Maloney, David G.

190 Background: Metastatic colorectal (CRC), pancreatic (PANC), and gastroesophageal (GE) cancers are the leading causes of GI cancer–related mortality (5-yr survival rate, 14%, 3% and ̃5-6%, respectively). T-cell immunotherapy targeting GI-associated tumor antigens has been attempted, but efficacy has been constrained by on-target off-tumor toxicity, limiting the therapeutic window. The Tmod (TM) platform is an AND-NOT logic-gated CAR T modular system, versions of which have a CEA- or MSLN-targeting CAR activator and a separate HLA-A*02-targeting blocker receptor to protect normal cells. Tmod CAR T exploits HLA LOH, common in GI malignancies (10-33% in primary solid tumors [TCGA]) and can kill tumor cells without harming healthy cells in vitro and in vivo. However, the prevalence of HLA LOH across GI tumors is unknown in the real-world setting. We utilized the Tempus xT oncology NGS database of patients with multiple GI tumors. From a standard-of-care NGS assay, GI cancer patients can be readily identified for HLA LOH and future treatment with Tmod CAR T therapy. Methods: The occurrence of HLA LOH in GI tumors of 1439 patients was assessed using paired germline and somatic DNA sequencing using a research assay [6]. CRC, PANC and GE patients with ≥ stage 3 were then extracted, and rates of HLA LOH were identified (ie, whether loss occurred across high-frequency HLA-A alleles). In addition, mutations in KRAS and BRAF, as well as MSI status were stratified to determine any association with HLA-A LOH. Results: HLA-A LOH was detected in 830 (17.3%) of all solid tumor records, and a similar proportion when all GI cancer records were analyzed (17.0%). For GI subtypes, these values ranged from 13.5% to 23.1% (Table). No high-frequency HLA-A allele (A*01, A*02, A*03, A*11) was more likely to be lost. Clinical biomarkers ( KRAS, BRAF and MSI status) were not associated with HLA-LOH. Conclusions: The frequency of HLA LOH among advanced solid tumor cancers in this dataset is 17.3%, with a range of 13.5-23% between CRC, PANC and GE. The HLA LOH frequency observed in these GI tumors is consistent with that in primary tumors from TCGA, which also used germline-matched and tumor samples. Clinical biomarkers were not associated with HLA LOH. Tempus NGS was able to identify HLA LOH, which can be used for Tmod CAR T therapy to an enhanced therapeutic window. Identification of these patients in BASECAMP-1 (NCT04981119) will enable novel Tmod CAR T therapy. [Table: see text]

Abstract Background: Pts with LBCL primary refractory to or relapsed ≤ 12 mo after first-line (1L) therapy may have poor outcomes with SOC, including salvage CT and ASCT, which underscores a critical unmet need. Liso-cel is an autologous CD19-directed, defined composition, 4-1BB CAR T cell product administered at equal target doses of CD8 + and CD4 + CAR + T cells. In the TRANSCEND NHL 001 study (NCT02631044) in pts with R/R LBCL (≥ 2 prior lines of therapy), liso-cel treatment resulted in an ORR of 73% (CR rate, 53%), 2% grade ≥ 3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS), and 10% grade ≥ 3 neurological events (NE) (Abramson et al. Lancet 2020). Here we present a prespecified interim analysis of TRANSFORM (NCT03575351; SOC vs liso-cel as 2L therapy in pts with R/R LBCL). Methods: TRANSFORM is a pivotal, global, randomized, multicenter, phase 3 study comparing efficacy and safety of SOC (Arm A; R-DHAP, R-ICE, or R-GDP per investigator choice followed by BEAM + ASCT) vs liso-cel (Arm B). Pts were adults (aged ≤ 75 years), eligible for ASCT, and with LBCL primary refractory to or relapsed ≤ 12 mo after 1L therapy. Key inclusion criteria were ECOG PS ≤ 1 and adequate organ function (LVEF ≥ 40%; serum CrCl > 45 mL/min); pts with secondary CNS lymphoma were allowed. Key exclusion criteria were prior gene or anti-CD19-targeted therapy, and active infection. Pts in Arm A were to receive 3 cycles of CT. Responding pts (CR or PR) were to proceed to BEAM + ASCT. Pts in Arm B were to undergo lymphodepletion with fludarabine/cyclophosphamide followed by liso-cel at a target dose of 100 × 10 6 CAR + T cells. Bridging therapy with an Arm A CT regimen was allowed. Crossover to receive liso-cel was allowed in Arm A for pts not achieving CR or PR after 3 cycles of CT or not in CR after ASCT, or demonstrating PD at any time. Primary endpoint is event-free survival (EFS) based on independent review committee per Lugano 2014 criteria, defined as time from randomization to death from any cause, PD, failure to achieve CR or PR by 9 weeks after randomization, or start of new antineoplastic therapy, whichever occurred first. Key secondary endpoints included in the testing strategy are CR rate, PFS, and OS. P value significance threshold for endpoints to reject the null hypothesis was ≤ 0.012. Results: A total of 184 pts were randomized, with 92 pts in each arm. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between both arms (Table). Of 91 treated pts in Arm A (1 pt withdrew consent), 43 received BEAM + ASCT, of which 28 achieved CR with CT. Fifty pts crossed over to receive liso-cel. In Arm B, 90 pts received liso-cel infusion; 58 pts (63%) received bridging therapy. Two Arm B pts were not infused (1 each due to manufacturing failure and rapid progression). Median EFS and PFS were significantly longer, and CR rate was significantly improved for Arm B vs Arm A. For Arms A and B, respectively, median EFS was 2.3 vs 10.1 mo (HR, 0.349; P < 0.0001), median PFS was 5.7 vs 14.8 mo (HR, 0.406; P = 0.0001), and CR rate was 39% vs 66% (P < 0.0001). OS data were immature at the time of this analysis with a median follow-up of 6.2 mo (range, 0.9-20.0), but a numerical trend favored Arm B (HR, 0.509; 95% CI, 0.258-1.004; P = 0.0257). Cellular kinetics in Arm B showed a median t max of 10 d (range, 6‒22). No new liso-cel safety signals were detected in the 2L setting. In Arm B, any-grade CRS was reported in 49% of pts, with grade 1 in 37% and grade 2 in 11%. Only 1 pt had grade 3 CRS (onset at Day 9, which resolved in 2 days). Any-grade NEs were reported in 12% of pts and were also primarily low grade (grade 3, 4%). No grade 4 or 5 CRS or NEs were reported. In Arm B, 24% of pts received tocilizumab, 17% received corticosteroids, and none received vasopressors. The most common TEAEs in both arms were cytopenias. Prolonged cytopenias in Arm B (ie, grade ≥ 3 at 35 d after infusion) were reported in 43% of pts; the majority recovered within 2 mo after infusion. Conclusions: In the TRANSFORM study, liso-cel demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in the primary endpoint, EFS, as well as in key secondary efficacy endpoints (CR rate and PFS) compared with SOC as 2L therapy in pts with LBCL primary refractory to or relapsed ≤ 12 mo after 1L therapy. Safety results in the 2L setting were consistent with the liso-cel safety profile in 3L or later LBCL, and no new safety concerns were identified. Liso-cel improved outcomes vs SOC and exhibited a favorable safety profile, providing support for liso-cel as a potential new SOC for 2L treatment in pts with R/R LBCL. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Kamdar: SeaGen: Speakers Bureau; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene: Other; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; KaryoPharm: Consultancy; Celgene (BMS): Consultancy; Genetech: Other; Genentech: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy. Arnason: Juno/BMS: Honoraria. Glass: BMS: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Riemser: Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Helios Klinik Berlin-Buch: Current Employment. Bachanova: KaryoPharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Research Funding; FATE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gamida Cell: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Ibrahimi: Karyopharm Theraputics: Divested equity in a private or publicly-traded company in the past 24 months. Mielke: Immunicum: Other: Data safety monitoring board; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Miltenyi: Other: Data safety monitoring board; DNA Prime SA: Speakers Bureau; Gilead/KITE: Other: Travel support, Expert panel ; Celgene/BMS: Speakers Bureau. Mutsaers: BMS: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Research Funding. Hernandez-Ilizaliturri: Kite: Other: Advisory Boards; Amgen: Other: Advisory Boards; Pharmacyclics: Other: Advisory Boards; BMS: Other: Advisory Boards; Celgene: Other: Advisory Boards; Incyte: Other: Advisory Boards; AbbVie: Other: Advisory Boards; Gilead: Other: Advisory Boards; Epyzime: Other: Advisory Boards. Izutsu: Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Huya Biosciences: Research Funding; Genmab: Honoraria, Research Funding; Fuji Film Toyama Chemical: Honoraria; Eisai: Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria, Research Funding; Chugai: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Beigene: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Allergan Japan: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; Ono Pharmaceutical: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Solasia: Research Funding; Symbio: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Yakult: Research Funding. Morschhauser: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy; Janssen: Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Epizyme: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Chugai: Honoraria; Servier: Consultancy; AstraZenenca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genmab: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lunning: Karyopharm: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Legend: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Myeloid Therapeutics: Consultancy; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Celgene, a Bristol Myers Squibb Co.: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Acrotech: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy. Maloney: Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Rights to royalties from Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center for patents licensed to Juno Therapeutics/Bristol Myers Squibb; A2 Biotherapeutics: Honoraria, Other: Stock options; BMS: Honoraria, Other: Rights to royalties from Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center for patents licensed to Juno Therapeutics/Bristol Myers Squibb; Celgene: Other: Research funding was paid to my institution, Research Funding; Umoja: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Legend Biotech: Honoraria; Genentech: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; MorphoSys: Honoraria; Juno therapeutics: Other: Research funding was paid to my institution, Research Funding; Navan Technologies: Honoraria, Other: Stock options; Kite Pharma: Honoraria, Other: Research funding was paid to my institution, Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Honoraria, Other: Rights to royalties from Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center for patents licensed to Juno Therapeutics/Bristol Myers Squibb. Crotta: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Montheard: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Previtali: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Stepan: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ogasawara: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Mack: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Abramson: Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; EMD Serono: Consultancy; Kymera: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy; Allogene Therapeutics: Consultancy; Seagen Inc.: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; C4 Therapeutics: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genmab: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: Liso-cel is a CAR T cell therapy approved for use in the third line for R/R LBCL. This trial reports data from the pivotal trial in the second line.

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

Abstract Background: Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) S0016 was a phase III randomized study that compared safety and efficacy of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone and rituximab (CHOP-R) with CHOP followed by consolidation with (131) iodine-tositumomab radioimmunotherapy (CHOP-RIT) for previously untreated follicular lymphoma (FL) patients. As reported previously, the study demonstrated excellent outcomes in both arms with 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) of 76% and 80% and 2-year overall-survival (OS) of 97% and 93% in the CHOP-R and CHOP-RIT arms, respectively. (Press. et al. JCO, 2012) We now report the long term outcome of patients who were treated on the S0016 study. Methods: Between 2001 and 2008, 531 previously untreated advanced follicular lymphoma patients were randomized to receive either 6 cycles of CHOP every 3 weeks with 6 doses of rituximab (CHOP-R) or 6 cycles of CHOP every 3 weeks followed by RIT. Patients with advanced-stage disease (bulky stage II, III or IV) with any pathologic grade (1, 2 or 3) were eligible. Results: Patients on CHOP-R (n=264) and CHOP-RIT (n=267) arms had balanced baseline characteristics including age (median 54.5 vs. 53.4 years), presence of B symptoms (29% vs. 26%), pathologic grade 3 (8% vs. 9%), "high" FLIPI risk group (22% vs. 26%), stage IV disease (59% vs. 63%), elevated β2M (53% vs. 55%), bone marrow involvement (56% vs. 55%) and bulky disease (24% vs. 26%). Objective remissions were documented in 226 of 267 eligible patients treated with CHOP-R (85%) and in 226 of 264 patients with CHOP-RIT (86%). Complete remission (CR) rate was 40% in the CHOP-R and 45% in the CHOP-RIT arm. Neutropenia was the most common adverse event (AE) in both arms (48% vs. 51%). Rate of grade 3-5 AEs were not different except for thrombocytopenia which was more common in the CHOP-RIT group (18% vs. 2%). After a median follow-up of 9.6 years (range 0.1 - 14.4 years), the estimated 10-year PFS was 42% (95% CI: 35.6%, 48.5%) in the CHOP-R arm and 57% (95% CI: 50.5%, 63.2%) in the CHOP-RIT arm (p-value = 0.01). 51% of responders on the CHOP-R arm and 38% of responders on the CHOP-RIT arm have relapsed (p-value= 0.01). The estimated 2-year relapse-free survival was 76% for CHOP-R patients and 81% for CHOP-RIT patients (p-value=0.15). There were 48 deaths in the CHOP+R arm and 59 deaths in the CHOP-RIT arm with an estimated 10-year OS of 82% (95% CI: 76.3%, 86.4%) with CHOP-R and 77% (95% CI: 70.5%, 81.4%) with CHOP-RIT (p-value = 0.18). (Figure-1) During the follow-up, 41 patients (15.4%) in the CHOP-R arm and 37 patients (14%) in the CHOP-RIT arm developed secondary malignancies. MDS/AML were more common in the CHOP-RIT arm (11 patients; 4.2%) compared to CHOP-R arm (5 patients; 1.9%) with a relative risk of 2.2 (95% CI: 0.8-6.3) (P-value 0.12). Conclusion: With almost 10 years of follow-up, patients with FL treated on protocol S0016 show outstanding survival in both CHOP-R and CHOP-RIT arms, and represent the best published long-term outcomes to date in this disease. Indeed, almost half of patients enrolled still remain progression-free, confirming registry experiences. While CHOP-RIT provided significantly longer PFS and lower relapse rate compared to CHOP-R in our study, the OS rate was not different between 2 arms due in part to higher incidence of fatal MDS/AML in the CHOP-RIT group, emphasizing the importance of long-term follow-up, and calling into question the validity of PFS as a surrogate for OS in this setting. Given these outstanding outcomes, we believe chemoimmunotherapy should remain the standard induction approach for patients with high-risk FL until long-term follow-up of alternative approaches demonstrates superiority. Support: NIH/NCI grants CA180888, CA180819, CA180821 and in part by GlaxoSmithKline Disclosures Shadman: Emergent: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding. Rimsza:NCI/NIH: Patents & Royalties: L.M. Rimsza is a co-inventor on a provisional patent, owned by the NCI of the NIH, using Nanostring technology for determining cell of origin in DLBCL.. Gopal:Paid Consultancy- Gilead, Janssen, Seattle Genetics, Spectrum, Research funding- Gilead, Janssen, Pfizer, BMS, Merck, Teva, Takeda, Spectrum, Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Maloney:Juno Therapeutics: Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Honoraria. Cheson:Gilead: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: 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, Research Funding. Smith:Amgen: Other: Educational lecture to sales force; TGTX: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Other: on a DSMB for two trials ; Portola: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. Fisher:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Johnson and Johnson: Consultancy. Friedberg:Bayer: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Committee. Press:Roche / Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding.

CD19-targeted chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy is a novel treatment with promising results for patients with relapsed/refractory lymphoid malignancies. CAR-T cell therapy has known early toxicities of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity, but little is known about long-term neuropsychiatric adverse effects. We have utilized patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including PROMIS®measures, to assess outcomes of patients with relapse/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) who were treated with CD19-targeted CAR-T cells on a clinical trial in our institution (NCT01865617) and survived at least one year after treatment. Between October 2018 to February 2019, 52 patients (at their 1-5 year anniversary after CAR-T cell therapy) were sent a questionnaire. The questionnaire included the PROMIS Scale v1.2-Global Health and the PROMIS-29 Profile v2.1, as well as 30 additional questions, including questions pertaining to cognitive function. As of February 28, 2019, 40 questionnaires were returned (76.9% response rate) and were included in the analysis. Patients' characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Cognitive function was assessed by asking if patients had experienced difficulties with concentration, finding words, memory, or solving problems since their CAR-T cell therapy; answer "yes" to each of the questions received "1" point to determine the total cognitive difficulty score (0-4). PROMIS measures are standardized to a T-score metric, with a score of 50 representing the general US population mean. Clinically meaningful differences were defined as a 5-point difference in scores (1/2 standard deviation). The cohort's self-reported cognitive difficulties and PROMIS mean T scores are shown in Table 2. Mean T scores of PROMIS domains of Global Mental health, Global Physical Health, Social Function, anxiety, depression, fatigue, pain and sleep disturbance were not clinically meaningfully different from the mean in the general US population. However, 19 participants (47.5%) reported at least one cognitive difficulty and/or clinically meaningful depression and/or anxiety (Figure 1), and 7 participants (17.5%) scored ≤ 40 in Global Mental Health, indicating at least one standard deviation worse than the general population mean. On risk factor analysis, younger age was found to be associated with worse Global Mental Health (p=0.02), anxiety (p=0.01) and depression (p=0.01). Anxiety prior to CAR-T cell therapy was associated with increased likelihood of anxiety after CAR-T cell therapy (p=0.001). Multivariate analysis confirmed association between age and PROMIS Global Mental Health score (p=0.03). 15 participants (37.5%) reported cognitive difficulties post CAR-T cell therapy. On multivariate analysis, depression prior to CAR-T cell therapy was statistically significantly associated with higher likelihood of self-reported cognitive difficulties after CAR-T therapy (p=0.02) and there was a trend for association between acute neurotoxicity after CAR-T cell infusion and self-reported long-term cognitive difficulties (p=0.08). Having more cognitive difficulties was associated with worse Global Mental Health (p=0.0001) and worse Global Physical Health (p= 0.01). Similarly, worse scores for pain interference, sleep disturbance, fatigue, depression, anxiety, physical function, and social function were associated with more long-term self-reported cognitive difficulties (p=0.007,p=0.0003, p=0.00006, p=0.01, p=0.0007, p=0.003, p=0.0004 respectively). Our study demonstrates overall good neuropsychiatric outcomes in 40 long-term survivors after CAR-T cell therapy. However, despite good overall mean scores, nearly 50% of patients in the cohort reported at least one negative neuropsychiatric outcome (anxiety, depression or cognitive difficulty), and almost 20% scored at least one standard deviation lower than the general US population mean in Global Mental Health, indicating that there is a significant number of patients who would likely benefit from mental health services following CAR-T cell therapy. Younger age, anxiety and depression pre-CAR-T cell therapy, and acute neurotoxicity after CAR-T cell infusion may be risk factors for long-term neuropsychiatric problems in this patient population. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings. Disclosures Shaw: Therakos: Other: Speaker Engagement. Lee:AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Syndax: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Kadmon: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Turtle:T-CURX: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite/Gilead: Other: Ad hoc advisory board member; Caribou Biosciences: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Allogene: Other: Ad hoc advisory board member; Humanigen: Other: Ad hoc advisory board member; Juno Therapeutics: Patents & Royalties: Co-inventor with staff from Juno Therapeutics; pending, Research Funding; Nektar Therapeutics: Other: Ad hoc advisory board member, Research Funding; Precision Biosciences: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Eureka Therapeutics: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Other: Ad hoc advisory board member. Maloney:Juno Therapeutics: Honoraria, Patents & Royalties: patients pending , Research Funding; A2 Biotherapeutics: Honoraria, Other: Stock options ; Celgene,Kite Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; BioLine RX, Gilead,Genentech,Novartis: Honoraria.

Abstract Abstract 2877 FLC assay measures circulating unbound k and l light chains and is of diagnostic and prognostic value in plasma cell disorders. Normalization of FLC ratio is considered a higher level of complete response (CR) in MM but this has not been well validated prospectively. HLC is a novel antibody based assay that targets the unique junctional epitopes between the heavy chain and light chain constant regions of intact immunoglobulin (Ig) molecules. It separately measures in pairs the light chain types of each immunoglobulin class generating ratios of monoclonal Ig/background polyclonal Ig concentrations (i.e IgGκ/IgGλ, IgAκ/IgAλ and IgMκ/IgMλ); potentially simplifying assessment of monoclonal protein response. To assess the prognostic impact of these assays and to correlate them with electrophoretic/immunofixation (SPE/IFE) assessment, we analyzed 497 stored serum samples from patients enrolled in the Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT CTN) 0102 clinical trial, sponsored by the NHLBI and NCI, of tandem autologous (autoHCT) vs. tandem autoHCT- allogeneic (alloHCT). Samples were collected prior to the first autoHCT and analyzed for FLC (Freelite™) and HLC (Hevylite™) at The Binding Site, UK. Corresponding disease status determination was centrally performed by an expert data review committee using uniform response criteria and correlated with FLC and HLC results. HLC remission was defined as normalization of composite heavy and light chain ratios across all 3 measured heavy/light chain pairs or the normalization of clonal isotype with normal ratios of uninvolved pairs. The demographics of 497 patients with HLC/FLC samples at baseline were concordant with the main study and showed similar patient proportions from the 2 study arms. Of the 211 pts with baseline SPE response better than or equal to a very good partial response (>VGPR), 188 also had an HLC remission (Sensitivity=89%). Comparison of the HLC remission with the >VGPR disease state also identified a specificity of 52%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 58% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 87%. Similarly, all 56 patients in complete remission (CR) by SPE/IFE were in HLC remission. Compared with conventional CR assessment, sensitivity of HLC remission was 100%, specificity 39%, PPV and NPV values of 17% and 100% respectively. FLC remission correlated with >VGPR disease state had a sensitivity of 47%, specificity of 81% and a PPV and NPV of 64% and 67% respectively. Multivariate models for post transplant progression free survival (PFS) indicated that baseline disease response (>VGPR vs. partial remission (PR) or<PR) was associated with longer PFS. Adjusted models including baseline response, myeloma stage and study arm were used to compare the predictive utility of HLC and FLC assays. There was a lower risk of treatment failure (HR 0.74, p=0.02) and superior PFS for patients who achieved an HLC remission. When stratified by baseline disease response states, there was no additional prognostic impact for HLC remissions on PFS. Normalization of FLC ratio among patients with >VGPR disease state did not impact PFS (HR 0.96, p=0.83). Abnormal HLC after induction therapy has a high negative predictive value (100%) for identifying patients not achieving CR by uniform response criteria and is also associated with shorter PFS after transplant. FLC ratio normalization had no impact suggesting that stringent CR criteria may need further validation. Disclosures: Krishnan: Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Speakers Bureau. Alvi:the binding site: Employment. Harding:The Binding Site Group Ltd: Employment. Maloney:Cellgene: Consultancy.

Purpose SWOG S0016 was a phase III randomized study that compared the safety and efficacy of R-CHOP (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) with CHOP-RIT (CHOP followed by consolidation with iodine-133–tositumomab radioimmunotherapy) for previously untreated patients with follicular lymphoma. Understanding the long-term outcome of patients provides a benchmark for novel treatment regimens for FL. Patients and Methods Between 2001 and 2008, 531 previously untreated patients with FL were randomly assigned to receive either six cycles of R-CHOP or six cycles of CHOP-RIT. Patients with advanced-stage disease (bulky stage II, III, or IV) of any pathologic grade (1, 2, or 3) were eligible. Results After a median follow-up of 10.3 years, 10-year estimates of progression-free and overall survival were 49% and 78% among all patients, respectively. Patients in the CHOP-RIT arm had significantly better 10-year progression-free survival compared with patients in the R-CHOP arm (56% v 42%; P = .01), but 10-year overall survival was not different between the two arms (75% v 81%; P = .13). There was no significant difference between the CHOP-RIT and R-CHOP arms in regard to incidence of second malignancies (15.1% v 16.1%; P = .81) or myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukemia (4.9% v 1.8%; P = .058). The estimated 10-year cumulative incidences of death resulting from second malignancies were not different (7.1% v 3.2%; P = .16), but cumulative incidence of death resulting from myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukemia was higher in the CHOP-RIT arm compared with the R-CHOP arm (4% v 0.9%; P = .02). Conclusion Given these outstanding outcomes, immunochemotherapy should remain the standard induction approach for patients with high-risk FL until long-term follow-up of alternative approaches demonstrates superiority.

Abstract Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) is a distinct B-cell lymphoproliferative disorder for which clearly defined criteria for the diagnosis, initiation of therapy, and treatment strategy have been proposed as part of the consensus panels of International Workshops on WM (IWWM). As part of the IWWM-7 and based on recently published and ongoing clinical trials, the panels updated treatment recommendations. Therapeutic strategy in WM should be based on individual patient and disease characteristics (age, comorbidities, need for rapid disease control, candidacy for autologous transplantation, cytopenias, IgM-related complications, hyperviscosity, and neuropathy). Mature data show that rituximab combinations with cyclophosphamide/dexamethasone, bendamustine, or bortezomib/dexamethasone provided durable responses and are indicated for most patients. New monoclonal antibodies (ofatumumab), second-generation proteasome inhibitors (carfilzomib), mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, and Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors are promising and may expand future treatment options. A different regimen is typically recommended for relapsed or refractory disease. In selected patients with relapsed disease after long-lasting remission, reuse of a prior effective regimen may be appropriate. Autologous stem cell transplantation may be considered in young patients with chemosensitive disease and in newly diagnosed patients with very-high-risk features. Active enrollment of patients with WM in clinical trials is encouraged.