Back to Authors

Bennani, N. Nora

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8358-5953

Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic

Citations 174

Baseline Hypoalbuminemia Does Not Appear to be an Adverse Prognostic Factor in Patients with Relapse/Refractory B-Cell Lymphomas Treated with Axicabtagene Ciloleucel (axi-cel)
Melody, Megan , Gandhi, Sangeetha, Lengerke-Diaz, Paula A. , Gannon, Nicole, Truong, Tuan, Brandes, Eva, Lange, Gina, Estby, Breanna, Johnston, Patrick B. , Ansell, Stephen M. , Ayala, Ernesto , Foran, James M. , Castro, Januario E. , Kharfan‐Dabaja, Mohamed A. , Castro, Januario E , Diaz, Paula A Lengerke , Rahman, Zaid Abdel , Rosenthal, Allison , Novo, Mattia , Bennani, N. Nora , Paludo, Jonas , Villasboas, José C. , Tun, Han W. , Murthy, Hemant S. , Roy, Vivek , Lin, Yi

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 5343-5343

10.1182/blood-2019-126594 Get It

BACKGROUND: Axi-cel is an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy that is approved for treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma and is associated with high response rates and durable remissions. Recent data show that axi-cel is effective across various adverse prognostic features, namely cell of origin, disease bulkiness, and extranodal disease, among others. Hypoalbuminemia is a known adverse prognostic factor in lymphomas. It is unknown if axi-cel overcomes the adverse prognostic feature of hypoalbuminemia in R/R large B-cell or transformed follicular lymphoma. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients treated with axi-cel across three Mayo Clinic campuses (Rochester, Jacksonville, and Phoenix) from 06/01/2018 until 04/01/2019. The primary objective of this analysis was to assess the impact of hypoalbuminemia (defined at day 0, prior to infusion) on outcome after axi-cel therapy. RESULTS: A total of 50 (male=37, 74%) patients (pts), median age of 53 (26-67) years received axi-cel. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 3 (2-8) (Table 1). Two pts had no available serum albumin levels at time of axi-cel infusion. Seven (15%) of 48 pts had serum albumin levels lower than 3.5 g/dL (median= 3.3 g/dL (range 2.6-3.4)) and the median follow up of survivors was 7.6 (1.9-14.3) months. The best overall response rate (ORR) and complete remission (CR) rates in these pts were 57% and 57%, respectively. One (14%) patient had stable disease and 2 (29%) had disease progression. The median overall survival (OS) for pts with hypoalbuminemia was not reached. On the other hand, 41 (85%) pts had a normal serum albumin level (median=4.0 (range 3.5-5.1) g/dL) and the median follow up for survivors was 6.3 months. The best objective response rate (ORR) and complete remission (CR) rates in these pts were 82% and 44%, respectively. The median OS for pts with normal serum albumin was 14 (95%CI=6.3-29.6) months. There was no significant difference at 6-months and 1-year OS between pts with hypoalbuminemia vs. those with normal baseline serum albumin levels [6-month=100% vs. 79%(95%CI=64-93%); 1-year (100% vs. 54% (95%CI=26-82%), p=0.17] (Figure 1). All grades cytokine release syndrome (CRS) was diagnosed in all 7 pts with hypoalbuminemia (100%) and in 38 of 41 (92%) pts without hypoalbuminemia. There was no difference in the median duration of CRS between pts with or without hypoalbuminemia [6 (range 1-11) days vs 5 (range 1-19) days, p=0.89]. Neurotoxicity (all grades) was observed in 5 (71%) pts with hypoalbuminemia compared 26 (63%) with normal albumin levels. There was no statistically significant difference in median duration of neurotoxicity between pts with hypoalbuminemia and those with normal baseline albumin levels [9 (range 1-10) days vs. 3 (range 0-25) days, p= 0.72]. CONCLUSIONS: Hypoalbuminemia does not have a significant impact on the outcomes of axi-cel therapy, including the incidence of CRS or neurotoxicity. These results need to be validated in a large collaborative multicenter study. Further investigation is needed to assess the prognostic impact of severe hypoalbuminemia (<3g/dL) on axi-cel therapy. Disclosures Ansell: Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Trillium: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding. Bennani:Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board. Paludo:Verily Life Sciences: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Verily Life Sciences: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Tun:DTRM Biopharma: Research Funding; Mundi-pharma: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Foran:Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kharfan-Dabaja:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy.
Low-Dose BRAF-Inhibitors in the Treatment of Histiocytic Disorders with the BRAF-V600E Mutation
Ruan, Gordon , Abeykoon, Jithma P. , Goyal, Gaurav , Bennani, N. Nora , Rech, Karen L. , Young, Jason R. , Shah, Meera , Go, Ronald S.

