Cymbalista, Florence

PURPOSE The combination of the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib with bendamustine-rituximab for first-line treatment of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) prolonged progression-free survival (PFS), but without improvement in overall survival (OS), likely because of toxicity. Acalabrutinib was shown to be efficacious and less toxic than ibrutinib in a head-to-head trial in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and therefore might lead to better outcomes in MCL. METHODS Patients 65 years and older with previously untreated MCL received acalabrutinib (100 mg twice daily) or placebo (until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity), plus six cycles of bendamustine (90 mg/m 2 once daily; days 1 and 2) and rituximab (375 mg/m 2 as a single dose; day 1) followed by rituximab maintenance in responding patients for 2 years. Crossover to acalabrutinib at disease progression was permitted. The primary end point was PFS per the independent review committee; overall response rate and OS were secondary end points. RESULTS In total, 598 patients were randomly assigned, with 299 in each arm. At a median follow-up of 49.8 months using the reverse Kaplan-Meier method, the median PFS was 66.4 months in the acalabrutinib arm and 49.6 months in the placebo arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.94]; P = .0160). Benefit was seen across all subgroups, including those with high-risk features. Overall response/complete response rates were 91.0%/66.6% and 88.0%/53.5% in the acalabrutinib and placebo arms, respectively. OS was not significantly different (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.65 to 1.13]; P = .27). Grade 3 or greater adverse events were reported in 88.9% and 88.2% in the acalabrutinib and placebo arms, respectively. CONCLUSION The combination of acalabrutinib with bendamustine-rituximab significantly improved PFS. Clinical benefit of acalabrutinib with bendamustine-rituximab was achieved with manageable toxicity.

Abstract Richter syndrome (RS), an aggressive lymphoma that develops in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), is a striking example of histologic transformation. While recent therapeutic advances have transformed the treatment landscape of CLL and lymphoma, RS remains associated with dismal overall survival. Despite an advanced genomic and molecular characterization of CLL over the past decade, the current understanding of the genetic factors driving evolution of CLL to RS is limited. To decipher the genetics underlying this transformation, we have performed an integrative analysis of exome, genome and transcriptome data generated from matched RS and CLL samples from a discovery cohort of 53 patients with newly diagnosed RS of DLBCL histology. Through computational deconvolution of CLL and RS clones, we constructed phylogenetic relationships and traced evolution of CLL to RS, confirming both clonal related (87%) and unrelated cases (13%). In addition to identifying recognized RS-risk genetic lesions, we discovered novel RS-specific alterations, including 5 putative somatic driver genes (IRF2BP2, SRSF1, B2M, DNMT3A and EZH2), frequent copy number alterations beyond del(9p21)(CDKN2A/B), (including amp(7q21.2) (CDK6), amp(9p24) (PDL1/L2), and amp(1q23)(MCL1)), and recurrent whole genome duplication and chromothripsis. Integration of exome and genome sequencing data led to the identification of distinct molecular subtypes of RS with prognostic importance. To confirm these molecular subtypes, a validation cohort of 47 RS cases has been assembled with paired exome and transcriptome data. To further investigate the stepwise clonal evolution of CLL to RS, we performed single-cell RNA-sequencing on biopsy samples obtained at diagnosis from 5 individuals with clonally related transformation. Using a novel tool, CNVSingle, we inferred allele specific single-cell copy number alterations that enabled identification of the single-cell clusters representing distinct CLL and RS genetic subclones as well as intermediate, or transitional, evolutionary states. RS cells displayed gene expression enriched in pathways of MYC targets and cell cycle, in line with similar analysis on bulk transcriptomes. Finally, by ultra-low pass (ULP)-WGS sequencing of plasma samples from RS patients, we demonstrate detection of RS tumor DNA in plasma months prior to initial clinical diagnosis (n=3 of 6) or post-allogeneic stem cell transplant relapse (n=2 of 2). cfDNA is thus a promising tool for early detection of emerging RS and RS relapse as well as for non-invasive detection surrounding diagnosis. Altogether, our study defines RS-specific alterations and provides a molecular definition of RS, identifies distinct genetic subtypes of RS with prognostic significance, traces the evolutionary path to RS and suggests future strategies for improved detection. Citation Format: Erin M Parry, Ignaty Leshchiner, Romain Guieze, Connor Johnson, Eugen Tausch, Sameer A Parikh, Camilla K Lemvigh, Conor Messer, Filippo Utro, Chaya Levovitz, Kahn Rhrissorrakrai, Matthew S Davids, Julien Broseus, Shuqiang Li, Ziao Lin, Binyamin A Knisbacher, Christof Schneider, Laura Z Rassenti, Thomas J Kipps, Nitin Jain, William Wierda, Florence Cymbalista, Neil E Kay, Kenneth J Livak, Brian P Danysh, Chip Stewart, Donna Neuberg, Jennifer R Brown, Laxmi Paridi, Stephan Stilgenbauer, Gaddy Getz, Catherine Wu. Evolutionary history of transformation from chronic lymphocytic leukemia to Richter syndrome [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Third AACR International Meeting: Advances in Malignant Lymphoma: Maximizing the Basic-Translational Interface for Clinical Application; 2022 Jun 23-26; Boston, MA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Blood Cancer Discov 2022;3(5_Suppl):Abstract nr A13.

