Moustafa, Muhamad Alhaj

Abstract Background:Erdheim-Chester Disease (ECD) is a rare, incurable histiocytic neoplasm. Since its recognition in 1930, our understanding of ECD's pathophysiology has evolved. The identification of its clonal nature after 2015 established ECD as a cancer, prompting increased disease awareness and treatment advances. Targeted therapies show promising responses, but changes in ECD mortality over time have not been extensively documented. Methods:A multi-institutional retrospective cohort study analyzed adults with ECD consecutively seen at Mayo Clinic MN, AZ, and FL and the University of Alabama at Birmingham between 2007 and 2024. Clinical and prognostic data were abstracted. Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared to expected survival using U.S. Census data, based on age at diagnosis (by calendar year), date of diagnosis, and sex. Standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) were calculated by dividing the number of observed deaths in the study population by the expected number of deaths using U.S. population data. Risk of death was compared by date of diagnosis (pre- and post-2015) using Cox proportional hazards analysis. Statistical analysis was performed with R software. Results:A total of 159 ECD patients were included (median age 58 years [range 19-82], 65% male). Forty-nine patients were diagnosed between 1990-2014 and 110 between 2015-2024. Median follow-up for the entire cohort was 4.0 years (95% CI: 3.2-4.4). Median follow-up for those diagnosed between 1990-2014 was 10.4 years (CI: 3.2-16.8), compared to 3.5 years (CI: 3.0-4.2) for those diagnosed between 2015-2024. The 5-year overall survival rate was 80% (95% CI: 72-88). Patients with ECD had an increase in mortality over expected, with 28 deaths compared to an expected 11.2, an SMR of 2.5 (95% CI: 1.7-3.6, p<0.001). Of 17 patients with an identified cause of death, death was attributable to ECD in 11 (65%), secondary malignancy in 1 (7%), and unrelated causes in 5 (29%). Cause of death was unknown in 11 patients. Among deaths, 11 (39%) were treated with targeted therapy, 8 (29%) with chemotherapy, and 1 (4%) received both. One patient (4%) received steroids, 1 received immunomodulator and targeted therapy (4%), and 6 (21%) received no disease-directed therapy. Of the patients whose death was related to ECD, 10 (91%) had multisystem disease. For 49 patients diagnosed pre-2015, 14 deaths occurred during the follow-up, significantly higher than the expected 5.2 deaths based on U.S. population data (SMR of 2.7 [95% CI: 1.5-4.4, p=0.001]). Among those diagnosed between 2015 and 2024, 14 deaths occurred, compared to expected 6.1 (SMR of 2.3 [95% CI: 1.3-3.8, p=0.006]). In an age- and sex-adjusted Cox proportional hazards model, diagnosis after 2015 vs. diagnosis prior to 2015 yielded a hazard ratio of 0.59 (95% CI: 0.27-1.31, p=0.19). Conclusion:The mortality rate of ECD patients remains higher than the general population, despite advancements in disease recognition and development of targeted therapies. While our data suggest a possible trend toward improved survival among patients diagnosed after 2015, we did not find statistically significant evidence of decreased mortality compared to those diagnosed prior to 2015. Larger cohorts with longer follow-up periods are needed to draw definitive conclusions regarding mortality.

Abstract Introduction Peripheral T-cell lymphoma not otherwise specified (PTCL-NOS) is the most common subtype of peripheral T-cell lymphoma. It is characterized by aggressive clinical behavior and poor prognosis and treatment often includes chemotherapy, but the benefit of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) remains an area of ongoing investigation. Using the National Cancer Database, we analyzed the impact of HSCT on survival in a large cohort of patients with PTCL-NOS. Materials and Methods We queried the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for patients aged 18 or older diagnosed with PTCL-NOS between 2004 and 2019. Patients who lost to follow-up were excluded. We analyzed the impact of HSCT on overall survival (OS) using Kaplan-Meier estimates and multivariate Cox regression to identify factors associated with OS. Results A total of 14,301 patients with PTCL-NOS were included in this analysis. Among them, 60.1% were male, 65.7% were Caucasian, 17.1% were black and 7.4% were Hispanic. Early-stage disease (stage I or II) was present in 24.1%, while 49.3% patients had advanced-stage disease (stage III or IV). The median age at diagnosis was 65 years (range 18-90, 23.6% were above age 75), and the median overall survival (mOS) was 15.3 months (95%CI 14.6-16), with a median follow-up of 82.8 months (95%CI 80.4-85.2). Regarding first-line treatment, 11.7% received radiation therapy, 68.9% received chemotherapy, and 6.6% underwent HSCT. The percentage of patients receiving HSCT increased from 3.3% in 2004 to 9.9% in 2019, tripling over the 16-year period. Transplant utilization varied by race/ethnicity: 7.3% of white patients underwent HSCT, compared to 6.4% of Hispanic and 4.3% of Black patients (P < 0.001). Socioeconomic disparities were also observed: patients with insurance were more likely to receive HSCT (6.8%) compared to those without insurance (2.1%); HSCT rates increased with income, from 3.9% in the lowest quartile to 8.1% in the highest; and patients from areas with higher education levels had nearly double the HSCT rate (8.4%) compared to those from the lowest-education areas (4.5%) with P<0.001 for all. In patients with advanced-stage disease, the mOS was 10.5 months (95%CI 9.8-11.1). Patients who received HSCT had significantly improved survival compared to those who did not (mOS 110.9 vs. 11.1 months; P < 0.001). Among those who underwent HSCT, there was no significant difference in survival between auto (N=207) and allo (N=47) mOS 118.9 vs. 95.7 months; P = 0.128. A similar trend of improved survival with HSCT and no significant difference between autologous and allogeneic HSCT was observed across all racial/ethnic groups: in Hispanic patients mOS in HSCT (N=31) vs. no HSCT (N=456) 106.2 vs. 8.8 months; P < 0.001. comparison between auto and allo was not performed due to the low number of allogeneic transplants (N=2). In Black patients mOS inHSCT (N=47) vs. no HSCT (N=1,215) 69.7 vs. 8.8 months; P < 0.001 and mOS in auto vs. allo NR in both groups; P = 0.764. InCaucasian patients mOS in HSCT (N=419) vs. no HSCT (N=4,111) 111.8 vs. 8.8 months; P < 0.001 and mOS in Auto vs. allo 118.9 vs. 99.4 months; P = 0.263. On multivariate analysis, older age, male gender, black race, presence of B-symptoms at diagnosis, HIV positive status, higher comorbidity score and receiving allogeneic (vs. autologous) HSCT were associated with worse survival. In contrast, having medical insurance, receiving radiation therapy, chemotherapy, and undergoing HSCT (vs. no HSCT) were associated with improved survival. Conclusion HSCT was associated with significantly improved overall survival in patients with PTCL-NOS, especially in those with advanced-stage disease. This survival benefit was consistently observed across racial and ethnic groups. These findings might be related to transplant eligibility. However, allogeneic HSCT was linked to worse outcomes compared to autologous HSCT, likely due to higher transplant-related mortality or selection bias of more aggressive diseases to undergo allogeneic transplant. Even though the trend reflects a growing adoption of HSCT as part of treatment strategies in advanced-stage PTCL-NOS over time, transplant utilization varied significantly by sociodemographic factors (insurance, education and income level), highlighting potential disparities in access to this potentially life-prolonging therapy. Further prospective studies are needed to refine transplant strategies and improve patient selection.

Abstract Introduction: CD20xCD3 bispecific antibodies (BsAb) have been approved for use in relapsed/refractory (RR) large B-Cell lymphomas (LBCLs) with manageable toxicities. The main adverse events of clinical interest are cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). The risk factors for CRS and ICANS are not well understood. Knowledge of variables that contribute to increased risk may help clinicians identify and tailor management for high-risk patients (pts) and increase the comfort level for providers using these therapies in community practices. Methods: We performed a multicenter retrospective study at 21 US centers evaluating pts with RR LBCLs receiving commercially available epcoritamab (epco) or glofitamab (glofit) between 2023 and 2025. We obtained baseline characteristics, safety and efficacy outcomes. Univariate analysis was performed to identify associations between CRS, ICANS, and clinical variables of interest. Results: As of May 31, 2025, a total of 312 pts with RR LBCLs were treated with BsAb, Epco n=193 (62%), Glofit n= 119 (38%); median age 68; 63% male; 70% ECOG PS 0-1. Most common histologic type was diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, not otherwise specified (DLBCL, NOS) (n=239, 84%) followed by high-grade B-cell lymphoma (HGBL) (n=46, 16%). 179 pts (57%) were previously treated with chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy, with 47% receiving CAR-T <6 months (mo) prior to BsAb. Among pts with prior CAR-T, CRS with CAR-T therapy of any grade occurred in 63%, with 26% ≥ grade 2. ICANS of any grade (G) occurred in 25% of pts (9.4% ≥ G3). Overall and complete response (ORR and CR) rates to BsAb were 51% and 29%, respectively. With a median follow up of 5 mo, median progression-free and overall survival (PFS and OS) were 2.3 and 7.3 mo, respectively. With BsAb treatment, CRS of any grade occurred in 117 (39%) patients: 24% G1, 8.7% G2, 4% G3, 1% G4 and 1% G5. The max grade CRS occurred most frequently after the third dose of epco (35%) and the first dose of glofit (23%). CRS was managed with additional steroids in 24% of pts and tocilizumab in 22%. 13% of pts experienced ICANS: 5.8% G1, 3.4% G2, 2% G3, 1% G4 and 0.3% G5. Factors that increased the risk for any grade CRS included: bulky disease ≥ 7.5 cm at time of BsAb treatment (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.17 – 3.55, p = 0.012), elevated LDH (OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.45– 4.76, p = 0.002) and treatment with epco compared to glofit (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.04- 2.77, p = 0.036). As G ≥2 CRS generally requires inpatient monitoring and management, we next compared the risk factors between pts with no CRS or G1 CRS and G ≥2 CRS. Factors associated with increased risk for high grade CRS included: bone marrow involvement by lymphoma (OR 3.47, 95% CI 0.97 – 11.3, p = 0.043), platelet count ≤ 75 (OR 2.46, 95% CI 1.21 – 4.87, p = 0.011), ≥ 2 extra nodal sites (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.07 – 3.97, p = 0.032) and ≥G2 CRS with prior CAR-T (OR 3.35, 95% CI 1.13 – 9.97, p = 0.027). Factors that increased the risk for ICANS included: bulky disease (OR 2.67, 95% CI 1.28 – 5.49, p = 0.008), elevated Cr ≥ 1.5x ULN (OR 3.79, 95% CI 1.25 – 10.4, p = 0.012), elevated AST/ALT ≥ 3x ULN (OR 4.65, 95% CI 0.92 – 19.9, p = 0.042), low albumin (OR 2.85, 95% CI 1.49 - 5.5, p = 0.002), and co-occurrence of CRS with BsAb (OR 9.1, 95% CI 3.85- 25, p < 0.001). No other clinical variables including older age, histologic subtype, ECOG PS, B symptoms, IPI score, cell of origin or histologic subtype, baseline labs such as ALC, CRP, fibrinogen or D-dimer were significantly associated with CRS or ICANS risk. There was no difference in ORR or CR rates in patients who experienced CRS or ICANS. Conclusions: Our analysis of pts treated with commercial BsAb for LBCL shows an increased risk for CRS and ICANs based on clinical variables that are routinely obtained at baseline including tumor bulk, sites of disease, laboratory parameters, and history of prior CRS with CAR-T therapy. Differences in baseline populations receiving epco and glofit treatments in this real-world analysis have been previously reported (Brooks et al, Blood 2025) and the comparative risk for CRS between these treatments remains unclear. Future plans including multivariable analysis may allow for development of a predictive model to identify pts at high risk of CRS and ICANS with BsAb treatment, potentially leading to prospective clinical trials evaluating prophylactic interventions for high-risk pts.

Abstract Introduction: Epcoritamab (epco) and glofitamab (glofit) are bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) approved for the treatment of patients (pts) with multiply relapsed or refractory (r/r) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). Though response rates are relatively high, most patients (pts) eventually experience progression of disease (POD). We sought to investigate the treatment patterns and clinical outcomes following POD post-BsAb for r/r LBCL Pts, as this has not previously been described. Methods: We performed a multicenter retrospective study including 21 US centers evaluating pts with r/r LBCL receiving commercially available epco or glofit between 2023 and 2025. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were extracted from medical records. Efficacy and survival outcomes were assessed by site investigators and included overall response rate (ORR), complete and partial response (CR, PR) rates, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), analyzed using the Kaplan Meier method. Results: As of May 15, 2025, a total of 312 pts with r/r LBCLs were treated with BsAb, of whom a total of 168 (53.8%) pts experienced POD [104 of 193 (53.8%) treated with prior epco and 64 of 119 (53.8%) treated with prior glofit]. Pts with POD had a median age at BsAb start of 67 years (interquartile range [IQR] 58-76), most were male (68.4%), and the most common histology was diffuse large B-cell lymphoma not otherwise specified (n=122 [71.8%]). Sixty-seven of 168 pts (39.9%) with POD after BsAb had experienced primary refractory disease defined as failure to achieve PR or CR to frontline therapy. A total of 102 (60.7%) pts with POD to BsAb had received chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy prior to BsAbs, with 33.3% of these pts being refractory to CAR T and 30.4% progressing within 6 months of CAR T-cell infusion. The median time to progression following BsAb start was 48 days. Following POD, 70 pts received no further anti-lymphoma therapy. Among 98 pts receiving subsequent therapy, 85 initially received systemic therapy and 13 initially received local therapy with radiation (concurrently with systemic therapy in 8 pts). The most commonly-used next line of systemic therapies included: loncastuximab tesirine in 19 pts (ORR 16.7%, all PR); commercial CAR T in 11 pts (ORR 50% [CR 36.4%, PR 18.2%); tafasitamab with lenalidomide in 7 (no responses); and other chemotherapy in 46 pts (ORR 27.6% [CR 24.1%]). The median follow-up time from POD was 9.2 months among survivors (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.8-13.3). Among those who initiated subsequent-line therapy following BsAbs, the median progression-free survival (PFS2) was 1.9 months (95% CI 1.5-2.4) and median overall survival (OS) from initiation of subsequent-line therapy was 3.9 months (95% CI 2.4-5.5). The estimated 1-year OS following initiation of next therapy was 12%. Conclusions: We report the outcomes of largest cohort of pts with POD post-BsAbs in r/r LBCL. Progression events occurred early after initiation of single agent BsAbs, and almost half of pts who progressed did not receive subsequent therapy. For those who received standard subsequent-line therapy after POD, response rates and survival outcomes were poor. Pts with POD after BsAB should be strongly considered for clinical trials of novel therapeutics or combination therapies.

Abstract Background: In R/R DLBCL/FL, T-cell engager therapy (TCET) using chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CART) or bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) are promising options. Patients (pts) with R/R disease post TCET experience dismal outcomes with overall survival (OS)< 5 months (mos). Lonca, an antibody drug conjugate (ADC) targeting CD19 (FDA approved for R/R DLBCL and beneficial in R/R FL) has been increasingly used post-TCET. RWDA of Lonca is limited, especially regarding: 1) impact of CD19 expression on activity, 2) adverse events (AEs) in non-clinical trial setting, and 3) impact of sequencing Lonca and TCET. Thus, we conducted a RWDA of Lonca efficacy and toxicity in R/R DLBCL and FL pre- and post-TCET. Methods: We conducted a multicenter retrospective study of R/R DLBCL or FL pts ≥18 years who received Lonca from 2017 to 2025 at 10 US academic sites. Demographic, pathological, treatment, and AEs were collected. Efficacy outcomes included overall response rate (ORR), complete response (CR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), and progressive disease (PD). Progression-free survival (PFS) and OS were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method. CD19 expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and/or flow cytometry (FC) prior to Lonca administration was correlated to outcomes. Results: Among 120 pts (DLBCL n= 101, FL n=19), all but 2 pts received Lonca monotherapy. At a median follow-up of 6.1 mos, median PFS and OS were 2.6 mos and 6.7 mos, respectively for the entire cohort. For DLBCL, median age was 66 years (18-89). Median prior lines of therapy (LOT) were 4 (1-11). ORR was 37.7% (CR: 17%, PR: 20.7%), SD: 6%, and PD: 56%. Median PFS was 2.1 mos, and median OS was 5.8 mos. For FL, median age was 62 years (28-88). Median prior LOT was 6 (2-8). ORR was 49.4% (CR: 28%, PR: 21.4%), SD: 14%, and PD: 35.7%. Median PFS was 6.7 mos, and median OS was 6.8 mos. OS by best response (entire cohort) was 11.3 mos and 11.8 mos in those who had CR and PR, respectively, 10.6 mos in SD and 3.5 mos in those with PD. Lonca LOT (2nd-12th line) was not associated with improved OS (p=0.58). Bulky disease (>7.5 cm) was not associated with worse OS (p=0.07). PD to Lonca was associated with PD at 2nd line treatment (OR: 4.3; 95% CI: 1.7–10.9) and 3rd-line treatment (OR: 4.2; 95% CI: 1.5–11.5), elevated lactate dehydrogenase (OR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.2–2.9), and each subsequent increase of extranodal sites >1 prior to Lonca (OR: 1.5; 95% CI: 1.04–2.1). Among pts with available CD19 status prior to Lonca administration, 28 were FC-positive and 22 were IHC-positive. Of the CD19 FC-positive pts (n=23), 22% (5/23) achieved CR, 26% (6/23) had PR, 8% (2/23) had SD, and 43% (10/23) developed PD. Of the CD19 IHC-positive pts (n=20): 15% (3/20) achieved CR, 20% (4/20) had PR, 5% (1/20) had SD, and 60% (12/20) developed PD. Among all CD19-negative pts (n=7), two achieved CR, one had SD, and four with PD. Any grade AE was seen in 84% of pts. Any grade ≥3 (G3) AE was seen in 62% of pts. Notable G3 AEs included: anemia (35%), lymphopenia (34%), neutropenia (21.6%), thrombocytopenia (20%), infection (17%), fatigue (9%), peripheral edema (5%), pleural effusion (4%), photosensitivity (2.5%), and pruritus (2.5%). Treatment discontinuation due to AEs occurred in 17% (n=21) of pts. Fifty-five pts (50 DLBCL, 5 FL) received both Lonca and CD19 directed CART (Pre-Lonca n=54; Post-Lonca n=1). There was no significant difference in PFS or OS between pts who received CART and those who did not (PFS: 2.7 mos vs 3 mos; OS: 7.4 mos vs 5 mos). BsAb was used in 41 pts (34 DLBCL, 7 FL) (Pre-Lonca n=30; Post-Lonca n=11). No significant difference in PFS or OS was observed between pts who received BsAb pre- or post-Lonca. There was also no significant difference in PFS between pts who received a BsAb (2.2 mos) and those who did not (2.9 mos), nor in OS.Conclusion: In this large RWDA of Lonca, pts who achieved any form of clinical response experienced a significantly longer OS than previously reported for heavily pre-treated pts. Lonca was predominantly administered after TCET; however, there was no significant difference in efficacy between pts who received CART and BsAbs and those who did not. CD19 positivity and earlier utilization of Lonca did not appear to have an impact on response rates. Our findings support a role for Lonca in the treatment of R/R DLBCL pts not candidates for TCET. This RWDA highlights the need to further investigate the sequencing of Lonca in R/R DLBCL and FL.

Abstract There are no approved treatments for relapsed/refractory (R/R) PCNSL. We show promising efficacy in the salvage setting using emavusertib in combination with ibrutinib, which targets the BCR and TLR pathways. These 2 major pathways are associated with activation of NF-κB. Updated safety and efficacy data of this combination in R/R PCNSL from the ongoing Phase 1/2 TakeAim Lymphoma trial (NCT03328078) will be presented. As of 01 May 2025, 33 patients with R/R PCNSL were treated with emavusertib in combination with ibrutinib. Eligible patients receive emavusertib in combination with ibrutinib until tumor progression or unacceptable toxicity. Median age was 63 years (range 43-81); 16 patients were male. Median prior anti-cancer therapy was 2 (range 1-5); 26 (78.8%) patients had prior BTKi exposure. Median duration of emavusertib/ibrutinib treatment was 51 days (range 5-798). Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 11 (33.3%) patients; neutropenia in 5 (15.2%) patients, amylase increased, lipase increased, and leukopenia in 2 (6.1%) patients each. The majority of Grade ≥ 3 TRAEs were reversible and manageable. Among the 19 BTKi-experienced patients treated for ≥ 28 days, there were 5 CRs and 2 PRs, with an ORR of 36.8%. Three patients with CR were on treatment for 10+ mos, with 1 CR patient ongoing with DOT of 26.2+ mos. Among the 5 BTKi-naïve patients treated for ≥ 28 days, 1 achieved CR and 3 had PR, with ORR of 80%; the CR patient is ongoing with DOT of 18.1+ mos. The ORR in the combined population was 45.8% (6 CRs; 5 PRs). The combination of emavusertib and ibrutinib demonstrates promising clinical activity and an acceptable safety profile in patients with R/R PCNSL. This regimen appears capable of overcoming resistance to prior BTKi therapy. Patient enrollment in this trial continues.

Abstract Purpose: Polatuzumab vedotin (polatuzumab) was approved for up-front treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in combination with chemoimmunotherapy (Pola-R-CHP) based on the POLARIX trial. However, when stratified by cell of origin (COO), polatuzumab seems to have greater efficacy in activated B-cell than germinal center B-cell (GCB) subtype disease. Most studies of polatuzumab used RNA expression to assess COO, whereas in routine clinical practice, the immunohistochemistry-based Hans algorithm is used. Experimental Design: To assess the impact of COO by immunohistochemistry on polatuzumab efficacy, we conducted a multicenter real-world study of adults with large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) receiving polatuzumab from 2015 to 2024, split by receipt of polatuzumab in first-line versus relapsed/refractory settings. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) to polatuzumab-based treatment in GCB versus non-GCB relapsed/refractory LBCL. Results: Of 740 patients, 305 received polatuzumab in the first-line setting and 435 in the relapsed/refractory setting. In the relapsed/refractory cohort, the ORR in non-GCB versus GCB LBCL was 59.7% versus 36.3% [OR, 2.6; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.77–3.84; P < 0.0001], with a complete response rate of 35.7% versus 17.7% (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.66–4.02; P < 0.0001). Progression-free survival was longer for patients with non-GCB versus GCB COO (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.5–0.83; P = 0.0006). In the first-line cohort, ORR, complete response rate, and progression-free survival were similar in non-GCB versus GCB LBCL, as hypothesized based on outcomes in the Pola-R-CHP arm of POLARIX, suggesting that the addition of polatuzumab overcomes the adverse risk of non-GCB COO in patients receiving R-CHOP. Conclusions: Based on these data, COO classification by the Hans algorithm is a strong predictor of polatuzumab efficacy in LBCL, informing real-world treatment decisions.

ABSTRACT Anaplastic lymphoma kinase‐positive large B‐cell lymphoma (ALK+ LBCL) is a rare, aggressive subtype of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma with poor outcomes using standard chemotherapy. In this multi‐institutional retrospective study, we analyzed 39 cases of ALK+ LBCL identified at six US academic centers from 2002 to 2024, with treatment including conventional cytotoxic regimens in frontline and biologically informed and nonchemotherapy‐based strategies in the relapsed setting. Ninety‐two percent of patients received frontline anthracycline‐based chemotherapy; 43% received intensified regimens, and 15% underwent upfront autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Despite these approaches, outcomes remained poor. At a median follow‐up of 5.4 years, median event‐free survival (EFS) was 0.6 years (95% CI, 0.4–0.9), and median overall survival (OS) was 1.5 years (95% CI, 1.3–NR). One‐ and five‐year EFS rates were 28% and 17%, while corresponding OS rates were 72% and 42%, respectively. Advanced stage and high IPI scores were associated with inferior outcomes. Twelve patients received ALK inhibitors, with alectinib showing more durable responses than crizotinib. Lenalidomide and immune checkpoint inhibitors also demonstrated activity, including durable complete responses. Five patients underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation, with three achieving sustained remission. In conclusion, our findings highlight the limited benefit of chemotherapy, even when intensified or followed by ASCT, and support the integration of biologically targeted therapies, which may have contributed to improved OS in our cohort compared to historical outcomes. Prospective, collaborative studies are needed to better understand disease biology and define optimal use of modern therapies in this rare lymphoma.

Abstract Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD) is a rare systemic histiocytic neoplasm, with cardiac morbidities, including cardiovascular (CV) risk factors and cardiac conditions, playing a significant yet poorly understood role in the disease burden. This study evaluated the prevalence, characteristics, and prognosis of ECD in patients with (ECD-C) and without cardiac involvement (ECD-noC) and compared the burden of cardiac morbidities with matched controls. Patients diagnosed with ECD between 1990 and 2021 at a tertiary center were included, with cardiac involvement centrally assessed using radiographic studies. Cardiac morbidities were compared with a control group without ECD, matched for age, sex, body mass index, and smoking history. Among 104 patients with ECD, 39 (37%) had cardiac involvement. Patients with ECD-C had higher rates of hypertension (67% vs 46%), hyperlipidemia (67% vs 40%), heart failure (36% vs 8%), and pericardial effusion (28% vs 2%) than those with ECD-noC. Compared with the matched non-ECD cohort, patients with ECD had higher prevalence of coronary artery disease (20% vs 7%), heart failure (18% vs 4%), and antihypertensive drug use (55% vs 40%). Notably, patients with ECD-C had inferior progression-free survival (PFS) from frontline therapy compared with patients with ECD-noC (5-year PFS, 28.3% vs 70.5%). These findings highlight the burden of CV risk factors and cardiac conditions in ECD, even without a clinical diagnosis of ECD-C. Importantly, this cardiac morbidity burden is substantial for patients with ECD-C compared with ECD-noC. Our findings highlight the need for comprehensive cardiac risk assessment and management strategies to improve patient outcomes.

Abstract Introduction Biliary-tract cancers, including intra- and extra-hepatic cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma, are uncommon but highly lethal. They represent roughly 2–3 % of new cancer diagnoses yet contribute about 5 % of cancer-related deaths. Complete surgical resection remains the foundation of curative treatment, whereas the value of peri-operative chemotherapy continues to be debated. Materials and Methods The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients diagnosed with non- metastatic biliary tract cancer at age 18 or older between 2004 and 2019. After excluding patients with unknown timing of surgery and chemotherapy, patients who died within 90 days of the most definitive primary site surgery, and patients lost to follow-up, we split the cohort into three groups according to the clinical stage (stage I-III). Then, we evaluated the overall survival (OS) between the different treatment modalities (surgery only, chemotherapy only, adjuvant chemotherapy following surgery, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery) in each group. We studied the OS using Kaplan-Meier estimates and multivariate Cox regression analyses to evaluate factors associated with OS. Results A total of 35,260 patients with non-metastatic biliary tract cancers were included in the analysis, of which 50.4% were females, 83% Caucasians, and 9.5% African Americans. The median age at diagnosis was 70 (range 18-90). 14,757 (41.9%) were stage I, 12,472 (35.4%) stage II, and 8,031 (22.8%) stage III. 7,286 (20.7%) had surgical resection only, 8,144 (23.1%) had chemotherapy only, 6,964 (19.7%) had surgical resection with perioperative chemotherapy, and 12,866 (36.5%) did not receive any treatment. We compared survival between different treatment modalities based on clinical stage. In stage I, patients treated with surgery alone exhibited superior median OS compared with those receiving adjuvant chemotherapy (65.7 vs 50.4 months, P < 0.001). Median OS after neoadjuvant chemotherapy was numerically higher than surgery alone (79.8 vs 65.7 months); however, this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.63). Whereas in stage II, patients who were treated with adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy had better mOS compared to those treated with surgery only (33.9 and 40.3 vs 29.9 months with P<0.001 and P=0.005, respectively). The same trend was seen in stage III, patients who were treated with adjuvant and those treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy had better mOS compared to surgery only (22.6 and 41.5 vs 19.5 months, respectively, with P<0.001 for all). In multivariate analysis, adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not affect the OS in all stages, except in stage III, where neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with better OS (HR 0.646, 95% CI 0.530-0.786; P<0.001). Conclusion Adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy do not seem to have a survival benefit in early-stage (stage I and II) biliary tract cancers, whereas neoadjuvant chemotherapy tends to improve OS in stage III.