Rimsza, Lisa M.

Abstract Background:The role of radiation therapy (XRT) for advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is controversial. In the HD15 trial, the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) administered XRT for PET-positive residual disease ≥2.5 cm at least 2 weeks after completion of chemotherapy and showed 91.5 % in-field control rate with a median follow-up of 102 months (Engert, A; personal communication). However, there is no comparison arm where patients with PET-positive residual disease ≥2.5 cm did not receive XRT. SWOG S0816 was a US intergroup trial utilizing ABVD-based therapy with response adaptation based on interim PET imaging; XRT was not allowed per protocol, and counted as an event. In this analysis, we identified patients in S0816 who would have met HD15 criteria for XRT, but did not receive XRT per design. We then modeled the potential impact of XRT on disease control. Patients and Methods:Of 336 eligible and evaluable HIV-negative patients enrolled in S0816, 49 had an end-of-treatment PET (termed "PET3," to be done 6-8 weeks after completion of chemotherapy) that was positive (i.e. Deauville 4-5) upon central review. We simulated the progression free survival (PFS) if XRT had been delivered per HD15 criteria (PET positive disease and ≥2.5 cm), evaluating by assumptions of 50, 80 and 90% control of the disease within the XRT fields. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analyses were performed with additional size cut-off points of 2.0 and 1.5 cm. Results:The median follow-up for the 49 PET3 positive patients was 71 months (range 9.7-92.6). For these 49 patients, the observed landmark PFS at 2 years after the date of PET3 was 30.6%. Twenty-four (49%), 33(67%), and 40 (82%) of the 49 patients had at least one site of disease that met the HD15 criteria for XRT with ≥2.5 cm, ≥2.0 cm, and ≥1.5 cm size cut-offs respectively. Sixteen, 19, and 25 patients had disease progression respectively from each group at median of 1.4-1.5 months. Twelve, 12, and 15 patients had relapses limited to the sites that would have been radiated following HD15 criteria with ≥2.5 cm, ≥2.0 cm, and ≥1.5 cm respectively. Estimated landmark PFS at 2 years for the 49 PET3 positive patients assuming 50, 80, and 90 % control of the disease within the radiated sites following HD15 guideline with ≥2.5 cm, ≥2.0 cm, and ≥1.5 cm cut-off are summarized in columns A, B, and C of the table respectively. For the entire group of 336 patients, the observed PFS at 2 years was 79%. Estimated 2-year PFS for the entire group of 336 patients assuming 50, 80, and 90 % control of the disease within the radiated sites following HD15 guideline with ≥2.5 cm, ≥2.0 cm, and ≥1.5 cm cut-off are in columns D, E, and F of the table respectively. Conclusion: Among the PET3 positive patients, consolidation XRT per HD15 criteria with cut-off points of 2.5, 2.0, and 1.5 cm could have raised the 2-year PFS by 12-28 % assuming 50-90% local control within radiated sites. However, the improvement in PFS is more moderate at 1.6-3.9 % if we consider the entire cohort of 336 patients. Although there may be some gain in PFS as the cut-off point is lowered by our ROC analysis, one needs to consider the trade-off against potentially increasing normal tissue toxicity as more sites are irradiated. Table. Table. Disclosures Brem: Pharamcyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genetech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bartlett:Merck & Co: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; ImaginAB: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Acerta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Evens:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Affimed: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Tesaro: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics International DMC: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy. Rimsza:NanoString: Other: Inventor on the patent for the Lymph2Cx assay. Leonard:Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; MEI Pharma: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; United Therapeutics: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Biotest: Consultancy; Sutro: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Genentech/Roche: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy. Kahl:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; CTI: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Smith:BMS: Consultancy; Portola: Honoraria. Friedberg:Bayer: Honoraria.

Abstract Abstract 87 Background: The International Prognostic Index (IPI) remains the most powerful predictor of clinical outcome in DLBCL in the R-CHOP era, serving as a useful surrogate for the biology we are just beginning to understand. With a follow-up of more than 9 years, its uniformly staged and treated patients and its prospectively collected unstained slides for correlative studies, the clinical data set from E4494, the US Intergroup trial comparing CHOP and RCHOP in patients >60 years with DLBCL, stands as a valuable resource for investigating prognosis in DLBCL. Based on immunohistochemistry, we previously showed that rituximab modulates the prognostic significance of some biomarkers in DLBCL. With these same specimens, the quantitative nuclease protection assay (qNPA), a methodology for measuring mRNA levels in FFPET, was used to develop separate prognostic signatures for the CHOP and RCHOP arms that can be simply applied using stored unstained slides. Methods: Five micron unstained FFPET sections from 183 eligible and evaluable cases enrolled on E4494 and submitted for prospective immunohistochemical correlative studies more than ten years ago were used for this analysis. Tissue was scraped from slides and a multiplexed qNPA was performed in triplicate using a customized Array Plate assay (HTG, Inc) for 43 genes of interest. TBP served as a housekeeping gene. Association between standardized log gene expression and patient failure-free survival (FFS) and overall survival (OS) was obtained using the Cox proportional hazards model. A weighted analysis was used to eliminate the confounding effect of maintenance rituximab. Genes that showed at least marginal significance in the univariate analysis were used to perform LASSO (penalized method to select best subset) to select a final list of genes in the multivariate analysis. Using the predictive model for either CHOP or R-CHOP induction, individual risk scores were calculated based on the multivariable model, and cases were dichotomized into low and high risk groups based on the median risk score. The model was then validated using the Lenz dataset (NEJM, 2008). Results: In six cases, tissue from slides prepared >10 years ago was compared to freshly cut sections from corresponding blocks, and showed excellent concordance (corr=0.86). On-study characteristics for the 176 cases with analyzable data were representative of the greater E4494 patient population. Six gene predictors were developed for each arm of the trial: RCHOP: FN1, LMO2, AKT1, HIF1a, AKT3, BCL2; and CHOP: PDCD4, HLADRB1, COL3A1, LMO2, ROBO4, TP53. Both signatures proved powerful predictors of FFS and OS among CHOP (FFS: p=0.0031; OS: p=0.0013) and RCHOP (FFS: p=0.001; OS=p=0.0015) treated patients. When adjusted for the clinically-based IPI, the gene-risk score retained its significance (CHOP: FFS p=0.0007; OS p=0.0011; RCHOP: FFS p=0.003; OS, p=0.001) while the IPI became only marginally significant (CHOP: FFS: p=0.06, OS p=0.06; R-CHOP: FFS p=0.09, OS p=0.02), suggesting that the gene predictor accounted for much of the predictive power of the IPI. The predictive model was then validated using the Lenz dataset for OS. The predictor models for CHOP and R-CHOP-treated patients effectively dichotomized patients into prognostic subgroups (CHOP: p<0.0001; RCHOP: p=0.0014; see figure below) and this difference was maintained when the subset over age 60 was analyzed (CHOP: p=0.0008; RCHOP: p=0.017). When adjusted for the IPI, the molecular predictor developed for CHOP treated patients remained robust (OS: P=.0001; HR 2.39), while the molecular predictor for RCHOP predicted OS marginally (p=.06; HR 1.82), with shorter followup than the CHOP cohort. Conclusions: Unstained slides from FFPET stored for many years may be used to investigate gene expression in lymphoma biopsy specimens for which there is mature followup. Gene risk scores based on the expression of a limited number of genes are powerful predictors of clinical outcome. Disclosures: Pollock: HTG, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Botros:HTG, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Horning:Genentech: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Abstract Gene expression profiling has shown that diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) clusters into three major subtypes based on similarity in expression patterns to their cell of origin (COO): germinal center B-cell-like (GCB-DLBCL), activated B-cell-like DLBCL (ABC-DBLCL) and primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL). These subtypes of DLBCLs are associated with distinctly different overall survival rates after standard immunochemotherapy. However, clinical and prognostic heterogeneity remains within COO subsets and strategies are needed to further stratify patients to identify and target high-risk subsets. A comprehensive genomic analysis of COO on a clinically defined set of DLBCL cases has not been performed and the aim of this study was to use whole-exome sequencing (WES) data from 58 paired tumor-normal DLBCL samples to assess association of known DLBCL genomic alterations with cell COO as well as for identification of novel and relevant genetic biomarkers. To investigate genomic alterations associated with DLBCL subsets, we analyzed WES and genome wide copy number data from 58 paired tumor-normal DLBCL tumors. Gene expression profiling or Hans classification was performed to determine DLBCL COO subtype; 31 patients were classified as GCB and 27 as non-GCB. The WES data were used to 1) assess the association of known DLBCL genomic alterations with COO, and 2) identify novel alternations associated with COO. Statistical analysis was performed and the data were ranked by significance (p≤ 0.05) within each DLBCL subtype. In total, 45 genomic abnormalities were analyzed for their association with either GCB, non-GCB or both. Mutations in CREBBP, EZH2, MEF2B, FOXO1 and REL have also been reported as GCB driver mutations and we observed GCB patients with these mutations, but the mutation clustering was not wholly associated with GCB. MYC double-hits were exclusively found in the GCB-subtype group. For the non-GCB cases we found that mutations in MAP2K3 and MYD88 were significantly associated with this subtype(p< 0.05). In addition to mutational patterns, we identified several copy number alterations (CNA) across both groups. Chromosomal losses in GCB patients were found at chromosomes 10q11.21-10q24.23, 4q12-4q35.2, 3q12.1-3q29, 4p12-4p16.3, 10p11.21-10p15.3, and 14q11.2-14q24.3 whereas gains were localized to 7q11.1-7q36.3, 7p11.2-7p22.3, and 1q21-1q32.1 (p < 0.05). No CNA was observed to directly associate with non-GCB patients, however, a loss at 9p21 and gains at 9q24.1 and 18q21.33 trended with the non-GCB subtype, supporting previous reports. Loss at 10q23.31 or a gain in 2p13-2p12 have been reported as being specific for GCB and our data confirmed the association of 10q23.31 with GCB while a gain at 2p13-2p12 (REL)was found in both subtypes. To further understand genomic differences between DLBCL subtypes, we evaluated the relative percentage of each genomic feature. 18/45 (40%) were only observed in GCB patients whereas 2/45 (5%) were specific to the non-GCB subtype. The majority (25/45, 55%) overlapped between the two subtypes. Throughout our analysis we noted that 7 non-GCB cases lacked any of the driver mutations analyzed in the study. While all cases carried mutations, they consisted of low frequency mutations that were not specifically associated with COO. 2/7 cases had a gain at 9p24.1 that included CD274 and JAK2. Because 9p24.1 gains have not been fully defined in DLBCL, we reviewed all cases and identified 4 (7%) with a 9p24.1 gain, 3 of which were non-GCB and 1 GCB. One non-GCB case was EBV+ and none of the cases showed evidence of PMBCL. Of the 9p24.1 cases, three had RNAseq data available and we found that PDL1 and JAK2 expression was elevated (12 fold p< 0.01 and 7 fold p< 0.01, respectively) when compared to the 9p24.1 normal cases (n=32). While outcome was not the focus of the study, we did note that 6/7 cases that lacked driver mutations achieved event free survival at 24 months (EFS24). Taken together, this analysis has further characterized the genetic profile of each COO subtype and has identified novel GCB CNAs which require independent replication. Additionally, we identify a subgroup of non-GCB DLBCL patients that do not harbor known driver mutations and require further genomic study to better resolve the biology of these tumors. Together, these data provide insight on the genetic heterogeneity of DLBCL and identify genetic variants that may inform subtype specific therapy. Disclosures Nowakowski: Morphosys: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, 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..

Abstract To date, there are no effective strategies to treat patients with a particularly lethal form of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) that over-express both B-cell lymphoma gene-2 (BCL2) and cellular-myelocytomatosis (MYC) oncogenes. Here, we provide a novel approach for simultaneously targeting BCL2 and MYC directly through secondary DNA structures. These structures act as molecular switches, turning gene expression on or off, and serve as scaffolds for protein and small molecule interaction. Previously identified compounds IMC-76 and GQC-05, recognize the BCL2 or MYC promoter region DNA structures, respectively, and independently lower mRNA and protein expression of each oncogene.For utility in sensitizing aggressive lymphoid tumors that concurrently dual express BCL2 and MYC, we examined the efficacy ofIMC-76 and GQC-05 in the presence and absence of a standard chemotherapy, cyclophosphamide (CPA)to inhibit tumor growth in a severe combinedimmunodeficient U2932 DLBCLxenograft mouse model. Unlike IMC-76, effects of GQC-05 in a xenograftmouse model are unknown; therefore, our initial in vivo studies involved GQC-05 alone and with IMC-76 in combination with CPA to determine the concentration for MYCdown-regulation and a maximum tolerated dose (MTD). At 2.5 and 5 mg/kg GQC-05 with 50 mg/kg CPA, we observed no effect on mean mouse weight and while the 5 mg/kg GQC-05-CPA combination group exhibited some mouse death, LD50 was not reached. Tumors from mice treated with GQC-05 and CPA were compared to diluent or CPA alone treated mice for MYC mRNA level and found to have significantly less MYC expression. As expected, there was no effect on BCL2 mRNA levels. Next, we carried over the 5 mg/kg GQC-05 to a subsequent in vivo experiment where we also tested a 10 mg/kg GQC-05 dose and included IMC-76 at 10 mg/kg, a previously established efficacious dose, to determine if we would reach an MTD, but still retain the repression of MYC. While the mice were able to tolerate the 5 mg/kg GQC-05 dose when IMC-76 and/or CPA was added to the treatment regimen, the LD50 was reached and surpassed in mice treated with the 10 mg/kg of GQC-05 combinations. However, both concentrations of GQC-05 when co-treated with IMC-76 and CPA resulted in a notable decrease of tumor MYC expression relative to untreated and CPA only treated mice as well as a detectable inhibition of BCL2. We then conducted a follow-up study to evaluate effects on tumor burden using concentrations of GQC-05 below the LD50, 5 mg/kg and 7.5 mg/kg, and also reduced the dose of CPA to 30 mg/kg. The co-treatment of mice with IMC-76 (10 mg/kg) and GQC-05 (7.5 mg/kg) in combination with CPA delayed tumor growth and decreased tumor size by 50%, 46%, and 37% at 9, 12, and 15 days post-first-day drug administration compared to the diluent and 50%, 67%, and 44% smaller tumors relative to CPA only treated mice (Figure 1). Overall, there was a prominent decrease in tumor burden in these mice as determined by area under the curveand the tumors displayed a lower expression of BCL2 and MYC at both the mRNA and protein levels. Interestingly, tumors of mice that received IMC-76 and GQC-05 also showed knock-down of BCL2 and MYC, but no effect on tumor burden unless CPA was present indicating these transcriptional inhibitors act as chemo-sensitizers. None of the various drug regimens resulted in a significant loss of mouse weight and while survival for GQC-05 7.5 mg/kg treated mice was reduced, LD50 was not reached. These are the first studies to demonstrate two differentpromoterDNA secondary structures can be targeted at the same time for direct transcriptional inhibition that leads tochemo-sensitization and slowed tumor growth in mice.Our findings demonstrate the potential utility of a dual-targeted, precision medicine-based strategy to improve the response of DLBCL patients to current chemotherapy and overcome resistant disease. Figure Tumor burden of DLBCL xenograft mice Figure. Tumor burden of DLBCL xenograft mice Disclosures Gokhale: Tetragene: Equity Ownership. Hurley:Tetragene: Consultancy, Equity Ownership. 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..

Abstract Background: We previously reported that Lenalidomide combined with R-CHOP (R2CHOP) has significant activity in non-GCB (non-germinal center B-cell) subtype of DLBCL as defined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) using Hans algorithm (J Clin Oncol. 2015 Jan 20;33(3):251-7). However, defining non-GCB subtype of DLBCL by IHC as opposed to the "gold standard" gene expression profiling (GEP) is subject to technical limitations and its prognostic value has not reproduced in some recently published studies. In addition, recent reports questioned prognostic value of GEP in prospective clinical trials as opposed to initial reports from retrospective case series. To address these concerns, we assessed outcomes by cell of origin (COO) as determined via GEP using NanoString Lymphoma Subtyping Test (LST) on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue on patients enrolled in a phase 2 study of R2CHOP and an independent comparison cohort of patients treated with RCHOP alone. Methods: Eligible patients for R2CHOP phase 2 study MC078E were adults with newly diagnosed, untreated, stages II-IV CD20 positive DLBCL. Patients received oral lenalidomide 25 mg days 1-10 with standard dose R-CHOP every 21 days for 6 cycles. All patients received pegfilgrastim on day 2 of each cycle and aspirin prophylaxis. DLBCL molecular subtype was determined by GEP using NanoString LST, a multiplexed digital gene expression assay performed on the nCounter® Dx Analysis System and reported as GCB vs ABC vs unclassified. A comparison cohort of RCHOP treated DLBCL patients was generated from the prospectively enrolled Mayo Clinic component of the Lymphoma SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER). MER patients meeting the same inclusion criteria as MC078E with available tissue were selected based via matching on age, stage, and IPI to the MC078E patients. Event-free survival was defined as time from diagnosis (MER) or study registration (MC078E) to progression, re-treatment, or death. EFS24 was defined as being event-free at 24 months. Associations between COO and outcome were assessed via log-rank tests due to censoring for EFS24. Results: 50 MC078E R2CHOP patients enrolled between 2008 and 2013,124 matched MER RCHOP patients diagnosed between 2003 and 2012 were assessed for COO. Median follow up in 70 patients still alive was 7.9 years (1.9-13.0) in RCHOP treated patients and 4.4 years (1.9-5.5) for 24 in R2CHOP treated patients still alive. Median age was 65 years (range 35-89) in RCHOP treated patients and 69 years (22-87) in R2CHOP patients (p=0.485). 53 RCHOP treated patients (43%) and 31 R2CHOP treated patients (62%) had intermediate-high or high IPI (p=0.021). COO was GCB, ABC, and unclassified DLBCL subtype in 80, 31 and 13 patients in the 124 RCHOP cohort and 33, 13 and 4 patients in the R2CHOP treated patients, respectively (see table). EFS24 was inferior for ABC (48%) compared to GCB DLBCL 71% in MER RCHOP treated patients (p=0.013). In contrast, in R2CHOP treated pts, EFS24 was not different between ABC vs GCB DLBCL 69% vs 67% (p= 0.674). Conclusion: Cell of origin classification of DLBCL determined by NanoString LST remains prognostic in a series of prospectively enrolled DLBCL patients treated with RCHOP. R2CHOP shows promising efficacy in ABC DLBCL as defined by NanoString LST, where the addition of lenalidomide to RCHOP appears to mitigate the negative impact of an ABC molecular subtype on the outcome. Table Table. Disclosures Nowakowski: Morphosys: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Maurer:Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Storhoff:NanoString Technologies, Inc.: Employment, Other: Stock option. Dennis:NanoString Technologies, Inc.: Employment, Other: Stock option. Gandhi:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Thakurta:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hagner:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. 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..

Abstract Background: We recently clarified the use of consolidative autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) as first remission consolidation therapy for high grade diffuse aggressive T and B non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL)in patients with high-intermediate (HI) or High (H) age adjusted IPI disease (Stiff et al, NEJM 369:1681). After receiving CHOP or R-CHOP for 5 cycles responding patients were randomized to either 3 more induction cycles or 1 cycle followed by an ASCT using either a BCNU or TBI based preparative regimen. We found a PFS but not OS advantage for those randomized to transplant and no differential treatment effect for those with T-NHL patients as compared to B-NHL in the initial analysis of this study. In light of Phase II data suggesting a value of early ASCT for T-NHL, a lack of randomized ASCT trials for T-NHL and the inferior prognosis for T-NHL as compared to B cell disease, we further evaluated this sub group, since a post hoc analysis of the entire trial did find a survival advantage for those with H IPI disease. This then provided a unique opportunity to evaluate the role of ASCT consolidation for T-cell NHL in the setting of a prospective randomized trial. Method: Among the 370 eligible B-NHL and T-NHL patients with HI/H IPI disease treated on this trial, 40 had a T-NHL phenotype and were the subject of this analysis. Individual patient files were re-reviewed and those randomized after the first 5 cycles of CHOP were further analyzed for stage, IPI group, histology (centrally reviewed), and response to induction and consolidation and updated survival outcome. Results: Of the 40 T-NHL patients enrolled on study, 28 (70%) were randomized after induction therapy, a similar ratio to the entire trial (68%). Twelve were not randomized; 1 was ineligible for study, and of the eligible 11, 9 were HI IPI and 8 had peripheral T cell (PTCL-NOS). These 11 were not randomized due to patient choice in 2, and all of the remaining 9 pts progressed early: 2 after C1; 3 after C3, 1 after C4, and 3 after C5. For the 28 randomized, their median age was 50 and 19 were males. Of the group, 21/28 had B symptoms at diagnosis, 14 had stage IV disease, and 18 and 10 were in the HI and H IPI groups respectively. Histologies included 11 with PTCL-NOS, 7 angioimmunoblastic and 10 anaplastic large cell NHL. At randomization 13 were to continue CHOP and 15, ASCT. Of the 15 assigned to ASCT, 3 did not undergo transplant (2-refusals, 1- unable to mobilize); 7 received the BCNU-etoposide-cyclophosphamide and 5 the TBI-etoposide-cyclophosphamide preparative regimen. The 5 year estimates of PFS and OS for the randomized ASCT vs CHOP only groups (intent to treat) were 40% vs 38% (p=0.56) and 40% vs 45% (p=0.98) respectively. We found no difference in outcome based on IPI group, histology or stage of disease. Interestingly, only 1/7 patients who received BCV as the ASCT preparative regimen are long term survivors vs 4/5 receiving the TBI-based regimen. Conclusions: We did not observe a PFS/OS advantage for those with high-risk T-NHL in first remission randomized to ASCT following CHOP induction vs CHOP alone in this retrospective analysis. In addition, the 30% early drop out rate before randomization due primarily to early progression strongly suggests that more optimal induction regimens need to be developed for this disease. While the numbers are small the finding that TBI based preparative regimens might be associated with a higher PFS is of interest and deserves further study. Support: NIH/NCI grants CA180888 and CA180819; Bristol-Myers Squibb. Contributions of Dr. Raymond R Tubbs, deceased, are gratefully acknowledged. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Porcu: miRagen: Other: Investigator in a clinical trial; celgene: Other: Investigator in a clinical trial; Millenium: Other: investigator in a clinical trial; Innate Pharma: Other: Investigator in a clinical trial. Winter:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Medivation: Other: Provision of investigational agent for clinical trial; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding. Kahl:This study was coordinated by the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (Robert L. Comis, MD and Mitchell D. Schnall, MD, PhD, Group Co-Chairs) and supported by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health under the following award number: Research Funding. Smith:Juno: Consultancy; TGTX: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Other: on a DSMB for two trials ; Gilead: Consultancy; Portola: Consultancy; Amgen: Other: Educational lecture to sales force; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. 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.. Fisher:Gilead: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Johnson and Johnson: Consultancy. Friedberg:Bayer: Honoraria, Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board.

One-third of peripheral T-cell lymphomas are “not otherwise specified” (PTCL-NOS), but they have been subdivided into 2 subgroups based on gene expression profiling. Amador and colleagues generated an immunohistochemical algorithm that parallels the molecular separation of PTCL-NOS and provides useful prognostic information.

Abstract Introduction Primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMLBCL) is recognized as a distinct lymphoid neoplasm. However, differentiation from diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) can be difficult due to the need for close clinicopathologic correlation and variability in morphology and immunophenotype. In addition, a recent study identified lymphomas that share molecular and morphological features with PMBCL, yet do not involve the mediastinum. Correct classification of PMBCL may impact therapeutic decision making, increasing the demand for more accurate diagnostic methods. Recent research identified a new gene expression signature that robustly differentiated PMLBCL from DLBCL in both training and independent validation cohorts using RNA isolated from routinely available formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues. Methods This assay, known as the “Lymph3Cx,” utilizes the nCounter platform (NanoString Technologies, Seattle, WA) and consists of probes for 58 target genes (including both discriminatory and housekeeping genes) that can distinguish PMLBCL cases from DLBCL as well as the “cell-of-origin” subtypes of DLBCL. In the current study reported here, the Molecular Diagnostics–Arizona Laboratory (MDAZL) performed a full validation of the Lymph3Cx assay for use in our clinical diagnostic laboratory. Results Assay performance included accuracy (92.9%), precision (100%), analytical sensitivity (100 ng RNA limit of detection), analytical specificity (measures are in place to prevent interfering substances), reproducibility between technologists and technical replicates (100%), specimen stability (18 months for unstained tissue sections), and RNA Isolation Kit Utility (two kits with equal performance) in order to become the first CLIA-certified, CAP-accredited clinical diagnostics laboratory to offer a molecular assay for distinction of PMLBCL from DLBCL. Conclusion The Lymph3Cx assay will be prospectively used for evaluation of Mayo Clinic patients and for use as an integrated biomarker in clinical trials.

Abstract Introduction Lymph2Cx lymphoma cell-of-origin assay (LM2CX) was developed by the Lymphoma/Leukemia Molecular Profiling Project (LLMPP) to better categorize diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). NanoString has licensed the assay and is currently pursuing FDA approval. In the meantime, the test is offered exclusively as a lab-developed test (LDT) by the Mayo Clinic Molecular Diagnostics–Arizona Lab (MDAZL) to Mayo Clinic Enterprise patients. In order to comply with these restrictions, the normal workflow for Mayo Clinic Rochester has been modified as cases are sent to Arizona. Rochester consultants order LM2CX using their local laboratory information system (LIS). Slides are prepared by Rochester histology and then shipped to Arizona, where they are entered into the Arizona LIS and processed. In July 2018, we discovered numerous cases that were ordered but not shipped. Because this step took place at the LIS transition between Arizona and Rochester, it was not detected immediately. Methods Allied Health Staff (AHS) colleagues in Rochester and Arizona had the unique opportunity to collaborate. After Arizona AHS identified the problem, they reached out to the Rochester pathology reporting specialists (PRSs) and began a joint improvement project. Together, we were able to measure the impact of the problem, with Arizona auditing digitally, while Rochester audited physical cases. We found 29% of the cases were handled improperly over a 6-month time period. In order to eliminate the gap, Rochester implemented several improvements, including training, tagging all LM2CX cases, and huddle discussions, while Arizona AHS monitored the process digitally. Results Since implementation of improvements, we have had zero defects. Modifications to AHS/consultant training in Rochester will ensure continued success. Conclusions This intervention illustrates the importance of strong collaborations in order to quickly respond to testing issues and provide the greatest value to patients.