Advani, Ranjana H.

Abstract Abstract 3701 Background: Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia (WM) is an indolent B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (B-NHL) characterized by production of a monoclonal IgM paraprotein and variable CD20 expression due to the downregulation of CD20 as B cells differentiate into plasma cells. Rituximab monotherapy (R) achieves an overall response rate (ORR) of 25–50% in therapy naïve and relapsed WM and is associated with IgM flares in 25–75% of patients (pts) that potentially lead to hyperviscosity due to a rapid rise in IgM. Ofatumumab (OFA) is a fully human monoclonal anti-CD20 antibody approved for the treatment of fludarabine and alemtuzumab-refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and has demonstrated activity in indolent B-NHL. Since OFA is active in CLL, with its low CD20 expression, we initiated a phase II single-arm trial of OFA in pts with WM. We report primary endpoint data from this study. Methods: Pts (age ≥ 18 years) with WM requiring therapy by 2nd International Workshop on WM (IWWM) criteria were eligible. Cycle 1 (C1) of therapy consisted of OFA 300 mg week 1 and 1000 mg weeks 2–4 (Treatment Group A [TGA]) or OFA 300 mg week 1 and 2000 mg weeks 2–5 (TGB). Premedication included acetaminophen and antihistamine (all infusions) and glucocorticoid (infusions 1 and 2). Pts with grade 3–4 infusion-related adverse events (AEs) during weeks 1 and 2 also received glucocorticoid during weeks 3–5. Pts with stable disease (SD) or a minor response (MR) at week 16 of cycle 1 were eligible to receive a re-dosing cycle (C2) consisting of OFA 300 mg week 1 and 2000 mg weeks 2–5. The primary endpoint was ORR assessed by 3rd IWWM criteria. Toxicity was assessed according to NCI-CTCAE, v 3.0. Results: Thirty-seven pts were enrolled between March 2009 and February 2011. Median age was 63 years (range 43–85); 22 pts were male. Median IgM level was 3.11 g/dL (range 0.81–8.64); median hemoglobin (hgb) was 9.8 g/dL (range 5.3–13.2). Nine pts were treatment naïve; 28 pts had received a median of 3 prior therapies (range 1–5) including R (25 pts) and purine analog (14 pts). The first 15 pts were enrolled in TGA and the next 22 pts in TGB; pt characteristics were similar in both groups. Thirty-four pts completed C1; 1 pt withdrew after 1 dose and 2 pts received only 3 doses due to serious AEs (SAEs). Eleven pts achieved partial response (PR) and 7 achieved MR after C1 (ORR=49%; 95% CI [32%, 66%]). Twelve pts received C2, after which 4 pts improved their response (1 MR to PR, 1 SD to PR, 2 SD to MR) and 1 nonevaluable pt attained MR. After C1 and C2, the ORR was 59% (13 PR, 9 MR; 95% CI [42%, 75%]). Responses were seen in 67% (6/9) of therapy naïve pts, 57% (16/28) of relapsed pts, 52% (13/25) of pts who had prior R, 75% (9/12) of R-naïve pts, 64% (16/25) of pts with IgM < 4 g/dL and 50% (6/12) of pts with IgM ≥ 4 g/dL. ORR was 47% (7/15) in TGA and 68% (15/22) in TGB. ORR in TGA was negatively affected by prior R exposure and IgM ≥ 4 g/dL, whereas ORR in TGB was not affected by prior therapy, prior R or IgM level. Fifteen of 26 (58%) pts with hgb < 11.0 g/dL experienced ≥ 3.0 g/dL increase in hgb (range 3.0–7.1). Infusion-related events occurred with dose 1 in 30 (81%) pts and with dose 2 in 21 (57%) pts; all infusion events were grade 1–2 except 4 grade 3 events (1 rash, 1 chest pain, 1 chest discomfort, 1 back pain). Fifteen pts developed 22 infections including 8 upper respiratory tract, 4 urinary tract (UTI) and 4 sinus infections; all infections were grade 1–2 except 1 grade 3 UTI. One pt developed grade 3 febrile neutropenia. In total, there were 14 grade 3–4 AEs (all grade 3). Five pts developed 8 SAEs possibly related to OFA. One pt withdrew due to grade 3 hemolytic anemia. Two pts with baseline IgM of 6.63 and 4.75 g/dL required plasmapheresis for grade 3 renal insufficiency and hyperviscosity symptoms, respectively, with resolution of symptoms and were able to complete C1. Two pts developed IgM flare, defined as > 25% rise in IgM followed by subsequent MR or PR. Conclusions: OFA is clinically active in pts with WM, with an acceptable toxicity profile and a lower incidence (5%) of IgM flare. The ORR to OFA was 59% (TGA 47%, TGB 68%) including a 50% ORR (TGA 17%, TGB 83%) in pts with IgM ≥ 4.0 g/dL. Pts' anemia responded to OFA with 58% of pts with baseline hgb < 11.0 g/dL experiencing ≥ 3.0 g/dL increase in hgb. TGB achieved ORR > 60% in all pt groups regardless of prior therapy or baseline IgM level. A higher dose of OFA appeared to be more effective in pts previously exposed to R or with baseline IgM ≥ 4.0 g/dL. Further study of OFA in WM is warranted. Disclosures: Furman: Genentech: Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: • Ofatumumab is an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody approved for the treatment of fludarabine- and alemtuzumab-refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and is currently under development for the treatment of B-cell malignancies (chronic lymphocytic leukemia, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, Waldenstroms macroglobulinemia and follicular lymphoma), as well as autoimmune diseases (rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis). Eradat:Millennium: Speakers Bureau; Genentech, A Roche Company: Speakers Bureau. DiRienzo:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment. Leonard:GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy. Advani:GSK: Research Funding. Switzky:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment. Liao:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment. Shah:GSK: Employment. Lisby:Genmab A/S: Employment. Lin:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment.

