Citations

Abstract A simple unit is described for detecting interrupted flow in an automated immunoprecipitin system. The principle involved is conductivity change resulting from interruption of bubble flow.

Abstract Blood specimens from normal individuals and patients (with and without blood dyscrasias) were sent through a 1,423-m pneumatic-tube system that included two monitoring devices, three switches, and 67 bends (62 with a 152-cm radius and 5 with a 76-cm radius), and then returned to the central laboratory. Each specimen was thus subjected to twice the trauma it usually would receive during transit. After transit, these specimens and duplicates kept in the laboratory were analyzed in the same manner for serum or plasma Na, K, Cl, CO2, Ca, Pi, LDH, urea, uric acid, glucose, creatinine, total protein, fibrinogen, hemoglobin, and bilirubin. Filling the tubes completely with blood and using a foam-rubber-Iined vinyl insert to hold the specimen tubes in the carrier decreased the differences attributable to transportation. Allowing the blood to clot before transport did not alter the results. Increases attributable to transport occurred only in hemoglobin, LDH, and K. Values were altered considerably less when the transported aliquot made only one leg of the trip via pneumatic tube. The alterations observed for the remaining analyses were within laboratory error. The pH of whole blood and the mean for PCO2 were not significantly altered, while the mean value for PO2, was increased 1.7 (0.5 to 4.5) mm Hg on transport.

Abstract Background The proportion of tumors of various histologies that may respond to drugs targeted to molecular alterations is unknown. NCI-MATCH, a collaboration between ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group and the National Cancer Institute, was initiated to find efficacy signals by matching patients with refractory malignancies to treatment targeted to potential tumor molecular drivers regardless of cancer histology. Methods Trial development required assumptions about molecular target prevalence, accrual rates, treatment eligibility, and enrollment rates as well as consideration of logistical requirements. Central tumor profiling was performed with an investigational next-generation DNA–targeted sequencing assay of alterations in 143 genes, and protein expression of protein expression of phosphatase and tensin homolog, mutL homolog 1, mutS homolog 2, and RB transcriptional corepressor 1. Treatments were allocated with a validated computational platform (MATCHBOX). A preplanned interim analysis evaluated assumptions and feasibility in this novel trial. Results At interim analysis, accrual was robust, tumor biopsies were safe (<1% severe events), and profiling success was 87.3%. Actionable molecular alteration frequency met expectations, but assignment and enrollment lagged due to histology exclusions and mismatch of resources to demand. To address this lag, we revised estimates of mutation frequencies, increased screening sample size, added treatments, and improved assay throughput and efficiency (93.9% completion and 14-day turnaround). Conclusions The experiences in the design and implementation of the NCI-MATCH trial suggest that profiling from fresh tumor biopsies and assigning treatment can be performed efficiently in a large national network trial. The success of such trials necessitates a broad screening approach and many treatment options easily accessible to patients.

Production of precipitating and complement-fixing antibody in rabbits and other animals was induced by immunization with live yeast-phase cells of Histoplasma capsulatum . Results of studies of polysaccharide antigens from three strains of H. capsulatum , by quantitative complement-fixation with human and rabbit antisera, strongly suggest the presence of type specificity. The variations of titer during 11 weeks in one patient with histoplasmosis and the variations of titer among a group of patients with histoplasmosis were studied by use of quantitative complement-fixation tests.

Abstract Purpose: Preclinical data demonstrating androgen receptor (AR)–positive (AR+) triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) cells are sensitive to AR antagonists, and PI3K inhibition catalyzed an investigator-initiated, multi-institutional phase Ib/II study TBCRC032. The trial investigated the safety and efficacy of the AR-antagonist enzalutamide alone or in combination with the PI3K inhibitor taselisib in patients with metastatic AR+ (≥10%) breast cancer. Patients and Methods: Phase Ib patients [estrogen receptor positive (ER+) or TNBC] with AR+ breast cancer received 160 mg enzalutamide in combination with taselisib to determine dose-limiting toxicities and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Phase II TNBC patients were randomized to receive either enzalutamide alone or in combination with 4 mg taselisib until disease progression. Primary endpoint was clinical benefit rate (CBR) at 16 weeks. Results: The combination was tolerated, and the MTD was not reached. The adverse events were hyperglycemia and skin rash. Overall, CBR for evaluable patients receiving the combination was 35.7%, and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.4 months. Luminal AR (LAR) TNBC subtype patients trended toward better response compared with non-LAR (75.0% vs. 12.5%, P = 0.06), and increased PFS (4.6 vs. 2.0 months, P = 0.082). Genomic analyses revealed subtype-specific treatment response, and novel FGFR2 fusions and AR splice variants. Conclusions: The combination of enzalutamide and taselisib increased CBR in TNBC patients with AR+ tumors. Correlative analyses suggest AR protein expression alone is insufficient for identifying patients with AR-dependent tumors and knowledge of tumor LAR subtype and AR splice variants may identify patients more or less likely to benefit from AR antagonists.

Liver transplantation (LT) for alcohol associated hepatitis (AH) remains controversial. We convened a consensus conference to examine various aspects of LT for AH. The goal was not to unequivocally endorse LT for AH; instead, it was to propose recommendations for programs that perform or plan to perform LT for AH. Criteria were established to determine candidacy for LT in the setting of AH and included the following: (1) AH patients presenting for the first time with decompensated liver disease that are nonresponders to medical therapy without severe medical or psychiatric comorbidities; (2) a fixed period of abstinence prior to transplantation is not required; and (3) assessment with a multidisciplinary psychosocial team, including a social worker and an addiction specialist/mental health professional with addiction and transplantation expertise. Supporting factors included lack of repeated unsuccessful attempts at addiction rehabilitation, lack of other substance use/dependency, acceptance of diagnosis/insight with a commitment of the patient/family to sobriety, and formalized agreement to adhere to total alcohol abstinence and counseling. LT should be avoided in AH patients who are likely to spontaneously recover. Short‐term and longterm survival comparable to other indications for LT must be achieved. There should not be further disparity in LT either by indication, geography, or other sociodemographic factors. Treatment of alcohol‐use disorders should be incorporated into pre‐ and post‐LT care. The restrictive and focused evaluation process described in the initial LT experience for AH worldwide may not endure as this indication gains wider acceptance at more LT programs. Transparency in the selection process is crucial and requires the collection of objective data to assess outcomes and minimize center variation in listing. Oversight of program adherence is important to harmonize listing practices and outcomes.

Background: The DIAL study is testing the efficacy of dual immunomodulation in patients with advanced aggressive B cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (B-NHL). Sponsored by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP), the trial combines the use of a programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitor (nivolumab) with an agonist of the CD27 receptor (varlilumab) in a randomized phase 2 design. CD27, a co-stimulatory receptor, regulates T cell activation in the context of T cell receptor (TCR) engagement through interaction with CD70. T cell exhaustion plays a major role in immune evasion in B-NHL. Varlilumab is an agonistic IgG1 monoclonal antibody that recognizes CD27 leading to prevention or reversal of exhaustion in pre-clinical models. Varlilumab also demonstrates direct anti-tumoral activity in xenograft models of human lymphoma cell lines via antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity. Phase 1 data supports the safety and tolerability of single-agent varlilumab in advanced hematologic malignancies (NCT01460134). We hypothesize that CD27 activation synergizes with PD-1 inhibition resulting in a superior anti-lymphoma effect compared to PD-1 blockade alone. The study will also evaluate the effect of these agents on tumor and immune cells using immunohistochemistry (IHC), mass cytometry (CyTOF), multiplex ELISA, imaging mass cytometry (IMC), and whole exome sequencing. Methods: The trial is enrolling patients with advanced aggressive B-NHL. Standard inclusion criteria and prior treatment with at least 2 lines of standard therapy are required. Prior autologous stem cell transplant and/or chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy is allowed. Patients with active CNS disease are excluded. Eligible patients are randomized to treatment with single-agent nivolumab (group 1) or dual immunotherapy with nivolumab and varlilumab. Group 1 is allowed to cross-over at the time of progression. Nivolumab will be administered intravenously (IV) every 2 weeks (240 mg) for 4 months followed by monthly dosing thereafter (480 mg). Varlilumab will be given IV every 4 weeks (3 mg/kg). Response assessment will be done by PET-CT scan every 12 weeks. Primary outcome is overall response rate (ORR) according to the LYRIC criteria. The trial will enroll 48 patients per arm, allowing 80% power to detect at least 20% increase in ORR in the experimental arm (group 2) assuming a 25% ORR in the control arm (group 1). The trial is registered (NCT03038672) and open to participation to members of the Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network (ETCTN) and Early Drug Development Opportunity Program (EDDOP). Figure Disclosures Tun: BMS: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Mundi-pharma: Research Funding; DTRM Biopharma: Research Funding. Bartlett:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Autolus: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding. Kline:Merck: Honoraria; Merck: Research Funding. Awan:Janssen: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Lazaryan:Kadmon: Consultancy. Ansell:Affimed: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Regeneron: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Trillium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding. Diefenbach:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Denovo: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; MEI: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding.

Abstract BACKGROUND NRG-CC001 sought to evaluate the neuro-protective effects of avoiding the peri-hippocampal stem cell niche using intensity-modulated radiotherapy during WBRT. METHODS Patients with brain metastasis were stratified by RPA class and prior radiosurgery/surgery and randomized to WBRT+M or HA-WBRT+ Memantine (M) (30Gy in 10 fractions). Standardized NCF tests and the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory Brain Tumor (MDASI-BT) were obtained at baseline, 2, 4, 6, and 12 months (mos). The primary endpoint was NCF failure defined using the reliable change index. Pre-specified secondary endpoints included patient-reported symptoms using the MDASI-BT. Time to NCF was reported as cumulative incidence (with death without NCF failure as a competing risk); between-arms differences were tested using Gray’s test. Deterioration at discrete time-points were tested using chi-square tests. MDASI-BT symptom burden, interference, and cognitive and neurologic burden were analyzed using mixed effects models and t-tests within the model using Hochberg’s multiplicity adjustment. RESULTS A total of 518 patients were randomized from 7/2016 to 3/2018. Median follow-up for alive patients was 12.1 mos, with no difference between arms in terms of toxicity, overall survival or intracranial progression-free survival. HA-WBRT+M was associated with lower risk of NCF failure (adjusted HR=0.739, 95% CI: 0.577–0.945, p=0.0.016), with differences first noted at 4 mos in Trail Making Test Part-B (23.3% vs. 40.4% deteriorated, p=0.012). Age did not dilute treatment effect. HA-WBRT+M was associated with reduced cognitive symptom burden in an imputed model (estimate=-0.29, p=0.0425), and also reduced overall symptom burden (p< 0.0001) and interference (p< 0.0016) at 6 mos. CONCLUSIONS The addition of HA to WBRT+M preserved NCF and reduced patient reported cognitive symptom burden, overall symptom burden and symptom interference and should be considered standard of care for any patient fit enough to have WBRT. Supported by grants UG1CA189867 (NCORP), U10CA180868 (NRG Oncology Operations), DCP from the National Cancer Institute.

Abstract Introduction: Given the availability of several active treatment (tx) options for CLL, providers frequently make tx recommendations based on their interpretation of objective data from consensus criteria and clinical trials. There are limited data describing patient (pt) experience, values, and insights when encountering multiple tx choices. The CLL Society, a pt-driven, physician-curated nonprofit organization focused on the unmet needs of the CLL community, sought to explore how CLL pts make tx decisions. Methods: A 64 question survey was distributed online and in paper to CLL pts from Oct-Dec 2017. The survey was developed by CLL experts. The research was IRB-approved. Chi square was used for statistical comparison; all other analyses are descriptive in nature. Results: 1147 pts from 48 states completed the survey. Median age was 65 (range 28-86), 46% male, 96% Caucasian. Who Influences Tx: Of the 79% of pts who have seen a CLL expert, defined as a provider focused on CLL at an academic/research center, 95% rated their provider as very/extremely influential. 83% of pts rated their own opinions as influential, and 59% rated the opinion of a general hematologist/oncologist (gen heme/onc), a provider who sees a variety of cancer types, as influential. Only 27% let their provider unilaterally decide on tx. Of these pts, 19% trusted their provider to select the best tx and 5% didn't have enough understanding to be involved in the decision. 64% were influenced by outside sources of information, such as family members, live CLL support groups, or online sources including pt experts and forums. Factors in Deciding Tx: Of the 67% pts surveyed who have been treated, 73% were offered > 1 tx choice by their provider. In deciding on a specific tx, 94% of respondents stated that it was very/extremely important to know there were tx options beyond their current regimen. The most important factors in selecting tx were response rate (91%), overall survival (88%), progression-free survival (86%), long-term side effects (82%), ability to achieve undetectable MRD (80%), cost/insurance coverage (66%), and location of tx (50%) with significant differences between subgroups (Table 1). Tx was impacted by cost or insurance issues for 16% (n=104). Of these 104 pts, cost/insurance issues resulted in tx delay for 34 and change in tx plan for 24 pts. 16 pts reported that an appeal led to coverage and 16 pts received financial assistance. Pts' willingness to accept potentially curable but high-risk tx was heavily influenced by availability of alternate options. For example, 18% of pts would be willing to consider cytotoxic chemotherapy if alternate options were available vs. 72% if no options were available. Similar patterns were seen with CAR-T tx (28% vs. 79%) and bone marrow transplantation (BMT) (15% vs. 66%) with significant differences between subgroups (Table 2). 82% were willing to take a life-long tx for long-term control without potential for cure. Willingness to accept long-term tx was significantly higher in treated vs. untreated pts (84% vs. 77%, p=.006) and men vs. women (84% vs. 78%, p=.008). Clinical Trial Education: Of those treated by a gen heme/onc, 31% received no education on clinical trials. Only 15% reported good understanding of trial opportunities vs. 52% treated by a CLL expert (p<.001). 9% of pts treated by gen heme/onc were offered clinical trial participation vs. 47% treated by a CLL expert (p<0.001). Pts who declined or would have declined participation cited reasons including preference for "proven" tx (38%), distance from trial site (29%), fear (20%), frequent imaging (20%), overall lack of understanding about trials (15%), and lack of information (14%). Summary: Most respondents want to be and are involved in tx decisions. While providers are influential in decision making, CLL pts also rely on outside sources. Gender, age, and tx status influence which factors drive decision making. Pts select tx based on response rate, survival, side effects, and ability to achieve deep response and want a plan in place for sequencing tx. The majority are willing to consider long-term tx without cure. Few want chemotherapy, CAR-T, or BMT unless they have no other options. A significant opportunity for improvement in education on clinical trial opportunities was identified. This description of pt experience, values, and preferences enriches the informed consent process and may lead to more tailored and patient-centered care. Disclosures Kennard: AbbVie, Gilead, Verastem: Consultancy. Furman:TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Loxo Oncology: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Other: DSMB; Genentech: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. Pagel:Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy. Davids:Sunesis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Surface Oncology: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy; Sunesis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: 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, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Surface Oncology: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: 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, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Surface Oncology: Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sunesis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Nabhan:Cardinal Health: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kay:Acerta: Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morpho-sys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Agios Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cytomx Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Siddiqi:Juno Therapeutics: Other: Steering committee. Brander:Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Teva: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: DSMB; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; BeiGene: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Acerta: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; DTRM: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding. Wierda:AbbVie, Inc: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Hill: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; Seattle Genetics: 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; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: 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; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Research Funding; Abbvie: 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. Cheson:AbbVie, Roche/Genentech, Pharmacyclics, Acerta, TG Therapeutics: Consultancy. Choi:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Rigel: Consultancy; Genentech: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie, Inc: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Mato:AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Prime Oncology: Honoraria; Portola: Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy; Medscape: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding.