Khurana, Arushi

e19556 Background: CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy possesses unique side effects including cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). Age is a major risk factor for ICANS. However, whether ICANS in older patients is different compared to younger patients is unknown. Herein, we report clinical course, outcomes and risk factors for ICANS in older patients with large B cell lymphoma (LBCL) treated with axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel). Methods: We comprehensively reviewed detailed clinical courses of ICANS in 78 adult patients with LBCL treated with axi-cel between June 2016 and October 2020. Incidence, manifestation, risk factors, treatment, and outcomes of ICANS were compared between patients age ≥60 (n=32) and <60 (n=46) years old. Results: Baseline characteristics were comparable between older and younger patients except higher proportion of high international prognostic index and underlying cerebral microvascular disease in older patients. ICANS was observed in 16 patients in the older and 24 patients in the younger age group, with a 30-day incidence of 52% and 50%, respectively. Median time to CRS and ICANS were similar between 2 age groups. The most common initial neurological findings included aphasia, dysgraphia and encephalopathy in both age groups. Table summarizes the characteristics, clinical course and interventions of ICANS in older and younger patients. In Cox regression model, the presence of CRS was the only factor associated with ICANS in both age groups. Age, history of central nervous system involvement and cerebral microvascular disease were not associated with ICANS. Importantly, all patients had complete resolution of ICANS. No elderly patients in our cohort experienced seizure as a manifestation of ICANS. Conclusions: In our study, older age was not a risk factor for ICANS. CRS was the only factor associated with ICANS in both younger and older patients. Incidence, clinical course and neurological outcomes of ICANS in older patients treated with axi-cel were comparable to younger patients. [Table: see text]

e19554 Background: Obesity is associated with a pro-inflammatory state and immune dysregulation. Retrospective studies indicate that obesity could affect toxicities and outcomes after immunotherapies including checkpoint inhibitors and allogeneic stem cell transplant. Currently, there are no data specifically on outcomes for obese patients who receive chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cells. We described the clinical outcome in obese patients with large B cell lymphoma (LBCL) who received axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel). Methods: We analyzed the effect of body weight (BW) and body mass index (BMI) on toxicities and outcomes of 78 adults with LBCL who received axi-cel between June 2016 and October 2020 at Mayo Clinic. Obesity was defined as having BMI of 30 or higher. Results: Of 78 patients, 22 (28%) and 19 (24%) were classified as overweight (BMI 25-29.99 kg/m2) and obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m2), respectively. Baseline characteristics were not statistically significantly different between non-obese and obese patients. The median delivered dose of fludarabine was similar between non-obese and obese patients (89 [0-105] vs 88 [56-94] mg/m2, P=0.32) whereas the median delivered dose of cyclophosphamide was lower in non-obese patients (1503 [1077-1525] vs 1512 [1021-1660] mg/m2, P=0.01). The 30-days cumulative incidence of CRS and ICANS were similar between non-obese and obese patients. BW and BMI were not associated with CRS or ICANS. The overall response rate was 66% (CR 47%) and 68% (CR 53%) in non-obese and obese group, respectively ( P=0.83). The 1-year event free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) was 34.6% and 64.5%, neither were different between non-obese and obese patients (EFS 35.8% vs. 30.7%, P=0.60; OS 59.4% vs. 83.9%, P=0.18). The 1-year cumulative incidence of relapse and non-relapse mortality was comparable (60.8% vs. 69.0%, P=0.40 and 3.4% vs. 0%, P=0.42). In the Cox proportional hazards model, higher dose of fludarabine, but not cyclophosphamide, was associated with better EFS and OS; however, neither obesity nor BW were associated with toxicities and outcomes. Conclusions: In our study, Obesity was not associated with risk of toxicities or adverse survival outcomes. The effect of obesity on the pattern of LD chemotherapy dosing including toxicities and outcomes after CAR-T warrants further exploration. [Table: see text]

Abstract The dilemma of whether to treat elderly patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) with a full or reduced dose intensity (DI) of R-CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone+rituximab) is often faced by clinicians. We conducted a systematic review assessing the impact of R-CHOP DI on DLBCL survival outcomes, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL for studies with ≥100 patients treated with R-CHOP/R-CHOP–like therapies published from January 2002 through November 2020. Studies were included if they reported the impact of R-CHOP DI on survival outcomes. We screened records, extracted data, and reviewed all the studies for quality and statistical appraisal. Of 380 screened records, 13 studies including 5188 patients were reviewed. DI was often calculated as the ratio of the cumulative delivered dose of prespecified drug(s) to the cumulative planned dose multiplied by a time-correction factor. Lower DI (intended or relative) was associated with inferior survival in 7 of 9 studies reporting crude survival analyses. Multivariable analysis using DI as a covariate was performed in 10 studies. Six showed an association (P &lt; .05) with adjustment for other covariates, and 4 did not. Most studies and those larger studies of higher quality showed poorer outcomes associated with reduced DI. In subgroups aged ≥80 years, survival was not consistently affected by reduced DI. DI-specific randomized trials are warranted, but these data support full-dose R-CHOP in elderly and fit patients aged &lt;80 years with DLBCL, but not in those aged ≥80 years, where dose-reduced R-CHOP does not appear to compromise survival.

AbstractNeurolymphomatosis (NL) is a rare manifestation of lymphoma, with limited evidence for optimal management. The largest patient series, 50 cases of lymphoma and leukemia, was published in 2010 with limited rituximab exposure. This study aims to evaluate the clinical presentation, diagnostic testing, and outcomes of NL in the rituximab era. Forty biopsy-proven cases of NL, in association with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), at the Mayo Clinic were retrospectively evaluated. B-cell NHL was associated with 97% of NL cases, of which diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) was the most common (68%). Primary NL, defined as neural involvement present at the time of diagnosis of lymphoma, was noted in 52% cases. Seventy percent of patients presented with sensorimotor weakness and neuropathic pain. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was positive in 100% patients. Overall survival (OS) was significantly better for primary NL and NL associated with indolent lymphomas. Relapses were seen in 60% (24/40) of patients; 75% involved the peripheral or central nervous system at relapse. The use of rituximab in the frontline setting significantly impacted progression-free survival (PFS). Transplant consolidation was noted to be associated with improved OS. This study adds to the available literature on NL in the rituximab era. The overall outcomes have improved in recent years. In our experience, MRI and positron emission tomography/computed tomography may be required for accurate assessment of the extent of disease involvement and identification of an optimal biopsy site. The use of rituximab was associated with improvement in PFS, and autologous stem cell transplant was associated with OS.

Background: Anti CD-19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T) is approved to treat relapsed/refractory (R/R) aggressive NHL after 2 or more lines of therapy. Randomized clinical trials are ongoing comparing CAR-T and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in second line. In standard of care practice, patients refractory to second line chemotherapy are sometimes treated with third line chemotherapy and taken to ASCT if disease is chemo-sensitive. Current study aims to evaluate the impact of prior lines of therapy on the efficacy of CAR-T and ASCT. Methods: A retrospective review of patients who received ASCT and/or axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) for R/R aggressive NHL from June 2016 - January 2020 at Mayo Clinic, Rochester was performed. The lymphoma types included in the study were DLBCL, transformed lymphoma (TFL), high grade B-cell lymphoma (HGBL), and primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL). Response to all lymphoma-directed therapy was evaluated using 2014 Lugano criteria. Overall survival (OS) was defined as time from CAR-T or ASCT infusion to death, and progression free survival (PFS) was defined as time from CAR-T or ASCT infusion to disease progression, or next treatment. Categorical data was analyzed as Chi-square or fishers exact test as appropriate. Continuous variables were analyzed using Wilcoxon Rank Sum test. Analysis was performed in R3.6.3. Results: A total of 105 patients underwent ASCT and 53 patients underwent CAR-T therapy in the study period with at least 6 months follow-up. Of the 105 ASCT patients, 87 received ASCT after 2 lines of chemotherapy, ASCT(2), and 18 received ASCT after 3 lines of chemotherapy, ASCT(3). Twenty six of the ASCT [n=19, ASCT(2) and n=7, ASCT(3)] patients received CART in subsequent therapy. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups except ASCT(3) had higher percent of refractory disease after first line (table 1). With a median follow up of 17.4 months, the PFS was significantly longer for the ASCT(2) group with a trend toward longer OS (Figure 1; PFS @ 1 year: ASCT(2) 67%, 95%CI 58-79%; ASCT(3) 27%, 95%CI 27-74%; p = 0.036). Among the CAR-T recipients, only 18 (33%) patients received CAR-T in the earliest possible indication, CAR-T(2): after 2 lines of chemotherapy (n=12) and/or after ASCT(2) (n=6), table 1. Compared to patients who received CAR-T in later lines (CAR-T 3+), OS was significantly longer for patients who received CAR-T(2), with a trend toward longer PFS (Figure 1; OS @ 1 year: CAR-T (2) 82%, 95%CI 65-100%; CAR-T later lines 62%, 95%CI 47-82%; p = 0.05). Additionally, 12 (23%) of patients received CAR-T immediately after ASCT (9 after ASCT(2), 3 after ASCT(3)). Baseline demographics in these 12 patients, CAR-T(ASCT), were comparable to the others who had chemoimmunotherapy as the last salvage therapy prior to CAR-T [CAR-T(chemo)], except a smaller proportion received bridging therapy (33% vs. 73%, p = 0.01). The CAR-T (ASCT) group had significantly prolonged PFS (median PFS - not reached [95%CI 3-not reached (NR)] vs. 3 months [95% CI 3-4 months]), and OS (median OS - NR, [95%CI 10.34-NR] vs. 15.1 months, [95%CI 11.9 - NR], p = 0.03). Updated analysis will be presented at the meeting with longer follow up (Figure 1). Conclusion: CAR-T use at the earliest current approved indication may confer survival advantage. Referral for earlier use of CAR-T remains low at only one third of our CAR-T practice volume. CAR-T use for relapse immediately after ASCT appear to have longer PFS and OS than after other systemic salvage therapy, although contributing parameters such as the need for bridging therapy requires further study. While patients who are chemo-refractory to second line chemotherapy may demonstrate chemo sensitivity with third line chemotherapy, PFS is shorter for ASCT(3). Comparison between ASCT(3) and CAR-T (2, chemorefractory) require larger cohorts with longer follow-up. Disclosures Bennani: Affimed: Research Funding; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory Board; Kite/Gilead: Research Funding; Verastem: Other: Advisory Board. Ansell:Takeda: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; AI Therapeutics: Research Funding. Lin:Juno: Consultancy; Legend BioTech: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Gamida Cells: Consultancy; Sorrento: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Vineti: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding.

PURPOSE Exclusion of patients needing urgent treatment or requiring novel biomarkers before enrollment has impacted the ability to enroll real-world patients in frontline trials of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). The impact of baseline organ function–based eligibility criteria on this effect and clinical trial exclusion is less well-understood. METHODS Consecutive patients with newly diagnosed lymphoma were enrolled from 2002 to 2015 into the Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) of the University of Iowa and Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Specialized Program of Research Excellence. The current analysis includes 1,265 patients with DLBCL receiving standard immunochemotherapy. Organ function parameters were identified from criteria for hemoglobin, absolute neutrophil count, platelet count, creatinine clearance, and bilirubin, as reported in frontline DLBCL trials. Abstracted laboratory values from MER were used to determine the percent (%) of patients excluded. Outcomes and cause-of-death analyses comparing ineligible and eligible groups in MER were conducted. An interactive online tool was developed to estimate exclusions based on organ function for future trial design. RESULTS Between 9% and 24% of MER patients with DLBCL receiving standard immunochemotherapy were excluded on the basis of baseline organ function alone. Ineligible patients based on organ function had significantly inferior event-free survival (hazard ratios, 1.67-2.16), overall survival (hazard ratios, 1.87-2.56), and event-free survival at 24 months (odds ratio, 1.71-2.16). Ineligible patients were more likely to die from lymphoma progression than increased therapy-related complications. CONCLUSION Current national and international trials exclude up to 24% of patients from participation on the basis of organ function alone. A significant difference in the outcomes, notably lymphoma-related death, suggests issues with generalization and potential exclusion of high-risk patients. These data will help future clinical trial development and meet US Food and Drug Administration and ASCO recommendations to increase trial accrual.

Background: Observation or "wait and watch" (W/W) strategy remains a viable option in the rituximab era for asymptomatic, stage II-IV, low-tumor burden patients with FL grade 1-2, 3A. Studies to date both in pre and post rituximab era have not shown an overall survival benefit from immediate treatment in such low-risk patients.To improve our understanding and to better counsel FL patients on W/W strategy, we sought to estimate the incidence of treatment initiation at landmark time points in our prospectively observed cohort from the Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) of the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE). We further evaluate the association between the presence of GELF criteria (MER treatment criteria) at diagnosis and initiation of treatment patterns, transformation rates and cause of death in FL patients managed by W/W. Methods: FL patients on W/W strategy were identified from MER of the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic Lymphoma SPORE. From 2002-2015, consecutive patients with newly diagnosed FL were offered enrollment. Patients were managed per treating physician and followed prospectively. Baseline clinical and pathological data were abstracted using a standard protocol. Cumulative incidence estimates of treatment initiation for follicular lymphoma were calculated using transformation to large cell lymphoma (as the first event) and death due to any cause as competing risks. Transformation was defined based on biopsy-proven disease. Patients were retrospectively considered to meet treatment criteria at diagnosis if they had the presence of any GELF criteria components per available abstracted data in the MER database. Not all GELF criteria were prospectively assessed and captured for all patients, and thus the MER treatment criteria utilized here will be conservative for formal GELF assessment. Results: A total of 401 FL patients were identified in MER on W/W strategy. Baseline characteristics for W/W patients showed a favorable profile such as normal LDH (89%), low and intermediate FLIPI score in 48% and 35% respectively, no B symptoms (97%), low tumor burden (&lt;4 nodal groups) in 72%, and GELF positive vs. negative in 36% and 64% respectively. At a median follow up of 8 years (IQR 5.9-12), 64% initiated treatment for FL only. Cumulative incidence estimates of treatment initiation at sequential time points were calculated from the initiation of observation (Table1&2). At diagnosis, the likelihood of treatment initiation was 15%, 26%, and 42% in the next 1, 2, and 5 years. The incidence of treatment initiation decreased over time as patients remained treatment-free after diagnosis (Figure 1A [blue curve]). Patients that met MER treatment criteria had increased rates of therapy initiation (33.2% vs. 21.9%) in the next two years and untreated transformation to large cell lymphoma [red curve] (8.7% vs. 4.5%) during the next 5 years (Figure 1B). Despite this, the rate of lymphoma related death at 10 years was similar between groups (met treatment criteria = 6.2% vs. 7.1%) (Figure 1C, [green curve]). Discussion: The longer duration of W/W strategy suggests a decreasing need for treatment over time. We provide time point estimates, which would be helpful for counseling patients. Of note, long-term continuous oncologic assessment and follow-up is necessary since approximately 66% of patients in this mature cohort initiated treatment by 8 years median follow up. MER treatment criteria at diagnosis identified patients with higher rates of transformation and therapy initiation in the first two years but did not identify those with worse lymphoma specific survival. Identification of biological differences in patients with early vs. late or no progression is a critical next step in understanding outcomes in W/W patients. Disclosures Ansell: Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; AI Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding. Cerhan:BMS/Celgene: Research Funding; NanoString: Research Funding. Wang:Incyte: Research Funding; Innocare: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Witzig:MorphSys: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Acerta: Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Spectrum: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Maurer:Morphosys: 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; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene / BMS: Research Funding. Nowakowski:NanoString: Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Kymera: Consultancy; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; Curis: Consultancy; Ryvu: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.