Sher, Taimur

Abstract Background: DLBCL is the most common adult NHL and despite significant advancements, outcomes in ethnic minorities remain suboptimal. Factors responsible for these disparities in ethnic minorities, especially variability in clinical and pathological features with evaluation of patient-level data have not been studied. Methods: A multi-institutional database of DLBCL patients seen at Mayo Clinic in Florida, University of Miami and University of Southern California between 1996-2016 was developed. Patient demographics, clinical disease characteristics and details of DLBCL immunophenotype [CD10, MUM1, BCL6 (Han's classification), Ki 67, MYC, BCL2) were reviewed. Comparisons between Hispanic and Non-Hispanic patients were made by Chi-square, Fischer's exact and Signed rank tests, where applicable. Patients with missing data on a certain feature were not included in the statistical analysis of that specific characteristic. Results: A total of 966 DLBCL patients with 69 Hispanics and 752 non-Hispanics were identified. These included 52% males (N=36) and 48% females (N=33) in Hispanics versus 58% males (N=436) and 42% females (N=316) in Non-Hispanics (p=0.35). Median age at diagnosis was significantly lower at 61 years (range 27-89) in Hispanics versus 66 in non-Hispanics (p=0.014). Extranodal disease was seen significantly more commonly in Hispanics (74%) than in non-Hispanics (60%) (p=0.037). There was no significant difference in disease stage at presentation between the two cohorts (p=0.189) although the proportion of patients with stage III and IV disease was higher among Hispanics (80.4%) as compared to non-Hispanics (68.5%). Similarly there was no significant difference in presence of primary CNS DLBCL at diagnosis between the two groups (p=0.74). GCB phenotype per the Hans' classification was seen in 59% (N=29) in both, Hispanics and Non-Hispanics (N=241) (p=0.99). Similarly, the median ki67 index of 80% was seen in both cohorts (p=0.48). MYC was positive in 59% in Hispanics versus only 37.5% in non-Hispanics (p=0.024). BCL2 expression by itself and also combined BCL2 and MYC double expression were not significantly different between the two groups (p=0.58 and p=0.11, respectively). Median overall survival (OS) was 22.5 months in Hispanics compared 54.9 months in Non-Hispanics (p<0.0001) (Figure 1). Conclusion: Survival outcome disparities in racial and ethnic minorities have been previously reported from population-based analyses. Lack of patient-level clinical data makes these analyses hypothesis generating, but not conclusive. We confirmed some prior findings including younger age at diagnosis for Hispanics with DLBCL. We also reported greater incidence of extranodal as well as stage III or IV disease at the time of presentation among Hispanics which may contribute to poor outcomes in this population. From DLBCL pathology standpoint, we found increased expression of MYC among Hispanics but no other significant immunohistochemical differences including double expression or non-GCB phenotype. The inferior OS despite uniform treatment practices at large Cancer Centers suggest multifactorial influences on patient outcomes which may at least in part include some of the differences we report here. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: Racial disparities in outcomes of cancer patients have been reported. Access to comprehensive cancer centers is associated with improved overall survival (OS) but racial/ethnic minorities may have a disparate access to such care. While the impact of treatment facility volume on outcomes has been evaluated, outcomes of centers with minority-predominant patient population have not been studied. We compared demographic profiles, facility level data and OS of patients treated at minority-predominant facilities to facilities that treated predominantly non-Hispanic Whites (NHW) with non-DLBCL. Methods: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was used to identify all non-DLBCL patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2015. "Minority-treating facilities" were defined as facilities in the top decile by proportion for initial treatment of non-Hispanic African-Americans (NHAA), Hispanics and other races. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses to compare sociodemographic and clinical factors influencing outcomes between minority treating and non-minority treating facilities. A subgroup analysis stratified by race/ethnicity was also conducted to study the effect of treating facilities on the outcome of NHWs and minorities separately. Results: Of 1339 total facilities, 123 (9.1%) qualified as minority treating. Of 207,239 eligible patients in NCDB, 18,719 (9.03%) received treatment at the minority-treating facilities and of these, 11,190 (~60%) belonged to the minority races. Overall, 4.5% (6,988/156,664) NHWs and 30% (11,190/37,639) minorities received treatment at the minority-treating facilities. Several demographic and facility level characteristics were significantly different among the patients treated at minority-treating facilities as compared to non-minority treating facilities. Overall, significantly higher number of patients in minority-treating hospitals had lower income and education, had Medicaid coverage or lack of insurance. The OS of patients in minority treating facilities was significantly worse as compared to non-minority facilities (Figures). On multivariate analysis, patients who received treatment at minority-treating facilities were at 10% (HR=1.10, 95% CI: 1.06-1.14 p<0.001) higher risk of mortality as compared to those treated at the non-minority treating facilities. On multivariate analysis, NHAA (30% increased risk) and 'other races' (9% increased risk) were at significantly higher risk of mortality as compared to the NHW (Table 2). To study the effect of treatment at minority-treating facilities on OS among the patients of same race/ethnicity group, a multivariate analysis was also run separately for NHW and racial minorities. The NHWs who received treatment at minority-treating facilities were at 13% higher risk of death (HR=1.13, 95% CI: 1.08-1.19 p<0.001) as compared to NHWs who were treated at non-minority treating facilities. Similarly, the racial minorities who received treatment at minority treating facilities were at 8% higher risk of death (HR=1.08, 95% CI: 1.03-1.19 p=0.003) as compared to those who received treatment at the nonminority treating facilities. Conclusions:Outcomes of patients who received treatment at minority treating facilities was significantly worse than those at non-minority treating facilities. This was true for NHWs and racial minorities separately as well. Several demographic and facility level characteristics were significantly different in the two groups however OS remained worse after adjusting for them. Causes of poor outcomes at minority-treating facilities must be analyzed to mitigate them and improve outcomes for all. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: The treatment of NHL has witnessed a paradigm shift over time, with targeted immunotherapy, stem cell transplant (SCT) among others. Historically, XRT was used quite frequently for the management of NHL but with advent of better systemic therapy, its utilization has changed. Trends and patterns of care for XRT use have never been formally reported. Methods: We identified patients with NHL diagnosis in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) between years 2004 and 2015. Demographic, clinical, facility level, initial treatment and outcome data were collected. The utilization of XRT in diffuse large B-cell (DLBCL) and non-DLBCL NHL were analyzed separately by univariate and multivariate analyses. To analyze the trends in the rates of XRT, we applied segmented linear regression to calculate the average annual percent change (AAPC) and 95% confidence Interval (CI) with a 'p' value. AAPC and CIs were calculated using the segmented package in R studio v1.1.49. Rest of the analyses was conducted using StataCorp version 15.1. Results: A total of 133,182 DLBCL and 204,933 non-DLBCL patients were identified. Among patients with DLBCL, 27,895 (20.9%) patients received RT. The rate of XRT declined from 25% in 2004 to 18.4% in 2015 with estimated AAPC of -0.59% (95%CI: -0.70- -0.49), p= 0.03 (Figure 1). In a subgroup analysis, a similar decline in the rate of XRT was evident across all the age groups, combined stages I and II vs stages III and IV and nodal vs extra nodal DLBCL (Table 1). Among non DLBCL, 33,369 (16.3%) patients received XRT. There was a statistically significant decline in the rate of XRT from 18.03% in 2004 to 16.3% in 2014 with an AAPC of -0.26 (95%CI: -0.38- -0.14) p <0.001 (Figure 1). On the subgroup analysis, the utilization of XRT declined across all the studied subgroups except among patients aged 80 years and above (Table 1). On multivariate analysis, several demographic, clinical and facility level factors were found to be significantly associated with XRT utilization in NHL (Table 2). In particular, older age groups, racial/ethnic minorities, advanced stages, higher Charlson comorbidity scores and diagnosis in the more recent calendar years were associated with lesser chances of receiving RT. Extranodal DLBCL had lower utilization while extranodal non-DLBCL had increased XRT utilization. Conclusion: There has been a significant decline in the utilization of XRT among patients with NHL (DLBCL and non-DLBCL) in the US since 2004, likely due to introduction of practice changing systemic therapeutics. There is still significant heterogeneity noted in practice patterns regarding utilization of XRT across the US. Having more standardized guidelines will help streamline delivery of evidence-based patient care. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding.

