Vose, Julie M.

AbstractThis phase 1-2 study evaluated brentuximab vedotin (BV) combined with nivolumab (Nivo) as first salvage therapy in patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). In parts 1 and 2, patients received staggered dosing of BV and Nivo in cycle 1, followed by same-day dosing in cycles 2 to 4. In part 3, both study drugs were dosed, same day, for all 4 cycles. At end of study treatment, patients could undergo autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) per investigator discretion. The objective response rate (ORR; N = 91) was 85%, with 67% achieving a complete response (CR). At a median follow-up of 34.3 months, the estimated progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 3 years was 77% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65% to 86%) and 91% (95% CI, 79% to 96%) for patients undergoing ASCT directly after study treatment. Overall survival at 3 years was 93% (95% CI, 85% to 97%). The most common adverse events (AEs) prior to ASCT were nausea (52%) and infusion-related reactions (43%), all grade 1 or 2. A total of 16 patients (18%) had immune-related AEs that required systemic corticosteroid treatment. Peripheral blood immune signatures were consistent with an activated T-cell response. Median gene expression of CD30 in tumors was higher in patients who responded compared with those who did not. Longer-term follow-up of BV and Nivo as a first salvage regimen shows durable efficacy and impressive PFS, especially in patients who proceeded directly to transplant, without additional toxicity concerns. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02572167.

Abstract Introduction Brentuximab vedotin (BV) is an ADC directed against CD30, a receptor expressed by malignant Reed-Sternberg (RS) cells present in the inflammatory/immune cell microenvironment of classical Hodgkin lymphomas (cHL). Through induction of immunogenic cell death, BV may prime an antitumor immune response via microtubule disruption of CD30-expressing RS cells (Gardai 2015). Tumor cells expressing PD-1 ligands use the PD-1 pathway to evade an immune response. Nivolumab (Nivo) blocks the PD-1 receptor, inhibits binding of PD-1 ligands, and restores an effective antitumor immune response. Targeted killing of CD30-expressing RS cells, concurrent with restoration of the immune response, may lead to higher complete response (CR) rates in patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory cHL (R/R HL), as well as improved durability of responses post autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Here we present updated results from the phase 1/2 study of BV + Nivo in pts with R/R HL. Methods BV + Nivo was evaluated in cHL that had relapsed or was refractory to frontline (FL) chemotherapy in adult pts (NCT02572167). Pts were excluded if they had received prior salvage therapy, BV or immuno-oncology therapy, or allogeneic SCT or ASCT. Pts were treated in 21-day cycles for up to 4 cycles. In Parts 1 and 2 of the trial, BV (1.8 mg/kg) was given on Cycle 1 Day 1 and Nivo (3 mg/kg) on Cycle 1 Day 8. For Cycles 2-4, BV and Nivo were given on Day 1. After the Cycle 4 response assessment, pts were eligible to undergo ASCT. The investigators assessed response per the Lugano Classification (Cheson 2014). Results 62 pts with R/R HL were enrolled in Parts 1 and 2; 61 pts received BV + Nivo, of whom 58 completed treatment (tx). 4 pts discontinued the study due to pt decision (2), AE (1), and investigator decision (1). Median age was 36 years, 52% were female, and 90% had received FL ABVD. 45% of pts had primary refractory disease and 31% experienced relapse within 1 year of FL therapy. Infusion-related reactions (IRRs) occurred in 41% of pts. Tx emergent AEs occurred in 98% of pts prior to ASCT (33% G3, 5% G4). Excluding IRRs, potential immune-related AEs (IrAEs) occurred in 84% of pts (10% G3, 3% G4) with 5 pts (8%) treated with systemic steroids for G4 pneumonitis, G4 pneumonitis and colitis, G2 pneumonitis, G3 diarrhea and G2 colitis, and G3 AST elevation. Among the 60 efficacy-evaluable pts, the CR rate was 62%, (48% of CR pts had Deauville ≤ 2) with an objective response rate of 85%; 5 pts (8%) had stable disease and 4 pts (7%) progressed on tx. At the time of this analysis, 39 pts had initiated ASCT with a median 5.1x106 CD34+ cells/kg (range; 3-60) collected. Median times to neutrophil and platelet engraftment were 12 and 15 days, respectively. Pts were followed for a median of 3 months from ASCT (N=39, range; 0-12) and 5.7 months from first dose (N=61, range; 1-17). BV and Nivo effects on the immune system were evaluated by peripheral blood immunophenotyping, serum cytokine/chemokine analyses, T-cell receptor sequencing, and intracellular cytokine staining. The first dose of BV resulted in elevation of pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines and concurrent reduction in serum TARC levels, with these results maintained post Nivo. We observed a reduction in Tregs and other T cell subsets after the first dose of BV with an elevation of T cell subsets post BV + Nivo. While TCR clonality in the periphery did not change over the course of the trial, T cell clonal expansion was observed post BV + Nivo, concurrent with T cell elevation measured by flow cytometry. Ex vivo peptide stimulation of PBMCs isolated from blood revealed the enhanced ability of T cell subsets to respond to MHC I and MHC II antigens following BV + Nivo compared to baseline: e.g., effector memory CD8+ T cells from some pts displayed increased intracellular IL-2, and TNFa after stimulation with MHCI and MHCII peptide pools compared to baseline, potentially indicating elevated activation status of the immune system following combination tx. Conclusion R/R HL remains an unmet clinical need despite recent medical advances. These data suggest the combination BV + Nivo is a well tolerated and an active salvage therapy with a high rate of CR (62%) that has no adverse impact on stem cell collection. The safety and activity of this novel combination support further exploration in an ongoing pivotal phase 3 trial in pts with R/R HL who have either already received or are considered ineligible for ASCT (NCT03138499). Disclosures Herrera: Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Moskowitz: Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Incyte: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding. Bartlett: Novartis: Research Funding; ImaginAB: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Vose: Merck: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Allos Therapeutics: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; US Biotest: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Ramchandren: Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; MERCK: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Feldman: AbbVie: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Kite Pharma: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. LaCasce: BMS: Consultancy; Forty Seven: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Ansell: Merck: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding. Moskowitz: Celgene: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Other: Ad Board, Research Funding; Genentech BioOncology: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding. Fenton: Seattle Genetics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ogden: Seattle Genetics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Taft: Seattle Genetics: Employment, Research Funding. Zhang: Seattle Genetics: Employment, Research Funding. Kato: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment, Equity Ownership; Seattle Genetic: Research Funding. Campbell: Seattle Genetics: Employment, Equity Ownership; CTI BioPharma: Employment, Equity Ownership. Advani: Agensys: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; FortySeven: Research Funding; Nanostring: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Kura: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Spectrum: Consultancy; Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Sutro: Consultancy.

Background: Axi-cel, an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy, is approved for treatment of adult pts with R/R LBCL after ≥ 2 lines of systemic therapy. In the pivotal ZUMA-1 study, axi-cel demonstrated durable responses and a largely manageable safety profile (Locke FL, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2019). ZUMA-9 (NCT03153462), a multicenter, open-label study, provided pts with R/R LBCL with expanded access to axi-cel until commercial availability (Cohort 1 [C1]) and later, if commercially manufactured product did not meet commercial release specification(s) (Cohort 2 [C2]). Safety and efficacy of axi-cel (C1 and C2) and translational analyses (C2) are presented. Methods: Eligible adults had histologically confirmed R/R LBCL, ECOG ≤ 1, and received prior CD20-targeting and an anthracycline-containing regimen. C2 pts must have had commercial OOS product. Pts underwent leukaphersis and conditioning chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2/day and fludarabine 30 mg/m2/day) for 3 days followed by a single axi-cel infusion (target dose, 2 × 106 CAR T cells/kg). C1 and C2 pts with high disease burden could receive bridging therapy before conditioning at investigator's discretion. Endpoints included frequency of adverse events (AEs), objective response rate (ORR) per standard-of-care imaging assessment, overall survival (OS) for C1 and C2, and blood CAR T cells levels and serum cytokines for C2 only. Outcomes were contextualized with the primary analysis of ZUMA-1 C1+2 (n = 101; ≥ 6 mo of follow-up; Neelapu SS, et al. NEJM. 2017). Results: As of 11/29/2019 (C1) and 3/15/2020 (C2), 25 C1 pts and 36 C2 pts received axi-cel with a median follow-up of 27.1 mo (range, 23.6 - 29.6) and 13.2 mo (range, 0.4 - 25.7), respectively. In C1, median age was 56 y (range, 28 - 76), 60% were male, 80% had DLBCL, 48%/0% had ECOG1/≥2, 44% had IPI ≥3, and 64% had ≥ 3 prior lines of therapy. In C2, median age was 61 y (range, 24 - 81), 75% were male, 78% had DLBCL, 58%/17% had ECOG 1/≥2, 56% had IPI ≥3, and 69% had ≥ 3 prior lines of therapy. In C2, 50% of pts had OOS product with low viability, 28% had high IFN-γ, 14% had low IFN-γ, 14% received a low dose, and 6% had high transduction ratio. The ORR was 76% (64% complete response [CR]) for C1, 53% (36% CR) for C2, and 82% (54% CR) for ZUMA-1 C1+2. Median OS was 23.8 mo (95% CI, 13.5 - NE) for C1 and not reached (95% CI, 3.4 - NE) for C2, respectively. ORR and OS were consistent in C2 OOS subgroups (Table). Grade ≥ 3 AEs were reported in 88% and 89% of C1 and C2 pts, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 CRS (Lee et al, Blood. 2014) was not observed in C1 but was reported in 3% of C2 pts (13% in ZUMA-1 C1+2). Grade ≥ 3 neurologic events (NEs) occurred in 36% and 19% of pts in C1 and C2, respectively, and 28% of pts in ZUMA-1 C1+2. No Grade 5 CRS or NEs occurred in C1 or C2. All CRS and NEs resolved in C1, and most CRS (29/30) and NEs (19/24) resolved in C2 as of the data cutoff. Of 3 Grade 5 AEs in C1, 2 were unrelated to axi-cel (clostridial sepsis [on Day (D) 6] and respiratory failure [on D212]) and 1 was related to conditioning (myelodysplastic syndrome [on D563]). Of 3 Grade 5 AEs in C2, 2 were unrelated to axi-cel (multiple organ dysfunction syndrome [on D6] and cardiac arrest [on D482]) and 1 was related to axi-cel (systemic mycosis [on D30]). Median peak CAR T cell levels and median CAR T cell expansion (area under the curve in the first 28 days) were lower in ZUMA-9 C2 (n = 32/36; 12 cells/µL [range, 0 - 442] and 112 cells/µL × days [range, 0 - 3413]) vs ZUMA-1 C1+2 (n = 96/101; 42 cells/µL [range, 1 - 1514] and 462 cells/µL × days [range, 5 - 14,329]). Serum IFN-γ levels peaked within 8 days after axi-cel infusion (median, 170 pg/mL [range, 8 - 1876]) and were lower vs ZUMA-1 C1+2 (median, 477 pg/mL [range, 8 - 8209]). Axi-cel in ZUMA-9 C2 contained fewer, less differentiated CCR7+ naïve and central memory T cells, and a greater proportion of more differentiated CCR7- effector memory and effector T cells vs ZUMA-1 C1+2. No cases of replication-competent retroviruses were reported in C1 or C2. Conclusion: Axi-cel treatment demonstrated a manageable safety profile and meaningful clinical benefit in this expanded access and OOS product study. While CAR T cell therapy showed clinical benefit in C2 (OOS product), the lower CR rate was corroborated by lower CAR T cell expansion and a more differentiated product vs ZUMA-1 C1+2, warranting further investigation. ZUMA-9 C2 is enrolling pts and evaluation is ongoing. Disclosures Jacobson: Precision Biosciences: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; AXIS: Speakers Bureau; Nkarta: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; Clinical Care Options: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; Lonza: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support. Locke:Calibr: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Wugen: Consultancy; GammaDelta Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Cellular Biomedicine Group: Other: Consultancy with grant options; Allogene: Consultancy. Miklos:Adaptive Biotech: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Juno-Celgene-Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Allogene Therapeutics Inc.: Research Funding; Miltenyi Biotec: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel support; Kite-Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, Research Funding. Vose:Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Allogene: Honoraria; Loxo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Miltenyi Biotec: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Epizyme: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria; Wugen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Roche/Genetech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other. Lin:Sorrento: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Research Funding; Vineti: Consultancy; Gamida Cells: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Legend BioTech: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Budde:Roche: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Mustang Therapeutics: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding. Maloney:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; A2 Biotherapeutics: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Patents & Royalties: Patents are pending, but not issued, licensed, no royalties, no licensees., Research Funding; Bioline Rx: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Jaglowski:Juno: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; CRISPR: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Riedell:MorphoSys: Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Perales:Celgene: Honoraria; MolMed: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Omeros: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bellicum: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Miltenyi Biotec: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Nektar Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cidara Therapeutics: Other; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Medigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; NexImmune: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kim:Gilead Sciences: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Kawashima:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Other: stock or other ownership . Yang:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Rossi:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Goyal:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Neelapu:Legend Biotech: Other; Allogene Therapeutics: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Cell Medica/Kuur: Other: personal fees; Incyte: Other: personal fees; Unum Therapeutics: Other, Research Funding; Adicet Bio: Other; Novartis: Other: personal fees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Merck: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Precision Biosciences: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Poseida: Research Funding; Calibr: Other; Acerta: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Patents & Royalties; Celgene: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Other: personal fees; Karus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; N/A: Other.

8569 Introduction: Relapsed or refractory MCL patients demonstrated a promising overall response rate (ORR) of 53% with a median duration of response (DR) of 13.7 months to single-agent lenalidomide when analyzed as a subset in a recent a phase II study (NHL-002). A supporting international phase II trial (NHL-003) of single-agent lenalidomide was initiated for patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive NHL. In this report, we analyze the current results from the MCL patients enrolled in this trial. Methods: Patients with relapsed or refractory MCL and measurable disease 2 cm after at least 1 prior treatment regimen were eligible. Patients received 25 mg of lenalidomide orally once daily on days 1–21 of every 28-day cycle. Patients continued therapy until disease progression or toxicity. The 1999 IWLRC methodology was used to assess response and progression. Results: Fifty-four MCL patients were enrolled and were evaluable for response assessment. Median age was 69 years (33–82) and 40 patients (74%) were male. Median time from diagnosis was 3.2 years (0.4–10.4), patients had received a median of 3 prior treatments (1–8), 17 of the patients (32%) had received prior bortezomib therapy (MCL-bortezomib), and 14 (26%) had received a prior stem cell transplant (MCL-stem cell). Response rates are shown in the Table. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (43%), thrombocytopenia (22%) and anemia (11%). Conclusions: This is the second study to demonstrate that lenalidomide oral monotherapy is effective in the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory MCL, with manageable side effects. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

e19504 Background: Patients with diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who are not cured with R-CHOP or high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell rescue have a dismal prognosis. A recent phase II trial (NHL-002) of lenalidomide in patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) demonstrated a 19% overall response rate (ORR) with a 7-month median duration of response (DR) in the subset of patients with DLBCL. A supporting international phase II trial (NHL-003) of single-agent lenalidomide was initiated for patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive NHL that had received at least one prior treatment and had measurable disease. Herein, we report the data from the DLBCL patients enrolled in this trial. Methods: Patients received 25 mg oral lenalidomide once daily on days 1–21 of every 28-day cycle and continued therapy until disease progression or toxicity. The 1999 IWLRC methodology was used to assess response and progression. Results: One hundred-three DLBCL patients were enrolled and were evaluable for response assessment. The median age was 66 years (21–87) and 70 patients (68%) were male. Median time from diagnosis was 2 years (0.4–18.6), patients had received a median of 3 prior treatment regimens (1–10) and 46 of the patients (45%) had received a prior stem cell transplant (DLBCL-stem cell). Response rates are shown in the Table . Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurring in more than 5% of patients were neutropenia (34%), thrombocytopenia (18%), asthenia (9%), anemia (8%), leucopenia (7%), back pain (6%) and dyspnea (6%). Conclusions: This international study demonstrates that lenalidomide is active in heavily pre-treated patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL and has manageable side effects. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

PURPOSE Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) is an autologous CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy approved for relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) on the basis of the single-arm phase II ZUMA-1 trial, which showed best overall and complete response rates in infused patients of 83% and 58%, respectively. We report clinical outcomes with axi-cel in the standard-of-care (SOC) setting for the approved indication. PATIENTS AND METHODS Data were collected retrospectively from all patients with relapsed/refractory LBCL who underwent leukapheresis as of September 30, 2018, at 17 US institutions with the intent to receive SOC axi-cel. Toxicities were graded and managed according to each institution’s guidelines. Responses were assessed as per Lugano 2014 classification. RESULTS Of 298 patients who underwent leukapheresis, 275 (92%) received axi-cel therapy. Compared with the registrational ZUMA-1 trial, 129 patients (43%) in this SOC study would not have met ZUMA-1 eligibility criteria because of comorbidities at the time of leukapheresis. Among the axi-cel–treated patients, grade ≥ 3 cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicity occurred in 7% and 31%, respectively. Nonrelapse mortality was 4.4%. Best overall and complete response rates in infused patients were 82% (95% CI, 77% to 86%) and 64% (95% CI, 58% to 69%), respectively. At a median follow-up of 12.9 months from the time of CAR T-cell infusion, median progression-free survival was 8.3 months (95% CI, 6.0 to15.1 months), and median overall survival was not reached. Patients with poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2-4 and elevated lactate dehydrogenase had shorter progression-free and overall survival on univariable and multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION The safety and efficacy of axi-cel in the SOC setting in patients with relapsed/refractory LBCL was comparable to the registrational ZUMA-1 trial.

Abstract Background: FL comprises one quarter of lymphoma in the United States, presents in a heterogeneous fashion, and generates substantial debate regarding optimal management strategies. The recently published clinical prognostic index (FLIPI, BLOOD104:1258) facilitates outcome evaluation and may guide therapeutic strategy. The National LymphoCare Study (NLCS) is an ongoing disease-based longitudinal observational study designed to assess patterns of initial disease presentation including prognosis, long term treatment choices, and clinical outcomes in FL patients. Methods: Beginning March, 2004, pts were recruited from U.S. community practices and academic centers. Pts with FL diagnosed within 6 months with no prior lymphoma history are eligible for enrollment. Collected data includes histology, staging and prognostic evaluation, serial management strategies including drug choices but not doses, response to treatment, and events including relapses and death. There is no study-specific prescribed treatment regimen or intervention. The treating physician determines management for FL according to clinical judgment. Results: 992 pts were enrolled from 207 sites through April, 2005. 182 community sites enrolled 86% of subjects. Pt characteristics include median age 62y, 52.5% female, 90.6% Caucasian, 40% Gr1, 26% Gr2, 19% Gr3, 13% NOS, with highest determined Ann Arbor stage = 17% I, 15%II, 26% III, 33%IV, 8% Unk. The demographic characteristics are similar to pts in the national SEER registry (median age 64, 51% F, 91.3% Caucasian) but clinical characteristics are notable for a higher fraction of advanced stage disease. 686/992 (69%) patients had calculable FLIPI scores based on initial investigator workup. Of factors contributing to FLIPI scores, LDH was collected by investigators in 78% of pts. When correlated with age, geography, and academic/community sites, LDH collection rates differ with 90% in academic sites vs 76% in community sites (p = .0002). Distribution of FLIPI among 686 pts with complete scores are shown in Table1, and show remarkable consistency across grades. Summary: The NLCS is an ongoing study with a large and rapidly growing database combining clinical and treatment data and is the first database investigating initial workup, prognosis, and outcomes of pts in a predominantly community based U.S. population. FL pts enrolled in NLCS are similar to those in the SEER database, and should be widely generalizable to the US population. FLIPI continues to define three distinct groups in the NLCS and is independent of histologic grade. Current evaluation patterns result in 31% incomplete FLIPI scores, suggesting this useful prognostic index is underutilized. FLIPI distribution (%) Low 36 37 37 38 34 81 14 Intermed 37 31 32 28 37 14 40 High 27 32 31 34 29 5 46 Solal Celigny n=1795 NLCS n=686 NLCS Gr1 n=276 NLCS Gr2 n=188 NLCS Gr3 n=136 Stage I/II n=234 Stage III/IV n=452

Abstract Two death receptors, TRAIL-R1 (DR4) and TRAIL-R2 (DR5), expressed in a wide variety of cancer cell types including lymphoma, enable TRAIL (TNF related apoptosis inducing ligand), a member of the TNF ligand superfamily, to induce apoptosis. HGS-ETR1 (TRM-1, mapatumumab) is a fully human monoclonal antibody agonistic to TRAIL-R1 with preclinical evidence of anti-tumor activity in vitro and in vivo. We conducted a phase 2 multicenter study of HGS-ETR1 in 40 subjects with relapsed or refractory NHL. Patients were included on the study if they had relapsed/refractory NHL of any histologic subtype, irrespective of the number of previous treatment regimens. HGS-ETR1 was administered at 2 dose levels: 3 mg/kg (8 subjects) or 10 mg/kg (32 subjects) every 21 days in the absence of disease progression or prohibitive toxicity for up to 6 cycles. The primary endpoint was tumor response evaluated with the International Working Group Criteria after every third treatment. Responses were confirmed between 4 and 8 weeks after initial documentation of response. Secondary endpoints included safety and tolerability. The median age of subjects was 62 years (range 32–81) (24M:16F) with an ECOG performance status 0–2. Subjects had received up to 12 previous therapeutic regimens (69% received 3 or more prior regimens). Original histologic classification is presently available for 34 subjects (14 follicular, 7 diffuse large B-cell, 6 mantle cell, 1 small lymphocytic, 2 peripheral T-cell, 1 anaplastic large cell, 3 lymphomas not classified). Preliminary response data are available for all 40 subjects. 3 subjects (8%), all with follicular lymphoma, had clinical responses (1CR, 2PR). Additionally, 12/40 subjects (30%) had stable disease, and the remainder had progressive disease at the time of first evaluation. 8 subjects (7 follicular) remain on study without disease progression for >5 to >13 months. One subject with a PR (special permission) has continued to receive HGS-ETR1 (10 cycles to date). Subjects tolerated therapy well with no subjects discontinuing therapy due to toxicity related to drug. There have been 10 reported SAEs, 2 of which were considered possibly/probably related to HGS-ETR1 administration (shingles, fever). In conclusion, HGS-ETR1 can be safely administered to heavily treated NHL patients. Clinical responses were seen in 3/14 follicular lymphoma subjects to date. Final data for all subjects will be reported at the meeting. These data suggest that HGS-ETR1 has activity in heavily pretreated lymphoma patients and further studies in combination with agents active in lymphoma are justified.

Abstract Introduction: Diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common of the non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL). Patients with DLBCL who are not cured by treatment with R-CHOP chemotherapy or high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell rescue have a poor prognosis. These patients reflect a clear unmet need in the treatment of DLBCL. A previous sub-analysis of a phase II trial (NHL-002) of lenalidomide in patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL, demonstrated a 19% overall response rate (ORR) with a 7-month median duration of response (DR). A confirmatory international phase II trial (NHL-003) of single-agent lenalidomide was initiated for patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive NHL that had received at least one prior treatment and had measurable disease. Herein, we report the data from the DLBCL patients enrolled in this trial. Methods: Patients received 25 mg oral lenalidomide once daily on days 1–21 of every 28-day cycle and continued therapy until disease progression or toxicity. The 1999 IWLRC methodology was used to assess response and progression. Results: This report focuses on the 73 DLBCL patients that were enrolled and evaluable for response assessment. The median age was 67 (21–87) years and 49 (67%) patients were male. Median time from diagnosis to lenalidomide treatment was 2 (0–18.6) years, and patients had received a median of 3 (1–6) prior treatment regimens. The ORR to lenalidomide was 29% (21/73), with 4% complete response (3/73) and 25% partial response (18/73). Eleven patients (15%) had stable disease. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (32%), thrombocytopenia (15%), asthenia (8%) and anemia (7%). Conclusion: These results of this international study confirm that lenalidomide is active in heavily pre-treated patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL with manageable side effects.