Citations

AbstractIntroductionA recent study reported that diffuse left ventricular (LV) fibrosis is a predictor of atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence following catheter ablation, by measuring postcontrast cardiac T1 (an error prone metric as per the 2017 Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance consensus statement) using an inversion‐recovery pulse sequence (an error prone method in arrhythmia) in AF ablation candidates. The purpose of this study was to verify the prior study, by measuring extracellular volume (ECV) fraction (an accurate metric) using a saturation‐recovery pulse sequence (accurate method in arrhythmia).Methods and ResultsThis study examined 100 AF patients (mean age = 62 ± 11 years, 69 males and 31 females, 67 paroxysmal [pAF] and 33 persistent [peAF]) who underwent a preablation cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) exam. LV ECV and left atrial (LA) and LV functional parameters were quantified using standard analysis methods. During an average follow‐up period of 457 ± 261 days with 4 ± 3 rhythm checks per patient, 72 patients maintained sinus rhythm. Between those who maintained sinus rhythm (n = 72) and those who reverted to AF (n = 28), the only clinical characteristic that was significantly different was age (60 ± 12 years vs 66 ± 9 years); for CMR metrics, neither mean LV ECV (25.1 ± 3.3% vs 24.7 ± 3.7%), native LV T1 (1093.8 ± 73.5 ms vs 1070.2 ± 115.9 ms), left ventricular ejection fraction (54.1 ± 11.2% vs 55.7 ± 7.1%), nor LA end diastolic volume/body surface area (42.4 ± 14.8 mL/m2 vs 43.4 ± 19.6 mL/m2) were significantly different (P ≥ .23). According to Cox regression tests, none of the clinical and imaging variables predict AF recurrence.ConclusionNeither LV ECV nor other CMR metrics predict recurrence of AF following catheter ablation.

Abstract Aims As health systems around the world increasingly look to measure and improve the value of care that they provide to patients, being able to measure the outcomes that matter most to patients is vital. To support the shift towards value-based health care in atrial fibrillation (AF), the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) assembled an international Working Group (WG) of 30 volunteers, including health professionals and patient representatives to develop a standardized minimum set of outcomes for benchmarking care delivery in clinical settings. Methods and results Using an online-modified Delphi process, outcomes important to patients and health professionals were selected and categorized into (i) long-term consequences of disease outcomes, (ii) complications of treatment outcomes, and (iii) patient-reported outcomes. The WG identified demographic and clinical variables for use as case-mix risk adjusters. These included baseline demographics, comorbidities, cognitive function, date of diagnosis, disease duration, medications prescribed and AF procedures, as well as smoking, body mass index (BMI), alcohol intake, and physical activity. Where appropriate, and for ease of implementation, standardization of outcomes and case-mix variables was achieved using ICD codes. The standard set underwent an open review process in which over 80% of patients surveyed agreed with the outcomes captured by the standard set. Conclusion Implementation of these consensus recommendations could help institutions to monitor, compare and improve the quality and delivery of chronic AF care. Their consistent definition and collection, using ICD codes where applicable, could also broaden the implementation of more patient-centric clinical outcomes research in AF.

New Findings What is the central question of this study? What is the effect of an elevated baseline blood flow, induced by high‐dose intra‐arterial infusion of either adenosine or ATP, on the rapid‐onset vasodilatory response to a single forearm muscle contraction? What is the main finding and its importance? The peak response to a single contraction is unaffected by augmented baseline blood flow, and thus, is likely to be attributable to a feedforward vasodilatory mechanism. AbstractThe hyperaemic responses to single muscle contractions are proportional to exercise intensity, which, in turn, is proportional to tissue metabolic demand. Hence, we tested the hypothesis that the rapid‐onset vasodilatory response after a single muscle contraction would be unaffected when baseline blood flow was increased via high‐dose intra‐arterial infusion of either adenosine (ADO) or ATP. Twenty‐four healthy young participants (28 ± 1 years) performed a single forearm contraction (20% maximal voluntary contraction) 75 min after commencement of a continuous infusion of ADO (n = 6), ATP (n = 8) or saline (control; n = 10). Brachial artery diameter and blood velocity were measured using Doppler ultrasound. Resting forearm vascular conductance (FVC; in millilitres per minute per 100 mmHg per decilitre of forearm volume) was significantly higher during ADO (33 ± 17) and ATP infusion (33 ± 17) compared with the control infusion (8 ± 3; P < 0.05). The peak FVCs post‐contraction during ADO and ATP infusions were significantly greater than during the control infusion (P < 0.05), but not different from one another. The peak change in FVC from baseline was similar in all three conditions (control, 14 ± 1; ADO, 24 ± 2; and ATP, 23 ± 6; P = 0.15). Total FVC (area under the curve) did not differ significantly between ADO and ATP (333 ± 69 and 440 ± 125); however, total FVC during ATP infusion was significantly greater compared with the control value (150 ± 19; P < 0.05). We conclude that the peak response to a single contraction is unaffected by augmented baseline blood flow and is therefore likely to be attributable to a feedforward vasodilatory mechanism.

Abstract Introduction: Nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 monoclonal antibody targeting programmed death receptor-1, has recently been FDA approved for classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) that has relapsed or progressed after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and post-transplantation brentuximab vedotin (BV). CheckMate 205 (NCT02181738) is a phase 2, international, multicohort study evaluating nivolumab monotherapy in patients with cHL after failure of ASCT. At minimum 6 months' follow-up of Cohort B (205B) which included patients who had received BV after disease recurrence following ASCT, objective response rate (ORR) per independent radiologic review committee (IRRC) was 66% and 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) was 77%, with an acceptable safety profile (Younes et al. Lancet Oncol 2016; Jul 20 [Epub ahead of print]). Here we report outcomes with longer follow-up (minimum 12-month follow-up) in 205B. Primary results from Cohort A, which enrolled patients who relapsed after ASCT but were BV-naïve, will also be presented for the first time as data were not available at time of abstract submission. Methods: CheckMate 205 was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nivolumab monotherapy in patients with cHL who relapsed after ASCT in 3 cohorts: 205A (BV-naive patients; n = 63); 205B (BV after failed ASCT; n = 80); 205C (BV at any time prior to study drug; n = 100). Nivolumab was given at 3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity in 205A and 205B. The primary endpoint was IRRC-assessed ORR. Results: 80 patients were treated in Cohort 205B; the median age was 37 years (range 18-72). Patients had received a median of 4 prior regimens (range 3-15). At data cut-off (April 2016) with median duration of follow-up of 15.4 months (range 1.9-18.5), 43 patients (54%) still remained on therapy. IRRC-assessed ORR for patients in 205B was 68% (95% confidence interval [CI], 56%, 78%). CR and partial response (PR) rates per IRRC were 8% (3%, 16%) and 60% (48%, 71%), respectively. With longer follow-up, the median duration of response was prolonged to 13.1 months (95% CI, 8.7, not reached; range, 0.0+, 14.2+). The median duration of CR (DOCR) was not reached (95% CI, 4.6, not available [NA]; range, 0.7+, 10.4+) and the median duration of PR was 13.1 months (95% CI, 7.79, NA; range, 0.0+, 13.4+) (Table 1). IRRC median PFS was 14.8 months (95% CI, 11.3 months, NA); 12-month PFS was 54.6% (95% CI, 40.9%, 66.4%), and 12-month overall survival (OS) was 94.9% (median OS not reached). Of 37 patients (46%) who discontinued nivolumab, the most common reasons were disease progression (n = 19 [24%]), allogeneic stem cell transplant (n = 7 [9%]) and adverse events (n = 5 [6%]). Seventy-four patients (93%) had drug-related adverse events (AEs) of any grade. The most common drug-related AEs were fatigue (28%), infusion reaction (20%), arthralgia (15%), and rash (15%). 29% of patients had Grade 3-4 drug-related AEs; the most common were increased lipase (8%), neutropenia (5%), and increased aspartate aminotransferase (4%). The most common serious AEs were pyrexia, pneumonia, tumor progression, arrhythmia, infusion reaction, and meningitis (≤4% each). Conclusions: In this report with extended 12-month follow-up, longer remissions are noted following nivolumab monotherapy in relapsed cHL, including durable PRs in heavily pretreated patients. Nivolumab has an acceptable safety profile, similar to previously reported. Primary results following nivolumab monotherapy in BV-naïve patients with cHL who progressed after ASCT (Cohort 205A) will also be presented at the meeting. Study funding: Study funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb. Professional writing assistance was provided by K. Jesien of Caudex and funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb. Disclosures Timmerman: Seattle Genetics, Genmab, Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb, Kite Pharma, Valor Biopharmaceuticals, Janssen: Research Funding. Engert:Takeda, BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Armand:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sequenta Inc: Research Funding. Collins:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kuruvilla:Roche Canada: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Lundbeck: Honoraria. Cohen:Millennium/Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: 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; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Trneny:Roche, Celgene, Takeda, Janssen, Gilead, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche, Celgene: Research Funding. De Boer:NKI-AVL: Employment. Shipp:Cell Signaling: Honoraria; Merck, Gilead, Takeda: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Bayer: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding. Rodig:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Perkin Elmer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kato:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment. Sumbul:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment. Ansell:BMS, Seattle Genetics, Merck, Celldex and Affimed: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 1828 Poster Board I-854 Background IgM Multiple Myeloma (MM) and Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia (WM) are two hematologic diagnoses with the common variable of an IgM monoclonal gammopathy. Distinguishing these two diagnoses is critical as the approach to therapy is different. A study by Avet-Loiseau et al demonstrated the presence of t(11;14) translocations in 7 of 8 patients with IgM MM that was absent in all of a series of 17 cases of WM (Semin Oncol 2003 30:2;153). However, 6 of the 8 IgM MM cases lacked classic lytic lesions. Method A priori, based on the literature and the natural history of MM, we defined IgM MM as a symptomatic clonal plasma cell proliferative disorder characterized by a serum IgM monoclonal protein (regardless of size) plus presence of t(11;14) on fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) and/or lytic bone lesions felt to be related to the underlying plasma cell disorder. The cases for the study were screened by a computerized database search for ‘IgM’ and ‘Myeloma’ of all patients seen at Mayo Clinic in the last 30 years at all three sites (Rochester, Arizona and Florida). Patients identified on the computerized screen were then audited by chart review to identify the study cohort. Results 38 cases were identified on initial screen of the computerized database as potential patients with IgM MM. Of these, a total of 22 cases met our specific definition of IgM myeloma (t(11;14 and/or lytic lesions). Of the remaining 16 cases, 8 were IgM MGUS, 5 were WM based on clinical presentation (hyperviscosity, lymphadenopathy and organomegaly) and biopsy findings of lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma, 1 was excluded due to lack of information, and the remaining 2 patients were indeed considered to have clinical IgM MM. Interestingly, these two patients did not have either the t(11;14) or lytic lesions, but rather had immunophenotypic features suggestive of MM and not WM (CD138+, CD20-). Table 1 summarizes the clinical characteristics of the 22 patients who met our criteria for IgM MM. All 22 patients had lytic bone lesions. Of the 17 evaluated with FISH, 6 (35%) demonstrated the t(11;14) abnormality. Median overall survival by Kaplan-Meier analysis was 37 months represented in Figure 1. Conclusion IgM MM is a discrete clinical entity that can and should be distinguished from WM. Our definition of IgM MM is designed to be specific and requires the presence of a symptomatic IgM secreting plasma cell proliferative disorder plus presence of t(11;14) and/or lytic bone lesions felt related to the underlying plasma cell disorder. In this, the largest series of patients with IgM MM, the t(11;14) abnormality is very specific for IgM MM, but may not be sensitive, being present in approximately 1/3 of patients. The median overall survival is similar to non-IgM myeloma patients treated during this period, and much shorter than what would be expected for WM. The minority of symptomatic patients with IgM monoclonal gammopathy who do not meet this criteria, but have immunophenotypic features more suggestive of MM rather than WM need further study. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

BackgroundSystematic evaluation of complex flow in the true lumen and false lumen (TL, FL) is needed to better understand which patients with chronic descending aortic dissection (DAD) are predisposed to complications.PurposeTo develop quantitative hemodynamic maps from 4D flow MRI for evaluating TL and FL flow characteristics.Study TypeRetrospective.PopulationIn all, 20 DAD patients (age = 60 ± 11 years; 12 male) (six medically managed type B AD [TBAD], 14 repaired type A AD [rTAAD] now with ascending aortic graft [AAo] or elephant trunk [ET1] repair) and 21 age‐matched controls (age = 59 ± 10 years; 13 male) were included.Field Strength/Sequence1.5T, 3T, 4D flow MRI.Assessment4D flow MRI was acquired in all subjects. Data analysis included 3D segmentation of TL and FL and voxelwise calculation of forward flow, reverse flow, flow stasis, and kinetic energy as quantitative hemodynamics maps.Statistical TestsAnalysis of variance (ANOVA) or Kruskal–Wallis tests were performed for comparing subject groups. Correlation and Bland–Altman analysis was performed for the interobserver study.ResultsPatients with rTAAD presented with elevated TL reverse flow (AAo repair: P = 0.004, ET1: P = 0.018) and increased TL kinetic energy (AAo repair: P = 0.0002, ET1: P = 0.011) compared to controls. In addition, TL kinetic energy was increased vs. patients with TBAD (AAo repair: P = 0.021, ET1: P = 0.048). rTAAD was associated with higher FL kinetic energy and lower FL stasis compared to patients with TBAD (AAo repair: P = 0.002, ET1: P = 0.024 and AAo repair: P = 0.003, ET1: P = 0.048, respectively).Data ConclusionQuantitative maps from 4D flow MRI demonstrated global and regional hemodynamic differences between DAD patients and controls. Patients with rTAAD vs. TBAD had significantly altered regional TL and FL hemodynamics. These findings indicate the potential of 4D flow MRI‐derived hemodynamic maps to help better evaluate patients with DAD.Level of Evidence: 3Technical Efficacy Stage: 1J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;51:1357–1368.

Abstract Background CDI is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in SOT and HCT patients (pts). In retrospective single-center analyses, severe disease and relapse were common. We undertook a multicenter prospective observational study to evaluate outcomes of CDI among both SOT and HCT patients. Methods Adults with a first episode of CDI, defined as 3 liquid stools/24 h with the detection of C. difficile toxin in stool, within the first 2 years of SOT or HCT were recruited from 12 centers internationally in the INSIGHT network. At enrollment, demographics, comorbidities, medication histories and outcomes were collected prospectively over 90 days to assess clinical cure, recurrences and complications and to define baseline risk factors for clinical cure and recurrent CDI. Results 132 patients (81 SOT, 51 HCT (32 allogeneic)) were enrolled: median age 56 years, 62.1% were males, 97% were hospitalized. 80.3% were diagnosed by DNA assay. CDI occurred a median of 20 days post transplant (IQR: 6–133). 108 patients were on PPIs. 98.5% were on antibiotics before CDI. 1st line treatment regimen was oral vancomycin in 66 patients (40 SOT, 26 HCT), metronidazole in 48 patients (27 SOT, 21 HCT), both drugs in 14 (10 SOT, 4 HCT), fidaxomicin (3) and linezolid (1). Rejection within 60 days before CDI was uncommon (6.2% SOT) as was GVHD (27.5%). 110 patients (83%, 95% CI: 46–89)) (65 SOT, 45 HCT) had clinical cure; 18% (95% CI: 11–27) had recurrent CDI, 2 were admitted to the ICU due to CDI, 11 (8.3%) died (2 HCT related to CDI). Among baselines variables, only first-line regimen was associated with a higher rate of clinical cure (P = 0.003), most notably for SOT. Factors that did not have a statistically significant negative impact on clinical cure included sex, age > 60, race, country, transplant type, steroids, diabetes, CMV viremia/disease, WBC > 15,000, creatinine > 1.5 mg/dL, or specific antibiotic given prior to CDI. Higher recurrence rates were associated with metronidazole-only regimen (OR: 4.6, 95% CI: 1.6–12.8; P = 0.004) and a history of CMV after transplant (OR: 5.2, 95% CI: 1.7–15.7; P = 0.003). Conclusion Despite their immunosuppressed state, recurrence, ICU admission and mortality occurred in a minority of SOT and HCT with CDI. Initial use of metronidazole and CMV viremia/disease were associated with higher recurrence rates. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Abstract History of prior cancer is a widespread exclusion criterion in cancer trials. Up to 80% of NCI-sponsored and 80% of industry-sponsored lung cancer trials exclude patients with a prior cancer. We suspect this exclusion is commonly applied in other cancer trials, although no definitive data exist. Prior cancer is especially common among older patients and those with certain cancer types. Among patients >65 years, 15.1% overall have prior cancer. In Multiple Myeloma, the most common plasma cell disorder (PCD), prevalence of prior cancer is as high as 17.4%. Examining the prior cancer exclusion criterion is important because the number of US cancer survivors is large and rapidly growing. Arbitrarily excluding cancer survivors from trials is not evidence-based and exclusion presumably arises from assumptions that higher mortality of patients with prior cancer could hinder study conduct and bias trial outcomes. However, few data exist to support this assumption of higher mortality. In fact, we demonstrated that lung cancer patients with a prior cancer have similar or lower mortality risk, compared to those without prior cancer. In this abstract, we reviewed prior cancer related eligibility criteria in three of the most common PCD (Multiple Myeloma, Amyloidosis and Waldenström Macroglobulinemia) clinical trials sponsored or endorsed by 5 major Co-Operative groups in North America (Table 1). We use descriptive statistics (n, %) and Fisher's exact tests to describe characteristics of trials with and without exclusion criteria. Of 33 trials, 26 (79%) excluded patients with prior cancer as follows - active cancer (12%), within 2-3 years of PCD diagnosis (9%), or within 5 years of PCD diagnosis (55%). Many trials had exceptions to prior cancer exclusion. Specifically, 67% of trials allowed non-melanoma skin cancer, 58% allowed in-situ cervical cancer, 12% allowed early stage prostate cancer. Table 2 shows the association between clinical trial characteristics and prior cancer exclusion. There was no association between prior cancer exclusion and phase of study, transplant studies, or survival end point. Exclusion criteria varied across year of activation (p=0.01); for example, 75% of studies activated 1990-1999 excluded prior cancer, compared to 100% of studies activated after 2010. Type of PCD was marginally associated with exclusion criteria (p=0.08); 74% of Multiple Myeloma trials excluded patients with prior cancer compared to 100% of the Amyloidosis and Waldenström Macroglobulinemia trials. Conclusion: A substantial proportion of potential participants may be excluded from PCD clinical trials because of a history of prior cancer. This practice impacts accrual, generalizability, and fair access to cutting-edge treatments and the highest level of clinical care. As treatment outcomes for other cancers continue to improve, it is likely that the prevalence of multiple primary cancers will increase. This exclusion criterion is applied widely across studies, including more than two-thirds of those with non-survival endpoints. Our study is the first to examine the prevalence and potential impact of prior cancer exclusion in PCD clinical trials. Using population-based cancer registry data, we plan to undertake further research to understand the appropriateness and ramifications of this standard exclusion policy in PCD cancer trials. Disclosures Collins: Agios: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Arog Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Devine:Kiadis Pharma: Consultancy. Usmani:Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, Pharmacyclics,Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda: Research Funding; Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Genmab, Merck, MundiPharma, Janssen, Seattle Genetics: Consultancy. Anderson:Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Kumar:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Genetic alterations at 9p24.1 resulting in overexpression of programmed death-1 (PD-1) ligands are near-universal in cHL (Roemer et al, J Clin Oncol 2016); cHL may thus be uniquely sensitive to PD-1 blockade. Nivolumab (nivo), an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, was associated with an objective response rate (ORR) of 69% in relapsed/refractory (R/R) cHL after auto-HCT and irrespective of prior brentuximab vedotin (BV) in the phase 2 CheckMate 205 study (Armand et al, J Clin Oncol 2018; NCT02181738). Whether some patient (pts) can derive very long clinical benefit, whether depth of response predicts long-term outcome, whether treatment (Tx) can be interrupted in complete remission (CR), and whether the safety profile of nivo in R/R cHL changes with prolonged Tx all remain unclear. We therefore present an updated analysis of CheckMate 205, focusing on long-term efficacy and safety. Methods: This international, single-arm, multi-cohort study enrolled pts aged ≥18 y with R/R cHL after auto-HCT. Pts were BV naïve (Cohort A), had prior BV failure after auto-HCT (Cohort B), or had received BV before and/or after auto-HCT (Cohort C). Pts received nivo 3 mg/kg every 2 wk until disease progression (PD)/unacceptable toxicity. Pts in Cohort C discontinued nivo after 1 y in CR and could resume if they relapsed within 2 y of the last dose. Primary endpoint was ORR per independent radiology review committee (IRC); additional endpoints included duration of response (DOR) per IRC, progression-free survival (PFS) per IRC, overall survival (OS), and safety. Time to next Tx (TTNT: time from first dose to next systemic Tx or death) was an exploratory post-hoc analysis. Responses were assessed using International Working Group 2007 criteria. Results: In total, 243 pts were enrolled to Cohorts A (n=63), B (n=80), and C (n=100). Baseline characteristics have been previously described (Armand et al, J Clin Oncol 2018). At data cut-off, minimum follow-up was 31 mo and 49 pts (20%) were still on Tx; the most common reason for discontinuation was PD (35%). Median duration of Tx was 14 mo. ORR per IRC was 71% (65%, 71%, 75% in Cohorts A, B, C, respectively) with a best overall response (BOR) of CR in 21% (32%, 14%, 20% in Cohorts A, B, C, respectively). Among 51 pts who achieved CR, 20 had CR as the first response and 31 improved from partial remission (PR), mostly (n=28/31) within 1 year of first PR. Median time to response was 2 mo, and to CR was 4 mo. Within the first 6, 12, and 18 mo, 68%, 71%, and 71% of pts, respectively, achieved a response. Median DOR was 18 mo overall, and was 32 and 13 mo in pts with a BOR of CR and PR, respectively. Among responders, 64%, 44%, 31%, and 21% of pts had a DOR of at least 6, 12, 18, and 24 mo, respectively. Overall, 11 pts in Cohort C discontinued with persistent investigator-assessed CR; 2 reinitiated nivo due to PD. Median (95% CI) PFS per IRC among all pts was 15 (11-19) mo (Figure A), and was 17, 12 and 15 mo in Cohorts A, B, and C, respectively. Median OS was not reached in any cohort; 24-mo OS rates were 90%, 86%, and 86% in Cohorts A, B, and C, respectively, and were similar among pts in CR, PR, or with stable disease (SD; Figure B). Median TTNT was 29, 27, and 20 mo in Cohorts A, B, and C, respectively. The most common Tx-related adverse events (AEs) of any grade (G) were fatigue (24%), diarrhea (16%), and rash (12%), each <1% G3-4. Tx-related infections were reported in 15% of pts, 2% G3-4. Tx-related infusion related reactions were reported in 34 pts (14%), <1% G3-4. The most commonly reported immune-mediated AE category was rash, which was G3-4 in 4 pts (2%). In total, 26 pts (11%) experienced an AE of any cause leading to discontinuation. There were no Tx-related deaths. Conclusions: With the longest phase 2-3 study follow-up of a checkpoint inhibitor in R/R cHL to date, nivo was associated with frequent and durable responses regardless of BV Tx history. More than 1 in 5 responders remained in response ≥2 years later. With extended follow-up, additional pts achieved CR in all cohorts. Pts with CR had longer PFS than pts with PR or SD. However, pts with both PR and SD had prolonged OS, unlike pts with PD, which may suggest that clinical benefit duration is not well predicted by conventional response criteria. Nivo continued to be well tolerated, with no new safety signals. Characteristics of long-term responders will be presented. Study support: BMS. Medical writing: A Gill, Caudex, funded by BMS Figure. Figure. Disclosures Armand: Infinity: Consultancy; Affimed: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Otsuka: Research Funding; Adaptive: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Tensha: Research Funding. Younes:Celgene: Honoraria; Genentech: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; J&J: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Curis: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Zinzani:PFIZER: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TG Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Verastem: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; PFIZER: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astra Zeneca: Speakers Bureau; Merck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; SERVIER: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; TG Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Collins:ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celleron: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding. Ramchandren:Merck: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Cohen:Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BioInvent: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; AbbVie: 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; Millennium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. De Boer:Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; EISA: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kuruvilla:Lundbeck: Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Princess Margaret Cancer Foundation: Research Funding; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society Canada: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Trněný:F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board, Research Funding; Sandoz: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board; Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board; Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board. Shipp:Merck: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Sacchi:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sumbul:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment. Ansell:Trillium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding.