Phillips, Tycel

Introduction: XmAb13676 is a humanized bispecific antibody that binds both CD20 and CD3 in order to recruit cytotoxic T cells to kill CD20 expressing malignant cells. Interim results of an ongoing first-in-human, dose-escalation study (XmAb13676-01; NCT02924402) in subjects with relapsed/refractory (R/R) non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) are reported here. Methods: The study is a first-in-human, multi-center, open-label, phase 1, dose-escalation study in subjects with R/R NHL and R/R CLL with a standard 3 + 3 design. The primary objectives are to determine safety, tolerability, and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or recommended dose of XmAb13676. Secondary objectives include preliminary anti-tumor activity and PK/PD of XmAb13676. This study is designed in two parts: Part A, escalating dose cohorts that establish an initial priming dose as part of repeated weekly infusions at a fixed dose in a 28-day cycle; and Part B, with a dosing schedule consisting of a priming dose on C1D1 , established in Part A, followed by escalated dose(s) on subsequent weeks. Cytokine Release Syndrome (CRS) prophylaxis with dexamethasone was mandated prior to each administration of XmAb13676. Treatment was continued for 2 cycles or longer if there was evidence of therapeutic benefit. Results: At data cut-off, 44 subjects have been treated, 36 with NHL and 8 with CLL. NHL: Subjects with R/R NHL had a median age of 61.5 years (range 32-89), a median of 3.5 prior therapies (range 1-9) and had been diagnosed a median of 24.6 months (range 6.3-181.2) prior to treatment in the study. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) related to treatment occurring in ˃ 3 subjects are shown in Table 1A. Nine treatment-related serious adverse events (SAE) occurred in 6 subjects. The most common treatment-related SAE was CRS, which occurred in 4 (11.1%) subjects with 1 of the events being Grade 4 and the other events being ≤ Grade 2. Treatment responses were assessed by the Lugano criteria or International Working Group criteria for Waldenström Macroglobulinemia (WM). There have been 7 objective responses: 2 complete responses (CR; DLBCL), 1 Very Good PR (VGPR; WM), and 4 partial responses (PR; 1FL, 3 DLBCL) at doses of 20-125 µg/kg. In the efficacy-evaluable population, at doses of 80-125 µg/kg, objective responses were observed in 6/18 patients. A priming dose of 45 µg/kg has been chosen for Part B. An MTD has not been reached and dose escalation is ongoing in Part B in NHL. CLL: Subjects with R/R CLL had a median age of 76 years (range 62-81), a median of 4.5 prior therapies (range 2-6) and had been diagnosed a median of 76.1 months (range 17.5-328.9) prior to treatment in the study. Treatment-related TEAEs occurring in ˃ 1 subject are shown in Table 1B. Three treatment-related serious adverse events (SAE) occurred in 2 subjects. The treatment related SAEs were CRS (Grade 3), hepatocellular injury (Grade 3), and jaundice cholestatic (Grade 2), each of which occurred in 1 (12.5%) subject. There has been 1 CR reported (Richter transformation) in 5 subjects at 20 µg/kg, the highest dose administered thus far. The treatment response was assessed by the Lugano criteria. An MTD has not been reached and dose escalation is ongoing in Part A in CLL. Conclusions: XmAb13676 demonstrated evidence of clinical activity in heavily pretreated subjects with R/R NHL and R/R CLL treated at doses between 20 and 125 µg/kg. CRS was generally manageable with premedication. The study is ongoing with further optimization of dose and schedule. Disclosures Patel: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics/Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sunesis: Consultancy. Chanan-Khan:AbbVie: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic: Employment; Ascentage: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding. Salles:Novartis, Servier, AbbVie, Karyopharm, Kite, MorphoSys: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational events; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche, Janssen, Gilead, Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational events; Autolus: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Educational events; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational events; BMS: Honoraria. Cartron:Gilead: Honoraria; Jansen: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria. Thomas:Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding. Wierda:KITE pharma: Research Funding; Sunesis: Research Funding; Miragen: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma Inc: Research Funding; GSK/Novartis: Research Funding; Cyclcel: Research Funding; Loxo Oncology Inc.: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Research Funding; Oncternal Therapeutics Inc.: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Liebowitz:Xencor: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pagel:AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Ribrag:MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Other: Travel, accommodations, and expenses ; Nanostring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Epizyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Servier: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AZ: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accommodations, and expenses ; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ArgenX: Research Funding. Saville:Xencor: Employment, Equity Ownership. Johnson:Xencor: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ly:Xencor: Employment, Equity Ownership. Phillips:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; Abbvie: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Key Points Five-year follow-up of S1106 demonstrates similar efficacy, MRD negativity, and 5-year survival with RH or RB, but RH was more toxic than RB. RB showed excellent efficacy and survival and less toxicity compared with a cytarabine-based regimen in transplant-eligible MCL patients.

Abstract Introduction: The optimal initial management of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is unknown, but aggressive induction chemoimmunotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant confers long remission durations and is standard for younger patients. Cytarabine-based induction achieves higher rates of MRD-negativity compared to anthracycline-based induction regimens and correlates with improved outcomes. Whether a similar benefit exists after bendamustine-rituximab (RB) induction is unknown. S1106 compared induction R-HyperCVAD/MTX/ARAC (RH) or RB followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). We previously reported similar 2-year (yr) progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with either regimen, and provocatively found that MRD negativity was similar with both regimens. RH was more toxic than RB and had higher stem cell mobilization failure rates. Methods: Inclusion criteria were untreated stage III, IV or bulky stage II MCL, Cyclin D1 +, age > 18-65, and adequate organ function. Randomization was stratified by MIPI. Patients (pts) received either 4 cycles of RH or 6 cycles of RB followed by ASCT. MRD was assessed at baseline and post induction. Extraction of genomic tumour DNA from paraffin embedded tissue or bone marrow aspirate and PCR amplification of IGH-VDJ, IGH-DJ, and IGK regions was performed followed by high-throughput sequencing to determine the tumor clonotype(s) (Adaptive Biotechnologies). DNA from peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) and plasma was amplified and sequenced to determine lymphoma molecules per million diploid genomes. Herein we report the results of the updated analysis at a median follow-up (mFU) of 5 yrs. Results: Fifty-two of 53 pts were evaluable. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups except for more female pts in the RH group. This study was closed based on prespecified criteria of stem cell mobilization failures in the RH arm. With mFU of 5 yrs (range, 29 days-6yrs), updated ORR (94.1% RH vs. 85.7% RB) and CR (41% RH vs. 43% RB) rates were similar. The 5-yr estimated PFS was 62% and 66% and the 5-yr estimated OS was 74% and 80% for RH and BR, respectively (Fig.1). Increased grade 3/4 toxicity and inadequate stem cell mobilization was seen in the RH arm thus challenging its use as an induction platform for future upfront MCL trials. 9/17 pts in RH and 23/35 pts in RB arm underwent ASCT. A landmark analysis was performed evaluating 5-yr PFS and 5-yr OS with and without ASCT in each arm. (Table 1) 27 patients consented to optional MRD assessment, with 12 paired serial samples (baseline and post induction). Overall, the estimated 5 yr PFS was 90% for all patients who achieved MRD negative status at the end of RB. Long-term toxicity included acute myeloid leukemia (N=1) in the RH arm at 5.4 yrs after diagnosis and lung cancer (n=1) in the RB arm at 2.9 yrs after diagnosis. Conclusion: The optimal induction regimen prior to ASCT in the initial management of MCL is a source of significant debate. Our initial findings supported RB as an effective platform with the ability to achieve MRD negativity. Long-term results of this study continue to demonstrate excellent response rates, 5-yr PFS and 5-yr OS with either RH or RB without any new toxicity signal. The 5-yr outcomes with RB compare favorably to more aggressive cytarabine-based induction regimens. Thus, R-Bendamustine could be an excellent backbone for induction therapy in transplant eligible patients and needs to be tested in larger phase III trials. Support: NIH/NCI grants CA180888, CA180819, CA180821, CA180820, and in part by Sequenta, Inc. (Adaptive Biotechnologies) Disclosures Kamdar: Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy. Chen:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck & Co., Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech Inc.: Consultancy. Rimsza:NanoString: Other: Inventor on the patent for the Lymph2Cx assay. Barr:AbbVie, Gilead: Consultancy. Phillips:Genentech: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding. Leonard:ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Genentech/Roche: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Sutro: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; MEI Pharma: Consultancy; United Therapeutics: Consultancy; Biotest: Consultancy. Kahl:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy; CTI: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy. Friedberg:Bayer: Honoraria. Smith:Portola: Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy.

Abstract Introduction Transformation of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) into Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is a rare, but recognized complication of CLL. The prognosis of CLL with HL Transformation (HT) appears significantly worse than de novo HL, but most series are small and there are limited published data. These reports have prompted several groups to recommend aggressive therapy with stem cell transplantation (SCT) in first complete remission (CR1). We describe the largest reported series of HT patients (pts) with analyses of the clinicobiologic characteristics, treatment patterns, and clinical outcomes based upon our multi-institutional clinical experience. Methods Pts diagnosed with HT from 01/2000 - 01/2018 were retrospectively identified in 13 tertiary cancer centers. Clinicobiologic characteristics, treatment type, and survival outcomes for each pt were analyzed. Overall survival (OS) was measured from the time of HT diagnosis until time of death. OS estimates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The log-rank test was used to calculate differences in survival. Results Ninety-four pts with HT were identified. Median age at HT was 67 years (yrs; range, 38-85) and 81% of the pts were male. Median time from CLL diagnosis to HT was 5.5 yrs (range, 0-20.2; 7 pts with simultaneous diagnosis of CLL and HL). At initial CLL diagnosis, 31%, 34%, 21%, 10%, and 4% were Rai Stage 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. At CLL diagnosis, 67% (25/37) had an un-mutated IgVH gene, 36% (21/59) had del(13q), 32% (14/44) had trisomy 12, 24% (14/59) had del(11q), and 15% (9/61) had del(17p). Prior to HT diagnosis, pts had a median of 2 (range, 0-12) therapies for CLL. Seventeen (18%) had no prior CLL treatments. Forty-three (46%) and 25 (27%) patients had received purine analogue- and ibrutinib-based therapy prior to HT, respectively. Baseline characteristics at HT are described in Table 1. As initial therapy for HL, the majority of pts (61%, n = 62) received ABVD-based regimens (adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine) at full (n = 48) or reduced (n = 14) doses. Of these, CD20 monoclonal antibody was added in 6 and Bruton-tyrosine kinase inhibitor was added in 2. Ten (11%) received a brentuximab-based regimen. Seven (7%) received an RCHOP-based regimen (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone). Six patients (6%) received no therapy for HT due to frailty. Subsequent therapy included autologous SCT and allogeneic SCT in 7 (7%) and 11 (12%) of patients, respectively. Two (2%) and 5 (5%) pts received their autologous and allogeneic SCT while in CR1, respectively. The median number of treatments for HT per pt was 1 (range, 0-5) with 59 (61%) pts only receiving one line of therapy. After HT diagnosis, pts had a median follow-up of 1.6 yrs (range, 0.0 - 15.1). Two-yr OS after HT diagnosis was 72% (95%CI 62 - 83%). The pts who received any CLL directed therapy (n = 80) prior to HT had a significantly lower estimated 2-yr OS of 69% (95%CI 58 - 82%) compared with pts who did not receive any prior CLL-directed therapy (n = 17; 93%; 95%CI 82-100%; p 0.02; Figure 1). Pts who received purine-analogue-based therapy for their CLL prior to HT had a significantly lower estimated 2-yr OS of 60% (95%CI 46 - 79%) compared with pts who did not receive purine-analogue-based CLL-directed therapy prior to HT (n = 51; 83%; 95%CI 73 - 96%; p 0.009; Figure 2). Although limited by small sample size, the pts who underwent SCT for HT in CR1 had a similar 2-yr OS (n = 7; 67%; 95%CI 38-100%) to pts who did not undergo SCT for HT in CR1 (n = 87; 72%; 95%CI 63 - 84%; p 0.46; Figure 3). Conclusions In this retrospective analysis, we describe the largest reported series of pts with HT from CLL. Two-yr survival in pts with HT was shorter than what is historically expected in patients with de novo HL, but longer than what is expected in CLL pts who transform to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Pts with HT who have received prior CLL-directed therapies (specifically purine-analogue-based treatments) are estimated to have a shorter 2-yr OS, likely due to underlying immunosuppression. The majority of pts (61%) only received 1 line of HL therapy and only 20% went on to receive SCT (7% while in CR1), indicating that these patients can have prolonged OS after achieving response to first-line therapy for HT and may not require SCT in CR1. Further study of this rare population is required to determine