Smith, Scott E.

Abstract Although it is evident that standard-dose whole-brain radiotherapy as consolidation is associated with significant neurotoxicity, the optimal consolidative strategy for primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is not defined. We performed a randomized phase 2 clinical trial via the US Alliance cancer cooperative group to compare myeloablative consolidation supported by autologous stem cell transplantation with nonmyeloablative consolidation after induction therapy for PCNSL. To our knowledge, this is the first randomized trial to be initiated that eliminates whole-brain radiotherapy as a consolidative approach in newly diagnosed PCNSL. Patients aged 18 to 75 years were randomly assigned in a 1:1 manner to induction therapy (methotrexate, temozolomide, rituximab, and cytarabine) followed by consolidation with either thiotepa plus carmustine and autologous stem cell rescue vs induction followed by nonmyeloablative, infusional etoposide plus cytarabine. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). A total of 113 patients were randomized, and 108 (54 in each arm) were evaluable. More patients in the nonmyeloablative arm experienced progressive disease or death during induction (28% vs 11%; P = .05). Thirty-six patients received autologous stem cell transplant, and 34 received nonmyeloablative consolidation. The estimated 2-year PFS was higher in the myeloablative vs nonmyeloablative arm (73% vs 51%; P = .02). However, a planned secondary analysis, landmarked at start of the consolidation, revealed that the estimated 2-year PFS in those who completed consolidation therapy was not significantly different between the arms (86% vs 71%; P = .21). Both consolidative strategies yielded encouraging efficacy and similar toxicity profiles. This trial was registered at www.clininicals.gov as #NCT01511562.

Abstract Introduction: Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology A041202 is a NCI National Clinical Trials Network phase 3 study (NCT01886872) comparing BR (Arm 1) with ibrutinib (Arm 2) and the combination of ibrutinib plus rituximab (Arm 3) to determine whether ibrutinib-containing regimens are superior to chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) in terms of progression-free survival (PFS), and whether rituximab adds benefit to ibrutinib therapy. Initial results showed that ibrutinib-containing regimens had superior PFS to CIT, and that rituximab added to ibrutinib did not improve PFS over ibrutinib alone. Pts and Methods: Eligible pts on A041202 were those age ≥ 65 years with previously untreated, symptomatic CLL. Pts had a CrCl > 40 mL/min, bilirubin < 1.5 x ULN, and no significant life-limiting intercurrent illness or need for warfarin treatment. Pts were stratified on Rai stage, Zap-70 methylation performed centrally, and del(17)(p13.1) or del(11)(q22.3) by local interphase cytogenetics and were randomized 1:1:1 to each arm. Pts on Arm 1 who progressed could cross over to Arm 2. Here we present an updated analysis after the third planned interim analysis of Arms 2 and 3 versus Arm 1, and at the second planned interim analysis for Arms 3 vs 2. PFS and OS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and corresponding hazard ratios with p-values were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. These data encompass patient visits through April 2020 and were locked 15 February 2021. Results: Between 12/9/2013 and 5/16/2016, 547 pts were randomized (Arms 1: 183, 2: 182, and 3: 182). Baseline characteristics have previously been reported; briefly, median age was 71 years, 53% had unmethylated Zap-70, 61% were IGHV unmutated (performed in 66% of patients), 6% had del(17p) and 20% del(11q) by central FISH. Stimulated karyotype was performed centrally and revealed ≥ 3 abnormalities in 27%, and ≥ 5 in 11% of patients. With median follow-up of 55 months (mo), median PFS was 44 mo (95% CI 38-54) in Arm 1 and has not been reached in Arms 2 or 3 [Arm 2 vs 1 hazard ratio (HR): 0.36, 95% CI 0.26-0.52, p<0.0001; Arm 3 vs 1 HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.25-0.51, p<0.0001; Arms 3 vs 2 HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.66-1.48, p=0.96]. 48-month PFS estimates were 47%, 76% and 76% in Arms 1, 2, and 3 respectively (Figure 1). At this time, there are no significant differences in overall survival (OS) among arms (p=0.49). 48-month OS estimates were 84%, 85%, and 86% in Arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively (Figure 2). The benefit of ibrutinib regimens over CIT, with no additional benefit of rituximab when combined with ibrutinib, was consistent for all subgroups of patients defined by TP53 abnormalities, del(11q), complex karyotype, and IGHV (Figure 3). No significant interaction effects were observed between treatment arm and del(11q), complex karyotype, or IGHV. However, greater benefit of ibrutinib regimens over CIT was observed among patients with TP53 abnormalities than without (p<0.001). Thus in Arm 1, PFS was significantly worse for those with TP53 abnormalities vs without (HR 5.32, 95% CI 3.05-9.27, p<0.0001), but in Arms 2 and 3 combined, there was no significant difference in PFS by presence/absence of TP53 abnormalities (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.51-1.91, p=0.98). Notable adverse events with ibrutinib include atrial fibrillation or flutter (afib) and hypertension (HTN). All grade afib was seen in 11 pts on BR (6%) and 67 pts on ibrutinib (19%). All grade HTN was seen in 95 pts on BR (54%) and 263 pts on ibrutinib (73%). Conclusions: This update of the A041202 trial continues to show that ibrutinib regimens prolong PFS over BR for older patients with treatment-naïve CLL. With longer follow-up, these benefits continue to be seen across subgroups, including those associated with higher risk disease. Strikingly, within the ibrutinib arms, there does not appear to be inferior PFS for patients with abnormalities in TP53, the highest risk feature seen in CLL, and a predictor of inferior PFS with ibrutinib in relapsed CLL. This differentiates ibrutinib (and perhaps BTKi in general) from other targeted therapy paradigms for treatment-naïve CLL. Similar to prior studies, rates of afib and HTN continue to increase with time on therapy. These data support the use of ibrutinib as initial therapy in CLL, and strengthen the rationale for use of ibrutinib for high risk disease. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171, https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org, Pharmacyclics, Inc Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Woyach: Gilead Sciences Inc: Other: Data & Safety; AbbVie Inc, ArQule Inc, Janssen Biotech Inc, AstraZeneca, Beigene: Other: Advisory Committee; AbbVie Inc, Loxo Oncology Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly & Company: Research Funding; AbbVie Inc, ArQule Inc, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Janssen Biotech Inc, Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company,: Consultancy. Ruppert: Telios Pharma: Consultancy. Ding: Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; DTRM: Research Funding; Octapharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bartlett: ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Seagen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Autolus: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Brander: Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: Biosimilars outcomes research panel; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics/Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LOXO: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; NCCN: Other: panel member; ArQule/Merck: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; DTRM: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Ascentage: Research Funding; ArQule: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: informCLL registry steering committee, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Barr: Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Abbvie/Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Rogers: Pharmacyclics LLC: Consultancy; Innate Pharma: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Acerta Pharma: Consultancy; AbbVie Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; ovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Research Funding. Parikh: Pharmacyclics, MorphoSys, Janssen, AstraZeneca, TG Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, AbbVie, and Ascentage Pharma: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, AstraZeneca, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Verastem Oncology, and AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Coutre: Acerta: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Committee, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Beigene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Data Safety Monitoring Committee, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Larson: Epizyme: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; CVS/Caremark: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Rafael Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding. Erba: AbbVie Inc: Other: Independent review committee; AbbVie Inc; Agios Pharmaceuticals Inc; ALX Oncology; Amgen Inc; Daiichi Sankyo Inc; FORMA Therapeutics; Forty Seven Inc; Gilead Sciences Inc; GlycoMimetics Inc; ImmunoGen Inc; Jazz Pharmaceuticals Inc; MacroGenics Inc; Novartis; PTC Therapeutics: Research Funding; AbbVie Inc; Agios Pharmaceuticals Inc; Bristol Myers Squibb; Celgene, a Bristol Myers Squibb company; Incyte Corporation; Jazz Pharmaceuticals Inc; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie Inc; Agios Pharmaceuticals Inc; Astellas; Bristol Myers Squibb; Celgene, a Bristol Myers Squibb company; Daiichi Sankyo Inc; Genentech, a member of the Roche Group; GlycoMimetics Inc; Incyte Corporation; Jazz Pharmaceuticals Inc; Kura Oncology; Nov: Other: Advisory Committee. Litzow: Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Pluristem: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee. Blachly: INNATE: Consultancy, Honoraria; KITE: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria. Owen: Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Abramson: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; C4 Therapeutics: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; EMD Serono: Consultancy; Genmab: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Kymera: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy; Allogene Therapeutics: Consultancy; Seagen Inc.: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy. Brown: Abbvie, Acerta/Astra-Zeneca, Beigene, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Juno/Celgene, Catapult, Eli Lilly, Genentech/Roche, Janssen, MEI Pharma, Morphosys AG, Nextcea, Novartis, Pfizer, Rigel: Consultancy; Invectys: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Committee Service; Gilead, Loxo/Lilly, SecuraBio, Sun, TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Stone: Onconova: Consultancy; Syntrix/ACI: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syndax: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Elevate Bio: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boston Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Arog: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gemoab: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Innate: Consultancy; BerGen Bio: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Foghorn Therapeutics: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Actinium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aprea: Consultancy; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Macrogenics: Consultancy. Byrd: Novartis, Trillium, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Pharmacyclics, Syndax: Consultancy, Honoraria; Vincerx Pharmaceuticals: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Newave: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

e20004 Background: IB is a Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitor that showed superior progression-free survival compared with BR in CLL patients (pts) 65 years or older in a randomized phase 3 trial (Woyach et al, NEJM 2018). Pts receiving IB had higher rates of atrial fibrillation (AFIB) and hypertension (HTN); BR pts had higher rates of hematologic toxicity. Differences in treatment duration for BR (6 cycles) and IB (until progression) complicated adverse event (AE) comparisons. Here we use an exploratory approach to compare toxicity burden between arms and provide assessment of AFIB, HTN and infections (INF). Methods: AEs were reported for each of cycles 1-6 and then every 3 cycles until progression or nonprotocol CLL therapy. Only grade (gr) 3-4 AEs were reported thereafter until death. A simple global AE score was calculated for each pt by summing grades of all gr 1-4 AEs and dividing by the number of cycles over which AEs were submitted. Results: 537 pts began therapy (176 BR, 361 IB). 68% on BR completed all 6 cycles. At a median follow-up of 38 months, 64% remained on IB. Treatment discontinuation for AE occurred in 10% and 14% of BR and IB pts. Overall, median AE score was 1.8 (interquartile range (IQR) 0.9-3.3) and 3.8 (IQR 2.3-5.9) in BR and IB arms (p < 0.01). For cycles 1-6, median AE score was 6.2 (IQR 3.8-9.0) and 4.8 (IQR 3.0-7.2) in BR and IB arms (p < 0.01). In the IB arm, median AE score post 6 cycles decreased significantly to 3.4 (IQR 1.9-5.6) (p < 0.01). Gr 3 or higher cumulative rates of AFIB, HTN, and INF over time appear in the table. 100 pts (26/176 BR, 74/361 IB) had 137 severe INF (39% respiratory: 16 BR, 37 IB; 25% skin: 3 BR, 31 IB; 12% GU: 3 BR, 13 IB; 25% other: 12 BR, 22 IB). There were 7 gr 5 INF (3 BR, 4 IB), none confirmed fungal. Conclusions: There was no difference in treatment discontinuation rates for AE. Overall toxicity burden was significantly higher for IB, although IB toxicity burden decreased after 6 cycles. Toxicity burden was significantly higher in cycles 1-6 for pts receiving BR. Risk of severe AFIB, HTN, and INF is highest in the first year of IB. A simple AE score provides valuable information, especially when evaluating regimens of varying length. Clinical trial information: NCT01886872 . Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org ; Pharmacyclics; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01886872. [Table: see text]