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation can heavily impact the quality of life (QOL) of an individual. However, this procedure may be the only hope for a cure or a longer life for some individuals. When these patients develop severe neutropenia during transplantation, protective isolation is recommended to reduce the risk of infection. During protective isolation, patients may be confined to their hospital room which can decrease their physical activity. For autologous hematopoietic stem cell receipts (AHSCR), severe neutropenia may last several days to weeks. During this time, patients often experience social isolation, emotional encumbrances and also physical deconditioning.Data is inconsistent whether protective isolation does reduce the incidence of infections. In this study, we sought to investigate the impact of physical activity during hospitalization on Quality of Life in AHSCR with severe neutropenia using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Marrow Transplant (FACT-BMT) questionnaire. METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational study of 15 patients admitted to Mayo Clinic Florida during November 2017 to May 2018 for autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, wherein we monitored the activity of each patient during hospitalization by recording the number of steps taken each day by using an activity tracker worn by the patient. Informed consent was obtained on admission before enrolling patients. Patients completed a Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (FACT-BMT version 4) on admission and prior to discharge from the hospital. RESULTS: Of the 15 patients that were enrolled, 5 walked ≤ 100 steps/day (group A, median, 71) and 10 walked > 100 steps/day (group B, median, 406). While there was no difference in the median time to engraftment and length of hospital stay, the mean QOL score decreased from 89.2 on admission to 81.4 on discharge in less active neutropenia patients compared to the ones who were more active. (Table 1; Figure 1) CONCLUSION: Lack of physical activity decreases QOL in AHSCR. During hospitalization, AHSCR should be encouraged to increase their activity to improve QOL. Having an activity tracker may make it easier for patients to monitor their activity, and thus lead to a better QOL. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Sher: Affimed: Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: CLL is the most common leukemia diagnosis in adults and its treatment has undergone significant change from chemotherapy, to immunotherapy and now targeted kinase inhibitors, leading to improved overall survival (OS). With improving survivorship, SPMs can occur but an in-depth analysis of risks and trends of SPMs in CLL survivors is lacking. We performed a population-based analysis to evaluate this. Methods: Patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database diagnosed with CLL between 1973-2015 were included. Due to variation in management techniques over time, the cohort was divided in four time periods: 1973-1982, 1983-1992, 1993-2002 and 2003-2015. We evaluated differences in risk for SPMs among CLL survivors compared to risk of individual malignancies expected in the general population during these time periods and studied the effect of demographics and time since CLL diagnosis. Results: Over a nearly 270,000 person-year follow up, 6,467 new SPMs were diagnosed with a standardized incidence ratio (SIR) of 1.2 (95% CI 1.17-1.23), which resulted in a 39 excess cancers per 10,000 population. The CLL survivors had a 20% overall increased risk of developing SPMs (excluding non-squamous skin cancer) compared to the general population. The risks for both solid (SIR 1.15 CI 95% 1.12-1.18) and hematological malignancies (SIR 1.61 95% CI 1.5-1.73) was higher than the expected in the general population. However, the risk for individual cancers was heterogeneous. The tumors associated with the highest risk were Hodgkin lymphoma (almost 8 times higher), Kaposi Sarcoma (4 times), non-epithelial skin cancers (4 times), salivary gland cancer (3 times) and acute lymphocytic leukemia (3 times). In contrast, tumors in the hepatobiliary system, female breast and female genital system were associated with a lower risk than the general population. The highest SIR across the study periods was observed in the younger population (ages 15-49). Although the risk increased in all ethnicities, it was statistically significant only in Caucasians. There was no gender-wise difference in SIR during any of the four time periods. A statistically significant increase in SIR was observed for both men and women from 1973-1982 to 2003-2015. This was mostly due to an increase in risk of hematological malignancies from 1.08 early in the study to 2.56 in the most recent study period. The SIR in solid tumors did not change significantly over time; in absolute terms, however, lung carcinoma contributed the most to the excess risk, followed by non-epithelial skin cancers and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. The risk of developing a SPM was higher for the CLL survivors during most of the latency periods, but it was statistically significant during the 2-5 months and 12-59 months after diagnosis. A multivariate analysis was conducted to evaluate the impact of period of diagnosis on the development of SPMs among these patients. After adjusting for gender, ethnicity, radiation therapy, chemotherapy, and age at diagnosis of CLL, patients diagnosed with CLL in the most recent time period were at 45% higher risk of developing SPMs as compared to the patient diagnosed during 1973-1982 (Hazard ratio(HR) =1.45 95%CI:1.34-1.6, p<0.001). Moreover increased HRs were also observed for 1983-1992 and 1993-2002 time periods (Fig. 1) Conclusions: With improving therapeutics for cancer treatment, survivorship is improving as well and the risk of SPMs needs to be better understood and addressed. This is truer for CLL, where majority of patients have a favorable survival. The risk of SPMs was 20% higher in CLL survivors than in the general population and was most prominent in the survivors aged 15-49 years at the time of CLL diagnosis. The risk of individual malignancies may be heterogenous but there has been an increase in risk of SPMs over time, mainly due to an increase of secondary hematological malignancies in recent years. Active survivorship plans and long-term surveillance for SPMs is crucial for improved outcomes of patients with a history of CLL. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Clinical trials are fundamental to advance therapeutics systematically and improve patient outcomes. Despite this, enrollment on clinical trials remains dismal in the United States (US) and is a constant focus of healthcare policy. We studied distribution of clinical trials for B-cell malignancies over time across the US and unique clinical trial opportunities i.e. individual clinical trials for the given diagnosis at a site that patients may have access to participate. Methods: We abstracted data from clinicaltrials.gov for all trials that had non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) or multiple myeloma (MM) as an inclusion indication between 1999-2018. Clinical trial characteristics and distribution over US geographical divisions (West, Midwest, Northeast, and South) were studied, and differences were assessed by Chi-square test. Results: A total of 1930 trials were identified (NHL: 982, MM: 948), of which 483 were recruiting at the time of data abstraction (NHL: 250, MM: 233). Over the past 2 decades, 182691 patients were enrolled on the various trials (NHL: 81592, MM: 101099). Trials by phase of study included phase 1: 629, phase 1/2: 316, phase 2: 813, phase 2/3: 11 and phase 3: 161. Number of trials by phase separated by NHL and MM are shown in Figure 1. Of these, 197 trials were randomized (NHL: 67, MM: 130). Geographical distribution of trials by diagnosis type is shown in Figure 2. A total of 31806 unique trial opportunities were noted for MM and NHL, of which 9,513 were international and 22,293 were in the US, with a geographical distribution of 5080 in West, 8198 in Midwest, 3944 in Northeast, and 5071 in South. 4,883 of the unique trial opportunities were available at NCI/NCCN accredited sites and 17,410 were at non-NCI/NCCN sites in the US. Treatment characteristics of the trials included monoclonal antibodies in 1218, other targeted agents in 2641, stem cell transplant in 526, and other agents in 517 trials with several trials utilizing more than one of these therapeutic options. There was no statistically significant difference in the distribution of clinical trials by phase of study across various US geographical regions for MM (p=0.71), NHL (p=0.98) or combined MM+NHL (p=0.16). On the other hand, unique trial opportunities were significantly different by study phase and geographical distribution for MM, NHL or MM+NHL (all p<0.001) (Figure 3). Conclusions: Widespread access to clinical trials within a cancer diagnosis is imperative for generalizability of trial results. In a comprehensive, national analysis we noted that while it may appear that clinical trials are available across the US, sites where they are open are distributed unevenly, giving rise to a disparity in access to evidence-based therapeutic advancements for patients. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Janssen: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Sher:Affimed: Research Funding.

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Patients undergoing HSCT are reported to have a high prevalence of depression and anxiety. These comorbid mood disorders have been known to be associated with alteration in pain perception in patients without hematological malignancies. Pharmacological compounds such as opioid and benzodiazepines are frequently used to manage patient symptomology including pain and anxiety. Patients undergoing HSCT are a unique population where the impact of depression and anxiety on opioid and benzodiazepine use has not been well studied. METHODS: The study population consisted of patients who underwent HSCT at a single center for a variety of hematological malignancies from 2015-2018. Opioid and benzodiazepine exposure and dosage was defined in a) Patients who were exposed to opioid including those who were previously exposed and those who were exposed during hospitalization for HSCT b) Patients who were neither exposed to opioid previously, nor during the hospitalization for HSCT. Depression and Anxiety was defined as per PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scales prior to hospital admission. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify differences in opioid status, previous benzodiazepine use, transplant type, Karnofsky score, gender, age, race, and marital status with associated Diazepam Equivalent Daily Dosage (DEDD) (Negative Binomial Regression), and Morphine Milligram Equivalent Daily Dosages (MMEDD) (Logistic and Zero Truncated Negative Binomial Regression). RESULTS: A total of 275 patients underwent HSCT including autologous and allogeneic from 2015-2018. Anxious or depressed HSCT recipients had an increased incidence of higher DEDD with an IRR of 1.69 (95% CI: 1.15, 2.49) compared to those who were neither depressed nor anxious (Figure 1). However, patients who reported anxiety and depression did not have a different DEDD than those not anxious nor depressed. In addition, patients who were not naïve to benzodiazepine use prior to admission had an increased incidence of a higher DEDD [IRR of 2.23 (95% CI: 1.61, 3.05)]. Patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplant had a decreased incidence of receiving a higher DEDD [IRR of 0.65 (95% CI: 0.47-0.90)]. African American and other populations had a decreased incidence of receiving a higher DEDD [IRR of 0.40 (95% CI: 0.27, 0.59)]. Patients receiving higher MMEDD had a higher DEDD incidence [IRR of 1.01 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.02)]. Patients who were both anxious and depressed had increased odds of receiving an opioid [OR of 3.35 (95% CI: 1.62, 6.94)] compared to patients who were neither depressed nor anxious. However, patients who were either depressed or anxious did not have different odds of receiving an opioid compared to those who were neither depressed nor anxious. Patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplant had reduced odds of receiving an opioid [OR of 0.17 (95% CI: 0.07, 0.40)]. Patients with less than normal Karnofsky performance status (<90 on scale of 1-100) had an increased incidence of receiving a higher MMEDD [IRR of 2.34 (95% CI: 1.07, 5.12)] when modeled by Zero Truncated Negative Binomial Regression. Finally, HSCT recipients who were both anxious and depressed had reduced odds of being naïve to opioids [OR0.31 (95% CI: 0.15, 0.67)] compared to recipients who were neither depressed nor anxious. New opioid users had reduced odds of receiving a greater MMEDD [OR of 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96, 0.99)] when compared to previous users. In addition, autologous stem cell transplant recipients had reduced odds of receiving greater MMEDD compared to allogeneic transplant recipients (OR 0.33, 95% CI: 0.16, 0.66). CONCLUSION: Comorbid depression and /or anxiety impact opioid and benzodiazepine use in patients undergoing HSCT. The presence of these comorbid conditions and their association with increased use of opioids and benzodiazepines can also affect various health related outcomes. Larger studies are needed to fully understand the potential impact of this association on health related outcomes. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Kharfan-Dabaja: Incyte Corp: Speakers Bureau; Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau. Ailawadhi:Amgen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: Current tumor profiling analytics provide some insight into the various molecular abnormalities and their individual consequences on oncogenic signaling. However, these analyses are limited by their lack of integration where the combined effect of individual mutations, gene copy number variations and chromosomal aberrations are not consolidated to create the global molecular architecture that supports neoplastic growth, particularly in the context of drug resistance. Consequentially, identities of the preferential oncogenic pathway(s) tumor cells employ to oppose the effects of targeted therapies remain cryptic and unactionable. Here we present a simulation-based method, which not only replicates the molecular architecture of ibrutinib-resistant Waldenstroms Macroglobulinemia (WM, for which ibrutinib is the only FDA-approved agent) in silico, but also predicts cell sensitivity towards existing drugs, which we validated experimentally for potential clinical translation. Materials: We used the newly established human WM cell line, RPCI-WM1/IR, as a surrogate model of ibrutinib-refractory WM. Genomic data including whole exome sequencing (WES) and copy number analysis (CNA) was utilized for the creation of an avatar of RPCI-WM1/IR, which through simulation identified the salient and prominently dysregulated cellular pathways. Importantly, illustrating these pathways highlights common convergence points on increased proliferation and viability. These convergence points were then directly and indirectly targeted by simulated testing of a library of FDA approved drugs and those impacting these dysregulated pathways were nominated. Importantly, this simulation avatar approach not only looks for agents acting on the specific gene mutation, but also predicts the convergence points to be attacked. The personalized simulation avatar technology is a comprehensive functional proteomics representation of the WM physiology network. A standardized library of equations models all the biological reactions such as enzymatic reactions, allosteric binding and protein modulation by phosphorylation, de-phosphorylation, ubiquitination, acetylation, prenylation and others. Results: Several genomic aberrations were used to create the RPCI-WM1/IR simulation avatar. Functional activity (based on mutation or copy number alteration) of several ibrutinib targets or transcription factors associated with BTK activity such as FYN, SP1, BMX and FRK were predicted to be lost. Increased expression of CAV1, which also inhibits BTK mediated signaling, was increased. An increase in CSNK2B, which activates PU.1- a transcriptional target of BTK, was also observed. Of note, no CXCR4 mutations, which have been shown to impact ibrutinib response, were observed. Next, the cytotoxic potential of over 150 FDA approved drug (and some in experimental stages) were simulated individually and in combination on the RPCI-WM1/IR avatar. In silico modeling predicted aberrant activity of aurora kinase A (AURKA) and its associated signaling partners, which could be disrupted with the (AURKA) inhibitor, tozasertib. AURKA activation was predicted as upregulated due to alterations in several genes: RASA1 loss and SOS1 increase --> increased ERK --> increased ETS1 --> increased AURKA. High beta-catenin signaling (high CTNNB1 and FZD1/4 and low AXIN1 and GSK3B) was also shown to increase AURKA. The simulation predictions were experimentally validated in vitro where AURKA inhibition with tozasertib significantly inhibited proliferation of RPCI-WM1/IR cells (IC50~14nM) as well as inducing apoptosis (48hr, 20nM treatment) and cell-cycle arrest. Conclusions: Our data demonstrates the potential of in silico modeling in predicting novel drug targets, allowing guidance in 1.) Delineating operational oncogenic circuits in an ibrutinib-resistant state by reanimation of the molecular architecture in silico, 2.) Calculating the impact of individual genomic abnormalities and their collective influence on maintaining tumor survival and 3.) Performing a rapid in-silico drug-sensitivity screen directed by the pathway analyses, which can be validated experimentally using standard assays. This novel approach holds tremendous potential in creating highly personalized therapies for ibrutinib-refractory WM patients based on unique genetic signatures. Disclosures Vali: Cellworks Group, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kumar:Cellworks Group, Inc.: Employment. Singh:Cellworks Group, Inc.: Employment. Abbasi:Cellworks Group, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Abstract Background: Lenalidomide (Len) is clinically active in CLL patients (pts). Robust anti-leukemic immune response from Len is truncated by dysfunctional immune system in CLL and anti-apoptotic bcl-2 protein. We hypothesized that therapeutic downregulation of Bcl-2 may help enhance the killing potential of immune effector cells that are activated by Len. AT-101 is a novel, orally active BH3-mimetic that binds to antiapoptotic Bcl-2 family proteins (Bcl-2, Mcl-1 and Bcl-xL) and induces CLL cell death ex vivo (Masood et al British Journal of Haematology 2012). Encouraging efficacy and safety results of AT-101 alone or in combination with rituximab in CLL have been reported in Phase I/II studies. We have previously demonstrated that bcl-2 downregulation in CLL cells enhanced the killing potential of Len-activated immune cells. Conversely, pretreatment of CLL cells with Len enhanced AT-101 cytotoxicity in an immune cell independent manner (Masood et al British Journal of Haematology 2012). These preclinical findings formed the basis of a phase I/II clinical trial testing the combination of AT-101 and lenalidomide in relapsed B-CLL patients. Methods: The phase I portion of this study (NCT 01003769) utilizes a standard cohort of three design to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination regimen. The MTD is defined as the dose level below the lowest dose that induces dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) in at least one-third of patients. Following the MTD determination, the phase 2 portion will assess the efficacy of this combination using a one-stage design with an interim analysis. Key inclusion criteria include adult CLL pts with relapsed disease who have received 1-4 prior lines of treatment (Rx) (phase I) or 1-2 lines of Rx (phase II), last dose > 4 weeks from enrollment, ECOG performance status 0-2, good renal/liver function, acceptable blood counts. Patients with known hypersensitivity to thalidomide/Len or prior use of gossypol/AT-101 were excluded. Cycle 1 Rx includes Len alone and cycles 2-12 includes Len and