optimum management. Disclosures Kander: AstraZeneca: Consultancy. Parikh:Gilead: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding. Shadman:Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Mustang Biopharma: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Beigene: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Qilu Puget Sound Biotherapeutics: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy. Pagel:Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy. Mato:Portola: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Acerta: Research Funding; Prime Oncology: Honoraria; Regeneron: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Medscape: Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Hill:Amgen: Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: 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; Genentech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: 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; Seattle Genetics: 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; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Danilov:Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Aptose Biosciences: Research Funding; Takeda Oncology: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Bayer Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding. Phillips:Abbvie: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy. Brander:Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Acerta: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: DSMB; Teva: Consultancy, Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; DTRM: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; BeiGene: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding. Smith:BMS: Consultancy; Portola: Honoraria. Davids:Surface Oncology: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy; Sunesis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy; Sunesis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Surface Oncology: Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy; Sunesis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Consultancy, 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; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; BMS: Research Funding; Surface Oncology: Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) remains challenging particularly in the relapsed/refractory setting, where patients often show chemoresistance. Novel molecular-based therapies have shown impressive and durable activity in that setting, although primary and acquired resistance remains problematic. A recent retrospective series of 114 patients who had failed ibrutinib (median of 4.7 month exposure) showed very short median overall survival of 2.9 months after ibrutinib cessation (Martin et al. Blood 2015). Here we report the results from the observationalMCL-004 study investigating outcomes of patients treated with lenalidomide (an IMiD® immunomodulatory agent) after failing ibrutinib; patients were either relapsed, progressed, refractory, or intolerant to ibrutinib. The objective here is to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of lenalidomide monotherapy or a lenalidomide-containing regimen in relapsed/refractory MCL after ibrutinib failure or intolerance. Methods: MCL-004 is a multicenter study in patients with MCL who relapsed/progressed after or were refractory/intolerant to ibrutinib, and were subsequently treated with lenalidomide. With patient informed consent, data were collected retrospectively from patients who, after their disease failed to respond to ibrutinib, received lenalidomide-based therapy from March 1, 2009 to June 9, 2015. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed overall response rate (ORR) based on 2007 International Working Group criteria, with required patient monitoring and routine imaging. Results: Thirty patients were enrolled at 7 US sites and 1 EU site, including patients receiving lenalidomide monotherapy (n=8), lenalidomide + rituximab (n=8), and lenalidomide + other treatment (n=14). Lenalidomide + other treatment included combination with rituximab, carfilzomib, and dexamethasone (n=3); other combinations were given in ≤2 patients. Patients had a median age of 69 years (range, 50-84), and median time from last dose of ibrutinib to first dose of lenalidomide was 1.3 weeks (range, 0.1-21.7). All patients received ≥2 prior lines of therapy, and 83% received ≥3 prior therapies (median prior therapies, 3.5; range, 2-8). With prior ibrutinib, the best responses achieved were 10% complete response (CR), 43% partial response (PR), 3% stable disease, 40% relapse/progressive disease (PD), and 3% unknown. Primary reasons for ibrutinib discontinuation were 50% relapse/PD, 40% refractory, and 10% intolerance. Patients received a median of 2 cycles (range, 1-11) of lenalidomide-based treatment. Eight patients' disease responded (4 CR, 4 PR), resulting in an ORR of 27% (95% CI, 12%-46%). Five of 8 maintained their response at data cut-off (3 CR, 2 PR). ORR was similar for patients with relapse/PD vs. those refractory to ibrutinib (29% vs. 33%, respectively). Median duration of response (DOR) was 18 weeks (95% CI, 2.9-25+) for all patients. Median DOR was not reached in patients who previously relapsed/progressed with ibrutinib compared with a median of 11 weeks for those whose disease was refractory to ibrutinib. Most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were 33% fatigue; 27% nausea; and 23% each dyspnea, neutropenia, dizziness, or rash. In general, TEAEs were less common with lenalidomide monotherapy. The most frequently reported serious AEs were pneumonia, dyspnea, deep vein thrombosis, hypotension, and acute kidney injury (7% each). At data cutoff, 15 patients (50%) had died, mostly due to MCL and none due to second primary malignancy. Conclusions: Most patients received ≥3 prior lines of treatment, and median time from last dose of ibrutinib to first dose of lenalidomide was short. Lenalidomide-based treatment showed clinical activity in this difficult-to-treat patient population, including 27% ORR and 13% CR. No new safety signals for lenalidomide were identified. Overall, our results show that lenalidomide is active in a selected group of patients with relapsed/refractory MCL that previously failed ibrutinib. Disclosures Wang: BeiGene: Research Funding; Asana BioSciences: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Martin:Acerta: Consultancy; Teva: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses. Goy:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Writing support, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; infinity: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Research Funding; Acerta: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hamadani:Takeda: Research Funding. Ghosh:Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; SGN: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Reeder:Millennium: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Barnett:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Casadebaig Bravo:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Schuster:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Janssen Research & Development: Research Funding; Nordic Nanovector: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Hoffman-LaRoche: Research Funding.

Key PointsINCB040093 was active across lymphoma subtypes, and the addition of itacitinib provided substantial activity in classic Hodgkin lymphoma. INCB040093 ± itacitinib had a manageable safety and tolerability profile; severe hepatic adverse effects were less common with the combination.

SummaryAggressive induction chemotherapy followed by autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplant (auto‐HCT) is effective for younger patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). However, the optimal induction regimen is widely debated. The Southwestern Oncology Group S1106 trial was designed to assess rituximab plus hyperCVAD/MTX/ARAC (hyperfractionated cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin and dexamethasone, alternating with high dose cytarabine and methotrexate) (RH) versus rituximab plus bendamustine (RB) in a randomized phase II trial to select a pre‐transplant induction regimen for future development. Patients had previously untreated stage III, IV, or bulky stage II MCL and received either 4 cycles of RH or 6 cycles of RB, followed by auto‐HCT. Fifty‐three of a planned 160 patients were accrued; an unacceptably high mobilization failure rate (29%) on the RH arm prompted premature study closure. The estimated 2‐year progression‐free survival (PFS) was 81% vs. 82% and overall survival (OS) was 87% vs. 88% for RB and RH, respectively. RH is not an ideal platform for future multi‐centre transplant trials in MCL. RB achieved a 2‐year PFS of 81% and a 78% MRD negative rate. Premature closure of the study limited the sample size and the precision of PFS estimates and MRD rates. However, RB can achieve a deep remission and could be a platform for future trials in MCL.