Budde, Lihua E.

The aim of the NCCN Guidelines for Management of Immunotherapy-Related Toxicities is to provide guidance on the management of immune-related adverse events resulting from cancer immunotherapy. The NCCN Management of Immunotherapy-Related Toxicities Panel is an interdisciplinary group of representatives from NCCN Member Institutions, consisting of medical and hematologic oncologists with expertise across a wide range of disease sites, and experts from the areas of dermatology, gastroenterology, endocrinology, neurooncology, nephrology, cardio-oncology, ophthalmology, pulmonary medicine, and oncology nursing. The content featured in this issue is an excerpt of the recommendations for managing toxicities related to CAR T-cell therapies and a review of existing evidence. For the full version of the NCCN Guidelines, including recommendations for managing toxicities related to immune checkpoint inhibitors, visitNCCN.org.

In the last decade, a better understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas has resulted in the development of novel targeted therapies, such as small molecule inhibitors of select kinases in the B-cell receptor pathway, antibody–drug conjugates, and small molecules that target a variety of proteins (eg, CD-19, EZH2, and XPO-1–mediated nuclear export). Anti-CD19 CAR T-cell therapy, first approved for relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, has also emerged as a novel treatment option for R/R follicular lymphoma and mantle cell lymphoma. These NCCN Guideline Insights highlight the new targeted therapy options included in the NCCN Guidelines for B-Cell Lymphomas for the treatment of R/R disease.

Background: Axi-cel, an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy, is approved for treatment of adult pts with R/R LBCL after ≥ 2 lines of systemic therapy. In the pivotal ZUMA-1 study, axi-cel demonstrated durable responses and a largely manageable safety profile (Locke FL, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2019). ZUMA-9 (NCT03153462), a multicenter, open-label study, provided pts with R/R LBCL with expanded access to axi-cel until commercial availability (Cohort 1 [C1]) and later, if commercially manufactured product did not meet commercial release specification(s) (Cohort 2 [C2]). Safety and efficacy of axi-cel (C1 and C2) and translational analyses (C2) are presented. Methods: Eligible adults had histologically confirmed R/R LBCL, ECOG ≤ 1, and received prior CD20-targeting and an anthracycline-containing regimen. C2 pts must have had commercial OOS product. Pts underwent leukaphersis and conditioning chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2/day and fludarabine 30 mg/m2/day) for 3 days followed by a single axi-cel infusion (target dose, 2 × 106 CAR T cells/kg). C1 and C2 pts with high disease burden could receive bridging therapy before conditioning at investigator's discretion. Endpoints included frequency of adverse events (AEs), objective response rate (ORR) per standard-of-care imaging assessment, overall survival (OS) for C1 and C2, and blood CAR T cells levels and serum cytokines for C2 only. Outcomes were contextualized with the primary analysis of ZUMA-1 C1+2 (n = 101; ≥ 6 mo of follow-up; Neelapu SS, et al. NEJM. 2017). Results: As of 11/29/2019 (C1) and 3/15/2020 (C2), 25 C1 pts and 36 C2 pts received axi-cel with a median follow-up of 27.1 mo (range, 23.6 - 29.6) and 13.2 mo (range, 0.4 - 25.7), respectively. In C1, median age was 56 y (range, 28 - 76), 60% were male, 80% had DLBCL, 48%/0% had ECOG1/≥2, 44% had IPI ≥3, and 64% had ≥ 3 prior lines of therapy. In C2, median age was 61 y (range, 24 - 81), 75% were male, 78% had DLBCL, 58%/17% had ECOG 1/≥2, 56% had IPI ≥3, and 69% had ≥ 3 prior lines of therapy. In C2, 50% of pts had OOS product with low viability, 28% had high IFN-γ, 14% had low IFN-γ, 14% received a low dose, and 6% had high transduction ratio. The ORR was 76% (64% complete response [CR]) for C1, 53% (36% CR) for C2, and 82% (54% CR) for ZUMA-1 C1+2. Median OS was 23.8 mo (95% CI, 13.5 - NE) for C1 and not reached (95% CI, 3.4 - NE) for C2, respectively. ORR and OS were consistent in C2 OOS subgroups (Table). Grade ≥ 3 AEs were reported in 88% and 89% of C1 and C2 pts, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 CRS (Lee et al, Blood. 2014) was not observed in C1 but was reported in 3% of C2 pts (13% in ZUMA-1 C1+2). Grade ≥ 3 neurologic events (NEs) occurred in 36% and 19% of pts in C1 and C2, respectively, and 28% of pts in ZUMA-1 C1+2. No Grade 5 CRS or NEs occurred in C1 or C2. All CRS and NEs resolved in C1, and most CRS (29/30) and NEs (19/24) resolved in C2 as of the data cutoff. Of 3 Grade 5 AEs in C1, 2 were unrelated to axi-cel (clostridial sepsis [on Day (D) 6] and respiratory failure [on D212]) and 1 was related to conditioning (myelodysplastic syndrome [on D563]). Of 3 Grade 5 AEs in C2, 2 were unrelated to axi-cel (multiple organ dysfunction syndrome [on D6] and cardiac arrest [on D482]) and 1 was related to axi-cel (systemic mycosis [on D30]). Median peak CAR T cell levels and median CAR T cell expansion (area under the curve in the first 28 days) were lower in ZUMA-9 C2 (n = 32/36; 12 cells/µL [range, 0 - 442] and 112 cells/µL × days [range, 0 - 3413]) vs ZUMA-1 C1+2 (n = 96/101; 42 cells/µL [range, 1 - 1514] and 462 cells/µL × days [range, 5 - 14,329]). Serum IFN-γ levels peaked within 8 days after axi-cel infusion (median, 170 pg/mL [range, 8 - 1876]) and were lower vs ZUMA-1 C1+2 (median, 477 pg/mL [range, 8 - 8209]). Axi-cel in ZUMA-9 C2 contained fewer, less differentiated CCR7+ naïve and central memory T cells, and a greater proportion of more differentiated CCR7- effector memory and effector T cells vs ZUMA-1 C1+2. No cases of replication-competent retroviruses were reported in C1 or C2. Conclusion: Axi-cel treatment demonstrated a manageable safety profile and meaningful clinical benefit in this expanded access and OOS product study. While CAR T cell therapy showed clinical benefit in C2 (OOS product), the lower CR rate was corroborated by lower CAR T cell expansion and a more differentiated product vs ZUMA-1 C1+2, warranting further investigation. ZUMA-9 C2 is enrolling pts and evaluation is ongoing. Disclosures Jacobson: Precision Biosciences: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; AXIS: Speakers Bureau; Nkarta: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; Clinical Care Options: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; Lonza: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support. Locke:Calibr: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Wugen: Consultancy; GammaDelta Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Cellular Biomedicine Group: Other: Consultancy with grant options; Allogene: Consultancy. Miklos:Adaptive Biotech: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Juno-Celgene-Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Allogene Therapeutics Inc.: Research Funding; Miltenyi Biotec: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel support; Kite-Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, Research Funding. Vose:Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Allogene: Honoraria; Loxo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Miltenyi Biotec: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Epizyme: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria; Wugen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Roche/Genetech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other. Lin:Sorrento: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Research Funding; Vineti: Consultancy; Gamida Cells: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Legend BioTech: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Budde:Roche: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Mustang Therapeutics: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding. Maloney:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; A2 Biotherapeutics: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Patents & Royalties: Patents are pending, but not issued, licensed, no royalties, no licensees., Research Funding; Bioline Rx: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Jaglowski:Juno: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; CRISPR: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Riedell:MorphoSys: Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Perales:Celgene: Honoraria; MolMed: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Omeros: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bellicum: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Miltenyi Biotec: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Nektar Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cidara Therapeutics: Other; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Medigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; NexImmune: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kim:Gilead Sciences: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Kawashima:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Other: stock or other ownership . Yang:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Rossi:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Goyal:Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Neelapu:Legend Biotech: Other; Allogene Therapeutics: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Cell Medica/Kuur: Other: personal fees; Incyte: Other: personal fees; Unum Therapeutics: Other, Research Funding; Adicet Bio: Other; Novartis: Other: personal fees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Merck: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Precision Biosciences: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Poseida: Research Funding; Calibr: Other; Acerta: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Patents & Royalties; Celgene: Other: personal fees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Other: personal fees; Karus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; N/A: Other.

Abstract Approximately 90% of limited-stage Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) patients are projected to be cured with standard therapy, but many do not live their expected life span because of late treatment–related complications. New treatment paradigms are needed to reduce the use of radiation therapy (RT) as well as conventional chemotherapy drugs while improving upon current standard-of-care survival outcomes. In this phase 2 multicenter study, patients with non-bulky limited-stage HL received doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) followed by brentuximab vedotin (BV) consolidation. Forty-one patients were enrolled, and patient characteristics included median age of 29 years (range, 19 to 67 years), 58% were female, 45% had unfavorable disease, and 98% had stage II disease. Based on positron emission tomography (PET)–based risk stratification, patients received 2 to 6 cycles of ABVD followed by 6 cycles of BV. After ABVD followed by BV, 95% of evaluable patients (37 out of 39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 83%-99%) achieved PET-negative status. In the intent-to-treat patient population, the estimated 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate was 92%, and the overall survival (OS) rate was 97%, with a median follow-up of 47 months. All 37 patients who achieved negative PET status after BV consolidation effectively avoided RT and remain in remission with estimated 3-year PFS and OS rates of 100%. In conclusion, BV demonstrates encouraging clinical activity when it follows ABVD therapy in limited-stage HL. Early incorporation of BV may reduce the use of RT as well as conventional chemotherapy drugs while achieving favorable survival outcomes in risk-stratified patients with non-bulky limited-stage HL. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01578967.

The NCCN Guidelines for Management of Immunotherapy-Related Toxicities provide interdisciplinary guidance on the management of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) resulting from cancer immunotherapy. These NCCN Guidelines Insights describe symptoms that may be caused by an irAE and should trigger further investigation, and summarize the NCCN Management of Immunotherapy-Related Toxicities Panel discussions for the 2020 update to the guidelines regarding immune checkpoint inhibitor–related diarrhea/colitis and cardiovascular irAEs.

Abstract Introduction DLBCL is the most common lymphoid neoplasm in adults (Swerdlow 2016). While durable CRs are achieved in approximately 70% of patients (pts) with frontline RCHOP therapy (Pfreundschuh 2008), pts with high-risk features often experience disease resistance or relapse. In Part 1 of an ongoing study, pts with high-intermediate or high risk DLBCL by international prognostic index (IPI) scores, regardless of CD30 expression by IHC, were treated with 1.2 or 1.8 mg/kg brentuximab vedotin (BV) combined with RCHOP. After 3 of the first 10 pts treated at 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHOP developed Grade 3 peripheral neuropathy (per Standardized MedDRA Query [SMQ]), all pts enrolled subsequently received treatment with 1.2 mg/kg BV+RCHOP. Following completion of enrollment in Part 1, the protocol was amended to enroll a non-randomized portion of the study (Part 2) evaluating the safety and efficacy of 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHP (Yasenchak 2015), followed by an open-label, randomized portion comparing BV+RCHP to RCHOP (Part 3). Initial results from Part 2 and updated results from Part 1 are reported here. Methods For Part 2 of the study, pts with CD30-expressing high-intermediate and high-risk DLBCL were treated with up to 6 cycles of 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHP (NCT01925612). Key inclusion criteria were CD30 expression by IHC performed by a local pathology lab and standard IPI scores of 3-5 or age-adjusted IPI (aaIPI) scores of 2-3 (high-intermediate/high risk). CD30 expression was confirmed by a central pathology lab, although CD30 expression by local pathology lab was required for eligibility. Disease response was evaluated with PET/CT per Cheson 2007. Results At the time of analysis for this ongoing study, 11 pts in Part 2 were treated with BV+RCHP (7 male, 4 female; 22-78 yrs). Of these pts, 9 had high-intermediate risk (IPI 3, aaIPI 2) and 2 had high risk disease (IPI 4-5, aaIPI 3), 6 had Stage IV disease, and 6 had an ECOG score of 2. At the end of treatment, the overall response rate was 91% (9 CR, 1 PR); 1 pt had PD after Cycle 4. The most frequent (>20%) treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were alopecia and nausea (73% each); fatigue (64%); constipation and peripheral sensory neuropathy (55% each); neutropenia and throat irritation (36% each); and chills, diarrhea, headache, and stomatitis (27% each). Grade 3 or 4 AEs occurred in 8 pts and 5 pts had serious AEs, which included febrile neutropenia, bacteremia, nausea, pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, and vomiting. Peripheral sensory neuropathy occurred in 6 pts and all were Grade 1 or 2 events; no peripheral motor neuropathy AEs were reported. No AEs were fatal or led to discontinuation. One pt discontinued treatment after Cycle 4 due to disease progression. For the first 51 pts in Part 1, the progression-free survival (PFS) at 18 months for pts with CD30 expression (25 pts) or without detectable CD30 expression (24 pts) by IHC was 79% (95% CI: 57%, 91%) versus 58% (95% CI: 36%, 75%), respectively. Overall survival for pts was 92% (95% CI: 71%, 98%) versus 71% (95% CI: 48%, 85%), respectively. Ten pts had pre-existing peripheral neuropathy (per SMQ) at study entry. Treatment-emergent peripheral neuropathy (per SMQ) was observed in 75% of pts (38/51) who received BV+RCHOP; 55% of these pts (21/38) had resolution of all or some peripheral neuropathy events. Conclusions 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHP is active as frontline treatment in CD30-expressing, high-intermediate/high risk DLBCL. When combined with RCHP, 1.8 mg/kg BV appears to be well-tolerated. The PFS and OS for pts with CD30-expression who received BV+RCHOP appear promising. The study is currently ongoing in pts with CD30-expressing high-intermediate/high risk DLBCL to assess the safety and activity of 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHP versus standard RCHOP. Disclosures Halwani: Bristol Myers-Squibb: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Miragen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Amgen: Research Funding. Yasenchak:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Farber:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Burke:Pfizer: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Other: Travel Expenses; Millenium: Consultancy. Fayad:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Holkova:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Knapp:Insys Therapeutics, Inc.: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding. Kolibaba:Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; janssen: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding. Patel-Donnelly:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Yimer:Ariad Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Biotheranostics: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Equity Ownership; Kite Pharma: Equity Ownership; Clovis Oncology: Equity Ownership; Juno Therpeutics: Equity Ownership; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Smith:Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Levy:Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Seetharam:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Belada:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Brooks:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Kingsley:Gilead: Equity Ownership; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Equity Ownership. Wagner-Johnston:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Ruffner:Forma Therapeutics: Consultancy; Sydnax: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Employment, Equity Ownership; Array Biopharma: Employment; Medivation: Employment. Bartlett:Gilead: Consultancy.

Abstract Introduction RCHOP is the standard frontline treatment for patients with DLBCL. However, for patients with high-intermediate or high-risk disease (IPI 3-5), outcomes are suboptimal, with an estimated 3-year PFS of about 55%. In addition to IPI, an additional factor associated with an increased risk include non-GCB cell of origin. Brentuximab vedotin, an ADC targeting CD30, has demonstrated single-agent activity in relapsed/refractory DLBCL patients. Of note, higher ORR and CR, as well as longer duration of PFS, were observed in those patients with CD30 detected on tumor cells by routine IHC. Methods This phase 2 study was designed to evaluate combination therapy using brentuximab vedotin (BV) and standard RCHOP chemotherapy as frontline treatment in patients with high-intermediate/high risk (standard IPI score 3-5 or age-adjusted IPI [aaIPI] score 2-3) DLBCL, regardless of CD30 expression (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01925612). Patients were randomized to receive either 1.2 mg/kg BV+RCHOP or 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHOP for up to 6 cycles of treatment. BV was given on Day 1 of every 21-day cycle. Response was assessed per investigator using Cheson 2007. AEs, physical examination findings, and laboratory testing were utilized to characterize safety. Tumor cell CD30 expression was measured by IHC and gene expression analysis; soluble CD30 was measured in plasma. Tumor microenvironment was also evaluated for frequency of immune-infiltrating cells. The primary endpoints for this study were the tolerability of each regimen and the CR rate at the end of treatment (EOT). Key secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS). Additional exploratory endpoints included CD30 expression on tumor specimens (CD30- defined as <1% per IHC) and correlation of CD30 expression and response. Results Twenty-nine patients were treated with 1.2 mg/kg BV+RCHOP and 22 patients were treated with 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHOP. Over half (63%) were high-intermediate risk (IPI 3, aaIPI 2) and 37% were high risk (IPI 4-5, aaIPI 3). Most had Stage IV disease (71%) and 27% had an ECOG score of 2. AEs in ≥50% of patients included peripheral sensory neuropathy (63%), fatigue (61%), nausea (55%), and diarrhea (53%). Grade 3 or higher events occurred in 76% of patients; the most frequent were neutropenia (33%) and febrile neutropenia (31%). The PET-negative CR rate was 69% overall; CD30+ patients had a CR rate of 76% (19/25) compared with 63% (12/19) in CD30- patients by IHC. Although PFS data are still immature (median follow up of 8 months), the estimated PFS rate at 12 months was 82% (95% CI: 58, 93) in CD30+ patients and 56% (95% CI: 32, 75) in CD30- patients. 60% (3/5) of patients with CD30- ABC-DLBCL progressed versus 27% (3/11) of CD30+ ABC-DLBCL patients. Four patients with EBV+ DLBCL were treated and all achieved CR; 3 EBV+ patients remain in remission after a median follow-up of 12 months. Within the microenvironment, a higher percentage of CD3+ T-cells was observed in patients with CR (23%; range, 4-80%) than in those with PR (14%; range, 10-15%) or PD (11%; range, 5-15%). Of the 32 patients who have not yet progressed, 50% had ≥20% CD3+ cells compared to 18% of patients with PD (2/11). Other factors, including soluble CD30 levels and infiltrating CD68+ cells, were not associated with clinical outcomes. Conclusions Interim results demonstrate that adding BV to RCHOP results in a high rate of CR in this population of IPI 3-5 DLBCL. Patients with CD30-expression in the tumor appear to have a higher CR rate and fewer early progression events than patients with CD30- DLBCL. Furthermore, subsets of patients who have a particularly poor prognosis (CD30+ ABC subtype and EBV+ DLBCL) appeared to have a favorable outcome with BV+RCHOP. Evaluation of the tumor microenvironment showed that higher frequencies of infiltrating CD3+ cells were observed in the CR group, suggesting possible immunologic correlates of response. However, CD30 expression appears to have greater prognostic significance in this study despite the relatively small sample size. These results are intriguing and merit further testing in a randomized trial. Disclosures Yasenchak: Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Brentuximab vedotin is indicated in the US for treatment of patients with Hodgkin lymphoma after failure of autologous stem cell transplant or after failure of at least two prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimens in patients who are not ASCT candidates and for the treatment of patients with systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma after failure of at least one prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimen. The drug is being evaluated in this study for use as frontline treatment in patients with high-intermediate/high risk DLBCL in combination with multiagent chemotherapy. . Halwani:Abbvie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Takeda/Millenium: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Advani:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Genetech: Consultancy. Ansell:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding. Budde:Merck: Research Funding; Ikara Inc: Patents & Royalties; Atara Biotherapeutics: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Burke:Millenium/Takeda: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Other: Travel expenses; Gilead: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Farber:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Holkova:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Kolibaba:GSK: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Knapp:Celgene: Research Funding; Heron Pharmaceuticals: Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Research Funding; Brystol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Research Funding; EMD Serono: Research Funding. Li:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Manley:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Patel-Donnelly:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Seetharam:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Yimer:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Bartlett:Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Colgene: Research Funding; Medimmune: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; Insight: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; MERC: Research Funding; Dynavax: Research Funding; Idera: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; LAM Theapeutics: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Treatment of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) requires a careful balance between providing enough therapy to cure the disease and avoiding unnecessary treatment that could result in excessive long-term treatment-related complications. The preferred treatment option for limited stage non-bulky HL currently involves the use of combined chemotherapy and involved-field radiation therapy. Given the unclear overall survival advantage and the long-term side effects associated with consolidative radiation, the use of this modality remains one of the most controversial topics in the treatment of HL. Therefore, alternative consolidation approaches are worthy of exploration for treatment of limited stage non-bulky HL. Brentuximab vedotin has been associated with favorable response rates in patients with relapsed or refractory HL. We hypothesize that brentuximab vedotin may be safe and effective in eradicating residual disease after induction chemotherapy and may potentially replace radiation therapy for consolidation in patients with newly diagnosed limited stage non-bulky HL. Methods: In this phase 2 multicenter study, patients with non-bulky (< 7.5 cm) stage I or II HL are being enrolled to determine the efficacy and safety of brentuximab vedotin when administered for consolidation after a standard chemotherapy with ABVD (doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine) (ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT01578967). The primary objective of the study is to estimate the proportion of patients who achieve PET-negative disease (Deauville score of 2 or less) after induction chemotherapy followed by consolidation with brentuximab vedotin. Involved-field radiation is recommended only if the PET scan is positive at the completion of therapy with brentuximab vedotin. Patients received 2 to 6 cycles of ABVD based on their baseline risk factors and the interim PET scan result; patients with favorable disease with negative interim PET received 2 cycles, favorable disease with positive interim PET or unfavorable disease with negative interim PET received 4 cycles, and unfavorable disease with positive interim PET received 6 cycles of ABVD. Approximately 6 to 8 weeks after the induction chemotherapy, 1.8 mg/kg of brentuximab vedotin was given every 3 weeks for 6 cycles for consolidation. Results: Interim analysis was performed per protocol for futility and safety after 15 evaluable patients were enrolled since April 2012. Out of 15 evaluable patients, 8 patients have completed 6 cycles of brentuximab vedotin, and the remaining 7 patients are currently under active treatment. The median age was 28 years (range 19 – 58), and 7 patients (47%) presented with unfavorable disease defined by the presence of B symptoms, ESR > 50, or > 3 sites of disease. All patients had masses measuring less than 7.5 cm in diameter except one patient who requested an exception to the eligibility criteria for a conglomerate mediastinal mass measuring 10 cm. No grade 3 or above adverse events have been observed with brentuximab vedotin therapy. No grade 2 or above peripheral neuropathy or pulmonary toxicity has been reported. Ten out of 12 patients, who completed ABVD, achieved PET-negative disease after 2 cycles of ABVD, and all 7 patients who completed brentuximab vedotin achieved PET-negative disease and remain in remission with a median follow-up of 7.6 months (range 5.6 – 15). Thus far, none of the treated patients on this protocol required consolidative radiation therapy. Conclusion: In this interim analysis of 15 patients with newly diagnosed limited stage non-bulky HL, brentuximab vedotin as consolidation therapy demonstrates promising safety and clinical activity following ABVD. Enrollment is currently open with the target accrual of 40 patients to assess the feasibility of achieving PET-negative disease and thereby avoiding radiation therapy in at least 85% of patients who receive ABVD followed by brentuximab vedotin consolidation. Table: PET results in HL patients who received ABVD followed by BV Consolidation Interim-PET2 (n = 12) Post ABVD (n = 12) Post BV (n = 7) Deauville 1 0 1 4 Deauville 2 10 11 3 Deauville 3 2 0 0 Deauville ≥ 4 0 0 0 PET, positron emission tomography; HL, Hodgkin lymphoma; ABVD, doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine; BV, brentuximab vedotin; Interim-PET-2, PET scan after 2 cycles of ABVD; Post ABVD, PET scan after 2 to 6 cycles of ABVD; Post BV, PET scan after 6 cycles of brentuximab vedotin Disclosures Park: Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding; Janssen: Travel, Travel Other. Off Label Use: Brentuximab vedotin in previously untreated Hodgkin lymphoma patients.

Abstract Background Outcomes for patients with DLBCL have improved over the past decade, with the addition of rituximab to CHOP or CHOP-like multi-agent chemotherapy regimens improving the 3-year overall survival (OS) of patients by 10-16% compared to multi-agent chemotherapy alone (Coiffier 2002; Pfreundschuh 2010). However, patients with high-intermediate or high-risk disease have relatively poor outcomes with the standard RCHOP regimen (Ziepert 2010); in a recent prospective trial of intermediate- and high-risk DLBCL patients, complete response (CR) rate for RCHOP alone was 26% (Hainsworth 2011). Brentuximab vedotin (ADCETRIS®) is an antibody-drug conjugate comprising the antibody cAC10, specific for human CD30, covalently attached to the microtubule-disrupting agent monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE) via a protease-cleavable linker. Brentuximab vedotin has demonstrated compelling activity as a single agent in patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL, even those with low CD30 expression (Bartlett 2013). This phase 2, randomized, open label study is designed to evaluate the antitumor activity and safety of brentuximab vedotin (1.2 or 1.8 mg/kg) when administered in combination with standard RCHOP chemotherapy (A+RCHOP) for the front-line treatment of patients with CD30-unselected high-intermediate/high-risk (standard IPI score 3–5 or age-adjusted IPI [aaIPI] score 2–3) DLBCL (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01925612). Methods Patients were randomized to receive up to 6 cycles of either 1.2 or 1.8 mg/kg brentuximab vedotin administered IV on Day 1 of every 21-day cycle in combination with RCHOP; prednisone was administered orally on Days 1-5 of every 21-day cycle. Assessments included disease response per Cheson 2007, as evaluated by the investigator, surveillance of adverse events (AEs), physical examination findings, and laboratory testing. The primary endpoints for this study are the CR rate at the end of treatment (EOT) and the type, incidence, and severity of AEs. Key secondary endpoints include objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and OS. Results At the time of the planned interim analysis, 33 patients were enrolled (17 patients, 1.2 mg/kg A+RCHOP; 16 patients, 1.8 mg/kg A+RCHOP). Median age for all patients was 66 years (range, 21 to 81). At baseline, 36% were high-risk (IPI 4-5, aaIPI 3) and 64% were high-intermediate risk (IPI 3, aaIPI 2). The majority of patients (73%) had Stage IV disease and 33% had an ECOG status of 2. At the time of interim analysis, a total of 12 patients (6 patients in each arm) had completed EOT. Across both dose levels, ORR was 92% (11/12), with 7 CRs (58%), 4 PRs (33%), and 1 PD. The patient with PD subsequently died. Patients with PR had a median reduction of baseline tumor size of 84% (range, 92% to 83%), as measured by SPD. The only patient with follow-up after EOT converted from PR to CR without subsequent therapy. Treatment-emergent AEs occurring in ≥30% of patients treated (26/33) were nausea, diarrhea, peripheral sensory neuropathy, fatigue, and decreased appetite. Grade 3 or higher events occurring in more than 2 patients were febrile neutropenia and neutropenia. Events of peripheral neuropathy occurred equally per arm (46%, 1.2 mg/kg A+RCHOP; 46% 1.8 mg/kg A+RCHOP) and were generally Grade 1 or 2 (15% and 23%, respectively); events were of similar grade across dose levels. The median time to onset of any grade of peripheral neuropathy was 6 weeks (range, 2 to 10 weeks). Five patients (19%) had dose reductions due to peripheral neuropathy and 3 patients (12%) had dose reductions due to febrile neutropenia. One patient who received 1.2 mg/kg A+RCHOP discontinued study drug due to an AE (thrombocytopenia). Conclusions At doses of 1.2 or 1.8 mg/kg, A+RCHOP exhibited manageable toxicity in the treatment of newly-diagnosed DLBCL; the incidence of peripheral neuropathy was similar to single-agent administration of brentuximab vedotin (Pro 2012, Younes 2012) and RCHOP alone (Rummel 2013, Flinn 2014). In 12 patients with response-assessable, high-intermediate and high-risk DLBCL, A+RCHOP showed encouraging antitumor activity, with an ORR of 92% and a CR rate of 58%. Disclosures Yasenchak: Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Brentuximab vedotin is indicated in the US for treatment of patients with Hodgkin lymphoma after failure of autologous stem cell transplant or after failure of at least two prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimens in patients who are not ASCT candidates and for the treatment of patients with systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma after failure of at least one prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimen. . Farber:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Budde:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Ansell:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Advani:Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Jansseen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding, Travel expenses Other. Holkova:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Halwani:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Knapp:Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Research Funding; EMD Serono: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Heron Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding, Travel expenses, Travel expenses Other; Genentech: Research Funding, Travel expenses, Travel expenses Other; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Fayad:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kolibaba:Genentech: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Patel-Donnelly:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Seetharam:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Manley:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Bartlett:Genentech: Research Funding; ImaginAb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding, Travel expenses Other; Janssen: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding.