Citations

Abstract BCMA/CD3-targeting bispecific antibodies (BsAb) are a recently developed immunotherapy class that shows potent tumor killing activity in multiple myeloma. Here, we investigated a murine BCMA/CD3-targeting BsAb in the immunocompetent Vk*MYC model and its immunomodulatory imide drug (IMiD)–sensitive derivative Vk*MYChCRBN model of multiple myeloma. The BCMA/CD3 BsAb was safe and efficacious in a subset of mice but failed in those with high tumor burden, consistent with clinical reports of BsAb in leukemia. The combination of BCMA/CD3 BsAb with pomalidomide expanded lytic T cells and improved activity even in IMiD-resistant high–tumor burden cases. Yet, survival was only marginally extended due to acute toxicity and T-cell exhaustion, which impaired T-cell persistence. In contrast, the combination with cyclophosphamide was safe and allowed for a tempered proinflammatory response associated with long-lasting complete remission. Concurrent cytotoxic therapy with BsAb actually improved T-cell persistence and function, offering a promising approach to patients with a large tumor burden. Significance: BCMA-targeted therapy induces deep but transient clinical responses. We developed an immunocompetent, IMiD-sensitive genetically engineered mouse model and show that IMiDs potentiate T-cell activation, increasing short-term efficacy of anti-BCMA/CD3 BsAb, but exacerbate T-cell exhaustion. Surprisingly, by reducing tumor burden and depleting regulatory T cells, cyclophosphamide prevents BsAb-induced T-cell exhaustion and promotes long-term multiple myeloma control. See related commentary by Louvet et al., p. 297.

Objective The aim of this study was to search for genes/variants that modify the effect of LRRK2 mutations in terms of penetrance and age‐at‐onset of Parkinson's disease. Methods We performed the first genomewide association study of penetrance and age‐at‐onset of Parkinson's disease in LRRK2 mutation carriers (776 cases and 1,103 non‐cases at their last evaluation). Cox proportional hazard models and linear mixed models were used to identify modifiers of penetrance and age‐at‐onset of LRRK2 mutations, respectively. We also investigated whether a polygenic risk score derived from a published genomewide association study of Parkinson's disease was able to explain variability in penetrance and age‐at‐onset in LRRK2 mutation carriers. Results A variant located in the intronic region of CORO1C on chromosome 12 (rs77395454; p value = 2.5E‐08, beta = 1.27, SE = 0.23, risk allele: C) met genomewide significance for the penetrance model. Co‐immunoprecipitation analyses of LRRK2 and CORO1C supported an interaction between these 2 proteins. A region on chromosome 3, within a previously reported linkage peak for Parkinson's disease susceptibility, showed suggestive associations in both models (penetrance top variant: p value = 1.1E‐07; age‐at‐onset top variant: p value = 9.3E‐07). A polygenic risk score derived from publicly available Parkinson's disease summary statistics was a significant predictor of penetrance, but not of age‐at‐onset. Interpretation This study suggests that variants within or near CORO1C may modify the penetrance of LRRK2 mutations. In addition, common Parkinson's disease associated variants collectively increase the penetrance of LRRK2 mutations. ANN NEUROL 2021;90:82–94

AbstractThis phase 1-2 study evaluated brentuximab vedotin (BV) combined with nivolumab (Nivo) as first salvage therapy in patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). In parts 1 and 2, patients received staggered dosing of BV and Nivo in cycle 1, followed by same-day dosing in cycles 2 to 4. In part 3, both study drugs were dosed, same day, for all 4 cycles. At end of study treatment, patients could undergo autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) per investigator discretion. The objective response rate (ORR; N = 91) was 85%, with 67% achieving a complete response (CR). At a median follow-up of 34.3 months, the estimated progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 3 years was 77% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65% to 86%) and 91% (95% CI, 79% to 96%) for patients undergoing ASCT directly after study treatment. Overall survival at 3 years was 93% (95% CI, 85% to 97%). The most common adverse events (AEs) prior to ASCT were nausea (52%) and infusion-related reactions (43%), all grade 1 or 2. A total of 16 patients (18%) had immune-related AEs that required systemic corticosteroid treatment. Peripheral blood immune signatures were consistent with an activated T-cell response. Median gene expression of CD30 in tumors was higher in patients who responded compared with those who did not. Longer-term follow-up of BV and Nivo as a first salvage regimen shows durable efficacy and impressive PFS, especially in patients who proceeded directly to transplant, without additional toxicity concerns. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02572167.

Abstract Introduction: Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapies have demonstrated robust and sustained clinical responses in several hematologic malignancies. Data suggest that achieving acceptable benefit:risk profiles depends on several factors, including the specificity of the antigen target and characteristics of the CAR itself, including on-target, off-tumor activity.To test the safety and efficacy of CAR T cells in relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), we have designed a second-generation CAR construct targeting B cell maturation antigen (BCMA) to redirect T cells to MM cells. BCMA is a member of the tumor necrosis factor superfamily that is expressed primarily by malignant myeloma cells, plasma cells, and some mature B cells. bb2121 consists of autologous T cells transduced with a lentiviral vector encoding a novel CAR incorporating an anti-BCMA scFv, a 4-1BB costimulatory motif and a CD3-zeta T cell activation domain. Methods: CRB-401 (NCT02658929) is a multi-center phase 1 dose escalation trial of bb2121 in patients with RRMM who have received ≥ 3 prior regimens, including a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory agent, or are double-refractory, and have ≥ 50% BCMA expression on malignant cells. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells are collected via leukapheresis and shipped to a central facility for transduction, expansion, and release testing prior to being returned to the site for infusion. Patients undergo lymphodepletion with fludarabine (30 mg/m2) and cyclophosphamide (300 mg/m2) daily for 3 days then receive 1 infusion of bb2121. The study follows a standard 3+3 design with planned dose levels of 50, 150, 450, 800, and 1,200 x 106 CAR+ T cells. The primary outcome measure is incidence of adverse events (AEs), including dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). Additional outcome measures were quality and duration of clinical response assessed according to the IMWG Uniform Response Criteria for Multiple Myeloma, evaluation of minimal residual disease (MRD), overall and progression-free survival, quantification of bb2121 in blood, and quantification of circulating soluble BCMA over time. Results: Asof May 4, 2017, 21 patients (median 58 [37 to 74] years old) with a median of 5 (1 to 16) years since MM diagnosis, had been infused with bb2121, and 18 patients were evaluable for initial (1-month) clinical response. Patients had a median of 7 prior lines of therapy (range 3 to 14), all with prior autologous stem cell transplant; 67% had high-risk cytogenetics. Fifteen of 21 (71%) had prior exposure to, and 6 of 21 (29%) were refractory to 5 prior therapies (Bort/Len/Car/Pom/Dara). Median follow-up after bb2121 infusion was 15.4 weeks (range 1.4 to 54.4 weeks). As of data cut-off, no DLTs and no treatment-emergent Grade 3 or higher neurotoxicities similar to those reported in other CAR T clinical studies had been observed. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS), primarily Grade 1 or 2, was reported in 15 of 21 (71%) patients: 2 patients had Grade 3 CRS that resolved in 24 hours and 4 patients received tocilizumab, 1 with steroids, to manage CRS. CRS was more common in the higher dose groups but did not appear related to tumor burden. One death on study, due to cardiopulmonary arrest more than 4 months after bb2121 infusion in a patient with an extensive cardiac history, was observed while the patient was in sCR and was assessed as unrelated to bb2121. The overall response rate (ORR) was 89% and increased to 100% for patients treated with doses of 150 x 106 CAR+ T cells or higher. No patients treated with doses of 150 x 106 CAR+ T cells or higher had disease progression, with time since bb2121 between 8 and 54 weeks (Table 1). MRD negative results were obtained in all 4 patients evaluable for analysis. CAR+ T cell expansion has been demonstrated consistently and 3 of 5 patients evaluable for CAR+ cells at 6 months had detectable vector copies. A further 5 months of follow up on reported results and initial data from additional patients will be presented. Conclusions: bb2121 shows promising efficacy at dose levels above 50 x 106 CAR+ T cells, with manageable CRS and no DLTs to date. ORR was 100% at these dose levels with 8 ongoing clinical responses at 6 months and 1 patient demonstrating a sustained response beyond one year. These initial data support the potential of CAR T therapy with bb2121 as a new treatment paradigm in RRMM. CT.gov study NCT02658929, sponsored by bluebird bio and Celgene Disclosures Berdeja: Teva: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Vivolux: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; Bluebird: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding. Siegel: Celgene, Takeda, Amgen Inc, Novartis and BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Consultancy. Jagannath: MMRF: Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Medicom: Speakers Bureau. Turka: bluebird bio: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lam: bluebird bio: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hege: Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Morgan: bluebird bio: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Quigley: bluebird bio: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Kochenderfer: Bluebird bio: Research Funding; N/A: Patents & Royalties: I have multiple patents in the CAR field.; Kite Pharma: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: The phase 2 CheckMate 205 study (NCT02181738) of nivolumab (nivo) has demonstrated high objective response rates, durable efficacy, and acceptable safety profiles in patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma (R/R cHL) after failure of autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto-HCT) regardless of prior brentuximab vedotin (BV) treatment (Younes A et al. Lancet Oncol 2016; Fanale M et al. ICML 2017 [Oral 125]). Recently proposed new response criteria aim to account for atypical patterns of response with checkpoint inhibitors which may not be fully captured by conventional response criteria (Cheson BD et al. Blood 2016; Younes A et al, Ann Oncol 2017). Studies in solid tumors have shown that pts may continue to derive clinical benefits from nivo beyond disease progression as defined by conventional criteria (George S et al, JAMA Oncol 2016; Long GV et al, JAMA Oncol 2017). Here we report outcomes among pts with R/R cHL treated beyond progression (TBP) in CheckMate 205. Methods: This single-arm, multicenter study enrolled pts (age ≥18 y) with R/R cHL after failure of auto-HCT into 3 independent cohorts (A: BV naïve, B: BV after auto-HCT, C: BV before and/or after auto-HCT). Nivo 3 mg/kg IV every 2 wk was given until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Response was assessed by 2007 International Working Group criteria. Best overall response (BOR) was assessed per investigator. A protocol amendment in July 2014 allowed pts to be TBP (investigator-assessed) if they met prespecified criteria, including deriving clinical benefit, stable performance status, and non-rapid progression. Pts TBP were required to discontinue in the event of further progression (≥10% increase in tumor burden). Tumor burden after initial progression was assessed in a prespecified analysis. Exploratory analyses assessed overall survival (OS) and time to next therapy (TTNT) in pts TBP. Results: In total, 70/243 (29%) pts were TBP: 19 in Cohort A, 23 in B, and 28 in C. Demographics were similar to the overall study population: 57% had stage IV disease at study entry, median (range) age was 37 (18-72) y, and median number of prior therapies was 3 (2-5). BOR prior to progression was complete remission (CR) in 5 (7%) pts, partial remission (PR) in 31 (44%), stable disease (SD) in 20 (29%), and progressive disease in 13 (19%) (BOR was non-evaluable in 1 pt). Among pts TBP, the initial cause of progression was a ≥50% increase in total tumor burden in 13 (19%) pts, non-target lesion progression in 17 (24%), and new lesions in 47 (67%) (pts could have multiple findings as reasons for progression). The median time to initial progression in pts TBP was 6 mo; 11 mo in pts with initial BOR of CR and 7 mo in pts with initial PR or SD. At December 2016 database lock, median (range) doses of nivo beyond progression were 8 (1-43), and median duration of treatment beyond progression was 5 (0-19) mo. Overall, 21 (30%) pts TBP remained on treatment; the most common reason for discontinuation was further disease progression (80%). The majority of pts TBP demonstrated stable reductions in tumor burden with continued treatment. Median (95% CI) TTNT from first study dose of nivo was 17 (14, not estimable) mo (Figure). Median OS from date of initial progression was not reached in pts TBP and OS was 84% (95% CI 70, 92) at 1 y. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 46% of pts (13% grade [G] 3-4) after progression, vs 64% (9% G3-4) prior to progression. Serious TRAEs after progression were aspartate aminotransferase increase (n=1) and hypercalcemia (n=1), both G3-4. Ten deaths occurred in pts TBP; 7 were due to disease progression and none were considered related to study drug. Conclusions: In total, 29% of pts from CheckMate 205 Cohort A/B/C were TBP. New lesions were the most common reason for initial progression in pts TBP. Stable reductions in tumor burden were seen with continued treatment in pts TBP, and median TTNT and OS remained high. Proposed updates to response criteria may help to better assess the long-term efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors. These data suggest that pts considered to show stable performance status, non-rapid progression, and clinical benefits despite progression according to conventional response criteria may derive long-term benefits from continued nivo treatment. Study