Parikh, Sameer A.

Abstract Introduction: CLL is the most common leukemia in the U.S. and characterized by constitutively activated BCR signaling pathway, which has a crucial role both in normal B cell development and B cell malignancies. The biological events controlled by BCR signaling in CLL are not fully understood. Active BCR signaling is mediated through activation of the downstream kinase Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK), which has become a key therapeutic target to inhibit BCR signaling for the treatment of B cell malignancies. We reasoned that blood samples from CLL patients before and after Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi) treatment would provide a valuable resource in the study of BCR modulation of epigenetic machinery in leukemic B cells. Methods: We obtained blood samples from CLL patients before and after BTKi ibrutinib treatment and used them to study BCR signaling regulated genes (n = 8 patients, after one-year of continuous ibrutinib treatment). Gene expression profile of CLL B cells from patients before and after one-year ibrutinib treatment was analyzed by mRNA-seq seq. Genome wide Histone H3K4me1, H3K27ac, and H3K4me3 profile was determined by CUT&tag. Chromatin accessibility was determined by ATAC-seq. Putative enhancers were deleted by CRISPR-Cas9. Results: Notably BTKi treatment led to the reduction of expression in genes associated with single strand DNA deamination (Fig. 1A) The BTKi regulated genes involved in this process mainly contains the APOBEC3 family genes (APOBEC3C, APOBEC3D APOBEC3F, APOBEC3G, APOBEC3H), and their expression levels showed a consistent reduction in CLL B cells from ibrutinib treated patients (Fig. 1B). We then confirmed the reduction of APOBEC3 levels by western blot in CLL B cells from four patients before and after one-year of continuous ibrutinib treatment (Fig. 1C). We hypothesized that BCR signaling regulates APOBEC3 expression by modifying the local chromatin around the APOBEC3 gene cluster and performed CUT&Tag to map the histone marks including H3K4me1, H3K4me3, H3K27ac and ATAC-seq. This approach permitted us to examine the chromatin accessibility of the leukemic cells from CLL patients before and then after one-year of continuous ibrutinib treatment. We found that BTKi treatment caused reductions of H3K4me1, H3K27ac, and chromatin accessibility at these regions in ibrutinib treated patients ( 7 of the 8 samples tested), however, there was no change of the promoter marker H3K4me3 (Fig. 1D), which indicated that BTKi treatment leads to APOBEC3 genes expression change via the regulation of their enhancer regulation (APOBEC3 enhancers, AEs). Based on the enrichment of H3K4me1, H3K27ac and chromatin accessibility, AE regions of the ibrutinib native samples contain three active enhancer modules, we designated these modules as AE1, AE2, and AE3 (Fig. 1D). To assess the functional activity of these enhancers on the expression of APOBEC3 genes, we investigated the consequence of deletion of each one of these AEs in the MEC1 cell line by CRISPR-Cas9. PCR analysis showed very robust deletion of AE1, AE2, and AE3 (Fig. 1E). Both deletion of AE1 or AE2 reduced the expression of APOBEC3 genes, while AE3 deletion suppressed the expression of APBEC3C, APOBEC3D, APOBEC3F and APOBEC3G, but not APOBEC3H, which is in closest proximity to AE3 (Fig. 1F, G). Together, we identified the BCR signaling dependent enhancers that regulate APOBEC3 expression. Since APOBEC3 deaminates ssDNA, we reasoned that APOBEC3 in CLL B cells may also contribute to replication stress and DNA instability. We found that MEC1 cells have a high level of spontaneous DNA damage in the S phase cells (Fig. 1H). which is associated with replication stress. However, AE2 deleted MEC cells showed decreased γH2Ax in the S phase cells (Fig. 1H). Edu/PI assay showed that MEC1 cells had a fraction of S phase cells with low Edu incorporation during S phase, also indicating DNA replication stress (Fig. 1I); however, AE2 deletion greatly increased Edu incorporation (Fig. 1I). Taken together, these data suggest that increased expression of APOBEC3 may be involved in DNA replication stress and drives genomic instability in malignant B cells. Conclusion: We demonstrate a novel mechanism for BTKi suppression of APOBEC3 expression via direct enhancer regulation in CLL B cells, implicating BCR signaling as a potential regulator of leukemic genomic instability. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Parikh: Pharmacyclics, MorphoSys, Janssen, AstraZeneca, TG Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, AbbVie, and Ascentage Pharma: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, AstraZeneca, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Verastem Oncology, and AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kay: AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Dava Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Research Funding; Agios Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sunesis: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Targeted Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Rigel: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morpho-sys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Behring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Bristol Meyer Squib: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Oncotracker: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; CytomX Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Introduction Monoclonal B-cell lymphocytosis (MBL), monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS), and clonal hematopoiesis (CH) are three common premalignant hematological conditions. MBL is a precursor to chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), MGUS is a precursor to both multiple myeloma (MM) and Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM), and CH is a possible precursor to myeloid disease. All three conditions are independently associated with aging. Furthermore, there is evidence that all three conditions are associated with increased risk of infection. The relationship among these conditions, the prevalence with which they co-exist, and the association between the number of premalignant conditions and risk of infection is unknown. Methods Study participants from the Mayo Clinic Biobank, a large-scale biorepository of adult patients, provided a peripheral blood sample between 7/14/2009 to 06/18/2015. Individuals were screened for MBL using eight-color flow cytometry capable of detecting clonal B-cells to the 0.005% level. MGUS was screened using a matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time of flight (MALDI-TOF) assay. CH was screened using a targeted sequencing panel of 42 CH-associated genes with at least 1000x read depth and the ability to detect variant allele fractions down to 1%. All study participants resided in Olmsted County, Minnesota, the county that includes Mayo Clinic. Serious infection, defined as hospitalization due to infection, was abstracted from medical records from the time of sample collection through 12/31/2020 or date of death. The medical record abstractor collecting data was blinded to condition. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between each of the conditions. Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CI to assess the association between number of premalignant conditions with risk of infection. All analyses were adjusted for age at sample collection and sex. Results A total of 407 individuals (55% male, median age 68 years) were screened for all three conditions. The prevalence was 19.9% (n=81) for MBL, 14.5% (n=59) for MGUS, and 25.6% (n=104) for CH. When we evaluated the association between each of the conditions, we found no evidence of an association between the prevalence of CH and risk of MBL (OR=0.79, 95% CI: 0.43-1.42), CH and risk of MGUS (OR=1.24, 95% CI: 0.66-2.27), or MGUS and risk of MBL (OR=1.32, 95% CI:0.66-2.52). The prevalence of co-existence of these conditions was assessed by grouping individuals based on their condition or conditions (Figure 1A). We found that 197 (48.4%) study participants had at least one premalignant condition and 10.6% had two or more. Individuals with 2 or more conditions were the oldest (median age 74 years), followed by 1 condition (median 69 years) and 0 conditions (median 67 years, P-trend <0.001). Sex was not significantly different across the groups, with 55%, 58%, and 47% male for 0, 1, and 2 conditions, respectively. Medical record abstraction identified 97 serious infection events in 80 individuals. Medical records were not available on 7 individuals. The most common infections were urinary tract (20 events), pneumonia (14 events), and cellulitis (14 events). Median follow-up time was 10.6 years (range 0.1-11.5 years). Compared to individuals with no condition, MBL (HR=1.75, 95% CI: 1.06-2.88) and MGUS (HR=1.75, 95% CI: 1.04-2.93) were associated with increased risk of serious infection. We found no evidence of an association with CH (HR=1.15, 95% CI: 0.71-1.87). When grouped by the number of conditions, we observed a significant trend (P-trend <0.01, Figure 1B) in risk of serious infections by the number of conditions: individuals with 1 condition had a 35% increased risk of infections (HR=1.35, 95% CI:0.83-2.20) and individuals with 2 or more conditions had a 2.6-fold increased risk (HR=2.58, 95% CI: 1.37-4.84). Discussion At least one premalignant condition was present in nearly 50% of the study population, with CH being the most prevalent. No evidence of a relationship between any of the three conditions was observed. However, we found increased susceptibility to serious infections as the number of conditions increased with individuals with at least two conditions had 2.6-fold increased risk of infections. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Parikh: Pharmacyclics, AstraZeneca, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Verastem Oncology, and AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics, MorphoSys, Janssen, AstraZeneca, TG Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, AbbVie, and Ascentage Pharma: Research Funding. Dispenzieri: Takeda: Research Funding; Alnylam: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Sorrento Therapeutics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Murray: Mayo Clinic: Other: Has received patents for the Mass-Fix technology which has been licensed to the Binding Site with potential royalties.. Kumar: Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Antengene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Tenebio: Research Funding; Roche-Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Carsgen: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Cerhan: Regeneron Genetics Center: Other: Research Collaboration; Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene/BMS: Other: Connect Lymphoma Scientific Steering Committee, Research Funding; NanoString: Research Funding. Kay: TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Morpho-sys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Targeted Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncotracker: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sunesis: Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Meyer Squib: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Rigel: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Behring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CytomX Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Dava Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Juno Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shanafelt: Genentech, Pharmacyclics: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology A041202 is a NCI National Clinical Trials Network phase 3 study (NCT01886872) comparing BR (Arm 1) with ibrutinib (Arm 2) and the combination of ibrutinib plus rituximab (Arm 3) to determine whether ibrutinib-containing regimens are superior to chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) in terms of progression-free survival (PFS), and whether rituximab adds benefit to ibrutinib therapy. Initial results showed that ibrutinib-containing regimens had superior PFS to CIT, and that rituximab added to ibrutinib did not improve PFS over ibrutinib alone. Pts and Methods: Eligible pts on A041202 were those age ≥ 65 years with previously untreated, symptomatic CLL. Pts had a CrCl > 40 mL/min, bilirubin < 1.5 x ULN, and no significant life-limiting intercurrent illness or need for warfarin treatment. Pts were stratified on Rai stage, Zap-70 methylation performed centrally, and del(17)(p13.1) or del(11)(q22.3) by local interphase cytogenetics and were randomized 1:1:1 to each arm. Pts on Arm 1 who progressed could cross over to Arm 2. Here we present an updated analysis after the third planned interim analysis of Arms 2 and 3 versus Arm 1, and at the second planned interim analysis for Arms 3 vs 2. PFS and OS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and corresponding hazard ratios with p-values were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. These data encompass patient visits through April 2020 and were locked 15 February 2021. Results: Between 12/9/2013 and 5/16/2016, 547 pts were randomized (Arms 1: 183, 2: 182, and 3: 182). Baseline characteristics have previously been reported; briefly, median age was 71 years, 53% had unmethylated Zap-70, 61% were IGHV unmutated (performed in 66% of patients), 6% had del(17p) and 20% del(11q) by central FISH. Stimulated karyotype was performed centrally and revealed ≥ 3 abnormalities in 27%, and ≥ 5 in 11% of patients. With median follow-up of 55 months (mo), median PFS was 44 mo (95% CI 38-54) in Arm 1 and has not been reached in Arms 2 or 3 [Arm 2 vs 1 hazard ratio (HR): 0.36, 95% CI 0.26-0.52, p<0.0001; Arm 3 vs 1 HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.25-0.51, p<0.0001; Arms 3 vs 2 HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.66-1.48, p=0.96]. 48-month PFS estimates were 47%, 76% and 76% in Arms 1, 2, and 3 respectively (Figure 1). At this time, there are no significant differences in overall survival (OS) among arms (p=0.49). 48-month OS estimates were 84%, 85%, and 86% in Arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively (Figure 2). The benefit of ibrutinib regimens over CIT, with no additional benefit of rituximab when combined with ibrutinib, was consistent for all subgroups of patients defined by TP53 abnormalities, del(11q), complex karyotype, and IGHV (Figure 3). No significant interaction effects were observed between treatment arm and del(11q), complex karyotype, or IGHV. However, greater benefit of ibrutinib regimens over CIT was observed among patients with TP53 abnormalities than without (p<0.001). Thus in Arm 1, PFS was significantly worse for those with TP53 abnormalities vs without (HR 5.32, 95% CI 3.05-9.27, p<0.0001), but in Arms 2 and 3 combined, there was no significant difference in PFS by presence/absence of TP53 abnormalities (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.51-1.91, p=0.98). Notable adverse events with ibrutinib include atrial fibrillation or flutter (afib) and hypertension (HTN). All grade afib was seen in 11 pts on BR (6%) and 67 pts on ibrutinib (19%). All grade HTN was seen in 95 pts on BR (54%) and 263 pts on ibrutinib (73%). Conclusions: This update of the A041202 trial continues to show that ibrutinib regimens prolong PFS over BR for older patients with treatment-naïve CLL. With longer follow-up, these benefits continue to be seen across subgroups, including those associated with higher risk disease. Strikingly, within the ibrutinib arms, there does not appear to be inferior PFS for patients with abnormalities in TP53, the highest risk feature seen in CLL, and a predictor of inferior PFS with ibrutinib in relapsed CLL. This differentiates ibrutinib (and perhaps BTKi in general) from other targeted therapy paradigms for treatment-naïve CLL. Similar to prior studies, rates of afib and HTN continue to increase with time on therapy. These data support the use of ibrutinib as initial therapy in CLL, and strengthen the rationale for use of ibrutinib for high risk disease. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171, https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org, Pharmacyclics, Inc Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Woyach: Gilead Sciences Inc: Other: Data & Safety; AbbVie Inc, ArQule Inc, Janssen Biotech Inc, AstraZeneca, Beigene: Other: Advisory Committee; AbbVie Inc, Loxo Oncology Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly & Company: Research Funding; AbbVie Inc, ArQule Inc, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Janssen Biotech Inc, Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company,: Consultancy. Ruppert: Telios Pharma: Consultancy. Ding: Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; DTRM: Research Funding; Octapharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bartlett: ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Seagen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Autolus: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Brander: Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: Biosimilars outcomes research panel; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics/Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LOXO: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; NCCN: Other: panel member; ArQule/Merck: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; DTRM: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Ascentage: Research Funding; ArQule: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: informCLL registry steering committee, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Barr: Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Abbvie/Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Rogers: Pharmacyclics LLC: Consultancy; Innate Pharma: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Acerta Pharma: Consultancy; AbbVie Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; ovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Research Funding. Parikh: Pharmacyclics, MorphoSys, Janssen, AstraZeneca, TG Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, AbbVie, and Ascentage Pharma: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, AstraZeneca, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Verastem Oncology, and AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Coutre: Acerta: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Committee, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Beigene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Data Safety Monitoring Committee, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Larson: Epizyme: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; CVS/Caremark: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Rafael Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding. Erba: AbbVie Inc: Other: Independent review committee; AbbVie Inc; Agios Pharmaceuticals Inc; ALX Oncology; Amgen Inc; Daiichi Sankyo Inc; FORMA Therapeutics; Forty Seven Inc; Gilead Sciences Inc; GlycoMimetics Inc; ImmunoGen Inc; Jazz Pharmaceuticals Inc; MacroGenics Inc; Novartis; PTC Therapeutics: Research Funding; AbbVie Inc; Agios Pharmaceuticals Inc; Bristol Myers Squibb; Celgene, a Bristol Myers Squibb company; Incyte Corporation; Jazz Pharmaceuticals Inc; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie Inc; Agios Pharmaceuticals Inc; Astellas; Bristol Myers Squibb; Celgene, a Bristol Myers Squibb company; Daiichi Sankyo Inc; Genentech, a member of the Roche Group; GlycoMimetics Inc; Incyte Corporation; Jazz Pharmaceuticals Inc; Kura Oncology; Nov: Other: Advisory Committee. Litzow: Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Pluristem: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee. Blachly: INNATE: Consultancy, Honoraria; KITE: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria. Owen: Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Abramson: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; C4 Therapeutics: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; EMD Serono: Consultancy; Genmab: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Kymera: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy; Allogene Therapeutics: Consultancy; Seagen Inc.: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy. Brown: Abbvie, Acerta/Astra-Zeneca, Beigene, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Juno/Celgene, Catapult, Eli Lilly, Genentech/Roche, Janssen, MEI Pharma, Morphosys AG, Nextcea, Novartis, Pfizer, Rigel: Consultancy; Invectys: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Committee Service; Gilead, Loxo/Lilly, SecuraBio, Sun, TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Stone: Onconova: Consultancy; Syntrix/ACI: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syndax: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Elevate Bio: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boston Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Arog: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gemoab: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Innate: Consultancy; BerGen Bio: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Foghorn Therapeutics: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Actinium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aprea: Consultancy; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Macrogenics: Consultancy. Byrd: Novartis, Trillium, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Pharmacyclics, Syndax: Consultancy, Honoraria; Vincerx Pharmaceuticals: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Newave: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Sparse data exist regarding I+V in an off-trial setting, particularly in patients (pts) with progression of disease on either I or V as single agent treatment. The 1-year overall survival (OS) rates with V monotherapy following I range from 75%-91% (Eyre et al, BJH 2019; Jones et al, Lancet Oncol 2018); however, longer-term follow-up of these or other patient cohorts treated with V after I has not yet been reported. Effective options in double-refractory pts are lacking when a clinical trial is not feasible. Here, we report our experience with I+V in these patient groups. METHODS After IRB approval, we reviewed the records of pts seen at Mayo Clinic (between 4/2012-1/2021) who received I+V therapy off-trial for CLL progression. Pts treated with I+V for Richter's transformation were excluded. Time to next treatment (TTNT) was measured from I+V treatment start date to the date of next treatment start or last known treatment status with death as a competing risk. OS was measured from I+V start date until date of death or when the patient was last known alive; OS was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS Thirty-three pts with progressive CLL were treated with I+V (median duration 13.3 months [95% CI: 7.1 months-not estimable (NE)]). The median age was 70 years (range 47-86), 6 (18%) were women, and 20 (65%) had del(17p) or TP53 mutation. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 3 (range 1-15). Additional characteristics at the time of I+V start are shown in Table 1. Median follow-up from start of I+V was 23.8 months. Among 22 pts with prior progression on I only (V-naïve), the median duration of I+V was 14.8 months (95% CI 7.6 months-NE). The median duration on either I or V from the start of combination was 20.3 months (95% CI 8.3 months-NE). The median TTNT was 25.1 months (Figure 1A). Four pts proceeded to cellular therapy (alloSCT [n=3], CAR-T [n=1]) while on I+V. Next therapy (n=9) consisted of Richter transformation treatment (n=2), chemotherapy plus continued I+V (n=1), anti-CD20 plus continued I+V (n=1), duvelisib + I (n=1), TP-0903 + I (n=1), reintroduction of I at disease progression after previously stopping I during I+V therapy (n=1), and reintroduction of I (n=1) or V (n=1) at disease progression after previously stopping I+V. Of 9 pts who did not receive subsequent therapy, 4 pts remain on I+V (median duration 16.4 months), 4 pts continued V after discontinuing I (median duration on V from start of I+V was 21.5 months), and 1 pt discontinued I+V following a second cancer diagnosis and died without receiving additional CLL-directed treatment. Eleven pts received I+V in the double-refractory setting; 9 pts had prior disease progression on sequential I then V and 2 pts had prior disease progression on sequential V then I. The median duration of I+V was 7.5 months (95% CI 4.3 months-NE), and the median duration of either agent from I+V start was 10.8 months (95% CI 7.1 months-NE). The median TTNT was 14.0 months (Figure 1A). Eight pts required additional treatment, consisting of PI3K inhibitor (n=2), anti-CD20 added to I+V (n=1), CAR-T (n=1), anti-CD20 with (n=1) or without (n=1) bendamustine added to continued I, and Richter transformation treatment (n=2). One pt continues I+V (17.4 months ongoing) without further treatment. Two pts died from disease progression without receiving additional treatment. The median OS of all 33 pts was 27.4 months (95% CI 25.9 months-NE; Figure 1B). The median OS of the 22 pts with prior progression on I (V-naïve) was 47.1 months (95% CI 27.7 months-NE), and the median OS of the 11 pts with prior progression on I and V separately was 27.0 months (95% CI 15.5 months-NE). In univariate analyses, prior progression on V was a predictor of shorter OS (HR=3.9; 95% CI 1.4-11.2; p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS Combination I+V therapy in heavily pre-treated CLL pts who have disease progression after I provides durable benefit with a median OS approaching 4 years. In the double-refractory setting, repurposing both drugs as combination I+V therapy can be a useful strategy, despite the short-term disease control, for pts where clinical trial options are limited or not available. Further examination of these approaches in larger cohorts and understanding the operative resistance mechanisms in pts with double-refractory disease are key next studies. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Ding: Octapharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; DTRM: Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Chanan-Khan: BeiGene, Jansen, Ascentage: Honoraria; Ascentage, Starton, Cellectar, NonoDev, Alpha2 Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alpha2 Pharmaceuticals: Patents & Royalties: Tabi; Ascentage: Research Funding; Cellectar: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Alpha2 Pharmaceuticals, NonoDev, Starton: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company; BieGene, Jansen, Ascentage: Consultancy. Kenderian: Humanigen, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Wang: TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MorphoSys: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; LOXO Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; InnoCare: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ailawadhi: Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ascentage: Research Funding; Medimmune: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy. Koehler: AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kay: AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Dava Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Targeted Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Meyer Squib: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Agios Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sunesis: Research Funding; Rigel: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; CytomX Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Morpho-sys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncotracker: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Behring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Parikh: Pharmacyclics, MorphoSys, Janssen, AstraZeneca, TG Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, AbbVie, and Ascentage Pharma: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, AstraZeneca, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Verastem Oncology, and AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. OffLabel Disclosure: Combination ibrutinib and venetoclax in patients with relapsed CLL.

