Porrata, Luis F.

Abstract Abstract 1926 Background: Follicular lymphoma (FL) is the second most common non Hodgkin lymphoma in the United States, comprising up to 30% of all non Hodgkin lymphomas. Typically an indolent disease, relapses are common. High dose therapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant is an option that has shown to produce prolonged progression-free and relapse-free survival in patients who relapse. Adequate bone marrow reserve for peripheral stem cell mobilization has been shown to be adversely effected by prior regimens such as fludarabine and radioimmunotherapy. Concerns regarding stem cell mobilization at the point of relapse have led some to collect stem cells early in the course of disease to allow for potential subsequent transplant after relapse. Recent advances in stem cell mobilization have resulted in a 3% collection failure rate for lymphoma patients at the point of planned transplant at our institution versus a historical rate of up to 30%. We studied the utilization of stem cells collected for potential future use in FL patients in remission or prior to therapy at the point of relapse or progression in order to determine the utility of this approach. Methods: Record review of patients diagnosed with FL through the Mayo Clinic Tumor Registry and the Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Data Base who had cryopreserved stem cells for potential future transplant at relapse. Cost of stem cell storage at our institution was reviewed as was the subsequent use of the collected cells. Results: 73 patients with FL had stem cells collected and stored. 37 (51%) were collected prior to a double dose yttrium-90 (90Y) ibritumomab tiuxetan trial for relapsed lymphoma as required by the study. The median age at collection of this group was 56 years (range 28–70). Stem cells remain in storage for a median of 44 months (range 8–119). The median cost of cryopreservation and storage is $4,094 based on the median storage time of 44 months (range $3,628 to 5,065) with a collection cost of $3,524.20 and an annual storage fee of $155.39. This does not include the cost of filgrastim for mobilization, nor line placement. At 5 years, 60% of the cells were not utilized, and at 10 years, 56% of the cells were not utilized. 36 (49%) of the total number of patients were not part of the double dose 90Y ibritumomab tiuxetan trial, but were collected in remission for possible future use or in the setting of relapsed, progressed or transformed disease for potential future transplant. Five of these patients required the use of plerixafor for adequate mobilization. The median age at collection of this group was 47 years (range 24–76). Stem cells remain in storage for a median of 39 months (range 2–128). The median cost of cryopreservation and storage is $4,029 based on the median storage time of 39 months (range $3,550 to 5,182) with a collection cost of $3,524.20 and an annual storage fee of $155.39. This does not include the cost of filgrastim or plerixafor for mobilization, nor line placement. At 5 years, 89% of these cells were not used, and at 10 years, 71% of cells were not used. Conclusion: The utilization of stem cells collected early in the course of FL patients is low, with the majority of cells not being utilized at 10 years. Given improved mobilization techniques resulting in 97% efficacy of stem cell collection at relapse, routine collection and storage of stem cells early in the course FL is not recommended. Disclosures: Micallef: Genzyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 4168 Background: Primary Pulmonary MALT lymphoma represents 15–20% of Extranodal Marginal Zone Lymphomas of Mucosa Associated Lymphoid Tissue (MALT). In contrast to the more common gastric MALT lymphoma, natural history, prognosis and treatment outcomes for primary pulmonary MALT lymphoma are not well defined. Herein, we report a single institution experience. Methods: Consecutive patients with primary pulmonary MALT lymphoma registered in the Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Database, which includes all consenting patients with lymphoma seen at Mayo Clinic Rochester, were reviewed for clinical features, treatment outcome progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The pathology for all patients was centrally reviewed by hematopathologist and the diagnoses were based on WHO lymphoma classification criteria. PFS and OS were assessed using the Kaplan–Meier method and the Cox proportional hazard model was used to assess the impact of variables on PFS and OS. Results: Between December 1986 and June of 2009, ninety-seven patients with primary pulmonary MALT lymphoma were enrolled. The median age at diagnosis was 63 years (range 31–87). There were 43 (44%) males. The initial presentation was a unilateral pulmonary lesion (n=47, 48%), bilateral pulmonary lesions (n=41, 42%), and pulmonary lesion with intrathoracic lymphadenopathy (n= 4, 4%). Bone marrow involvement and presence of B symptoms were 4, 4% and 5, 5%, respectively. International Prognostic Index (IPI) was 0–1, 2–3 and 4–5 in 69, 25 and 1 patient(s) respectively. The median follow-up was 10.4 years. The estimated median OS was 13. 