Schwager, Susan M.

INTRODUCTION Richter transformation (RT) is the histologic transformation of CLL/SLL into an aggressive lymphoma, most commonly diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). We previously reported an incidence of 0.5% per year of RT in patients with newly diagnosed CLL and an incidence of 1% per year following initiation of therapy (Parikh, BJH, 2013). It is unknown whether these incidences have changed in the novel agent era. METHODS We identified patients with previously untreated CLL/SLL in the Mayo Clinic CLL Database who were seen within 12 months of diagnosis. Only patients with biopsy-proven DLBCL with histopathology confirmation at Mayo Clinic were included. Cumulative incidence methodology was used to display the time to development of RT with death as a competing risk (both from time of initial CLL/SLL diagnosis, and from start of CLL directed therapy). We defined the time period prior to February 2014 (FDA approval of ibrutinib for CLL) as the pre-novel agent era and the time period starting February 2014 as the novel agent era. Using Cox regression analysis, we compared the incidence of RT, both after initial CLL diagnosis and after initiation of CLL therapy, between patients diagnosed with CLL in the pre-novel agent era versus the novel agent era. RESULTS Between 1/2000 and 4/2023, 3347 patients were seen at Mayo Clinic. The median age at diagnosis was 65 years (range 21-97 years), and 66% patients were male. Baseline characteristics of patients at the time of CLL and RT diagnoses between the two treatment eras were similar, including distance in miles of primary residence from Mayo Clinic ( Table 1). The median follow-up for the entire cohort was 5.6 years (9.5 years for the pre-novel agent era cohort and 3.2 years for the novel agent era cohort). A total of 82 patients were diagnosed with RT (69 in the pre-novel agent era and 13 in the novel agent era). Overall, the 1-, 5- and 10-year cumulative incidence rates for RT from the time of CLL/SLL diagnosis were 0.6% (95% CI: 0.4-0.9%), 1.8% (95% CI: 1.3-2.3%), and 3.0% (95% CI: 2.4-3.8%), respectively. Among the patients who received CLL/SLL therapy (n=1382), the 1-, 5-, and 10-year incidence rates for RT from the time of treatment start were 0.3% (95% CI: 0.1-0.8%), 3.3% (95% CI: 2.4-4.5%), and 4.9% (95% CI: 3.7-6.5%), respectively. Among 1981 patients diagnosed with CLL/SLL in the pre-novel agent era, the 1- and 5-year incidence rates for RT from the time of diagnosis were 0.6% (95% CI: 0.4-1.1%) and 2.1% (95% CI: 1.5-2.8%), respectively. Among 1366 patients diagnosed with CLL/SLL in the novel agent era, the 1- and 5-year incidence rates following CLL/SLL diagnosis were 0.5% (95% CI: 0.2-1.1%) and 1.1% (95% CI: 0.6-2.2%), respectively. The RT incidence from time of CLL/SLL diagnosis was not significantly different between the pre-novel agent and novel agent era patients (hazard ratio [HR] 1.6, 95%CI 0.9-3.0, p=0.13). Patients who received CLL/SLL treatment in the pre-novel agent era (n=926) and novel agent era (n=456) had subsequent 1-year incidence rates of RT of 0.3% (95% CI: 0.1-1.0%) and 0.2% (95% CI: 0.0-1.8%), respectively. The 5-year incidence rates for these groups were 3.7% (95% CI: 2.6-5.2%) and 1.9% (95% CI: 0.7-5.0%), respectively. Although an increased risk of RT after CLL/SLL directed therapy was observed in the pre-novel agent era compared to the novel agent era (HR 2.4, 95%CI: 0.9-6.1, p=0.07; Figure 1), this did not cross the threshold of statistial significance. Among patients diagnosed in the pre-novel agent era who developed RT (n=69), CLL treatment prior to RT included: none, n=19 (28%); chemoimmunotherapy only, n=36 (52%); and novel agent, n=14 (20%; includes 11 treated with prior chemoimmunotherapy also). In contrast, among patients diagnosed in the novel agent era who developed RT (n=13), CLL treatment prior to RT included: none, n=8 (62%); and novel agent, n=5 (38%). CONCLUSIONS Patients who received CLL/SLL directed treatment appear to have a lower risk of RT in the novel agent era. This may be driven by the fact that none of the patients who developed RT in the novel agent era received chemoimmunotherapy. Whether novel agent use for CLL/SLL suppresses the development of RT or avoids the risk associated with cytotoxic chemotherapy-induced clonal evolution requires further study. Although limited by length of follow-up, our findings challenge the notion that RT incidence will increase in parallel with CLL patients living longer with novel agent treatments.

INTRODUCTION We aim to identify factors that impact outcomes of venetoclax for patients with CLL treated in routine practice at a tertiary center. We report on the use of venetoclax in the most frequently encountered disease scenarios: first-line, relapsed/Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi)-naïve, and relapsed/BTKi-exposed. METHODS We identified patients who received venetoclax therapy for CLL (between 4/2012-4/2023) from the Mayo Clinic CLL Database. Undetectable measurable residual disease (uMRD) was defined as <1 CLL cell per 10,000 leukocytes using 8-color flow cytometry on peripheral blood (PB) or bone marrow (BM). Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time from venetoclax start until date of death or last known to be alive. Treatment-free survival (TFS) after venetoclax was defined as the time from venetoclax start until the earliest of date of next treatment, or death. Kaplan-Meier was used to display OS and TFS. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate associations of factors with time-to-event outcomes. RESULTS A total of 155 patients received venetoclax: firstline therapy (in combination with obinutuzumab, n=55) and relapsed CLL (n=100; 17 had relapsed/BTKi-naïve CLL, and 83 had previously received BTKi [55 with progression after BTKi], relapsed/BTKi-exposed). The median follow-up for the cohorts of first-line therapy, relapsed/BTKi-naïve, and relapsed/BTKi-exposed was 12.9 months, 37.0 months, and 27.6 months, respectively. Baseline characteristics at the time of venetoclax initiation for all patients are shown in Table 1. The median TFS for the overall cohort was 39.0 months. The median OS was 54.6 months. Among patients treated with venetoclax as first-line therapy (n=55), the 2-year TFS ( Figure 1) and 2-year OS rates were both 91%. MRD testing was performed in 28 patients and was uMRD in 23 (82%) patients (only PB assessed, n=7; only BM assessed, n=2; PB and BM assessed, n=14). Detectable MRD was identified in 3 patients, and 2 patients had discordant results (PB uMRD and BM detectable disease). Among patients treated with venetoclax in the relapsed/BTKi-naïve setting (n=17), the 2-year TFS rate was 73% ( Figure 1) and the 2-year OS rate was 100%. MRD testing was performed in 7 patients and was uMRD in all 7 (100%) (only PB assessed, n=3; only BM assessed, n=2; PB and BM assessed, n=2). The median time to first uMRD result was 14.1 months. Among relapsed/BTKi-exposed venetoclax-treated patients (n=83), the median TFS was 26.9 months ( Figure 1), and the median OS was 39.4 months.In this subgroup, the median TFS for patients with (n=55) and without (n=28) prior disease progression on prior BTKi were 22.3 and 42.3 months, respectively. Median TFS with venetoclax monotherapy (n=30) was 24.0 months, venetoclax in combination with rituximab (n=37) was 26.9 months, and venetoclax in combination with obinutuzumab (n=16) was 39.0 months. BTKi-exposed patients that were chemotherapy-naïve (n=27) and chemotherapy-exposed (n=56) had median TFS of 29.1 and 24.0 months, respectively. MRD testing was performed in 28 patients and was uMRD in 16 (57%) patients (only PB assessed, n=9; only BM assessed, n=2; PB and BM assessed, n=5). Detectable MRD was identified in 11 patients, and 1 had discordant results (PB uMRD and BM detectable disease). The median time to first uMRD result was 11.5 months. TP53 disruption, unmutated IGHV genes, older age, complex karyotype (CK; defined as more than 3 chromosomal aberrations on CpG stimulated karyotype), and disease progression on prior BTKi were associated with shorter TFS in the overall cohort on univariate analysis. TP53 disruption, older age, CK, and disease progression on prior BTKi were associated with shorter OS in the overall cohort on univariate analysis. Multivariable analysis was performed by including only those patients where all variables significant in univariable analysis were available (OS model n=65, TFS model n=53). In these models, only CK was significantly associated with shorter TFS (HR 8.5; 95%CI 2.5-29.1; P<0.001) and shorter OS (HR 4.1; 95%CI 1.2-14; P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS Patients with BTKi-exposed CLL, particularly those with prior disease progression on BTKi, had worse outcomes. Our study identified CK as one of the most important baseline predictors of adverse TFS and OS in the overall cohort of patients, supporting karyotype assessment for prognostication prior to venetoclax treatment.

INTRODUCTION Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and SLL represent a single entity in current classifications per the WHO-HAEM5 and ICC. Both are characterized by malignant B cells with an identical immunophenotype, but they are distinguished by the predominant site of disease burden, such as peripheral blood for CLL and nodal compartments for SLL. Most clinical trials and retrospective studies involving CLL/SLL do not separate out SLL patients. In this study, we report reasons for treatment initiation and outcomes in a cohort of SLL patients seen at our institution. METHODS Using the Mayo Clinic CLL Database, we retrospectively identified patients with SLL who received first line therapy between 12/1995 and 2/2023. Patients were classified as having SLL if they met at least one of the following criteria for diagnosis: 1) presence of lymphadenopathy or splenomegaly (either by exam or scans) and an absolute clonal B cell count of < 5 x 109/L; or 2) presence of lymphadenopathy or splenomegaly (either by exam or scans) and an absolute lymphocyte count of < 11 x 109/L (if absolute clonal B cell count was not available). Although the presence of anemia (hemoglobin < 11 g/dL) and thrombocytopenia (platelets < 100 x 109/L) are considered as exclusion criteria for a diagnosis of SLL, patients were included if these cytopenia were due to autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA) or immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) with < 50% bone marrow involvement by SLL (bone marrow biopsy confirmed). Patients treated for SLL with extranodal involvement were also included. Indications for SLL treatment were abstracted by chart review and included one of the following: 1) symptomatic or progressive lymphadenopathy and/or splenomegaly, 2) autoimmune cytopenias, 3) extranodal/direct organ infiltration; and 4) other (e.g., cryoglobulinemia, paraneoplastic, non-infiltrative renal disease such as minimal change disease). Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time from treatment start until date of death or last known to be alive. Treatment-free survival (TFS) was defined as the time from treatment start until the earliest of date of next treatment, or death. Kaplan-Meier method was used to display OS and TFS. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate associations of factors with time-to-event outcomes. RESULTS We identified 182 patients with SLL who received first line treatment. The median age at treatment start was 66 years, and 132 (73%) were male. Unmutated IGHV was identified in 60/82 (73%) patients and peripheral blood fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) assessed pre-treatment start showed del13q in 10%, trisomy 12 in 43%, del11q in 7%, del17p in 8%, and no abnormalities in 33%. TP53 disruption (del17p and/or TP53 mutation) was present in 7/89 (8%) patients prior to first therapy. The median follow-up after diagnosis was 6.9 years. The indications for treatment were grouped as follows: symptomatic or progressive lymphadenopathy/splenomegaly (n=130), extranodal/direct organ infiltration (n=30), AIHA/ITP (n=10), and other (n=12). For the entire cohort, the median TFS was 2.9 years and the median OS was 12.3 years. The median TFS by the treatment indication groups were 3.3, 5.1, 1.6, and 5.3 years, respectively (Figure 1). The median OS by treatment indication groups were 11.1, 10.5, 8.8, and 19.9 years, respectively. Among the 160 patients with symptomatic or progressive lymphadenopathy/splenomegaly or extranodal disease, the treatments administered include: mAb alone (n=35), chemotherapy alone (n=33), chemoimmunotherapy (n=57), targeted agent (n=33; Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor [BTKi] based n=28; venetoclax-based n=3, BTKi + venetoclax n=2), and other (n=2). The median TFS by treatment groups were 2.4, 2.0, 3.8, and 6.0 years (Figure 2), respectively (excluding the small “other” subgroup of 2 patients). The median OS for these groups were 9.5, 9.7, 15.0, and not evaluable, respectively. Only older age at treatment start predicted for shorter TFS (HR 1.02; 95%CI 1.002-1.038; p=0.03) and shorter OS (HR 1.05; 95%CI 1.03-1.07; p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS In this study of patients with SLL who received therapy, the most frequent indications for treatment included symptomatic lymphadenopathy and/or splenomegaly, followed by extranodal disease. Trisomy 12 was the most frequently detected abnormality on peripheral blood FISH testing. Treatment with novel agents achieved durable TFS and OS.

e19507 Background: Patients (pts) with CLL are at elevated risk of developing non-hematologic malignancies. Radiation therapy (RT) is a critical component of management in localized solid organ malignancies. Novel agents (NA) are widely used in CLL treatment; however, safety data are lacking to guide treatment of pts requiring concurrent RT and NA. Methods: We identified pts treated concurrently with NA for CLL and RT for second primary malignancy (SPM) at Mayo Clinic from 2014-2022. Adverse events within 3 months of RT were evaluated using the International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (iwCLL) criteria for hematological toxicity and the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5 for non-hematological toxicity. Patients without seamless, concurrent treatment with NA and RT were excluded. Results: Twenty-six pts were included. NA therapy consisted of ibrutinib (n = 23), acalabrutinib (n = 2), and venetoclax (n = 1). Median follow up time since RT completion was 1.5 years. The median age at NA initiation was 67 years (range:46-85) and at RT start was 68 years (range: 51-85); 92% of pts were male. NA was first treatment in 23% of pts; the median number of prior lines of therapy was 1 (range: 0-4). IGHV was unmutated in 82% and TP53 aberration was present in 24% of evaluable patients. SPM sites included prostate (n = 9), head/neck (n = 8), lung (n = 3), and brain, breast, bone, skin, kidney, and thymus (n = 1 each). The most common conventionally fractionated prescriptions (cGy/fx) were 6000/30 (n = 6) and > 6000-7020/20-33 (n = 7). SBRT ranged from 3300/5 to 5400/3 (n = 8). Five pts received other, varied RT prescriptions. Overall, 3 (12%) pts experienced at least one grade 3/4 toxicity. Grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia was observed in 2 (8%) pts and grade 3/4 neutropenia was observed in 2 pts per iwCLL criteria. Grade ≥3 non-hematological toxicities occurred in two pts that required hospitalization for critical illness, including 1 pt with grade 5 respiratory failure within 6 weeks after RT. Dose de-escalation of ibrutinib was reported in one case for pancytopenia attributed to use of a radiosensitizing agent. There were no cases of RT dose modification. Conclusions: Continuing NA CLL therapy during RT did not result in unexpected toxicities. This approach may maintain CLL disease control without compromising management of the SPM. [Table: see text]

Abstract Background: COVID-19 causes significant morbidity and mortality, albeit with considerable heterogeneity among affected individuals. It remains unclear which host factors determine disease severity and survival. Given the propensity of clonal hematopoiesis (CH) to promote inflammation in healthy individuals, we investigated its effect on COVID-19 outcomes. Methods: We performed a multi-omics interrogation of the genome, epigenome, transcriptome, and proteome of peripheral blood mononuclear cells from COVID-19 patients (n=227). We obtained clinical data, laboratory studies, and survival outcomes. We determined CH status and TET2-related DNA methylation. We performed single-cell proteogenomics to understand clonal composition in relation to cell phenotype. We interrogated single-cell gene expression in isolation and in conjunction with DNA accessibility. We integrated these multi-omics data to understand the effect of CH on clonal composition, gene expression, methylation of cis-regulatory elements, and lineage commitment in COVID-19 patients. We performed shRNA knockdowns to validate the effect of one candidate transcription factor in myeloid cell lines. Results: The presence of CH was strongly associated with COVID-19 severity and all-cause mortality, independent of age (HR 3.48, 95% CI 1.45-8.36, p=0.005). Differential methylation of promoters and enhancers was prevalent in TET2-mutant, but not DNMT3A-mutant CH. TET2-mutant CH was associated with enhanced classical/intermediate monocytosis and single-cell proteogenomics confirmed an enrichment of TET2 mutations in these cell types. We identified cell-type specific gene expression changes associated with TET2 mutations in 102,072 single cells (n=34). Single-cell RNA-seq confirmed the skewing of hematopoiesis towards classical and intermediate monocytes and demonstrated the downregulation of EGR1 (a transcription factor important for monocyte differentiation) along with up-regulation of the lncRNA MALAT1 in monocytes. Combined scRNA-/scATAC-seq in 43,160 single cells (n=18) confirmed the skewing of hematopoiesis and up-regulation of MALAT1 in monocytes along with decreased accessibility of EGR1 motifs in known cis-regulatory elements. Using myeloid cell lines for functional validation, shRNA knockdowns of EGR1 confirmed the up-regulation of MALAT1 (in comparison to wildtype controls). Conclusions: CH is an independent prognostic factor in COVID-19 and skews hematopoiesis towards monocytosis. TET2-mutant CH is characterized by differential methylation and accessibility of enhancers binding myeloid transcriptions factors including EGR1. The ensuing loss of EGR1 expression in monocytes causes MALAT1 overexpression, a factor known to promote monocyte differentiation and inflammation. These data provide a mechanistic insight to the adverse prognostic impact of CH in COVID-19. Citation Format: Moritz Binder, Terra L. Lasho, Wazim Mohammed Ismail, Nana A. Ben-Crentsil, Jenna A. Fernandez, Minsuk Kim, Susan M. Geyer, Amelia Mazzone, Christy M. Finke, Abhishek A. Mangaonkar, Jeong-Heon Lee, Kwan Hyun Kim, Vernadette A. Simon, Fariborz Rakhshan Rohakthar, Amik Munankarmy, Susan M. Schwager, Jonathan J. Harrington, Melissa R. Snyder, Nathalie M. Droin, Eric Solary, Keith D. Robertson, Eric D. Wieben, Eric Padron, Nicholas Chia, Alexandre Gaspar-Maia, Mrinal M. Patnaik. Enhancer deregulation inTET2-mutant clonal hematopoiesis is associated with increased COVID-19 severity and mortality [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 806.

SummaryPatients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) disease progression on ibrutinib or after sequential ibrutinib and venetoclax‐based treatments (double‐refractory) have poor outcomes. In this retrospective study, we analysed outcomes with combined ibrutinib and venetoclax treatment in these groups of patients. The median treatment‐free and overall survival for 22 patients with prior progression on ibrutinib (venetoclax‐naïve) were 23.7 and 47.1 months respectively. In 11 patients with double‐refractory CLL, the median treatment‐free and overall survival were 11.2 and 27.0 months respectively. The combination of ibrutinib and venetoclax may help bridge the current gap in options for patients with disease refractory to the most commonly used novel agents.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Sparse data exist regarding I+V in an off-trial setting, particularly in patients (pts) with progression of disease on either I or V as single agent treatment. The 1-year overall survival (OS) rates with V monotherapy following I range from 75%-91% (Eyre et al, BJH 2019; Jones et al, Lancet Oncol 2018); however, longer-term follow-up of these or other patient cohorts treated with V after I has not yet been reported. Effective options in double-refractory pts are lacking when a clinical trial is not feasible. Here, we report our experience with I+V in these patient groups. METHODS After IRB approval, we reviewed the records of pts seen at Mayo Clinic (between 4/2012-1/2021) who received I+V therapy off-trial for CLL progression. Pts treated with I+V for Richter's transformation were excluded. Time to next treatment (TTNT) was measured from I+V treatment start date to the date of next treatment start or last known treatment status with death as a competing risk. OS was measured from I+V start date until date of death or when the patient was last known alive; OS was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS Thirty-three pts with progressive CLL were treated with I+V (median duration 13.3 months [95% CI: 7.1 months-not estimable (NE)]). The median age was 70 years (range 47-86), 6 (18%) were women, and 20 (65%) had del(17p) or TP53 mutation. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 3 (range 1-15). Additional characteristics at the time of I+V start are shown in Table 1. Median follow-up from start of I+V was 23.8 months. Among 22 pts with prior progression on I only (V-naïve), the median duration of I+V was 14.8 months (95% CI 7.6 months-NE). The median duration on either I or V from the start of combination was 20.3 months (95% CI 8.3 months-NE). The median TTNT was 25.1 months (Figure 1A). Four pts proceeded to cellular therapy (alloSCT [n=3], CAR-T [n=1]) while on I+V. Next therapy (n=9) consisted of Richter transformation treatment (n=2), chemotherapy plus continued I+V (n=1), anti-CD20 plus continued I+V (n=1), duvelisib + I (n=1), TP-0903 + I (n=1), reintroduction of I at disease progression after previously stopping I during I+V therapy (n=1), and reintroduction of I (n=1) or V (n=1) at disease progression after previously stopping I+V. Of 9 pts who did not receive subsequent therapy, 4 pts remain on I+V (median duration 16.4 months), 4 pts continued V after discontinuing I (median duration on V from start of I+V was 21.5 months), and 1 pt discontinued I+V following a second cancer diagnosis and died without receiving additional CLL-directed treatment. Eleven pts received I+V in the double-refractory setting; 9 pts had prior disease progression on sequential I then V and 2 pts had prior disease progression on sequential V then I. The median duration of I+V was 7.5 months (95% CI 4.3 months-NE), and the median duration of either agent from I+V start was 10.8 months (95% CI 7.1 months-NE). The median TTNT was 14.0 months (Figure 1A). Eight pts required additional treatment, consisting of PI3K inhibitor (n=2), anti-CD20 added to I+V (n=1), CAR-T (n=1), anti-CD20 with (n=1) or without (n=1) bendamustine added to continued I, and Richter transformation treatment (n=2). One pt continues I+V (17.4 months ongoing) without further treatment. Two pts died from disease progression without receiving additional treatment. The median OS of all 33 pts was 27.4 months (95% CI 25.9 months-NE; Figure 1B). The median OS of the 22 pts with prior progression on I (V-naïve) was 47.1 months (95% CI 27.7 months-NE), and the median OS of the 11 pts with prior progression on I and V separately was 27.0 months (95% CI 15.5 months-NE). In univariate analyses, prior progression on V was a predictor of shorter OS (HR=3.9; 95% CI 1.4-11.2; p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS Combination I+V therapy in heavily pre-treated CLL pts who have disease progression after I provides durable benefit with a median OS approaching 4 years. In the double-refractory setting, repurposing both drugs as combination I+V therapy can be a useful strategy, despite the short-term disease control, for pts where clinical trial options are limited or not available. Further examination of these approaches in larger cohorts and understanding the operative resistance mechanisms in pts with double-refractory disease are key next studies. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Ding: Octapharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; DTRM: Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Chanan-Khan: BeiGene, Jansen, Ascentage: Honoraria; Ascentage, Starton, Cellectar, NonoDev, Alpha2 Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alpha2 Pharmaceuticals: Patents & Royalties: Tabi; Ascentage: Research Funding; Cellectar: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Alpha2 Pharmaceuticals, NonoDev, Starton: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company; BieGene, Jansen, Ascentage: Consultancy. Kenderian: Humanigen, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Wang: TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MorphoSys: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; LOXO Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; InnoCare: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ailawadhi: Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ascentage: Research Funding; Medimmune: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy. Koehler: AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kay: AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Dava Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Targeted Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene: 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; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Agios Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sunesis: Research Funding; Rigel: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; CytomX Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Morpho-sys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncotracker: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Behring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Parikh: Pharmacyclics, MorphoSys, Janssen, AstraZeneca, TG Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, AbbVie, and Ascentage Pharma: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, AstraZeneca, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Verastem Oncology, and AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. OffLabel Disclosure: Combination ibrutinib and venetoclax in patients with relapsed CLL.

Abstract The utility of the chronic lymphocytic leukemia-international prognostic index (CLL-IPI) in predicting outcomes of individuals with Rai 0 stage CLL and monoclonal B-cell lymphocytosis (MBL) is unclear. We identified 969 individuals (415 MBL and 554 Rai 0 CLL; median age, 64 years; 65% men) seen at Mayo Clinic between 1 January 2001 and 1 October 2018, and ascertained time to first therapy (TTFT) and overall survival (OS). After a median follow up of 7 years, the risk of disease progression needing therapy was 2.9%/y for MBL (median, not reached) and 5%/y for Rai 0 CLL (median, 10.4 years). Among patients with low, intermediate, and high/very high-risk CLL-IPI risk groups, the estimated 5-year risk of TTFT was 13.5%, 30%, and 58%, respectively, P< .0001 (c-statistic = 0.69); and the estimated 5-year OS was 96.3%, 91.5%, and 76%, respectively, P< .0001 (c-statistic = 0.65). In a multivariable analysis of absolute B-cell count with individual factors of the CLL-IPI, the absolute B-cell count was associated with shorter TTFT (hazard ratio [HR] for each 10 × 109/L increase: 1.31; P< .0001) and shorter OS (HR: 1.1; P = .02). The OS of the entire cohort was similar to that of the age- and sex-matched general population of Minnesota (P = .17), although Rai 0 CLL patients with high and very high-risk CLL-IPI score had significantly shorter OS (P= .01 and P= .0001, respectively). The results of this study demonstrate the ability of CLL-IPI to predict time from diagnosis to first treatment (an end point not affected by therapy) in a large cohort of patients whose only manifestation of disease is a circulating clonal lymphocyte population.