Choi, Michael Y.

Abstract The Bridging the Gaps (BTG) in Leukemia, Lymphoma and Multiple Myeloma Consensus Conference 2025 brought together a multidisciplinary group of oncology experts to address the complexities of lymphoma management, focusing on mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), and diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL). This article presents consensus recommendations developed through a modified Delphi process, which emphasize the need for tailored therapeutic strategies in light of recent advancements in treatment options. Key recommendations include the screening for high‐risk features in MCL, use of the BOVen regimen (zanubrutinib, obinutuzumab, and venetoclax) for TP53 ‐aberrant cases, and integration of chimeric antigen receptor T‐cell therapy for patients with mantle cell lymphoma that is refractory to covalent Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors. For CLL, recommendations include consideration of time‐limited therapies for younger patients and a “watch and wait” strategy for asymptomatic patients despite the improved activity and safety of current treatment regimens. For DLBCL, this article highlights the challenges in treatment sequencing and the role of circulating tumor DNA and minimal residual disease testing in monitoring disease progression. Overall, the conference describes the importance of ongoing research to refine management strategies and improve patient outcomes in lymphoma care, addressing the gaps in clinical practice where high‐level evidence is lacking.

Abstract BackgroundAlternative splicing (AS) is a fundamental process in eukaryotes contributing to the diversity of mRNA isoforms with variable ratios of intron/exon. SF3B1 is a pivotal protein of the spliceosome machinery. Mutations in the SF3B1 gene have prognostic value in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL). Our previous studies have shown that SF3B1 inhibition with macrolides induces apoptosis specifically in CLL compared with normal cells. SF3B1 inhibition is associated with a widespread increase in intron retention (IR) on most transcripts, suggesting that IR can be used as a marker of spliceosome inhibition in CLL cells. However, it is unknown how the activity of SF3B1 contributes to the spliceosome activity and the poor clinical prognosis in CLL.MethodsTo better understand this process, we performed a comprehensive analysis to quantify the abundance of individual exonic and intronic mapped reads on annotated RNA-Seq transcripts derived from the B cells of 98 CLL patients and nine healthy volunteers (Normal B cells – NBC). We calculated ratios for intron and exon abundance for each transcript and use this as a measure of intron retention (IR) and a surrogate for alternative splicing (AS).ResultsWe found that 66% of CLL B-cells transcripts had significant IR elevation compared to NBC and that transcripts with high IR were associated with low expression levels and mRNA downregulation. The IR increase in CLL B-cells was independent of prognostic factors such as IgVH or SF3B1 mutations. Transcripts with the highest IR levels belonged to biological pathways associated with gene expression and RNA splicing. Also, we observed a >2-fold increase of active pSF3B1 in CLL B-cells compared to NBC. Additionally, when the CLL-B cells were treated with macrolides (pladienolide-B), a significant decrease in pSF3B1, but not total SF3B1 protein was observed. ConclusionsOur findings suggest that IR/ARS is increased in CLL and that this process is associated with SF3B1 phosphorylation and susceptibility to SF3B1 inhibitors. These data provide additional support to the relevance of AS in carcinogenesis and evidence of pSF3B1 participation in this process.

Ibrutinib-based therapies are costly and require continuous administration. We hypothesized combining BTK inhibition with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies would yield deep remissions allowing discontinuation. We enrolled 32 therapy-naïve CLL patients to receive ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab, followed by single-agent ibrutinib. Patients could discontinue ibrutinib after 36 months with sustained complete response (CR). We evaluated treatment safety, efficacy, and outcomes after ibrutinib discontinuation. The overall response rate was 100%, 28% achieved a CR, and 12.5% achieved bone marrow undetectable minimal residual disease. At a three-year median follow-up, 91% remain in remission with 100% overall survival. Five patients in sustained CR stopped ibrutinib and have not progressed. Eight non-CR patients discontinued for other reasons, with only two progressing. The treatment was safe, with a lower IRR rate. All patients responded to treatment with longer time-to-progression after discontinuation of ibrutinib. Our data support the evaluation of ibrutinib discontinuation strategies in more extensive clinical trials (https://Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02315768).

Single oral targeted therapies have emerged as a standard of care in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). However, accessibility, side effects, and financial burden associated with long term administration limit their clinical use. Mainly, it is unclear in what clinical situation discontinuation of oral therapy can be recommended. The combination of type II anti-CD20 antibody obinutuzumab-Gazyva® with ibrutinib (GI) has shown a significant progression-free survival benefit in patients (pts) with CLL, including those with high-risk genomic aberrations. We conducted a phase 1b/2, single-arm, open-label trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of GI as first-line treatment in 32 CLL pts. We report the outcome in pts that discontinued ibrutinib (either after 3 years of sustained complete response (CR) as stipulated in the clinical protocol, or due to other reasons). CLL pts enrolled in this protocol were ≥65 years old, or unfit/unwilling to receive chemotherapy. Pts received GI for six cycles, followed by daily single-agent ibrutinib. The protocol was designed to ensure that pts with a sustained CR after 36 months were allowed to discontinue ibrutinib. The median age was 66 years (IQR 59-73), and 6% of the evaluated pts had 17p deletion. All pts were able to complete the six planned cycles of obinutuzumab. The combination regimen was well-tolerated, and the most common adverse events (>5% CTCAE grade 3-4) were neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and hyperglycemia. The rate and severity of infusion-related reactions (IRR) were much lower than expected (Grade≥ 3, 3%), and pts without IRR had lower serum levels of cytokines/chemokines CCL3 (P=0.0460), IFN-γ (P=0.0457), and TNF-α (P=0.0032) after infusion. The overall response rate was 100%, with nine pts (28%) achieving a CR, and four pts (12.5%) with undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD) in the bone marrow, defined as <10-4 CLL cells on multicolor flow cytometry. At a median follow-up of 35.5 months (IQR 24.5-42.7) after starting treatment, 91% of the enrolled pts remain in remission with a 100% overall survival. Sixteen pts have completed a long-term follow-up of 36 months. Six pts showed CR, with three of them achieving uMRD in the bone marrow. Ten of these pts were in PR, and only one had disease progression and started treatment for symptomatic stage I disease with obinutuzumab plus venetoclax. In total, thirteen pts (41%) have stopped ibrutinib, with a median time on treatment prior to discontinuation of 35 months. Five (16%) of these pts had CRs and discontinued after 36 months. Eight additional pts (25%) had PRs and discontinued ibrutinib without being eligible: three pts discontinued prior to 36 months due to toxicities, and five pts discontinued after 36 months (3 due to side effects, and 2 due to financially driven decision). One patient eligible to discontinue ibrutinib, decided to remain on treatment despite sustained CR. After a median follow up time following ibrutinib discontinuation of 8 months (IQR 3.5-17), only two out of 13 pts have progressed (10 and 17 months after Ibrutinib discontinuation). None of the pts that stopped ibrutinib after achieving a CR have shown signs of disease progression. Of note, the pharmaceutical sponsor provided ibrutinib for the first 36 months, after which pts or their insurer became financially responsible. This particular scenario could bias the discontinuation pattern compared to a real world experience. It also provided us with a perspective about diverse factors affecting the treatment choices of pts. In summary, the obinutuzumab plus ibrutinib combination therapy was well-tolerated, with a much lower IRR rate. Efficacy compares favorably with historical controls with all pts responding to therapy, no deaths associated with treatment or disease progression, and a longer than expected time-to-progression after discontinuation of ibrutinib. The rate of ibrutinib discontinuation was higher than reported in the literature, most likely influenced by the protocol design and financial decisions driven by the switch from sponsor-provided ibrutinib to insurance or self-paid medication. Our observations regarding safety, efficacy and lack of disease progression after ibrutinib discontinuation are encouraging, and warrant confirmation in long-term prospective studies. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT02315768. Funding: Pharmacyclics LLC. Disclosures Choi: AbbVie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Amaya-Chanaga:AbbVie: Ended employment in the past 24 months, Other: Research performed while employed as an investigator of this study at UCSD.. Kipps:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Castro:Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Fate Therapeutics: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Given the availability of several active treatment (tx) options for CLL, providers frequently make tx recommendations based on their interpretation of objective data from consensus criteria and clinical trials. There are limited data describing patient (pt) experience, values, and insights when encountering multiple tx choices. The CLL Society, a pt-driven, physician-curated nonprofit organization focused on the unmet needs of the CLL community, sought to explore how CLL pts make tx decisions. Methods: A 64 question survey was distributed online and in paper to CLL pts from Oct-Dec 2017. The survey was developed by CLL experts. The research was IRB-approved. Chi square was used for statistical comparison; all other analyses are descriptive in nature. Results: 1147 pts from 48 states completed the survey. Median age was 65 (range 28-86), 46% male, 96% Caucasian. Who Influences Tx: Of the 79% of pts who have seen a CLL expert, defined as a provider focused on CLL at an academic/research center, 95% rated their provider as very/extremely influential. 83% of pts rated their own opinions as influential, and 59% rated the opinion of a general hematologist/oncologist (gen heme/onc), a provider who sees a variety of cancer types, as influential. Only 27% let their provider unilaterally decide on tx. Of these pts, 19% trusted their provider to select the best tx and 5% didn't have enough understanding to be involved in the decision. 64% were influenced by outside sources of information, such as family members, live CLL support groups, or online sources including pt experts and forums. Factors in Deciding Tx: Of the 67% pts surveyed who have been treated, 73% were offered > 1 tx choice by their provider. In deciding on a specific tx, 94% of respondents stated that it was very/extremely important to know there were tx options beyond their current regimen. The most important factors in selecting tx were response rate (91%), overall survival (88%), progression-free survival (86%), long-term side effects (82%), ability to achieve undetectable MRD (80%), cost/insurance coverage (66%), and location of tx (50%) with significant differences between subgroups (Table 1). Tx was impacted by cost or insurance issues for 16% (n=104). Of these 104 pts, cost/insurance issues resulted in tx delay for 34 and change in tx plan for 24 pts. 16 pts reported that an appeal led to coverage and 16 pts received financial assistance. Pts' willingness to accept potentially curable but high-risk tx was heavily influenced by availability of alternate options. For example, 18% of pts would be willing to consider cytotoxic chemotherapy if alternate options were available vs. 72% if no options were available. Similar patterns were seen with CAR-T tx (28% vs. 79%) and bone marrow transplantation (BMT) (15% vs. 66%) with significant differences between subgroups (Table 2). 82% were willing to take a life-long tx for long-term control without potential for cure. Willingness to accept long-term tx was significantly higher in treated vs. untreated pts (84% vs. 77%, p=.006) and men vs. women (84% vs. 78%, p=.008). Clinical Trial Education: Of those treated by a gen heme/onc, 31% received no education on clinical trials. Only 15% reported good understanding of trial opportunities vs. 52% treated by a CLL expert (p<.001). 9% of pts treated by gen heme/onc were offered clinical trial participation vs. 47% treated by a CLL expert (p<0.001). Pts who declined or would have declined participation cited reasons including preference for "proven" tx (38%), distance from trial site (29%), fear (20%), frequent imaging (20%), overall lack of understanding about trials (15%), and lack of information (14%). Summary: Most respondents want to be and are involved in tx decisions. While providers are influential in decision making, CLL pts also rely on outside sources. Gender, age, and tx status influence which factors drive decision making. Pts select tx based on response rate, survival, side effects, and ability to achieve deep response and want a plan in place for sequencing tx. The majority are willing to consider long-term tx without cure. Few want chemotherapy, CAR-T, or BMT unless they have no other options. A significant opportunity for improvement in education on clinical trial opportunities was identified. This description of pt experience, values, and preferences enriches the informed consent process and may lead to more tailored and patient-centered care. Disclosures Kennard: AbbVie, Gilead, Verastem: Consultancy. Furman:TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Loxo Oncology: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Other: DSMB; Genentech: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. Pagel:Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy. Davids:Sunesis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Surface Oncology: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy; Sunesis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Surface Oncology: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Surface Oncology: Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sunesis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Nabhan:Cardinal Health: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kay:Acerta: Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morpho-sys: 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; Agios Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cytomx Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Siddiqi:Juno Therapeutics: Other: Steering committee. Brander:Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Teva: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: DSMB; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; BeiGene: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Acerta: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; DTRM: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding. Wierda:AbbVie, Inc: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Hill:Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: 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; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: 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; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cheson:AbbVie, Roche/Genentech, Pharmacyclics, Acerta, TG Therapeutics: Consultancy. Choi:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Rigel: Consultancy; Genentech: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie, Inc: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Mato:AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Prime Oncology: Honoraria; Portola: Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy; Medscape: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding.

Abstract Obinutuzumab-Gazyva (G) is an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody that has shown better outcomes in patients (pts) with chronic lymphocytic leukemia and low-grade lymphoma (Goede 2014, Marcus 2017). However, one limitation for its use when compared to Rituximab is the presence of significantly more frequent and more severe infusion related reactions (IRR). Strategies to mitigate this significant adverse event are needed particularly to allow a safer administration of this antibody to elderly pts or those with existing comorbidities. We have observed a reduction of G-induced IRR in previously untreated CLL pts that are enrolled on a phase Ib/II clinical trial (NCT02315768) that combines G with the Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor, ibrutinib (Ibr). Only 5 out of 23 pts treated have developed IRR (Grade 1-2, 17% and Grade 3, 4%). This rate of IRR is much lower as compared with rates previously reported (all grades: 65%, grade 3-4: 20% - Goede 2014), (all grades: 92%, grade 3-4: 26.3% - Freeman,2015). Moreover, there were no pts that require permanent discontinuation of G due to IRR. To understand the biology of this beneficial effect of Ibr, we performed serial cytokine measurements on plasma samples from 23 pts enrolled in this study at different time points during the first week of combined treatment (Cycle 1 prior to the first infusion of G and post G infusion on Day 1, Day 2 and Day 8) - Figure 1. We developed a multiplex assay (Luminex) to measure 7 different cytokines previously reported to be involved in IRR (IFN-g, IL-10, IL6, IL8, CCL3/MIP1-a, CCL4/MIP1-band TNF-a). Standards were set up in duplicate yielding curves from 3.2 pg/ml to 10.000 pg/ml. Assays were performed according to manufacturer's instructions, with undiluted samples and overnight agitated incubation at 4 °C. We identified the maximum peak of cytokine levels post G infusion and compared those values with the baseline cytokine profile obtained prior to the first G infusion on Cycle 1 Day 1. The majority of pts (22 out of 23) showed cytokines maximum peaks in the middle of G-infusion during Cycle 1 Day 1 and this correlated with the onset of IRR associated symptoms in those pts that reacted to G. With the exception of IL-6, we observed statistically higher post vs. pre G infusion levels of TNF-a(p=0.0012), IFN-g(p=<0.0001), CCL3 (p=0.0458), CCL4 (p=<0.0001), IL-8 (p=<0.0001), and IL-10 (p=<0.0001) even in pts that did not develop IRR. However, the post infusion peak levels of TNF-a(p=0.0043), IFN-g(p=0.0457) and CCL3 (p=0.0460) were significantly higher in pts with IRR compared to those that had no IRR. Baseline levels prior to G infusion of TNF-a(p=0.0495) and IFN-g(p=0.0301) were higher in IRR pts, suggesting a possible predictive role in the development of IRR. Figure 1. Our study shows that concurrent administration of Ibr (Initiated on Cycle 1 Day 1 with pre-medications) and G shows a beneficial effect decreasing the rates of IRR (Amaya-Chanaga, 2016). All pts showed a significant increase of cytokine levels post G infusion with IL-6 levels being the exception. When we compared post G infusion cytokine levels, we observed that IRR-pts had a significant increase in TNF-a, IFN-g, and CCL3 suggesting a role of these cytokines in the clinical manifestations associated with IRR. In addition, higher levels of TNF-a and IFN-g, at baseline prior to G infusion appear to be predictive of the development of IRR. Even though our sample size is small, our observations provide additional insights into the biology of G associated IRR and how to decrease effectively those adverse events using Ibr while preserving the immune function needed for the activity of this monoclonal antibody. In addition, Ibr induced modulation of signaling through the B cell receptor and patterns of cytokine release might be efficacious in preventing other monoclonal antibody IRR as well as those reactions observed in pts that receive adoptive cellular therapy (i.e. CART cell treatment). Disclosures Choi: AbbVie, Inc: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Rigel: Consultancy. Amaya-Chanaga:AbbVie: Equity Ownership, Other: Research performed while employed as an investigator of this study at UCSD. Review and approval of abstract performed while employed at Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company.; Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Employment, Other: Research performed while employed as an investigator of this study at UCSD. Review and approval of abstract performed while employed at Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company.. Kipps:Celgene: Consultancy; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Verastem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Verastem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Castro:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company:: Consultancy.

Abstract Standard treatment for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is rapidly evolving and gradually has incorporated the combined use of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and targeted therapy with small molecules. Single agent Ibrutinib (Ibr), a first-in-class BTK inhibitor, is effective in previously untreated patients including those that are older than 65 or considered unfit to receive chemotherapy-based combinations. The complete response rate in patients receiving single agent Ibr is relatively low (overall response rate of 86% and complete response of 4% based on 2008 iwCLL criteria), though most patients have durable remissions. The combination of Ibr with mAbs like Obinutuzumab-Gazyva (G), a third-generation anti-CD20 mAb, can ameliorate the Ibr-induced lymphocytosis and increase the overall and complete response rates. Accordingly, we initiated an open-label phase Ib/II clinical study of Ibr in combination with G for first-line therapy of previous untreated pts with CLL. The study completed enrollment of 32 previously untreated patients with CLL. Patients received G administered based on FDA dosing recommendations for 6 cycles (28 days/cycle) and Ibr 420mg po (1-3 hours before starting G infusion), and daily for up to 3 years. All patients received prophylactic medications. Patients were assessed for response by 2008 iwCLL criteria two months after completion of G, as the primary efficacy endpoint. The median age of the patients was 65 (range: 46-78) years. 84% of the patients had a CIRS >6, 45% had a Rai stage III-IV and 19% had an ECOG performance ≤2. The median baseline absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) was 79x103/mm3(range: 1.4-412.4). Patients showed the following FISH/cytogenetic abnormalities: del(13q) in 55%, trisomy 12 in 23% and del(11q) in 19%. Only 2 (6%) of these patients showed del(17p). From the patients with IGVH mutational status available (n=17), 11 (65%) were unmutated (>98% homology). Most adverse events (AEs) were grade 1-2 (74%). Six patients (19%) had grade 1-2 G-infusion-related reaction (IRR) and only one patient (3%) showed grade 3 IRR (without the need for G discontinuation). We observed neutropenia (all grades: 52%, grade 3-4: 23%), thrombocytopenia (all grades: 71%, grade 3-4: 19%) and anemia (all grades: 26%). There were no cases of febrile neutropenia. Two patients (6%) had grade 1 bleeding (one patient with asymptomatic lower gastrointestinal bleeding and the second patient with epistaxis) that resolved spontaneously without requirement of blood transfusion or study treatment discontinuation. Two patients (6%) developed pneumonia, one was community-acquired pneumonia requiring inpatient treatment with IV antibiotics; the study treatment was held until resolution of symptoms and re-initiated at full dose. The most frequent non-hematological AEs were diarrhea, transaminitis, hyperbilirubinemia, hyperglycemia, and electrolyte alterations (grade 1-2). Three patients (9%) discontinued Ibr due to atrial fibrillation grade 1 (n=1), rash and headaches grade 2 (n=1), and persistent grade 4 thrombocytopenia (n=1). Twenty-three patients were evaluable for response assessment by 2008 iwCLL criteria (median follow-up of 11 months). 84% of the patients showed a rapid decrease in ALC from baseline during the first cycle of treatment and only four patients (13%) required more than 3 cycles of treatment to achieve an ALC response. The overall response rate was 100%. The majority of pts had a partial response and six of 23 evaluable patients (26%) achieved a complete remission with detectable Minimal Residual Disease in the bone marrow by multiparametric flow cytometry. In summary, Ibr-G combination has been generally well tolerated. AEs have been consistent with the known safety profiles of Ibr and G individually. The patients that discontinued Ibr remain in follow-up without disease progression. 100% of evaluable patients achieved response after 6 months of combination therapy, and 26% of patients met CR criteria. One important finding thus far has been a very low rate of IRR, (19% grade 1-2 and 3% grade 3-4), suggesting that Ibr can strongly mitigate the incidence and severity of G associated IRR. Disclosures Choi: AbbVie, Inc: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Rigel: Consultancy; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Speakers Bureau. Amaya-Chanaga:AbbVie: Equity Ownership, Other: Research performed while employed as an investigator of this study at UCSD. Review and approval of abstract performed while employed at Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company.; Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Employment, Other: Research performed while employed as an investigator of this study at UCSD. Review and approval of abstract performed while employed at Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company.. Kipps:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Verastem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Verastem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Castro:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company:: Consultancy.