Koehler, Amber B.

7050 Background: The management of Richter transformation (RT) of CLL represents an unmet clinical need. We previously reported modest efficacy of pembrolizumab monotherapy in an initial cohort of patients with RT (Ding, et al, Blood 2017). Here we report updated results of this trial, including an expansion cohort and a combination therapy cohort. Methods: Patients with biopsy proven RT to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma were enrolled and treated with single agent pembrolizumab (200 mg IV Q3W). Patients with progressive disease (PD) or stable disease (SD) after 3 months of pembrolizumab monotherapy were allowed to add a B-cell receptor (BCR) kinase inhibitor. The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR). Results: A total of 26 patients with RT were enrolled (9 in initial cohort and 17 in expansion cohort). The median age was 68.5 years. Ten (38%) patients had del(17p) or TP53 mutation. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 3 (range 1-10). Fifteen (58%) patients had received ibrutinib previously (14 of whom had PD on ibrutinib). With pembrolizumab monotherapy (n=26), the ORR was 23.1%, with 2 (7.7%) complete response (CR), 4 (15.4%) partial response (PR), and 7 (26.9%) SD. Of the 6 patients with confirmed CR or PR, responses occurred after a median of 2 cycles of monotherapy. The median duration of response (DOR) was 3.2 months (95% CI 2.8-NA). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.6 months (95% CI 1.6-3.6). Sixteen patients went on to receive a BCR kinase inhibitor (ibrutinib [n=15], idelalisib [n=1]) in combination with pembrolizumab, after SD or PD on pembrolizumab monotherapy. The ORR to combination therapy was 62.5%, with 4 (25.0%) CR and 6 (37.5%) PR. Of the 10 patients with confirmed CR or PR to combination therapy, responses occurred after a median of 4 cycles of therapy. The median DOR was 4.5 months (95% CI 1.6-NA). The median PFS was 7.6 months (95% CI 2.3-13.3). After a median follow-up of 50.4 (95% CI 34.0-56.0) months, the median overall survival (OS) for all 26 patients with RT was 11.6 months (95% CI 7.5-20.1), and the 2-year OS rate was 27%. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade occurred in 24 (92%) patients, including anemia (54%), thrombocytopenia (58%), neutropenia (54%), leukopenia (35%), lymphopenia (23%), dyspnea (23%), diarrhea (19%), and nausea (23%). Treatment-related grade 3 or above AEs occurred in 21 (81%) patients, including neutropenia (38%), leukopenia (31%), thrombocytopenia (27%), anemia (15%), febrile neutropenia (12%), and lung infection (12%). Conclusions: This expanded analysis confirmed that pembrolizumab has modest single agent activity in RT. Combination therapy with pembrolizumab and a BCR kinase inhibitor is associated with increased efficacy (ORR >60%), similar to other reports. These results support further investigation of immune checkpoint inhibitor-based combination therapy in RT. Clinical trial information: NCT02332980 .

INTRODUCTION Richter transformation (RT) is the histologic transformation of CLL/SLL into an aggressive lymphoma, most commonly diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). We previously reported an incidence of 0.5% per year of RT in patients with newly diagnosed CLL and an incidence of 1% per year following initiation of therapy (Parikh, BJH, 2013). It is unknown whether these incidences have changed in the novel agent era. METHODS We identified patients with previously untreated CLL/SLL in the Mayo Clinic CLL Database who were seen within 12 months of diagnosis. Only patients with biopsy-proven DLBCL with histopathology confirmation at Mayo Clinic were included. Cumulative incidence methodology was used to display the time to development of RT with death as a competing risk (both from time of initial CLL/SLL diagnosis, and from start of CLL directed therapy). We defined the time period prior to February 2014 (FDA approval of ibrutinib for CLL) as the pre-novel agent era and the time period starting February 2014 as the novel agent era. Using Cox regression analysis, we compared the incidence of RT, both after initial CLL diagnosis and after initiation of CLL therapy, between patients diagnosed with CLL in the pre-novel agent era versus the novel agent era. RESULTS Between 1/2000 and 4/2023, 3347 patients were seen at Mayo Clinic. The median age at diagnosis was 65 years (range 21-97 years), and 66% patients were male. Baseline characteristics of patients at the time of CLL and RT diagnoses between the two treatment eras were similar, including distance in miles of primary residence from Mayo Clinic ( Table 1). The median follow-up for the entire cohort was 5.6 years (9.5 years for the pre-novel agent era cohort and 3.2 years for the novel agent era cohort). A total of 82 patients were diagnosed with RT (69 in the pre-novel agent era and 13 in the novel agent era). Overall, the 1-, 5- and 10-year cumulative incidence rates for RT from the time of CLL/SLL diagnosis were 0.6% (95% CI: 0.4-0.9%), 1.8% (95% CI: 1.3-2.3%), and 3.0% (95% CI: 2.4-3.8%), respectively. Among the patients who received CLL/SLL therapy (n=1382), the 1-, 5-, and 10-year incidence rates for RT from the time of treatment start were 0.3% (95% CI: 0.1-0.8%), 3.3% (95% CI: 2.4-4.5%), and 4.9% (95% CI: 3.7-6.5%), respectively. Among 1981 patients diagnosed with CLL/SLL in the pre-novel agent era, the 1- and 5-year incidence rates for RT from the time of diagnosis were 0.6% (95% CI: 0.4-1.1%) and 2.1% (95% CI: 1.5-2.8%), respectively. Among 1366 patients diagnosed with CLL/SLL in the novel agent era, the 1- and 5-year incidence rates following CLL/SLL diagnosis were 0.5% (95% CI: 0.2-1.1%) and 1.1% (95% CI: 0.6-2.2%), respectively. The RT incidence from time of CLL/SLL diagnosis was not significantly different between the pre-novel agent and novel agent era patients (hazard ratio [HR] 1.6, 95%CI 0.9-3.0, p=0.13). Patients who received CLL/SLL treatment in the pre-novel agent era (n=926) and novel agent era (n=456) had subsequent 1-year incidence rates of RT of 0.3% (95% CI: 0.1-1.0%) and 0.2% (95% CI: 0.0-1.8%), respectively. The 5-year incidence rates for these groups were 3.7% (95% CI: 2.6-5.2%) and 1.9% (95% CI: 0.7-5.0%), respectively. Although an increased risk of RT after CLL/SLL directed therapy was observed in the pre-novel agent era compared to the novel agent era (HR 2.4, 95%CI: 0.9-6.1, p=0.07; Figure 1), this did not cross the threshold of statistial significance. Among patients diagnosed in the pre-novel agent era who developed RT (n=69), CLL treatment prior to RT included: none, n=19 (28%); chemoimmunotherapy only, n=36 (52%); and novel agent, n=14 (20%; includes 11 treated with prior chemoimmunotherapy also). In contrast, among patients diagnosed in the novel agent era who developed RT (n=13), CLL treatment prior to RT included: none, n=8 (62%); and novel agent, n=5 (38%). CONCLUSIONS Patients who received CLL/SLL directed treatment appear to have a lower risk of RT in the novel agent era. This may be driven by the fact that none of the patients who developed RT in the novel agent era received chemoimmunotherapy. Whether novel agent use for CLL/SLL suppresses the development of RT or avoids the risk associated with cytotoxic chemotherapy-induced clonal evolution requires further study. Although limited by length of follow-up, our findings challenge the notion that RT incidence will increase in parallel with CLL patients living longer with novel agent treatments.

INTRODUCTION We aim to identify factors that impact outcomes of venetoclax for patients with CLL treated in routine practice at a tertiary center. We report on the use of venetoclax in the most frequently encountered disease scenarios: first-line, relapsed/Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi)-naïve, and relapsed/BTKi-exposed. METHODS We identified patients who received venetoclax therapy for CLL (between 4/2012-4/2023) from the Mayo Clinic CLL Database. Undetectable measurable residual disease (uMRD) was defined as <1 CLL cell per 10,000 leukocytes using 8-color flow cytometry on peripheral blood (PB) or bone marrow (BM). Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time from venetoclax start until date of death or last known to be alive. Treatment-free survival (TFS) after venetoclax was defined as the time from venetoclax start until the earliest of date of next treatment, or death. Kaplan-Meier was used to display OS and TFS. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate associations of factors with time-to-event outcomes. RESULTS A total of 155 patients received venetoclax: firstline therapy (in combination with obinutuzumab, n=55) and relapsed CLL (n=100; 17 had relapsed/BTKi-naïve CLL, and 83 had previously received BTKi [55 with progression after BTKi], relapsed/BTKi-exposed). The median follow-up for the cohorts of first-line therapy, relapsed/BTKi-naïve, and relapsed/BTKi-exposed was 12.9 months, 37.0 months, and 27.6 months, respectively. Baseline characteristics at the time of venetoclax initiation for all patients are shown in Table 1. The median TFS for the overall cohort was 39.0 months. The median OS was 54.6 months. Among patients treated with venetoclax as first-line therapy (n=55), the 2-year TFS ( Figure 1) and 2-year OS rates were both 91%. MRD testing was performed in 28 patients and was uMRD in 23 (82%) patients (only PB assessed, n=7; only BM assessed, n=2; PB and BM assessed, n=14). Detectable MRD was identified in 3 patients, and 2 patients had discordant results (PB uMRD and BM detectable disease). Among patients treated with venetoclax in the relapsed/BTKi-naïve setting (n=17), the 2-year TFS rate was 73% ( Figure 1) and the 2-year OS rate was 100%. MRD testing was performed in 7 patients and was uMRD in all 7 (100%) (only PB assessed, n=3; only BM assessed, n=2; PB and BM assessed, n=2). The median time to first uMRD result was 14.1 months. Among relapsed/BTKi-exposed venetoclax-treated patients (n=83), the median TFS was 26.9 months ( Figure 1), and the median OS was 39.4 months.In this subgroup, the median TFS for patients with (n=55) and without (n=28) prior disease progression on prior BTKi were 22.3 and 42.3 months, respectively. Median TFS with venetoclax monotherapy (n=30) was 24.0 months, venetoclax in combination with rituximab (n=37) was 26.9 months, and venetoclax in combination with obinutuzumab (n=16) was 39.0 months. BTKi-exposed patients that were chemotherapy-naïve (n=27) and chemotherapy-exposed (n=56) had median TFS of 29.1 and 24.0 months, respectively. MRD testing was performed in 28 patients and was uMRD in 16 (57%) patients (only PB assessed, n=9; only BM assessed, n=2; PB and BM assessed, n=5). Detectable MRD was identified in 11 patients, and 1 had discordant results (PB uMRD and BM detectable disease). The median time to first uMRD result was 11.5 months. TP53 disruption, unmutated IGHV genes, older age, complex karyotype (CK; defined as more than 3 chromosomal aberrations on CpG stimulated karyotype), and disease progression on prior BTKi were associated with shorter TFS in the overall cohort on univariate analysis. TP53 disruption, older age, CK, and disease progression on prior BTKi were associated with shorter OS in the overall cohort on univariate analysis. Multivariable analysis was performed by including only those patients where all variables significant in univariable analysis were available (OS model n=65, TFS model n=53). In these models, only CK was significantly associated with shorter TFS (HR 8.5; 95%CI 2.5-29.1; P<0.001) and shorter OS (HR 4.1; 95%CI 1.2-14; P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS Patients with BTKi-exposed CLL, particularly those with prior disease progression on BTKi, had worse outcomes. Our study identified CK as one of the most important baseline predictors of adverse TFS and OS in the overall cohort of patients, supporting karyotype assessment for prognostication prior to venetoclax treatment.

