Citations

7566 Background: Parenteral limited-duration BR chemoimmunotherapy and continuous orally administered Ibr, a Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor, dominate the treatment landscape of WM, a rare B cell lymphoma. No trials have assessed the comparative effectiveness of these 2 vastly different approaches. We conducted a multiinstitutional, international, collaborative study to compare BR and single-agent Ibr in patients (pts) with treatment naïve (TN) WM. Methods: Data from 347 pts with active TN WM, seen between 2011 and 2021 in the US and Europe, were analyzed. The pts on rituximab maintenance were excluded. The modified IWWM-6 criteria (based on IgM alone) were used for response assessment. All time-to-event analyses were performed from the frontline therapy initiation, using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: The median age of the pts treated with BR (n=208) and Ibr (n=139) was 66 (range 40-86) years (y) and 69 (39-97) y, respectively, (p=0.005). With a median follow up of 4.2 y (95% CI 3.8-4.5), the 4-y progression free survival (PFS) was 73% in each group, p=0.6, and 4-y overall survival (OS) was 94% (95% CI 91-98) in the BR group versus ( v) 82% (95% CI 75-90) in the Ibr group, p=0.01. In a bivariate analysis adjusting for age and the treatment type, only age emerged as a predictor for OS (HR 7.2, p=0.0001). Therefore, a 1:1 age-matched analysis of 246 pts who received Ibr (n=123) or BR (n=123) was performed. Pts with a known MYD88WT status who had received Ibr and their age matched controls on BR were excluded. The international prognostic scoring system (IPSS) WM was comparable between the 2 groups (Table). A higher proportion of pts on BR attained very good partial or deeper response (≥VGPR) as the best response in comparison to the pts on Ibr (Table). The 4-y PFS for the BR and Ibr groups was similar [72% (95% CI 63-82) v 78% (95% CI 70-87), p=0.14] and 4-y OS was 95% (95% CI 91-99) with BR v 86% (95% CI 80-93) with Ibr (p=0.3). Premature discontinuation, during active treatment, due to adverse effects (AEs) or lack of response was noted in 13% and 33% of pts on BR and Ibr, respectively. A detailed assessment of the AEs will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: Both BR and Ibr lead to comparable outcomes in pts with TN WM, although deeper responses are attained with BR. These findings require confirmation in prospective studies. For pts who harbor MYD 88L265P mutation, selection between the 2 approaches should be dictated by their potential toxicities, pt comorbidities, pt/clinician preference (parenteral fixed-duration v continuous oral) and access to therapies. [Table: see text]

Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) is an indolent lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma. Recent strides made in the genomic profiling of patients with WM have led to the identification of many novel therapeutic targets. Patients with WM can present with asymptomatic disease and not all patients require treatment. When criteria for initiating systemic therapy are met, the choice of therapy depends on the tumor genotype ( MYD88 and CXCR4 mutation status), patient preference (fixed versus continuous duration therapy, oral versus intravenous route, cost), associated medical comorbidities, and adverse effect profile of the treatment. In the absence of head-to-head comparison between chemoimmunotherapy and Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitors in otherwise fit patients with a MYD88 L265P mutation, our preference is fixed duration therapy with four to six cycles of chemoimmunotherapy with bendamustine–rituximab. In this review, we discuss the role of MYD88 and CXCR4 mutation in treatment selection, and current data for frontline and salvage treatment options in patients with WM.

AbstractErdheim–Chester disease (ECD) is a histiocytic neoplasm that predominantly harbors mitogen‐activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway variants. MAPK inhibitors typically are effective treatments, but mutations outside the MAPK pathway, such as CSF1R variants, may cause refractory ECD. We describe a patient with a novel somatic mutation in CSF1R (CSF1RR549_E554delinsQ) that resulted in refractory ECD affecting the central nervous system. Cell model studies, RNA sequencing analysis, and in silico protein modeling suggested that she had a gain‐of‐function mutation occurring in a region critical for autoinhibition. The patient was treated with pexidartinib, a CSF1R inhibitor, and has had a complete clinical and metabolic response lasting more than 1.5 years to date. To our knowledge, this is the first report to describe successful treatment of a patient with ECD by using an agent that specifically targets CSF1R. This case also highlights the critical role of individualized molecular profiling to identify novel therapeutic targets in ECD.

Abstract Introduction Histiocytic disorders pose significant diagnostic and management challenges for the clinicians due to diverse clinical manifestations and often non-specific histopathologic findings. Herein, we report the tumor board experience from the first-of-its-kind Histiocytosis Working Group (HWG). Materials and Methods The HWG was established in June 2017 and consists of experts from 10 subspecialties that discuss cases in a multidisciplinary format. We present the outcome of tumor board case discussions during the first 2 years since its inception (June 2017-June 2019). Results Forty cases with a suspected histiocytic disorder were reviewed at HWG during this time period. Average number of subspecialties involved in HWG case discussion was 5 (range, 2-9). Histiocytosis Working Group tumor board recommendations led to significant changes in the care of 24 (60%) patients. These included change in diagnosis (n = 11, 27%) and change in treatment (n = 13, 33%). Conclusion Our report highlights the feasibility of a multidisciplinary tumor board and its impact on outcomes of patients with histiocytic disorders.

Abstract Background: Activation of extracellular-signal regulated kinase (ERK) is almost universal in histiocytic disorders and is driven by genomic alterations in the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) and phosphoinositide 3-kinases (PI3K) pathways. While BRAFV600E mutations are well described in histiocytic disorders, less is known about BRAF fusions. The goal of our study is to describe the frequency and clinical characteristics of patients harboring BRAF fusions. Methods: We included patients with a diagnosis of histiocytic disorder seen at our institution from November 2016-June 2021. Only those who had adequate BRAF testing were included. The following were considered adequate BRAF testing: 1) unequivocally positive BRAF V600E immunostain with or without molecular confirmation; 2) successful multigene next generation sequencing (mostly Tempus â or FoundationOne â) if BRAF V600Eimmunostain was equivocal or negative. We also searched the literature for similar cases and compared BRAF fusions found in histiocytic disorders to those found in solid tumors and other hematologic conditions. Results: One hundred and twenty-six patients were included in this study. BRAF fusions were detected in 7 (6%) patients. The median follow-up for these patients was 1.4 years (95% CI: 0.4-not reached). The frequency according to disease subtypes is as follows: Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD; 2/46 [4%]), Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH; 1/41 [2%]), adult or juvenile xanthogranuloma (AXG/JXG; 4/7 [57%]), and histiocytic or Langerhans cell sarcoma (HS/LCS; 0/9 [0%]). The median age at diagnosis for our study cohort was 34 years (range, 7-81 years) and 5 were females. The clinical characteristics and nature of BRAF fusions of our 7 patients plus additional 13 cases from the literature are shown in Table 1. For the final cohort of 20 patients with BRAF-fusions, the median age was 16 years (range, 0.5-81 years) and most (56%) were females. The distribution by histiocytic subtypes is as follows: AXG/JXG (45%), LCH (40%), ECD (10%), HS/LCS (5%). Two patients received cobimetinib as frontline treatment in our cohort and achieved partial responses. Of these two patients, one completed 12 cycles (12 months) of cobimetinib and had a sustained PR while the other patient received 2 cycles before having to hold therapy due to intolerable adverse effects despite dose reduction. From literature review, another patient (LR-12) received cobimetinib as second line treatment and achieved complete response. We found 15 unique BRAF gene fusions with 4 being recurrent. Except for AGAP3-BRAF, none of these BRAF fusions in histiocytosis has been reported in solid tumors or hematologic conditions to date. Conclusions: BRAF gene fusions occur rarely (<5%) in histiocytic disorders. The only exception is AXG/JXG where more than half of the patients harbor BRAF gene fusions. These gene fusions are mostly distinct to histiocytosis and not found in solid tumors or other hematologic conditions. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Bennani: Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory Board; Daichii Sankyo Inc: Other: Advisory Board; Kyowa Kirin: Other: Advisory Board; Vividion: Other: Advisory Board; Kymera: Other: Advisory Board; Verastem: Other: Advisory Board.

Abstract Background: Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD) is characterized by multi-organ infiltration of clonal histiocytes bearing activating mutations predominantly in the MAPK pathway. The diagnosis of ECD is clinico-pathologic; histopathologic findings alone are often non-specific. Characteristic pathognomonic finding of ECD is the symmetric osteosclerosis of the distal femur and proximal tibia/fibula, seen in >90% of cases, and referred to herein as classic ECD (C-ECD). There is a paucity of data on the phenotypic and mutational differences between C-ECD and non-classic ECD (NC-ECD). Determining phenotypic patterns may allow for earlier suspicion and diagnosis. Methods: Patients who met the revised ECD criteria proposed by Haroche J et al (Blood 2020;135:1311-1318) and had full body imaging that included the lower legs (18-FDG-PET/CT or CT/bone scan) were included. ECD diagnosis was made when >1 major criteria plus >1 minor criteria were present. Major criteria: 1) symmetric meta-diaphyseal osteosclerosis in legs; 2) "hairy kidneys"; "coated aorta", right atrial pseudotumor, xanthelasma, exophthalmos; or osteosclerosis of paranasal sinuses. Minor criteria: 1) histologic finding of typical foamy histiocytes (CD68+/CD163+/CD1a-) associated with fibrosis; 2) mutation/gene fusion of BRAF, CSF1R, or MAPK/PI3K pathways. We compared the organ involvement and BRAF V600Emutational status between C-ECD and NC-ECD. Results: A total of 105 patients were included. The median age at diagnosis was 57 years (range, 38-81) and most were males (62%). Majority had 18-FDG-PET/CT (83%) and BRAF V600E testing (65%). The main organ systems involved were skeletal (83%), renal (64%), adrenal (44%), and pulmonary (42%). Central diabetes insipidus (DI), "hairy kidneys", and "coated aorta" were present in 27 (26%), 54 (51%), and 44 (42%) patients, respectively. Among those tested, BRAF V600E mutation was found in 48/67 (72%) by immunohistochemistry. In our cohort, most patients (n=87. 83%) had C-ECD. NC-ECD had significantly lower number of organs/systems involved compared with C-ECD (median 3 vs 6, p=0.002). C-ECD had significantly higher rates of involvement of paranasal sinuses (51%/7%, p=0.002), DI (26%/0%, p=0.02), and similar rates of lung (44%/43%), cardiac (34%/14%), and skin (14%14%) involvement when compared to NC-ECD. BRAF V600E was significantly more common in C-ECD (88%/30%, p=0.004). Thirty-nine (37%) patients underwent next generation sequencing, of whom 33 (31%) had successful testing. In C-ECD, 3 patients had mutations other than BRAF V600E, these included: NRAS, MAP2K1, and MEF2C-FLT3 fusion. In NC-ECD, 5 patients had mutations other than BRAF V600E, these included: MAP2K1, KRAS, and NF1. Conclusions: Our study suggests distinct differences in clinical presentation and molecular findings exist between C-ECD and NC-ECD. C-ECD has a higher degree of organ involvement and harbor BRAF V600E more frequently than NC-ECD. Further analysis of histopathologic findings and outcomes in this cohort may provide insights into these ECD subsets that can optimize future management of this disease. Figure 1: Sites of involvement of classical Erdheim-Chester Disease (C-ECD) versus non-classical Erdheim-Chester Disease (NC-ECD) Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Vassallo: Bristol-Myers-Squibb: Research Funding; Sun Pharma.: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding. Tobin: Mayo Clinic Center for MS and Autoimmune Neurology: Research Funding; Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; National Institutes of Health: Research Funding. Bennani: Verastem: Other: Advisory Board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory Board; Vividion: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Board; Daichii Sankyo Inc: Other: Advisory Board; Kyowa Kirin: Other: Advisory Board.

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Belantamab mafodotin (BLMF) is a first-in-class, antibody-drug conjugate targeting B-cell maturation antigen on myeloma cells. BLMF was approved for use in patients (pts) with advanced multiple myeloma (MM). Due to the risk of ocular toxicity, it is made available through a restricted program under a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy. It is speculated that monomethyl auristatin F (MMAF), the cytotoxic payload of BLMF may be internalised by the corneal epithelium via an off-target mechanism, leading to epithelial changes. In the pivotal DREAMM-2 trial, only 1% of pts permanently discontinued treatment due to keratopathy. Data regarding BLMF-induced ocular toxicity following its commercial availability since August 2020, are sparse, and in this context, we evaluated our clinical experience with BLMF to determine the impact of its ocular toxicity on outcomes when utilized outside of stringent clinical trial settings. METHODS: We reviewed records of pts with advanced MM who were evaluated at Mayo Clinic between 09/01/2020-07/01/2021 and initiated on BLMF monotherapy following a baseline ophthalmic examination that was also performed prior to each dose, and as needed for worsening ocular symptoms. Data pertaining to ocular symptoms, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and corneal examinations were collected and analyzed with respect to patient outcomes. Adverse events were graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. RESULTS: Thirty-four pts, with median age of 67 (range:49-90) years who received BLMF at the approved 2.5 mg/kg dose as their first infusion and completed at least one cycle were included. All patients were instructed to use preservative-free lubricant eye drops at least 4 times a day, starting with the initial infusion and continuing until the end of therapy, and avoid contact lenses. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 8 (range: 2-15). The median time to BLMF initiation from the diagnosis of MM was 7.5 (range: 1.3-19.7) years. The median follow-up from initiation of BLMF was 7 [95% confidence interval (CI): 5.7-8.6] months, and the median number of BLMF doses administered was 2 (range: 1-6). Twenty-seven (79%) pts experienced ocular toxicity, comprising keratopathy [n=25 (74%)] and/or decreased visual acuity [n=21 (62%)]. Table 1 outlines the keratopathy-related details. Thirteen pts (38%) developed symptomatic xerophthalmia. A clinically significant decrease in BCVA of equal or worse than 20/40 in the better-seeing eye was observed in 12 (35%) pts at a median of 1.7 (95%CI: 1.4-2.2) months of commencing BLMF. In 7 (58%) pts, it improved to better than 20/40 within a median of 3 (range: 0.7-4) months from the time of documentation of impaired BCVA following withholding treatment (n=5), with or without subsequent dose reduction or its permanent discontinuation (n=2). Treatment was permanently discontinued in 5 (15%) pts after a median of 3 doses due to grade ≥2 keratopathy. It was withheld in 9 (26%) due to grade ≥2 keratopathy. Four (12%) pts required dose reduction due to keratopathy (Table 1). Of 14 pts in whom BLMF was held or permanently discontinued due to keratopathy, 10 (77%) had disease progression within a median of 1 month (range 0.4-2.5) following BLMF interruption. Among 11 pts (32%) responded to BLMF, 45% developed grade 2 or higher keratopathy after the first dose compared to 13% of pts who were refractory to BLMF (n=23). The median duration of response was 4 (95%CI: 0.7-NR) months. Among responders, 2 pts (18%) had to permanently discontinue BLMF due to keratopathy, with subsequent progression from partial remission at 1.4 and 4.6 months following its discontinuation. Additionally, 73% of responders required dose withholding due to keratopathy and of those, 50% had evidence of disease progression within a median of 1.2 month (range: 0.7-1.7) following BLMF interruption. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS : Despite efficacy in pts with advanced MM, in routine practice, ocular toxicity of BLMF is a major challenge and a deterrent to its continuous use. While frequent ocular toxicity-related interruptions were observed at expected rates, permanent treatment discontinuation due to keratopathy was observed in a higher proportion of pts than that encountered in the DREAMM-2 trial. Larger prospective studies are warranted to accurately discern the effects of ocular toxicities on outcomes of pts treated with BLMF. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Patel: Emmecell: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Senju Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Santen, Inc.: Consultancy. Kumar: Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche-Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Carsgen: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Tenebio: Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Antengene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Ailawadhi: AbbVie: Consultancy; Xencor: Research Funding; Medimmune: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Ascentage: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy. Bergsagel: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Patents & Royalties: human CRBN mouse; Genetech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria. Gertz: Ionis Pharmaceuticals: Other: Advisory Board; Akcea Therapeutics, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals Inc, Prothena: Consultancy; Akcea Therapeutics, Ambry Genetics, Amgen Inc, Celgene Corporation, Janssen Biotech Inc, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Pfizer Inc (to Institution), Sanofi Genzyme: Honoraria; Aurora Biopharma: Other: Stock option; AbbVie Inc, Celgene Corporation: Other: Data Safetly & Monitoring. Kapoor: Karyopharm: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Cellectar: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Amgen: Research Funding; Ichnos Sciences: Research Funding; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Glaxo SmithKline: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: DNA mismatch repair (MMR) is a major mechanism cells use to repair erroneous insertion or deletion of bases during DNA replication. MMR deficiency (MMR-d), including rare germline mutations (Lynch syndrome) and somatic inactivation, has been extensively studied in solid tumors, such as colon, endometrial, pancreatic, and ovarian cancers. The prevalence of MMR-d in solid tumors ranges from 1% - 20% of somatic defects, and patients with MMR-d tumors have a longer overall survival. It is also well-known that MMR is an integral part of activation-induced cytidine deaminase (AID)-mediated somatic hypermutation and immunoglobulin class switch processes in normal mature B lymphocytes, while mice deficient in the MMR genes are prone to develop T and B cell lymphomas. It is also known that follicular lymphoma (FL) carries a high degree of somatic hypermutation with some heterogeneity induced by AID. Our understanding of MMR status in human blood cancers, especially in FL remains very limited. One could hypothesize that MMR-d status could permit cells to acquire and sustain high-degree of mutation rates, better sensitivity to DNA damaging chemotherapy while hindering rapid cell proliferation, which could manifest to a better prognosis in patients. Herein, we conducted an exploratory analysis to understand the frequency of MMR-d status and its prognostic significance in FL. Methods: Following approval of the Institution Review Board, we assessed the expression of MMR proteins; MLH1, PMS2 and MSH6 on formalin fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) lymph node tissue obtained from patients with FL by immunohistochemistry (IHC) using standard methods on Ventana Benchmark XT automated stainers (Ventana Medical Systems, Tucson, AZ). Dako (clone ES05), Cell Marque (clone EPR3947) and Biocare (clone BC/44) antibodies were used to stain MLH1, PMS2 and MSH6, respectively. Fifty cases of FL with existing FFPE blocks were selected randomly. The expression of MLH1, PMS2 and MSH6 proteins in the tumor cells was scored as 0, +1 or +2, (Figure 1A). Cases with absence of the IHC signal (score of 0) in any one of the three proteins were classified as MMR-d. Progression free survival at 12 months (PFS12) or 24 months (PFS24) was defined as being free from disease progression or death at 12 or 24 months, respectively. All time-to-event analyses were done from the time of diagnosis. Results: Fifty patients with FL were included in the study. The median age at diagnosis was 65 years (range 34-85) and 58% were females. At initial diagnosis, 36 (72%) patients had advanced stage (stage 3, n=8, stage 4, n=28) disease. Of the 50 patients, 26 (52%) required treatment; chemotherapy (n=14), radiation treatment alone (n=9), surgery alone (n=3). Out of the 50 patients, 23 (46%) were classified as MMR-d due to lack of expression of one of the three assessed proteins: MLH1 (n=1, 2%), PMS2 (n=11, 22%) and MSH6 (n=19, 38%). The patient who had MLH1 loss had concomitant PMS2 loss. Stage IV disease was observed in 52% of the MMR-d patients and 59% in the MMR proficient (MMR-p) patients, p=0.77. Median age at diagnosis was 62 (range: 34-84) years and 67 (range: 34-85) years in MMR-d and MMR-p patients, respectively, p=0.1. FLIPI score was similar between the MMR-d [low n=10 (43%), intermediate n=9 (39%), high n=4 (18%)] and MMR-p [low n=5 (18%), intermediate n=14 (52%), high n=8 (30%)] patients, p=0.16. Fourteen (61%) of MMR-d patients required initiation of therapy upon diagnosis compared to 12 (44%) of MMR-p patients, p=0.27. The median follow-up for the entire cohort was 17 years [95% confidence interval (CI): 11.7-29.4]. The median overall survival (OS) of MMR-d patients was 10 years (95%CI: 7.8-20.7) compared to 6 years (95%CI: 4.5-NR) in MMR-p patients, p=0.036, Figure 1B. In patients with MMR-d and MMR-p, 83% and 55% achieved PFS12, p=0.04 and 65% and 41% achieved PFS24, p=0.08, respectively. After adjusting for FLIPI score, MMR status remained associated with OS (MMR-d HR: 0.51, 95%CI: 0.2-1.02, p=0.05). Discussion and Conclusion: In this pilot study, MMR-d in the FL tumors was common (46%) and, as predicted, was associated with a favorable OS. Association of MMR-d status with PFS in general and patients with early progression (short PFS12 and PFS24) and relationship of MMR-d with types of therapy need further study in large FL datasets. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Paludo: Karyopharm: Research Funding. King: Celgene/BMS: Research Funding. Maurer: Celgene: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Nanostring: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Nowakowski: Celgene, NanoString Technologies, MorphoSys: Research Funding; Celgene, MorphoSys, Genentech, Selvita, Debiopharm Group, Kite/Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Witzig: Karyopharm Therapeutics, Celgene/BMS, Incyte, Epizyme: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene/BMS, Acerta Pharma, Kura Oncology, Acrotech Biopharma, Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding.

Abstract Background Histiocytic disorders are rare hematologic neoplasms characterized by their high clinical heterogeneity. Evidence of constitutive activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway in a number of these disorders has led to the increasing use of BRAF- and MEK-inhibitors as a therapeutic strategy. Response to these therapies is not universal and additional effective treatment options are required. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have proven effective for a wide array of malignancies. Tumor mutational burden (TMB), the total number of somatic pathogenic variants per coding region in a tumor genome, is a clinical biomarker associated with response to immunotherapy. We have previously reported preliminary findings of low TMB in a small cohort of patients with histiocytic neoplasms (Goyal G et al. Blood 2019). In this study, our aim was to confirm the findings in a larger clinical cohort using next generation sequencing studies. Methods A retrospective review of adult patients consecutively seen at Mayo Clinic from 2017 to April 2021 and diagnosis of a histiocytic neoplasm was performed. Electronic records were queried for demographic and laboratory data of all patients who consented to undergo tumor-tissue next-generation sequencing with the Tempus-xT ® or xO ® assay (Chicago, IL), throughout the course of their evaluation. TMB was reported as the number of nonsynonymous mutations per coding area of a tumor genome. TMB across groups was compared via an independent-samples T-test or via analysis of variance and post hoc subgroup testing via Turkey's Test as required. Results Seventy-three patients were included in the study. Individual diagnoses included: Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD) in 31.5% (n=23), including 3 patients with overlap features of ECD and other histiocytoses; Rosai Dorfman disease (RDD) in 28.8% (n=21); Langerhans cell histiocytosis in 21.9% (n=16), histiocytic sarcoma (HS) in 5.5% (n=4), and other histiocytic neoplasms in 12.3% (n=10) including adult xanthogranuloma, xanthoma disseminatum, undifferentiated histiocytoses, and one case of Langerhans cell sarcoma. Median tumor percentage on analyzed samples was 30% (range 10%-90%) and was ≤20% in 29 samples. TMB was <1.0 mutations per megabase (mpMb) in 42.5% (n=31) and >5.0 mpMb in only 6 cases. Median TMB was 1.58 (range 0 - 5.26) for ECD, 1.08 (range 0 - 6.3) for LCH, 0.2 (range 0 - 5.8) for RDD, 3.19 (range 1.67 - 6.8) for HS, and 1.6 (range 0 - 7.5) for other histiocytic neoplasms (Figure 1). No clear association between increasing TMB and number of systems with histiocytic infiltration was observed (Figure 2). A significant increase in TMB was observed among the 5 cases of sarcoma as compared to the rest of the cohort (p=0.014). When not considering sarcomas, no differences were observed in TMB between patients with ECD, LCH, RDD or other histiocytoses (F=0.775; p=0.512). Conclusion In this large cohort of histiocytic disorders, TMB was low compared to that historically seen in other neoplasms though this is likely influenced by tumor purity ≤20% in 29 cases. Only 6 tumors had TMB reports with mpMb above the threshold thought to be associated with an increased likelihood of response to PD-1/PDL1-targeted therapies (>5 mpMb). Our results suggest a low likelihood of response among histiocytic disorders using immune checkpoint inhibitors. Further exploration among malignant histiocytoses (HS and Langerhans cell sarcoma) is warranted given our findings of higher TMB compared with other histiocytic neoplasms. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Bennani: Kymera: Other: Advisory Board; Vividion: Other: Advisory Board; Kyowa Kirin: Other: Advisory Board; Daichii Sankyo Inc: Other: Advisory Board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory Board; Verastem: Other: Advisory Board.