6 years and the median PFS was 5.5 years (Figure). In a multivariate analysis, age >60 (p=0.02) and ECOG PS>2 (p=0.01) were associated with shortened survival. The IPI and age adjusted IPI were not predictive of overall survival. The treatment outcomes for the most common treatment modalities are summarized in the Table below. The median PFS of the 38% of patients who had a complete surgical resection was excellent at 11.2 years; whereas for observed patients with residual disease after biopsy was 3.2 years. Only 8 patients received single agent rituximan with relatively low response rate. Summary: The prognosis of primary pulmonary MALT lymphoma is favorable, with a median survival of over 13 years. In patients with resectable disease, surgery alone is associated with excellent disease control. Further prospective studies are needed to define the optimal treatment of primary pulmonary MALT lymphoma. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 3088 Background: Despite the use of modern immunochemotherapy (R-CHOP) regimens, almost 50% of patients with diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) will relapse. Current prognostic models, most notably the International Prognostic Index, are comprised of patient and tumor characteristics and are unable to identify patients with less than a 50% chance of long-term survival. However, recent observations demonstrate that factors related to host adaptive immunity and the tumor microenvironment are powerful prognostic variables in non-Hodgkin lymphoma Methods: We retrospectively examined the absolute neutrophil count (ANC), monocyte count (AMC) and lymphocyte count (ALC), obtained from an automated complete blood count with differential, as prognostic variables in a cohort of 255 consecutive DLBCL patients that were uniformly treated with R-CHOP between 2000 and 2007 at a single institution. The primary study objective was to assess if ANC, AMC, and ALC at diagnosis were predictors of overall survival (OS) in DLBCL. Results: At diagnosis, the median ANC was 4720/uL (range 1190–17690), the median AMC was 610/uL (range 30–4040), and the median ALC was 1220/uL (range 140–5410). The median follow-up for these patients was 48 months. In the univariate analysis, each of these variables predicted OS as continuous variables. As dichotomized variables, an elevated ANC (≥5500/μL; hazard ratio 1.75, 95% confidence interval 1.14–2.60, p=0.01) and AMC (≥610/μL; hazard ratio 3.36, 95% confidence interval 2.10–5.59, p<0.0001) were each associated with inferior OS. In contrast, the presence of lymphopenia, defined as an ALC ≤1000/uL, was associated with inferior OS (hazard ratio 2.21, 95% confidence interval 1.43–3.39, p=0.0004). When components of the IPI were included on multivariate analysis only the AMC and ALC were independently significant prognostic factors for OS, with hazard ratios of 3.37 (95% confidence interval 2.05–5.74, p<0.0001) and 2.19 (95% confidence interval 1.38–3.44, p=0.0009), respectively. The dichotomized AMC and ALC generated the AMC/ALC prognostic index (PI) and stratified patients into 3 risk groups: very good (AMC <610/uL and ALC >1000/uL), good (AMC ≥610/uL or ALC ≤1000/uL), and poor-risk (AMC ≥610/uL and ALC ≤1000/uL) populations. For both the very good (n=79) and good-risk (n=134) groups median OS has not been reached with estimated 5-year overall survival of 88% and 69%, respectively. Median OS for poor-risk (n=42) patients was 1.7 years (95% confidence interval 1.1–2.7 years) with an estimated 5-year overall survival of 28% (p<0.0001). By comparison, the R-IPI was unable to identify a group of patients with a median survival less than 8 years. The estimated 5-year OS was 93%, 71% and 53% for very good, good and poor-risk patients, respectively. We sought to determine whether the AMC/ALC PI may provide additional prognostic information when combined with the R-IPI. To test this possibility, the 171 very good/good risk and 84 poor risk patients identified by the R-IPI were subsequently risk stratified using the AMC/ALC PI. Among R-IPI very good/good risk patients a subset of poor risk patients (n=21) with a median OS of 2.2 years (95% confidence interval 1.1–6.6 years) and 35% 5-year OS could be identified with the AMC/ALC PI. In contrast, 5-year OS ranged from 75%-88% among very good and good risk patients. Similarly, stratification of R-IPI poor risk patients by the AMC/ALC PI identified subsets of very good (n=19) and good risk (n=44) patients with median OS that had not been reached and 86% and 55% 5-year OS, respectively. High risk (n=21) patients had a median OS of 1.4 years (95% confidence interval 0.9–2.2 years) and an estimated 5-year OS of less than 25%. Conclusions: Measurement of AMC and ALC at diagnosis is widely applicable, cost effective, predicts OS, and identifies high-risk patients with DLBCL. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 2802 Background: Redundancy of pro-survival signaling pathways promotes survival and drug resistance in lymphoid and plasma cell malignancies. In particular, the PI3K-Akt and the MEK-ERK pathways have been shown to play an important role in the proliferation and survival of these malignant cells induced by various cytokines in the tumor microenvironment. Sorafenib, a Raf kinase and VEGF receptor inhibitor, and everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, have synergistic cytotoxicity in myeloma and lymphoma cells due to inhibition of multiple signaling pathways. Methods: We designed a Phase 1/2 clinical trial to identify the maximum tolerated doses of the two drugs used in combination and the efficacy of the combination. Patients (Pts) with relapsed myeloma or lymphoma were eligible for enrollment. Pts were required to have an absolute neutrophil count ≥1500 × 10(6)/L, a platelet count ≥75,000, and a serum creatinine 21.5 mg/dL. The study utilized the classic 3+3 design. Extensive pharmacokinetic studies were performed to better delineate potential drug interactions. Results: Twenty-six pts were accrued from August 2007 to February 2009. Four pts discontinued sorafenib during cycle 1 for various reasons (2 patient refusal, 1 unrelated medical condition and 1 physician discretion) and were excluded from MTD determination. An additional pt did not have measurable disease and was ineligible, leaving 19 pts with lymphoma (including 6 with Hodgkin lymphoma) and 2 with myeloma for phase I analysis. The pts had a median age of 56 years (range, 22, 69) and were heavily pretreated with a median of 4 prior therapies (range, 1–10). Eighteen (86%) had received a prior stem cell transplant. Four dose limiting toxicities were seen across all dose levels (Table). These included grade 3 vomiting (level 1), grade 4 thrombocytopenia (level 2 and 3, one each) and grade 2 hand and foot rash leading to treatment delay (level 3). Overall, 13 pts experienced a grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicity. Grade 3 or 4 anemia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia occurred in 19%, 43%, and 38% of pts, respectively. Four pts have experienced a grade 3 non-hematologic toxicity; no grade 4 non-hematologic toxicities were seen. Grade 3 non-hematologic toxicities included hypokalemia, weight loss, vomiting, hand-foot skin reaction, fatigue, and elevated alkaline phosphatase. Dose level 1 (sorafenib 200 mg and everolimus 5 mg daily) was best tolerated and was selected for phase 2 evaluation. The ORR was 33% (7/21;95% CI: 15–57%, Table) with 3 pts at dose level 0 (2 PR, 1 CR), one at level 2 (1 PR) and three at level 3 (2 PR, 1 CR) responding. The responders included 5 pts with Hodgkin's disease and one each with an NK cell and T-cell lymphoma. Pts have received a median of 6 cycles (range: 1–19) of treatment. 16 pts have discontinued treatment due to disease progression (13 pts), non-resolution of cytopenias (1 pt), physician discretion (1 pt), and death on study due to lymphoma (1 pt). Disease progression has been seen in 16 pts; 9 pts have died. Median follow-up for pts still alive is 18.7 months (range: 11.5–29.4). 6 pts died from disease progression, one each due to sepsis unlikely related to treatment, cholecystitis, and unknown causes. Sorafenib is metabolized by the cytochrome P450 CYP3A enzyme and RAD-001 mainly by the CYP3A4 system in the liver, hence there is a potential for interactions. The detailed PK analyses performed as part of this trial showed a decrease in the RAD001 levels following initiation of sorafenib on day 8 of cycle 1 (Figure). Conclusion: The combination of sorafenib and everolimus is safe at a recommended phase 2 dose of sorafenib 200 mg and everolimus 5 mg daily. There is no significant drug interaction seen. Activity has been observed, especially in the setting of Hodgkins Disease. Disclosures: Kumar: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide for treatment of newly diagnosed myeloma. Witzig:Novartis and Celgene: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding, Served on advisory boards with Novartis and Celgene – both uncompensated with compensation to Mayo Clinic.

Abstract Abstract 3557 Introduction: Autologous stem cell transplantation for patients with amyloidosis results in high reported hematologic and organ response rates compared with conventional chemotherapy. Patients: Four-hundred and thirty-four patients have undergone transplantation between March 8, 1996, and April 13, 2010 Table 1. Clinical parameters seen in patients with amyloid are given in Table 2. The overall day-100 mortality seen in this group of patients is 44 of 434 patients (10%). Results: The most important determinant of outcome is stage defined by BNP and troponin levels. Figure 1 demonstrates the survival for patients for all 3 cardiac stages. Troponin <.035; NT-proBNP <332. Stage 1 both low, Stage 3 both elevated. The survival of all patients based on whether they achieved a complete response, a partial response (>50%), or no response was analyzed. Median survival has not been reached for the complete response group, is 107 months for the partial response group, and is 32 months for the no response group (p<0.0001). Figure 2, divides the patients at the median dFLC level of 13.5 mg/dL demonstrating that for patients with a higher level of free light chain, the median survival is 87.6 months and has not been reached for those with a lower level of free light chain. A proportional hazards model for variables that impact on survival was done in all patients, and the only relevant predictor of outcome was stage (p<0.0001). When the same analysis was performed using a landmark of 6 months, the only predictor of outcome was stage (p=0.0005). When best response was incorporated into the landmark model, it was the strongest predictor of survival. The amyloid stage predicted survival (p= 0.0005), and the best response to therapy (p <0.0001). When the same analysis was performed in the entire group of 434, stage and best response each remained significant (p<0.0001). Discussion: There is a high response rate associated with high-dose therapy that was not observed in the melphalan and prednisone era. For eligible patients who can be transplanted safely, high-dose melphalan is an effective therapy for many patients with amyloidosis. Best response and stage at diagnosis are the best predictors of overall survival. Disclosures: Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Binding Site: Honoraria. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 2634 The peripheral blood absolute lymphocyte/monocyte ratio (ALC/AMC) at diagnosis has been recently reported [Porrata et al, Hematologica 2012; 97(2):262-9] and confirmed [Koh et al, Oncologist 2012; 17(6):871-80] to be a predictor of clinical outcomes in classical Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). In addition, an inversed correlation has been reported between the ALC/AMC ratio and tumor associated macrophages in classical HL suggesting an association between the host biological response in the macro-environment and micro-environment. However, a limitation of the ALC/AMC ratio at diagnosis, the International Prognostic Score at diagnosis, the Positron-Emission Tomography (PET-scan) at diagnosis, or interim PET-scan during treatment is their inability to sequentially assess the host/tumor interaction during treatment. Therefore, we studied the ALC/AMC ratio recovery, as a surrogate marker of host immunity (i.e., ALC) and tumor micro-environment (i.e., AMC), at each treatment cycle phase to assess its predictive ability for clinical outcomes in classical HL. To participate in the study, patients were required to be diagnosed, treated, and followed at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota and treated with adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) with or without radiation therapy. An ALC/AMC ratio ≥ 1.1 cut-off was used in the study based on our previous publication [Porrata et al, Hematologica 2012; 97(2):262-9]. From 1990 until 2008, 190 classical HL patients qualified for the study. The cohort was evenly split with 50% males and 50% females. Fifty-eight percent of the patients had an interim PET-scan performed. The median age at diagnosis was 36 years (range: 18–83 years). Seventeen patients received 2 cycles; 5 patients 3 cycles; 51 patients 4 cycles; 5 patients 5 cycles and 112 patients 6 cycles. The median follow-up was 3.7 years (range: 0.2–20 years). The ALC/AMC ratio ≥ 1.1 at each treatment cycle phase of ABVD was a predictor for overall survival (OS), lymphoma-specific survival (LSS), progression-free survival (PFS) and time to progression (TTP). Patients were stratified based on how many cycles the ALC/AMC ratio did not reach the cut-off of 1.1. The more cycles with an ALC/AMC < 1.1 the worse survival was observed. The 23 patients who did not achieve an ALC/AMC ≥ 1.1 during the treatment cycles phase experienced the worst survival rates: 5 year OS of 33%; 5 year LSS of 43%; 5 year PFS of 16%; and 5 year TTP of 27%. Patients were then dichotomized into patients that did not achieve an ALC/AMC ratio ≥ 1.1 for all the cycles versus patients with an ALC/AMC ratio ≥ 1.1 in any cycle during treatment. Patients with an ALC/AMC ratio ≥ 1.1 in any cycle (N=167) experienced better survival compared with patients that in all cycles the ALC/AMC ratio was < 1.1 [ OS, the hazard ratio(HR) was 0.09, 95% CI (0.04–0.19), p < 0.0001; for LSS, HR =0.07, 95% CI (0.02–0.17), p <0.0001; for PFS, HR = 0.08, 95%CI (0.04–0.14), p < 0.0001; and for TTP, HR = 0.05, 95% CI (0.02–0.11), p < 0.0001]. In the multivariate analysis, an ALC/AMC ratio ≥ 1.1 in any cycle versus none was an independent predictor for clinical outcome when compared to ALC/AMC ratio at diagnsosis, PET-scan, International Prognostic Score, limited verus advanced stage, and radiation therapy [OS, HR = 0.14, 95% CI (0.04–0.40), p< 0.0002; for LSS, HR = 0.09, 95% CI (0.01–0.37), p <0.0006); for PFS, HR = 0.19, 95% CI (0.05–0.82), p < 0.03); and for TTP, HR = 0.15, 95% CI (0.02–0.89), p < 0.02]. In conclusion, the ALC/AMC ratio during ABVD treatment cycles in classical HL is a predictor for survival and provides an opportunity to develop therapeutic modalities to manipulate the ALC/AMC ratio during ABVD chemotherapy to improve clinical outcomes in classical HL. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 287 Purpose: Farnesyltransferases are key cellular enzymes involved in the prenylation of proteins. Prenylated proteins are important for malignant cell growth. The purpose of this phase II study (NCT00082888) was to assess tumor response and toxicity associated with the oral farnesyltransferase inhibitor tipifarnib (R115777, Johnson and Johnson) in patients with relapsed aggressive, indolent, or uncommon lymphoma. The uncommon group included low incidence lymphoma types such as Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and T-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma- cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) and peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL). Patients and Methods: Patients with relapsed or refractory non-Hodgkin (NHL) or Hodgkin (HL) were eligible if they had measurable disease, performance status ≤2, platelet count ≥75,000 × 10(6)/L, an absolute neutrophil count ≥1000 × 10(6)/L and a creatinine ≤2 × upper limit of normal. Patients initially received tipifarnib 300 mg twice daily, days 1–21 every 28 days. The trial was conducted by the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic Lymphoma SPORE. Results: Ninety-three patients with lymphoma (42 aggressive, 15 indolent, and 36 uncommon) enrolled in the trial between March 2004 and November 2008. The median age was 62 years (range, 18–91). The median number of prior therapies was 5 (range, 1–17). The overall response rate (ORR) was 20% (19/93) with 6% (6/93) complete responses (CR) and 14% (13/93) partial responses (PR). The ORR was 17%, 7%, and 31% for the aggressive, indolent, and uncommon groups, respectively (Table). Among the 19 responders were 7 diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), 7 T-cell NHL, 1 follicular grade II, and 4 HL. The overall median response duration for the 19 responders was 7.5 months (mean, 12.8; range, 1.8 – 48.1 months). The median response duration was 11.3 months (mean, 10.1; range, 1.8 – 18.5 months), 2 months, and 7.5 months (mean, 15.5; range, 1.9 – 48.1 months) for the aggressive (7), indolent (1), and uncommon (11) groups, respectively. Five patients in the uncommon group are still receiving treatment with a range of treatment duration between 25 – 60+ months. Among the 5 still receiving treatment 4 responded and 1 is stable. The range of response duration is 15.4, 17.7, 43.1, and 48.1 months. These five patients (2 with HL, 1 anaplastic large cell cutaneous, and 2 PTCL) are currently receiving doses of 400 (1), 200 (2), and 100 (2) mg twice daily. The median time to progression for all patients was 3.6 months (95% CI: 2.1 – 4.5 months). The grade 3,4 toxicities observed were primarily fatigue (10%) and reversible myelosuppression with 11% anemia, 37% neutropenia, and 32% thrombocytopenia. Correlative studies demonstrated tipifarnib-induced upregulation of Bim, a marker of tipifarnib action in lymphoma cell lines, in 7 of 9 paired lymphoma biopsies. Conclusions: Tipifarnib has activity in lymphoma, with responses in patients with heavily pretreated DLBCL, HL and T-cell types, but little activity in follicular NHL. This agent has an excellent toxicity profile and targets a novel pathway. Further studies in combination with other agents are warranted for patients with DLBCL, HL or T-cell NHL. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Introduction Relapse in the central nervous system is an uncommon complication of diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) associated with a poor prognosis. The addition of rituximab to chemotherapy has improved outcomes in patients with DLBCL but its effect on the outcome of patients with CNS relapse is not well characterized. Here we present the natural history of patients with CNS relapse in a large cohort of patients with DLBCL who were treated in the immunochemotherapy (IC) era. Methods Newly diagnosed patients with DLBCL or primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) and treated with primary anthracycline based IC were prospectively enrolled on the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) within 9 months of diagnosis and followed for relapse, retreatment, and death. Clinical management at diagnosis and subsequent therapies were per treating physician. Patients with documented CNS involvement at diagnosis, primary CNS lymphoma, or post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder at diagnosis were excluded. All CNS relapse and retreatment details were verified by medical record review. Results 1017 patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL or PMBCL, no documented CNS disease at diagnosis, and treated with IC were enrolled in the MER between 2002 and 2012. At a median follow-up of 59 months (range 1-148), 36 patients had CNS relapse. The cumulative incidence of CNS relapse was 3.1% (95% CI: 2.2%-4.4%) at 2 years and 3.7% (95% CI: 2.7%-5.0%) at 5 years after diagnosis. CNS involvement was identified after first line IC in 25 patients, and after salvage therapy in 11 patients. 22 patients had an isolated CNS relapse, while 14 had both systemic and CNS disease at relapse. The incidence of isolated CNS relapse at two years from diagnosis was 1.9% (95% CI: 1.2%-3.0%, figure 1). CNS involvement was parenchymal in 22 patients, leptomeningeal in 11, and parenchymal and leptomeningeal in 3 patients. At diagnosis, this subset of 36 patients had a median age of 61 years (range 20-86); 25 (69%) were male. IPI was 0-1 in 6 patients, 2 in 13 patients, 3 in 11 patients and 4-5 in 6 patients. Cell of origin per Hans algorithm was available in 17 patients, 8 were GCB and 9 were non-GCB. Extranodal sites of disease at diagnosis included testicular (2), renal (5), bone (10) and bone marrow (6). 7 patients had no sites of extranodal disease. LDH was elevated in 71%. The German High-Grade Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Study Group CNS risk score was low risk in 6 patients, intermediate risk in 22 patients, and high risk in 8 patients. 6 patients received CNS prophylaxis with their initial immunochemotherapy, including 3 of the 21 patients who subsequently developed isolated CNS disease. First line therapy after CNS relapse included high dose methotrexate based chemotherapy in 22 patients and other systemic regimens in 6, with intrathecal (IT) chemotherapy in 5. Overall survival in patients after CNS relapse was poor with a median survival of 6.3 months (95% CI: 2.9-15.5) and 12-month survival rate of 29% (95% CI: 17%-49%). Patients who had CNS relapse following initial IC had better subsequent survival (median OS = 7.6 months) compared to patients with first presentation of CNS relapse following salvage therapy (OS = 2.1 months, p=0.005, see figure 2). 10 patients (28%) proceeded to SCT after CNS relapse, of which 6 remain alive at a median follow-up of 39 months. There were no differences in post-CNS relapse survival by age, sex, CNS risk score, cell of origin, extranodal site involvement at diagnosis, or site of CNS relapse (all p>0.10), though power was limited due to small numbers. Conclusions The incidence of CNS relapse in DLBCL is approximately 4% in the immunochemotherapy era. The vast majority of CNS relapses occur within 2 years of diagnosis. Isolated relapse in patients without CNS involvement at diagnosis is a relatively rare event with an incidence of approximately 2% at 2 years of diagnosis. Outcomes remain poor, and standard clinical variables do not predict survival after CNS relapse. Novel therapeutic approaches are needed in this population, with consideration to autologous SCT, which produces durable remission in a subset of patients. Disclosures Maurer: Kite Pharma: Research Funding. Farooq:Kite Pharma: Research Funding. Thompson:Kite Pharma: Research Funding. Ansell:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding. Cerhan:Kite Pharma: Research Funding. Link:Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 3231 Poster Board III-168 Background Peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) are the preferred graft type for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and mobilization is typically done using growth factor (GF) alone or a combination of chemotherapy (CTX) and GF. The success of mobilization is influenced by several factors such as prior therapy and mobilization strategy. Patients (Pts) failing to mobilize successfully often have GF dose increased and if unsuccessful, mobilization reattempted with chemotherapy + GF or G-CSF (Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor) + GM-CSF (Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor). More recently, plerixafor, a CXCR4 inhibitor, has been found to enhance G-CSF based collection allowing potential early intervention in poor mobilizers. However, this approach requires valid cut-points for peripheral CD34 counts (pCD34) for cost efficient use. Methods We studied 910 first time, G-CSF based PBSC mobilizers with MM (565; 62%), or light chain amyloidosis (345; 38%). Salvage attempts were excluded, as were first attempts using CTX+GCSF, plerixafor or GF combinations. Sensitivity-specificity analysis (ROC) was used to define ideal cut-points for predefined outcomes. We used a CD34 yield of 2 million/kg as the minimum required collection and 4 million/kg as the ideal collection for this analysis. Our current practice is to initiate collection at a pCD34 of 10/uL. Results We first determined the best day 1 pCD34 cutoff for being able to collect at least 2 million/kg PBSC to be 9.2/uL. Among those with ≥9.2/uL, only 1.6% failed to collect at least 2 million compared to 27% among the rest (P < 0.001). These numbers were 1.7% and 25% respectively using the traditional cutoff of 10/uL. We then examined how the pCD34 on day 2 predicted collection, among those failing to reach the current threshold of 10/uL. Among this group, a pCD34 on day 2 of 8/uL was the best cutoff to predict a collection of 2 million/kg. Among those with >8/uL, only 9% failed to collect at least 2 million compared to 48% among the rest (P < 0.001). Among those with day 1 pCD34 < 10, 65% achieved a count of 8/uL on day 2. We then examined what pCD34 on day 1 can best predict a pCD34 ≥ 8 on day 2 and found this to be 5/uL. Among those with day 1 pCD34 ≥ 5/uL, 92% reached day 2 pCD34 ≥ 8 compared to 36% among the rest (P < 0.001).We then determined cutoffs based on ideal targets using only those patients achieving pCD34 count > 10/uL by day 2, since these patients would have started collection without any change in the mobilization technique. We used a maximum of 5 collections to achieve the goal as being ideal, taking into account the most commonly used practice of collecting during weekdays. We examined cutoffs both for a target of 4, 8 and 12 million/kg for one, two or three transplants respectively. Among those with a day 1 or day 2 pCD34 > 10/uL 98% collected 4 million/kg in 5 collections. The best day 1 or day 2 pCD34 predicting a 8 million/kg yield in 5 collections was 21.4/uL and a 12 million/kg yield was 27.9/uL. Among those with day 1or 2 pCD34 ≥ 21.4/uL, 90% collected 8 million compared to 54% among those with pCD34 < 21.4/uL. Similarly, among those with day 1 or 2 pCD34 ≥ 27.9/uL, 79% reached 12 million in ≤ 5 days compared to 17% among those with pCD34 < 27.9/uL (P < 0.001).Finally we examined if poor collection on first day, despite a pCD34 > 10 predicts for poor overall yield. A ratio of day 1 collection (million/kg) to pCD34 day 1 or 2 < 5×104 was highly predictive of failure to get eventual yield of 2 million/kg, with 38% below the cutoff failing to reach the goal compared to 2% for those above the cutoff. Conclusions This study provides an estimate of optimal pCD34 count thresholds for early identification of patients at high risk of collection failure. It is reasonable to use the first or second day pCD34 count, since a substantial proportion of patients will achieve the threshold value by day 2 and have similar outcome as those reaching the threshold by day 1. Based on the results here, interventions such as plerixafor can be considered if pCD34 count is < 5/uL on day 1 or < 9/uL by day 2, to achieve the minimum collection of 2 million/kg. However, in order to achieve the ideal targets, a higher threshold should be considered and the recommendation would be 17/uL, and 28/uL for target of 8 or 12 million respectively. Finally, identification of poor mobilizers after start of collection potentially provides another time point for early intervention, and this needs to be prospectively studied. Disclosures Micallef: Genzyme: Research Funding. Gertz:Genzyme: Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene,Genzyme,Millenium,Novartis,Bayer,: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 3211 Poster Board III-148 Although autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has become standard of care for many patients with hematologic malignancies, many patients fail to collect a minimum number of CD34 + stem cells to support high dose chemotherapy and ASCT. Recently, plerixafor, a CXCR4 antagonist, was FDA approved for use in combination with G-CSF for autologous peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in patients with NHL or Multiple Myeloma. In February 2009, we commenced a risk adapted approach to the utilization of plerixafor. The study was restricted to patients mobilized with GCSF alone and patients undergoing chemotherapy primed PBSC mobilization were excluded. Peripheral blood stem cell mobilization was commenced with G-CSF at 10 mcg/kg/day. On day 4, a peripheral blood (PB) CD34 count was measured. For patients whose PB CD34 was ≥10/μL, apheresis was commenced the following morning. For patients whose PB CD34 was <10/μL, it was measured again on day 5; if ≥10/μL then apheresis was commenced the following morning. If PB CD34 was <10/μL on day 5, plerixafor (0.24 mg/kg sc) was administered on the evening of day 5 and apheresis was commenced the following day (Group A). In addition, during apheresis, for patients whose collection yield was < 0.5 × 106 CD34/kg, in the absence of instrument failure or problems with the collection procedure, plerixafor was added (Group B). Morning administration of G-CSF and evening dosing of plerixafor continued daily until apheresis was complete. From February to July 2009, 174 mobilization attempts occurred; 27 with chemotherapy and 147 with cytokines alone. The 147 pts who underwent mobilization with cytokines alone are presented here. The underlying diagnosis was as follows: Myeloma 61 pts, NHL 54 pts, Amyloid 17 pts, Hodgkin 10 pts, POEMS 4 pts and 1 pt with a solid tumor. For the entire group the median number of CD34 cells collected was 5.5 × 106 CD34/kg (range 0.1-17). The median number of apheresis was 3 (range 1-12). 67 patients (46%) received plerixafor; 37 patients started plerixafor during mobilization (Group A) and 30 patients during collections due to a poor yield (Group B). 12 pts of the 37 received plerixafor on day 4 because of prior mobilization failure or high risk of mobilization failure and are included in Group A. Table 1 outlines the details of mobilization and collection by groups. By disease category, of the 61 patients with MM, 28 (46%) received plerixafor (8 Group A and 20 Group B). Median apheresis in all the MM pts was 2 (range 1-12) with a total of 6.8 × 106 CD34/kg (2.2-16.7). In the 54 NHL pts, 32 (59%) received plerixafor (24 Group A and 8 Group B). Median apheresis for all pts with NHL was 3 (range 1-7) with a total of 4.6 × 106 CD34/kg (range 0-11.4). Overall, only 7 of 147 (5%) mobilization attempts failed to achieve a minimum of 2 × 106 CD34/kg. This compares to a 22% failure rate prior to institution of this risk adapted approach. In conclusion, implementing this risk adapted approach allows poor mobilizers to be identified promptly and for plerixafor to be initiated during mobilization and collection, thereby reducing the number of mobilization failures. In patients who predictably would not have successful collection based on a PB CD34 <10/μL, addition of plerixafor results in a majority of patients achieving an adequate collection. This risk adapted approach may be more cost effective than reattempting mobilization after a prior failure or utilizing combination G-CSF and plerixafor for upfront mobilization. Table 1. Mobilization and Collection data. All patients N=147 Group A1 N=37 Group B2 N=30 No Plerixafor N=80 PB CD34 day 4 Median 11 0 7 19 Range 0-331 0-7 0-32 0-331 PB CD34 day 5 Median 10 4.5 12 15 Range 0-51 2-9 11-23 9-51 Apheresis Yield Median 5.5 4.4 6.0 6.2 Range 0.1-17 3.1-12.7 3.0-12.2 2-17 Number of Apheresis Median 3 3 5 2 Range 1-12 1-7 4-12 1-8 Days of Plerixafor Median n/a 3 2 n/a Rang 1-7 1-8 1 Group A – Plerixafor initiated prior to apheresis 2 Group B – Plerixafor initiated during apheresis Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.