Introduction: The treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) has evolved over the past two decades, from finite duration chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) to an era of targeted agents such as Bruton Tyrosine Kinase (BTK) inhibitors, BCL2 inhibitors, and anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies. Little is known about how initial management strategy (watch and wait [W&W] vs. treatment) at diagnosis impacts patient reported outcomes (PROs) in CLL survivors over time, particularly in light of therapeutic advances over the last decade. Methods: Newly diagnosed CLL patients were prospectively enrolled within 9 months of diagnosis in the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER1) study between 9/1/02 and 6/30/15, and within 6 months of diagnosis in the MER Phase 2 (MER2) study between 7/1/15 and 5/1/20. PROs were measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General scale (FACT-G), which generates Physical (PWB, range 0-28), Social/Family (SFWB, 0-28), Emotional (EWB, 0-24), and Functional Well-Being (FWB, 0-28) scores and a Total Score (0-108), with higher scores indicating better WB. In both cohorts, FACT-G was measured at enrollment and at years 1, 2, and 3 after diagnosis, while the timing of later assessments varied slightly by study (MER1: 6 yrs and 9 yrs; MER2: 5 years). We employed a generalized linear mixed model to evaluate change from baseline between groups with groups defined by each participant's initial management strategy (W&W vs. upfront systemic treatment). Initial management strategy was determined by the treating physician. The study was approved by the Mayo Clinic IRB. Results: A total of 722 patients were identified in MER1 and 256 patients in MER2. The median age at diagnosis was 63 years in MER1 and 66 years in MER2 (P<0.05); 66% were male in MER1 and 68% were male in MER2 (P>0.05). More patients initiated upfront systemic therapy in MER1 (n=380, 53%) than in MER2 (n=110, 43%). Other baseline clinical characteristics were similar between the cohorts ( Table 1). There was no statistical difference in the mean FACT-G total score at baseline between MER1 (85.0, SD 12.5) and MER2 (85.2, SD 12.7). In the MER1 cohort, statistically significant lower baseline QOL scores were observed in patients initiating upfront treatment compared to W&W on the FACT-G total score (P=0.002) as well as the PWB (P=0.01), EWB (P=0.03), and FWB (P=0.006) subscales. We also observed that over time, EWB and FWB scores were consistently lower amongst those treated upfront compared to W&W. Further, EWB scores steadily improved over time regardless of initial management ( Figure 1), whereas the FWB and PWB subscales were largely stable over time. Mean SFWB scores dropped amongst patients who received upfront therapy at 3 years, which then steadily improved through year 9 but did not recover back to baseline. SFWB scores were stable among W&W patients. In the MER2 cohort, no statistically significant differences in any of the baseline QOL scores were noted between the W&W vs. initial treatment groups. Despite this, we observed consistently lower mean EWB scores among patients who initiated upfront treatment compared to W&W pts over time. No other statistically significant differences in mean QOL scores over time were observed between groups. Similar to MER1, we did observe a drop in mean SFWB scores amongst patients initiating upfront therapy at 3 years of follow-up that remained decreased at year 5. Conclusion: This is the largest longitudinal study of CLL survivors that spanned over 18 years and two treatment eras. We demonstrated that in the novel treatment era, QOL metrics were similar between initial management strategies (W&W vs. treatment), suggesting that initial management had little to no impact on QOL at baseline or over time. In contrast, in the CIT era, we observed differences in QOL metrics at baseline between groups. In both treatment eras, patients with CLL who required upfront therapy demonstrated a decrease in SFWB from baseline at year 3 of follow-up, and the mean EWB scores were lowest at baseline regardless of initial management strategy (W&W vs. upfront treatment) or treatment era (CIT vs. novel agents), but steadily improved over time. These findings suggest opportunities for interventions to improve QOL in patients with CLL, and additional analyses are ongoing. Further follow-up in the era of novel agents is needed.

Background: Understanding the symptoms and quality of life (QOL) over time of adults with follicular lymphoma (FL) is important for treatment decision-making and clinical management. However, there are limited population-level data on the long-term QOL of adults with FL. We aim to describe the real-world, long-term QOL of adults with newly diagnosed FL up to 5/6 years after diagnosis. Methods: We used the Mayo Clinic/Iowa Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) and the multi-institutional Lymphoma Epidemiology of Outcomes (LEO) to identify adults with grade 1-3A FL who completed QOL surveys at baseline and follow-up. Participants with lymphoma were prospectively enrolled within 9 months of diagnosis in the MER cohort from 2002-2015 and within 6 months of diagnosis in the multi-institutional LEO cohort study across 8 cancer centers from 2015-2020. The LEO/MER cohort studies systematically collected information on disease status, QOL, health behaviors, and functional assessment. Treatments, disease relapses, and deaths were verified by medical record review. Treating physicians determined clinical management. QOL was measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) at years 1, 2, 3, and 5/6 post-diagnosis. A higher FACT-G total score (range 0-108) indicated better QOL across 4 subscales (range): physical (0-28), social/family (0-28), emotional (0-24), and functional (0-28) well-being. We categorized participants based on their frontline management at time of diagnosis: “observation” (surveillance), “treatment” (systemic treatment with immunotherapy +/- chemotherapy), and “local” (radiation) groups. We employed a generalized linear mixed model to evaluate and compare the changes in QOL scores (as a continuous variable) from baseline for the observation, treatment, and local groups, adjusting for sex, race/ethnicity, age, FLIPI risk, and cohort (i.e., LEO or MER). We also evaluated QOL changes by FLIPI risk. Results: Our study included 1,544 participants with FL and QOL data. At the time of enrollment, median age was 61 years (range 19-91), 88% were non-Hispanic White, and 49% were female. Based on initial management, 529 (34%) were in the observation group, 880 (57%) were in the treatment group, and 135 (9%) were in the local group. FLIPI risk was high for 17% in the observation group, 29.3% in the treatment group, and 3% in the local group. The mean (standard deviation) baseline FACT-G total score was lowest in the treatment group with the following baseline scores: 86 (13) for the observation group, 83 (14) for the treatment group, and 88 (12) for the local group (Table 1). The observation and local groups reported a greater worsening of their baseline FACT-G total score vs the treatment group at both the 2-year (-1.2, -0.8 vs +1.8, respectively) and 5/6 year (-5.4, -6 vs. -1.6, respectively) timepoints (Figure 1). This appeared to be driven by worsened physical and functional well-being in the observation (-1.3, -2.2, respectively) and local (-0.9, -2.4, respectively) groups vs the treatment group (0, -0.3, respectively). These differences were statistically significant between the observation vs treatment groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the other subscales, i.e., social/family and emotional well-being, by frontline management. Social/family well-being decreased across all groups by 5/6 years (-2.3 in observation, -2.2 in treatment, and -3 in local, p<0.05). Regardless of FLIPI risk, the total FACT-G scores decreased within each FLIPI risk group at 5/6 years (-4.4 for low, -3.8 for intermediate, and -4.9 for high, p<0.05). This was primarily due to worsened social/family well-being (-2.4 for low, -2.2 for intermediate, and -3 for high, p<0.05) at 5/6 years. There was no statistically significant difference in QOL between FLIPI risk groups. Conclusion: This is one of the first and largest studies with real-world longitudinal QOL data for FL. Our study suggests that frontline systemic treatment initially improved QOL and resulted in a lower degree of QOL decline over time. Social/family well-being decreased over time regardless of frontline management or FLIPI risk. Further research is warranted to explore the impact of timing and specific systemic treatments on QOL, incorporate the patient/caregiver experience to address social/family well-being, and identify the clinical significance of our findings.

INTRODUCTION Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and SLL represent a single entity in current classifications per the WHO-HAEM5 and ICC. Both are characterized by malignant B cells with an identical immunophenotype, but they are distinguished by the predominant site of disease burden, such as peripheral blood for CLL and nodal compartments for SLL. Most clinical trials and retrospective studies involving CLL/SLL do not separate out SLL patients. In this study, we report reasons for treatment initiation and outcomes in a cohort of SLL patients seen at our institution. METHODS Using the Mayo Clinic CLL Database, we retrospectively identified patients with SLL who received first line therapy between 12/1995 and 2/2023. Patients were classified as having SLL if they met at least one of the following criteria for diagnosis: 1) presence of lymphadenopathy or splenomegaly (either by exam or scans) and an absolute clonal B cell count of < 5 x 109/L; or 2) presence of lymphadenopathy or splenomegaly (either by exam or scans) and an absolute lymphocyte count of < 11 x 109/L (if absolute clonal B cell count was not available). Although the presence of anemia (hemoglobin < 11 g/dL) and thrombocytopenia (platelets < 100 x 109/L) are considered as exclusion criteria for a diagnosis of SLL, patients were included if these cytopenia were due to autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA) or immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) with < 50% bone marrow involvement by SLL (bone marrow biopsy confirmed). Patients treated for SLL with extranodal involvement were also included. Indications for SLL treatment were abstracted by chart review and included one of the following: 1) symptomatic or progressive lymphadenopathy and/or splenomegaly, 2) autoimmune cytopenias, 3) extranodal/direct organ infiltration; and 4) other (e.g., cryoglobulinemia, paraneoplastic, non-infiltrative renal disease such as minimal change disease). Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time from treatment start until date of death or last known to be alive. Treatment-free survival (TFS) was defined as the time from treatment start until the earliest of date of next treatment, or death. Kaplan-Meier method was used to display OS and TFS. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate associations of factors with time-to-event outcomes. RESULTS We identified 182 patients with SLL who received first line treatment. The median age at treatment start was 66 years, and 132 (73%) were male. Unmutated IGHV was identified in 60/82 (73%) patients and peripheral blood fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) assessed pre-treatment start showed del13q in 10%, trisomy 12 in 43%, del11q in 7%, del17p in 8%, and no abnormalities in 33%. TP53 disruption (del17p and/or TP53 mutation) was present in 7/89 (8%) patients prior to first therapy. The median follow-up after diagnosis was 6.9 years. The indications for treatment were grouped as follows: symptomatic or progressive lymphadenopathy/splenomegaly (n=130), extranodal/direct organ infiltration (n=30), AIHA/ITP (n=10), and other (n=12). For the entire cohort, the median TFS was 2.9 years and the median OS was 12.3 years. The median TFS by the treatment indication groups were 3.3, 5.1, 1.6, and 5.3 years, respectively (Figure 1). The median OS by treatment indication groups were 11.1, 10.5, 8.8, and 19.9 years, respectively. Among the 160 patients with symptomatic or progressive lymphadenopathy/splenomegaly or extranodal disease, the treatments administered include: mAb alone (n=35), chemotherapy alone (n=33), chemoimmunotherapy (n=57), targeted agent (n=33; Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor [BTKi] based n=28; venetoclax-based n=3, BTKi + venetoclax n=2), and other (n=2). The median TFS by treatment groups were 2.4, 2.0, 3.8, and 6.0 years (Figure 2), respectively (excluding the small “other” subgroup of 2 patients). The median OS for these groups were 9.5, 9.7, 15.0, and not evaluable, respectively. Only older age at treatment start predicted for shorter TFS (HR 1.02; 95%CI 1.002-1.038; p=0.03) and shorter OS (HR 1.05; 95%CI 1.03-1.07; p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS In this study of patients with SLL who received therapy, the most frequent indications for treatment included symptomatic lymphadenopathy and/or splenomegaly, followed by extranodal disease. Trisomy 12 was the most frequently detected abnormality on peripheral blood FISH testing. Treatment with novel agents achieved durable TFS and OS.

12057 Background: AlthoughCLL primarily affects older adults (median age 71 years), limited data exists about the outcomes of adults who are ≥80 years old because they are under-enrolled on clinical trials. Methods: The Mayo Clinic CLL Database was used to conduct a retrospective cohort study of adults ≥80 years at the time of frontline CLL treatment. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to plot OS, and cumulative incidence was used to plot TTNT, accounting for competing risk of death. The Mayo Clinic IRB approved the study. Results: Our study included 216 patients with CLL who were age ≥80 years at the time of frontline CLL therapy between 1/1995 and 11/2022 (Table). The median time from CLL diagnosis to initiation of frontline therapy was 3.1 years. The median OS after start of frontline therapy was 3.9 years. The median OS was 3.3 years (95% CI 2.6–4.2) for patients who received alkylating agents (e.g., chlorambucil, n=96), 3.8 years (95% CI 2.8–not reached [NR]) for purine analogues (e.g., fludarabine, n=11), 3.9 years (95% CI 3.2–4.9) for anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody monotherapy (e.g., obinutuzumab, n=64), and not reached (95% CI 3.3-NR) for novel agents (n=43) (P=0.02). The types of novel agents included ibrutinib (n=19), acalabrutinib (n=16), venetoclax (n=7), and orelabrutinib (n=1). There was no difference in OS between 36 patients who received a BTKi compared to the 7 patients who received venetoclax-based therapy. At a median follow-up time of 6.7 years from the first visit, 143 patients died from the following: progressive CLL (n=63), infections (n=12), other cancer (n=11), non-CLL reasons (n=21). Cause of death was unavailable for 36 patients. On multivariable analyses, older age (i.e., any 5-year increase in age) was associated with a 50% increased risk of death (HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2-1.9, p=0.001), and treatment with non-novel agents was associated with 3.2 times increased risk of death (HR 3.2, 95% CI 1.2-8.9, p=0.02). Of the 216 patients, 76 patients required second-line therapy; the median TTNT was 4.2 years (95% CI 2.9-NE). The most used second-line agents were monoclonal antibodies alone (20/76, 26%) and single-agent alkylators (18/76, 24%). Conclusions: When compared to all other CLL treatments, novel agents such as BTKi and venetoclax-based treatments are associated with significantly improved OS in patients with CLL ≥80 years old when used in the frontline setting. [Table: see text]

e19507 Background: Patients (pts) with CLL are at elevated risk of developing non-hematologic malignancies. Radiation therapy (RT) is a critical component of management in localized solid organ malignancies. Novel agents (NA) are widely used in CLL treatment; however, safety data are lacking to guide treatment of pts requiring concurrent RT and NA. Methods: We identified pts treated concurrently with NA for CLL and RT for second primary malignancy (SPM) at Mayo Clinic from 2014-2022. Adverse events within 3 months of RT were evaluated using the International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (iwCLL) criteria for hematological toxicity and the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5 for non-hematological toxicity. Patients without seamless, concurrent treatment with NA and RT were excluded. Results: Twenty-six pts were included. NA therapy consisted of ibrutinib (n = 23), acalabrutinib (n = 2), and venetoclax (n = 1). Median follow up time since RT completion was 1.5 years. The median age at NA initiation was 67 years (range:46-85) and at RT start was 68 years (range: 51-85); 92% of pts were male. NA was first treatment in 23% of pts; the median number of prior lines of therapy was 1 (range: 0-4). IGHV was unmutated in 82% and TP53 aberration was present in 24% of evaluable patients. SPM sites included prostate (n = 9), head/neck (n = 8), lung (n = 3), and brain, breast, bone, skin, kidney, and thymus (n = 1 each). The most common conventionally fractionated prescriptions (cGy/fx) were 6000/30 (n = 6) and > 6000-7020/20-33 (n = 7). SBRT ranged from 3300/5 to 5400/3 (n = 8). Five pts received other, varied RT prescriptions. Overall, 3 (12%) pts experienced at least one grade 3/4 toxicity. Grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia was observed in 2 (8%) pts and grade 3/4 neutropenia was observed in 2 pts per iwCLL criteria. Grade ≥3 non-hematological toxicities occurred in two pts that required hospitalization for critical illness, including 1 pt with grade 5 respiratory failure within 6 weeks after RT. Dose de-escalation of ibrutinib was reported in one case for pancytopenia attributed to use of a radiosensitizing agent. There were no cases of RT dose modification. Conclusions: Continuing NA CLL therapy during RT did not result in unexpected toxicities. This approach may maintain CLL disease control without compromising management of the SPM. [Table: see text]

Abstract Preclinical studies have shown augmented activity when combining Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi) with inhibitors of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) and immunomodulatory agents (IMiD). We conducted a phase 1, open‐label study at five centers in USA to evaluate the safety of triplet BTKi/mTOR/IMiD therapy. Eligible patients were adults aged 18 years or older with relapsed/refractory CLL, B cell NHL, or Hodgkin lymphoma. Our dose escalation study used an accelerated titration design and moved sequentially from single agent BTKi (DTRMWXHS‐12), doublet (DTRMWXHS‐12 + everolimus), and then to triplet therapy (DTRMWXHS‐12 + everolimus + pomalidomide). All drugs were dosed once daily on days 1–21 of each 28‐day cycle. The primary goal was to establish the recommended phase 2 dose of the triplet combination. Between September 27, 2016, and July 24, 2019, a total of 32 patients with a median age of 70 years (range 46 to 94 years) were enrolled. No MTD was identified for monotherapy and the doublet combination. The MTD for the triplet combination was determined to be DTRMWXHS‐12 200 mg + everolimus 5 mg + pomalidomide 2 mg. Responses across all studied cohorts were seen in 13 of 32 (41.9%). Combining DTRMWXHS‐12 with everolimus and pomalidomide is tolerable and shows clinical activity. Additional trials could confirm benefit of this all‐oral combination therapy for relapsed/refractory lymphomas.