funding: BMS. Writing support: Simon Wigfield, Caudex, funded by BMS. Disclosures Cohen: Bioinvent: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takada: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Abbvie: 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; Janssen: 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; LAM Therapeutics, Inc: Research Funding. Engert: Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Affimed: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Ansell: Merck: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding. Younes: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Third-party medical writing assistance, under the direction of Anas Younes, was provided by Scott Malkin of Gardiner-Caldwell Communications, and was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.; Bayer: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; Curis: Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Takeda Millenium: Honoraria; Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Trneny: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Savage: Roche: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy. Ramchandren: Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Janssen: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Collins: ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Research Funding; Celleron: Consultancy; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Fanale: AMGEN: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CELGENE: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; TAKEDA: Honoraria, Research Funding; ONYX: Research Funding; SEATTLE GENETICS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; MOLECULAR TEMPLATES: Research Funding; MERCK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GENENTECH: Research Funding; ADC THERAPEUTICS: Research Funding. Armand: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: research funding (institutional); Merck: Consultancy, Other: research funding (institutional); Infinity: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: research funding (institutional); Affimed: Other: research funding (institutional); Otsuka: Other: research funding (institutional); Sequenta: Other: research funding (institutional); Sigma Tau: Other: research funding (institutional); Roche: Other: research funding (institutional); Tensha: Other: research funding (institutional). Zinzani: Bayer: 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; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm Therapeutics: 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; Merck: 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; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. De Boer: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Non-restricted grant for research in head and neck cancer; Eisai: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Other: member of Independent Data Monitoring Committee. Shipp: Cell Signaling: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Takeda: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Merck: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Gilead: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; AstraZeneca: Honoraria. Santoro: Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Timmerman: Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Genmab: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Kite Pharma: Research Funding; ImmuneGene: Research Funding. Sacchi: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment. Sy: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment. Kuruvilla: BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy; Hoffman LaRoche: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Lundbeck: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Nivolumab (nivo), an immune checkpoint inhibitor targeting the programmed death-1 (PD-1) receptor, augments T-cell activation and restores antitumor T-cell function. In the phase 2 CheckMate 205 study (NCT02181738), nivo demonstrated frequent (65-73%) and durable objective responses across 3 cohorts of patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory (R/R) cHL after failure of autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (Fanale M et al. ICML 2017 [oral 125]). While most pts with cHL are cured with first-line therapy, those with advanced-stage disease are more likely to relapse or progress. More aggressive regimens (eg, BEACOPPesc., Borchmann P et al. Lancet Oncol 2017) are associated with improved progression-free survival (PFS) but are hampered by excessive toxicities and have limited applicability in elderly pts.PD-1 ligand gene amplification has been linked to poorer outcomes in cHL pts treated with standard induction regimens (Roemer MG et al. J Clin Oncol 2016) but is associated with improved responses to nivo in R/R cHL (Younes A et al. Lancet Oncol 2016), suggesting that PD-1 blockade may benefit pts in the frontline setting. We therefore assessed the safety and efficacy of nivo as a single-agent lead-in treatment followed by nivo in combination with chemotherapy, excluding bleomycin due to potential overlapping pulmonary toxicity, for pts with previously untreated advanced-stage cHL. Methods: Cohort D of CheckMate 205 enrolled untreated pts (aged ≥18 y) with advanced-stage newly diagnosed cHL (stage III, IV, or II with B symptoms and extranodal or bulky disease) and ECOG score 0-1. Pts received 4 biweekly doses of nivo monotherapy (240 mg IV flat dose) followed by nivo plus chemotherapy (nivo 240 mg IV, doxorubicin, vinblastine, dacarbazine [N-AVD]) for 6 cycles (12 doses). The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability: proportion of pts with ≥1 grade (G) 3-5 treatment-related adverse event (TRAE) ≤30 d after last dose. Additional endpoints included rates of discontinuation and of independent radiologic review committee-assessed complete remission (CR). Results: At database lock (June 2017), 51 pts had been treated, with a median (range) follow-up of 8 (1-11) mo. Median (range) age was 37 (18-87) y; 29 (57%) pts had stage IV disease, and 41 (80%) had B symptoms. At baseline, 7 (14%) pts had bulky disease and 17 (33%) had extranodal involvement. International prognostic score was ≥3 in 25 (49%) pts. At analysis, 49 (96%) pts had completed nivo monotherapy treatment, receiving all 4 doses; 1 pt discontinued due to disease progression and 1 due to study drug toxicity (G1-2 hyperthyroidism), subsequently receiving AVD only. TRAEs for both treatment phases are shown in the Table. During nivo monotherapy, 2 pts had 1 dose delay each due to an AE; 2 (4%) pts had serious AEs (SAEs; 1 G1-2 hyperthyroidism; 1 G1-2 polyneuropathy); an immune-mediated AE (IMAE), G1-2 hyperthyroidism, was reported in 2 (4%) pts. Fifty pts started combination therapy; at database lock, 35 (70%) had completed therapy, with 34 (69%) receiving 12 N-AVD doses. With N-AVD, 10 (20%) pts had SAEs, 6 G3-4; the most common G3-4 SAE was febrile neutropenia in 2 (4%) pts; IMAEs occurring in >1 pt were hypothyroidism in 8 (16%) pts and increased ALT in 2 (4%). AEs leading to discontinuation of N-AVD occurred in 2 pts: G1-2 hepatic abnormality, and G3-4 febrile neutropenia (FN) and Klebsiella bacteremia. The pt who developed FN and Klebsiella bacteremia died 38 d after the first dose of his fifth cycle of N-AVD due to study drug toxicity of acute respiratory insufficiency. Important primary, secondary, and exploratory endpoints (including CR and objective response rates at end of monotherapy, after 2 combocycles and end of therapy, and PFS) will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: Nivo monotherapy followed by N-AVD combination therapy was well-tolerated in pts with newly diagnosed, untreated, advanced-stage cHL. Nearly all pts completed nivo monotherapy treatment and started combination therapy with N-AVD. The safety profile was consistent with historical experience of nivo and AVD separately, with no new safety signals. Nivo followed by N-AVD may provide a tolerable alternative treatment option to standard-of-care multi-agent chemotherapy for pts with newly diagnosed advanced-stage cHL. Study support: BMS. Writing support: Matthew Thomas, PhD, Caudex, funded by BMS. Disclosures Ramchandren: Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy. Fanale: CELGENE: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; ADC THERAPEUTICS: Research Funding; GENENTECH: Research Funding; MERCK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; MOLECULAR TEMPLATES: Research Funding; AMGEN: 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, Research Funding; TAKEDA: Honoraria, Research Funding; ONYX: Research Funding. Rueda: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Armand: Roche: Research Funding; Genmab: Consultancy; Infinity: Consultancy; Sigma Tau: Research Funding; Tensha: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Otsuka: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck & Co., Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sequenta/Adaptive: Research Funding. Trněný: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria. Feldman: Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Ansell: Merck: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding. Jaeger: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses. Cohen: Bioinvent: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; LAM Therapeutics, Inc: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takada: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Infinity: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Savage: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Honoraria. Willenbacher: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Sacchi: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment. Sumbul: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment.

Abstract Introduction Brentuximab vedotin (BV) is an ADC directed against CD30, a receptor expressed by malignant Reed-Sternberg (RS) cells present in the inflammatory/immune cell microenvironment of classical Hodgkin lymphomas (cHL). Through induction of immunogenic cell death, BV may prime an antitumor immune response via microtubule disruption of CD30-expressing RS cells (Gardai 2015). Tumor cells expressing PD-1 ligands use the PD-1 pathway to evade an immune response. Nivolumab (Nivo) blocks the PD-1 receptor, inhibits binding of PD-1 ligands, and restores an effective antitumor immune response. Targeted killing of CD30-expressing RS cells, concurrent with restoration of the immune response, may lead to higher complete response (CR) rates in patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory cHL (R/R HL), as well as improved durability of responses post autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Here we present updated results from the phase 1/2 study of BV + Nivo in pts with R/R HL. Methods BV + Nivo was evaluated in cHL that had relapsed or was refractory to frontline (FL) chemotherapy in adult pts (NCT02572167). Pts were excluded if they had received prior salvage therapy, BV or immuno-oncology therapy, or allogeneic SCT or ASCT. Pts were treated in 21-day cycles for up to 4 cycles. In Parts 1 and 2 of the trial, BV (1.8 mg/kg) was given on Cycle 1 Day 1 and Nivo (3 mg/kg) on Cycle 1 Day 8. For Cycles 2-4, BV and Nivo were given on Day 1. After the Cycle 4 response assessment, pts were eligible to undergo ASCT. The investigators assessed response per the Lugano Classification (Cheson 2014). Results 62 pts with R/R HL were enrolled in Parts 1 and 2; 61 pts received BV + Nivo, of whom 58 completed treatment (tx). 4 pts discontinued the study due to pt decision (2), AE (1), and investigator decision (1). Median age was 36 years, 52% were female, and 90% had received FL ABVD. 45% of pts had primary refractory disease and 31% experienced relapse within 1 year of FL therapy. Infusion-related reactions (IRRs) occurred in 41% of pts. Tx emergent AEs occurred in 98% of pts prior to ASCT (33% G3, 5% G4). Excluding IRRs, potential immune-related AEs (IrAEs) occurred in 84% of pts (10% G3, 3% G4) with 5 pts (8%) treated with systemic steroids for G4 pneumonitis, G4 pneumonitis and colitis, G2 pneumonitis, G3 diarrhea and G2 colitis, and G3 AST elevation. Among the 60 efficacy-evaluable pts, the CR rate was 62%, (48% of CR pts had Deauville ≤ 2) with an objective response rate of 85%; 5 pts (8%) had stable disease and 4 pts (7%) progressed on tx. At the time of this analysis, 39 pts had initiated ASCT with a median 5.1x106 CD34+ cells/kg (range; 3-60) collected. Median times to neutrophil and platelet engraftment were 12 and 15 days, respectively. Pts were followed for a median of 3 months from ASCT (N=39, range; 0-12) and 5.7 months from first dose (N=61, range; 1-17). BV and Nivo effects on the immune system were evaluated by peripheral blood immunophenotyping, serum cytokine/chemokine analyses, T-cell receptor sequencing, and intracellular cytokine staining. The first dose of BV resulted in elevation of pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines and concurrent reduction in serum TARC levels, with these results maintained post Nivo. We observed a reduction in Tregs and other T cell subsets after the first dose of BV with an elevation of T cell subsets post BV + Nivo. While TCR clonality in the periphery did not change over the course of the trial, T cell clonal expansion was observed post BV + Nivo, concurrent with T cell elevation measured by flow cytometry. Ex vivo peptide stimulation of PBMCs isolated from blood revealed the enhanced ability of T cell subsets to respond to MHC I and MHC II antigens following BV + Nivo compared to baseline: e.g., effector memory CD8+ T cells from some pts displayed increased intracellular IL-2, and TNFa after stimulation with MHCI and MHCII peptide pools compared to baseline, potentially indicating elevated activation status of the immune system following combination tx. Conclusion R/R HL remains an unmet clinical need despite recent medical advances. These data suggest the combination BV + Nivo is a well tolerated and an active salvage therapy with a high rate of CR (62%) that has no adverse impact on stem cell collection. The safety and activity of this novel combination support further exploration in an ongoing pivotal phase 3 trial in pts with R/R HL who have either already received or are considered ineligible for ASCT (NCT03138499). Disclosures Herrera: Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Moskowitz: Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Incyte: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding. Bartlett: Novartis: Research Funding; ImaginAB: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Vose: Merck: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Allos Therapeutics: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; US Biotest: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Ramchandren: Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; MERCK: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Feldman: AbbVie: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Kite Pharma: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. LaCasce: BMS: Consultancy; Forty Seven: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Ansell: Merck: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding. Moskowitz: Celgene: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Other: Ad Board, Research Funding; Genentech BioOncology: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding. Fenton: Seattle Genetics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ogden: Seattle Genetics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Taft: Seattle Genetics: Employment, Research Funding. Zhang: Seattle Genetics: Employment, Research Funding. Kato: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment, Equity Ownership; Seattle Genetic: Research Funding. Campbell: Seattle Genetics: Employment, Equity Ownership; CTI BioPharma: Employment, Equity Ownership. Advani: Agensys: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; FortySeven: Research Funding; Nanostring: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Kura: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Spectrum: Consultancy; Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Sutro: Consultancy.

Abstract Background Light chain (AL) amyloidosis is a plasma cell neoplasm associated with high early mortality and severe morbidity that can cause severe disability. We explored the impact of AL amyloidosis on symptoms and well-being from the perspectives of patients and health care providers who regularly care for AL patients. We intended to develop a conceptual understanding of patient-reported outcomes in AL amyloidosis to identify the context of use and concept of interest for a clinical outcome assessments tool in this disease.Method Twenty patients and 10 professionals were interviewed. Patient interviews captured the spectrum of amyloidosis experience including time from diagnosis, type of organ involvement, and presence and type of treatment received. Interviews with professionals included physicians, advanced practice providers, registered nurse, and a patient advocate; these interviews covered similar topics. Results The impact of AL amyloidosis on patients’ life was multidimensional, with highly subjective perceptions of normality and meaning. Four major themes from patients and experts included diagnosis of AL amyloidosis, living with AL amyloidosis, symptom burden, and social roles. Barriers to patient-reported outcomes data collection in patients were additionally explored from experts. The themes provide a comprehensive understanding of the important experiences of symptom burden and its impact on daily life from AL amyloidosis patients’ and from the perspectives of professionals who care for patients with AL amyloidosis. Conclusion These findings further the conceptual understanding and identification of a preliminary model of concept of interest for development of a clinical outcome assessments tool for AL amyloidosis.