Abstract Introduction DLBCL is the most common lymphoid neoplasm in adults (Swerdlow 2016). While durable CRs are achieved in approximately 70% of patients (pts) with frontline RCHOP therapy (Pfreundschuh 2008), pts with high-risk features often experience disease resistance or relapse. In Part 1 of an ongoing study, pts with high-intermediate or high risk DLBCL by international prognostic index (IPI) scores, regardless of CD30 expression by IHC, were treated with 1.2 or 1.8 mg/kg brentuximab vedotin (BV) combined with RCHOP. After 3 of the first 10 pts treated at 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHOP developed Grade 3 peripheral neuropathy (per Standardized MedDRA Query [SMQ]), all pts enrolled subsequently received treatment with 1.2 mg/kg BV+RCHOP. Following completion of enrollment in Part 1, the protocol was amended to enroll a non-randomized portion of the study (Part 2) evaluating the safety and efficacy of 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHP (Yasenchak 2015), followed by an open-label, randomized portion comparing BV+RCHP to RCHOP (Part 3). Initial results from Part 2 and updated results from Part 1 are reported here. Methods For Part 2 of the study, pts with CD30-expressing high-intermediate and high-risk DLBCL were treated with up to 6 cycles of 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHP (NCT01925612). Key inclusion criteria were CD30 expression by IHC performed by a local pathology lab and standard IPI scores of 3-5 or age-adjusted IPI (aaIPI) scores of 2-3 (high-intermediate/high risk). CD30 expression was confirmed by a central pathology lab, although CD30 expression by local pathology lab was required for eligibility. Disease response was evaluated with PET/CT per Cheson 2007. Results At the time of analysis for this ongoing study, 11 pts in Part 2 were treated with BV+RCHP (7 male, 4 female; 22-78 yrs). Of these pts, 9 had high-intermediate risk (IPI 3, aaIPI 2) and 2 had high risk disease (IPI 4-5, aaIPI 3), 6 had Stage IV disease, and 6 had an ECOG score of 2. At the end of treatment, the overall response rate was 91% (9 CR, 1 PR); 1 pt had PD after Cycle 4. The most frequent (>20%) treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were alopecia and nausea (73% each); fatigue (64%); constipation and peripheral sensory neuropathy (55% each); neutropenia and throat irritation (36% each); and chills, diarrhea, headache, and stomatitis (27% each). Grade 3 or 4 AEs occurred in 8 pts and 5 pts had serious AEs, which included febrile neutropenia, bacteremia, nausea, pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, and vomiting. Peripheral sensory neuropathy occurred in 6 pts and all were Grade 1 or 2 events; no peripheral motor neuropathy AEs were reported. No AEs were fatal or led to discontinuation. One pt discontinued treatment after Cycle 4 due to disease progression. For the first 51 pts in Part 1, the progression-free survival (PFS) at 18 months for pts with CD30 expression (25 pts) or without detectable CD30 expression (24 pts) by IHC was 79% (95% CI: 57%, 91%) versus 58% (95% CI: 36%, 75%), respectively. Overall survival for pts was 92% (95% CI: 71%, 98%) versus 71% (95% CI: 48%, 85%), respectively. Ten pts had pre-existing peripheral neuropathy (per SMQ) at study entry. Treatment-emergent peripheral neuropathy (per SMQ) was observed in 75% of pts (38/51) who received BV+RCHOP; 55% of these pts (21/38) had resolution of all or some peripheral neuropathy events. Conclusions 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHP is active as frontline treatment in CD30-expressing, high-intermediate/high risk DLBCL. When combined with RCHP, 1.8 mg/kg BV appears to be well-tolerated. The PFS and OS for pts with CD30-expression who received BV+RCHOP appear promising. The study is currently ongoing in pts with CD30-expressing high-intermediate/high risk DLBCL to assess the safety and activity of 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHP versus standard RCHOP. Disclosures Halwani: Bristol Myers-Squibb: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Miragen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Amgen: Research Funding. Yasenchak:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Farber:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Burke:Pfizer: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Other: Travel Expenses; Millenium: Consultancy. Fayad:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Holkova:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Knapp:Insys Therapeutics, Inc.: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding. Kolibaba:Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; janssen: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding. Patel-Donnelly:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Yimer:Ariad Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Biotheranostics: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Equity Ownership; Kite Pharma: Equity Ownership; Clovis Oncology: Equity Ownership; Juno Therpeutics: Equity Ownership; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Smith:Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Levy:Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Seetharam:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Belada:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Brooks:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Kingsley:Gilead: Equity Ownership; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Equity Ownership. Wagner-Johnston:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Ruffner:Forma Therapeutics: Consultancy; Sydnax: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Employment, Equity Ownership; Array Biopharma: Employment; Medivation: Employment. Bartlett:Gilead: Consultancy.

Abstract Introduction: The most effective initial therapy for older adults with CLL has not yet been established due to the lack of comparison of chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) and targeted therapy with the Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase (BTK) inhibitor ibrutinib. CIT has been the gold standard since studies showing that addition of CD20 antibody to chemotherapy prolongs survival. Bendamustine plus rituximab (BR) is one standard, more aggressive CIT regimen for patients (pts) age 65 or older. While ibrutinib has been FDA approved for untreated CLL since 2016, it has only been compared to chlorambucil, which is relatively ineffective, and never before to aggressive CIT. Additionally, the benefit of the addition of rituximab to ibrutinib in this setting has not been prospectively studied in a phase 3 trial. As part of a randomized phase 3 trial, the Alliance sought to answer these important clinical questions. Pts and Methods: Alliance A041202 is a multicenter NCI National Clinical Trials Network phase 3 study comparing BR (Arm 1) with ibrutinib (Arm 2) and the combination of ibrutinib plus rituximab (Arm 3) to determine whether ibrutinib-containing regimens are superior to CIT in terms of PFS. Additionally, this study sought to determine if adding rituximab to ibrutinib would prolong PFS over ibrutinib alone. At time of progression, pts on Arm 1 could cross over to Arm 2. Eligible pts were those age ≥ 65 years with previously untreated, symptomatic CLL. Pts had a CrCl ≥ 40 mL/min, bilirubin ≤ 1.5 x ULN, and no significant life-limiting intercurrent illness or need for warfarin treatment. Pts were stratified based upon Rai stage, Zap-70 methylation performed centrally, and del(17)(p13.1) or del(11)(q22.3) by local interphase cytogenetics and were randomized 1:1:1 to each arm. With 166 pts per arm, the trial was powered to detect an improvement in 2-year PFS from 61% in Arm 1 to 75% in Arms 2 or 3 (HR=0.586) using two one-sided log-rank tests with type I error rate of 2.5% and 90% power. The Alliance Data and Safety Monitoring Board approved the data release after meeting the protocol-defined efficacy threshold at a planned interim analysis with a one-sided critical value of 0.001538. These data were locked July 2, 2018; updated results will be presented at the meeting. Results: Between 12/9/2013 and 5/16/2016, 547 pts were registered and randomized (Arms 1: 183, 2: 182, and 3: 182). Median age was 71 years and 67% of pts were men. High-risk Rai stage (stage III/IV) was seen in 54%, unmethylated Zap-70 in 53%, and del(17p) or del(11q) by local FISH in 28%. Local vs centralized FISH was performed for del(11q) and del(17p) with agreement between local and central results in 94% (Kappa=0.80) and 97% (Kappa=0.76) of pts, respectively. 525 (96%) pts were eligible and included in the primary PFS analysis (Arms 1: 176, 2: 178, and 3: 171). With median follow-up of 32 months (mo), median PFS was 41 mo in Arm 1 and has not been reached in Arms 2 or 3 (HR comparing Arm 2 to 1 is 0.40 with one-sided p&lt;0.0001; HR comparing Arm 3 to 1 is 0.41 with one-sided p&lt;0.0001; HR comparing Arm 3 to 2 is 1.01 with one-sided p=0.48). 2-year PFS estimates were 74%, 87% in 2, and 88% in Arms 1, 2, and 3 respectively. At this time, there are no significant differences in overall survival (OS) among arms (p=0.87), median OS has not been reached for any arm, and 2-year OS estimates were 95%, 90%, and 94% in Arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Adverse events (AEs) were compared among arms using Fisher's exact tests. Grade 3+ treatment-emergent AEs were seen in 428 of 537 evaluable pts with 61%, 41%, and 38% of pts experiencing Grade 3+ heme AEs (p&lt;0.0001) and 60%, 72%, and 71% of pts experiencing Grade 3+ non-heme AEs (p=0.03) in Arms 1, 2, and 3 respectively. Grade 5 AEs were seen in 5 (2.8%), 14 (7.8%), and 14 (7.7%) pts (p=0.07). Unexplained or unwitnessed death over the entire observation period was seen in 2 (1.1%), 7 (3.9%), and 4 (2.2%) pts (p=0.24) in Arms 1, 2, and 3 respectively. Conclusions: This international phase 3 trial demonstrates that ibrutinib produces superior PFS to standard CIT in older pts with CLL and justifies it as a standard of care treatment for pts age 65 and older. The addition of rituximab does not prolong PFS with ibrutinib. While ibrutinib represents a major therapeutic advance, toxicities and also cost justify future efforts to reduce the need for long-term continuous treatment. Support: K23CA178183, R01CA183444, U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171, Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01886872 Figure. Figure. Disclosures Ding: Merck: Research Funding. Bartlett:Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; ImaginAB: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: 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; Acerta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding. Brander:BeiGene: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: DSMB; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Teva: Consultancy, Honoraria; Acerta: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; DTRM: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding. Barr:AbbVie, Gilead: Consultancy. Parikh:Gilead: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Coutre:Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lozanski:Novartis: Research Funding; BI: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Stem Line: Research Funding; Coulter: Research Funding; Beckman: Research Funding. Larson:Ariad/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; BristolMyers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Erba:Amgen: Research Funding; Juno: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; MacroGenics: Consultancy; Juno: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Juno: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; MacroGenics: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda/Millenium: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda/Millenium: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; MacroGenics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Astellas: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Other: Chair, Data and Safety Monitoring Committee; MacroGenics: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: grant; Astellas: Research Funding; Juno: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Astellas: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: grant; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: grant; Astellas: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Immunogen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Immunogen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Other: Chair, Data and Safety Monitoring Committee; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: grant; Jazz: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Immunogen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Immunogen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda/Millenium: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Other: Chair, Data and Safety Monitoring Committee; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda/Millenium: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Other: Chair, Data and Safety Monitoring Committee. Owen:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria; Teva: Honoraria. Abramson:Bayer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Humanigen: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy.

Abstract Dasatinib with corticosteroid yields high complete remission (CR) rates in Ph+ ALL with minimal induction death. Optimal post-remission therapy is not known. We report a prospective study evaluating dasatinib/dexamethasone induction then consolidation with reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT), autologous HCT (autoHCT), or chemotherapy alone (chemo), followed by dasatinib-based maintenance. Methods: We conducted a phase II, 3-arm, non-randomized trial (NCT01256398, Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U10CA180861, U24CA196171) at 17 US centers with primary objectives to determine 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of adults ≥18 years (yrs) old with untreated Ph+ ALL treated with dasatinib/dexamethasone induction, CNS prophylaxis with systemic and intrathecal methotrexate, consolidation with alloHCT, autoHCT, or chemo, then dasatinib maintenance. Induction (Course I) used dasatinib 140 mg orally daily and dexamethasone 10 mg/m2/day orally or IV days 1-7. If ≤20% lymphoblasts in marrow at Day 15, Course II continued dasatinib with 7 days of dexamethasone. If >20% lymphoblasts, patients (pts) also received vincristine and daunorubicin. Pts not in CR/CRi received a second induction (Course III) with dasatinib, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, daunorubicin, and dexamethasone. CNS prophylaxis (Course IV) used dasatinib, IV vincristine and IV, oral, and intrathecal methotrexate. Course V consisted of HCT or chemo. Pts 18-70 yrs old underwent RIC alloHCT if they had a HLA-matched donor; otherwise they underwent autoHCT. AlloHCT conditioning used fludarabine 30 mg/m2/day IV day -7 through -3, alemtuzumab 20 mg/day IV day -7 through -3, and melphalan 140 mg/m2 IV once on day -2. GVHD prophylaxis with tacrolimus began day -2. Pts undergoing autoHCT received etoposide 10 mg/kg/day (age >65, 5 mg/kg/day) CIV for 4 days and cytarabine 2 g/m2 (age >65, 1 g/m2) IV every 12 hours for 8 doses then G-CSF for mobilization. AutoHCT conditioning was melphalan 100 mg/m2/day IV on days -2 and -1. Pts >70 yrs old or unable to undergo HCT received etoposide/cytarabine alone. Dasatinib maintenance (Course VI) began day 30 of Course V and continued for 12 months and until 2 consecutive negative BCR-ABL1 RT-PCR assays 3 months apart or relapse. BCR-ABL1 isoform and ABL1 kinase domain (KD) mutation determination were done locally. Results: From 12/15/2010 to 11/14/2014, 64 eligible pts enrolled. Median age was 60 yrs (22-87); median WBC 23.2 x 103/μl (0.3-454). The dominant BCR-ABL1 isoform was p190 in 59%, p210 in 17%, and not reported in 23%. The CR rate was 97% with no induction deaths. Fifty-five pts completed CNS prophylaxis (Course IV). Twenty pts underwent protocol-specified alloHCT, 7 autoHCT, and 9 chemo. Nine pts underwent off-study alloHCT and 5 skipped Course V. Dasatinib maintenance was tolerable with 72%, 80%, and 80% receiving >50% of planned maintenance doses in alloHCT, autoHCT, and chemo arms, respectively. With a median follow up of 48 months (37-78) for survivors, 3-yr OS and DFS were 55% (median OS 45 months) and 43% (median DFS 30 months), respectively. For pts undergoing consolidation with protocol-specified alloHCT, autoHCT, or chemo, 3-yr OS was 75%, 71%, and 55% respectively with median OS not reached (NR) for all groups. DFS at 3-yrs was 55%, 43%, and 46% respectively. Median DFS for alloHCT was 42 months vs 15 months for autoHCT and 34 months for chemo (Log-Rank P=0.4). Outcomes were similar with inclusion of off-study alloHCT and chemo patients skipping Course V. Relative to p190 BCR-ABL1 isoform, p210 was associated with shorter median OS (NR vs 16 months, P=0.04) and median DFS (35 months vs 10 months, P<0.0001). Three-year DFS was 9% with p210. Relapse occurred in 23 pts with 5 CNS relapses reported, one isolated. Relapse occurred in 25% of alloHCT, 43% of autoHCT, and 37% of chemo pts. T315I mutation in ABL1 KD was detected in 6 of 8 marrow relapses (75%). One isolated CNS relapse had no ABL1 KD mutations. Conclusions: Dasatinib and dexamethasone followed by alloHCT, autoHCT, or chemo yield similar 3-yr survival comparable to approaches using intensive induction chemotherapy. Pts with the p210 BCR-ABL1 isoform had dismal outcomes and may benefit from alternate approaches. T315I mutation was the major cause of relapse and should be addressed in future studies. Disclosures Wieduwilt: Amgen: Research Funding; Reata Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership; Daiichi Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Leadiant: Research Funding; Shire: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Uy:GlycoMimetics: Consultancy; Curis: Consultancy. Powell:Rafael Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kolitz:Magellan Health: Consultancy, Honoraria. Liedtke:Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen/Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; celgene: Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Prothena: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BlueBirdBio: Research Funding. Stock:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Devine:Kiadis Pharma: Consultancy. Larson:BristolMyers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 2778 Introduction: Lenalidomide is approved for the treatment of del(5q) MDS in US and Japan. In Low to Intermediate-1 (Int-1) risk non-del(5q) MDS, lenalidomide treatment is less effective with a lower response rate (25%) and shorter response duration [Raza A. et al, Blood, 2008.111,1]. Ezatiostat, a glutathione S-transferase P1-1 (GST P1-1) inhibitor, activates Jun kinase, promoting the growth and maturation of hematopoietic progenitors while inducing apoptosis in malignant cells. Based on the novel mechanism of action, response rates, non-overlapping toxicities, and tolerability observed in a single agent ezatiostat Phase 2 study in MDS, a study of the combination of ezatiostat and lenalidomide was conducted to determine the safety and efficacy of ezatiostat with lenalidomide in non-del(5q) Low to Int-1 risk MDS. Methods: In this multicenter Phase 1 dose-ranging study, ezatiostat was given at a starting dose of 2000 mg in combination with lenalidomide at 10 mg, days 1–21 of a 28-day cycle. In stage 1, 3–6 patients in a standard 3+3 design were treated before escalation to the ezatiostat/lenalidomide 2500/10 mg dose level. Treatment was given until lack of MDS response or unacceptable toxicity. Hematologic improvement-erythroid (HI-E) rates were determined by the MDS International Working Group (IWG; 2006) criteria. Results: Eighteen pts (median age 73 yrs; range 57–82; 72% male), with World Health Organization classifications: 4 refractory anemia (RA), 2 RA with excess blasts-1, 4 refractory cytopenia with multilineage dysplasia (RCMD), 5 RCMD with ring sideroblasts, 2 MDS-unclassified, 1 MDS/myeloproliferative disorder-U were enrolled. Thirteen pts (72%) were Int-1 risk, 5 (28%) Low risk; 4 pts (22%) had abnormal cytogenetics. Twelve RBC transfusion-dependent pts (67%) required a median of 6 units (range 4–10)/8-weeks. Two pts (11%) were platelet transfusion dependent. A total of 67 treatment cycles were given (median 3.5 cycles/pt [range 1–11]) and only 6 cycles (9%) required dose reductions and 8 (12%) dose delays. Two of 6 pts reported DLTs (Grade 3 diarrhea and Grade 3 rash) at 2500/10 mg, with 9 additional pts receiving the recommended combination dose of 2000/10 mg. Eleven of 18 pts were evaluable (4 at 2500/10 mg and 7 at 2000/10 mg), and 3 pts are still on therapy with insufficient treatment duration to be evaluable. The HI-E rate was 43% (3/7; 95% CI, 10%–82%) for pts at the recommended 2000/10 mg dose and 6 pts are continuing therapy at the time of analysis. Three of 8 (38%; 95% CI, 9%–76%) RBC transfusion-dependent evaluable pts achieved transfusion independence including 1 responder who did not respond to prior lenalidomide. In responders, the median increase in hemoglobin level was 3.4 g/dL (from 7.9 g/dL). In 2 of 4 thrombocytopenic pts, a HI-platelet (HI-P) response was observed. A bilineage (HI-E and HI-P) response in 2 of 4 pts with anemia and thrombocytopenia was reported. One RBC and platelet transfusion-dependent pt who had a poor response to prior anti-thymocyte globulin treatment achieved complete RBC and platelet transfusion independence. The combination was generally well tolerated with no unexpected toxicities. Most common treatment-related non-hematologic adverse events (AEs) were Grades 1 and 2 including: fatigue (6%, 28%), swelling (0%, 11%), anorexia (11%, 6%), rash (0%, 6%), skin odor (11%, 6%), nausea (39%, 11%), diarrhea (22%,17%), vomiting (28%,17%), upper abdominal pain (5.6%, 5.6%), and constipation (11%, 0%). Grade 3 events were rash (11%), nausea (6%), diarrhea (17%), and vomiting (6%). Most common hematologic-related AEs were Grades 1 and 2 thrombocytopenia (11%, 6%) and neutropenia (0%, 11%). Grade 3–4 AEs were thrombocytopenia (11%, 17%), neutropenia (17%, 11%), anemia (6%, 6%), and febrile neutropenia (11%, 0%). Conclusions: Ezatiostat is the first GST P1-1 inhibitor to cause clinically significant reductions in RBC and platelet transfusions, including RBC and platelet transfusion independence. Since ezatiostat is non-myelosuppressive, it is a good candidate for combination with lenalidomide and in this study, the combination was well tolerated. Interestingly, ezatiostat may also have the potential to enhance lenalidomide's efficacy. The recommended doses of this combination regimen for future studies is the ezatiostat/lenalidomide 2000/10 mg. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Lenalidomide was used off-label in patients with non-del5q MDS. Mulford:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Brown:Telik, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Meng:Telik, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lyons:Incyte: Research Funding; Telik: Research Funding; Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Sekeres:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Mesa:NS Pharma: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; SBio: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 283 Background: Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is characterized by the presence of CD30-positive Hodgkin Reed-Sternberg cells. The antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) brentuximab vedotin (SGN-35) delivers the highly potent antimicrotubule agent monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE) to CD30-positive malignant cells by binding specifically to CD30 on the cell surface and releasing MMAE inside the cell via lysosomal degradation. Binding of MMAE to tubulin disrupts the microtubule network within the cell, induces cell cycle arrest, and results in apoptotic death of the CD30-expressing tumor cell. In a previous phase 1 study with brentuximab vedotin dosing every third week, 11 of 12 patients (92%) treated at the maximum tolerated dose of 1.8 mg/kg had tumor reductions and 6 of 12 patients (50%) achieved an objective response (complete remission [CR] + partial remission [PR]). Methods: A pivotal, phase 2, single-arm, multicenter study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of brentuximab vedotin in patients with relapsed or refractory HL post autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Brentuximab vedotin 1.8 mg/kg was administered every 3 weeks as a 30-minute outpatient IV infusion for up to 16 cycles of treatment. The primary endpoint was the overall objective response rate (ORR) as assessed by an independent review facility according to the Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma (Cheson 2007). Results: A total of 102 patients with relapsed or refractory HL were treated at 26 study centers. Median age was 31 years (range 15–77) and approximately half of the patients were female (53%). Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status at baseline was 0 (41%) or 1 (59%). All patients had previously received an ASCT and the median number of prior chemotherapy regimens was 4 (range 1–13). More than 70% of the patients had primary refractory disease, defined as failure to achieve a CR or progression within 3 months of completing frontline therapy. In addition, 39% of patients had lymphoma that was refractory to the most recent salvage therapy excluding ASCT. The median duration of brentuximab vedotin treatment on this study was 27 weeks (range 3–54) and the median number of cycles was 9 (range 1–16). The most common (>15%) treatment-related adverse events (AEs) of any grade were peripheral sensory neuropathy (43%), fatigue (40%), nausea (35%), neutropenia (19%), diarrhea (18%), and pyrexia (16%); most events were Grade 1 or 2. Grade 3 treatment-related AEs reported in >1 patient were neutropenia (14%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (5%), thrombocytopenia and hyperglycemia (3% each), and fatigue (2%). The only Grade 4 treatment-related events were neutropenia (4%), and thrombocytopenia, abdominal pain, and pulmonary embolism (1% each). No related Grade 5 events were observed. 18 patients discontinued treatment due to an AE. Consistent with findings from the phase 1 study, 97 patients (95%) had a reduction in tumor size per investigator assessment. Of the 35 patients who had B symptoms at baseline, 29 (83%) experienced resolution of these symptoms. The median time to B symptom resolution was 3 weeks (range <1–16 weeks). To date, 5 patients have received an allogeneic stem cell transplant as their first therapy after discontinuing treatment in the study; all of these patients remain in follow up. Per protocol, no interim analyses were planned for the primary endpoint of ORR by independent review. Independent assessment of ORR is being conducted and final efficacy results will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: Brentuximab vedotin was associated with manageable adverse events and, based on investigator assessment, demonstrated encouraging activity in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed or refractory HL. Tumor shrinkage was observed in 95% of patients and the B symptom resolution rate was 83%. Final results of the independent assessment of ORR, as well as duration of response, progression-free survival, and updated safety data, will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: Chen: Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Off Label Use: This clinical trial uses the investigational drug, brentuximab vedotin (SGN-35). Gopal:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Smith:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Ansell:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Rosenblatt:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Klasa:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Connors:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Engert:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Larsen:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kennedy:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sievers:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Younes:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; SBIO: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Potent inhibitors of BCR-ABL1have improved remission results and altered post-remission therapy for Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Dasatinib plus dexamethasone followed by hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) promises high response rates, reduced toxicity, and durable remissions. Methods: We conducted a Phase II trial at 17 U.S. centers with the primary objective being to estimate the 3-year overall survival and disease-free survival of patients with Ph+ ALL treated with dasatinib and dexamethasone for remission induction and intensification, central nervous system (CNS) prophylaxis, consolidation with reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) allogeneic HCT, autologous HCT, or etoposide and cytarabine, and dasatinib-based maintenance. Eligible patients had untreated Ph+ ALL, were ≥18 years old, and had normal cardiac function. Induction (Course I) used dasatinib 140 mg oral daily and dexamethasone 10 mg/m2/day oral or intravenous (IV) days 1-7. For patients with ≤20% blasts in the Course I, Day 15 bone marrow biopsy, intensification (course II) continued daily dasatinib with another 7 days of dexamethasone. Those with >20% lymphoblasts also received vincristine (VCR) and daunorubicin (DNR). Patients (n=3) not in CR/CRi after Course II received a second induction (Course III) with dasatinib, cyclophosphamide, VCR, DNR, and dexamethasone. After Course II or III, CNS prophylaxis (Course IV) consisted of IV VCR and IV, oral, and intrathecal methotrexate (MTX). Dasatinib was restarted at serum [MTX] <0.05 microM. Course V consisted of HCT or chemotherapy. Patients aged 18-70 years with an HLA-matched donor underwent RIC allogeneic HCT; otherwise they underwent autologous HCT. Allogeneic HCT conditioning used fludarabine 30 mg/m2/day IV day -7 through -3, alemtuzumab 20 mg/day IV day -7 through -3, and melphalan 140 mg/m2 once on day -2. GVHD prophylaxis with tacrolimus began day -2. Patients undergoing autologous HCT received etoposide 10 mg/kg/day (age >65 years, 5 mg/kg/day) continuous IV for 4 days and cytarabine 2 g/m2 (age >65 years, 1 g/m2) IV every 12 hours for 8 doses (EA) then G-CSF for mobilization. Autologous HCT conditioning used melphalan 100 mg/m2/day on days -2 and -1. Patients >70 years or unable to undergo HCT received EA alone. Dasatinib maintenance (Course VI) began on day 30 of Course V and continued for 12 months and until 2 consecutively negative bone marrow BCR-ABL1RT-PCR assays 3 months apart or until relapse. Dasatinib levels were measured on day 15 of induction. Results: Sixty-six patients enrolled from 12/15/2010 to 11/14/2014; 65 received dasatinib and are evaluable. Median age was 60 years (22-87); 49% were male. Median presenting WBC count was 23.1 x 103/ul (0.3-453.6). No deaths occurred during induction or intensification. CR or CRi occurred 31 patients (48%) by Day 15 of induction and in 62 patients overall (95%; CR 86%). Median dasatinib levels in serum and CSF on Day 15 of induction were 30.3 ng/mL (<3-308) and 0.29 ng/mL (<0.2-1.37), respectively suggesting approximately 1% of plasma dasatinib penetrates into the CSF, less than the unbound fraction (6%). Fifty-four patients started Course IV, 38 Course V, and 37 Course VI. Fourteen patients continue on protocol therapy. Of 38 patients receiving Course V, 22 had allogeneic HCT, 6 had autologous HCT, and 10 had EA chemotherapy. Median age of allogeneic HCT recipients was 61 years (31-69). Robust autologous stem cell mobilization was observed [median CD34+ cell count, 90 x 106/kg (31-166, n=6)]. Dasatinib maintenance was feasible after allogeneic HCT, autologous HCT, and chemotherapy alone with no missed doses in 59%, 83%, and 63% of cycles, respectively. Ten patients have relapsed with one isolated CNS relapse. No relapses have occurred after allogeneic HCT with 3 relapses after autologous HCT and one after Course V EA alone. Median follow up for survivors is 22.8 months (longest, 51 months). There have been 23 deaths: 5 treatment-related (4 after allogeneic HCT, 1 after course V EA), 16 disease-related and 2 unrelated. Conclusions: Dasatinib with dexamethasone yields CR rates comparable to those reported with tyrosine kinase inhibitors combined with conventional chemotherapy. Post-remission therapy with reduced-intensity allogeneic HCT, autologous HCT, or chemotherapy followed by dasatinib maintenance is feasible. Survival follow up is maturing. Disclosures Stock: Sigma-Tau: Honoraria, Research Funding; Royalties for a chapter in Up to Date: Patents & Royalties; ADC Therapeutics: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria. Beumer:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Stone:Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Celator: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy; Jansen: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; ONO: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Xenetic Biosciences: Consultancy. Larson:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Classical Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is characterized by the presence of CD30-positive Hodgkin Reed-Sternberg cells. The standard of care for patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory (R/R) HL is salvage chemotherapy followed by high dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant (auto-SCT). Approximately 50% of these pts will experience relapse or progression of HL after auto-SCT. For these individuals, outcomes have historically been poor, with median overall survival (OS) from time of relapse ranging from 10.5 to 27.6 mos (Crump, 2008; Fanale, 2013). A pivotal phase 2 study evaluated brentuximab vedotin, a CD30-directed antibody-drug conjugate, in pts with R/R HL after auto-SCT (ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT00848926). Primary results and 3-year follow-up data have been previously reported (Younes, 2012; Gopal, 2015). Here, we summarize final data from the 5-year follow-up period. Methods: Pts received 1.8 mg/kg brentuximab vedotin once every 3 wks as a 30-min outpatient IV infusion for up to 16 cycles. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) per independent review according to the Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma (Cheson 2007). Assessments of response and durability of response per an independent review facility (IRF) have been previously reported. Following a protocol amendment that removed the requirement for routine CT scanning during the follow-up period, disease status was only assessed per the investigator. Survival and disease status were assessed every 3 mos for 2 yrs and then every 6 mos through Year 5. CT scans were required if progression was suspected clinically. At the time of the amendment, 18 patients were still being assessed for progression; these patients had been in long-term follow-up for a median of over 30 months. Results: The enrolled population of 102 pts (53% female) was heavily pretreated and had a median age of 31 yrs (range, 15-77 yrs). Pts received a median of 9 cycles (range, 1-16) of brentuximab vedotin. Per investigator, the ORR to brentuximab vedotin was 72% and complete remission (CR) rate was 33%. The most common treatment-related adverse events were peripheral sensory neuropathy, nausea, fatigue, neutropenia, and diarrhea. Adverse events of Grade 3 or higher that occurred in ≥5% of pts were neutropenia, peripheral sensory neuropathy, thrombocytopenia, and anemia. At study closure, which occurred approximately 5 yrs after the last patient's end-of-treatment visit, the median observation time for all enrolled patients from first dose was 35.1 mos (range, 1.8 to 72.9). The estimated 5-year overall survival rate was 41% (95% CI: 31 %, 51%) and the median OS was 40.5 mos (95% CI: 28.7, 61.9 [range, 1.8 to 72.9+]). Median OS by best clinical response was CR (n=34): median not reached; partial remission (PR, n=39): 39.4 mos; and stable disease (SD, n=28): 18.3 mos. The median PFS was 9.3 months overall, but was not reached in CR pts. Of the 102 enrolled patients, 15 remained in follow-up and in remission at study closure. Among these 15 pts, 6 received consolidative allo-SCT and 9 have received no further therapy since completing brentuximab vedotin. Conclusions: These end-of-study results demonstrate that single agent brentuximab vedotin can induce durable remissions and long-term survival in a subset of heavily pretreated patients with relapsed/refractory HL, particularly in pts that achieve CR. A randomized phase 3 study is being conducted to evaluate brentuximab vedotin in combination with AVD (doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine) versus ABVD (A, bleomycin, VD) for frontline treatment of advanced HL (ECHELON-1 trial, ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT01712490). Figure 1. Overall Survival Figure 1. Overall Survival Disclosures Chen: Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Gopal:BMS: Research Funding; Piramal: Research Funding; Emergent/Abbott: Research Funding; Millenium: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; BioMarin: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi-Aventis: Honoraria; Merck: Research Funding. Smith:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Ansell:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding. Rosenblatt:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Savage:Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria; Infinity: Honoraria; Roche: Other: Institutional research funding. Connors:Roche: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Engert:Takeda Millenium: Honoraria, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding. Larsen:Seattle Genetics Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Huebner:Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fong:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Younes:Janssen: Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte: Honoraria; Takeda Millenium: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Bristol Meyer Squibb: Honoraria; Curis: Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi-Aventis: Honoraria; Johnson and Johnson: Research Funding.