Abstract Introduction RCHOP is the standard frontline treatment for patients with DLBCL. However, for patients with high-intermediate or high-risk disease (IPI 3-5), outcomes are suboptimal, with an estimated 3-year PFS of about 55%. In addition to IPI, an additional factor associated with an increased risk include non-GCB cell of origin. Brentuximab vedotin, an ADC targeting CD30, has demonstrated single-agent activity in relapsed/refractory DLBCL patients. Of note, higher ORR and CR, as well as longer duration of PFS, were observed in those patients with CD30 detected on tumor cells by routine IHC. Methods This phase 2 study was designed to evaluate combination therapy using brentuximab vedotin (BV) and standard RCHOP chemotherapy as frontline treatment in patients with high-intermediate/high risk (standard IPI score 3-5 or age-adjusted IPI [aaIPI] score 2-3) DLBCL, regardless of CD30 expression (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01925612). Patients were randomized to receive either 1.2 mg/kg BV+RCHOP or 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHOP for up to 6 cycles of treatment. BV was given on Day 1 of every 21-day cycle. Response was assessed per investigator using Cheson 2007. AEs, physical examination findings, and laboratory testing were utilized to characterize safety. Tumor cell CD30 expression was measured by IHC and gene expression analysis; soluble CD30 was measured in plasma. Tumor microenvironment was also evaluated for frequency of immune-infiltrating cells. The primary endpoints for this study were the tolerability of each regimen and the CR rate at the end of treatment (EOT). Key secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS). Additional exploratory endpoints included CD30 expression on tumor specimens (CD30- defined as <1% per IHC) and correlation of CD30 expression and response. Results Twenty-nine patients were treated with 1.2 mg/kg BV+RCHOP and 22 patients were treated with 1.8 mg/kg BV+RCHOP. Over half (63%) were high-intermediate risk (IPI 3, aaIPI 2) and 37% were high risk (IPI 4-5, aaIPI 3). Most had Stage IV disease (71%) and 27% had an ECOG score of 2. AEs in ≥50% of patients included peripheral sensory neuropathy (63%), fatigue (61%), nausea (55%), and diarrhea (53%). Grade 3 or higher events occurred in 76% of patients; the most frequent were neutropenia (33%) and febrile neutropenia (31%). The PET-negative CR rate was 69% overall; CD30+ patients had a CR rate of 76% (19/25) compared with 63% (12/19) in CD30- patients by IHC. Although PFS data are still immature (median follow up of 8 months), the estimated PFS rate at 12 months was 82% (95% CI: 58, 93) in CD30+ patients and 56% (95% CI: 32, 75) in CD30- patients. 60% (3/5) of patients with CD30- ABC-DLBCL progressed versus 27% (3/11) of CD30+ ABC-DLBCL patients. Four patients with EBV+ DLBCL were treated and all achieved CR; 3 EBV+ patients remain in remission after a median follow-up of 12 months. Within the microenvironment, a higher percentage of CD3+ T-cells was observed in patients with CR (23%; range, 4-80%) than in those with PR (14%; range, 10-15%) or PD (11%; range, 5-15%). Of the 32 patients who have not yet progressed, 50% had ≥20% CD3+ cells compared to 18% of patients with PD (2/11). Other factors, including soluble CD30 levels and infiltrating CD68+ cells, were not associated with clinical outcomes. Conclusions Interim results demonstrate that adding BV to RCHOP results in a high rate of CR in this population of IPI 3-5 DLBCL. Patients with CD30-expression in the tumor appear to have a higher CR rate and fewer early progression events than patients with CD30- DLBCL. Furthermore, subsets of patients who have a particularly poor prognosis (CD30+ ABC subtype and EBV+ DLBCL) appeared to have a favorable outcome with BV+RCHOP. Evaluation of the tumor microenvironment showed that higher frequencies of infiltrating CD3+ cells were observed in the CR group, suggesting possible immunologic correlates of response. However, CD30 expression appears to have greater prognostic significance in this study despite the relatively small sample size. These results are intriguing and merit further testing in a randomized trial. Disclosures Yasenchak: Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Brentuximab vedotin is indicated in the US for treatment of patients with Hodgkin lymphoma after failure of autologous stem cell transplant or after failure of at least two prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimens in patients who are not ASCT candidates and for the treatment of patients with systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma after failure of at least one prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimen. The drug is being evaluated in this study for use as frontline treatment in patients with high-intermediate/high risk DLBCL in combination with multiagent chemotherapy. . Halwani:Abbvie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Takeda/Millenium: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Advani:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Genetech: Consultancy. Ansell:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding. Budde:Merck: Research Funding; Ikara Inc: Patents & Royalties; Atara Biotherapeutics: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Burke:Millenium/Takeda: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Other: Travel expenses; Gilead: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Farber:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Holkova:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Kolibaba:GSK: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Knapp:Celgene: Research Funding; Heron Pharmaceuticals: Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Research Funding; Brystol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Research Funding; EMD Serono: Research Funding. Li:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Manley:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Patel-Donnelly:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Seetharam:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Yimer:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Bartlett:Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Colgene: Research Funding; Medimmune: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; Insight: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; MERC: Research Funding; Dynavax: Research Funding; Idera: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; LAM Theapeutics: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 1603 Background: We have previously reported similar outcomes for patients with bulky stage I or II mediastinal HL treated with combined modality therapy either with ABVD + radiotherapy or the Stanford V regimen in the North American Intergroup trial E2496 (Advani et al, ASH 2010 abstract 416). In the current analysis, we compare the patterns of failure between the two groups. Methods: Patients with stage I/II bulky mediastinal HL (maximum mediastinal mass width > 1/3 of intrathoracic diameter) were randomized to receive chemotherapy (CT) on either Arm A (ABVD x 6–8 cycles administered q 28 days) or Arm B (12 weeks of Stanford V administered weekly). Two-3 weeks after completion of chemotherapy all patients received modified involved field radiotherapy (RT) (36 Gy) delivered to the mediastinum, hila, and supraclavicular regions. Patients on Stanford V arm also received involved field RT to any other sites ≥ 5 cm at diagnosis. Patients were assessed 3, 6 and 12 months after completing RT with computed tomography scanning and then every 6 months for 5 years. The primary end points were failure free survival (FFS) and overall survival (OS). Disease progression was defined as 'in-field', 'distant' or both relative to the radiation fields prescribed in the E2496 protocol. Distant sites of failure were further characterized as intra-thoracic, intra-abdominal or other (bone, bone marrow and axillae, if not previously irradiated). Results: Two hundred and sixty-seven patients were randomized: 136 on the ABVD arm and 131 on the Stanford V arm. Patient characteristics were well matched with no differences between two arms in overall response rates (ORR), FFS and OS. (Advani et al ASH 2010 abstract 416). At a median follow up of 5.5 years 40 patients have relapsed with no difference in ABVD (n=18, 13%) versus Stanford V (n=22, 17%) (p=0.49). Central review of RT fields available in 37/40 patients found major violations with under treatment of tumor noted in 7/37 (19%). Patterns of failure are shown in Table 1. There were no differences in patterns of relapse for the two study arms. In-field relapses occurred in <10% in both study arms. Conclusion: For patients with stage I/II bulky mediastinal HL, combined modality therapy with either ABVD +RT or the Stanford V regimen results in excellent disease control. In-field relapse was uncommon. These results set a benchmark for assessing ongoing trials omitting RT in patients with stage I/II bulky mediastinal HL. Future research efforts should focus on risk stratification to identify the small subset of patients who are likely to fail standard upfront therapy. US cooperative group efforts in this subset of patients are ongoing that use interim PET-CT imaging based risk-adapted strategies. Disclosures: Horning: Genentech: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Abstract Abstract 2687 Background: Patients with early stage (Stages I, II) diffuse large B cell (DLBCL) have been traditionally treated with either CHOP x6 alone or with CHOP followed by involved field external beam radiotherapy (IFRT). With the demonstration of the superiority of rituximab CHOP (RCHOP) in advanced stage DLBCL, RCHOP has been adopted as the chemoimmunotherapy standard of care in early stage disease with or without IFRT. Radioimmunotherapy (RIT) has the advantage of delivering high-energy, short path length radiation in a targeted approach using an anti-CD20 antibody as the carrier. Thus, radiation is potentially targeted to microscopic sites outside of known disease. Goals: To evaluate the complete response (CR) rate and functional CR rate (CR or CRu/PR and PET negative) to a treatment regimen of RCHOP followed by 90Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan (Zevalin, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals) radioimmunotherapy (RIT); only patients not achieving PET negative status after RIT were to be given IFRT. The study goal was to achieve a functional CR rate of ≥75%. Patients and Methods: Eligible patients were those with new, untreated Stages I or II DLBCL as determined by standard CT scanning, adequate blood counts, creatinine and bilirubin <2.0 mg/dl, cardiac ejection fraction >45%, and a performance status 0–2. Stage I patients were required to have ≥1 adverse risk factor (≥60 years, bulky disease, elevated LDH or PS2). Patients received standard RCHOP21 × 2 cycles and then were restaged. Patients in CR received 2 additional cycles; those in PR or CRu received 4 additional cycles. At end of RCHOP a PET scan was repeated and centrally reviewed; those with a PR or functional CR proceeded to Zevalin RIT 0.4 mCi/kg (maximum 32 mCi) within 12 weeks of the last RCHOP. Patients were restaged 12 weeks post-RIT; PET negative patients were observed without maintenance; PET positive patients received 30Gy involved field radiation and then were restaged. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the patient characteristics, treatment and response. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate failure rates. Results: Between Dec 2004 and Nov 2008, 62 patients were enrolled; after pathology review 53 were considered eligible. 42% (22/53) patients were stage I/IE; 58% (31/53) were stage II/IIE. 57% (30/53) received 6 cycles of RCHOP; 40% (21/53) received 4 cycles; and 2 patients received 1 and 2 cycles, respectively. After immunochemotherapy, 79% (42/53) were in functional CR and 19% (10/53) PR; 1 was unevaluable. Of the 53 eligible patients who completed RCHOP therapy 91% (48/53) proceeded to RIT. After RIT, 87% (46/53; 95% CI: 75–95) were in CR/CRu and 89% (47/53; 95% CI:77–96%) were in functional CR. One patient proceeded to IFRT. The median follow-up is now 4.3 years. Seven (13%) of patients have had tumor progression but only 2 have died (1 of disease). At 4 years, 88% of patients remain progression free and 98% remain alive (Fig 1,2). The median has not been reached for either PFS or OS. There has been one case of myelodysplastic syndrome. Conclusions: Combination immunochemotherapy and RIT is an active regimen for patients with early stage DLBCL. Nearly all patients will achieve functional CR without the requirement of IFRT. The regimen of RCHOP and RIT for early stage DLBCL is worthy of further study. Disclosures: Witzig: Spectrum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, uncompensated Other. Off Label Use: Use of Zevalin in treating patients with Stage I-II DLBCL. Kahl:Roche: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding. Horning:Genentech: Employment; Roche: Equity Ownership.

Motexafin gadolinium (MGd, Xcytrin®) is a novel anti-cancer drug that selectively concentrates in cancer cells and disrupts redox dependent pathways by targeting oxidative stress related proteins such as thioredoxin reductase and metallothioneins. MGd has been shown to generate reactive oxygen species and induce apoptosis in tumor cells. We initiated a study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of MGd in two B-cell malignancies, relapsed/refractory LG and relapsed/refractory CLL or CLL/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL). MGd was given intravenously (IV) at 6mg/kg/day for 3 days q 2 weeks for LG and 5mg/kg/day for 10 days q 3 weeks for CLL/SLL. Ten patients (pts) with LG (2 grade 1, 5 grade 2, 1 grade 3 follicular, 2 marginal zone), 2 pts with CLL/SLL and 1 pt with CLL have been enrolled. Median age was 64.5 yrs (range 44–77), median prior treatment regimens was 3.5 (range 1–6) and median time from diagnosis to treatment was 52 mo. Many LG pts had failed prior aggressive treatment regimens including: CHOP (4), ICE (1), HyperCVAD(1), auto-bone marrow transplant (1); all failed rituxamab and 6 failed Zevalin. CLL/SLL and CLL pts had failed rituxamab (3), fludarabine (2), and R-CHOP (1). MGd related adverse events included skin and urine discoloration (6 and 4 pts), diarrhea, nausea, vesiculobullous rash, peripheral neuropathy (3 pts each). MGd related ≥gr 3 adverse events included skin rash (3 pts), fatigue, neuropathy, photosensitivity (1 pt each). Importantly, no MGd-related myelosuppression was observed. In 12 evaluable pts, there have been three PRs of 2+, 5+ and 8 months duration (2 follicular, 1 CLL). Two pts had SD (follicular, SLL) one of these had resolution of lymphoma related autoimmune hemolytic anemia. Responses occurred after ≤2 cycles of therapy and were seen in patients after extensive prior treatment (mean 4.3 prior regimens, range 3–7). MGd is a non-myelosuppressive drug with single agent activity in LG and CLL/SLL.