Abstract Richter’s syndrome (RS) arising from chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is a striking example of an aggressive malignant histology that emerges from indolent cancer. RS is a major barrier to disease control in CLL and is associated with poor clinical outcomes and limited survival. The genetic basis of RS is poorly understood, and its relationship to the antecedent CLL remains incompletely characterized. To study RS, we performed whole-exome sequencing (WES) on samples collected from 52 patients with RS of diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) histology. For this genomic characterization, samples from 42 patients were analyzed as ‘trios’ (matched germline, CLL and RS tissue DNA) and those from 10 as ‘duos’ (matched CLL and RS DNA). Beyond addressing contamination of CLL DNA in the germline sample, we developed methods for discriminating between the RS and CLL clones which often coexist in the same samples. The discovery cohort revealed that RS and CLL were clonally-related in 45/52 (87%) cases based on WES analysis, with a distinct RS clone emerging from a CLL subclone. The remaining 13% were determined to be clonally unrelated. RS clones presented ~3x higher rates of additional mutations than the ancestral CLL clones from which they developed. We identified novel RS somatic driver mutations (in IRF2BP2, SRSF1, B2M, DNMT3A and others), a high rate of copy number variations with recurrent deletions (e.g., del(17p) [TP53], del(13q14.3), del(7q36), and del(15q13.11) [MGA], del(9p21.3) [CDKN2A/B], del(16q12.2)), focal amplifications (amp(7q21.2) [CDK6], amp(8q24.2) [RECQL4, MYC], amp(13q31.2) [ERCC5], and frequent whole genome duplication. To further investigate RS and CLL clonal evolution, we performed single-cell RNA-sequencing on biopsies at the time of RS diagnosis in 5 individuals with clonally related transformation. Using our novel tool, CNVSingle, we inferred allele specific single-cell copy number alterations, yielding cluster-specific copy number profiles that matched the WES results of individual subclones of the RS and CLL populations. This enabled mapping genetic clones to specific expression patterns. Finally, we devised and tested a methodology that uses cfDNA for early detection of emerging Richter’s disease and have successfully identified Richter‘s tumor DNA in the blood several months prior to the clinical diagnosis. Our study thus defines drivers, distinct molecular subtypes and evolutionary path to RS and suggests strategies for its improved detection. Citation Format: Erin M. Parry, Ignaty Leshchiner, Romain Guièze, Connor Johnson, Eugen Tausch, Sameer Parikh, Camilla Lemvigh, Conor Messer, Daniel Rosebrock, Filippo Utro, Chaya Levovitz, Kahn Rhrissorrakrai, Matthew Davids, Raquel A. Jacobs, Kara Slowik, Julien Broseus, Shanye Yin, Shuqiang Li, Geoff Fell, Ziao Lin, Binyamin A. Knisbacher, Neil Ruthen, Dimitri Livitz, Christof Schneider, Jialin Ma, Julian Hess, Laura Z. Rassenti, Thomas J. Kipps, Nitin Jain, William Wierda, Florence Cymbalista, Neil E. Kay, Kenneth J. Livak, Brian P. Danysh, Chip Stewart, Donna Neuberg, Jennifer R. Brown, Laxmi Parida, Stephan Stilgenbauer, Gad Getz, Catherine J. Wu. Evolutionary history of transformation from chronic lymphocytic leukemia to Richter’s syndrome [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr 4007.

Richter's syndrome (RS) arising from chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is a striking example of an aggressive malignant histology that emerges from indolent cancer. A major barrier to disease control in CLL, RS is associated with poor clinical outcomes and limited survival. The genetic basis of RS is poorly understood and its relationship to antecedent CLL remains incompletely characterized. Notable challenges to the genomic study of RS includes those of sample acquisition, the distinction between true tumor events rather than sequence artifacts in archival fixed tissue, and the limitations of available computational techniques for deconvoluting admixtures of CLL and RS DNA within the same biopsy specimen. To address these challenges and characterize the genetic profile of RS, we performed whole-exome sequencing (WES) on samples collected from 42 patients with RS of diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) histology. For this genomic characterization, samples from 37 patients were analyzed as 'trios' (matched germline, CLL and RS tissue DNA) and those from 5 as 'duos' (matched CLL and RS DNA). CLL diagnosis preceeded RS diagnosis by a median of 60.6 months (range 0.1-234.5). The median number of prior CLL-directed therapies was 2 (range 0-10). 8 patients had no prior CLL-directed therapy, while 9 were exposed to novel agents. The median time from most proximal CLL sampling to RS was 2.7 months (range: 82.2 months pre- to 3.8 months post RS diagnosis). Critical analytic innovations applied to this dataset included addressing contamination of CLL DNA in the germline sample (through the tool DeTIN) and generating the ability to discriminate between clones arising from RS or from CLL, even while both histologies were commonly co-existing within originating biopsies (via the tool PhylogicNDT). From this discovery cohort of 42 cases, 36 (86%) revealed RS and CLL to be clonally-related based on WES analysis, with a distinct RS clone emerging from an existing CLL subclone. Of the 6 (14%) cases determined to be clonally unrelated by WES, 4 had been previously examined by IGHV sequencing; only 1 of 4 was categorized as clonally unrelated, likely due to CLL and RS admixture. RS displayed mutational signatures reflecting aging (CpG), canonical AID, and non-canonical AID processes. Through deconvoluting clonal composition using PhylogicNDT in related sample trios (n=31), we established several notable differences compared to antecedent CLL. First, RS clones presented higher rates of additional mutations than the ancestral CLL clones from which they developed (2.47 vs. 0.86 Mut/Mb, p<0.0001). Second, the frequency of CLL-associated driver mutations in the RS clones was altered:TP53 mutation (n=21, 50%), NOTCH1 mutation (n=17, 40%) NFKBIE (n=5, 12%), EGR2 (n=6, 14%), XPO1 (n=5, 12%), and RPS15 (n=3, 7%). Third, the clonal transition to RS was marked by a diversity of additional driver mutations and particularly increased copy number variants (CNVs). RS biopsies had recurrent arm level events, including del(17p) in 44%, del(4p) in 27%, del(4q) in 27%, del(9p) in 22%, del(17q) in 22% and del(9q) in 20% (Q<0.05, GISTIC). The top focal alterations in RS biopsies, as identified by tool GISTIC included (Q value <= 0.05): amp(7q21.2) - CDK6,amp(8q24.3) - RECQL4, amp(13q31.3) - ERCC5, amp(19p13.3), amp(19q13.42), del(8p12), del(17p13.1) - TP53, del(13q14.3), del(7q35), and del(16q12.2). Finally, whole genome doubling was observed in 6 cases upon transition to RS. To further investigate RS and CLL clonal evolution at high resolution, we performed single-cell RNA-sequencing (10x Genomics), on biopsies at the time of RS diagnosis in 5 individuals with clonally related transformation. Data analysis and clustering was conducted using Seurat(v3) with doublet removal (DoubletFinder). We identified CNV in single-cell transcriptomes that matched the WES copy-number profiles of individual subclones of the RS and CLL populations and thus linked subclones identified by WES to single-cell expression clusters and states, revealing CLL, RS and intermediate evolutionary cell states. In conclusion, we identify that RS arises from CLL subclones through distinct mutational trajectories. Further molecular subclassification of RS, including genetic characterization of additional cases, and linking mutational data with clinical outcomes is ongoing and has potential to alter clinical classification and prognostication of RS. Disclosures Guieze: abbvie: Honoraria, Other: advisory board, travel funds; janssen cilag: Honoraria, Other: advisory board, travel funds; roche: Other: travle funds; gilead: Honoraria, Other: travel funds; astrazanecka: Honoraria, Other: advisory board. Leshchiner:PACT Pharma, Inc.: Consultancy. Tausch:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Davids:Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Surface Oncology: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Syros Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy; Zentalis: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ascentage Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Elagina:AbbVie: Current Employment. Jain:TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Precision Bioscienes: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Fate Therapeutics: Research Funding; Verastem: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; BeiGene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aprea Therapeutics: Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Kipps:Oncternal Therapeutics, Inc.: Other: Cirmtuzumab was developed by Thomas J. Kipps in the Thomas J. Kipps laboratory and licensed by the University of California to Oncternal Therapeutics, Inc., which provided stock options and research funding to the Thomas J. Kipps laboratory, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Genentech/Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; VelosBio: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics/ AbbVie, Breast Cancer Research Foundation, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Oncternal Therapeutics, Inc., Specialized Center of Research (SCOR) - The Leukemia and Lymphoma Society (LLS), California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM): Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ascerta/AstraZeneca, Celgene, Genentech/F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Gilead, Janssen, Loxo Oncology, Octernal Therapeutics, Pharmacyclics/AbbVie, TG Therapeutics, VelosBio, and Verastem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Broséus:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria. Kay:MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Cytomx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Meyer Squib: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Juno Theraputics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Dava Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncotracker: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Rigel: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astra Zeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sunesis: Research Funding; Morpho-sys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Purroy:AstraZenica: Current Employment. Utro:IBM: Current Employment. Rhrissorrakrai:IBM: Current Employment. Levovitz:IBM: Current Employment. Parikh:GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ascentage Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria; Verastem Oncology: Honoraria. Brown:Abbvie, Acerta, AstraZeneca, Beigene, Invectys, Juno/Celgene, Kite, Morphosys, Novartis, Octapharma, Pharmacyclics, Sunesis, TG Therapeutics, Verastem: Consultancy; Gilead, Loxo, Sun, Verastem: Research Funding; Janssen, Teva: Speakers Bureau. Parida:IBM: Current Employment. Neuberg:Madrigak Pharmaceuticals: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Stilgenbauer:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-LaRoche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding. Getz:Scorpion Therapeutics: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: Founder; IBM: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Broad Institute: Patents & Royalties: MuTect, ABSOLUTE, MutSig, MSMuTect, MSMutSig, POLYSOLVER and TensorQTL. Wu:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; BionTech: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.

Abstract Abstract 2859 Introduction: Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia who relapse following purine-analog or bendamustine-based treatments have a poor prognosis. These patients have limited therapeutic options and novel agents with alternative mechanisms of action are needed. In phase 1 and 2 trials, escalating dose regimens of the immunomodulatory agent lenalidomide demonstrated promising activity with relapsed/refractory CLL. Of interest, the data indicate that superior efficacy might be achieved by a starting dose above 2.5 mg daily lenalidomide. A phase 2 trial (CLL-009 study) was developed to investigate the safety of different starting doses of lenalidomide followed by a step-wise dose escalation as tolerated in relapsed/refractory CLL. Methods: In this ongoing trial, eligible subjects with relapsed/refractory CLL who have received at least 1 prior treatment regimen are being enrolled. Subjects are randomized 1 :1 :1 to receive a double-blinded starting dose of 5 mg, 10 mg, or 15 mg oral lenalidomide on days 1–28 of each 28-day cycle. The primary objectives are to determine the safety and efficacy of the different lenalidomide starting doses of 5 mg, 10 mg or 15 mg daily, followed by an intra-patient escalation up to a maximum of 25 mg daily using a Bayesian approach. Based on individual patient tolerability, the daily lenalidomide dose can be escalated every 28 days by 5 mg increments. Dose reductions also occur in 5 mg increments; however, dose levels below 5 mg sequentially include 2.5 mg and 1.25 mg daily. Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) prophylaxis, comprised of oral hydration and allopurinol 300 mg/day is initiated at least 3 days prior to starting study drug and for a minimum of the first 3 treatment cycles. This adaptive design trial is considering joint efficacy and toxicity outcomes to stop randomization of less promising arms. Accrual to a starting dose arm will be stopped if unacceptable toxicities and/or high progression rate are observed in that arm. A total of 90 subjects will be enrolled in the study. Results: To date, 51 subjects with a median age of 63 years (range 39–78) have been enrolled. Subjects to date are primarily male (65%) and Caucasian (84%), and slightly more than half (53%) are ≥ 65 years old. Cytogenetic data is available for 42 subjects; 10 have del(11q), 8 have del(17p), and 24 have del(13q). Overall, 31 subjects had at least one cytogenetic deletion. Based on the Binet and Rai staging systems: 3 (6%), 10 (20%) and 15 (29%) of subjects are stage A, B and C, respectively; and, 6 (12%), 7 (14%) and 7 (14%) subjects are low, intermediate or high-risk disease, respectively. For 3 (6%) subjects the Binet/Rai staging is currently unknown. The most common hematological grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) thus far include neutropenia (41% of patients) and thrombocytopenia (24%). The most common non-hematological grade 3/4 AEs include fatigue (12%) and tumor flare (12%). Only 1 subject (2%) experienced tumor lysis syndrome of grade 1. Over half of the subjects (53%) remain on therapy; 24 (47%) subjects have discontinued treatment. The longest subject has completed 17 cycles, and remains on study medication. The most common reasons for study discontinuation include disease progression (n = 8) and AEs (n = 10). To date, 20 subjects (54% of eligible patients) have successfully dose escalated above their respective starting double blinded dose level, including 3, 3, 2 and 12 subjects undergoing 4, 3, 2, and 1 dose escalations, respectively. As 14 patients are still in the first cycle of the study, a total of 20 subjects have had no dose level reduction or escalations. The average duration of treatment is 4.34 cycles, and the median number of cycles is 3. Efficacy evaluations are completed monthly after 3 months of study drug treatment. By investigator assessment, 34 subjects have been evaluated to date, including 1 (3%) complete response, 12 (35%) partial response, 7 (21%) stable disease, 10 (29%) progressive disease and 4 (12%) not evaluable. Conclusion: The independent Data Monitoring Committee, as of March 24, 2011 (N=41), recommended that accrual into all three treatment arms should continue as planned, suggesting all three starting doses were tolerated. To date, the ORR is 38% (13/34 evaluable subjects), and 54% of subjects (20/37) have dose escalated at least once. In this relapsed/refractory CLL population lenalidomide appears active, and completion of accrual will hopefully demonstrate the appropriate starting dose. Disclosures: Wendtner: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Off Label Use: lenalidomide in cll. Goldberg:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Bloor:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Stilgenbauer:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Cymbalista:Roche: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Honoraria; Genzyme: Honoraria. Kipps:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbott Industries: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; Igenica: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Purse:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhang:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mei:Celgene: Employment.

Abstract Introduction In 2 large phase 3 trials of patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory (R/R) CLL/SLL, single-agent ibrutinib (ibr) was superior to ofatumumab (ofa) (RESONATE; Byrd. NEJM 2013) and ibr + BR was superior to placebo + BR (HELIOS; Chanan-Khan. ASCO 2015). Both studies evaluated ibr in different pt populations with different relevant comparators (eg, ofa in pts who had relapsed following prior anti-CD20-based chemoimmunotherapy [CIT] and/or with del17p, and BR in pts eligible for CIT). In the absence of head-to-head evaluations of single-agent ibr vs BR or single-agent ibr vs ibr + BR, indirect comparisons can be used for hypothesis testing by potentially providing insights on the relative efficacy of treatments. As such, an indirect comparative analysis of data from RESONATE and HELIOS was performed. Recognizing biases inherent in cross-trial comparisons, including lack of randomization across trials and consequent differences in distributions of important confounding variables (eg, pt characteristics, prognostic factors), we used pt-level data from both studies to risk adjust for confounders using accepted multivariate statistical approaches. Methods In RESONATE, pts received 420 mg oral ibr daily until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity or intravenous ofa for up to 24 weeks. The primary end point was IRC-assessed PFS, with secondary end points of OS and ORR. In HELIOS, pts received BR (≤ 6 cycles) with either 420 mg oral ibr daily or placebo until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Pts with del17p were excluded. The primary end point was IRC-assessed PFS, with secondary end points of ORR and OS. Per protocol amendment in both studies, pts in comparator arms could switch to ibr upon IRC-confirmed progression. The current exploratory analysis was based on the latest available data from each trial (median time on study: RESONATE, 19 months; HELIOS, 17 months) using investigator assessments, but excluding del17p pts from RESONATE. Analyses were performed using data from both the overall CLL/SLL population and only the CLL pts. Separate multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were constructed for PFS and OS, including treatment and clinically relevant prognostic variables as covariates (age, gender, Rai staging, ECOG score, del11q status, refractory status, number of prior lines of therapy, bulky disease, IgVH status). Adjusted HRs and 95% CIs are presented vs single-agent ibr, along with predicted survival curves derived from the multivariate Cox regressions. Results RESONATE and HELIOS enrolled populations with notable differences making naïve comparison flawed. Because HELIOS enrolled only CIT-eligible pts, the trial included younger pts who had received fewer lines of therapy, as well as lower proportions of pts with purine analog refractory disease, del11q, or Rai stage 4 disease. These factors have been previously reported to influence outcomes in pts with R/R CLL/SLL and thus were included as covariates in the statistical models. Other baseline factors (gender, ECOG score, bulky disease, and IgVH status) were not notably different between the trials, but were found to impact PFS and OS and thus were included as additional covariates. In the overall CLL/SLL population, PFS and OS were comparable for single-agent ibr vs ibr + BR, and were significantly improved for single-agent ibr vs BR (Figure 1). Results for only the CLL pts were similar to those shown in Figure 1 for both PFS (ibr + BR vs single-agent ibr: 1.03 [0.61-1.75], p = 0.9042; BR vs single-agent ibr: 7.52 [4.72-11.99], p < 0.0001; single-agent ibr reduced the risk of progression/death by 87% vs BR) and OS (ibr + BR vs single-agent ibr: 1.20 [0.59-2.43], p = 0.6197; BR vs single-agent ibr: 2.24 [1.14-4.40], p = 0.0197; single-agent ibr reduced the risk of death by 55% vs BR). Conclusions The adjusted indirect comparisons reported here suggest superiority of single-agent ibr over BR for PFS and OS in patients with R/R CLL/SLL. The comparisons also suggest that the addition of BR to ibr did not improve PFS or OS compared with single-agent ibr. However, as median PFS has not been reached for either ibr arm, it is too early to draw firm conclusions. Longer follow-up in the ibr arms of these studies will be required to give an indication of whether CIT adds any benefit to ibrutinib for PFS and OS. Overall, these findings provide support for single-agent ibr as an appropriate choice for all pts with previously treated CLL/SLL. Disclosures Hillmen: Roche Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Honoraria, Research Funding. Fraser:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Hoffman LaRoche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Jones:Acerta Pharma BV: Research Funding. Rule:Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel reimbursement; J&J: Consultancy, Other: Travel reimbursement, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Travel reimbursement; Gilead: Research Funding. Dilhuydy:Roche: Honoraria, Other: Travel reimbursement; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel reimbursement; Mundipharma: Honoraria. Jaeger:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cymbalista:Karyopharm: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Sun:Janssen/J&J: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ninomoto:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment. Mahler:Janssen: Employment, Other: Travel reimbursement. Cheng:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment. Diels:Janssen: Employment. Clow:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment. Salman:Janssen/J&J: Employment, Equity Ownership. James:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment. Howes:Janssen/J&J: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Abstract BACKGROUND. The detection of minimal residual disease (MRD) at the level of 0.01%/10-4 or above is a strong independent predictor of reduced progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with CLL treated with chemoimmunotherapy. Although newer agents such as B-cell receptor pathway inhibitors can result in prolonged survival without achieving complete response, there remains a important role for MRD analysis in assessing therapeutic strategies aimed at disease eradication and cure. This is particularly important in front-line trials for fit patients which now require at least five years of follow-up if PFS is used as an endpoint. The feasibility of using MRD as a surrogate or intermediate endpoint for accelerated approval of new treatments is under review by regulatory agencies but further prospective validation is required. At the same time technology is rapidly evolving and high-throughput sequencing (HTS) technologies now detect MRD at the 0.0001%/10-6 level. It is therefore important to determine the most effective approaches for quantifying MRD that are compatible with previous studies but sufficiently sensitive for current treatments. AIMS. This collaborative project had two objectives. First, to identify the simplest and most flexible flow cytometry panel capable of detecting MRD at the 0.01%/10-4 or lower, that is compatible with published data and independent of instrument/reagent manufacturer. Second, to compare the flow cytometry approach with HTS analysis using the ClonoSEQ assay (Adaptive Biotechnologies, Seattle, WA). METHODS AND RESULTS. A core panel of antibodies for MRD detection was identified by testing an 8-marker combination in 52 samples (27 post-treatment and 25 dilution study) and re-analysing data with serial exclusion of single markers to determine redundancy. A 1-tube core panel of CD19, CD20, CD5, CD43, CD79b, and CD81 was identified and validated against the previously published 2-tube 6-marker and 4-tube 4-marker ERIC panels in 76 samples (19 post-treatment and 57 dilution study). The results showed good concordance (for log-transformed data above the LoQ, linearity=0.977, Pearson correlation co-efficient=0.983, average difference=0.026 log, 95% limit of agreement 0.20log) and a limit of detection of 0.001%/10-5 for the 1-tube core panel. Inter-operator variation was similar to CML MRD monitoring with both experienced operators, or inexperienced cytometrists after ~1 hour of specific education, achieving a 95% limit of agreement less than 0.3log in samples with MRD levels ranging from 0.0001 – 100%. The flow cytometry approach was compared with the ClonoSEQ HTS assay in 109 samples (21 dilution study and 88 post-treatment samples, complete data currently available on 13/88). The assay was applicable to the vast majority CLL patients, often with two clonal markers. There was 94% concordance at the 0.01% (10-4) threshold (15 samples with ≥0.01% CLL by both methods, 14 samples with <0.01% by both methods, 1 sample with 0.03% CLL by HTS and <0.003% CLL by flow cytometry, and 1 sample with 0.005% CLL by HTS and 0.012% by flow cytometry. HTS detected CLL IGH sequences in 22% (7/31) samples with no detectable CLL cells by flow cytometry (i.e. CLL level 0.0001-0.001%, 3/13 patient samples and 4/18 dilution samples). HTS demonstrated a relatively high variability in quantification, as seen in previous studies, but with a clear superiority in the limit of detection and good linearity (linearity=0.905, Pearson correlation co-efficient=0.870, average difference=0.078 log, 95% limit of agreement 1.5 log). CONCLUSIONS. The 1-tube 6-marker flow cytometry core panel is compatible with published studies, manufacturer-independent and flexible, providing directly quantitative results to 0.001%/10-5 without requiring a pre-treatment sample. HTS requires further work to standardise the quantitative analysis and prospective validation but the ClonoSEQ assay is applicable to >95% of CLL patients, does not require viable cells and is extremely sensitive, detecting residual disease in a significant proportion of cases with <0.01% CLL. The results indicate that flow cytometry and HTS are complementary technologies with a combined approach offering the most reliable way of quantifying CLL at the 0.01%/10-4 threshold while allowing higher sensitivity in clinical trials aimed at disease eradication. Disclosures Rawstron: Roche: Honoraria; Biogen Idec: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; BD Biosciences: Intrasure reagent Patents & Royalties; Celgene: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria. Williamson:Adaptive Biotechnologies: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sanders:Adaptive Biotechnologies: Employment, Equity Ownership. Robins:Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Hallek:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria. Hillmen:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding.

SummaryIbrutinib, a Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor, is approved for treatment of various B‐cell malignancies. In ibrutinib clinical studies, low‐grade haemorrhage was common, whereas major haemorrhage (MH) was infrequent. We analysed the incidence of and risk factors for MH from 15 ibrutinib clinical studies (N = 1768), including 4 randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Rates of any‐grade bleeding were similar for single‐agent ibrutinib and ibrutinib combinations (39% and 40%). Low‐grade bleeding was more common in ibrutinib‐treated than comparator‐treated patients (35% and 15%), and early low‐grade bleeding was not associated with MH. The proportion of MH in RCTs was higher with ibrutinib than comparators (4.4% vs. 2.8%), but after adjusting for longer exposure with ibrutinib (median 13 months vs. 6 months), the incidence of MH was similar (3.2 vs. 3.1 per 1000 person‐months). MH led to treatment discontinuation in 1% of all ibrutinib‐treated patients. Use of anticoagulants and/or antiplatelets (AC/AP) during the study was common (~50% of patients) and had an increased exposure‐adjusted relative risk for MH in both the total ibrutinib‐treated population (1.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.2–3.0) and RCT comparator‐treated patients (2.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.0–5.6), indicating that ibrutinib may not alter the effect of AC/AP on the risk of MH in B‐cell malignancies.