trials that used 250 mg. The median dose delivered per month was 80 mg (range, 10–100 mg). Sixteen (59%) of patients required a dose reduction. The median time on treatment was 4.4 months (95% CI, 3.3–7.7). The incidence of grade 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia was 12% and 0%, respectively. One patient experienced grade 5 infection without neutropenia, which was considered unrelated to CCI-779. Conclusions: Single agent CCI-779 at a dose of 25mg has anti-tumor activity in relapsed MCL similar to the 250 mg dose. This study indicates that combinations of temsirolimus with other agents should be feasible. [Table: see text]

8055 Background: mTOR inhibition with intravenous temsirolimus (Wyeth Pharmaceuticals) has been associated with responses in mantle cell lymphoma (J Clin Oncol 23;5347, 2005) as well as other lymphomas (Blood 108 (11) 2483; 2006). This phase II study tested the oral mTOR inhibitor everolimus (RAD001, Novartis Pharmaceuticals) in three simultaneous two-stage phase II lymphoma studies - aggressive (group 1), indolent (group 2), or uncommon (group 3). The goals were to learn the toxicity profile and to assess the anti-tumor response. Planned interim analysis for groups 1 and 3 have been completed and are the subject of this report. Methods: Patients (pts) received 10 mg PO daily for each 28 day cycle (up to 12) and restaged after 2, 6, and 12 cycles. The primary endpoint is the confirmed response rate, including CR, CRu or PR. 12 pts were enrolled in stage 1 of each study. At least 1 success in 12 is required to proceed to stage 2, to a total of 37 pts. Overall, the treatment will be considered promising if 4 or more successes are observed in all 37 pts in each group. Results: The median age of the 12 pts in group 1 was 68.5 yrs (range: 53–80), with a median of 3 (range, 1–15) prior therapies. Four pts had a prior stem cell transplant (SCT). Pts completed a median of 7 (range, 1–12) cycles of therapy. 6 confirmed responses have been achieved (1 CR, 5 PR), meeting the overall criteria for promising results in this study. Common grade 3 adverse events (AEs) include thrombocytopenia (3 pts) and anemia (2 pts). For group 3, the median age was 49 yrs (range, 27–78), with a median of 7 (range, 1–13) prior therapies and 6 pts had a prior SCT. Pts have completed a median of 6.5 cycles (range, 1–11). 5 confirmed responses have been achieved (5 PR), meeting the criteria for this regimen to be considered promising. Of these 5 patients, 3 had HD, 1 T-cell NHL, and 1 had macroglobulinemia. Common grade 3 AEs include anemia (3 pts) and thrombocytopenia (2 pts). No grade 4 AEs were reported. Conclusions: Oral everolimus has activity in a spectrum of lymphomas with acceptable toxicity. The responses observed in both group 1 and group 3 met the criteria to continue accrual. These results provide the rationale for additional studies with this novel class of agents and to integrate mTOR inhibitors into salvage treatment regimens. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Introduction: Anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are highly active in relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL), but most patients (pts) will still relapse. Given this, allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) remains an important option for pts after PD-1 blockade, as it offers the possibility of cure. Prior reports have suggested that alloHSCT after PD-1 mAbs may be associated with severe immune-related complications including acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), veno-occlusive disease (VOD) and cytokine release/febrile non-infectious syndrome (CRS). Prior studies of alloHSCT after PD-1 blockade in cHL have been limited by the small number of pts and short follow-up, preventing an accurate assessment of long-term outcomes and complications, risk factors for early toxicity, and the impact of transplant strategies such as choice of GVHD prophylaxis. We therefore assembled a large retrospective international cohort of cHL pts who underwent alloHSCT after PD-(L)1 blockade to better answer these questions, including an assessment of the impact of post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) on efficacy and toxicity. Methods: Medical records and databases were reviewed at 26 European and United States transplant centers to identify pts with cHL who underwent an alloHSCT any time after receiving a PD-1 or PD-L1 mAb. Response assessment was performed by local investigators according to Lugano 2014 criteria. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), cumulative incidence (CumInc) of relapse (CIR), non-relapse mortality (NRM), acute (a) and chronic (c) GVHD were estimated, as was the association between baseline variables and these outcomes. Results: Between 2014 and 2019, 150 pts were identified who underwent alloHSCT after a median of 10 (range, 1-74) doses of nivolumab (n=118), pembrolizumab (n=31), or avelumab (n=1). The median age was 31 (range 17-68) and pts had received a median of 4 (range, 2-11) lines of therapy prior to PD-(L)1 blockade. 138 pts (92%) had failed BV and 111 (74%) autologous HSCT. The best overall response to PD-(L)1 mAbs was CR for 62 pts (41%), PR for 55 (37%), SD for 17 (11%), PD for 15 (10%) and unknown for 1 (1%). Median time from last dose of PD-(L)1 mAb to alloHSCT was 80 days (range, 17-756) with 70 pts (47%) receiving intervening systemic therapy. At alloHSCT, 90 pts were in CR (60%), 45 in PR (30%), 5 in SD (3%), and 10 in PD (7%). Donors were haploidentical (n=71, 47%), matched sibling (n=29, 19%), matched unrelated (n=39, 26%), mismatched unrelated (n=7, 5%), cord blood (n=2, 1%), or unknown (n=2, 1%). Stem cell source was bone marrow (n=38, 25%), peripheral blood (n=110, 73%), or cord blood (n=2, 1%). GVHD prophylaxis included PTCy in 88 pts (59%) (69/71 (97%) with haploidentical donors; 19/79 (24%) with other donors). With a median post-alloHSCT follow-up for survivors of 23.8 months (range, 1-67), the 2y OS and PFS were 79% (95CI 71-86%) and 65% (95CI 55-73%), respectively, while the 2y CumIncs of relapse and NRM were 21% (95CI 13-29%) and 14%, (95CI, 8-22%), respectively (Fig. 1A-B). 27 pts have died, 3 due to disease and 24 to NRM, including aGVHD (n=7) and VOD (n=2). Veno-occlusive disease (VOD) occurred in 5 pts (day 100 CumInc 4%) and 29 pts (19%) developed CRS (grade 1 n=16; grade 2 n=7; grade 3 n=4; grade 4 n=2). The 6-month CumIncs of grade 2-4, grade 3-4 and grade 4 aGVHD were 39%, 16% and 8%, respectively. Hyperacute GVHD (onset ≤ 14 days after alloHSCT) occurred in 4% of pts and was fatal in 2 pts. The 2y CumInc of cGVHD was 45%. Neither receipt of &gt; 10 doses (median) of anti-PD-(L)1 mAb nor undergoing alloHSCT ≤80 days (median) after last dose of PD-(L)1 mAb were associated with PFS or OS. However, pts with a shorter time to transplant (≤80 days) appeared to have a higher risk of severe (grade 3-4) aGVHD (6m CumInc 24% vs 9%, p=0.006). Recipients of PTCy in this cohort had lower 2y CumIncs of cGVHD (34% vs 58%, p=0.01) and relapse (12% vs 31%, p=0.02), superior 2y PFS (76% vs 54%, p=0.015), and similar rates of severe aGVHD (15% vs 18%, p=0.5), 2y NRM (12% vs 16%, p=0.5), and 2y OS (82% vs 78%, p=0.6). Conclusions: With extended follow-up of a large international cohort, our results argue that alloSCT performed after PD-(L)1 mAbs is a feasible strategy associated with an excellent PFS and a very low CIR for this disease. The use of PT-Cy appears to be associated with improved outcomes and may at present represent the optimal transplant strategy in this pt population. Figure Disclosures Corradini: kite: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; KiowaKirin: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Ho:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Omeros Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jaglowski:Kite: Consultancy, Other: advisory board, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: advisory board, Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy, Other: advisory board; Unum Therapeutics Inc.: Research Funding. Herrera:Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding. Blaise:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Pierre Fabre medicaments: Honoraria; Molmed: Consultancy, Honoraria. Hamadani:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Sanofi Genzyme: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Research Funding; Otsuka: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Medimmune: Consultancy, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Ansell:LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Affimed: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Regeneron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding. Nieto:Astra-Zeneca: Research Funding; Affimed: Consultancy; Affimed: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Feldman:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Portola Pharma: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Research Funding; Eisai: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Research Funding; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Corvus: Research Funding; Viracta: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. McGuirk:ArticulateScience LLC: Other: Assistance with manuscript preparation; Bellicum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gamida Cell: Research Funding; Pluristem Ltd: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Fresenius Biotech: Research Funding. Mohty:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding. Stamatoulas Bastard:Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy. Houot:Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Merck Sharp Dohme: Honoraria. Manson:Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Orvain:Incyte: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Other: Travel & accommodations; Pfizer: Other: Travel & accommodations. Bouabdallah:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Frigault:Novartis: Consultancy; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria; Nkarta: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Juno/Celgene: Consultancy; Foundation Medicine: Consultancy; Xenetic: Consultancy. Chen:Takeda: Consultancy; Kiadis: Consultancy; Magenta: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy. Lynch:T.G. Therapeutics: Research Funding; Rhizen Pharmaceuticals S.A: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Johnson Graffe Keay Moniz & Wick LLP: Consultancy. Smith:AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta Pharma BV: Research Funding; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb (spouse): Research Funding; Denovo Biopharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Ignyta (spouse): Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Ayala (spouse): Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Byrne:Karyopharm: Research Funding. Cohen:Hutchison: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb Company: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc.: Research Funding; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; UNUM: Research Funding; ASH: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Lymphoma Research Foundation: Research Funding. Svoboda:AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kyowa: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Santoro:Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Speakers Bureau; Arqule: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Speakers Bureau; Abb-Vie: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy; Lilly: Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Speakers Bureau; Eisai: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Armand:Sigma Tau: Research Funding; Otsuka: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Tensha: Research Funding; Affimed: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Adaptive: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Infinity: Consultancy; Genentech: Research Funding. Zinzani:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Portola: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Immune Design: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy; Eusapharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Kyowa Kirin: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Carlo-Stella:Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations; Genenta Science srl: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: Travel, accommodations, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Rhizen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Janssen Oncology: Honoraria; MSD: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Other: Travel, accommodations; Takeda: Other: Travel, accommodations.

Background: DLBCL has traditionally been classified by cell of origin (COO) subcategories based on tumor gene expression profiles which include Activated B-Cell (ABC) and Germinal Center B-Cell (GCB). Recently, using tumor samples from patients treated with RCHOP, new classification models have focused on DNA alterations. However, a comprehensive integrative approach using a large transcriptomic data set across both newly diagnosed (nd) and relapsed/refractory (r/r) DLBCL is yet to be accomplished. A robust clustering of this type will allow for identification of biologically driven DLBCL patient subgroups and may predict patient outcome and inform treatment approaches. Methods: RNAseq was performed on a total of 882 DLBCL tumor FFPE biopsies from 2 ndDLBCL cohorts (cohort 1 and 2) and 2 r/r DLBCL cohorts (cohorts 3 and 4). Cohort 1 (N=267) was commercially sourced and served as the discovery cohort. Cohort 2 (N=340) was from the Mayo/Iowa Lymphoma SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) and served as the replication cohort. Cohort 3 (N=189) was from the CC-122-ST-001 and CC-122-DLBCL-001 clinical trials (NCT01421524 and NCT02031419), and cohort 4 (N=86) was from r/r patients from the MER. Clustering input consisted of gene expression data, gene set variation analysis (GSVA) scores computed from the hallmark gene sets of MSigDB gene sets, as well as immune cell abundance estimates from a DLBCL-specific deconvolution method. An integrative clustering method iClusterPlus was applied to the input data to identify patient subgroups. A multinomial generalized linear model classifier was trained on the discovery dataset and applied to cohorts 2, 3, and 4 to assess patterns of gene expression and clinical features among the subgroups. Results: Integrative clustering identified 8 subgroups of ndDLBCL patients (DLBCL1-8; D1-D8) in cohort 1. Classifiers trained on cohort 1 were applied to cohort 2 and the same 8 clusters were identified. Among RCHOP treated patients in cohort 2, subgroups D4 (p&lt;0.01) and D8 (p&lt;0.0001) had significantly worse survival outcomes than the rest of the population. D4 comprised 21% of the MER ndDLBCL replication cohort (cohort 2) with a median event-free survival (mEFS) of 38.2 months and a median overall survival (mOS) of 80.3 months. D8 comprised 5% of the cohort with a mEFS of 7.5 months and a mOS of 12.1 months. The remaining 6 subgroups were standard risk, with mEFS ranging from 82.1 months to not reached, and none reaching mOS. The subgroups were not uniquely defined by previously known molecular classification methods such as COO or double hit signature (DHITsig), nor by clinical risk factors such as age or international prognostic index (IPI). Within D4, 92% of patients were ABC, representing a high risk subset of ABC patients. The mEFS in D4 ABCs was 38.2 months, while mEFS of non-D4 ABCs was not reached (p&lt;0.005). Transcriptomic analysis revealed a lower abundance of immune infiltration. D4 was associated with high IPI, with 49% of D4 having IPI&gt;2, compared to 33% of non-D4 with IPI&gt;2 (p&lt;0.05). D8 represented a high-risk subset which was 73% GCB. The mEFS of D8 GCBs was 5.4 months, while mEFS of non-D8 GCBs was not reached (p&lt;0.0001). Transcriptomic analysis revealed low expression of immune response and cytokine signaling pathways, consistent with the low abundance of immune cells in D8. This subgroup consisted of 63% DHITsig positive patients. Although only 20% of all DHITsig positive patients were in D8, these D8 DHITsig patients showed significantly worse survival than non-D8 DHITsig patients (mEFS 11.3 months vs. not reached, p&lt;0.0001). In the r/r DLBCL setting, D1-D8 were all present, with an increased prevalence of D4 and D8 in Cohort 3 (30% and 17%, respectively) and Cohort 4 (30% and 14%) compared to the newly diagnosed setting. Mutational data for these cohorts has been collected and is being interpreted in the context of the discovered subgroups. Conclusion: A novel integrative clustering of transformed gene expression data revealed 8 biologically homogeneous groups, two of which had inferior outcomes when treated with RCHOP therapy. Furthermore, these two subgroups were more prevalent in r/r DLBCL. This classification allows for the transcriptomic identification of high-risk patients underserved by RCHOP therapy. *Ortiz, Wenzl and Stokes contributed equally **Gandhi and Novak contributed equally Disclosures Ortiz: Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Stokes:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Huang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Maurer:Celgene: Research Funding; Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nanostring: Research Funding. Towfic:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hagner:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Ratushny:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. McConnell:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Danziger:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Stong:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lata:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kamalakaran:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mavrommatis:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Trotter:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Czuczman:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ansell:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Regeneron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding. Cerhan:NanoString: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding. Nowakowski:Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Selvita: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; NanoString: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gandhi:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Novak:Celgene Coorperation: Research Funding.