Abstract Abstract 415 Background: The ability to cure patients (pts) with advanced Hodgkin's Lymphoma (HL) with combination chemotherapy (CC) (MOPP and variants, ABVD and variants) represented a major milestone in oncology research, and CC became a paradigm for other malignancies. Further, the rationale for combined modality therapy (CMT) (radiation (RT) and CC) in HL evolved based on the high frequency of relapse in initially involved sites. As response rates and survival improved, newer treatments such as the combined modality Stanford V regimen were developed to shorten the duration of chemotherapy, add RT to sites of disease and reduce toxicity while maintaining or improving the cure rate. Indeed, the Stanford V regimen was tested and validated in a Phase II co-operative group trial (E1492) (J Clin Oncol 2000; 18:972). In order to investigate this approach against “standard” therapy, we conducted a randomized Phase III Intergroup trial of ABVD vs. the Stanford V regimen for patients with locally extensive or advanced HL. Objectives: The trial was designed to detect a 33% reduction in the failure free survival (FFS) hazard rate with Stanford V compared with ABVD, which corresponds to a difference in five-year FFS of 64% vs. 74%. Method: Patients with locally extensive (defined as clinical Ann Arbor Stage I-IIA/B and bulky mediastinal disease (BMD) (mass > 1/3 maximum intrathoracic diameter on standing postero-anterior chest x-ray or >/−10 cm on computerized tomography) or advanced (Ann Arbor Stage III or IV) HL were randomized to receive either ABVD × 6–8 cycles (C) (51% had 6 C, 35% had 8 C, 14% had <6 C) + 36 Gy (only in pts with BMD) or Stanford V × 12 weeks (95% had 12 weeks) + 36 Gy (for sites >5cm or for macroscopic splenic disease). The log-rank test was used to compare FFS for all eligible patients stratified on extent of disease (locally extensive vs. advanced), and number of International Prognostic Factor Project (IPFP) risk factors (0–2 vs. 3–7). An extended Cox model was also used to address non-proportional hazard between the two arms. Results: 854 pts enrolled from April, 1999 to June, 2006 and 812 were eligible for analysis. 404 pts were randomized to ABVD and 408 to Stanford V. Median age was 33 yrs in both arms (range 16–83). 53% were men and 47% women; 4% had Stage I, 31% had Stage II, 39% had Stage III and 25% had Stage IV disease by Ann Arbor criteria. 35% of pts on ABVD and 35% on Stanford V had BMD. Three % of pts had nodular lymphocyte predominant HL, 77% of pts had nodular sclerosis HL, 14% had mixed cell HL. Age, stage, pathology and risk factors (0–2 vs. 3–7) were similar in both arms. In total, 65% were IPFP score 0–2 and 33% were 3–6. Response rate. There was no difference in response rates (RR) between the two arms (ABVD=72% CR+ CCR, 7.7% PR, 7.9% SD; Stanford V= 69 % CR +CCR, 7% PR and 10 % SD. 8% were not evaluable for response on ABVD and 9% on Stanford V. Toxicity was similar in both groups. The most frequent Grade 3 + 4 toxicity was neutropenia, and was similar between the 2 groups (76% Grade 3 + 4 in ABVD and 70% Grade 3+ 4 in Stanford V). Grade 5 toxicity was <1% in both groups. There was, however, more Grade 3 lymphopenia in Stanford V (78% vs. 42%, p< 0.0001) and more Grade 3 +4 sensory neuropathy in Stanford V (10%) than in ABVD (3%) (p< 0.0001). A total of 26 second primary cancers developed, 12 after ABVD and 14 after Stanford V (p=NS). FFS and OS. For 812 eligible patients, with a median follow up of 5.25 years, 5-year FFS was 73% for ABVD and 71% for Stanford V (p=0.29 by log rank) (Figure left); 5-year OS was 88% for ABVD and 87% for Stanford V (p=0.87 by log-rank, HR=0.97, 95% CI: 0.65 to 1.44) (Figure right) indicating no significant difference in either FFS or OS between the 2 arms. Conclusion: In the largest Phase III intergroup trial of HL in North America, there was no significant difference in RR, FFS, OS, and 5-year toxicity when ABVD (+ RT for BMD) is compared with Stanford V (+RT for nodal sites >5 cm and macroscopic splenic disease). There was more Grade 3 lymphopenia (p< 0.0001) and more Grade 3 + 4 sensory neuropathy (p< 0.0001) on Stanford V. Thus ABVD (plus RT for BMD) remains the standard of care because Stanford V did not meet the objective of 33% improvement in FFS. For some patients, Stanford V, when given as described with RT, remains an acceptable alternative. Disclosures: Friedberg: Genentech: Honoraria. Blum:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Horning:Genentech: Employment.

Abstract Abstract 416 Background: Standard therapy for locally extensive Hodgkin Lymphoma (HL) defined as stage I/II with bulky mediastinal disease [mediastinal mass ratio (MMR) > than 1/3 of the chest diameter on standing postero-anterior chest x-ray or 10 cm on computerized tomography] is combined modality therapy (CMT). E2496 was a North American intergroup, randomized phase III study comparing ABVD versus the Stanford V regimen for patients with locally extensive and advanced stage HL. In this subgroup analysis we compare two CMT approaches, ABVD + radiotherapy (RT) and the Stanford V regimen, in patients with stage I/II bulky mediastinal HL. Methods: Patients with stage I/II HL bulky mediastinal disease were randomized to receive chemotherapy (CT) on either Arm A (ABVD × 6–8 cycles administered q 28 days) or Arm B (12 weeks of Stanford V, administered weekly). Two-3 weeks after completion of chemotherapy, modified involved field RT was delivered at 36 Gy to the mediastinum to patients on ABVD as well as Stanford V. Patients on Stanford V also received involved field RT to any other sites >5 cm at diagnosis. The primary endpoint was failure free survival (FFS) defined as the time to either progression/relapse or death. The log-rank test was used to compare FFS and OS (overall survival) for all eligible patients. Results: Of the 812 eligible patients with advanced HL enrolled on the study 267 had locally advanced bulky mediastinal disease: 136 on ABVD and 131 on Stanford V. Patient characteristics between the two randomized groups were well matched with a median age of 30 years and 86% had stage II disease. On ABVD 61% of patients received 6 cycles, 29% 8 cycles of CT and 77% required some dose modification. In Stanford V 97% completed the assigned 12 weeks of CT and 76% required some dose modification. 82% received RT per protocol in ABVD versus 88% in Stanford V. The overall response (CR+PR) was 82% in ABVD and 86% in Stanford V. At a median follow-up of 5.47 years, there are 19 failures and 6 deaths in the ABVD group and 25 failures with 9 deaths in the Stanford V group. We failed to detect statistically significant differences between ABVD +RT and Stanford V for FFS (5y 85% versus 77% p=0.13, HR=1.56 95% CI (0.87, 2.88) and OS (5y 95% versus 92% p=0.31, HR=1.69 95% CI (0.60, 4.75). No difference in hematologic toxicity was observed between the two arms. Evaluation of pulmonary function and patterns of failure are pending. Conclusions: For stage I/II patients with bulky mediastinal disease, CMT with either ABVD +RT or the Stanford V regimen results in high cure rates and is highly effective. ABVD for 6–8 cycles plus 36 Gy RT remains the US standard of care. Longer follow up is required to assess RT related late effects. Future research efforts should focus on risk stratification to identify; a) the 15–20% of patients destined to relapse after standard therapy and evaluate treatment intensification strategies and b) the 80–85% of patients who are cured with standard therapy and determine whether a subset can achieve the same excellent outcomes with a reduction or elimination of radiation. Planned US cooperative group trials will address these questions, using ABVD as the chemotherapy backbone in conjunction with interim PET imaging for risk stratification. Disclosures: Blum: Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Horning:Genentech: Employment.

Abstract Introduction: Waldenström's macroglobulinemia (WM) is a rare, indolent B-cell lymphoma characterized by lymphoplasmacytic cell infiltration of bone marrow and elevated serum levels of immunoglobulin M (IgM) protein. Despite recent advances in treatment the disease relapses in most patients. About 90% of WM patients harbor the MYD88 L265P oncogenic mutation. MYD88 is an adapter protein in the Toll-like receptor (TLR) pathway. The MYD88 L265P oncoprotein has been shown to amplify TLR 7 and 9 signaling, leading to downstream activation of NF-κB and cytokine signaling pathways that promote tumor cell survival and proliferation (Lim, AACR 2013). IMO-8400 is an investigational oligonucleotide antagonist of endosomal TLRs 7, 8 and 9. In preclinical studies in a human cell line and animal models of WM, IMO-8400 inhibited key cell signaling pathways, including NF-κB, BTK, STAT-3 and IRAK-4, and inhibited tumor growth and tumor IgM production. In Phase 1 and 2 clinical trials in healthy subjects (N=30) and in patients with autoimmune disease (N=35), IMO-8400 was generally well tolerated and demonstrated evidence of clinical activity. Based on these data, we initiated a Phase 1/2 clinical trial of IMO-8400 in WM, the first study of a drug candidate specifically targeting the MYD88 L265P mutation. Methods: This Phase 1/2 multicenter, open-label, dose-escalation clinical trial continues to recruit adult patients with relapsed or refractory WM (NCT Identifier: NCT02092909). In a classic 3x3 dose escalation scheme, patients are enrolled in one of three sequential escalating dose cohorts and receive subcutaneous IMO-8400 at dosages of 0.6, 1.2 or 2.4 mg/kg per week, respectively, for 24 weeks. The presence of the MYD88 L265P mutation is assessed by PCR-based genetic screening following enrollment. Patients who complete the 24-week treatment period are eligible to enroll in an extension trial. The primary study objective is to evaluate the safety and tolerability of escalating IMO-8400 dosages. Secondary objectives include preliminary evaluation of clinical response based on international guidelines and identification of an optimal dose for further evaluation (Kimby, Clin Lymphoma Myeloma 2006). Results: Overall, 17 patients (6 female, 11 male) have been enrolled in three dose cohorts to date. Median baseline characteristics include: age 66 years, prior therapies 4 (range 1-13), serum IgM 2,225 mg/dL, serum M protein 0.96 g/dL, and B2-microglobulin 3.42 mg/L. IMO-8400 has been generally well tolerated across all dose cohorts to date, with patient exposure ranging from 2-46 weeks in the Phase 1/2 and extension trials. The most common adverse events reported to date include transient flu-like symptoms and injection site reactions. One serious adverse event of worsening grade 3 arthritis, deemed possibly related to study drug, was reported in a patient with a pre-existing history of arthritis in the 2.4 mg/kg dose cohort. This patient discontinued study treatment. To date, no other patients have discontinued treatment due to treatment-related adverse events. Preliminary evidence of clinical activity for IMO-8400 has been observed in all dose cohorts. In June 2015, an independent Data Review Committee reviewed 4-week safety data from the highest dose cohort and agreed that 2.4 mg/kg was safe for further evaluation. Safety, pharmacokinetics and preliminary activity for all three dose cohorts will be presented. Conclusions: IMO-8400 is a mutation-targeted therapy in development for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory WM. In an ongoing Phase 1/2 clinical trial in WM, IMO-8400 has been generally well tolerated and has demonstrated preliminary evidence of clinical activity. Safety results support continued evaluation of IMO-8400 at 2.4 mg/kg/week in this patient population. Disclosures Thomas: Novartis, Celgene, Acerta Pharmaceuticals, Idera Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Harb:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding; Idera Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Beck:Idera Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Nashat:Idera Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Ansell:Idera Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Eradat:Idera Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Libby:Idera Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Hajdenberg:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Idera Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Heffner:Idera Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Hoffman:Idera Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Vesole:Celgene Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Idera Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Simov:Idera Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Wyant:Idera Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Brevard:Idera Pharmaceuticals: Employment. O'Leary:Idera Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Agrawal:Idera Pharmaceuticals: Employment.

Abstract Background: Despite advances in chemotherapy, R/R HL remains a significant clinical problem with over 1,000 primarily young lives lost annually. HL is a unique tumor in which a small number of malignant Hodgkin Reed-Sternberg (HRS) cells propagate an immunosuppressive microenvironment that augments HRS growth and survival. We hypothesized that immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy could activate the tumor immune microenvironment, while the CD30 expressing HRS cells could be targeted by brentuximab vedotin (BV), thereby overcoming tumor cell resistance and deepening clinical responses. E4412 is a phase 1 ECOG-ACRIN sponsored study of the combination of BV and the checkpoint inhibitors ipilimumab (IPI) and nivolumab (NIVO) in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). Here we report the data on the patients treated with BV + IPI, the first cohort of the study. Methods: Patients with biopsy proven R/R HL were treated with BV 1.8mg/kg and two escalating doses of IPI: 1 mg/kg or 3mg/kg. After safety was determined an expanded cohort was treated with BV 1.8mg/kg IV and IPI 3mg/kg IV. The schedule consisted of BV administered every 21 days for 16 cycles and IPI every 21 days x 4 doses and thereafter every 3 months for up to a year. Dose limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined for purposes of dose escalation within the first cycle of therapy. Patients are followed for toxicity up to 30 days beyond their last treatment. Results: As of 7/2015 19 of 23 planned patients have been treated with BV + IPI. We report the data on the full dose escalation population (13 patients: Dose level 1 (6), Dose level 2 (7)). The median age was 33 years (range: 20-49). Seven patients were male. Patients were heavily pretreated with a median of 4 prior therapies (2-13). Fourpatients had prior treatment with BV; 8 patients had prior SCT (7 autologous, 1 allogeneic). Safety: Overall the regimen of BV + IPI was extremely well tolerated with no DLTs noted during dose escalation. Toxicities considered at least possibly related to drug during any cycle of treatment are shown according to grade in Table 1. The most common treatment related adverse events were: diarrhea, rash, and peripheral sensory neuropathy. Other AEs of interest included: alopecia, transaminitis, and uveitis. Grade 3 and 4 treatment related adverse events (AEs) included: Dose level 1: one grade 3 infusion reaction, which led to a protocol amendment to include premedication, no further grade 3 infusion reactions were noted; Dose level 2: one each: grade 3 rash, vomiting, and peripheral sensory neuropathy, and one grade 4 thrombocytopenia in patient with pre-existing thrombocytopenia. Response: For the 12 evaluable patients, the overall response (ORR) for the combination of BV + IPI was 67% with a complete response (CR) rate of 42% (5 of 12 patients). An additional 2 patients had stable disease (SD) giving a clinical benefit rate of 83%. Three of 5 of the CRs occurred at dose level 1 (1mg dose of IPI). The median progression free survival (PFS) is 0.74 years with a median follow-up of 0.66 years. Conclusion: In this first reported study of the combination of checkpoint inhibitor and ADC, toxicity was low, primarily grades 1 and 2. In a heavily pretreated patient population, 33% of whom had had prior BV and 67% of whom were s/p ASCT, the ORR of 67% and CR rate of 42% suggests a potential deepening of response compared to monotherapy. More than half of these CRs occurred at 1mg of IPI suggesting that in combination with ADC, low doses of immune stimulation may be highly active. Optimization of this combination strategy is planned with ongoing accrual to cohorts receiving BV + NIVO, and BV + IPI + NIVO. Data will be updated to include the full BV + IPI cohort by the time of the annual meeting. Table 1. Common and Immune Toxicities Toxicity Type Dose Level 1 (n=6) Dose Level 2 (n=7) Grade Grade 1,2 3 4 5 1,2 3 4 5 (n) (n) (n) (n) (n) (n) (n) (n) Fatigue 5 - - - 3 - - - Fever 1 - - - 3 - - - Pain 2 - - - 3 - - - Alopecia 2 - - - 1 - - - Pruritus 1 - - - 2 - - - Rash maculo-papular 4 - - - 2 1 - - Diarrhea 4 - - - 4 - - - Dyspepsia 2 - - - 1 - - - Nausea 6 - - - 4 - - - Vomiting 3 - - - 2 1 - - Papulopustular rash 1 - - - 1 - - - Alanine aminotransferase increased 3 - - - 3 - - - Aspartate aminotransferase increased 3 - - - 2 - - - Platelet count decreased - - - - - - 1 - Anorexia 3 - - - - - - - Headache 2 - - - 2 - - - Peripheral sensory neuropathy 5 - - - 4 1 - - Dry eye 2 - - - - - - - Uveitis 1 - - - - - - - Cough 2 - - - 1 - - - Disclosures Diefenbach: Molecular Templates: Research Funding; Immunogen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Idera: Consultancy; Jannsen Oncology: Consultancy; Gilead: Equity Ownership, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Off Label Use: Presentation will discuss the experimental use of the checkpoint inhibitor Ipilimumab in relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma.. Cohen:Celgene: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; BMS: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Robertson:Eli Lilly: Equity Ownership. Fenske:Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria. Kahl:Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy; Cell Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Infinity: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy. Ansell:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 2721 Poster Board II-697 The role of the CD40 pathway in B-cell cancers is rather enigmatic due to having polar opposite roles in tumor biology. Stimulation of the CD40 receptor can reduce cell viability of NHL cell lines and xenograft tumor models, whereas, in sharp contrast, constitutive CD40 stimulation can actually promote proliferation of NHL cell lines, as well as drive lymphomagenesis and transformation of primary B-cells. Therefore, targeting the CD40 pathway has been challenging due to a knowledge gap in understanding the factors that may dictate a pro- or anti-tumor role. To address this directly, we employed a large panel of NHL cell lines and xenografts models to simulate a patient population and to define the molecular parameters to test in the context of clinical trials. Using baseline gene expression profiling, we found that the in vitro activity of an antibody that stimulates the CD40 pathway, Dacetuzumab (SGN-40), correlated strikingly with a transcriptional profile that was representative of an inactive CD40 pathway. Resistant cells, on the other hand, displayed a transcriptional profile indicative of an activated CD40 pathway. Consistent with these observations, constitutive phosphorylation of ERK, a node downstream of CD40 signaling, was present predominantly in cell lines that were resistant to Dacetuzumab. Fifteen genes, based on their association with in vitro activity and their biology as components of the CD40 network, were selected as a classifier from these pre-clinical data and independently tested in a panel of cell lines and xenografts models. Testing the selected gene classifier by qRT-PCR from baseline fixed tumor tissue of 39 patients treated with Dacetuzumab in phase I and II clinical trials revealed the ability to predict sensitivity in patients, as determined by tumor shrinkage >10%, with an overall accuracy of 80%. Consistent with the observed tumor shrinkage, the classifier positive, predicted to respond to Dacetuzumab, patients also exhibited a prolonged progression free survival (PFS) compared to classifier negative patients, predicted not to respond to Dacetuzumab (HR = 0.23, p = 0.001). Finally, using a novel microarray approach to genome-wide expression profiling on fixed tumor tissue revealed that CD40 pathway activation was indeed an important predictor of response. Overall, these data suggest that sensitivity to Dacetuzumab can be predicted by pre-determining the CD40 pathway activation status of tumors. Disclosures: Dornan: Genentech, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Burington:Genentech, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yue:Genentech, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Shi:Genentech, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Advani:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Yu:Genentech, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lau:Genentech, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yu:Genentech, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. De Vos:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Forero-Torres:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Modrusan:Genentech, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Koeppen:Genentech, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yang:Genentech, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Du:Genentech, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Elkins:Genentech, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Polson:Genentech, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Offringa:Genentech, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Whiting:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ebens:Genentech, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership.