Nasta, Sunita

Abstract Introduction: Primary central nervous system T-cell lymphoma (PCNSTL) is a rare form of PCNSL, comprising 2–8% of cases. Prognostic factors remain undefined, and no standard treatment protocol currently exists. Prior studies have been limited by small sample sizes, incomplete molecular profiling, and poor representation of novel treatment modalities. In this study, we aimed to identify clinicopathologic factors associated with patient (pt) outcomes and delineate the spectrum of treatment regimens used to inform future clinical practice. Methods A multicenter retrospective study was conducted across 15 North American academic institutions. Pts aged ≥18 years with biopsy-confirmed PCNSTL between 2009 and 2025 with no evidence of systemic disease were included. Cases with CNS relapse of systemic T-cell lymphoma were excluded. Baseline characteristics were analyzed using independent t-tests, Fisher's exact tests, or Pearson's chi-square tests. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), evaluated by Kaplan–Meier, log-rank tests, and Cox regression. Results: Forty-two pts met inclusion criteria. Median age was 57 (range 19–77), 69% were male, and 79% were white. Most (69%) had ECOG 0–1. No patients had HIV, hepatitis B or C, or a history of solid organ transplant. LDH was elevated at diagnosis in 38%, and 24% had B-symptoms. Mean absolute lymphocyte count at diagnosis was 1.82/µL. The most common histologic subtypes were PTCL-NOS (76%), followed by ALK-negative ALCL (12%) and γδ T-cell lymphoma (5%). All patients had parenchymal brain lesions with 57% having multifocal disease. Additionally, CSF involvement was seen in 21%, vitreoretinal involvement in 3%, and deep brain involvement in 34%. Next-generation sequencing was performed in seven pts (17%), with disease-associated variants identified in three cases. Among these, two pts had mutations in TP53, and one had a mutation in DNMT3A. Cytogenetics were obtained in 7 pts with only one exhibiting a complex karyotype. Only one pt was EBV positive by EBER-ISH. Overall, 79% received HD-MTX-based therapy. First-line treatments were mainly HD-MTX alone (38%), HD-MTX + temozolomide (17%), or vincristine + procarbazine (12%). No patients were treated on clinical trials. Median treatment duration was 78 days and median number of treatment cycles was 4 (range 1–9 cycles). One patient received radiation alone; 5% received radiation with systemic therapy. A steroid pre-phase was used in 60%, with 44% exhibiting a clinical response. Overall response rate to first-line treatment was 63% (13 CR, 12 PR). Imaging alone was used in determining response in all patients. Repeated biopsy was not performed. Twelve patients (29%) underwent consolidative autologous transplant, most commonly with thiotepa/carmustine (TT/BCNU, 69%) or BEAM conditioning (25%). Median duration of follow-up was 10.4 months. Sixty-two percent of pts progressed during the study period, with 7% experiencing extra-CNS relapse. Median PFS was 8.2 months. Improved PFS was associated with >3 cycles of therapy (p=0.03) and transplant with TT/BCNU (p=0.0004). At last follow-up, 43% were in remission and 52% were deceased, mostly due to disease progression (77%). Median OS was 17.6 months. One- and two-year OS rates were 58% and 42%, respectively. OS was associated with Nottingham/Barcelona score <2 (p=0.02), >3 treatment cycles (p=0.0008), response to first-line therapy (p=0.0007), and TT/BCNU-based transplant (p=0.0001). IELSG, Taipei, and MSKCC risk scores were not significantly associated with survival, though IELSG approached significance (p=0.09). Discussion: This study is among the largest cohorts of PCNSTL pts compiled to date. PCNSTL remains rare and heterogenous. Treatment across centers largely mirrors management of B-cell PCNSL with high utilization of HD-MTX regimens and TT/BCNU conditioning autologous transplant. Survival outcomes within our cohort are consistent with those previously reported within the literature. Receipt of >3 cycles of therapy, TT/BCNU conditioning and Nottingham/Barcelona scores were associated with longer survival within our cohort. Limitations of our study include its retrospective design and heterogeneity within pt disease characteristics, treatments utilized and disease assessment intervals. Further exploration into pathophysiology and optimal management of this unique entity is needed.

Abstract Background: Despite the efficacy of covalent Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (cBTKi) in R/R MCL, patients (pts) ultimately discontinue treatment due to intolerance or development of resistance and disease relapse. Pirtobrutinib is a highly selective, non-covalent BTKi that inhibits BTK with low nM potency throughout the daily dosing interval. Pirtobrutinib was safe and effective in the phase 1/2 BRUIN study in pts with R/R B-cell malignancies, including those previously treated with a BTKi. Pirtobrutinib is approved in the EU for adults with R/R MCL after prior treatment with a BTKi (EMA Conditional Approval, Oct 2023), and in the USA for adults with R/R MCL after ≥ 2 lines of systemic therapy, including a BTKi (FDA Accelerated Approval, Jan 2023).Here, we report the final results from the phase 1/2 BRUIN study (NCT03740529), with a follow-up period of up to 5 yrs, focusing on the efficacy and safety of pirtobrutinib in all R/R MCL pts. Methods: Pts with R/R MCL who received ≥1 prior lines of therapy (including BTKi) were eligible for treatment with pirtobrutinib monotherapy. Key endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR) and progression-free survival (PFS), all assessed by independent review committee (IRC) per Lugano 2014 criteria (presented here) and investigator, overall survival (OS), and safety. Pts were included across the range of doses evaluated in dose escalation and expansion (25-300 mg/day). A data cutoff on 27 January 2025 was utilized, with a median study follow-up of 17.5 months (range, 0.5-69.6). Results: Among the 166 pts with R/R MCL, 153 (92%) received the pirtobrutinib approved dose of 200 mg/day, 152 (92%) had received prior cBTKi, of which 128 (84.2%) discontinued any prior cBTKi due to progressive disease (PD), and 15 (9.9%) due to toxicity. The cBTKi-pre-treated pts had a median age of 70 yrs (range, 46-88), 52% had intermediate-risk and 28.3% had high-risk sMIPI scores. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 3 (range 1-9), with most pts having received a prior anti-CD20 antibody (96.7%) and chemotherapy (90.1%). Additional prior therapies included hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (21.7%; 19.7% auto and 4.6% allo), BCL-2 inhibitor (15.8%), CAR-T cell therapy (8.6%). As of the data cutoff, 11 (7.2%) pts who received a prior cBTKi and 6 (42.9%) cBTKi naïve pts remained on treatment. The cBTKi pre-treated pts had an ORR of 49.3% (95% CI, 41.1-57.6), including 15.8% complete responses (CR) (n=24) and 33.6% partial responses (PR) (n=51). The 75 responding pretreated pts had a median DOR of 21.6 months (95% CI, 9.2-27.2) at a median follow-up of 24 months. The ORR among 128 pts who had discontinued any prior cBTKi due to PD and 15 pts who discontinued due to toxicity was 43.0% and 93.3%, respectively. The median PFS and OS for cBTKi pre-treated pts were 5.6 months (95% CI, 5.3-9.2) and 23.9 months (95% CI, 17.3-51.5), respectively. Fourteen pts (9.2%) were censored for PFS due to subsequent anticancer therapy without documented PD, including 8 pts who received CAR-T. The cBTKi naïve pts (n=14) had an ORR of 85.7% (95% CI, 57.2-98.2), including 50.0% CR (n=7) and 35.7% PR (n=5). The 12 responding naïve pts had a median DOR of 42.7 months (95% CI, 25.8-NE) at a median follow-up of 43 months. The median PFS and OS in the cBTKi naïve pts were 44.6 months (95% CI, 16.7-NE) and not reached (95% CI, 33.5-NE), respectively. Among all R/R MCL pts (n=166), the most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE), regardless of attribution, were fatigue (31.9%), diarrhea (22.9%), anemia (18.1%), and dyspnea (18.1%). The most common Grade ≥3 TEAE was neutropenia/neutrophil count decreased (13.3%), and the rate of Grade ≥3 infections was 21.1%. Grade ≥3 hemorrhage/hematoma (2.4%) and all-grade atrial fibrillation/flutter (3.6%) were infrequent. In total, 13 (7.8%) pts had a fatal TEAE, with 4 (2.4%) classified as infections. Overall, 8 pts (4.8%) had treatment-related AE leading to dose reductions, and 6 (3.6%) had treatment-related AE leading to pirtobrutinib discontinuation. Conclusion: Pirtobrutinib continues to demonstrate efficacy in pts with heavily pre-treated R/R MCL including both those who previously received a cBTKi and those who were BTKi-naïve. The safety profile of pirtobrutinib remained favorable with a low-rate of dose reductions/discontinuations due to drug-related toxicity. No new safety signals were identified after up to 5 yrs of follow-up.

Abstract Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) poses a challenge in hematology given its varied symptoms, and the complex interplay between disease and treatment effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The phase 3 POLARIX study demonstrated superior progression-free survival and a similar safety profile with polatuzumab vedotin plus rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (Pola-R-CHP) vs R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) in patients with previously untreated DLBCL. Here, we evaluate HRQoL through patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments to fully characterize the patient experience in the POLARIX study. Changes from baseline in HRQoL, lymphoma symptoms, and gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms were assessed, as well as incidence and severity of common symptoms by PROs vs clinician-reported adverse events (AEs). Baseline characteristics of PRO-evaluable patients (N = 874) were consistent. Comparison between PROs and clinician-reported AEs revealed a notable discordance; patients generally reported a higher incidence of symptoms than clinicians, emphasizing the need for patient-centric tools to accurately capture the patient experience. Both treatments exhibited rapid and sustained improvements in HRQoL and lymphoma symptoms, with the most substantial improvements seen in global health status/QoL, lymphoma symptoms, fatigue, role, emotional, and social functioning. GI symptoms (diarrhea, constipation, nausea, and vomiting) were generally similar between treatment arms and returned to baseline levels after treatment completion. These HRQoL data underscore the complementarity of PROs, as an adjunct to clinician-reported AEs, in evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of new treatments, including Pola-R-CHP, which may represent a new benchmark for patient-reported HRQoL in previously untreated DLBCL. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03274492.

Abstract Castleman disease (CD) describes a group of rare lymphoproliferative disorders that exhibit a wide range of symptomatology and degree of lymphadenopathy, particularly across the 2 forms of CD with unknown etiology, unicentric CD (UCD), and human herpesvirus-8–negative/idiopathic multicentric CD (iMCD). Whereas UCD cases typically present with localized lymphadenopathy and mild symptoms, iMCD involves multicentric lymphadenopathy and cytokine storm–driven symptoms with 3 recognized clinical phenotypes. Increasingly, there are anecdotal reports of cases that do not fit into this framework, but these cases have not been systematically described. Herein, we use the ACCELERATE natural history registry to characterize the spectrum of CD based on disease features, symptomatology, and severity. Our results characterize a cohort of 179 CD cases, which were reviewed and confirmed by an expert panel of clinicians and hematopathologists. We show that patients with CD present on a continuous spectrum of clinical phenotypes, and we describe oligocentric CD (OligoCD), an intermediate phenotype that does not fit the criteria for UCD or iMCD. These cases tend to have “oligocentric” lymphadenopathy (median [interquartile range] regions of lymphadenopathy, 3.0 [2.0-4.0]) in a regional pattern and exhibit a mild clinical phenotype that is more similar to UCD than iMCD. We also show that patients with OligoCD are inconsistently categorized as UCD vs iMCD, highlighting the need for this characterization. Future data collected through ACCELERATE may further elucidate the natural history and risk profile of these patients.

Abstract Little is known about risk factors for central nervous system (CNS) relapse in mature T-cell and natural killer cell neoplasms (MTNKNs). We aimed to describe the clinical epidemiology of CNS relapse in patients with MTNKN and developed the CNS relapse In T-cell lymphoma Index (CITI) to predict patients at the highest risk of CNS relapse. We reviewed data from 135 patients with MTNKN and CNS relapse from 19 North American institutions. After exclusion of leukemic and most cutaneous forms of MTNKNs, patients were pooled with non-CNS relapse control patients from a single institution to create a CNS relapse–enriched training set. Using a complete case analysis (n = 182), including 91 with CNS relapse, we applied a least absolute shrinkage and selection operator Cox regression model to select weighted clinicopathologic variables for the CITI score, which we validated in an external cohort from the Swedish Lymphoma Registry (n = 566). CNS relapse was most frequently observed in patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma, not otherwise specified (25%). Median time to CNS relapse and median overall survival after CNS relapse were 8.0 and 4.7 months, respectively. We calculated unique CITI risk scores for individual training set patients and stratified them into risk terciles. Validation set patients with low-risk (n = 158) and high-risk (n = 188) CITI scores had a 10-year cumulative risk of CNS relapse of 2.2% and 13.4%, respectively (hazard ratio, 5.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.50-18.26; P = .018). We developed an open-access web-based CITI calculator (https://redcap.link/citicalc) to provide an easy tool for clinical practice. The CITI score is a validated model to predict patients with MTNKN at the highest risk of developing CNS relapse.

Background: Despite the efficacy of covalent (c) Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi) in R/R MCL, disease relapse arises through evolution of resistance mechanisms or development of cBTKi intolerance. Pirtobrutinib, a highly selective, non-covalent (reversible) BTKi has favorable oral pharmacology that enables continuous BTK inhibition throughout the daily dosing interval regardless of the intrinsic rate of BTK turnover. Pirtobrutinib is the first BTKi to demonstrate durable efficacy following prior cBTKi therapy in heavily pre-treated R/R MCL and was well-tolerated with a low frequency of treatment discontinuation due to toxicity (Wang et al., JCO, 2023). Pirtobrutinib is approved in the USA to treat relapsed or refractory MCL after at least two lines of systemic therapy including a prior cBTKi. Here, we report updated results of pirtobrutinib therapy in all patients (pts), including those with biologically high-risk R/R MCL with a median survival follow-up of 24.2 months (range, 18.2-29.8). Methods: Pts with R/R MCL received pirtobrutinib monotherapy in the multicenter Phase 1/2 BRUIN trial (NCT03740529). Efficacy was assessed in all cBTKi pre-treated pts, as well as in cBTKi treatment-naïve pts. Key endpoints included overall response rate (ORR) as assessed by independent review committee per Lugano 2014 criteria, duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Pts were included across the dose escalation range and expansion (25-300 mg/day) with 93% (n=141) receiving at least one dose of 200 mg/day, the FDA-approved dose. A data cut of 05 May 2023 was utilized. Results: Among all 152 pts with R/R MCL who received a prior cBTKi, the median age was 70 years (range, 46-88), and 52% had intermediate-risk and 28.3% had high-risk sMIPI scores. Median prior lines of therapy were 3 (range, 1-9), including an anti-CD20 antibody (96.7%), chemotherapy (90.1%), immunomodulator (17.1%), stem cell transplant (21.7%), BCL-2 inhibitor (15.8%), CAR-T cell therapy (8.6%), and PI3K inhibitor (3.9%). Among pts with high-risk biomarker data available, 30/60 (50%) had TP53 mutations and 45/63 (71%) had a Ki-67 index of ≥30%. The ORR for cBTKi pre-treated pts was 49.3% (95% CI, 41.1-57.6), including 15.8% complete responses (n=24) and 33.6% partial responses (n=51), whilst cBTKi naïve pts (n=14) had an ORR of 85.7% (95% CI, 57.2-98.2). The ORR among 128 pts who had discontinued a prior cBTKi due to PD and 21 pts who had discontinued for toxicity/other reasons was 43.0% and 90.5%, respectively. Among the 75 responding cBTKi pre-treated pts, the median DOR was 21.6 months (95% CI, 9.2-27.2) at a median follow-up of 24 months. The 18- and 24-month DOR rates were 51.9% (95% CI, 37-64.8) and 38.9% (95% CI, 22.7-54.8), respectively. ORR and DOR by high-risk subgroups (including blastoid/pleomorphic variants, Ki-67 index ≥30%, and TP53 mutations) are shown in Table 1. The 18- and 24-month DOR rates among 12 responding cBTKi naïve pts were both 90.0% (95% CI, 47.3-98.5). The median PFS and OS for cBTKi pre-treated pts was 5.6 months (95% CI, 5.3-9.2), and 23.5 months (95% CI, 17.1-NE), respectively. In the MCL cohort (n=166), the most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were fatigue (31.9%), diarrhea (22.3%), and dyspnea (17.5%). The most common Grade ≥3 TEAE was neutropenia/neutrophil count decreased (13.3%) and the rate of Grade ≥3 infections was (19.9%). Grade ≥3 hemorrhage/hematoma (2.4%) and all-grade atrial fibrillation/flutter (3.6%) were infrequent. Overall, 8 pts (5%) had treatment-related AEs leading to dose reductions and 5 (3%) had treatment-related AEs leading to pirtobrutinib discontinuation. Conclusion: Pirtobrutinib continues to demonstrate durable efficacy and a favorable safety profile in heavily pre-treated R/R MCL pts with prior cBTKi therapy. High ORRs were observed in pts who had PD on a prior cBTKi, and in pts with high-risk disease features including blastoid/pleomorphic variants, elevated Ki-67 index, and TP53 mutations.

12100 Background: The safety profiles of novel agents are mainly based on clinician-reported adverse events (AEs) from clinical trials. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) may better represent the treatment burden experienced by patients (pts) compared with clinician-reported AEs. Using data from POLARIX, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized Phase 3 international study (NCT03274492), we previously presented PRO and clinician-reported data showing similar rates of neuropathy (Trněný et al. 2022). Here, we evaluate the reporting of other common symptoms using PRO and clinician-reported data in POLARIX. Methods: POLARIX methods were previously described (Tilly et al. 2022); this analysis included all pts with PRO data. PRO and clinician-reported data described the incidence and severity of fatigue, constipation, diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting. Clinician-reported severity grading was based on the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) v4.0. PROs were collected using the European Organisation Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life-Core 30 questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), which was administered to pts at clinic visits on Day 1 of Cycles 1 (baseline), 2, 3, and 5, and end of treatment (EOT). PRO severity scores included ‘A little’, ‘Quite a bit’, and ‘Very much’. Results: Overall, 825 pts were evaluable. From baseline to EOT, PROs showed a higher incidence of symptoms compared with clinicians for fatigue (98% vs 27%), constipation (68% vs 29%), diarrhea (56% vs 26%), nausea (58% vs 40%), and vomiting (24% vs 15%). PRO severity scores of ‘Quite a bit’ or ‘Very much’ were reported in 33% of pts for fatigue, 29% for constipation, 17% for diarrhea, 19% for nausea, and 7% for vomiting. Clinicians reported Grade ≥2 symptoms in 11% of pts for fatigue, 11% for constipation, 11% for diarrhea, 14% for nausea, and 6% for vomiting. Conclusions: In POLARIX, pts reported a higher incidence and severity of symptoms compared with clinicians. Although distinct scales were used, the differences in symptom rates reported by pts and clinicians were clinically meaningful. These data may have implications for symptom management, including physician evaluation and communication of symptom expectations for pts. Reporting of symptoms by PROs should be incorporated into clinical trials as an adjunct to standard AE reporting to better characterize the patient experience. Clinical trial information: NCT03274492 . [Table: see text]

Abstract Introduction Central nervous system (CNS) relapse (CNSr) in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) occurs uncommonly (estimated incidence 5%) but carries a high morbidity and mortality. Studies have identified risk factors for CNSr such as high tumor burden and extranodal (EN) disease. However, most focus on B-cell NHL with minimal data in T-cell lymphomas (TCL), which are significantly less common and more heterogenous. The few small series of CNSr in TCL report a median overall survival (OS) less than 3 months (mo) with incidence ranging from 2.6-9%. To better define CNSr in TCL, we performed a multi-institutional retrospective analysis of TCL patients with CNSr and herein describe clinicopathologic characteristics and treatment of CNSr. Methods We performed a retrospective observational study using data from 9 US academic centers with IRB approval at individual sites. We included adult patients diagnosed with a mature T-cell neoplasm as per the 2016 WHO classification between 1/1/2009-1/1/2019, who were found to have CNSr at any time after initial diagnosis, and collected patient, disease, and treatment characteristics at time of initial diagnosis as well as at CNSr. Patients with a diagnosis of a precursor T-cell malignancy or with CNS disease identified at initial TCL diagnosis (TCLd) and/or prior to first-line systemic treatment were excluded. Results In this analysis, we report the outcomes of 75 patients (male n=45, female n=30). At TCLd, the median age was 59 years (range 20-81), and 61% of patients (n=46) had an IPI score of at least 3, 92% (n=69) had EN involvement with 37% (n=28) involving at least 2 EN sites, and 59% (n=44) had BM involvement. The most common pathologic diagnoses were peripheral T-cell lymphoma, not otherwise specified (PTCL, NOS; 24%, n=18), angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL; 17%, n=13), adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (ATLL; 17%, n=13), and mycosis fungoides (MF; 12%, n=9) (Figure 1A). First-line systemic therapy for TCL included anthracyclines for 72% (n=54). Autologous and allogenic transplants were performed prior to CNSr in 12% (n=9) and 8% (n=6) of patients, respectively. Prior to CNSr, 48% (n=36) had non-CNS relapse. Some form of CNS prophylaxis was used during initial systemic lymphoma therapy in 24% of patients (n=18), predominantly intrathecal methotrexate (IT MTX; n=16). Median time from TCLd to CNSr was 8.5mo, though this was significantly longer in MF (46.8mo [range 17.5-187.7]) versus PTCL, NOS (7.6mo [range 1.1-58.4], P=0.0002), AITL (21.2mo [range 2.0-61.6, P=0.008), and ATLL (7.3mo [range 0.7-46.4], P=0.0005) (Figure 1B). CNSr developed within 6mo of TCLd in 31% of patients (n=23) and within 12mo in 57% (n=43). Symptoms related to CNSr occurred in 71% of patients (n=53). CNSr patterns were 61% leptomeningeal (n=46), 21% parenchymal (n=16), and 17% both (n=13) with no significant survival difference between leptomeningeal or parenchymal disease alone (HR 1.45, 95% CI 0.78-2.70, P=0.28). Concomitant systemic relapse was observed in 59% of patients (n=44). The most common CNS-directed therapy for CNSr was IT MTX (56%; n=42), though multiple different IT and/or systemic regimens were used. Patients received a median of 1 line of CNS-directed treatment (range 0-5). The overall response rate to initial CNS directed treatment was 32% (16% CR, 16% PR). Median follow up after CNSr was 40.7mo. At last follow up, 83% had died (n=62). Median OS after CNSr was 4.6mo (range 0.1-68.7) (Figure 1C). Those with ATLL had the shortest median OS after CNSr (2.7mo) versus 6.3mo in MF (HR 3.69, 95% CI 1.44-9.42, P=0.005), 6.5mo in AITL (HR 2.16, 95% CI 0.92-5.06, P=0.054), and 4.8mo in PTCL, NOS (HR 1.49, 95% CI 0.70-3.19, P=0.27) (Figure 1D). The most common cause of death was progressive lymphoma (77%; n=48). Conclusions This is to our knowledge the largest series of CNSr in TCL to date. Most CNSr occurred within 12mo, though CNSr occurred later in patients with MF. Although the prognosis after CNSr was generally poor, we found that median OS in CNSr was longer than previously reported, perhaps reflecting more effective treatments for CNS and systemic relapse, inclusion of MF, or lead time bias. Further analysis of the impact of different treatment strategies and outcomes in CNSr was limited by the small sample size and heterogeneity within our cohort, and future analyses in a larger cohort should focus on factors associated with outcomes. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Horwitz: ADC Therapeutics, Affimed, Aileron, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Forty Seven, Inc., Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Millennium /Takeda, Seattle Genetics, Trillium Therapeutics, and Verastem/SecuraBio.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Aileron: Research Funding; Acrotech Biopharma, Affimed, ADC Therapeutics, Astex, Merck, Portola Pharma, C4 Therapeutics, Celgene, Janssen, Kura Oncology, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Myeloid Therapeutics, ONO Pharmaceuticals, Seattle Genetics, Shoreline Biosciences, Inc, Takeda, Trillium Th: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; C4 Therapeutics: Consultancy; Crispr Therapeutics: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Forty Seven, Inc.: Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Consultancy; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; Myeloid Therapeutics: Consultancy; ONO Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Secura Bio: Consultancy; Shoreline Biosciences, Inc.: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Trillium Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Tubulis: Consultancy; Verastem/Securabio: Research Funding. Bennani: Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory Board; Daichii Sankyo Inc: Other: Advisory Board; Kyowa Kirin: Other: Advisory Board; Vividion: Other: Advisory Board; Kymera: Other: Advisory Board; Verastem: Other: Advisory Board. Chavez: AstraZeneca: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merk: Research Funding; MorphoSys, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Genentech, Kite, a Gilead Company, and Epizyme: Speakers Bureau; MorphoSys, Bayer, Karyopharm, Kite, a Gilead Company, Novartis, Janssen, AbbVie, TeneoBio, and Pfizer: Consultancy; BMS: Speakers Bureau. Sokol: Dren Bio: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kyowa-Kirin: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Saeed: Nektar Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: research investigator; MEI Pharma Inc: Consultancy, Other: investigator; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Other: investigator; MorphoSys AG: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Consultancy; sano-aventis U.S.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, LP: Consultancy, Other: investigator; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Other: investigator; Other-TG therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: investigator; Other-Epizyme, Inc.: Consultancy; Other-Secura Bio, Inc.: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mehta-Shah: Kiowa Hakko Kirin: Consultancy; C4 Therapeutics: Consultancy; Verastem: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Ono Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Secura Bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Innate Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Corvus Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Olszewski: TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; PrecisionBio: Research Funding; Celldex Therapeutics: Research Funding; Acrotech Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; Genmab: Research Funding. Allen: Epizyme: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Secure Bio: Consultancy; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy. Gerson: Abbvie: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Landsburg: Triphase: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; ADCT: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: DSMB member; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Schuster: Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Tessa Theraputics: Consultancy; Juno Theraputics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Loxo Oncology: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Alimera Sciences: Consultancy; Acerta Pharma/AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; TG Theraputics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Svoboda: Atara: Consultancy; Adaptive: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Imbrium: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genmab: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Barta: Kyowa Kirin: Honoraria; Acrotech: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Seagen: Honoraria.