Citations

Abstract Background: Secondary CNS involvement (SCNS) is a detrimental complication seen in ~5% of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) treated with modern immunochemotherapy. Data from older series report short survival following SCNS, typically <6 months. However, data in patients that develop SCNS following primary therapy that contains a rituximab-based-regimen as well as the impact of more intensified treatment for SCNS are limited. Aims: The aims of this study were to i) describe the natural history of SCNS in a large cohort of patients treated with immunochemotherapy, and ii) determine prognostic factors after SCNS. Patients and methods: We performed a retrospective study of patients diagnosed with SCNS during or after frontline immunochemotherapy (R-CHOP or equivalently effective regimens). SCNS was defined as new involvement of the CNS (parenchymal, leptomeningeal, and/or eye) in patients without known CNS involvement at the time of first pathologic diagnosis of DLBCL. Patients were identified from local databases and/or regional/national registries in Denmark, Canada (British Columbia), Australia, Israel, US (University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic SPORE), and England (Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospital, London). Clinico-pathologic and treatment characteristics at the time of SCNS were collected from medical records. Results: In total, 281 patients with SCNS diagnosed between 2001 and 2016 were included. Median age at SCNS was 64 (range 20-93) years and male:female ratio was 1.3. SCNS occurred as part of first relapse in 244 (87%) patients and 112 (40%) had documented concurrent systemic disease at the time of SCNS. The median time from initial DLBCL diagnosis to SCNS was 9 months, which was similar for patients treated with (N=76, 27%) or without upfront CNS prophylaxis (N=205, 73%) (10 vs 9 Mo; P=0.3). The median post-SCNS OS was 4 months (interquartile range 2-13) and the 2yr survival rate was 20% (95% CI 15-25) for the entire cohort. Associations between clinicopathologic features, management strategy, and post-SCNS survival are shown in Table 1, which excludes patients who did not receive any treatment against SCNS, patients treated with steroids alone, and a patient with unavailable treatment information (n=43, 15%). In multivariable analysis, performance status >1, concurrent leptomeningeal and parenchymal involvement, SCNS developing before completion of 1st line treatment, and combined systemic and CNS involvement by DLBCL were associated with inferior outcomes. Upfront CNS prophylaxis did not influence post-SCNS OS. High-dose methotrexate (HDMTX) and/or platinum based treatment regimens (i.e. ICE, DHAP, or GDP [+/- IT treatment and/or radiotherapy], N=163) for SCNS were associated with reduced risk of death (HR 0.45 [0.32-0.62, P<0.01]). The 2yr post-SCNS survival for patients treated with HDMTX and/or platinum-based regimens (N=163) was 29% (95% CI 22-37). For patients with isolated parenchymal SCNS, single modality treatment with radiotherapy resulted in 2-yr OS of 19% (95% CI 8-35). For the subgroup of 49 patients treated with HDMTX- and/or platinum-based regimens for isolated SCNS after 1st line DLBCL treatment and with performance status 0 or 1, the 2yr post-SCNS survival was 46% (95% CI 31-59). Overall, 9% of the patients received HDT with ASCT as part of salvage therapy at the time of SCNS. Amongst 36 SCNS patients without systemic involvement and in CR following intensive treatment (HDMTX and/or platinum-based treatments), 11 patients consolidated with HDT had similar outcomes to 25 patients treated without consolidating HDT (P=0.9, Fig 1) Conclusions: Outcomes for patients with SCNS remain poor in this large international cohort of patients from the immunochemotherapy era. Combined parenchymal and leptomeningeal disease, presence of systemic disease concurrent with SCNS, performance status >1, and SCNS developing during first line treatment were independently associated with inferior OS. However, a significant fraction of patients with isolated SCNS after first line DLBCL treatment and with good performance status may achieve long-term remissions after intensive regimens for SCNS. Disclosures El-Galaly: Roche: Consultancy, Other: travel funding. Cheah:Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead Sciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Speaker's Bureau. Kansara:Celgene: Honoraria. Connors:Bristol Myers Squib: Research Funding; NanoString Technologies: Research Funding; F Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Sehn:roche/genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; seattle genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; TG therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; lundbeck: Consultancy, Honoraria; janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Opat:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Provision of subsidised drugs, Research Funding. Seymour:Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Villa:Celgene: Honoraria; Lundbeck: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 47 Background In adults with newly diagnosed, poor-risk AML we previously demonstrated that induction therapy with Flavopiridol in combination with Ara-C and Mitoxantrone (FLAM,) in a timed-sequential manner, yields complete remission (CR) rates of 67% and median disease-free survival (DFS) of 13.6 months. These data suggest that FLAM might improve outcomes relative to standard “7+3” in newly diagnosed AML with poor-risk features. Thus, we are conducting a phase II randomized trial comparing the CR rates with FLAM vs. 7+3 induction for all newly diagnosed adult patients with AML with intermediate and poor-risk features. We also previously identified a population of CD34+CD38− cells with intermediate aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH) activity that appears to represent a leukemic stem cell (LSC) population. We are examining the effects of FLAM vs. 7+3 in eradicating this LSC population and determining if persistence of LSC's predicts for relapse. Objectives The primary objective is to compare the rate of CR after 1 cycle of FLAM vs. 1 cycle of 7+3. The secondary objectives are to compare toxicities, survival rates, and presence or absence of minimal residual disease (MRD) after both induction regimens. Methods All newly diagnosed adult patients aged 18–70 without favorable risk features were randomized in a 2:1 fashion between FLAM and 7+3 at 90 mg/m2 of Daunorubicin. To achieve balanced randomization, patients were stratified by age, secondary AML and leukocyte count. CD34+ cell subsets were analyzed by flow cytometry for CD38 expression and ALDH activity by Aldefluor. The trial is ongoing. Results To date, 62 patients are evaluable for the primary end point. Demographics and results are depicted in table 1. Patient characteristics were similar in both arms, although there were more patients with poor risk features in the FLAM arm than 7+3. Overall grade > 3 toxicity was similar between both arms. However, there were 3 cases of grade > 3 tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) with FLAM, with 1 death, vs. 0 with 7+3. There were also 3 deaths with FLAM before day 60 vs. 0 with 7+3. CR rate with FLAM was 68% (28/41), with 1 cycle of 7+3 was 48% (10/21) (p = 0.17), and with 2 cycles (7+3 + 5+2) was 52% (11/21). CR rates based on specific risk factors are depicted in table 2. There was a trend toward improved CR rates in patients with adverse genetics with FLAM (p = 0.17). Putative AML LSC's were distinguished from normal hematopoietic stem cells based on ALDH activity. The persistence of putative LSC's in patients after therapy was highly predictive of subsequent clinical relapse. Conclusions Based on the current CR rate of 68%, FLAM holds promise as a therapeutic option for patients with newly diagnosed AML with intermediate and poor risk features. In this preliminary analysis, there is a suggestion that FLAM leads to higher CR rates in patients with adverse genetics than 7+3. Additionally, the detection of MRD consisting of a residual putative LSC population strongly portended subsequent relapse, even in patients without evidence of leukemia. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Flavopiridol (Alvocidib) is an anti-leukemia agent.

INTRODUCTION: Tofacitinib is an oral, small molecule JAK inhibitor for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). Tofacitinib safety in patients (pts) with UC was evaluated in an 8-week induction Phase (P) 2 study (NCT00787202), 1 2 8-week induction P3 studies (OCTAVE Induction 1 & 2; NCT01465763 & NCT01458951), 2 a 52-week maintenance P3 study (NCT01458574), and an ongoing, open-label, long-term extension (OLE) study (OCTAVE Open, NCT01470612). 3 We present updated infections data (Sep 2018) from the tofacitinib UC clinical program. 4,5 METHODS: Pts receiving placebo, tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID) were analyzed as Induction (P2 & P3, n = 1220), Maintenance (P3, N = 592), and Overall (pts in P2, P3 & OLE receiving tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID, N = 1157 [Sep 2018]) Cohorts. Proportions and incidence rates (IRs; pts with events per 100 pt-years [PY] of exposure) were evaluated for infections of special interest (incl. serious infections [SIs], opportunistic infections [OIs; independently adjudicated], and herpes zoster [HZ]). RESULTS: A total of 1157 pts received ≥1 dose of tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID (83% predominantly 10 mg BID [avg. daily dose ≥15 mg]), with 2403.6 PY of exposure (median 623 days, up to 6.1 years of treatment). The Table 1 shows infection IRs by Cohort. In the Overall Cohort, nasopharyngitis was the most frequent infection. For SIs, the Overall Cohort “Tofacitinib All” IR (1.75 [95% CI 1.27, 2.36]) was similar to the Maintenance Cohort IRs for tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID. No SIs resulted in death. OIs were infrequent (28 pts) and most were HZ (24 pts; IR 0.99 [95% CI 0.63, 1.47]), mostly cutaneous. Not all HZ events were OIs; 83 pts overall had HZ events (IR 3.57 [95% CI 2.84, 4.43]; 6 serious). CONCLUSION: In induction, SIs and OIs occurred with tofacitinib but not with placebo. Overall, SIs were generally infrequent and Overall Cohort IRs did not suggest increased risk with longer tofacitinib treatment vs the Maintenance Cohort. Non-HZ OIs were rare. SI incidence was similar in the UC and rheumatoid arthritis programs (incl. increased HZ risk) 6 and to other UC therapies incl. biologics. 7

INTRODUCTION: Tofacitinib is an oral, small molecule JAK inhibitor for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). Tofacitinib safety and efficacy were demonstrated in patients (pts) with moderate to severe UC in 3 Phase 3 studies, 1 and are being evaluated in an ongoing, open-label, long-term extension (OLE) study. 2 METHODS: We present updated safety and efficacy data from the OCTAVE Open OLE study (NCT01470612; Sep 2018; database not locked) 2 in completers/treatment failures in OCTAVE Sustain (NCT01458574) or non-responders in OCTAVE Induction 1/2 (NCT01465763/NCT01458951). Week (Wk) 8 data (OCTAVE Induction 1/2) and Wk 52 (completers) or early-termination data (OCTAVE Sustain) determined eligibility. Pts in remission (total Mayo score ≤2, no individual subscore >1, rectal bleeding subscore 0) at Wk 52 of OCTAVE Sustain (central read) received tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (BID) in the OLE study; all others received 10 mg BID. At Month 2, all pts had endoscopy, and induction non-responders with no clinical response were withdrawn. Incidence rates (IRs; unique pts with events per 100 pt-years [PY]) for adverse events (AEs) of special interest were calculated. Efficacy endpoints were derived from Mayo score (local read). RESULTS: Of 944 pts receiving ≥1 tofacitinib dose (for up to 5.5 years), 175 (18.5%) and 769 (81.5%) received 5 and 10 mg BID, respectively (454 and 1550 PY, respectively). 337 (35.7%) pts discontinued due to insufficient clinical response and 78 (8.3%) due to AEs excl. worsening UC. The most frequent AE class was infections and infestations (52.1%). The most frequent AEs were nasopharyngitis (20.3%) and worsening UC (19.5%). IRs (95% CI) for “Tofacitinib All” were: serious infections 1.61 (1.10, 2.27); herpes zoster (all) 3.35 (2.58, 4.27); major adverse cardiovascular events 0.15 (0.03, 0.44); malignancies excl. non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) 0.85 (0.50, 1.36); and NMSC 0.81 (0.46, 1.32), with no clustering of malignancy type. Table 1 shows AEs and IRs by dose. No new safety risks were identified. Table 2 shows efficacy data at Month 36. CONCLUSION: In pts with UC in the OLE study, no new safety risks emerged at 5.5 years vs earlier OLE analyses 2 or with tofacitinib in rheumatoid arthritis. Efficacy data continue to support long-term efficacy of tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg BID up to 36 months beyond OCTAVE Sustain.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is the most common behavioral condition and the second most common chronic illness in children. The observance of specific behaviors in multiple settings have remained the most successful method for diagnosing the condition, and although there are differences in specific areas of the brain, and a high heritability estimate (∼76%), they are not diagnostically specific. Medications, and particularly stimulant medication, have undergone rigorous studies to document their efficacy dating back to the 1970s. Likewise, behavioral interventions in the form of parent training and classroom programs have demonstrated robust efficacy during the same time period. Both medication and behavioral interventions are symptomatic treatments. The availability of only symptomatic treatments places ADHD in the same category as other chronic conditions such as diabetes and asthma. Successful treatment of most individuals requires ongoing adherence to the therapy. Improved communication between patients and their families, primary and mental health providers, and school personnel is necessary for effective ADHD treatment. Further enhancement of electronic systems to facilitate family, school, and provider communication can improve monitoring of ADHD symptoms and functional performance. The American Academy of Pediatrics ADHD guidelines were initially developed to help primary care clinicians address the needs of their patients with ADHD and were further refined with the second revision in 2019.

One-third of peripheral T-cell lymphomas are “not otherwise specified” (PTCL-NOS), but they have been subdivided into 2 subgroups based on gene expression profiling. Amador and colleagues generated an immunohistochemical algorithm that parallels the molecular separation of PTCL-NOS and provides useful prognostic information.