AT-101. Starting doses of Len and AT-101 are 5mg oral daily on days 1-21 and 40 mg oral twice daily (b.i.d) on days 1-3 of a 28-day cycle. Planned dose escalation is shown in Table 1. Three pts will be treated at each dose level and observed during the first cycle of the combination Rx. Dose limiting toxicity is defined as grade 4 anemia unrelated to disease, thrombocytopenia-grade 4 or grade 3 with bleeding/requiring platelets, ANC <500 for >14 days, febrile neutropenia , Grade 3/4 non-hematologic toxicity. Dose from Phase II will be based on MTD from phase I. Peripheral blood and bone marrow will be collected and analyzed for immune cellular microenvironment and effect of Len and AT-101 on molecular targets. Optional lymph node biopsy will be done at baseline and if tumor-flare reaction occurs. This study is expected to accrue a maximum of 26 pts in phase I and 34 pts in phase II, overall maximum sample size of 60 pts. Five pts in phase I have been accrued to date. Table 1 (* starting dose level) Table 1. (* starting dose level) Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Background: Pomalidomide has demonstrated excellent activity in patients with relapsed, lenalidomide refractory, multiple myeloma (MM). Between November 2007 and March 2012, we enrolled 285 patients with relapsed MM on 5 sequential phase 2 trials; patients received pomalidomide at 2mg or 4 mg daily with weekly dexamethasone (Pom/dex). The approved dose of pomalidomide is 4 mg for 21 of 28 days. We wished to compare efficacy, tolerability and long-term outcomes between cohorts treated with 2 mg or 4mg daily continuously and 4mg daily for 21/28 days. Methods: After excluding two ineligible patients, 283 patients with lenalidomide refractory, relapsed MM from 5 sequential cohorts were analyzed. These patients were divided into 3 groups: Group1 received Pom 2mg for 28/28 day cycle (N= 69), Group 2 received Pom 4 mg for 28/28 day cycle (N= 95) and Group 3 received Pom 4mg for 21/28 day cycle (N= 119). All patients received oral dexamethasone given 40 mg daily on days 1, 8, 15, and 22. Response was assessed by the IMWG Uniform Response criteria. All patients received aspirin 325 mg daily for DVT prophylaxis or full dose anticoagulation. Results: The median age was 63 years (32-85); 35% were female. The median time from diagnosis was 53 months and the median number of prior regimens was 4. 127 (46%) had high-risk molecular markers. Prior therapies (% received) included lenalidomide (100%), thalidomide (46%), bortezomib (78%), autologous stem cell transplant (71%), and allogeneic transplant (4%). The median follow-up is 16.4 months (3.2-64.4). Forty eight percent are alive and 26% remain progression free; 15 patients are continuing to receive treatment. Frequency of AEs by groups are shown in Table 1. The most notable difference is grade 3+ neutropenia seen in 39% of group 1 and 56% and 57% of groups 2 and 3. Confirmed responses of PR or better were seen in 29% (group1), 35% (group2) and 24% (group3). Median duration of response (DOR) was 14.1 months (group1), 14.5 months (group2) and 10.2 months (group3). Median PFS was 5.5 months (group1), 6.9 months (group2) and 4.3 months (group3). Although the dose level cohorts were sequential rather than randomized, we compared OS between the dose levels in an exploratory manner. There was no significant difference in OS between dose levels (p=0.26). Median overall survival (OS) was 16.6 months (group1), 21.9 months (group2) and 16.0 months (group3). Conclusions: Pom/dex is active and well tolerated even in heavily pretreated patients Responses are durable. Response rates and overall toxicity are similar between the 2 mg and 4 mg doses. Neutropenia is more common in those receiving doses of 4mg daily or for 21/28 days compared to those receiving 2 mg daily. Table 1. All Grades Grade 3+ 2mg 28 Day 4mg 28 Day 4mg 21 Day 2mg 28 Day 4mg 28 Day 4mg 21 Day Anemia 68% 58% 74% 14% 15% 27% Lymphopenia 22% 51% 11% 16% 32% 8% Neutropenia 71% 82% 77% 39% 57% 56% Thrombocytopenia 51% 61% 63% 10% 9% 23% Leukopenia 59% 77% 72% 26% 38% 39% Pneumonia 7% 11% 12% 6% 7% 11% Fatigue 51% 65% 60% 9% 5% 8% Neuropathy 28% 32% 28% 0% 3% 0% Elevated Blood Glucose 10% 21% 8% 4% 6% 3% Pneumonitis 3% 2% 3% 3% 1% 1% VTE (Thrombosis) 3% 3% 3% 1% 3% 3% Secondary Malignancy 0% 2% 1% 0% 2% 1% Figure1. Kaplan Meier Overall Survival Curves Figure1. Kaplan Meier Overall Survival Curves Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Fonseca:Medtronic, Otsuka, Celgene, Genzyme, BMS, Lilly, Onyx, Binding Site, Millennium, AMGEN: Consultancy, patent for the prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of the disease. He also has sponsored research from Cylene and Onyx Other, Research Funding. Bergsagel:Novartis: Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; OncoEthix: Research Funding; MundiPharma: Research Funding. Stewart:Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Array BioPharma: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Research Funding. Reeder:Millennium, Celgene, Novartis: Research Funding. Mikhael:Onyx: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding.