Campo, Elı́as

SummaryMantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is clinically and biologically heterogeneous. While various prognostic features have been proposed, none currently impact therapy selection, particularly in older patients, for whom treatment is primarily dictated by age and comorbidities. Herein, we undertook a comprehensive comparison of clinicopathological features in a cohort of patients 60 years and older, uniformly treated with bendamustine and rituximab, with a median survival of >8 years. The strongest prognostic indicators in this cohort were a high‐risk call by a simplified MCL international prognostic index (s‐MIPI) (HR: 3.32, 95% CI: 1.65–6.68 compared to low risk), a high‐risk call by MCL35 (HR: 10.34, 95% CI: 2.37–45.20 compared to low risk) and blastoid cytology (HR: 4.21, 95% CR: 1.92–9.22 compared to classic). Patients called high risk by both the s‐MIPI and MCL35 had the most dismal prognosis (HR: 11.58, 95% CI: 4.10–32.72), while those with high risk by either had a moderate but clinically relevant prognosis (HR: 2.95, 95% CI: 1.49–5.82). A robust assay to assess proliferation, such as MCL35, along with stringent guidelines for cytological evaluation of MCL, in combination with MIPI, may be a strong path to risk‐stratify older MCL patients in future clinical trials.

Abstract With the introduction of large-scale molecular profiling methods and high-throughput sequencing technologies, the genomic features of most lymphoid neoplasms have been characterized at an unprecedented scale. Although the principles for the classification and diagnosis of these disorders, founded on a multidimensional definition of disease entities, have been consolidated over the past 25 years, novel genomic data have markedly enhanced our understanding of lymphomagenesis and enriched the description of disease entities at the molecular level. Yet, the current diagnosis of lymphoid tumors is largely based on morphological assessment and immunophenotyping, with only few entities being defined by genomic criteria. This paper, which accompanies the International Consensus Classification of mature lymphoid neoplasms, will address how established assays and newly developed technologies for molecular testing already complement clinical diagnoses and provide a novel lens on disease classification. More specifically, their contributions to diagnosis refinement, risk stratification, and therapy prediction will be considered for the main categories of lymphoid neoplasms. The potential of whole-genome sequencing, circulating tumor DNA analyses, single-cell analyses, and epigenetic profiling will be discussed because these will likely become important future tools for implementing precision medicine approaches in clinical decision making for patients with lymphoid malignancies.

Abstract Since the publication of the Revised European-American Classification of Lymphoid Neoplasms in 1994, subsequent updates of the classification of lymphoid neoplasms have been generated through iterative international efforts to achieve broad consensus among hematopathologists, geneticists, molecular scientists, and clinicians. Significant progress has recently been made in the characterization of malignancies of the immune system, with many new insights provided by genomic studies. They have led to this proposal. We have followed the same process that was successfully used for the third and fourth editions of the World Health Organization Classification of Hematologic Neoplasms. The definition, recommended studies, and criteria for the diagnosis of many entities have been extensively refined. Some categories considered provisional have now been upgraded to definite entities. Terminology for some diseases has been revised to adapt nomenclature to the current knowledge of their biology, but these modifications have been restricted to well-justified situations. Major findings from recent genomic studies have impacted the conceptual framework and diagnostic criteria for many disease entities. These changes will have an impact on optimal clinical management. The conclusions of this work are summarized in this report as the proposed International Consensus Classification of mature lymphoid, histiocytic, and dendritic cell tumors.

Abstract BACKGROUND: Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma with variable clinical outcomes. Commonly used risk stratification tools (Ki67 IHC, MIPI) in newly diagnosed MCL are not frequently used when selecting therapy, resulting in treatment choice being dictated by age and co-morbidities rather than disease biology. The MCL35 risk score was developed as a more reliable measure of proliferation and has been shown to be prognostic and can risk stratify younger transplant eligible MCL patients into three groups with significantly different overall survival (OS; Scott et al. 2017; Holte et al. 2018) but has not been evaluated in older transplant ineligible patients. We report results evaluating the prognostic value of the MCL35 assay in older MCL patients (≥65) treated with frontline bendamustine/rituximab (BR). METHODS: Archived tissue samples from 119 patients age ≥65 years treated with BR from collaborating Lymphoma/Leukemia Molecular Profiling Project (LLMPP) sites and the LEO/MER cohort were collected and analyzed using the MCL35 assay and stratified into three distinct risk groups (low, standard, and high risk). Association between MCL35 proliferation scores and OS were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method and hazard ratios were calculated. Associations between Ki67, s-MIPI, p53 IHC status, morphology and OS were also evaluated. RESULTS: The MCL35 assay was run on tissue samples from 119 patients. Median patient age was 74 (range 65-93) and 69.5% were male. Ki67 was <30% in 29 patients (24%) and ≥30% in 90 patients (76%). Simplified MIPI (s-MIPI) score was 0-3 in 21 patients (24%), 4-5 in 42 patients (48%) and ≥6 in 25 patients (28%). Thirty-one did not have sufficient data to calculate a s-MIPI score. MCL35 was low risk in 51 patients (43%), standard risk in 39 patients (33%) and high risk in 29 patients (24%). Eleven patients had blastic morphology, 7 had pleomorphic morphology and the remainder were classic morphology (n=56). Of 57 samples with p53 IHC staining 7 (12.3%) were positive. At a median follow up of 33.4 months, 82 patients were alive and 35 had died. Patients with high risk MCL35 score had inferior OS compared to low risk (HR 2.27, 95% CI: 1.03-5.00; p=0.042) while standard risk was not statistically significant compared to low risk (HR 0.87, 95% CI: 0.37-2.0; p=0.740)(Figure 1). Ki67 IHC using a cutoff of ≥ 30% and 10%-29% was not significantly associated with OS compared to Ki67 <10% ( Ki67 ≥ 30% vs. Ki67 < 10%, HR 0.87, 95% CI: 0.12-6.41; p=0.892, Ki67 ≥ 10%-29% vs. Ki67 < 10%, HR 0.32, 95% CI: 0.04-2.83; p=0.303), however high s-MIPI score (≥6) (s-MIPI ≥6 vs. s-MIPI 0-3, HR 3.86, 95% CI 1.20-12.5; p=0.024) and positive p53 IHC (HR: 9.51, 3.26-27.7; p <0.001) were both associated with poor OS. Eighteen cases were blastic/pleomorphic by morphology, 12 of which were in the high-risk group by MCL35, and this subset also had worse survival than classic MCL (p=0.0052). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest high risk MCL35 score is a prognostic biomarker of poor OS in patients >65 with MCL treated with BR. Conversely, Ki67 was not significantly associated with OS in these patients. Additional clinical validation using a larger sample size from the E1411 study is planned. If similar results are found, the MCL35 assay in combination with s-MIPI and p53 status may have utility in stratifying patients into risk adapted treatment arms in future prospective clinical trial designs. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Maurer: BMS: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nanostring: Research Funding. Villa: Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Lundbeck: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; NanoString Technologies: Honoraria. Habermann: Seagen: Other: Data Monitoring Committee; Incyte: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Tess Therapeutics: Other: Data Monitoring Committee; Morphosys: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Loxo Oncology: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Eli Lilly & Co.,: Other: Scientific Advisor. Cohen: Janssen, Adicet, Astra Zeneca, Genentech, Aptitude Health, Cellectar, Kite/Gilead, Loxo, BeiGene, Adaptive: Consultancy; Genentech, BMS/Celgene, LAM, BioINvent, LOXO, Astra Zeneca, Novartis, M2Gen, Takeda: Research Funding. Hill: Celgene (BMS): Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gentenech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel Support, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZenica: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte/Morphysis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Raess: Scopio Labs: Research Funding. Scott: Celgene: Consultancy; NanoString Technologies: Patents & Royalties: Patent describing measuring the proliferation signature in MCL using gene expression profiling.; BC Cancer: Patents & Royalties: Patent describing assigning DLBCL COO by gene expression profiling--licensed to NanoString Technologies. Patent describing measuring the proliferation signature in MCL using gene expression profiling. ; Rich/Genentech: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy. Rimsza: NanoString Technologies: Other: Fee-for-service contract.

Abstract Introduction: Plasmablastic lymphoma (PBL) is an aggressive B-cell lymphoma that predominantly occurs in patients with HIV or other causes of immunodeficiency. Frequent infection by the Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) and MYC translocations have been described as major features contributing to the pathogenesis of PBL. Prior studies examining the genetic landscape of PBL have largely relied on targeted capture-based sequencing approaches. As such, the molecular features of PBL remain to be fully explored. Here, we provide a comprehensive description of the genomic landscape of PBL using whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing to identify commonly perturbed pathways. Method: Archival diagnostic fresh frozen and formalin fixed paraffin embedded tissue biopsies from 58 PBL tumours were accrued from Lymphoma/Leukemia Molecular Profiling Project (LLMPP) sites, including 15 tumours from Ramis-Zaldivar et al., Haematolgica 2021. MYC rearrangements were identified by break-apart fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) and rearrangement partner was determined in a subset of tumours from capture or genome sequencing data using structural variant callers Manta, GRIDSS, and Delly. High confidence somatic mutations (SNVs/Indels) were identified in data from whole-genome (n=5) or whole-exome (n=53) sequencing through an ensemble voting approach utilizing four variant callers (Strelka2, Lofreq, Mutect2, SAGE). Mutation frequencies in known lymphoma-related genes were compared to activated B-cell (ABC)-DLBCL (Schmitz et al., NEJM 2018), as the closest tumour entity in terms of putative cell-of-origin differentiation stage, to identify differences in genetic aberrations. Candidate somatic copy number alterations (CNAs) were identified from exome and genome sequencing data, using CopywriteR and ControlFREEC, respectively, and high-confidence CNAs were determined using GISTIC2.0. Results: Within the study cohort, 81% of patients were male with a median age of 59 years (range 11-88). HIV and EBV statuses were available for 47% of patients and 95% of tumours, respectively, with 49% (13/27) of the patients being HIV+ and 69% (38/55) of tumours being EBV+. MYC rearrangement was observed in 60% (35/58) of PBLs, with IGH as the partner gene in 88% (21/24) of tumours. The most frequently mutated genes were STAT3 (38%), TP53 (22%), NRAS (21%), and TET2 (16%), consistent with previous studies, however novel mutations were seen in DUSP2 (21%), KLHL6 (16%), and BHLHE41 (16%). Recurrent CNAs included amplifications in 1q, whole gains of 7, 8q24, 11p12 and deletions affecting 4p16, 5p15, 10q11.22. While the mutational landscapes were similar between samples with and without a MYC translocation, the MYC-translocated PBLs showed more frequent amplification of 1q32.1. When stratifying by EBV status, STAT3 and SOCS1 mutations were more frequent in EBV-positive tumours, whereas TP53, TET2, KRAS, and MMRN2 mutations were associated with EBV-negativity. In comparison to ABC-DLBCL, PBLs were significantly enriched in STAT3 and NRAS mutations, and lacked common mutations affecting the NF-κB pathway (eg. MYD88, CD79B, and NFKBIZ 3' UTR mutations). Mutations in genes that are frequently mutated in ABC-DLBCLs, such as those associated with plasma cell differentiation (eg. PRDM1) or a memory B-cell fate (eg. TBL1XR1), were also not mutated in PBLs. Finally, genetic alterations associated with immune evasion, such as deletion of MHC I and II and mutations in B2M, CIITA, and CD58, were rarely observed. Conclusion: These data present a comprehensive overview of the genomic landscape of PBLs in a large cohort. We show frequent mutations involving the JAK-STAT and MAPK pathways, wherein the genetic landscape can be differentially characterized by EBV status and MYC rearrangement status. We show that PBLs are genetically distinct from ABC-DLBCLs, with absence of mutations in genes affecting the NF-κB pathway, immune evasion, and driving a memory B-cell fate. Disclosures Slack: Seagen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Raess: Scopio Labs: Research Funding. Holte: Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nordic: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nanovector: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lectures honorarias; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Savage: Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional clinical trial funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional clinical trial funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Other: Institutional clinical trial funding; Beigene: Other: Institutional clinical trial funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Steidl: Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Curis Inc.: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Epizyme: Research Funding; Trillium Therapeutics: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Rimsza: NanoString Technologies: Other: Fee-for-service contract. Morin: Foundation for Burkitt Lymphoma Research: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy; Epizyme: Patents & Royalties. Scott: Abbvie: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Rich/Genentech: Research Funding; BC Cancer: Patents & Royalties: Patent describing assigning DLBCL COO by gene expression profiling--licensed to NanoString Technologies. Patent describing measuring the proliferation signature in MCL using gene expression profiling. ; Incyte: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; NanoString Technologies: Patents & Royalties: Patent describing measuring the proliferation signature in MCL using gene expression profiling..

Abstract Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) with aberrant coexpression of CD10+BCL6+MUM1+ (DLBCL-AE), classified as germinal center B cell (GCB) type by the Hans algorithm (HA), was genetically characterized. To capture the complexity of DLBCL-AE, we used an integrated approach that included gene expression profiling (GEP), fluorescence in situ hybridization, targeted gene sequencing, and copy number (CN) arrays. According to GEP, 32/54 (59%) cases were classified as GCB-DLBCL, 16/54 (30%) as activated B-cell (ABC) DLBCL, and 6/54 (11%) as unclassifiable. The discrepancy between HA and GEP was 41%. Three genetic subgroups were identified. Group 1 included 13/50 (26%) cases without translocations and mainly showing and ABC/MCD molecular profile. Group 2 comprised 11/50 (22%) cases with IRF4 alterations (DLBCL-IRF4), frequent mutations in IRF4 (82%) and NF-κB pathway genes (MYD88, CARD11, and CD79B), and losses of 17p13.2. Five cases each were classified as GCB- or ABC-type. Group 3 included 26/50 (52%) cases with 1 or several translocations in BCL2/BCL6/MYC/IGH, and GCB/EZB molecular profile predominated. Two cases in this latter group showed complex BCL2/BCL6/IRF4 translocations. DLBCL-IRF4 in adults showed a similar copy number profile and shared recurrent CARD11 and CD79B mutations when compared with LBCL-IRF4 in the pediatric population. However, adult cases showed higher genetic complexity, higher mutational load with frequent MYD88 and KMT2D mutations, and more ABC GEP. IRF4 mutations were identified only in IRF4-rearranged cases, indicating its potential use in the diagnostic setting. In conclusion, DLBCL-AE is genetically heterogeneous and enriched in cases with IRF4 alterations. DLBCL-IRF4 in adults has many similarities to the pediatric counterpart.