Manzke, Oliver

7520 Background: We report results of a phase 2, open-label study of durvalumab (durva) in combination with R-CHOP or R2-CHOP (R-CHOP + lenalidomide) in previously untreated, high-risk diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Methods: Subjects (≥18 y; ECOG 0–2) with previously untreated, high/high-intermediate risk DLBCL (IPI ≥3/NCCN-IPI ≥4) were stratified to durva + R-CHOP (Arm A, GCB DLBCL) or R2-CHOP for 6–8 cycles (Arm B, ABC DLBCL) based on cell of origin identified by gene expression followed by durva consolidation up to month 12 from start of induction. After FDA placed clinical holds on trials including combination therapy with checkpoint inhibitors and immunomodulatory agents, the study was revised to include both ABC and GCB in Arm A (durva + R-CHOP). The primary endpoint was complete response rate (CRR) at end of induction; secondary endpoints were rate of subjects continuing to consolidation, safety, and response in biological. Results: A total of 46 subjects were treated (safety; A/B, n=43/3); median age, 62/66 y; male, 61%/67%; ECOG 2, 19%/33%; Ann Arbor stage IV, 79%/33%; bulky disease: 49%/67%; double/triple-hit lymphoma, 30%/33%. As of Aug 2, 2018, 30/3 (A/B) had completed induction therapy, and 19 subjects (A) were ongoing. CRR (95% confidence interval) at end of induction was (A) 54% (37%-71%) and (B) 67% (9%-99%); 68%/67% (A/B) continued to consolidation therapy and were progression free at month 12. Safety profile was as expected for the components of the combination regimen with no new safety signal identified. Frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs; ≥25%; A+B) included fatigue (61%), neutropenia (52%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (50%), nausea (46%), diarrhea (28%); constipation, decreased appetite, insomnia, pyrexia (24% each); and alopecia, dizziness, dyspnea, headache, stomatitis (22% each). Grade 3/4 TEAEs occurred in 84%/100% of subjects (A/B), and 3 subjects (2/1) died with no death related to study treatment. Follow-up for efficacy and safety is ongoing. Conclusions: Durva + R-CHOP combination therapy is safe and demonstrates encouraging response rates in subjects with high-risk DLBCL including double-hit lymphoma. Clinical trial information: NCT03003520.

Abstract Introduction: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is an aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) comprising 3 molecular subtypes: germinal center B-cell (GCB), activated B-cell (ABC) and class III. ABC patients (pts) have a poor prognosis. The immunomodulatory drug lenalidomide (Len) produces durable responses in pts with aggressive NHL (Witzig 2011), with preferential activity reported in non-GCB DLBCL (Hernandez-Ilizaliturri 2011). Methods: This randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase 2/3 study was conducted to determine the efficacy and safety of single-agent Len vs single-agent investigator’s choice (IC) in relapsed/refractory DLBCL pts who received ≥2 prior therapies, or were ineligible for stem cell transplantation or further combination chemotherapy. DLBCL subtype (GCB vs non-GCB) was determined by a central pathology lab using immunohistochemistry (IHC) per the Hans method (Hans 2004). Pts were stratified by subtype, then randomized 1:1 to receive Len (25 mg/day, 21 days of 28-day cycle) or IC (gemcitabine, rituximab, etoposide, or oxaliplatin) until progressive disease (PD), unacceptable toxicity, or voluntary withdrawal. In the event of radiologically confirmed PD, pts in the IC arm were allowed to cross over to Len. The primary endpoint for Stage 1 was overall response rate (ORR), as determined by an Independent Response Assessment Committee. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and subtype analysis using gene expression profiling (GEP) were exploratory endpoints. Concordance of GEP and IHC was evaluated from 3 separate laboratories. Results: IHC subtyping agreement rate among the 3 laboratories ranged from 87.5%-97.9%, and sensitivity of IHC to detect ABC or GCB subtypes vs GEP ranged from 92.3%-100.0%. By IHC, 102 DLBCL pts (GCB, n=48; non-GCB, n=54) were treated with ≥1 dose of Len or IC (modified intent-to-treat population) in Stage 1. In this heavily pretreated population, >90.0% of pts received ≥2 prior systemic chemotherapies; 25 pts in Len and 32 pts in IC received ≥3 prior systemic chemotherapy regimens. Median age was 65 y in the IC arm vs 69 y in the Len arm. Twenty-nine pts crossed over from IC to Len after confirmed PD. All pts, regardless of subtype or therapy group, experienced ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event, with neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia being the most common. Efficacy data are presented in the Table. Pts with GCB or non-GCB DLBCL (per IHC) treated with Len had similar ORR, but the data suggested greater improvements in PFS and OS with Len vs IC in the non-GCB pts. In an exploratory analysis of pts subtyped by GEP, ABC pts treated with Len vs IC-treated showed greater improvements in ORR, PFS, and OS compared with GCB pts. Prespecified criterion to advance to Stage 2 was a 2-sided 15% significance level in ORR in favor of Len based on IHC-defined subtype. The data did not fulfill this requirement, and Stage 2 was not opened. Conclusion: Len monotherapy showed clinical activity in heavily pretreated pts with DLBCL. The data suggest improved ORR, PFS, and OS with Len vs IC in the non-GCB population as defined by IHC, and the difference appears to be more pronounced in the ABC population as defined by GEP. Subtyping by GEP is warranted in further studies of Len in DLBCL. Abstract 628. Table 1.Table. Efficacy DataBy IHCBy GEPOverallGCBNon-GCBGCBABCLen(n=51)IC(n=51)Len(n=23)IC(n=25)Len(n=28)IC(n=26)Len(n=14)IC(n=16)Len(n=11)IC(n=16)ORR, % (95% CI)27.5 (15.9-41.7)11.8 (4.4-23.9) 26.1 (10.2-48.4)12.0 (2.5-31.2)28.6 (13.2-48.7)11.5 (2.4-30.2)21.4 (4.7-50.8)12.5 (1.6-38.3)45.5 (16.7-76.6)18.8 (4.0-45.6)P Value .079 .279 .179 .642 .206PFS, med wk (95% CI)13.6 (8.6-17.7)7.9 (6.3-9.0) 10.1 (8.3-22.3)29.0 (6.3-20.6)15.1 (8.3-24.1)7.1 (5.3-8.4)13.2 (8.3-24.9)7.1 (6.0-20.6)82.0 (7.3-NA)6.2 (4.3-10.1)P Value .041 .550 .021 .506 .105HR (95% CI) 0.64 (0.41-0.99) 0.82 (0.43-1.57) 0.50 (0.27-0.92) 0.77 (0.35-1.68) 0.44 (0.15-1.23)OS, med wk (95% CI)31.0 (16.6-41.3)24.6 (12.7-33.9) 30.0 (14.9-44.4)24.9 (13.7-58.3)32.3 (15.9-48.1)20.4 (10.3-33.9)30.0 (18.0-34.6)20.1 (13.7-36.9)108.4 (9.6-108.4)18.6 (6.6-48.0)P Value .673 .526 .253 .767 .144HR (95% CI) 0.91 (0.59-1.41) 1.23 (0.65-2.34) 0.70 (0.38-1.30) 1.12 (0.52-2.42) 0.47 (0.17-1.33) Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; med, median; NA, not applicable/not available. Disclosures Czuczman: Celgene: Consultancy. Off Label Use: This abstract describes a clinical trial of lenalidomide, which is an orally-available immunomodulatory agent under investigation for treating patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.. Davies:GlaxoSmithKlein: Research Funding; Hoffman La Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Wagner-Johnston:Celgene: Research Funding. Gascoyne:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Salles:Pfizer: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Jansen: Honoraria; Hoffman La Roche: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Honoraria. Witzig:Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Zinzani:Mundipharma: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria; Millennium Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wright:Celgene: Research Funding. Staudt:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Repici:Celgene: Employment. Song:Celgene: Employment. Manzke:Celgene: Employment.

TPS7573 Background: The PD-1/PD-L1 pathway is an important immune checkpoint used by tumor cells and may provide an effective target for enhancing anticancer immune response. In DLBCL, high PD-L1 expression has been identified as a negative prognostic factor for overall survival. Durvalumab (MEDI4736) is a high-affinity human IgG1 monoclonal Ab that selectively blocks PD-L1 binding to PD-1 and CD80, and preliminary preclinical and clinical activity support the study of durvalumab in high-risk DLBCL subtypes. The primary study objective is to explore the clinical activity of durvalumab with R-CHOP in non-activated B-cell–like (non-ABC) and durvalumab with lenalidomide + R-CHOP (R2-CHOP) in ABC previously untreated DLBCL; secondary objectives are to evaluate safety and identify biomarkers predictive of clinical response. Methods: This is a phase II, two-arm, open-label, global, multicenter study of durvalumab combinations in patients with previously untreated, high-risk DLBCL (MEDI4736-DLBCL-001; EUDRA CT 2015-005173-20; NCT03003520). High risk was defined as Ann Arbor stage III/IV or II with bulky disease (≥7.0 cm), along with intermediate-high/high IPI ≥3 or NCCN-IPI ≥4; patients must also have CD20+ DLBCL, ECOG PS 0-2, and no prior antilymphoma therapy. All patients receive durvalumab + R-CHOP21 in induction cycle 1 simultaneous to cell-of-origin (COO) analysis by gene expression profiling with NanoString technology. Beginning with cycle 2, Arm A (non-ABC) receives durvalumab 1125 mg IV on day 1 with 6 or 8 cycles of R-CHOP21; Arm B (ABC) receives the same durvalumab + R-CHOP21 doses with oral lenalidomide 15 mg/day on days 1-14. Both arms receive durvalumab consolidation 1500 mg IV on day 1 q28d for ≤12 months from induction cycle 1, day 1. The primary endpoint is 2-y progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints include clinical response to treatment in biomarker-defined subpopulations (tumor and peripheral blood) and safety as assessed per NCI CTCAE v4.03 criteria. Exploratory endpoints include PFS at 12 mo, complete response, and PK/PD. Recruitment is ongoing, with a target enrollment of 120 patients. Clinical trial information: NCT03003520.