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 5895-5895

10.1182/blood-2019-124891 Get It

Introduction: The landmark VE-BASKET trial demonstrated that Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD) patients with the BRAF-V600E mutation can be effectively treated with vemurafenib 1920 mg/day. However, all patients required dose reductions due to adverse effects. The efficacy of low dose BRAF-inhibitors is not well established in ECD. Further, as Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) also harbors BRAF-V600E mutations in 50-60% of patients, BRAF-inhibitors may be effective in this disease as well. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy of low dose BRAF-inhibitors (vemurafenib and dabrafenib) in the treatment of ECD and LCH. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of ECD and LCH patients who were seen at our institution from January 1998 to July 2018. All patients had a diagnosis of ECD and LCH determined by clinical criteria in conjunction with histopathologic findings. Based on the standard doses approved for malignant melanoma and ECD, patients were categorized into the low dose BRAF-inhibitor group if they were treated with vemurafenib < 960 mg/day or dabrafenib ≤ 150mg/day at any point in time. We used a simple response criteria that defined clinical progressive disease (PD) as worsening of symptoms attributed to ECD/LCH or radiologic PD as a progression or worsening of proven or suspected lesions due to ECD/LCH. The minimum duration for symptom improvement to be considered a response was set at 3 months. Results: A total of 89 ECD patients and 186 LCH patients were identified. Within the ECD cohort, 24 of 44 (55%) patients who were tested had the BRAF-V600E mutation. Eight patients were included in the low dose BRAF-inhibitor group. The median age at diagnosis was 57 years (range 37-74) and 5 (63%) were male. The most common areas of involvement included bone (88%), cardiovascular system (63%), kidneys (63%), and brain parenchyma (50%). The median time of follow up was 66 months (range 23-165) and the median time on low-dose BRAF-inhibitor was 10 months (range 1-27) [Table 1]. Three patients had a starting dose of vemurafenib 1920 mg/day, 4 had 960 mg/day, and 1 had 480 mg/day. All patients required dose reductions and 50% of the patients ultimately discontinued vemurafenib due to side effects. Side effects included fatigue, pruritus, nausea, facial swelling, blisters, papillomas, and/or subcutaneous nodules. Four patients were able to remain on low-dose vemurafenib for a median follow up time of 24.5 months (range 12-28) with ongoing response and no signs of clinical or radiologic PD. Within the LCH cohort, 18 of 31 tested (58%) patients had the BRAF-V600E mutation. Four patients were included in the low dose BRAF-inhibitor group. The median age at diagnosis of this cohort was 43 years (range 34-69) and 2 (50%) were male. Areas of involvement included bone (100%), brain parenchyma (hypothalamus/optic stalk and pons; 50%), and skin (25%). The median time of follow up was 31 months (range 21-46) and the median time on low-dose BRAF-inhibitor was 4 months (range 3-24) [Table 2]. Two patients had a starting dose of vemurafenib 960mg/day. The patients with brain parenchymal involvement had a starting dose of dabrafenib 150mg/day or 100mg/day. All patients taking vemurafenib 960mg/day required dose reductions and one patient discontinued treatment due to skin blistering in her feet. In the patients taking dabrafenib, no side effects have yet been reported. 3 patients had an ongoing response and did not have clinical or radiologic PD. Patient #10 however, had clinical and radiologic PD after being on vemurafenib 720mg/day for 22 months. Conclusion: Our study suggests a potential role for lower doses of BRAF-inhibitors in ECD and LCH patients harboring BRAF-V600E mutations. Dabrafenib was found to be particularly efficacious and well-tolerated in LCH involving the brain parenchyma. However, patients who undergo dose reductions should be closely monitored due to the risk of disease progression. Careful balance of toxicities and efficacy is needed for optimizing patient outcomes with targeted therapies. Disclosures Bennani: Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board. OffLabel Disclosure: Vemurafenib and dabrafenib for Langerhans cell histiocytosis. Vemurafenib dosage for Erdheim-Chester disease is less than the approved dose of 960mg every 12 hours.
Central Nervous System Involvement in Peripheral T-Cell Lymphoma
Gandhi, Sangeetha, Johnston, Patrick B. , Ristow, Kay M., Thompson, Carrie A. , Nowakowski, Grzegorz S. , Porrata, Luis F. , Micallef, Ivana N. , Inwards, David J. , Ansell, Stephen M. , Bennani, N. Nora , Fortin, Sonia, Habermann, Thomas M. , Cerhan, James R. , Lin, Yi , Villasboas, José C. , Witzig, Thomas E. , Paludo, Jonas

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 5293-5293

10.1182/blood-2019-131965 Get It

Background: Central nervous system (CNS) involvement by peripheral T cell lymphoma (PTCL) is a rare condition. Among primary CNS lymphomas, only 2% are secondary to PTCL, while the risk of CNS relapse in all cases of PTCL is estimated at 2% to 6%. Little is known about the presentation and outcomes of PTCL patients with CNS involvement given the rarity of this entity. In this study, we describe patient characteristics, histology, and clinical course of patients with CNS involvement by PTCL. Methods: The Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Database was used to identify PTCL patients with primary or secondary CNS involvement seen at our institution between 2000 and 2018. A total of 12 patients were identified and their medical records were reviewed for patient and disease characteristics, CNS-directed treatment modality, and outcomes. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for time-to-event analysis. Results: The median age at CNS diagnosis was 63 years (range 41 to 76) and 11 (93%) patients were male. The histological diagnoses were PTCL, NOS in 9 (75%) patients, enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma in 2 (17%) patients, and angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma in 1 (8%) patient. Five patients presented with primary T-cell CNS lymphoma (all with a PTCL, NOS histology), while the remaining 7 (58%) patients also had systemic involvement. All patients presented with neurologic symptoms at the time of CNS involvement diagnosis including: focal motor deficits in 6 patients (unilateral upper extremity weakness, gait impairments, and hemiparesis), cognitive decline in 5 patients (memory impairments, reduced attention, and confusion), headache in 4 patients, and seizure in 3 patients. The CNS disease location included the brain parenchyma in 9 (75%) patients, leptomeninges in 1 (8%) patient, and lumbar plexus in 1 (8%) patient. One patient (8%) had positive CSF finding only without radiologic evidence of involvement. CSF analysis was performed in 11 patients. Elevated protein levels were noted in 3 (27%) patients, malignant cells in 2 (18%), and no clear abnormalities in the remaining 6 (55%) patients. Concomitant bone marrow involvement was seen in only 1 patient. Elevated LDH was seen in 2 patients. The a median LDH was 195 U/L (range 139 to 4,360) The most common CNS-directed therapies were: high-dose methotrexate (MTX)-based regimens in 8 (67%) patients, including high-dose MTX in combination with temozolomide (n=2), or cytarabine and thiotepa (n=2). Intrathecal MTX, temozolomide and dexamethasone, lenalidomide, high-dose steroids, and surgical resection were the treatment modality used for one patient each. At a median follow up of 18 months, eight (75%) out of 12 patients were not alive at the time of last follow up. The median overall survival (OS) from diagnosis was 16 months (95% CI: 2.8-173). The median progression free survival (PFS) from initiation of CNS-directed therapy was 9 months (95% CI: 1.6-33) (figure). Four patients had a PFS longer than 12 months. These 4 patients were treated with: temozolomide/dexamethasone, high-dose MTX, lenalidomide, and high-dose MTX followed by cytarabine/thiothepa. Conclusion: CNS involvement by T-cell lymphoma is a rare complication that carries a poor prognosis. Early onset of neurologic symptoms should trigger prompt investigation of CNS involvement. Despite the short OS and PFS, some patients may achieve a relatively longer disease free interval. Disclosures Bennani: Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board. Cerhan:Celgene: Research Funding; NanoString: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Nowakowski:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; NanoString: Research Funding; Selvita: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ansell:Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Affimed: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Paludo:Celgene: Research Funding; Verily Life Sciences: Research Funding; Verily Life Sciences: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding.
Copanlisib in Combination with Nivolumab in Subjects with Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma and Primary Mediastinal Large B-Cell Lymphoma: A Phase 2 Study
Nowakowski, Grzegorz S. , Adjei, Alex A. , Doyle, L. Austin, Ansell, Stephen M. , Bennani, N. Nora , Rimsza, Lisa M.

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 4090-4090

10.1182/blood-2019-129104 Get It

Background: Diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCL) are a heterogeneous group of aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL). Primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) is often grouped and managed as DLBCL, yet PMBCL is biologically and clinically different. Although about two-third of patients are cured with initial therapy, those who are refractory or progress within the first two years do poorly and will die from their disease. There is an unmet need for effective therapeutic approaches in this patient population. Evasion of the host immune responses is an important mechanism for inducing resistance to cancer therapy. Strategies to block molecular and cellular mediators of cancer induced immunosuppression such as programmed death -1 receptor (PD-1) have been explored. Targeting PD-1 immune checkpoints has the potential to play a major role in cancer therapy by reversing tumor immune escape. Trials using PD-1 blockers in advanced hematological malignancies demonstrated remarkable activity in Hodgkin lymphoma. Unfortunately, results in the DLBCL cohort with nivolumab were marginal and short lived. A phase 1b trial in heavily pre-treated relapsed/refractory (RR) PMBCL using pembrolizumab (a PD-1 blocker) showed that it was safe and active with an ORR of 41%. In recent years, several signaling pathways implicated in DLBCL pathogenesis have been targeted, including the PI3K-AKT-mTOR pathway. Copanlisib, a pan-PI3K inhibitor, with particularly potent PI3K-α/PI3K-δ inhibition, showed activity in both indolent and aggressive NHL, with a safer toxicity profile than the FDA-approved agent idelalisib. In a preclinical DLBCL mouse model, treatment with copanlisib resulted in effective down regulation of tumor‐infiltrating T-regulatory cells (Tregs). In the same model, copanlisib, when combined with a surrogate anti‐mouse PD‐1, showed in vivo responses in 75% vs 0% in the monotherapy groups. These data support the rational for the combination of copanlisib and checkpoint blockade in DLBCL. We developed a phase 2 prospective study with two RR cohorts (DLBCL and PMBCL), treated with the combination of copanlisib and nivolumab. Study Design: copanlisib hydrochloride 60 mg is given IV on days 1, 8 and 15 of cycles 1-8 and days 1 and 15 of subsequent cycles. Nivolumab 240 mg IV is given on days 1 and 15 of cycles 1-8 and 480 mg on day 1 of subsequent cycles. Cycles repeat every 28 days for up to 2 years in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Copanlisib dose will be determined using a safety cohort in 6 patients. The primary outcome is to assess ORR defined as complete and partial responses (CR+PR). Secondary outcomes are to evaluate safety of the combination; to assess progression free survival (PFS), duration of response (DOR), CR rate, and overall survival (OS). Exploratory objectives are to characterize the effects of the copanlisib and nivolumab combination regimen on tumor cells, tumor microenvironment and the immune response in RR DLBCL and PMBCL. We will also do Lymph3CX assay as an integrated biomarker to distinguish between DLBCL and PMBCL. Key inclusion criteria: adult patients with RR DLBCL and PMBCL who have measurable disease with at least one lesion that is >15mm in the longest diameter on cross-sectional imaging; After failure of ASCT or after failure of frontline therapy in subjects who declined or are not ASCT candidates; and have appropriate organ function. Key exclusion criteria: High grade B-cell lymphomas; Active, known or suspected autoimmune disease or patients on any prohibited therapies; History of active CNS involvement or leptomeningeal involvement This study is expected to enroll a maximum of 96 (6 safety cohort, 44 DLBCL and 46 PMBCL) evaluable patients. We anticipate accruing 10 additional patients to account for ineligibility, cancellation, or other reasons. Therefore, the study is expected to accrue a maximum of 106 patients. The largest success proportion where the proposed treatment regimen would be considered ineffective in DLBCL is 25% and 30% in PMBCL. The smallest success proportion that would warrant subsequent studies with the proposed regimen is 45% in DLBCL and 50% in PMBCL. This design has a 90% power with a 1-sided 10% level test. This study is conducted through NCI-CTEP (NCI Protocol #10193; NCT03484819) and is funded by Bayer. The study is to open in fall of 2019 at 11 ECTCN sites, and is available to interested sites to join in. Figure. Disclosures Bennani: Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board. Nowakowski:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Selvita: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; NanoString: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Rimsza:NanoSting: Patents & Royalties: Named inventor on a patent licensed to NanoSting [Institution]. Ansell:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Trillium: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Affimed: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Affimed: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding.
Single-Agent Cladribine As an Effective Therapy for Adults with Langerhans Cell Histiocytosis
Abeykoon, Jithma P. , Goyal, Gaurav , Hu, Marie , Bennani, N. Nora , Ryu, Jay H. , Shah, Meera , Vassallo, Robert , Go, Ronald S.

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 4189-4189

10.1182/blood-2019-122334 Get It

Introduction Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) is an uncommon histiocytic disorder which is now categorized as a hematopoietic neoplasm. Most treatment and outcomes data in LCH are derived from pediatric studies, and there is a lack of FDA-approved treatment options for adult LCH. There is some evidence that cladribine may be toxic to monocytes and monocyte-derived dendritic cells. In this study, we report the efficacy of cladribine in adult LCH patients seen at our institution. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the charts of all LCH patients seen at our institution between 1998 and 2018. Where necessary, the radiological images and histopathological slides were reviewed by an expert radiologist and pathologist. Since prospective uniform response assessment was not performed, we utilized the clinical documentation and radiological reports to assess the overall response rate (ORR). All time to event analyses were performed from the time of cladribine initiation. Results We included a total of 37 adult LCH patients in the study. The median age at diagnosis for this cohort was 35 years (range, 21-76), and 51% were males. Although 31 (84%) patients had multi-system disease, all patients had more than one LCH lesion (multifocal). Most commonly involved organs were bone (65%), lung (60%), skin (38%), lymph nodes (30%), and pituitary/hypothalamus (27%). BRAF-mutational analysis was performed in 13 patients, with 7 (54%) demonstrating the presence of BRAF-V600E mutation. Cladribine was administered as first line therapy in 22 (59%) patients and subsequent line treatment in 15 (41%). Of the 15 patients who received cladribine in subsequent line, surgery (n=3), radiation (n=3), steroids (n=3), antibiotic with inhaled steroids (n=1), vinblastine (n=3), topical nitrogen mustard cream (n=1) and vemurafenib (n=1) were the treatments utilized before the initiation of cladribine. Two patients received the drug more than once during the course of their disease. The dosing of cladribine for all patients was based on one of the two intravenous regimens (0.14 mg/kg for days 1-5 every 28 days or 5 mg/m2 for days 1-5 every 28 days). The median follow-up for the entire cohort was 4.5 years (95% CI:2-7) and the treatment outcomes are shown in Table 1. Median number of cycles of cladribine administered was 1.5 (range, 1-9). Clinical/radiographic responses were noted in 29 (78%) patientsORR was 78%, with 24% complete responses and 54% partial responses (PR). Responses were seen in various disease sites: lung nodules/infiltrates (13/29, 45%), bone (12/29, 41%), lymph nodes (8/29, 28%), skin (3/29, 10%), pituitary/hypothalamus (4/29, 14%). Eight (22%) patients did not respond and had progressive disease (PD)- cystic/bullous lung disease (n=2), skin (n=2), abdominal/peritoneal lymph nodes (n=2), and hypothalamus (n=3).The treatment was well tolerated, with grade 3 or above adverse effects seen in three patients: two with lymphopenia requiring dose delays and one with congestive cardiac failure leading to drug discontinuation. After initial disease response, PD was seen in three patients. 89%, 78%, 64% of those who responded initially maintained their responses at years 1, 3, and 5, respectively (Table 1). The 5-year progression free survival (PFS) was 55% for the entire cohort. BRAF-status was evaluated on 13 of 37 patients in the entire cohort (35%): BRAFV600E positive [n=7 (53%)] and WT [n=6 (46%)]. Of the 7 patients who had BRAFV600E mutation, responses were seen in 71%, while 100% of those without BRAFV600E achieved a response (p=0.09). At the time of last follow-up, 9 patients (24%) were dead. Of those, cause of death were available on 5 patients; due to LCH (n=1), stroke (n=1), gastrointestinal hemorrhage (n=1), acute myeloid leukemia (n=2). Conclusion In our study, cladribine monotherapy yielded a high ORR, with the majority of patients achieving a PR. The responses were durable with a small risk of subsequent disease relapse. Responses were seen irrespective of the presence of BRAFV600E mutation. Cladribine was well tolerated overall, and may be considered a potential therapy for adult LCH patients. Disclosures Vassallo: Sun Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Sun Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Cladribine for langerhans cell histiocytosis
Peak Lymphocyte Count after CAR T Infusion Is a Clinically Accessible Test That Correlates with Clinical Response in Axicabtagene Ciloleucel Therapy for Lymphoma
Gandhi, Sangeetha, Kubusek, Jilan, Truong, Tuan, Hayne, Justin, Ansell, Stephen M. , Nedved, Adrienne, Lange, Gina, Brandes, Eva, Hayman, Suzanne R. , Kapoor, Prashant , Kourelis, Taxiarchis , Kumar, Shaji , Warsame, Rahma , Johnston, Patrick B. , Novo, Mattia , Sidiqi, M Hasib , Paludo, Jonas , Hayne, Justin, Bennani, N. Nora , Villasboas, José C. , Alkhateeb, Hassan B. , Dingli, David , Kenderian, Saad S. , Shah, Meera , Siddiqui, Mustaqeem , Lin, Yi

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 4106-4106

10.1182/blood-2019-127094 Get It

Background: Two-year follow-up from ZUMA-1 trial for axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CART) in aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) demonstrated that patients (pts) achieving complete remission (CR) as their best response have the longest progression free survival (PFS), while PFS remained poor for others. Majority of the best response are achieved by month 3 post-infusion. Moreover, a subset of pts who do not achieve CR by month 1 may still achieve CR while others will progress within months. Having a clinically available test to predict for durable response can assist clinicians in selecting pts who can be observed for continued response vs. those who may need intervention earlier. Peak CAR-T expansion has been correlated with best clinical response to axi-cel. However there is no clinically available test to quantify CART cells post treatment. Given the prolonged lymphotoxic effect of the lymphodepletion (LD) chemotherapy administered before CART infusion, we hypothesize that the peak expansion of absolute lymphocyte count (ALC, ALCpeak) after infusion likely corresponds to CART expansion. We examined for correlation between ALCpeak and clinical response at month 3 post-infusion for pts who received axi-cel. Methods: Data was collected from pts who received axi-cel between June 2016 and March 2019 at Mayo Clinic Rochester (NCT02348216, NCT03153462, and standard of care). All infused pts were included in the intention to treat analysis for response and event-free survival (EFS). Lugano 2014 criteria were used for clinical response. EFS was defined as the date of infusion until progression or death due to any cause and evaluated using Kaplan Meier curves with log-rank test. Comparison between subgroups was investigated using Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon test for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Statistical analysis performed using JMP Pro 14.1. Results: Of the thirty-six NHL pts treated with axi-cel, the median age was 56 yrs (range 26-65); 78% (28) were male; 44% (16) had DLBCL; the median number of prior therapies was 3 (2-6), 47% (17) had stem cell transplant. Nineteen (53%) pts received bridging therapy after leukapheresis. All pts received fludarabine and cyclophosphamide for LD chemotherapy and achieved ALC nadir by the day of CART infusion (median 0.03 x 10^9/L, range 0.01-0.11). As CART expansion were found to peak within the first two weeks in ZUMA-1 trial, we examined ALC trend over 15 days post infusion and found that ALCpeak generally happened within the same timeframe (median ALCpeak day: 9, range 6-15). At 3 months post infusion, 33.3% (12/36) of pts achieved CR, 8.3% (3/36) pts were in partial remission (PR). No correlation was found between CR response and clinical characteristics: age >60 years, stage III/IV, B symptoms, elevated LDH, IPI score 3-4, number of previous treatments, use of bridging therapy, peak CRP and ferritin. However, the ALCpeak was significantly different between CR and non-CR pts (median, range: 1.09, 0.35-2.55; 0.67, 0.15-1.03; p=0.04). Using receiver operator curve (ROC)-derived area under the curve (AUC) estimates, ALCpeak 1.08 x 10^9/L was identified as the best threshold to discriminate patients at different likelihood to achieve CR at month 3. Pts achieving ALCpeak ≥ 1.08 showed a strong increased likelihood of achieving CR at month 3 (OR 2.8; 95% CI, 1.12-6.99; P=0.02). There was no statistical difference between the ALCpeak high and low groups in terms of use of bridging therapy, occurrence of any grade or higher grade cytokine release syndrome or neurotoxicity, or the use of tocilizumab or steroid. Interestingly, for pts who had changes in clinical response from month 1 to month 3, all 3 pts who converted to CR by month 3 had ALCpeak≥1.08, while the 13 of the 15 pts who had progressed by month 3 had ALCpeak<1.08. In addition, EFS was significantly different between pts who had ALCpeak above and below 1.08 (6 months EFS rate 75% vs. 25%, respectively, Figure 1). Conclusions: We found that the ALC expansion occurred in the first 15 days post axi-cel infusion, consistent with the known time frame for CART expansion. Higher ALCpeak level in this timeframe correlated with higher likelihood of achieving CR, and is associated with conversion to CR. This study is limited by the small sample size and limited follow-up, but the results are promising for further prospective investigation in a larger cohort of patients. Disclosures Paludo: Verily Life Sciences: Research Funding; Verily Life Sciences: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Ansell:Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Trillium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Bennani:Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board. Dingli:alexion: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Rigel: Consultancy. Kapoor:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; Cellectar: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding. Kenderian:Novartis: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Tolero: Research Funding; Humanigen: Other: Scientific advisory board , Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Lentigen: Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Research Funding. Kumar:Takeda: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding.
Bendamustine and Rituximab Plus Venetoclax in Untreated Mantle Cell Lymphoma over 60 Years of Age (PrE0405): A Phase II Study
Portell, Craig A. , Naik, Seema , Patel, Priyank , Reynolds, Christopher M. , Portell, Craig A , Bennani, N. Nora , Jegede, Opeyemi A. , Parsons, Benjamin M. , Kahl, Brad S.

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 5243-5243

10.1182/blood-2019-122759 Get It

Background: Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL) is an aggressive form of Non Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL) and typically presents in patients over the age of 60 years. Bendamustine and rituximab (BR) combination is one of the standard treatments for MCL and is given to patients for whom high dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell rescue is planned in the first remission. Progression free survival (PFS) with BR is approximately 36 months (Rummel M Lancet 2013; Flinn IW Blood 2014) and the regimen is overall well tolerated. Venetoclax (VEN) is an orally available inhibitor of BCL2, an anti-apoptotic protein highly expressed in several NHL. Single agent activity has mostly been studied in a Phase I study (in various NHL histologies) where 28 MCL patients were enrolled. Overall response rate was 75% (21 of 28) but complete response (CR) rate was only 21% (6 of 28). Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) has been associated with VEN and initial dosing requires a ramp up period (Davids MS JCO 2018). VEN has also been combined with other agents in MCL with promising activity (Tam CS NEJM 2018) VEN has been studied as a chemotherapy sensitizer and has shown pre-clinical synergy with chemotherapy. In Follicular lymphoma, BR+VEN was studied at 800mg PO continuous daily dosing and showed an excessive Grade 3-4 adverse event (AE) rate of 78% compared to historical studies of 46% (Zinzani ASH 2016). We hypothesize that, in MCL, VEN can be safely combined with BR at a lower dose and intermittent dosing with improvements to the response rate based on historical controls and maintain a better safety profile. Study Design: This Phase II single arm, multicenter study evaluates VEN at a max dose of 400mg with BR (Bendamustine 90mg/m2 IV day 1 and 2; rituximab 375mg/m2 IV or SQ equivalent day 1) for six 28-day cycles in untreated patients with MCL over the age of 60 years (NCT03834688). Cycle 1 will include a VEN dose titration over the 4 week course (20mg D1-7, 50mg D8-14, 100mg D15-21, and 200mg D22-28). For Cycles 2-6, VEN will be given at 400mg daily x 10 days starting with day 1. Participants are followed for 6 cycles, though will be followed for progression and survival afterward. Participants may receive maintenance rituximab at investigator's discretion. Eligible participants, age 60 years or older, must have biopsy proven untreated MCL with t(11;14) or cyclin D1 expression, though a short course of steroids is allowed for symptomatic MCL. They must have adequate organ function and not require any prohibited concomitant medications. Primary outcome is CR rate as assessed by the Lugano criteria. We estimate a historical CR rate of BR after induction of about 70%. A 15% increase in this rate, to 85% CR, is considered promising for the combination. To achieve this goal, the study will enroll 56 participants (53 eligible) to achieve a 90% power to detect the difference with a 10% Type I error rate. We will also evaluate PFS and overall survival. TLS is an AE of interest and will be evaluated after 19 participants have been enrolled and treated during cycle 1. Minimal residual disease (MRD) will be assessed throughout the study. MRD from peripheral blood will be compared to bone marrow aspirates in all participants undergoing bone marrow aspirate at the end of treatment. Tumor samples at screening and progression will be collected for future study. This study is conducted through PrECOG and is funded by Genentech, a member of the Roche Group. Venetoclax is co-developed by Genentech and AbbVie. The study is slated to open in Fall of 2019 at 10 US sites. Figure Disclosures Portell: AbbVie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding. Bennani:Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board. Naik:Celgene: Other: Advisory board. Parsons:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau. Kahl:BeiGene: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: Venetoclax is not approved for use in MCL.
Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, and Outcomes in Primary Cutaneous Gamma Delta T Cell Lymphoma (PCGDTCL): A Real World Multi-Institutional Analysis of a Rare Malignancy
David, Kevin A. , Pulitzer, Melissa , Guitart, Joan , Martínez‐Escala, Maria Estela , Wang, Yaqun , Ristow, Kay M., Winchell, Nicole, Haun, Paul , Allen, Pamela B. , William, Basem M. , Denlinger, Nathan , Mehta–Shah, Neha , Feldman, Tatyana , Weller, Alex , Evens, Andrew M. , William, Basem , Evens, Andrew M , Geller, Shamir , Bennani, N. Nora , Landsburg, Daniel J. , Wilcox, Ryan A. , Hristov, Alexandra C. , Horwitz, Sarah McCue

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 4028-4028

10.1182/blood-2019-130223 Get It

Background: PCGTCL is a rare disorder, accounting for < 1% of all lymphomas. In part given the rarity, timely and accurate diagnosis (dx) remains challenging. Moreover, PCGTCL is typically characterized by a highly aggressive course. We conducted a multi-institutional, retrospective analysis to delineate pathology, patient (pt) characteristics, treatment patterns & outcomes of PCGDTCL in the modern era. Methods: We collected detailed information on pts with PCGDTCL dx between 2000 - 2017 across 10 academic centers. Pathologic data, including IHC & flow characteristics on de-identified pathology reports, were reviewed centrally by an expert dermatopathologist (MP). A pathologic tier was assigned to each case based on fidelity to the following pre-defined minimum criteria: flow cytometric evidence of gamma and/or delta protein-expressing lymphoma or histopathologic evidence of gamma and/or delta protein expression & at least 50% atypical lymphocytes positive for gamma/delta immunostain (IHC) with tissue representative of entire lesion. The presence of >25% CD30 positivity of malignant lymphocytes was an exclusion criterion. Further, PCR evidence of TCR gamma monoclonality or TCR beta/betaF1 negativity alone were inadequate for inclusion with confirmation of gamma/delta phenotype (especially IHC) being key for inclusion. A clinical tier was also assigned to each case based on group consensus. A composite score was derived by combining pathologic & clinical tiers, with those fitting a pre-determined score threshold included in the primary analysis. Univariate (UVA) associations were derived via Cox model for associations with survival. Results: Collectively, all centers submitted a total of 80 cases that were dx & treated locally as PCGDTCL. 48 (60%) cases met pre-defined criteria for inclusion of bona fide dx of PCGTCL. 26 (33%) cases had insufficient composite scores and were grouped in a 2nd tier & 6 cases had incomplete follow-up data and were unsuitable for analysis. The most common reason for placement in the 2nd tier was negativity for gamma/delta IHC or lack of documentation of such testing (n=16). Among the top tier of 48 veritable cases, 32 pts (67%) were male, 39 (81%) white & 4 (8%) black. Median age was 62 years (range 20-88). 19 (40%) pts had B symptoms at dx; ECOG performance status (PS) 0 in 12 pts (25%) & 1-3 in 22 cases (45%) (unknown 29%); anemia was present in 21 pts (44%) & LDH increased in 22 (46%). Bone marrow was involved in only 3 pts (6%) & hemophagocytic syndrome was present at dx in 6 pts (12%). Frontline therapy was heterogeneous (Table 1) with the most common therapies being bexarotene alone in 8 pts; UV therapy in 6 pts; and CHOP in 4 pts. Furthermore, there was inclusion of etoposide in 12 pts (25%), anthracyclines in 9 (19%) & platinum agents in 3 pts (6%). The overall response to 1st line therapy was 40% (19% complete response) with stable disease in 10%, progression in 35% & unknown in 15%. Seven pts (15%) received consolidative stem cell transplantation (SCT), which was allogeneic in all but 1 case. The 2-year PFS for the 48 bona fide pts was 39% (95% CI 0.26-0.59) (Fig 1A) & 2-year OS was 36% (95% CI 0.23-.56) (Fig 1B). The 26 cases in the 2nd tier had overall similar 2-year PFS of 41% (95% CI 0.15-67) and OS of 37% (95% CI 0.22-0.62). In terms of impact of therapy, use of consolidative SCT in 1st remission was associated with improved survival (P=0.02) (Fig 1C). No other therapeutic variable had significance. In UVA for baseline factors, PS (P=0.006) (Fig 1D) and increased vs. normal LDH (P=0.05) were significantly associated with OS. Median OS for pts with normal LDH was 25 months vs 12 months with increased LDH. Median OS for pts with ECOG PS 0 was not reached vs approximately 14 months for ECOG PS 1-3. Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this series represents one of the largest reported to date of PCGDTCL. Accurate diagnosis and classification of PCGDTCL need ongoing analysis and delineation. Using strict criteria, only 60% of cases across 10 academic centers were confirmed as bona fide PCGDTCL. Analysis of these pts treated in the modern era demonstrated modest survival. In addition, we identified several prognostic factors, in particular LDH and ECOG PS, associated with patient outcome. Furthermore, the incorporation of allogeneic SCT in 1st remission may contribute to improved long-term survival. Enhanced treatment options and continued collaboration are critically needed in this rare disease. Disclosures Bennani: Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board. Landsburg:Takeda: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Triphase: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Triphase: Research Funding; Curis, INC: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Curis, INC: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Haun:Karger, Inc.: Other: Royalties: Textbook. William:Techspert: Consultancy; Guidepoint Global: Consultancy; Defined Health: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Kyowa Kirin, Inc.: Consultancy. Mehta-Shah:Kiowa Hakka Kirin: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Verastem Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Innate Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Wilcox:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. Feldman:AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Eisai: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; Portola Pharma: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Viracta: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite Pharma: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Corvus: Research Funding. Evens:Tesaro: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Horwitz:Affimed: Consultancy; Mundipharma: Consultancy; Forty-Seven: Research Funding; Astex: Consultancy; Aileron: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Consultancy; Infinity/Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Forty-Seven: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Portola: Consultancy; Kura: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex: Consultancy; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Consultancy; Aileron: Research Funding; Portola: Consultancy; Kura: Consultancy; Kura: Consultancy; Miragen: Consultancy; Miragen: Consultancy; Portola: Consultancy; Innate Pharma: Consultancy; Millennium/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy; ADCT Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Aileron: Research Funding; Forty-Seven: Research Funding; Miragen: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; ADCT Therapeutics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Consultancy; Corvus Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; ADCT Therapeutics: Research Funding; Infinity/Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Infinity/Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Corvus Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Innate Pharma: Consultancy; Millennium/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Affimed: Consultancy; Innate Pharma: Consultancy; Affimed: Consultancy; Astex: Consultancy; Trillium: Research Funding; Corvus Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Corvus Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Forty-Seven: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy; Astex: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Innate Pharma: Consultancy; Kura: Consultancy; ADCT Therapeutics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Infinity/Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Miragen: Consultancy; Portola: Consultancy; Aileron: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Consultancy; Affimed: Consultancy; Trillium: Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding.
Fitness and Anthracycline Use in Front-Line Therapy for Older Patients with Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma: A US Multi-Center Retrospective Analysis
Isaac, Krista M. , Wages, Nolan A. , Malecek, Mary‐Kate , Voorhees, Timothy , Hu, Rachel , Hill, Brian T. , Advani, Ranjana H. , Carter, Jordan , David, Kevin A. , Ballard, Hatcher J. , Svoboda, Jakub , Magarelli, Gabriela, Feldman, Tatyana , Churnetski, Michael C. , Cohen, Jonathon B. , Evens, Andrew M. , Portell, Craig A. , Advani, Ranjana H , Voorhees, Timothy J , Evens, Andrew M , Portell, Craig A , Orellana‐Noia, Victor M. , Bartlett, Nancy L. , Grover, Natalie S. , Hwang, Steven R. , Bennani, N. Nora , Mou, Eric , Carter, Jordan

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 4027-4027

10.1182/blood-2019-123572 Get It

Introduction Approximately 20% of patients (pts) with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) are age ≥ 60 years (yrs) at diagnosis (dx). Standard anthracycline-based therapies (ABTx) have historically shown lower efficacy and greater toxicity in this older population compared with younger pts, especially for unfit or frail pts. However, prior analyses have pre-dated the use of brentuximab vedotin (BV) and other novel targeted agents in the front-line setting and there remains no clearly defined or unified standard of care for this pt population. Studies in older lymphoma pts have also defined specific categories of pt fitness that may potentially guide therapy, although continued validation of these definitions in cHL are needed. We performed a large, multicenter retrospective study to identify current practice patterns in the US in older untreated cHL pts with specific attention to pt fitness using established definitions and to outcomes with ABTx versus non-ABTx. Methods Following IRB approval at each site, detailed pathologic and clinical data, including geriatric assessments (GAs) for the latter, were collected across 10 US academic medical centers. Eligible pts included: cHL dx on or after 1/1/2010, age ≥ 60 yrs at dx, and no preceding hematologic malignancy. Subjects with inadequate clinicopathologic and outcomes data or with dx other than cHL were excluded. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was developed to study the association of PFS and OS with various factors of interest, and survival rates were estimated by Kaplan-Meier using SPSS. Associations were considered significant for two-sided P values ≤ 0.05. Results Among 254 eligible older cHL pts with newly diagnosed disease, clinical features included: median age 67 yrs (range 60-90+), 54% male, 64% stage III/IV, 46% B symptoms, and 86.1% ECOG PS 0-1. 68.9% had nodular sclerosis, 18.9% mixed cellularity, and 12.2% other subtypes; EBV was detectable by IHC or peripheral blood in 39.3% of evaluable cases (n=98). In terms of geriatric measures, 31 pts (12.2%) had loss of at least one ADL; 40 (15.8%) had a geriatric syndrome; and 16 (6.3%) had both. Of note, only one pt underwent a comprehensive GA prior to treatment. Using established fitness definitions in lymphoma (Tucci et al, 2015), pts were classified as "Fit" (n=129; 50.8%), "Unfit" (n=8; 3.2%), or "Frail" (n=112 (44.1%); 5 (2%) were unclassifiable due to incomplete data (Table 1). Front-line regimens included ABVD (n=145; 57.1%), AVD (n=33; 13.0%), and CHOP (n=18; 7.1%). 6 pts (2.4%) received BV monotherapy; 21 (8.3%) received BV with AVD, the latter either concurrently (N=11) or sequentially (n=10). 11 pts did not receive systemic tx, of whom 9 received radiation alone; 58 pts received radiation with systemic tx. ABVD recipients received an average of 7.4 doses of bleomycin (range 1-14) and 18.4% (n=26) had pulmonary toxicity. In addition, 56.7% (n=130) of pts experienced at least one tx-related toxicity, which was similar across all fitness groups (Table 1). 15.1% (n=38) of pts stopped tx due to toxicity, which was noted more often in "frail" pts though it was relatively uncommon. 11 pts (4.3%) experienced treatment-related mortality (TRM). Compared with pts receiving non-ABTx, ABTx was associated with significantly improved PFS (HR 0.391, P=0.008) and OS (HR 0.195, P=0.0004). ECOG PS >1 was associated with inferior PFS (HR=1.96, P=0.017) and OS (HR=3.09, P=0.002). Pts defined as "frail" had no apparent difference in PFS compared with fit pts (Figure 1A;P=0.169), although decreased OS was seen (Figure 1B; P=0.01). Discussion To the best of our knowledge, these data represent one of the largest analyses of older cHL pts in the modern era. Our real-world analysis shows that in those who are able to receive them, anthracyclines provide meaningful survival benefit in this older cHL patient population and can be well-tolerated for many pts. The impact of dose intensity and backbone regimen are not yet known. In addition, current definitions of "fitness" incompletely identified pts at risk for poor outcomes or greater toxicity. Further studies are planned to better delineate fitness in this population. Disclosures Bartlett: Celgene: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Genenetech: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Grover:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy. Bennani:Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board. Hill:Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celegene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; TG therapeutics: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding. Advani:Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead Sciences, Inc./Kite Pharma, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Research Funding; Kura: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Autolus: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Infinity Pharma: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Celmed: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Forty-Seven: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin Pharmaceutical Developments, Inc.: Consultancy; Agensys: Research Funding; Stanford University: Employment, Equity Ownership; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cell Medica, Ltd: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: 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. Svoboda:AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kyowa: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Magarelli:Tevan Oncology: Speakers Bureau. Feldman:Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Kite Pharma: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Research Funding; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Corvus: Research Funding; Eisai: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Portola Pharma: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Viracta: Research Funding. Cohen:Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; ASH: Research Funding; UNUM: Research Funding; Hutchison: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc.: Research Funding; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy; Lymphoma Research Foundation: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb Company: Research Funding; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding. Evens:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Tesaro: Research Funding; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria. Portell:AbbVie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding.
Molecular Alterations in Adult Histiocytic Neoplasms
Abeykoon, Jithma P. , Liu, Minetta C. , Goyal, Gaurav , Bennani, N. Nora , Shah, Meera , Go, Ronald S.

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 2975-2975

10.1182/blood-2019-122286 Get It

Introduction Histiocytic neoplasms are rare disorders of the monocyte-macrophage-dendritic cell lineage that pose significant management challenges to the clinicians. Over the last five years, there has been emerging data on the role of MAPK/ERK pathway (RAS-RAF-MEK-ERK) in their pathogenesis. In this study, we report the molecular alterations among patients with histiocytic neoplasms seen at our institution. Methods We pursued target-capture next generation sequencing (NGS) on tissue specimen of patients with various histiocytic neoplasms- Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD), Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH), Rosai-Dorfman disease (RDD), histiocytic sarcoma (HS), and Langerhans cell sarcoma (LCS). We used three NGS platforms, Tempus® xO (1,714 genes), Tempus® xT (596 genes), or Foundation One® CDX (324 genes). All platforms used formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor tissue specimens for detection of substitutions, insertion and deletion alterations, and copy number alterations, and gene rearrangements. The Tempus assays also utilized matched blood or saliva samples for germline DNA sequencing in addition to whole-transcriptome RNA sequencing. The tumor cellularity threshold for pursuing RNA sequencing was 30% so the test was not pursued specimens for lower cellularity. Results We included 31 cases with histiocytic neoplasms in this study. The disease distribution was as follows: ECD (n=6), LCH (n=7), RDD (n=12), ECD-RDD overlap (n=3), HS (n=2), and LCS (n=1). Among the 13 patients with ECD and LCH, BRAF-V600E mutations were found in 8 (62%) cases. We found several novel DNA alterations in this study in all disease groups: ECD (BRAFV471F), LCH (MAP2K1 in-frame deletion), and RDD (frameshift mutations of DNMT3A, SMARCA4, KMT2A, and CDC73 truncation). In one LCH patient without any DNA alterations, we found MAPK1 and MAP2K1 overexpression on RNA sequencing. We also had two cases with HS, both of which were found to have KRAS exon 3 mutations. One of these cases had concomitant JAK2V617F+ myelofibrosis and the tissue specimen for HS demonstrated TET2 and SRSF2 mutations as well. Our cohort included one patient with multifocal lymph node LCS that demonstrated NRAS and TP53 mutations, who did not respond to MEK-inhibitor therapy. Alterations in epigenetic regulators (TET2, DMNT3A, KMT2A, ASXL1) were found in 5 (16%), potentially suggesting clonal hematopoiesis in a subgroup of histiocytosis. Conclusions Histiocytic neoplasms demonstrate diverse somatic oncogenic alterations. In our study, we noted several novel alterations beyond the MAPK-ERK pathway in RDD that may point toward other potentially pathogenic mechanisms for these rare disorders. In cases where the DNA sequencing does not reveal pathogenic alterations, transcriptome analysis may aid in the diagnosis and management. OffLabel Disclosure: Trametinib use for Langerhans cell sarcoma