Citations

Abstract Introduction Heterozygous germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in the 5' untranslated region of ANKRD26 cause inherited thrombocytopenia and predisposition to hematologic malignancy (HM). The estimated lifetime HM risk is ~10% based on families ascertained from an inherited thrombocytopenia cohort. However, the malignancy spectrum, molecular features, precursor states, and overall clinical outcomes remain poorly defined. Methods We established an international, multicenter cohort of individuals with ANKRD26-related thrombocytopenia diagnosed after undergoing genetic evaluation due to a personal and/or family history of thrombocytopenia and/or HM. Clinical, pathologic, and molecular data were collected for 27 individuals with germline ANKRD26 PVs from 21 unrelated families treated at 11 institutions across 5 countries. Statistical analyses were performed using R (v4.4.2). Results Patients were predominantly male (18/27) and white (25/27). Thrombocytopenia was typically identified in childhood (median age 10 years, range 0-48) with a genetic diagnosis made later (median age 53 years, range 2-80). The mean (+/- SD) pre-malignancy platelet count was 45 +/- 24 K/uL (range 5-87). ANKRD26 PVs observed in each family included: c.-126T>C (n=9), c.-128G>A (n=3), c.-134G>A (n=3), c.-116C>T (n=3), c.-118C>T (n=2), and c.-118C>A (n=1). Thirteen HMs were diagnosed in 11 of 27 (41%) patients, including myelodysplastic neoplasm/syndrome (MDS, n=5), acute myeloid leukemia (AML, n=3), chronic myeloid leukemia (CML, n=2), MDS/myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) overlap (n=2), and Langerhans cell histiocytosis (n=1). The median age at first HM diagnosis was 63 years (range 49-80). Recurrent somatic features in myeloid malignancies included complex karyotype (4/11, 36%) and TP53 mutations (5/10, 50%). Of the 3 patients with AML, 1 achieved a partial remission (PR) with venetoclax combined with cladribine, idarubicin, and cytarabine but relapsed, 1 achieved a PR with azacitidine but relapsed <100 days after haploidentical allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT), and 1 had primary refractory disease. Among 5 patients with MDS, 1 was refractory to decitabine, 1 underwent alloSCT but relapsed 2 years post-transplant, 1 remains in remission post-alloSCT with 1 year of follow-up, 1 is undergoing alloSCT evaluation, and 1 was lost to follow-up. Both patients with CML achieved durable major molecular remissions with imatinib. To better estimate HM risk, we assumed 100% penetrance of thrombocytopenia for ANKRD26 PV carriers and included family members with chronic thrombocytopenia who had not had germline genetic testing. In this expanded series (n=62), 16 individuals developed a HM (26%). Additional diagnoses included MDS with progression to AML (n=1), AML (n=1), CML (n=1), and leukemia of unknown type (n=2). Cumulative incidence of HM was 0% by age 40 years, 17% by age 60 years, and 60% by age 80 years. Somatic sequencing of peripheral blood was performed in 5 HM-unaffected ANKRD26 PV carriers. One individual was found to have clonal hematopoiesis driven by TET2 (c.1648C>T, p.Arg550*) with a variant allele frequency (VAF) of 9% at age 55. Bone marrow biopsy showed mild megakaryocytic atypia and 4% blasts without overt evidence of malignancy. To assess the prevalence of ANKRD26-related HM, we assessed the frequency of ANKRD26 PVs in 2 large MDS/AML cohorts. In the ARUP database (9662 AML, 6397 MDS), 2 individuals (0.01%) had an ANKRD26 PV with a VAF consistent with germline origin. In the MSK-IMPACT Heme Germline MDS/AML cohort (n = 284), no ANKRD26 P/LP variants were identified. Conclusions Germline ANKRD26 PVs underlie <1% of MDS/AML diagnoses but may represent a high-risk subtype characterized by complex karyotype, TP53 mutations, and high risk of relapse. Among our series, the incidence of HM was low early in life but increased substantially with age, reaching 60% by 80 years. This exceeds prior estimates, which were derived from individuals ascertained from thrombocytopenia-based registries. Together, our findings suggest that ANKRD26-associated HM may represent a high-risk clinical entity, and that age and family history should inform surveillance strategies. More studies are needed to define genetic and environmental modifiers of HM risk as well as precursor states to enable early detection and disease interception.

Abstract Introduction: T-PLL is a rare, aggressive leukemia with poor prognosis and limited therapies. Previous studies on T-PLL patients receiving an allogeneic stem cell transplant (alloSCT) are limited by small numbers with limited data on disease and transplant characteristics. Further, recent data from our large national cohort of patients demonstrated significant survival difference between TCL1A+ and TCL1A- T-PLL, and CD8+ T-PLL vs CD8- T-PLL. In this large multi-center series, utilizing comprehensive disease subtype and alloSCT clinical data, we evaluated prognostic and survival therapeutic outcomes in T-PLL patients that had an alloSCT with a particular focus on T-PLL disease subtypes. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 572 diagnosed with T-PLL at 21 academic cancer centers throughout the USA between 2000-2023, of which we performed a further evaluation on the169 that proceeded with alloSCT. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazard models. Results: Among n=169 alloSCT recipients with T-PLL, the median follow-up time was 20.9 months post-alloSCT (range: 0.2-182.9), the median age at transplant was 59 years (range: 35-77) and 52% were male. In evaluated patients (n=109), TCL1A was positive by cytogenetics or FISH in 69%. As our recent analysis demonstrated significant differences in survival among specific subtypes of T-PLL, we evaluated outcomes in patients with CD4+CD8- T-PLL (n=90, 53%), CD4-CD8+ (n=17, 10%) T-PLL, and CD4+CD8+ T-PLL (n=52, 31%). 53% (87/164) had known nodal involvement at diagnosis identified by PET or CT scan and 45% (43/96) of known patients had minimal residual disease (MRD) at the time of transplant [defined as <5% T-PLL in marrow by flow, or +cytogenetics (e.g. TCL1A)] prior to alloSCT. At the time of alloSCT, 136 (80%) patients were in CR and 23 (14%) patients were in PR. Forty-nine (30%) had a myeloablative (MAC)conditioning regimen and 114 (70%) had a reduced intensity chemotherapy (RIC) conditioning regimen. Eighty (49%) patients had TBI as part of their regimen. The most common regimens were fludarabine (flu)/melphalan based regimens (n=44; 26.0%), flu/cyclophosphamide (cy) based regimens (n=33; 19.5%), flu/busulfan based regimens (n=22; 13.0%), flu/total body irradiation (TBI) (n=8; 4.7%), and cy/TBI (n=4; 2.4%). Across the whole cohort, the median OS and PFS post-alloSCT was 32.6 months (95% CI: 21.0-41.9) and 20.8 months (95% CI: 14.4-30.5) months while the 1-year cumulative incidences (CI) of NRM and relapse were 17% and 20%, respectively. The incidences of grade II-IV acute GVHD and cGVHD were 19% and 23%. There was no difference between patients with myeloablative conditioning (MAC) (n=49, 29%) when compared to patients that received reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) (n=114, 67%) in OS (33.1 vs 29.2; p=0.68) and PFS (20.2 vs 20.8; p=0.97). Patients that were MRD+ (n=31) had worse OS (22.2 vs 48.6; p=0.1) and PFS (14.1 vs 32.5; p=0.04) and higher rates of relapse (1-year relapse 20% vs 8%; p=0.08) than patients that were MRD- (n=50). PFS was improved in those who received alloSCT though only trended towards significance due to low numbers (HR 0.76, p=0.09). In subtype analysis, TCL1A+ T-PLL had significantly worse outcomes compared to TCL1A negative T-PLL. TCL1A+ disease had significantly worse OS (21.6 vs 63.1; p=0.01) and PFS (12.4 vs 50.7; p=0.01) compared to TCL1A-. Additionally, in TCL1A+ disease CI of NRM (24% vs 3%; p=0.02) and relapse (25% vs 12%; p=0.86) was higher vs TCL1A- PLL. CD4+CD8-, CD4-CD8+, and CD4+CD8+ disease had no difference in survival via either OS (28.0 vs 34.4 vs 21.0; p=0.17) or PFS (29.4 vs 23.5 vs 13.6; p=0.09) as well as no difference 1-year CI of NRM ( 11.6 vs 23.5 vs 26.2; p=0.35) and relapse (18.5 vs 23.5 vs 20.0; p=0.67).Conclusions: AlloSCT significantly improved outcomes for patients with T-PLL compared to those who did not proceed to alloSCT and remains he only curative therapy for those with T-PLL. OS, PFS, and CI relapse were significantly worse for patients with TCL1A+ subtype of T-PLL, or those with MRD positivity or PR prior to alloSCT. Novel strategies to decrease relapse such as post-alloSCT maintenance therapy to improve outcomes are urgently needed in these patients.

Abstract Introduction: Standardized reporting of clinical trials results for MDS is essential to improve clinical interpretation and cross-study comparison. However, reporting of patient characteristics, response criteria, and endpoints in publications is often inconsistent; there is no systemic analysis of MDS trial reporting available. We conducted a systematic review of published MDS trial manuscripts on behalf of the international consortium for MDS (icMDS) to assess variability in reporting practices. Methods We searched ClinicalTrials.gov to identify all clinical trials registered for adults (≥18 years) with MDS that reported results between 2015-2024. Clinical trials that included acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or MDS/myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) were included if they enrolled ≥5 MDS patients. We excluded trials without an MDS cohort; non-therapeutic trials; trials focused on transplant interventions; or those which enrolled solid malignancies or other hematologic malignancies (chronic myeloid leukemia or lymphoid diseases). Finally, trials were required to have a manuscript available on Larvol, PubMed, or Google Scholar. Trials were categorized by disease risk (lower-risk [LR] vs. higher-risk [HR]) and trial phase (early phase [EP] vs. late phase [LP]). Results We identified 502 MDS trials on ClinicalTrials.gov, of which 351 did not meet inclusion criteria and 79 lacked a manuscript. A total of 72 trials (32 EP, 40 LP) with 80 publications (34 EP, 46 LP) were analyzed. Frequently reported baseline characteristics included age (100% EP, 100% LP), disease risk (74% EP, 74% LP), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (85% EP, 72% LP), prior treatments (71% EP, 67% LP), and RBC transfusion dependency (32% EP, 70% LP). Less frequently reported characteristics included blood counts (hemoglobin [Hb; 38% EP, 54% LP], platelet count [38% EP, 54% LP], neutrophil count [24% EP and LP]) and bone marrow blasts (29% EP, 43% LP). Although disease risk was widely reported, definitions varied: IPSS and IPSS-R were each reported in 54% of manuscripts, while IPSS-M appeared in only 3%. Cytogenetic risk was separately reported in 39% of manuscripts (38% EP, 39% LP), and mutational data in 45% (47% EP, 43% LP). Responses per IWG 2006 criteria were reported in 84% of manuscripts. The primary endpoint involved safety/tolerability in 85% of EP manuscripts, though definitions were variable; recommended phase 2 dose was the most common (26% of EP manuscripts). In LP trials, primary endpoints were risk-specific: transfusion independence (TI) in 77% of LR, overall response rate (ORR) in 28% of HR, and complete remission (CR) or overall survival (OS) in 22% of HR. In HR manuscripts, CR was reported in 100%, ORR in 73%, hematologic improvement (HI) in 48%, RBC-TI in 23%, and OS in 80%. However, seven different definitions were used for ORR: CR + marrow CR + partial remission + HI per IWG 2006 was most common (35%). Event-free survival was reported in 25%; progression-free survival and relapse-free survival in 13%; and leukemia-free survival in 5%. Early mortality rate was reported in 35% (18% EP, 56% LP) and transplant rate in 58% (50% EP, 67% LP). Only 47% of HR and 90% of LR manuscripts identified HI-eligible patients. In LR-MDS, RBC-TI was reported in 72% of manuscripts but used six definitions. The most common were RBC-TI ≥8 weeks at any time during treatment (24%), ≥8 weeks within 28 weeks of treatment (13%), ≥8 weeks with Hb increase ≥1.0 (4%), ≥12 weeks with Hb increase ≥1.5 (4%), and ≥16 weeks within 24 weeks of treatment (12%). The remainder did not report RBC-TI, did not define it, or used a custom definition not used in another trial. HI was reported in 80% of LR papers with most of those reporting HI using IWG 2006 criteria (90%). Conclusion Reporting of baseline characteristics, response criteria, and outcomes is inconsistent in MDS clinical trials, with wide variability in response definitions, including ORR and TI. This heterogeneity limits interpretability, hampers historical comparisons and may obscure efficacy signals. Our findings highlight the need for standardized reporting guidelines to ensure clarity and consistency in MDS trial publications. As a next phase of this effort, we will conduct a formal Delphi process among icMDS experts to establish consensus recommendations for minimal and optimal MDS clinical trial reporting in manuscripts by disease risk (LR/HR) and trial phase (EP/LP).

Abstract Background: Venetoclax (VEN)+obinutuzumab (VO) is an effective therapy for CLL/SLL requiring regular monitoring for tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) during VEN ramp-up. The CLL14 trial of VO reported no TLS during VEN ramp-up; however, there are limited real-world data on monitoring practices and TLS outcomes for different dose levels and monitoring timepoints. This study assessed VEN initiation prophylaxis and monitoring outcomes for patients (pts) with CLL/SLL starting VO in first line (1L) in an outpatient, real-world setting. Methods This interim analysis relied onretrospective observational data from 4 US sites of the CLL Collaborative Study of Real-World Evidence (CORE). Adult pts with CLL/SLL were eligible if they: (1) started VO per-label outside of a clinical trial in 1L, or immediately after exposure in 1L to agents with different mechanisms of action (i.e., BTKi, anti-CD20 only) of <30 days; (2) prior to VEN start, had either (i) low physician-determined tumor burden (TB) (i.e., all lymph nodes [LN] <5 cm and ALC <25 x 109/L), or (ii) medium physician-determined TB (i.e., any LN ≥5-<10 cm or ALC ≥25 x 109/L) with creatinine clearance ≥80 mL/min; (3) had no strong CYP3A inhibitors or prophylactic rasburicase from 3 days prior to VEN start until end of VEN ramp-up; and (4) had VEN ramp-up in an outpatient setting. TB-related labs/imaging was assessed from 2 months prior to obinutuzumab initiation (i.e., index date) until VEN start. VEN characteristics (i.e., dosing, duration), prophylaxis measures (i.e., antihyperuricemics and IV hydration), and TLS-related monitoring and management (i.e., lab results and interventions received) were collected per ramp-up week and TLS monitoring timepoint. Results Of 128 pts in CORE who initiated VO in any line, 72 pts met inclusion criteria (low TB: 57 [79.2%]; medium TB: 15 [20.8%]). Median (IQR) age was 62 (56.0, 68.5) years, 58.3% were male, and 81.9% had ECOG grade ≤1. Among pts tested, 7/68 (10.3%) had del(17p)/TP53 mutation and 43/66 (65.2%) had unmutated IGHV. Median (IQR) time from index to VEN start was 23.0 (22.0, 30.0) days. Most pts completed ramp-up (98.6% [71/72]) and followed a per-label regular dosing schedule (93.1% [67/72]). Prior to VEN ramp-up, all pts received prophylactic antihyperuricemics (allopurinol: 71 [98.6%]; febuxostat: 2 [2.8%]) and prophylactic hydration. In the 2 days prior to a dose escalation for at least 1 week of ramp-up, prophylactic IV hydration was reported for 27 (37.5%) pts based on physician determination. One pt stopped VEN after week 2 due to neutropenia (grade 3+). During ramp-up (median [IQR] of 9 [8, 12] blood tests per pt), no lab or clinical TLS was reported. Of 21 (29.2%) pts who received an intervention following a lab assessment, most had low TB at VEN start (16 [76.2%]). All interventions were either prophylactic or non-TLS-related. Following a lab assessment for at least 1 week of ramp-up, prophylactic IV or escalated oral hydration intervention was reported in 17/21 pts (81.0%) based on physician determination (e.g., to manage impaired baseline renal function in those with low TB, patient request, or institutional practice) (IV hydration: 15 pts; escalated oral hydration: 2 pts). By per-label monitoring timepoints, hydration intervention was given prophylactically following pre-dose lab tests for 7 pts (across weeks 1-5), 6-8 hours post-dose for 5 pts (weeks 1-2), and 24 hours post-dose for 10 pts (weeks 1-2). By per-label monitoring timepoints, other non-TLS-related interventions (i.e., blood transfusion for anemia, insulin for hyperglycemia, and potassium for non-TLS-related hypokalemia) were given following pre-dose lab tests for 2 pts (weeks 1-5) and 24 hours post-dose for 4 pts (weeks 1-2). Conclusion Consistent with the CLL14 trial, no TLS was reported in this real-world, interim analysis of pts with mostly low TB and good renal function at 1L VO initation. All interventions during VEN ramp-up were prophylactic or non-TLS-related, with prophylactic hydration commonly given based on physician preference. These results suggest that VO initiation is manageable in an outpatient setting. Consideration should be given for simplified monitoring requirements including potential removal of 6-8 hour post-dose lab in this population and be further explored in prospective studies. Data collection for this study is ongoing to further contextualize real-world VEN initiation prophylaxis and monitoring outcomes in a larger cohort.

Abstract Background: In R/R DLBCL/FL, T-cell engager therapy (TCET) using chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CART) or bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) are promising options. Patients (pts) with R/R disease post TCET experience dismal outcomes with overall survival (OS)< 5 months (mos). Lonca, an antibody drug conjugate (ADC) targeting CD19 (FDA approved for R/R DLBCL and beneficial in R/R FL) has been increasingly used post-TCET. RWDA of Lonca is limited, especially regarding: 1) impact of CD19 expression on activity, 2) adverse events (AEs) in non-clinical trial setting, and 3) impact of sequencing Lonca and TCET. Thus, we conducted a RWDA of Lonca efficacy and toxicity in R/R DLBCL and FL pre- and post-TCET. Methods: We conducted a multicenter retrospective study of R/R DLBCL or FL pts ≥18 years who received Lonca from 2017 to 2025 at 10 US academic sites. Demographic, pathological, treatment, and AEs were collected. Efficacy outcomes included overall response rate (ORR), complete response (CR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), and progressive disease (PD). Progression-free survival (PFS) and OS were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method. CD19 expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and/or flow cytometry (FC) prior to Lonca administration was correlated to outcomes. Results: Among 120 pts (DLBCL n= 101, FL n=19), all but 2 pts received Lonca monotherapy. At a median follow-up of 6.1 mos, median PFS and OS were 2.6 mos and 6.7 mos, respectively for the entire cohort. For DLBCL, median age was 66 years (18-89). Median prior lines of therapy (LOT) were 4 (1-11). ORR was 37.7% (CR: 17%, PR: 20.7%), SD: 6%, and PD: 56%. Median PFS was 2.1 mos, and median OS was 5.8 mos. For FL, median age was 62 years (28-88). Median prior LOT was 6 (2-8). ORR was 49.4% (CR: 28%, PR: 21.4%), SD: 14%, and PD: 35.7%. Median PFS was 6.7 mos, and median OS was 6.8 mos. OS by best response (entire cohort) was 11.3 mos and 11.8 mos in those who had CR and PR, respectively, 10.6 mos in SD and 3.5 mos in those with PD. Lonca LOT (2nd-12th line) was not associated with improved OS (p=0.58). Bulky disease (>7.5 cm) was not associated with worse OS (p=0.07). PD to Lonca was associated with PD at 2nd line treatment (OR: 4.3; 95% CI: 1.7–10.9) and 3rd-line treatment (OR: 4.2; 95% CI: 1.5–11.5), elevated lactate dehydrogenase (OR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.2–2.9), and each subsequent increase of extranodal sites >1 prior to Lonca (OR: 1.5; 95% CI: 1.04–2.1). Among pts with available CD19 status prior to Lonca administration, 28 were FC-positive and 22 were IHC-positive. Of the CD19 FC-positive pts (n=23), 22% (5/23) achieved CR, 26% (6/23) had PR, 8% (2/23) had SD, and 43% (10/23) developed PD. Of the CD19 IHC-positive pts (n=20): 15% (3/20) achieved CR, 20% (4/20) had PR, 5% (1/20) had SD, and 60% (12/20) developed PD. Among all CD19-negative pts (n=7), two achieved CR, one had SD, and four with PD. Any grade AE was seen in 84% of pts. Any grade ≥3 (G3) AE was seen in 62% of pts. Notable G3 AEs included: anemia (35%), lymphopenia (34%), neutropenia (21.6%), thrombocytopenia (20%), infection (17%), fatigue (9%), peripheral edema (5%), pleural effusion (4%), photosensitivity (2.5%), and pruritus (2.5%). Treatment discontinuation due to AEs occurred in 17% (n=21) of pts. Fifty-five pts (50 DLBCL, 5 FL) received both Lonca and CD19 directed CART (Pre-Lonca n=54; Post-Lonca n=1). There was no significant difference in PFS or OS between pts who received CART and those who did not (PFS: 2.7 mos vs 3 mos; OS: 7.4 mos vs 5 mos). BsAb was used in 41 pts (34 DLBCL, 7 FL) (Pre-Lonca n=30; Post-Lonca n=11). No significant difference in PFS or OS was observed between pts who received BsAb pre- or post-Lonca. There was also no significant difference in PFS between pts who received a BsAb (2.2 mos) and those who did not (2.9 mos), nor in OS.Conclusion: In this large RWDA of Lonca, pts who achieved any form of clinical response experienced a significantly longer OS than previously reported for heavily pre-treated pts. Lonca was predominantly administered after TCET; however, there was no significant difference in efficacy between pts who received CART and BsAbs and those who did not. CD19 positivity and earlier utilization of Lonca did not appear to have an impact on response rates. Our findings support a role for Lonca in the treatment of R/R DLBCL pts not candidates for TCET. This RWDA highlights the need to further investigate the sequencing of Lonca in R/R DLBCL and FL.

Abstract Background: For LS-DLBCL, clinical trials (FLYER, LYSA/GOELAMS 02-03, LYSA LNH09-1B, S1001) have shown that 4 cycles of rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (RCHOP4) without radiation (RT) leads to durable remissions in >90% of cases. However, only patients (pts) with non-bulky disease and/or international prognostic index (IPI) of 0 and complete metabolic response (CMR) on interim positron emission tomography (PET) scan, if performed, were eligible for RCHOP4 alone in these studies. Outcomes in trial-ineligible LS-DLBCL and the appropriate real-world candidates for RCHOP4 are still undefined. Methods: We conducted a multicenter retrospective study of adult pts with stage I/II DLBCL of any tumor bulk, IPI and with or without B-symptoms diagnosed after 2011 and treated with RCHOP4 +/- 2 cycles R from 21 U.S. centers. Pts with PMBCL, PTLD or receiving non-standard dose RCHOP for cycle (C) 1 or planned consolidative RT were excluded. The primary endpoint was PFS from C1 by Kaplan-Meier method, not counting indolent lymphoma relapse. Event free survival (EFS) was time to next therapy without progression (including unplanned RT for non-CR), progression or death. A competing risks analysis of non-relapse mortality (NRM) vs. DLBCL progression was performed. Results: The characteristics of the 428 pts were: median age 60 (18-88), 60% male, 11% Hispanic and 4% non-Hispanic Black, 62% stage I, 15% elevated LDH, 3% ECOG PS>1, 5% tumor bulk >7cm, 9% had B-symptoms and median Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was 4 (2-12). IPI was 0, 1 and 2-3 in 42%, 46% and 12% and stage-modified IPI (smIPI) was 0, 1, 2 and 3-4 in 25%, 48%, 21% and 6% of pts. 66% had nodal (59% head/neck, 11% pelvic, 9% multiple above diaphragm, 7% abdominal) and 46% extranodal sites (37% head/neck, 20% gastric/intestinal, 9% spleen, 8% skin/soft tissue); 6% had transformed/concurrent FL/MZL or grade 3B FL, 33% (138/408) were non-GCB cell of origin (COO), 25% (90/357) double expressor (DEL) and 0.5% (2/379) double-hit. 13% had completely resected disease, 97% staging PET and 47% bone marrow biopsy. Median diagnosis to treatment interval was 30 days (IQR 20-43), 6% had dose reductions after C1, 77% had an interim PET (iPET) after C2 (33%) or C3 (67%), 15% received 2 additional cycles R and 4% CNS prophylaxis. CMR rates by iPET were 83% after C2 and 94% after C3, and 95% by end-of-treatment PET. iPET PMR was more likely if smIPI>2 or bulky disease. Median follow-up time was 2.7 years. There were 32 progression events: 14 occurred at the primary site and 17 at distant sites (1 unknown), and 12 occurred after 2 years. Another 11 pts received unplanned RT after RCHOP4 for non-CR. There were 24 deaths, 12 without prior progression. Cause of death was DLBCL in 7 and non-DLBCL in 17 cases (6 infection, 2 ILD, 2 heart failure, 2 second cancer, 1 seizure, 4 unknown). EFS, PFS and OS rates were 88%, 90% and 96% at 3 years. By univariable Cox regression, Black race, elevated LDH, smIPI>2, DEL, increasing CCI, multiple subdiaphragmatic nodal sites and iPET PMR were associated with worse PFS. Non-significant variables of note included COO, extranodal sites, complete resection, missing bone marrow biopsy, missing iPET and additional cycles R. By multivariable analysis (including age>60, stage, ECOG PS>1, elevated LDH, bulky disease, CCI, B-symptoms and DEL), ECOG PS>1 (HR 3.95 p=0.050), CCI (HR 1.29 p=0.003) and DEL (HR 2.02 p=0.069) were associated with worse PFS. Cumulative incidence of DLBCL progression and NRM were 8% and 2% at 3 years. Competing risk analysis by univariable models found that age>60, ECOG PS>1, smIPI>2, elevated LDH, CCI and bulky disease were associated with NRM, while DEL and B-symptoms were associated with DLBCL progression.Conclusion: Presented is the largest retrospective cohort of LS-DLBCL treated uniformly with RCHOP4 to date. Despite modest follow-up time and lack of an “intention-to-treat“ population, this study shows that abbreviated RCHOP4 leads to excellent outcomes in the real-world, albeit with continuous risk of late relapse. smIPI risk factors were associated with worse PFS, though this may in part be driven by risk of non-lymphoma death. As pts with advanced age, poor performance status or comorbidities may benefit from reduced treatment exposure, RCHOP4 should still be considered for these and other “trial-ineligible” pts, particularly if other high-risk features (iPET PMR, DEL or B-symptoms) are absent.

ABSTRACT Central venous catheters (CVCs) are a cornerstone of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), facilitating the delivery of chemotherapy, parenteral nutrition, medications, and blood products. Despite CVCs’ essential role, prolonged use can lead to complications such as increased risk of infection, thrombosis, mechanical issues, and psychosocial burden. However, the timing of CVC removal remains highly variable across institutions. Additionally, there are no standardized guidelines to balance the benefits of extended access against the risks of prolonged use. This narrative review examines the existing literature on CVC management post‐HSCT, highlighting key factors influencing the removal timing, such as patient characteristics, disease‐specific considerations, and institutional practices. The review emphasizes the urgent need for multi‐institutional research and standardized protocols to improve outcomes, reduce complications, and enhance the quality of care for HSCT patients.

Abstract Description We used C57BL/6 mice bearing B16-F10 tumors expressing EGFRviii, treated with anti-EGFRviii CAR T cells and the oncolytic virus vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV). TCR signaling in CAR T cells was investigated using the novel Tocky transgenic mouse model, which reports T cell activation over time using an unstable fluorescent protein reporter of Nr4a3. We further investigated CAR T phenotypes using CyTOF and scRNA-Seq. Using an MHC I tetramer for the dominant VSV epitope VSV-N52-59, we found that 20-50% of transfused CAR T adopted TCR specificity against VSV-N (TCR-primed), far above the predicted frequency in a naïve T cell repertoire. Ex vivo, these TCR-primed CAR T produced increased levels of Granzyme B and IFNγ over tetramer negative CAR T against either TCR or CAR targets. TCR-primed CAR had decreased levels of T cell activation as compared to non-TCR-primed CAR. CyTOF and scRNA-Seq analyses demonstrated a hyper-effector phenotype among TCR-primed CAR, with increased expression of T-bet, CD44, Granzyme B, IFNγ, and perforin. TCR sequencing revealed hyper-expansion of VSV N-specific CAR T cells and little overlap in clonotypes between CAR T co-treated with PBS versus VSV. Overall, CAR T cells that undergo endogenous anti-viral TCR priming and signaling appear to adopt a unique phenotype that promotes their cytotoxic function. These data suggest that engineering anti-viral TCRs into CAR T could be used to improve efficacy with OV boosting. Funding Sources Supported by NIH T32GM145408 and NIH R01CA269384. Topic Categories Vaccines and Immunotherapy (VAC)

ABSTRACT Background Transvenous lead removal (TLR) in patients with a history of mediastinal radiation poses unique challenges due to potential radiation‐induced fibrosis, vascular changes, and anatomical distortion, which may increase procedural complexity and complication risk. However, contemporary data on clinical outcomes in this population remain limited. Methods We analyzed the National Readmissions Database (2016–2021) to identify adults (≥ 18 years) undergoing TLR. Patients were stratified by prior mediastinal radiation. Baseline characteristics were compared using standard statistical tests. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between prior mediastinal radiation and in‐hospital outcomes, 30‐day mortality, and 30‐day readmissions after adjustment for demographics and comorbidities. Results A total of 48,985 patients underwent TLR, of whom 735 (1.5%) had a history of mediastinal radiation. Compared with patients without radiation, those with prior radiation were older (70.1 vs. 66.2 years, p < 0.01), were more frequently females (38.2% vs. 31.6%, p < 0.01), and had higher rates of valvular heart disease, atrial fibrillation, and peripheral vascular disease. Adjusted analyses demonstrated no increased risk of in‐hospital mortality (2.3% vs. 3.4%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41–1.18, p = 0.29) or major complications, including cardiac arrest, pericardial complications, vascular injury, pulmonary complications, or embolic events. Similarly, (3.6% vs. 5.3%; aOR 0.76, 95% CI 0.48–1.43, p = 0.35) and 30‐day all‐cause readmissions (8.7% vs. 9.1%; aOR 0.81, 95% CI 0.64–1.28, p = 0.70) were not significantly different between groups. Subgroup analyses by indication for TLR (infection vs. mechanical complication) revealed no differences in outcomes. Conclusion Despite theoretical concerns, prior mediastinal radiation was not associated with excess procedural risk or worse short‐term outcomes after TLR. These findings may inform procedural planning and risk counseling in clinical practice.