Watkins, Marcus P.

Introduction Emerging evidence suggests that responses to CPI in Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) may be adversely affected by the reductions in microbiome diversity associated with concomitant antibiotic (abx) exposure. Given the increasingly key role that CPI-based regimens (CPI+) appear to have on improving post-ASCT outcomes, we evaluated the potential impact of abx exposure on CPI+ efficacy and post-ASCT outcomes in RRHL patients treated with CPI+ prior to ASCT. Methods This retrospective study of RRHL patients at 11 US academic centers included patients ≥18 who received CPI+ between 1/2012-12/2022. Patient/disease characteristics, treatment histories, outcomes, and abx exposure (2 weeks prior to and 30 days after CPI+) were collected by participating sites and analyzed centrally. Primary and key secondary objectives were overall response rate (ORR) to CPI+ by Lugano criteria, and PFS/overall survival (OS) by abx exposure. PFS/OS were estimated by Kaplan-Meier and compared by log-rank tests. Univariate and multivariate regression models evaluated the impact of abx exposure on ORR/complete response rate (CR)/PFS/OS. Results 237 patients with median follow-up of 3.20 and 2.73 years from CPI+ initiation and ASCT, respectively, were evaluated. At diagnosis: median age 30.6 (range 7.8 - 71.7) years, female (53.6%), nodular sclerosing (75.1%), and stages I-IIB/bulky and III/IV (73.4%). 1L regimens were ABVD/ABVD-like (75.5%), brentuximab vedotin (BV)+AVD (15.2%), and other (9.3%). 65.8% received 6 cycles of chemotherapy, and 10.5% received 1L radiation. End of 1L responses were CR (39.7%), partial response (PR; 13.1%), refractory disease (37.6%), and unknown (8.0%). Median time to first relapse from diagnosis was 0.95 (range 0.15 - 22.2) years. All patients underwent ASCT after 1 (58.2%), 2 (22.8%), or 3+ (19.0%) lines of salvage. CPI+ was given as 1st (65.8%), 2nd (21.5%), or 3rd+ (12.5%) salvage therapy. CPI+ included BV-nivolumab (44.3%) + ipilimumab (7.2%), pembrolizumab, gemcitabine, vinorelbine, and liposomal doxorubicin (P-GVD; 24.5%), and CPI-monotherapy (20.2%). ORR to CPI+ was 88.0% (CR 68.4%) in all lines; as 1st salvage ORR was 91.7% (CR 76.3%). 75.1% of patients underwent ASCT in CR (PR 19.4%) increasing to 91.1% CR after ASCT. At 3-years, PFS was 88.0% (95% CI: 83.5% - 92.8%) and OS was 94.8% (95% CI: 91.3% - 98.3%) for the full cohort. Overall, 46.8% patients were abx exposed during CPI+, 22.8% fluoroquinolone/beta-lactams (BL) prophylaxis (ppx) and 38.8% abx [BL 29.5%, carbapenems (CB) 12.2%, vancomycin (VM) 19.8%, anti-pseudomonas (PA) 24.9%, anti-MRSA (SA) 22.4%, anti-anaerobe (AN) 16.5%] for suspected/documented infection. Use of ppx, BL, CB, VM, PA, SA were significantly higher with CP1+ as 2nd+ vs 1st salvage. At 3-years, PFS (87.0% vs 88.4%, p=0.91) and OS (92.5% vs 95.8%, p=0.47) were similar for abx exposed vs naïve patients, respectively. On univariate analysis, line of salvage and CPI+ regimen (Cytotoxic vs Monotherapy) were associated with ORR/CR, while overall abx exposure was not associated with inferior ORR (OR 0.62; p=0.24), CR (OR 0.85, p=0.56), PFS (HR 0.95, p=0.91), or OS (HR 1.58, p=0.47). When adjusted for line of salvage and CPI+ regimen, exposure to BL, CB, VM, PS, SA, or AN, abx indication (ppx vs treatment), duration of abx exposure (<7 vs ≥7 days) by class were all not associated with ORR/CR or PFS/OS. Conclusion In this large cohort abx exposure does not appear to adversely affect ORR/CR to CPI+ or PFS/OS following ASCT, when adjusted for line of CPI+ salvage and CPI+ regimen. Our findings may be related the high proportion of patients (79.8%) receiving CPI-combinations compared to CPI monotherapy (20.2%), whereas in previous series all patients received CPI without cytotoxic agents. This observation could be related to intrinsic antimicrobial activities of some cytotoxic agents (e.g. gemcitabine and doxorubicin) that may overshadow impact from concomitant abx exposure. Alternatively, the lack of effect could be related to the inherent fitness of patients with RRHL who undergo ASCT, compared to those treated with CPI+ following ASCT or those with solid tumors receiving where abx exposure may indicate an overall sicker/higher-risk population. Overall, our findings demonstrate that combination of CPI with BV or chemotherapy may overcome any adverse impact of abx on the efficacy of CPI+ prior to ASCT.

Introduction: Pembrolizumab Gemcitabine Vinorelbine and Liposomal Doxorubicin (P-GVD) has become a commonly employed regimen for the treatment of relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma (CHL), often preceding autologous stem cell transplant in patients with good response. The utilization of P-GVD is based on a 38-evaluable patient prospective trial (Moskowitz et al. JCO 2021). There remains minimal data regarding the efficacy of this regimen in a larger, real-world cohort. Methods:Patients with CHL who received P-GVD at 9 United States centers were retrospectively evaluated to estimate efficacy and safety, with a focus on the second line use of this regimen. Demographic and clinical data were extracted from medical records. Responses reflected Lugano criteria per local investigator assessment. Study objectives were overall response rates (ORR), complete response rates (CRR), progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. PFS and OS were estimated by Kaplan-Meier. Results: Patients and Treatment: We identified 65 CHL patients who received P-GVD between July 2019 and June 2024, including 43 who were treated in the second line. Enrolled patients included a median age of 31 years (range 17-69 years), 36.9% (24) females, 75.4% (49) nodular sclerosing subtype, and 60% (39) stage III-IV at diagnosis. Patients included 64.6% (42) White and non-Hispanic, 15.4% (10) Hispanic or White and Hispanic, 10.8% (7) Black, 3.1% (2) Asian/Pacific Islander, 3.1% (2) other, and 3.1% (2) unknown. The median number of prior regimens was 1 (range 0-12); these included 3.1% (2) who had prior checkpoint inhibitor (CPI), 50.8% (33) who had prior brentuximab vedotin (BV), and 3.1% (2) who had prior transplant. Patients with primary refractory disease [no initial complete response (CR)] comprised 58.5% (38), and 35.4% (23) had relapse within 1 year of completing initial therapy. The median number of cycles received was 3 (range 1-5). Treatment in a community practice setting was noted for 21.5% (14) patients. Efficacy: At a median follow up of 17.7 months, ORR and CRR after P-GVD were 95% (62/65) and 74% (48/65), respectively. This increased to 95% ORR and 81% CRR when limited to 43 patients who were treated 2nd line. Responses by line included: 1st [n=1; 100% ORR and CRR]; 3rd [n=15; 100% ORR, 73.3% CRR], 4th [n=3; 100% ORR, 33.3% CRR], 5th [n=2; 100% ORR, 0% CRR], and 13th [n=1; SD]. CRR in BV- and CPI-exposed patients were 60.6% and 50%, respectively. Ninety one percent (39) of 2nd line treated patients proceeded to autologous transplant, as well as all 3 patients > age 60. Among 41 response-evaluable second-line patients, CR was achieved in 94% (30/32) who received 2 or 3 cycles of P-GVD, and 56% (5/9) who received 4 cycles of P-GVD. For the entire cohort at 12 and 24 months after starting P-GVD, PFS was 95% (95% CI: 89-100%), 91% (95% CI: 83-100%) and OS was 98% (95% CI: 94-100%), 94% (95% CI: 86-100%), respectively. Ninety five percent (41) of 2nd line transplanted patients remain alive and in remission at a median of 18.5 months (range 3.5-38.7 months). In the primary refractory subset, PFS and OS at 24 months were 91% and 97%, respectively. For the cohort with 2 or more prior lines of therapy, PFS and OS at 24 months were 91% and 94%, respectively. Safety: Immune-related adverse events (IRAEs) were reported in 20% (13) of patients, of which grade 3 IRAEs per NCCN criteria version 1.2024 comprised 38.5%; all others were grades 1-2. Non-IRAE grade 3-4 toxicities per CTCAE version 5.0 were reported in 22% (14) patients. Of 29 patients evaluable for treatment-related interruptions, 7% (2) had therapy discontinued, and 34% (10) had holds, dose reductions, and/or delays. No deaths were attributed to P-GVD treatment. Conclusions:This retrospective study confirms the utility of P-GVD in treating relapsed/refractory CHL in a real-world population. Though fewer CRs and higher rates of grade 3 adverse events were observed, the vast majority of patients were able to proceed to transplant, and outcomes to date are highly encouraging.

Introduction: The real-world outcomes in patients (pts) with PCALCL in the era of targeted therapies like Brentuximab Vedotin (BV) is not well defined due to lack of large multicenter studies. We conducted a multicenter retrospective RWA to assess patient and disease characteristics, treatment patterns, survival outcomes and impact of novel therapies in this rare type of cutaneous T cell lymphoma (CTCL). Methods: A total of 95 adult (≥18 years) pts from 8 academic institutions in the United States diagnosed from 2010-2022 were included in the analysis. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Boards at the respective sites. Demographic and disease factors were summarized by descriptive statistics. Overall survival (OS) was estimated by Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log rank method. Results: In our cohort, the median age at diagnosis was 63 (range 18-93) years. The majority of pts were male 60%, white 79%, and had good performance status (PS) ECOG 0-1 (93%). Median time from initial presentation to diagnosis was 1.8 (range 0-211) months. Most common initial skin presentation was tumor 46% (44/95), followed by plaques 27% (26/95) and patches 15% (14/95). No pt presented with erythroderma. Median size of the largest lesion was 2 (range 0.5-20) cm. 63% had early stage (IA-IIA) disease and 86% had <5 skin lesions at the time of initial diagnosis. Furthermore, palpable lymph node (LN) (10%) and elevated LDH (18%) were uncommon at diagnosis. Initial treatments include localized radiation 60%, surgical excision 21% and topical steroids 11%. A small subset of pts received systemic treatments like CHOP 13% (12/95), BV 8% (8/95) and oral methotrexate 7% (7/95) as frontline therapy. A proportion of pts received XRT with CHOP (6/12) and BV (2/8). The overall response rate (ORR) to initial therapy was 68% (65/95) with 61% achieving a CR and 17% had primary refractory disease (stable and progressive disease). Relapse rate after 1st line therapy was 52% (49/95). In our cohort a total of 22 pts received BV after frontline therapy, of which 19 were BV naïve and 3 were re-treated. At the time of last follow up, 27% of our cohort were still on treatment, 78% were alive and 21% were dead; only 3% of deaths were attributed to the lymphoma. The median OS was 128 months (95% CI: 78.4-NA) (Figure 1) with a median follow up of 42 (range 0.5-123.5) months. The 5-year OS was 77%. On univariate analysis, older age (≥65 vs <65 years) (median OS 78 vs 128 months; p=0.004) and higher number of lesions (5-10 vs <5) (mOS 34 vs 128 months; p=<0.0001) were significant associated with OS (Table 1). Type and size of the skin lesions, presence of palpable LN, elevated LDH, stage, and treatment modalities had no impact on OS. Results of multivariate analysis will be presented at the conference. Conclusion: In this large multicenter RWA of PCALCL, excellent long-term survival was observed following frontline therapies that were mostly skin directed. The use of systemic therapies including BV were infrequent even in relapsed disease. Older age and increased number of skin lesions were associated with poor OS.

Introduction: DH/THL also classified as high-grade B cell lymphomas (HGBCL) with MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6 rearrangements have higher risk of progression after initial treatment and poor response to salvage therapies compared to diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL), NOS. Recently, CART cell therapy has shown encouraging responses in treatment of relapsed refractory (R/R) DLBCL. In this retrospective study, we evaluated whether survival of (R/R) DH/THL is improved in the CART era. Methods: In this multicenter retrospective study, adult pts (pts) with R/R DH/THL after anthracycline-based therapy were included. Demographic and clinical variables were obtained from electronic health records. Study objectives was overall survival (OS) at 2 year landmark. We utilized full propensity score matching to compare progression free survival (PFS) and OS of CART with 2 nd line chemoimmunotherapy. Results: 278 DH/THL pts treated between 2010-2020 were included. Median age was 63 years (range 52-74), 163 (58%) were male, 119 (43%) were classified as DLBCL and 116 (42%) as HGBCL; 40 (14%) were transformed from follicular lymphoma. 225 (82%) had advanced stage, 161 (67%) had elevated LDH, 85 (33%) had bulky disease, 74 (59%) had B symptoms. 105 (38%) pts treated for relapsed disease before 2018 were included in the pre-CART era cohort. 168 (60%) pts treated from 2018 onwards were included in the CART era cohort. 102 (60%) pts in CART cell era received CART cells, 40 (14%) received polatuzumab vedotin (pola), 10 (3.5%) received loncastuximab tesirine, tafasitamab and bispecific antibody each. Characteristics at relapse were similar in both groups. Median follow up was 8.9 (0.2-146) months. 2-year OS estimate was 36% (CI 95: 30-42%) in entire population. Patients treated in CART cell era had significantly higher OS (2 yr OS: 43% [CI 95: 35-53]) compared to pts treated in pre-CART cells era (2-year OS: 24% [CI 95: 16-34], p=0.0006) (Figure 1). In multivariable analyses, increasing age (HR = 1.02 (CI 95: 1.01, 1.04), p=0.003), extranodal disease (HR = 1.41 (CI 95: 1.00, 1.99), p<0.001), elevated LDH (HR = 1.57 (CI 95: 1.11, 2.24), p=0.01) were associated with inferior OS. Increasing time to relapse (HR = 0.98 (CI 95: 0.97, 0.99), p<0.001) was associated with superior OS. BCL6 rearrangement did not affect OS. When adjusted for these factors, treatment with CART cells was associated with higher 2 yr OS (HR = 0.33 (CI 95: 0.22, 0.49), p<0.001). Treatment with polatuzumab (HR = 1.07 (CI 95: 0.71, 1.6), p=0.07) was not significantly associated with OS in univariable analysis. 102 pts underwent CART cell therapy at any point for relapse; 94 (93%) were refractory to prior chemotherapy. 62 (60%) responded and 52 (50%) had CR after CART cells. 2-year PFS and OS after CART cell therapy were 28% (CI 95: 19-40) and 40% (CI 95: 30-53), respectively. Increasing time to CART was associated with inferior OS (HR: 1.02 (CI 95: 1.0-1.03, p=0.03) but not PFS (HR: 1.02 (CI 95: 0.99-1.04), p=0.2). 219 (79%) pts received curative intent salvage chemotherapy for 2 nd line. 2-year PFS and OS were 15% (CI 95: 11-20) and 38% (CI 95: 31-45), respectively. 21 pts received CART cell therapy for 2 nd line. 2 year PFS and OS in this small number of pts were 52% (CI 95: 35-79) and 70% (CI 95: 52-94), respectively. Due in part to the small number of pts who received CART cells in 2 nd line, we utilized full propensity score matched analysis to compare each patient in CART cell group to all possible matched controls in salvage chemotherapy group. Variables matched were age, LDH, extra nodal disease and time to relapse. In propensity score matched analysis, pts who received CART cells had significantly higher 2 year PFS (HR: 10.5 (CI 95: 3.4-17.5), p=002) and 2 year OS (HR: 7.5 (CI 95: 1.4-13), p=0.01). Conclusions: Survival of r/r DH/THL appears to have improved in the era of CART cell therapy. About 2/3 of pts refractory to chemotherapy respond to CART cells, and in multivariable analysis, receipt of CART cells was associated with improved OS. Increasing time to CART cells was associated with inferior survival. In a propensity score matched analysis utilizing full matching, CART cell therapy in 2 nd line was associated with significantly higher 2 year PFS and OS compared to curative intent salvage therapy. Other CD 19 and CD 20 targeting agents approved after CART cell therapy might contribute to favorable survival, effect of these agents could not be assessed because of small numbers.

Abstract Follicular lymphoma (FL) is clinically heterogeneous, with select patients tolerating extended watch-and-wait, whereas others require prompt treatment, suffer progression of disease within 24 months of treatment (POD24), and/or experience aggressive histologic transformation (t-FL). Because our understanding of the relationship between genetic alterations in FL and patient outcomes remains limited, we conducted a clinicogenomic analysis of 370 patients with FL or t-FL (from Cancer and Leukemia Group B/Alliance trials 50402/50701/50803, or real-world cohorts from Washington University School of Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, or University of Miami). FL subsets by grade, stage, watch-and-wait, or POD24 status did not differ by mutation burden, whereas mutation burden was significantly higher in relapsed/refractory (rel/ref) FL and t-FL than in newly diagnosed (dx) FL. Nonetheless, mutation burden in dx FL was not associated with frontline progression-free survival (PFS). CREBBP was the only gene more commonly mutated in FL than in t-FL yet mutated CREBBP was associated with shorter frontline PFS in FL. Mutations in 20 genes were more common in rel/ref FL or t-FL than in dx FL, including 6 significantly mutated genes (SMGs): STAT6, TP53, IGLL5, B2M, SOCS1, and MYD88. We defined a mutations associated with progression (MAP) signature as ≥2 mutations in these 7 genes (6 rel/ref FL or t-FL SMGs plus CREBBP). Patients with dx FL possessing a MAP signature had shorter frontline PFS, revealing a 7-gene set offering insight into FL progression risk potentially more generalizable than the m7–Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (m7-FLIPI), which had modest prognostic value in our cohort. Future studies are warranted to validate the poor prognosis associated with a MAP signature in dx FL, potentially facilitating novel trials specifically in this high-risk subset of patients.

AbstractPlasmablastic lymphoma (PBL) is a rare entity, commonly associated with immunosuppressed states such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection or solid organ transplant. The clinical course is characterized by high relapse rates and a poor prognosis, leading some clinicians to recommend aggressive frontline therapy. However, a specific review of limited stage (LS) PBL patients is not available to evaluate outcomes and justify treatment recommendations. We performed a retrospective review of LS PBL cases to provide insight into this rare disease. Our cohort consisted of 80 stage I or II PBL patients from 13 US academic centers. With a median follow up of 34 months (1–196), the 3‐year progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of the entire cohort were 72% (95% CI 62, 83) and 79% (95% CI 70, 89), respectively. The 3‐year PFS and OS of patients treated with frontline chemotherapy alone was 65% (95% CI 50, 84) and 71% (95% CI 56, 89), respectively, compared to 85% (95% CI 72, 100) and 96% (95% CI 89, 100), respectively, in patients treated with combined frontline chemotherapy with radiation consolidation. Our data demonstrate favorable outcomes in LS PBL with no improvements in outcome from aggressive frontline treatment including Hyper‐CVAD or auto‐SCT consolidation. Multivariate regression analysis (MRA) demonstrated improved PFS for patients receiving EPOCH based frontline therapy versus CHOP (HR: 0.23; p = 0.029). Frontline chemotherapy followed by radiation consolidation versus chemotherapy alone appeared to be associated with improved relapse and survival outcomes but did not show statistical significance in MRA.

Background: Plasmablastic lymphoma (PBL) is a rare subtype of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma with a well-known association with HIV infection. The outcomes of PBL patients are typically described with high relapse rates and poor prognosis. (Loghavi S, J Hematol Oncol. 2015; Morscio J, Am J of Pathol. 2014; Castillo JJ, Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2011; Castillo JJ, Am J Hematol. 2008) There has been a paucity of data suggesting that limited stage disease (Ann Arbor stage I-II) may have a more favorable prognosis. However, due to the rarity of this disease there have been no large-scale reviews to confirm this. Thus, many patients with limited stage disease are subject to the aggressive therapy recommendations based on the poor outcomes of PBL patients as a whole. (Loghavi S, J Hematol Oncol. 2015; NCCN Guidelines, version 2.2020; Al-Malki MM, BBMT. 2014) We attempted to determine the treatment patterns and outcomes of patients with limited stage PBL. Methods: We conducted a multi-center (13 US academic centers) retrospective study of patients with limited stage (Ann Arbor stage I-II) Plasmablastic lymphoma. Determination of limited stage and diagnosis of PBL was determined by the investigators at each individual center. Patients diagnosed between 1/1/1990 and 6/1/2018 were included. Baseline demographic, clinical, laboratory, pathology, and outcomes data were extracted by retrospective chart review. Kaplan Meier was utilized for time to event analysis. Results: Baseline characteristics are included in table 1. A total of 80 patients were identified with limited stage disease. With a median follow up of 34 months the 3-yr Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was 71.9% and 78.7% respectively (Figure 1A and 1B). Patients that received frontline chemotherapy with (n=29) and without RT (n=36) had a 3-yr PFS and OS of 84.6% and 96.2% as compared to 64.5% and 70.8%, respectively (Figure 2A and 2B; Figure 3A and 3B). The Hazard ratio (HR) for PFS and OS for chemo (reference) vs chemo-RT was 0.47 (95% CI 0.18-1.3; P=0.131) and 0.18 (95% CI 0.04-0.84; p=0.029) respectively. The HR for PFS and OS for CHOP (n=14, reference) vs EPOCH (n=33) based regimens was 0.37 (95% CI 0.11-1.2; p=0.106) and 0.36 (95% CI 0.079-1.6; p=0.182) respectively. Patients with stage I/IE disease (n=56) had a 3-yr PFS and OS of 73.1% and 81.2% respectively. Patients with stage II/IIE disease (n=24) had a 3-yr PFS and OS of 69.3% and 73.4% respectively. Patients that received aggressive treatment (n=17) with Hyper-CVAD based regimens and/or Auto-SCT as consolidation had a 3-yr PFS and OS of 63.6% and 72.7% respectively. Patients with concomitant HIV (n=16) had a 3-yr PFS and OS of 80.8% and 77.4% respectively. Seven patients received RT alone and 6 patients had surgical resection alone as frontline therapy; 1 patient received no therapy; 1 patient received HAART therapy only and remains in CR without any other treatment for PBL 29 months after diagnosis. There were 8 deaths (10%) related to PBL, 3 deaths (4%) related to treatment of PBL (2 during frontline chemo and 1 upon relapse with salvage chemo), and 9 deaths (11%) related to other causes. The 3-yr lymphoma free survival (LFS) of the entire cohort, pts receiving chemo alone, and pts receiving chemo-RT (without including treatment related mortality (TRM) as an event) was 89.1%, 85.2%, and 100% respectively. The 3-yr LFS survival of the entire cohort, pts receiving chemo alone, and pts receiving chemo-RT (including TRM as an event) was 85.1%, 80.0%, and 96.2% respectively. Discussion: Here we report the largest review to our knowledge of limited stage PBL. Outcomes appear to be excellent with 3-yr PFS and OS of 71.9% and 78.7% respectively and a 3-yr LFS of 89.1% (85.1% when attributing TRM as an event). There was no obvious benefit to receiving aggressive therapy with H-CVAD based regimens and/or Auto-SCT. Although this is a small, uncontrolled sample size the HR for OS was improved in patients receiving frontline chemo-RT vs chemo alone 0.18 (95% CI 0.04-0.84; p=0.029). However, this did not take into account TRM with or progression while receiving frontline chemotherapy. Patients who were HIV+ had similar PFS and OS outcomes compared to the entire cohort. This retrospective study clearly demonstrates the favorable outcomes in this patient population, especially in those able to receive definitive therapy for their disease. Disclosures Hess: ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS, AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Patel:Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Precision Biosciences: Research Funding; Nektar: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Poseida: Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Nowakowski:Nanostrings: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Curis: Consultancy; Ryvu: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Kymera: Consultancy; Denovo: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding. Chavez:Bayer: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; BeiGene: Speakers Bureau; Morphosys: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy; Genentech: Speakers Bureau; Epizyme: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Hill:Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; AstraZenica: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Maddocks:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Morphosys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics, AstraZeneca: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding. Wagner-Johnston:ADC Therapeutics, Regeneron, CALIB-R, Verastem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kahl:AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche Laboratories Inc: Consultancy. Alderuccio:ADC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Forma Therapeutics: Other: Family member; Agios Pharmaceuticals: Other: Family member; Oncinfo: Honoraria; Inovio Pharmaceuticals: Other: Family member; Foundation Medicine: Other: Family member; Puma Biotechnology: Other: Family member; OncLive: Honoraria. Lossos:Janssen Biotech: Honoraria; Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen Scientific: Consultancy, Other; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Other; Stanford University: Patents & Royalties; NCI: Research Funding. Portell:Bayer: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding. Landsburg:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Triphase: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Curis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau. Castillo:TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kymera: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding.