Citations

Abstract Background Serum protein electrophoresis (SPEP) is used to quantify the serum monoclonal component or M-protein, for diagnosis and monitoring of monoclonal gammopathies. Significant imprecision and inaccuracy pose challenges in reporting small M-proteins. Using therapeutic monoclonal antibody-spiked sera and a pooled beta-migrating M-protein, we aimed to assess SPEP limitations and variability across 16 laboratories in three continents. Methods Sera with normal, hypo- or hypergammaglobulinemia were spiked with daratumumab, Dara (cathodal migrating), or elotuzumab, Elo (central-gamma migrating), with concentrations from 0.125 to 10 g/L (n = 62) along with a beta-migrating sample (n = 9). Provided with total protein (reverse biuret, Siemens), laboratories blindly analyzed samples according to their SPEP and immunofixation (IFE) or immunosubtraction (ISUB) standard operating procedures. Sixteen laboratories reported the perpendicular drop (PD) method of gating the M-protein, while 10 used tangent skimming (TS). A mean percent recovery range of 80%–120% was set as acceptable. The inter-laboratory %CV was calculated. Results Gamma globulin background, migration pattern and concentration all affect the precision and accuracy of quantifying M-proteins by SPEP. As the background increases, imprecision increases and accuracy decreases leading to overestimation of M-protein quantitation especially evident in hypergamma samples, and more prominent with PD. Cathodal migrating M-proteins were associated with less imprecision and higher accuracy compared to central-gamma migrating M-proteins, which is attributed to the increased gamma background contribution in M-proteins migrating in the middle of the gamma fraction. There is greater imprecision and loss of accuracy at lower M-protein concentrations. Conclusions This study suggests that quantifying exceedingly low concentrations of M-proteins, although possible, may not yield adequate accuracy and precision between laboratories.

Background The epidemiological transition of non-communicable diseases replacing infectious diseases as the main contributors to disease burden has been well documented in global health literature. Less focus, however, has been given to the relationship between sociodemographic changes and injury. The aim of this study was to examine the association between disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) from injury for 195 countries and territories at different levels along the development spectrum between 1990 and 2017 based on the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 estimates. Methods Injury mortality was estimated using the GBD mortality database, corrections for garbage coding and CODEm—the cause of death ensemble modelling tool. Morbidity estimation was based on surveys and inpatient and outpatient data sets for 30 cause-of-injury with 47 nature-of-injury categories each. The Socio-demographic Index (SDI) is a composite indicator that includes lagged income per capita, average educational attainment over age 15 years and total fertility rate. Results For many causes of injury, age-standardised DALY rates declined with increasing SDI, although road injury, interpersonal violence and self-harm did not follow this pattern. Particularly for self-harm opposing patterns were observed in regions with similar SDI levels. For road injuries, this effect was less pronounced. Conclusions The overall global pattern is that of declining injury burden with increasing SDI. However, not all injuries follow this pattern, which suggests multiple underlying mechanisms influencing injury DALYs. There is a need for a detailed understanding of these patterns to help to inform national and global efforts to address injury-related health outcomes across the development spectrum.

ABSTRACT Kaposi’s sarcoma (KS) is the most common neoplasm in patients with AIDS. Epidemiologic evidence and the recent identification of herpesvirus-like DNA sequences in patients with KS have suggested a role for viral agents in the etiopathogenesis of this disease. It is unclear if these sequences are present in all types of KS and if the copy number of these sequences has a correlation with disease severity (staging). In order to clarify these issues, we retrospectively analyzed, by PCR and Southern blotting, formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded biopsy specimens from 12 patients previously diagnosed with KS by histopathologic examination of these specimens between the years of 1977 and 1996. We also analyzed tissue samples from these patients taken from dermal sites without KS lesions and control tissues from healthy subjects. Of the 12 patients, 6 had classic KS, 5 had AIDS-associated KS, and 1 had the endemic type of KS. We tested the specimens for other herpesviruses, including cytomegalovirus, human herpesvirus 6 (HHV-6), HHV-7, HHV-8, and Epstein-Barr virus. Of 20 biopsy specimens from patients previously diagnosed with KS, 19 were positive for HHV-8 sequences (95%), while PCR for the DNAs of other herpesvirus agents was negative. Uninvolved tissue from these patients and control tissue from healthy subjects gave negative results for all viruses. Semiquantitative analysis of Southern blots showed higher levels of HHV-8 DNA in those patients with multicentric and visceral involvement than in those patients with localized involvement. In addition, in patients with localized skin disease, the nodular stage had higher levels of HHV-8 DNA than the patch or plaque stages. Our data confirmed that HHV-8 is involved in the etiopathogenesis of all types of KS and that there is a correlation between HHV-8 DNA load and the severity and staging of this disease.

ABSTRACT The availability of microbiologic methods that detect early replication of cytomegalovirus (CMV) posttransplantation will enhance the process of initiating preemptive antiviral therapy prior to the appearance of CMV disease. Using PCR techniques we sought to determine which region of the CMV genome present in peripheral blood leukocytes (PBLs) or serum provides the highest sensitivity for the detection of CMV posttransplantation. Blood samples were prospectively collected weekly for at least 8 weeks from a cohort of 21 consecutive liver transplant recipients not receiving anti-CMV prophylaxis. Results of PCR assays were correlated with recovery of CMV in cell cultures and histopathological findings from biopsy specimens of infected organs to assess clinical symptomatic infection. Of 148 specimens, primer pairs directed to the Hin dIII-X fragment region of CMV detected target DNA with a 94% sensitivity, compared to an 87% sensitivity with primer pairs directed to Eco RI fragment D, 32% sensitivity with primer pairs directed to the immediate-early antigen 1 gene (IEA1 gene), and 20% sensitivity with primer pairs directed to the major immediate-early (MIE) gene. The performance characteristics in terms of the sensitivity of primers for amplifying CMV DNA associated with symptomatic infection ranged from 100% ( Hin dIII-X) to 20% (MIE gene); however, specificity was inversely related ( Hin dIII-X, 45%; MIE gene, 91%) to primers directed to these gene targets. When Hin dIII-X and Eco RI-D primer sets were used, CMV DNA from PBLs was a more sensitive target than CMV DNA from serum for the early detection of symptomatic CMV infection (17 versus 12 days). Importantly, CMV DNA was not detected in five patients with no evidence of this viral infection. In conclusion, primers directed to the Hin dIII-X fragment region were the most optimal for the early detection of CMV DNA in PBLs and sera from symptomatic liver transplant recipients.

A 25-year-old Filipino woman living in the USA was evaluated for a 5-month history of left eye pain and a subsequent orbital mass. Histopathological analysis of the lacrimal mass showed a mixed inflammatory process with necrotising granulomas and positive cultures for Mycobacterium tuberculosis. She was treated with antituberculosis therapy, with resolution of symptoms. Tuberculosis dacryoadenitis is extremely rare in the USA and other developed countries. It requires a high degree of clinical suspicion with special attention to the patient’s history to make the correct diagnosis. It can be treated successfully with antituberculosis therapy.

Abstract Introduction: REGN1979 is a hinge-stabilized CD20xCD3bispecific full-length antibody (Ab) based on an IgG4isotype modified to reduce Fc binding. It is designed to bind T cells (via CD3) and CD20-expressing cells. Cross-linking results in specific, local T cell activation and engagement ofcytolytic functions, independent of T cell receptor mediated recognition. This mechanism of action (MOA) is distinct from approved anti-CD20 Abs, and may provide additional therapeutic benefit. This report describes safety and clinical outcomes in 25 patients (pts) treated with REGN1979. Methods: The study uses a 3+3 design to assess safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and activity of REGN1979 inpts with NHL and CLL, in separate dose escalation cohorts. REGN1979 is administered IV over 1-4 hours, weekly (QW) for 4 doses followed by every 4 weeks (Q4W) for 5 doses. Each dose level (DL) consists of an initial starting dose followed by a higher (step-up) dose.Pts with either progressive disease (PD) after initial response or suboptimal initial response could be retreated. Results: As of clinical cut-off, 25pts had been enrolled and treated with REGN1979 at flat doses ranging from 0.03 - 3.0 mg: 20pts with NHLand 5pts with CLL. NHL subtypes included DLBCL (n=12), FL (n=6), and MCL (n=2). Allpts hada medianof3 (range 1-7) prior regimens, and received a median of 5 (range 2-9) doses of REGN1979. Sixpts remained on initial treatment, 3pts completed treatment, and 16pts discontinued treatment (14 for PD; 2 subject decision). Of 4pts who entered retreatment, 2pts remained ongoing. The most common treatment-related treatment-emergent AEs (TR-TEAEs) were pyrexia (56%), infusionrelated reaction (IRR) (40%), chills (36%), cytokine release syndrome (CRS) (28%), fatigue (24%), tachycardia (24%), hypomagnesaemia (20%) and hypotension (20%). Grade >= 3 TR-TEAEs occurred in 8 pts(32%): IRR (12%), CRS (8%), hypotension (8%), and pyrexia, tachycardia, dyspnea, anemia, hypoxia, hypertension, tachypnea, transaminases increased, and tumor pain each in 1 pt(4%). All were grade 3 with the exception of 1 ptwith grade 4 hypotension. There were no protocol-defined DLTs, nor grade 5 TEAE. No ptsdiscontinued REGN1979 due to TR-TEAE. IRR and CRS events were most commonly reported with the first administration of both initial and step-up dose with incidence and severity decreasing with increasing exposure. Tenptsreported at least one TR-SAE: CRS (24%), IRR (20%), and increased AST and tumor pain, each in 1pt(4%). Threeptswith aggressive lymphoma who discontinued REGN1979 due to PD died of their disease within 30 days of their last dose. Notably, modifications to pre-medication(s) and drug administration instructions have improved tolerability (fewer and less severe IRR/CRS). No clinically significant CNS TEAEs have been observed. CT-based (Cheson, 2007) anti-tumor activity was observed in 11 ptswith NHL: PR [n=4,median duration of 50d];SD [n=7, median duration of >196d]. The overall response rate (ORR) in NHL ptsacross DLs was 20%. In 2 highest dose levels, ORR was 27% (Fig 1). Of the 14pts evaluated by PET, 4pts had a partial metabolic response, withmedian duration of 244d perLugano Criteria. Twopts with CLL attained SD as best overall response. PK: REGN1979 concentrations in serum increased with increasing DL and were variable across pts. Variability was less at higher DLs and also decreased over time during therapy. At DLs tested, REGN1979 concentrations did not notably increase over time during treatment. PD/Cytokines: At the lowest dose tested, 0.03 mg, transient B-cell depletion was observed inpts with measurable circulating B cells.Samples from 12pts were available for cytokine analysis. Interim analysis indicates REGN1979 induces cytokine release as expected based on MOA. An increase in IL-6, IL-10 and to lesser extent IFN-γ was observed. The magnitude of cytokine response generally correlated with symptomatic IRR/CRS. Conclusion: REGN1979 demonstrated an acceptable safety profile at flat doses of 0.03 - 3.0 mg (< 1% of rituximab dose) inpts with NHL and CLL. Most TEAEs were associated with IRR/CRS, and were managed with supportive therapy and modification to REGN1979 administration. No clinically significant neurological toxicity was observed. Preliminary antitumor activity demonstrates increased activity at higher doses. Dose escalation and treatment schedule optimization continue. Disclosures Brown: Acetylon, Gilead: Research Funding; Celgene, Roche/Genentech, Gilead, Infinity, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, ProNai, Sun BioPharma: Consultancy. Arnason:Gilead: Consultancy. O'Brien:Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Chavez:Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Ansell:BMS, Seattle Genetics, Merck, Celldex and Affimed: Research Funding. Topp:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria, Other: travel; Boehringer: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: Travel. Adriaens:Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ufkin:Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kostic:Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Paccaly:Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gao:Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Trail:Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lowy:Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Brownstein:Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership.

M.T.J. and M.D.J. contributed equally; A.G. and F.L.L. contributed equally. Introduction Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) is an autologous anti-CD19 CAR T-cell therapy that is approved for the treatment of adults with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) who have failed at least two prior systemic lines of therapy. In the ZUMA-1 trial that led to axi-cel approval, 93% of patients developed cytokine release syndrome (CRS) (Neelapu, Locke et al. NEJM 2018). CRS is a non-antigen-specific toxicity that occurs as a result of CAR T and bystander immune cell activation. Whether lack of development of CRS after treatment with axi-cel is associated with inferior lymphoma outcomes is unknown. Here we evaluate the outcomes of patients that did not develop CRS after receiving axi-cel in a large multicenter cohort. Methods and Results The US Lymphoma CAR T Consortium includes seventeen US academic centers that contribute data independently of manufacturers. As of 8/31/2018, 300 patients were apheresed with intent to manufacture standard of care axi-cel for LBCL. In this study, we analyzed the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population of 276 patients receiving CAR T infusion with a median follow up of 9 months. In this group, 25 patients (9%) did not develop CRS and 251 patients (91%) developed CRS following axi-cel infusion. CRS was graded according to Lee criteria (Lee et al. Blood 2014) or CARTOX (Neelapu SS et al. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2018). At baseline, a higher proportion of patients in the no CRS group had ECOG score of 0-1 (no CRS group 100% vs. CRS group 82%, p= 0.019) and IPI score of 0-2 (no CRS group 72% vs. CRS group 46%, p = 0.019) After CAR T cell infusion, patients who did not develop CRS had a lower chance of developing grade 3 or higher neurotoxicity (no CRS group 4% vs. CRS group 35%, p=0.001), lower rates of ICU admission (no CRS group 8% vs. CRS group 35%, p = 0.006), and shorter length of hospital stay (median 10 days for no CRS group vs 14 days for CRS group, p &lt; 0.001). Of the 25 patients who had grade 0 CRS, 23 (92%%) also had grade 0 neurotoxicity. In univariate analysis, no CRS was associated with lower complete response (CR) rate (no CRS group 40% vs. CRS group 66%, p=0.015) but no statistically significant difference in overall response rate (ORR) (no CRS group 72% vs. CRS group 84%, p= 0.158). In relation to CRS there was no difference in treatment related mortality among the two groups (CRS group 4% vs. no CRS group 4.4%, p = 0.85). In multivariate analysis correcting for confounding features, no CRS was associated with statistically significant lower complete response rate (p = 0.002), but there was no significant difference in ORR (p = 0.13), overall survival (P=0.15), progression free survival (P=0.16), and time to progression (P= 0.14) between the two groups (figure 1.). Conclusions In this large cohort of LBCL patients receiving axi-cel with median follow up of 9 months, patients that did not develop CRS, compared with those that developed CRS, achieved lower rates of complete response but there was no difference in overall response rate, progression free survival, time to progression, overall survival, and treatment related mortality between the two groups. Disclosures Jain: Kite/Gilead: Consultancy. Nastoupil:Bayer: Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Spectrum: Honoraria. Lunning:Spectrum: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Portola: Consultancy; OncLive: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy; DAVA: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; MiRagen: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Consultancy, Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; VANIUM: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy. Reagan:Kite, A Gilead Company: Consultancy; Curis: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Oluwole:Pfizer: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy. McGuirk:Novartis: Research Funding; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gamida Cell: Research Funding; Pluristem Ltd: Research Funding; ArticulateScience LLC: Other: Assistance with manuscript preparation; Juno Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bellicum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Fresenius Biotech: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding. Deol:Agios: Other: Advisory board; Novartis: Other: Advisory board; Kite: Other: Advisory board. Sehgal:Juno/Celgene: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Research Funding. Goy:Acerta: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Grants outside of the submitted work, Research Funding; University of Nebraska: Research Funding; Astrazenca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Hakensackumc: Research Funding; Hackensack University Medical Center, RCCA: Employment; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Grants outside of the submitted work; Takeda: Other: Grants outside of the submitted work; COTA: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: leadership role for profit healthcare company; Pharmacyclics/Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Grants outside of the submitted work, Research Funding; Genentech: Other: Grants outside of the submitted work, Research Funding. Hill:Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celegene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG therapeutics: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Andreadis:Juno: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Roche: Equity Ownership; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Employment; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Munoz:Incyte: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Fosunkite: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics /Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Consultancy; Kyowa: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/Juno: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Kite/Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Chavez:Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Speakers Bureau; Kite Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bennani:Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board. Vose:Acerta Pharma: Honoraria, Other: Grants, Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb Company: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Honoraria, Other: Grants, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Legend Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Miklos:Becton Dickinson: Research Funding; Miltenyi Biotech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AlloGene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Precision Bioscience: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite-Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Juno: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Neelapu:Poseida: Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; Precision Biosciences: Consultancy; Cell Medica: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Allogene: Consultancy; Acerta: Research Funding; Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karus: Research Funding. Ghobadi:Wugen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; EUSA: Consultancy; Kite Pharma a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Locke:Novartis: Other: Scientific Advisor; Cellular BioMedicine Group Inc.: Consultancy; Kite: Other: Scientific Advisor.

Abstract Introduction Axi-cel is an autologous anti-CD19 CAR T-cell therapy approved by the US FDA 10/18/2017, for the treatment of adults with relapsed or refractory (r/r) large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL), transformed lymphoma (tFL), and high-grade B-cell lymphoma (HGBCL) who have failed at least two prior systemic lines of therapy. In the pivotal ZUMA-1 trial, 108 patients (pts) with r/r DLBCL were treated with axi-cel: the best overall response rate (ORR) was 82% and complete response (CR) rate was 58%. At a median follow-up of 15.4 months, 42% of the pts had ongoing remission (Neelapu and Locke et al. NEJM 2017). Grade 3 or higher cytokine release syndrome (CRS) by Lee criteria and neurologic events (NEs) occurred in 13% and 31% of the pts, respectively. Here, we evaluated the real world outcomes of pts treated with standard of care axi-cel under the commercial FDA label. Methods and Results Seventeen US academic centers contributed data to this effort independently of the manufacturer. As of 6/30/2018, 211 pts were leukapheresed with intention to manufacture commercial axi-cel. Of these, 165 (78%) pts completed axi-cel infusion as of 6/30/18 and a further 23 (11%) pts are scheduled for axi-cel infusion in July 2018. Of the 23 remaining pts, 7 (3%) received axi-cel therapy on ZUMA-9 expanded access trial (NCT03153462) due to non-conforming cell therapy product, 15 (7%) pts died before axi-cel infusion (14 from lymphoma progression and 1 from sepsis) and 1 (1%) patient attained CR from bridging therapy and was not infused. Safety was evaluable in 163 pts receiving axi-cel. Grade ³3 CRS and NEs occurred in 7% and 31% of pts. Tocilizumab was administered in 62% of pts and 57% received corticosteroids. Outside of lymphoma progression, 3 deaths occurred post-axi-cel; 1 due to HLH, 1 due to systemic candidiasis, and a third due to septic shock. There were no grade 5 NEs observed. Response assessment was done for pts infused with axi-cel and who were re-staged at day 30 and/or day 100, or were deemed to have clinical progression. Of 112 pts evaluable at day 30, ORR was 79% with 50% CR, 29% PR, 6% SD and 14% with PD. Of 39 pts evaluable at day 100, 59% of pts had ongoing response (CR 49%, PR 10%). At the time of abstract submission, more detailed patient characteristics and treatment course data were available in 134/165 pts infused. Median age was 59 (range 21-82) with 57% male. Performance status (PS) was ECOG 0-1 (81%), ECOG 2 (16%) and ECOG 3 (3%). By histology, 61% of pts had DLBCL including HGBCL, 31% had tFL and 8% PMBCL. Thirty-one percent had a prior autologous stem cell transplant. Bridging therapy between apheresis and infusion was given in 56% of patients, the majority of which consisted of chemotherapy. Sixty-six of 134 (49%) would not have met eligibility criteria for ZUMA-1 at the time of leukapheresis. Common criteria that would have made these patients ineligible for ZUMA-1 included ECOG PS >1 (n = 22), platelets <75k (n = 17), GFR <60 (n =12), active DVT/PE (n = 13), liver enzyme abnormalities (n = 10), a history of CNS lymphoma (n = 8), recent checkpoint inhibitor therapy (n = 7), ejection fraction <50% (n = 4), prior CD19 CAR T therapy (n = 4), and prior allogeneic transplant (n=2). Median time from leukapheresis to start of conditioning chemotherapy was 21 days and median time from leukapheresis to axi-cel infusion was 26 days. Median hospitalization period was 14 days. Conclusions This multicenter retrospective study delineates the real world outcomes of axi-cel CAR T-cell therapy for r/r aggressive B-cell lymphoma when used as a standard of care. Though limited by relatively short follow up, 30 day responses in the real world setting are comparable to the best responses observed on the pivotal ZUMA-1 clinical trial (Table 1). Importantly, safety appears comparable to the ZUMA-1 trial despite nearly half the pts failing to meet ZUMA-1 eligibility criteria. Updated results including PFS and OS will be presented at the meeting. L.J.N. and M.D.J. contributed equally; D.B.M., S.S.N. and F.L.L. contributed equally. Disclosures Nastoupil: Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; TG Therappeutics: Research Funding; Karus: Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; Juno: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Spectrum: Honoraria. Lunning:Celgene: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Portola: Consultancy; Genzyme: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy. Reagan:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. McGuirk:Gamida Cell: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Fresenius Biotech: Research Funding; Bellicum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria, Other: speaker, Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Honoraria, Other: travel accommodations, expenses, speaker ; Pluristem Ltd: Research Funding. Deol:Novartis: Consultancy; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Hill:Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Andreadis:Gilead: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Employment; Astellas: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Juno: Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Munoz:Pfizer: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Juno: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Consultancy; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Westin:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Apotex: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vose:Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Legend Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.: Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria; Epizyme: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Incyte Corp.: Research Funding. Miklos:Genentech: Research Funding; Kite - Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics - Abbot: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Research Funding. Locke:Kite Pharma: Other: Scientific Advisor; Cellular BioMedicine Group Inc.: Consultancy; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Other: Scientific Advisor.