Citations

TPS7571 Background: The majority of patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who relapse after HSCT, or who are not candidates for HSCT have poor outcomes and are in need of novel therapies. Brentuximab vedotin (BV) is a CD30-directed ADC and preclinical data provide a strong rationale for combining BV, lenalidomide, and rituximab in the treatment of R/R DLBCL. In addition, in a phase 1 trial in which 37 pts with R/R DLBCL were treated with BV + lenalidomide, the ORR was 56.7% (73.3% in CD30+ pts; manuscript in preparation). The median duration of remission was 13.2 months in pts with a CR or PR and 11.7 months in pts with CR, PR, or stable disease > 6 months. The PFS and median OS were 11.2 months and 14.3 months, respectively and results were similar in the CD30+ and CD30 < 1% groups. The clinical activity and manageable safety profiles of BV, lenalidomide, and rituximab as single agents, make the combination a viable option in multiply relapsed and heavily pretreated pts. Methods: This is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, active-comparator, multicenter phase 3 study designed to evaluate the efficacy of BV vs placebo, in combination with lenalidomide + rituximab, in subjects with R/R DLBCL (NCT04404283). Prior to randomization, there will be a safety and PK run-in period where 6 pts will receive BV, lenalidomide + rituximab, and safety and PK will be evaluated after the first cycle of treatment; 6/6 subjects have been enrolled. Key eligibility criteria include: pts aged ≥18 with R/R DLBCL with an eligible subtype; ≥2 prior lines of therapy and must be ineligible for, or have declined, stem cell transplant, and chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy; ECOG 0 to 2; fluorodeoxyglucose-avid disease by PET and bidimensional measurable disease of at least 1.5 cm by CT. Patients (n = 400) will be randomized 1:1 to receive either BV or placebo in combination with lenalidomide + rituximab and will be stratified by CD30 expression (positive [ ≥1%] versus < 1%), prior allogeneic or autologous stem cell transplant therapy (received or not), prior CAR-T therapy (received or not), and cell of origin (GCB or non-GCB). The primary endpoints are PFS per BICR in the ITT and CD30+ populations. Key secondary endpoints are OS in the ITT and CD30+ populations, and ORR per BICR. Other secondary endpoints include CR rate, duration of response, and safety and tolerability of the combination. Disease response will be assessed by BICR and the investigator according to the Lugano Classification Revised Staging System. Radiographic disease evaluations, including contrast-enhanced CT scans and PET, will be assessed at baseline, then every 6 weeks from randomization until Week 48, then every 12 weeks. PET is not required after CR is achieved. The trial is currently enrolling and will be open in 16 countries. Clinical trial information: NCT04404283.

7506 Background: Optimal consolidative therapy for primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is not defined. Avoidance of whole brain radiation may reduce risk of neurotoxicity. Non-radiation consolidative options include myeloablative chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation (HDT/ASCT) or non-myeloablative chemotherapy. Methods: This is a randomized phase 2, National Clinical Trials Network study of induction methotrexate (MTX) (8 g/m2 days 1, 15), temozolomide (TMZ) (150-200 mg/m2 D7-11), and rituximab (RTX) (C1 D3, 10, 17, 24 and C2 D3, 10 ) in four 28-day cycles followed by one cycle of cytarabine (ARA-C) (2 g/m2 BID, D1, 2) (MTRA). After induction, patients (pts) received consolidation with thiotepa (5 mg/kg BID, D -5, -4) plus carmustine (400 mg/m2, day -6) and ASCT (Arm A) or one cycle of ARA-C (2 g/m2 BID, D1-4) plus infusional etoposide (40 mg/kg over 96h) (Arm B). Pts were stratified on age and performance status and randomized 1:1 before induction. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) from randomization. With 110 pts, there was 84% power to detect an improvement in PFS using a log-rank test (1-sided α= 10%), assuming a median PFS of 3 months for pts who progress during induction, and a median PFS of 2 years (yrs) for Arm B and 4.5 yrs for Arm A consolidation. This report includes the results for the primary endpoint analysis. Results: 113 pts (median age 61 yrs, range 33-75) were randomized (Arm A: 57, Arm B: 56) across 27 centers. 108 eligible pts who received induction therapy were included in the primary endpoint analysis (Arm A: 54, Arm B: 54). 72/108 pts started consolidation and 70/72 completed consolidation per protocol (Arm A: 36, Arm B: 34). With a median follow-up of 3.8 years, median PFS from randomization was 6 yrs (95% CI 3.9-not reached) in Arm A vs 2.4 yrs (95% CI 0.6-not reached) in Arm B (p = 0.02). However, more pts randomized to Arm B went off treatment before consolidation due to progression or death (28% vs 11%, p = 0.05). PFS landmarked at start of consolidation demonstrated a trend for improved PFS favoring Arm A (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.25-1.36; p = 0.21). Median OS was not reached in either arm, and 3-yr estimates were 83% (95% CI 69-91; Arm A) vs 72% (95% CI 57-82; Arm B). Toxicities were similar between arms with no treatment-related mortality during consolidation. Conclusions: MTRA induction followed by myeloablative consolidation (Arm A) had improved PFS vs MTRA induction followed by non-myeloablative consolidation (Arm B), though more progressions or deaths leading to treatment discontinuation prior to consolidation in Arm B were noted. Both consolidation regimens were well-tolerated with encouraging PFS and OS in newly-diagnosed PCNSL. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . Clinical trial information: NCT01511562.

7503 Background: Optimal initial therapy for mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) remains uncertain. The randomized phase 2 NCTN trial E1411 tested if progression-free survival (PFS) is prolonged by addition of bortezomib (V) (1.6 mg/m2 SC/IV days 1, 8) to bendamustine-rituximab (BVR vs BR) induction and/or by addition of lenalidomide (L) to rituximab (LR vs R) consolidation. Here we report efficacy and toxicity of induction BVR vs BR. Methods: 373 pts, accrued 2012–16, stratified by MIPI and age (≥60) received 1 of 4 arms: A) BR induction x 6 followed by R x 2 yrs, B) BVR followed by R, C) BR followed by LR or D) BVR followed by LR. Eligible pts had untreated MCL, ≥ age 18 (amended from ≥60 when S1106 for < 65 closed), ECOG PS 0-2 and adequate hematologic and organ function. Pts without progressive disease during induction proceeded to consolidation. Primary induction objective was whether adding bortezomib (BVR) (Arms B + D) to BR (Arms A + C) improves PFS, irrespective of consolidation R vs LR. Design of 360 eligible treated pts would provide 93.8% power to detect 10% improvement in 2-yr PFS from 70% hypothesized for BR, corresponding to 37.4% reduction in hazard using stratified log-rank test at 1-sided 10% alpha. Efficacy population was 179 (BVR) and 180 (BR), induction treatment completed in 144 vs 153, progressive disease during induction 6 vs 7 and registration to consolidation 140 vs 145. Results: Baseline demographics did not differ between the groups, with median age 67 (range 42-90) and 13% < 60 yr, 73% men, ECOG PS 0-1 97%, MIPI Low/Med/Hi 37/29/34%. Estimated PFS at 2 yrs 79.6% BVR (95% CI 73.8-85.9) vs 74.5% BR (95% CI 68.2-81.4) (1-sided stratified log-rank p = 0.268). With median PFS follow-up 51 mos, median PFS estimated at 64.1 and 64.0 mos. Overall response rate (ORR) for BVR was 88.9% (CR 65.5%) vs 89.5% (CR 60.5%) BR (z-test 1 sided p = 0.577 for ORR). Treatment related deaths during induction were 2 in BVR (cardiac arrest, hepatitis) and 1 in BR (tumor lysis). Grade ≥ 3 toxicities were 88.1% (163/185) BVR vs 77.5% (145/187) BR. For BVR vs BR grade ≥ 3 neutropenia occurred in 52 vs 39 pts, though febrile neutropenia (7 vs 6), anemia (7 vs 8) and thrombocytopenia (18 vs 16) did not differ. Peripheral neuropathy (PN) grade 2 was 8 sensory for BVR vs 2 sensory/1 motor for BR, while grade 3 PN was 6 sensory/1 motor for BVR vs 0 with BR. The only non-hematologic grade ≥ 3 toxicity in > 5% of pts was rash (9 vs 12 pts). Conclusions: Bortezomib did not significantly improve the primary endpoint of PFS when added to BR as initial MCL therapy. ORR and CR rates at end of induction were also similar. Follow-up continues to assess the entire treatment regimen, including consolidation R vs LR, but the PFS > 5 yrs, high ORR and MRD negativity rate (Smith et al ASH 2019) in this BR-based trial support BR as a platform for MCL induction therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT01415752.

e18634 Background: Informed patients have better health outcomes. In a study of 1,057 patient encounters with 3,552 clinical decisions, only 9% resulted in informed medical decisions.The complexity of treatments and patients' limitations in health literacy (especially common in underserved communities) make it difficult for patients to engage in SDM. In 2017, A Breath of Hope Lung Foundation introduced An Animated Patient’s Guide to Lung Cancer (APG), an online resource aimed at improving patient knowledge. Methods: APG consists of animations, expert FAQ videos, slide shows, infographics, patient-experience videos, knowledge-assessment tools, and learner feedback. Video views, duration of use, and learner responses to multiple-choice questions on the APG website were collected for 33 months – through August 2020. Total APG views, most frequently viewed animations and expert videos were monitored on the website and on YouTube, to measure learner responses to outcome-based questions, and learner intent-to-implement changes. Results: 212,336 total views: 142,998 unique visitors: 59% from U.S. and 41% from 50 other countries. Unique U.S. visitors: 43,872 patients, 16,030 caregivers, and 7,593 health providers. 94% reported they will ‘use new information to better self-manage their lung cancer’ (n = 277); 98% ‘will discuss information learned with their doctor’ (n = 455), and 93% ‘plan to discuss treatment options with their doctor’ (n = 272). Conclusions: Multimedia ‘animated’ formats of learning tailored to the needs and learning styles of lung cancer patients provides effective learning, informed patients, increased management skills, and improved engagement in shared decision making.

AbstractBiallelic loss‐of‐function variants in the thrombospondin‐type laminin G domain and epilepsy‐associated repeats (TSPEAR) gene have recently been associated with ectodermal dysplasia and hearing loss. The first reports describing a TSPEAR disease association identified this gene is a cause of nonsyndromic hearing loss, but subsequent reports involving additional affected families have questioned this evidence and suggested a stronger association with ectodermal dysplasia. To clarify genotype–phenotype associations for TSPEAR variants, we characterized 13 individuals with biallelic TSPEAR variants. Individuals underwent either exome sequencing or panel‐based genetic testing. Nearly all of these newly reported individuals (11/13) have phenotypes that include tooth agenesis or ectodermal dysplasia, while three newly reported individuals have hearing loss. Of the individuals displaying hearing loss, all have additional variants in other hearing‐loss‐associated genes, specifically TMPRSS3, GJB2, and GJB6, that present competing candidates for their hearing loss phenotype. When presented alongside previous reports, the overall evidence supports the association of TSPEAR variants with ectodermal dysplasia and tooth agenesis features but creates significant doubt as to whether TSPEAR variants are a monogenic cause of hearing loss. Further functional evidence is needed to evaluate this phenotypic association.

Statistical analyses are a crucial component of the biomedical research process and are necessary to draw inferences from biomedical research data. The application of sound statistical methodology is a prerequisite for publication in the American Heart Association (AHA) journal portfolio. The objective of this document is to summarize key aspects of statistical reporting that might be most relevant to the authors, reviewers, and readership of AHA journals. The AHA Scientific Publication Committee convened a task force to inventory existing statistical standards for publication in biomedical journals and to identify approaches suitable for the AHA journal portfolio. The experts on the task force were selected by the AHA Scientific Publication Committee, who identified 12 key topics that serve as the section headers for this document. For each topic, the members of the writing group identified relevant references and evaluated them as a resource to make the standards summarized herein. Each section was independently reviewed by an expert reviewer who was not part of the task force. Expert reviewers were also permitted to comment on other sections if they chose. Differences of opinion were adjudicated by consensus. The standards presented in this report are intended to serve as a guide for high-quality reporting of statistical analyses methods and results.

Abstract This manuscript is the result of the North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society consensus conference on the medical management and surveillance of metastatic and unresectable pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma held on October 2 and 3, 2019. The panelists consisted of endocrinologists, medical oncologists, surgeons, radiologists/nuclear medicine physicians, nephrologists, pathologists, and radiation oncologists. The panelists performed a literature review on a series of questions regarding the medical management of metastatic and unresectable pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma as well as questions regarding surveillance after resection. The panelists voted on controversial topics, and final recommendations were sent to all panel members for final approval.

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 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 Limited data are available on the development of skin cancer and the associated risk factors for non‐White liver transplant (LT) recipients. The aim of this study is to determine the incidence of newly diagnosed skin cancer postoperatively and to identify the risk factors for the development of skin cancer in non‐White LT recipients. Methods We conducted an initial retrospective chart review of non‐White LT patients who received a transplant at our center between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2013. Results Of the 96 patients in the study cohort, 32% were Black, 17% were Asian, 15% were White Hispanic, and 10% were Black Hispanic. One patient had a history of nonmelanoma skin cancer before transplant. No skin cancers were diagnosed during follow‐up (median, 1.3 years; range, 17 days to 8.6 years). Conclusion Our center’s experience is consistent with the literature and suggests that the incidence of newly diagnosed skin cancer in non‐White liver transplant recipients is low. Longer follow‐up may provide additional insights into the specific risk factors for the posttransplant development of skin cancer.