Wang, Victoria

Abstract Introduction: Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is marked by impaired T cell responses that limit the efficacy of immunotherapies. CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy (CART19) received FDA approval to treat CLL in 2024. However, itsefficacy in CLL patients remains low, with durable remission rate of ~20%. Ibrutinib, a Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has shown synergy with CART19 in preclinical and early clinical studies. We aimed to study the impact of ibrutinib on CART19 utilizing clinical samples from the pivotal clinical trial E1912 (NCT02048813) of ibrutinib/rituximab (IR) vs fludarabine/cyclophosphamide/rituximab (FCR). This trial led to the FDA approval of first line ibrutinib in CLL. Methods: We generated CART19 incorporating either CD28 (28ζ) or 41BB (BBζ) costimulatory domains from T cells isolated from patients with CLL treated with IR or FCR on the E1912 trial. IR samples were collected at baseline (pretreatment), 6- or 12-months during treatment, or at progression. FCR samples were collected at baseline, 15-18 months during treatment, or at progression. For animal experiments, NOD-SCID-γ-/- (NSG) mice were intravenously (i.v.) engrafted with 1×10⁶ luciferase⁺ CD19⁺ JeKo-1 cells. Upon tumor establishment (~10⁸ photons/sec by bioluminescence imaging), mice were randomized and treated i.v. with 1×10⁶ 28ζ or BBζ derived from longitudinal IR- or FCR-treated patient samples. To further assess the impact of prolonged ibrutinib exposure on CART19 function, we chronically stimulated healthy donor-derived 28ζ or BBζ in vitro for 22 days with JeKo-1 cells and 100nM ibrutinib or vehicle control and then tested CART19 functions. Finally, we performed single cell RNA sequencing (scRNAseq) of longitudinal patient T cell samples treated with IR. Results: Ex vivo T cell expansion was significantly enhanced following IR compared to FCR. BBζ generated from IR-treated patients after 6 months of ibrutinib exhibited enhanced in vitro expansion (p=0.016) and antigen-specific proliferation (p=0.038) in the presence of JeKo-1 cells. This corresponded with significantly improved antitumor efficacy and prolonged survival in vivo compared to cells generated at disease progression (p=0.017). In contrast, 28ζ showed no significant differences in efficacy across IR studied treatment timepoints. BBζ from FCR-treated patients did not show differences in tumor control based on treatment timepoints but demonstrated shorter survival compared to BBζ from IR-treated patients. 28ζ from FCR-treated patients generated at disease progression demonstrated significantly reduced tumor control and shorter survival compared to 28ζ produced at baseline (p=0.0002), indicating detrimental effects of FCR treatment on the therapeutic potential of CART products. To further investigate the impact of prolonged ibrutinib exposure, we utilized in vitro models of CART exhaustion. We found that, after repeated antigen stimulation with JeKo-1 cells, ibrutinib-treated BBζ had significantly increased antigen-specific degranulation (p=0.005), and cytokine production (IL-2, p=0.045; TNF-α, p=0.003; IFN-γ, p=0.001), compared to BBζ treated with vehicle control. In contrast, 28ζ did not show improved degranulation or cytokine production in cocultures with ibrutinib. Prolonged ibrutinib exposure led to downregulation of FOXO3, a transcription factor associated with T cell exhaustion which has been shown to cause dysfunction specifically in BBζ. These results further indicate that ibrutinib may be more beneficial to BBζ. Indeed, scRNAseq revealed that after ≥ 6 months of ibrutinib, T cells showed downregulation of inflammatory, oxidative stress, and apoptosis pathways, paralleled by modest activation of MYC and E2F targets. However, at disease progression, T cells under ibrutinib treatment displayed marked upregulation of interferon signaling, inflammation responses, and stress-related programs, indicating a shift toward immune reactivation or dysfunction.Conclusion: Our study shows that BBζ, but not 28ζ, generated 6 months during ibrutinib treatment has superior antitumor activity and persistence compared to similar later timepoints or FCR-treated counterparts. Prolonged ibrutinib exposure enhances BBζ function by modulating stress and apoptotic pathways. These findings highlight the importance of pre-CART treatment timing and support ibrutinib as a potential enhancer of CART cell fitness in CLL.

Abstract Measurable residual disease (MRD)-testing is often used to evaluate therapy efficacy in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL), with undetectable MRD (uMRD) often serving as a surrogate for progression-free survival (PFS). However, its accuracy in predicting PFS with Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKis), with or without venetoclax, remains controversial. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases up to February 8, 2025 using terms chronic lymphocytic leukemiaOR small lymphocytic lymphomaAND measurable residual diseaseAND progression-free survival. Bayesian Weibull accelerated failure time models were used for individual-level analyses, while trial-level correlations used weighted Spearman rank tests and weighted least squares regression. A total of 41 trials (9,569 subjects) were included. Therapies tested included BTKis (11 trials), venetoclax (12), the combination (5), and other therapies like chemoimmunotherapy and monoclonal antibodies (23). MRD was assessed in blood (21 trials), bone marrow (7), or both (9). At the individual level, subjects with detectable MRD (dMRD) had a higher progression and/or death risk compared to uMRD (Hazard Ratio [HR] = 3.63; 95% Credibility Interval [CrI] 3.30-4.00; P < 0.01). In sensitivity analysis, MRD-testing showed reduced predictive accuracy for PFS in subjects receiving BTKi-based therapy (HR = 1.52, 1.02–2.19) compared to venetoclax-based (HR = 4.46, 3.61–5.50) or other therapies (HR = 3.86, 3.45–4.34). Across subgroups, dMRD remained consistently associated with increased risk. In subjects with del(17p)/TP53 variants, dMRD predicted greater (HR = 6.52; 3.47–12.79) versus those without (HR = 4.34; 3.24–5.81). By IGHV status, dMRD conferred a 3.54-fold risk in IGHV-mutated (95% CrI: 2.42-5.34) and 2.64-fold in unmutated subjects (95% CrI: 2.10-3.34). Among response categories, risk was higher in partial responders (HR = 2.39; 1.70–3.43) than complete responders (HR = 1.64; 1.24–2.17). dMRD also predicted increased risk in relapsed/refractory (R/R) CLL subjects (HR = 4.11, 2.54-6.84) and untreated subjects (HR = 3.59, 3.25-3.98). Bone marrow MRD testing proved a stronger predictor of PFS than blood (HR = 4.27, 3.42-5.35 versus HR = 3.52, 3.17-3.92). The highest risk was seen with MRD testing 12–32 months post-treatment (HR = 5.37, 4.56-6.40), though differences across timepoints were modest after adjusting for analytical method. At the trial level, correlations between MRD and PFS were weak (Spearman's rho [R] = -0.35; Determination Coefficients [R²] = 0.02). In sensitivity analyses, correlations remained low for BTKi-based therapy (R = -0.19 [-0.73, 0.50]; R² = 0.04) and venetoclax-based therapy (R = -0.32 [-0.85, 0.45]; R² = 0.14), but were stronger for other therapies (R = -0.80; R² = 0.58). For other therapies, MRD tests of bone marrow samples showed higher predictive value than blood (R = -0.94; R² = 0.86 versus R = -0.81; R² = 0.63). Despite blood samples and testing at 9-months of other therapies meeting the validity threshold (R² = 0.63, P = 0.21; R² = 0.63, P = 0.06), the associated P-values preclude definitive conclusions. Additional analyses examining sample source, time points and testing method within treatment classes suggest limited accuracy of predicting PFS in heterogeneous conditions (all R < -0.85, R² < 0.60). In subgroup analyses, untreated trials showed weak associations (R = -0.30 [-0.77, 0.13]; R²= 0.02), while R/R CLL trials were insufficient for analysis. MRD-testing of blood showed lower PFS predictive accuracy than bone marrow(R = -0.26 [-0.71, 0.20]; R² = 0.03 versus R = -0.37 [-1.00, 0.62]; R² = 0.03). MRD-testing at 15 months demonstrated slightly better accuracy than 9-month testing (R = -0.59 [-1.00, 0.61]; R² = 0.27 versus R = -0.26 [-0.88, 0.41]; R² = 0.04).MRD-testing by NGS outperformed MPFC (R = -0.54 [-1.00, 1.00]; R² = 0.45 versus R = -0.30 [-0.76, 0.13]; R² = 0.01), though both methods remained below the pre-specified determination coefficient threshold. Our data indicate accuracy of results of MRD-testing to predict PFS depends on whether used at the subject or trial-level, type of therapy and sample tested. Importantly MRD-testing is not an accurate predictor of PFS for BTKis with or without venetoclax. We suggest results of MRD-testing as a surrogate for PFS should not be used as a surrogate endpoint for studies of BTKis with or without venetoclax.

Abstract Background: MCL is a B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma for which auto-HCT is often employed in first CR, based on non-randomized phase 2 trials, and a randomized trial (Dreyling et al, Blood 2005) conducted before the advent of more effective induction and maintenance regimens. The TRIANGLE trial (Dreyling et al, Lancet 2024) suggested that auto-HCT may not add benefit to more effective induction and maintenance regimens containing high-dose cytarabine, rituximab and BTK inhibitors. E4151 explored whether auto-HCT benefits pts achieving deep first remission, as measured by a highly sensitive immunoglobulin high throughput sequencing minimal residual disease (MRD) assay. Methods: EA4151 is a four arm trial conducted through the U.S. National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) and Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT-CTN). Pts with MCL between the ages of 18 and 70 and in first remission were eligible. After induction, pts underwent PET/CT, bone marrow biopsy, and the clonoSEQ® MRD assay from peripheral blood. Pts in CR with uMRD at 1 in 10-6 sensitivity (uMRD6) were randomized 1:1 to Arm A (auto-HCT + 3 years of maintenance rituximab [MR]) or Arm B (3 years of MR alone), stratified by MIPI-c score and intensive vs non-intensive induction. Pts with either MRD-positive (MRD+) CR or MRD-indeterminate CR (Arm C and Arm D, respsectively) both received auto-HCT + 3 years of MR. Pts who were MRD+ pre-transplant had MRD repeated at day 100. Primary endpoint was to compare overall survival (OS) in Arms A and B, with secondary endpoints including progression-free survival (PFS). Primary analysis population included all randomized pts. As some pts refused their assigned treatment (N=65 [25.3%] for arm A and N=2 [0.8%] for arm B), a “treated as assigned” analysis was also performed. Stratified logrank test was used to compare survival distributions. P-values are two-sided. Results: From Aug 2017 to July 2024, 650 pts were assigned to a treatment arm with 257, 259, 49, and 85 pts enrolled on Arms A, B, C, and D, respectively. Pts were 79% male and 92% white race. Median age was 60 years (range 27-70). MIPI-c was low/low-intermediate (LI) in 63% and high/ high-intermediate (HI) in 37%. Induction was intensive (defined as high-dose cytarabine-containing) in 73% and non-intensive in 27%. A BTK inhibitor was given during induction in 7.2% of pts, and during maintenance in 0.3% of pts. The third pre-planned interim analysis was based on data as of 7/15/24, with median follow up of 2.7 years. The futility boundary was an OS hazard ratio (HR) of 0.984 for Arm A vs B. The estimated OS HR for Arm A vs B in all randomized (n=516) and pts treated as assigned (n=375) were 1.11 (CI 0.71-1.74, p=0.66) and 1.00 (CI 0.58-1.74, p=0.99), respectively and crossed the futility boundary. The 3 year (yr) OS for Arms A and B were 82.1% and 82.7% in all randomized pts, and 86.2% and 84.8% in pts treated as assigned. The estimated PFS HR for Arm A vs B in all randomized and pts treated as assigned were 1.05 (CI 0.71-1.56, p=0.79) and 0.95 (CI 0.59-1.54, p=0.84), respectively. The 3 yr PFS for Arms A and B were 76.6% and 77.4% in all randomized pts, and 81.5% and 80.4% in pts treated as assigned. For Arm C, 3 yr OS and PFS were 81.9% (CI 69.6-96.4%) and 76.9% (CI 64.4-91.7%), respectively. For Arm D, 3 yr OS and PFS were 85.1% (CI 76.0%-95.4%) and 73.4% (62.7-85.9%), respectively. For the MIPI-c low/LI group, 3 yr OS was 84.6% vs 85.7% for Arm A vs B (p=0.96), while in the MIPI-c high/HI group, 3 yr OS was 77.4% vs 77.6% for Arm A vs B (p=0.71). For the intensive induction group, 3 yr OS was 83.0% vs 86.2% for Arm A vs B (p=0.30), while in the non-intensive induction group, 3 yr OS was 79.5% vs 72.8% for Arm A vs B (p=0.48). Exploratory analysis of MRD+ pts (Arm C) showed that pts who converted to uMRD6 post auto-HCT (n=17) had 3 yr OS of 100% and PFS of 100%, whereas those who remained MRD+ (n=13) post auto-HCT had 3 yr OS of 63.6% and PFS of 48.8%. Causes of death (COD) in Arm A were 4.7% lymphoma, 5.1% COVID-19, and 5.0% other/unknown. COD in Arm B were 3.5% lymphoma, 6.6% COVID-19, and 4.6% other/unknown. In Sept 2024, the DSMC recommended termination of accrual and release of trial findings based on these results. Conclusion: In this interim analysis, in the era of highly effective induction and maintenance regimens, MCL pts in first CR with uMRD6 did not benefit from consolidative auto-HCT. Pts who remain MRD+ after induction may benefit from auto-HCT. Longer follow-up will be important to confirm these findings.

Introduction: Ibrutinib, a Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi), changed the treatment landscape by demonstrating improved overall survival (OS) compared with chemotherapy/chemoimmunotherapy across multiple phase 3 trials in patients (pts) with CLL, including those with high-risk genomic features. Recently, data were reported for pts treated with ibrutinib in the phase 3 RESONATE-2 trial with up to 10 years of follow-up, representing the longest follow-up of any BTKi used in first-line treatment of CLL. With the most robust long-term follow-up data among BTKis, ibrutinib therapy trials are uniquely positioned to assess the long-term OS benefit of first-line BTKi treatment in pts with CLL across pt subgroups. We previously demonstrated that first-line ibrutinib is associated with OS rates that are similar to those in the age-matched general population, with a median follow-up of 5.9 years since initial diagnosis (Ghia P et al. HemaSphere 2024), but it remains unclear whether this holds true for pts with high-risk genomic features. This updated analysis evaluated long-term OS outcomes with a median follow-up of 8 years since randomization and 10 years since initial diagnosis in a pooled population of pts with previously untreated CLL, including those with high-risk features, who received first-line ibrutinib treatment in 2 phase 3 trials with comparison of survival estimates to the US age-matched general population. Methods: Data were pooled for pts who received first-line treatment with single-agent ibrutinib or ibrutinib + rituximab in the RESONATE-2 (NCT01722487) and ECOG-ACRIN E1912 (NCT02048813) trials, respectively. OS probabilities from the time of randomization and from the time of initial diagnosis for ibrutinib-treated pts were compared with an age-matched general population using 2021 life tables for the total US population published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention using the Kaplan-Meier method. Subgroup analyses were performed for high-risk pts, defined as those with del(11q), del(17p), mutated TP53, and/or unmutated IGHV (uIGHV). Results: A total of490 pts were pooled across the 2 studies: 352 pts (71.8%) were treated with ibrutinib + rituximab, and 135 pts (27.6%) were treated with single-agent ibrutinib; 3 pts did not receive study treatment. The median age at time of randomization was 61 years; 36.5% (179/490) were aged ≥65 years, 21.8% had del(11q), 7.8% had del(17p) and/or mutated TP53, and 54.7% had uIGHV. The median time from initial CLL diagnosis to randomization was 20.9 months (range, 0.0-341.8); the median follow-up was 123.5 months (10.3 years) from initial diagnosis and 99.2 months (8.3 years) from the time of randomization. From the time of randomization, estimated 9-year OS rates were 81.2% (95% CI, 76.8-84.9) in all ibrutinib-treated pts versus 82.0% (95% CI, 78.3-85.2) in the age-matched population (hazard ratio [HR] 1.17; 95% CI, 0.86-1.58). In high-risk pts, estimated 9-year OS rates were 79.5% (95% CI, 73.5-84.3) for ibrutinib-treated pts versus 83.2% (95% CI, 78.5-86.9) in the age-matched general population (HR 1.24; 95% CI, 0.84-1.84). In pts aged ≥65 years, estimated 9-year OS rates were 68.7% (95% CI, 60.5-75.6) for ibrutinib-treated pts and 68.7% (95% CI, 61.4-75.0) in the age-matched general population (HR 1.12; 95% CI, 0.77-1.63). In pts aged <65 years, estimated 9-year OS rates were 89.3% (95% CI, 84.6-92.7) for ibrutinib-treated pts and 90.0% (95% CI, 86.1-92.9) in the age-matched general population (HR 1.15; 95% CI, 0.68-1.94). From the time of initial diagnosis, estimated 15-year OS rates were 78.4% (95% CI, 72.8-83.0) in all ibrutinib-treated pts versus 72.0% (95% CI, 67.8-75.7) in the age-matched general population (HR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.62-1.11). Study treatment had been discontinued in 59.8% (293/490) of pooled ibrutinib-treated pts; the most frequent reasons for discontinuation were adverse events (43.0%; 126/293) and progressive disease (20.5%; 60/293). Study treatment was ongoing in 31.8% of pooled pts (156/490). Conclusions: With the longest follow-up time for any commercially available targeted therapy, this pooled analysis demonstrates that, regardless of evaluation from randomization or initial diagnosis, and irrespective of age or high-risk features, first-line treatment with ibrutinib provides long-term OS benefit with survival estimates that appear similar to those of a US age-matched cohort.

Abstract Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKis) that target B-cell receptor signaling have led to a paradigm shift in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) treatment. BTKis have been shown to reduce abnormally high CLL-associated T-cell counts and the expression of immune checkpoint receptors concomitantly with tumor reduction. However, the impact of BTKi therapy on T-cell function has not been fully characterized. Here, we performed longitudinal immunophenotypic and functional analysis of pretreatment and on-treatment (6 and 12 months) peripheral blood samples from patients in the phase 3 E1912 trial comparing ibrutinib-rituximab with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR). Intriguingly, we report that despite reduced overall T-cell counts; higher numbers of T cells, including effector CD8+ subsets at baseline and at the 6-month time point, associated with no infections; and favorable progression-free survival in the ibrutinib-rituximab arm. Assays demonstrated enhanced anti-CLL T-cell killing function during ibrutinib-rituximab treatment, including a switch from predominantly CD4+ T-cell:CLL immune synapses at baseline to increased CD8+ lytic synapses on-therapy. Conversely, in the FCR arm, higher T-cell numbers correlated with adverse clinical responses and showed no functional improvement. We further demonstrate the potential of exploiting rejuvenated T-cell cytotoxicity during ibrutinib-rituximab treatment, using the bispecific antibody glofitamab, supporting combination immunotherapy approaches.

Abstract Herein, we present the long-term follow-up of the randomized E1912 trial comparing the long-term efficacy of ibrutinib–rituximab (IR) therapy to fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR) and describe the tolerability of continuous ibrutinib. The E1912 trial enrolled 529 treatment-naïve patients aged ≤70 years with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Patients were randomly assigned (2:1 ratio) to receive IR or 6 cycles of FCR. With a median follow-up of 5.8 years, median progression-free survival (PFS) is superior for IR (hazard ratio [HR], 0.37; P < .001). IR improved PFS relative to FCR in patients with both immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region (IGHV) gene mutated CLL (HR: 0.27; P < .001) and IGHV unmutated CLL (HR: 0.27; P < .001). Among the 354 patients randomized to IR, 214 (60.5%) currently remain on ibrutinib. Among the 138 IR-treated patients who discontinued treatment, 37 (10.5% of patients who started IR) discontinued therapy due to disease progression or death, 77 (21.9% of patients who started IR) discontinued therapy for adverse events (AEs)/complications, and 24 (6.8% of patients who started IR) withdrew for other reasons. Progression was uncommon among patients able to remain on ibrutinib. The median time from ibrutinib discontinuation to disease progression or death among those who discontinued treatment for a reason other than progression was 25 months. Sustained improvement in overall survival (OS) was observed for patients in the IR arm (HR, 0.47; P = .018). In conclusion, IR therapy offers superior PFS relative to FCR in patients with IGHV mutated or unmutated CLL, as well as superior OS. Continuous ibrutinib therapy is tolerated beyond 5 years in the majority of CLL patients. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02048813.

Abstract Background: The ECOG-ACRIN randomized phase 3 clinical trial E1912 established ibrutinib-rituximab (IR) as the standard of care for CLL patients <= 70 years in the frontline setting by improving the progression free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to previous standard chemo-immunotherapy with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide and rituximab (FCR) (Shanafelt et al. NEJM 2019). Quality of life (QOL) was an important secondary endpoint on this trial comparing continuous (IR) vs time-limited (FCR) therapy due to the differing profile of treatment-related toxicities over the short and long-term. E1912 patient-reported outcomes (PROs) results are presented here. Methods: Patients enrolled on E1912 completed the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) and Leukemia subscale at randomization (baseline), 3, 6, and 12 months post-randomization, and every 6 months for 2 years regardless of disease status. The primary outcome was the 31-item FACT-Leukemia Trial Outcome Index (FACT-Leu TOI), calculated by summing items from the FACT-G physical wellbeing (PWB), functional well-being (FWB), and leukemia subscales (score range: 0-124). The primary endpoint was defined as the difference in FACT-Leu TOI change scores from randomization to 12 months (at response evaluation) between patients treated with continuous therapy Arm A (IR) vs time-limited therapy Arm B (FCR). Mean change scores from baseline to each time point were calculated using all cases with data at baseline and the corresponding time point. Comparisons between treatment arms were performed using two-sample t tests. Linear mixed effects models were used to estimate the trajectories of PRO scores. Results: PRO data was extracted on 3/8/2021. PRO data was provided at baseline and 12 months for 233/354 (65.8%) patients on the IR arm and 118/175 (67.4%) patients on the FCR arm. At enrollment, there were no significant differences in the baseline FACT-Leu TOI scores (mean ± SE) between the two arms: IR (93.27 ± 1.03) vs FCR (92.68 ± 1.38; p=0.73). The FACT-Leu TOI score improved from baseline to 12 months in both arms (Table 1 and Figure 1). The change scores from baseline to 12 months, the primary outcome, were not significantly different between IR (7.59 ± 1.09) vs FCR (8.22 ± 1.44; p=0.73). Change in FACT-Leu TOI from baseline to 3 months was 5.77 ± 0.77 and 4.06 ± 1.18 (p=0.22); and from baseline to 6 months was 6.87 ± 0.87 and 8.01 ± 1.44 (p=0.50) in the IR and FCR arms, respectively. After the first 6 months of treatment, the improvement in FACT-Leu TOI scores was maintained in both treatment arms. There was no significant difference in total FACT-Leu TOI score in the continuous therapy (IR) vs time-limited therapy (FCR) arms over the first 36 months post registration. Analysis of FACT subscales showed PWB improved in the IR arm (0.37 ± 0.22) and declined in the FCR arm (-0.92 ± 0.39) from baseline to 3 months (p=0.004 for difference in PWB change between arms) but there was no significant difference between the two arms for change in PWB scores from baseline to 6 and 12 months. There were no significant differences between the two arms for change in FWB and FACT-Leu subscales from baseline to 3, 6 and 12 months. Conclusions: QOL improves in CLL patients age 70 and younger when treated in the frontline setting with IR or FCR. The improvement in QOL is maintained during continuous therapy with ibrutinib and there is no significant decline in QOL over time. Given the improvement in PFS and OS with IR over FCR seen in E1912, the results of this QOL analysis support the use of frontline ibrutinib in previously untreated younger CLL patients. Acknowledgement: This study was conducted by the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (Peter J. O'Dwyer, MD and Mitchell D. Schnall, MD, PhD, Group Co-Chairs) and supported by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health under award numbers: U10CA180794, U10CA180820, UG1CA189863, UG1CA190140, UG1CA232760, UG1CA233180, UG1CA233230, UG1CA233253, UG1CA233277, UG1CA233290, UG1CA233339, UG1CA189859, UG1CA233332. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Kay: Oncotracker: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CytomX Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Behring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Rigel: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Dava Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morpho-sys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Targeted Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Sunesis: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Bristol Meyer Squib: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. O'Brien: Amgen, Astellas, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Oncology, Aptose Biosciences Inc., Vaniam Group LLC, AbbVie, Alexion, Verastem, Juno Therapeutics, Vida Ventures, Autolus, Johnson and Johnson, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, NOVA Research Company, Eli Lill: Consultancy; Kite, Regeneron, Acerta, Caribou, Gilead, Pharmacyclics, TG Therapeutics, Pfizer, Sunesis: Research Funding. Coutre: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Beigene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Data Safety Monitoring Committee, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Acerta: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Committee, Research Funding. Barr: AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Abbvie/Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Cashen: Secura Bio, ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy. Mato: Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Research Funding; DTRM BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Johnson and Johnson: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta/AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; LOXO: Consultancy, Research Funding; MSKCC: Current Employment; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: DSMB, Research Funding; Nurix: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genmab: Research Funding. Erba: AbbVie Inc; Agios Pharmaceuticals Inc; Astellas; Bristol Myers Squibb; Celgene, a Bristol Myers Squibb company; Daiichi Sankyo Inc; Genentech, a member of the Roche Group; GlycoMimetics Inc; Incyte Corporation; Jazz Pharmaceuticals Inc; Kura Oncology; Nov: Other: Advisory Committee; AbbVie Inc: Other: Independent review committee; AbbVie Inc; Agios Pharmaceuticals Inc; ALX Oncology; Amgen Inc; Daiichi Sankyo Inc; FORMA Therapeutics; Forty Seven Inc; Gilead Sciences Inc; GlycoMimetics Inc; ImmunoGen Inc; Jazz Pharmaceuticals Inc; MacroGenics Inc; Novartis; PTC Therapeutics: Research Funding; AbbVie Inc; Agios Pharmaceuticals Inc; Bristol Myers Squibb; Celgene, a Bristol Myers Squibb company; Incyte Corporation; Jazz Pharmaceuticals Inc; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Stone: Onconova: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Boston Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Gemoab: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Elevate Bio: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syndax: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; BerGen Bio: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Foghorn Therapeutics: Consultancy; Innate: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Arog: Consultancy, Research Funding; Actinium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syntrix/ACI: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aprea: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Macrogenics: Consultancy. Litzow: Actinium: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Pluristem: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Astellas: Research Funding; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee. Tallman: NYU Grand Rounds: Honoraria; Kura: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Innate Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Biosight: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncolyze: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; KAHR: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Orsenix: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi-Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Research Funding; Rafael Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Research Funding; Biosight: Research Funding; Orsenix: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic: Honoraria; UC DAVIS: Honoraria; Northwell Grand Rounds: Honoraria; NYU Grand Rounds: Honoraria; Danbury Hospital Tumor Board: Honoraria; Acute Leukemia Forum: Honoraria; Miami Leukemia Symposium: Honoraria; New Orleans Cancer Symposium: Honoraria; ASH: Honoraria; NCCN: Honoraria. Shanafelt: Genentech, Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Wagner: Eli Lilly, Johnson & Johnson: Other: Spouse, previously held individual stocks;; Celgene-BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Athenex Inc: Consultancy.

Abstract E1912 was a randomized phase 3 trial comparing indefinite ibrutinib plus 6 cycles of rituximab (IR) to 6 cycles of fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR) in untreated younger patients with CLL. We describe measurable residual disease (MRD) levels in E1912 over time and correlate them with clinical outcome. Undetectable MRD rates (<1 CLL cell per 104 leukocytes) were 29.1%, 30.3%, 23.4%, and 8.6% at 3, 12, 24, and 36 months for FCR, and significantly lower at 7.9%, 4.2%, and 3.7% at 12, 24, and 36 months for IR, respectively. Undetectable MRD at 3, 12, 24, and 36 months was associated with longer progression-free survival (PFS) in the FCR arm, with hazard ratios (MRD detectable/MRD undetectable) of 4.29 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.89-9.71), 3.91 (95% CI, 1.39-11.03), 14.12 (95% CI, 1.78-111.73), and not estimable (no events among those with undetectable MRD), respectively. In the IR arm, patients with detectable MRD did not have significantly worse PFS compared with those in whom MRD was undetectable; however, PFS was longer in those with MRD levels <10−1 than in those with MRD levels above this threshold. Our observations provide additional support for the use of MRD as a surrogate end point for PFS in patients receiving FCR. In patients on indefinite ibrutinib-based therapy, PFS did not differ significantly by undetectable MRD status, whereas those with MRD <10−1 tended to have longer PFS, although continuation of ibrutinib would very likely be necessary to maintain treatment efficacy.

BackgroundExtracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) is an immunomodulatory cellular therapy which has been shown to induce a tolerogenic state in patients with acute and chronic graft‐vs‐host disease. ECOG‐ACRIN explored the activity of ECP as a part of a reduced intensity conditioning regimen in two multicenter trials in patients with MDS (E1902) and lymphomas (E1402). While both studies closed before completing accrual, we report results in 23 patients (17 MDS and 6 lymphoma).Study Design and MethodsPatients received 2 days of ECP followed by pentostatin 4 mg/m2 /day for two consecutive days, followed by 600 cGy of total body irradiation prior to stem cell infusion. Immunosuppression for aGVHD was infusional cyclosporine A or tacrolimus and methotrexate on day +1, +3, with mycophenolate mofetil starting on day 100 for chronic GVHD prophylaxis.ResultsAll patients engrafted, with median time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment of 15‐18 days and 10‐18 days respectively. Grade 3 or 4 aGVHD occurred in 13% and chronic extensive GVHD in 30%.ConclusionsThese studies demonstrate that ECP/pentostatin/TBI is well tolerated and associated with adequate engraftment of neutrophils and platelets in patients with lymphomas and MDS.