Abstract Introduction: Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is characterized by multiple copy number alterations (CNA) and mutations that are central to disease pathogenesis, prognosis, risk-stratification, and identification of response or resistance to therapies. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is gold standard in the clinical laboratory for detecting prognostic CNAs in CLL (e.g. deletion 17p13 (del(17p), deletion 11q23 (del(11q), deletion 13q14 (del(13q), and trisomy 12). Most clinical FISH assays have high specificity and sensitivity, but the technique can detect a limited number of alterations per assay. Importantly, next-generation sequencing (NGS) techniques have become more readily available for clinical applications and are increasingly being used for screening not only mutations, but also copy number abnormalities in multiple genes and chromosomal regions of interest in hematologic malignancies. Here, we evaluated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) using a custom targeted NGS assay for detecting common prognostic chromosomal alterations in CLL and high-count monoclonal B-cell lymphocytosis (MBL), the precursor to CLL. Methods : We designed a SureSelect DNA targeted sequencing panel, covering all exons of 59 recurrently CLL mutated genes and additional amplicons across regions affected by clinically relevant CNAs. All CLL (N=534) and MBL (N=162) patients had pre-treatment peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) collected within two years of diagnosis. DNA was extracted in cases with purity >80% of CD5+/CD19+ cells. Clinical FISH data was available within 100 days of NGS in all untreated CLL and MBL cases. PatternCNV was used to detect clinically relevant CNAs in chromosomes 11, 12, 13 and 17. We performed a principal component analysis on the CNA calls, excluding chromosomes 11, 12, 13, and 17 to identify clusters of samples. Each cluster was then independently rerun with PatternCNV and the results from chromosomes 11, 12, 13, and 17 were extracted and further analyzed. We excluded samples with low tumor metrics identified by FISH (less than 20% of cells with del(17p), del(11q), trisomy 12 and del(13q)). Results: We sequenced a total of 696 patients of whom 162 were MBL and 534 were untreated CLL. The most commonly mutated genes were NOTCH1 (11.0%), TP53 (8.7%), SF3B1 (7.7%), ATM (4.1%), and CHD2 (3.8%). Based on CNA analyses from the NGS data, we identified 59 (9.1%) individuals with del(17p), 88 (13.4%) individuals with del(11q), 128 (20.0%) individuals with trisomy 12, and 329 (53.0%) individuals with del(13q). All 696 individuals had FISH panels conducted, with 39 (5.6%) individuals with del(17p), 68 (9.8%) individuals with (11q), 119 (17.1%) with trisomy 12, and 295 (42.4%) with del(13q). When we compared our CNA analyses with the FISH data, we found high concordance 95.0% for del(17p), 92.7% del(11p), 94.3% for trisomy 12, and 88.2% for del(13q). For del(17p) we found a sensitivity of 93.9%, specificity of 95.4%, PPV of 52.5%, and NPV of 99.7%. Del(11q) revealed a sensitivity of 88.1%, specificity of 94.0%, PPV of 59.1%, and NPV 98.8%. We found a sensitivity of 93.8%, specificity of 95.6%, PPV 82.0%, and NPV of 98.6% for trisomy 12 and for del(13q) we found a sensitivity of 92.6%, specificity of 90.9%, PPV of 91.7%, and NPV of 93.8%. We found lower PPVs in del(17p) and del(11q) likely due to lower prevalence of these chromosomal abnormalities. Conclusion: Here we show a high sensitivity, specificity, and NPV when comparing targeted sequencing with FISH. FISH panel testing is widely used in clinical practice to characterize highly prognostic chromosomal abnormalities in CLL. Comprehensive genetic profiling with NGS has become increasingly important in the work up of hematologic malignancies and provides additional prognostic and predictive information, including clinically relevant mutations such as TP53, SF3B1, and NOTCH1, tumor mutation load and mutations associated with resistance to chemo-immunotherapy and targeted therapies, such as BTK or BCL2 inhibitors, that FISH cannot offer. We show that NGS can infer clinically relevant CNA in cases without FISH testing while also providing additional clinically relevant information. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Cerhan: Regeneron Genetics Center: Other: Research Collaboration; Celgene/BMS: Other: Connect Lymphoma Scientific Steering Committee, Research Funding; NanoString: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Parikh: Pharmacyclics, MorphoSys, Janssen, AstraZeneca, TG Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, AbbVie, and Ascentage Pharma: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, AstraZeneca, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Verastem Oncology, and AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kay: Genentech: Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Sunesis: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Meyer Squib: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Rigel: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morpho-sys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CytomX Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncotracker: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Dava Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Targeted Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Behring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract CD19-targeted chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CART19) therapy has been remarkably successful in treating a subset of patients with hematological malignancies. However, it is associated with significant toxicities, including cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity (NT). Furthermore, the rate of durable responses after CART19 therapy is low, and most patients develop resistance to the therapy. One of the predominant mechanisms for CART cell resistance is intrinsic T cell dysfunction which leads to a suboptimal CART product. The Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor ibrutinib has been shown to favorably modulate CART phenotype and function through downregulation of inhibitory receptors and enhancement of CART cell efficacy in preclinical models and early clinical studies. However, ibrutinib is an irreversible receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) inhibitor, and thus there are concerns that it inhibits CART cell proliferation and expansion. In contrast to ibrutinib and other BTK inhibitors, vecabrutinib has recently emerged as a potent, reversible, non-covalent BTK inhibitor that can block the activity of both wild type and C481 mutant BTK as well as interleukin-2-inducible T-cell kinase (ITK). We hypothesized that treatment with vecabrutinib improves CART19 antitumor efficacy through the reversible inhibition of BTK/ITK, independent of its antitumor effect. To test this hypothesis, we assessed whether vecabrutinib potentiates CART19 cytotoxicity against CD19 + tumor cells. Killing of the CD19 + mantle cell lymphoma cell line, JeKo-1, was significantly increased when CART19 were combined with vecabrutinib (Fig. 1A). Of note, vecabrutinib did not induce antitumor activity in this model as a single agent (Fig. 1A). In addition, vecabrutinib (10 µM) treatment of CART19 resulted in enhanced antigen-specific proliferation (Fig. 1B). Next, we aimed to study the direct impact of vecabrutinib on CART19 cytokine production. We measured the levels of multiple pro-inflammatory cytokines in the supernatant of CART19 co-cultured for 3 days with JeKo-1 cells and vecabrutinib. Vecabrutinib did not impair CART19 degranulation, as measured by flow cytometric assessment of CD107a expression (Fig. 1C). Cytokines known to play a crucial part in the development of CRS, such as IL-6, IL-10, and MIP-1β were significantly downregulated in cocultures with vecabrutinib (Fig. 1D-F). We then investigated whether the addition of vecabrutinib to CART19 caused a synergistic antitumor effect in vivo. We used our established JeKo-1 lymphoma xenograft models. Here NSG mice were engrafted with CD19 + luciferase + JeKo-1 cells. Mice were then imaged for engraftment and randomized to treatment with 1) untransduced control T cells, 2) CART19 with vehicle, or 3) CART19 with vecabrutinib 50 mg/kg BID administered via oral gavage over a period of 4 weeks. Vecabrutinib combination with CART19 treatment led to sustained antitumor activity (Fig.1G) and increased CART19 proliferation (Fig.1H). Encouragingly, mice treated with vecabrutinib better maintained their body weight following CART19 infusion, suggesting possibly dampened toxicity (Fig.1I). We also measured serum cytokine levels from patients on a phase 1 clinical trial (NCT03037645) testing vecabrutinib in B cell malignancies at baseline and four weeks after treatment. We found that vecabrutinib significantly reduces the levels of multiple pro-inflammatory cytokines linked to CART cell toxicity, including MIP-1β, IP-10, and TNF-a (Fig. 1J-L), further validating our preclinical findings. Finally, we interrogated the transcriptome of CART19 co-cultured with JeKo-1 with or without vecabrutinib. Total RNA sequencing of activated CART19 highlighted a significant enhanced expression of multiple genes involved in the PI3K/AKT and Th1 pathways compared to antigen stimulated CART19 alone (Fig.1M, N). These results could explain the enhanced proliferation and cytotoxicity induced by vecabrutinib. In summary, we demonstrate for the first time that using the reversible BTK inhibitor, vecabrutinib, is a potent and a novel strategy to favorably modulate CART19 function by increasing their efficacy and decreasing toxicity. Further studies are currently underway to compare the effect of reversible versus irreversible BTK/ITK inhibition on CART functions and to further validate the mechanisms responsible for the observed effects. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Sakemura: Humanigen: Patents & Royalties. Cox: Humanigen: Patents & Royalties. Fox: Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Current Employment. Ding: Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Octapharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; DTRM: Research Funding. Parikh: Pharmacyclics, MorphoSys, Janssen, AstraZeneca, TG Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, AbbVie, and Ascentage Pharma: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, AstraZeneca, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Verastem Oncology, and AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kay: MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Sunesis: Research Funding; Rigel: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CytomX Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Meyer Squib: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Behring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Research Funding; Morpho-sys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Targeted Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Dava Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Agios Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncotracker: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kenderian: Humanigen, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: It has become increasingly apparent that chimeric antigen receptor T (CART) cell activation and differentiation level is an important determinant of CART cell fate and response to therapy. In this study, we aimed to 1) measure levels of activation-induced surface death receptors and ligands on CART cells; 2) investigate how CART cell activation could impact their fitness and clinical responses, and 3) identify cell-based targets to modulate CART cell activation, apoptosis, and cytotoxicity to improve anti-tumor activity. Methods: We performed flow cytometric studies on ex-vivo stimulated, clinically annotated CART products of patients with large B cell lymphoma from the pivotal ZUMA-1 clinical trial that led to FDA-approved Axicabtagene ciloleucel (Axi-Cel). We investigated possible correlations of a number of surface death receptors and ligands with T cell differentiation status and post-infusion CART cell expansion, utilizing samples from ZUMA-1 patients who achieved a complete response as a best outcome ('responders') vs patients who achieved stable or progressive disease('non-responders'). CART cell effector functions in vitro were measured, and CART apoptosis was assessed using Annexin V. For in vitro and in vivo functional studies, we used CART19 generated from healthy donors (HD CART19) as indicated in the specific experiment. CRISPR/Cas9 was employed during CART cell production to disrupt specific genes. A xenograft model of lymphoma was used to investigate the in vivo antitumor activity of CART19. Results: Following an ex vivo stimulation of Axi-Cel products with CD19 + target cells, we observed upregulation of death receptors and ligands in CART19 from non-responders, compared to responders. We also observed a possible association between such upregulated surface markers with CART cell differentiation as measured by CCR7 expression. In an extended in vitro co-culture assay, where HD CART19 cells were repeatedly stimulated through the CAR, we found that tumor necrosis factor α receptor 2 (TNFR2), unlike other death receptors and ligands, was persistently elevated, suggesting a possible role for TNFR2 in long-term antigen-dependent CART19 dysfunction (Figure 1A). We further found that HD CART19 upregulate TNFR2, but not TNFR1, upon CAR stimulation (Figure 1B). While non-specific TCR activation (CD3 stimulation) of HD CART19 cells protected them from activation-induced apoptosis, antigen-specific activation through the CAR resulted in significant initiation of apoptosis within 2 hours of stimulation (Figure 1C). Having identified a possible association between TNFR2 and CART19 dysfunction, we aimed to study the impact of TNFR2 knockout on HD CART19 functions. Using CRISPR/Cas9 during CART cell manufacturing, we generated TNFR2 k/o HD CART19 cells with a knockout efficiency of around 50%, where the expression levels of TNFR2 in activated CART19 cells were reduced, compared to control CART19 cells (with non-targeting gRNA CRISPR/Cas9, Figure 1D). TNFR2 k/o CART19 cells demonstrated reduced early activation surface markers compared to control CART19, as measured by CD25 and CD69 surface expression (Figure 1E), reduced apoptosis initiation as measured by the Annexin V assay (Figure 1F), and enhanced antigen-specific proliferation and cytotoxicity (Figure 1G). Finally, in an in vivo xenograft model of CD19 + lymphoma, TNFR2 k/o CART19 resulted in enhanced CART cell expansion and anti-tumor activity (Figure 1H). Conclusions: Our results indicate that TNFR2 plays a role in early activation and apoptosis initiation of CART19 following CAR stimulation with CD19 + target cells and present TNFR2 knockout as a strategy to enhance CART19 anti-tumor activity. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Cox: Humanigen: Patents & Royalties. Sakemura: Humanigen: Patents & Royalties. Ding: Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; DTRM: Research Funding; Octapharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Parikh: Pharmacyclics, MorphoSys, Janssen, AstraZeneca, TG Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, AbbVie, and Ascentage Pharma: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, AstraZeneca, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Verastem Oncology, and AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kay: Juno Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Dava Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Targeted Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Behring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CytomX Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sunesis: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Meyer Squib: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Morpho-sys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncotracker: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Rigel: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Scholler: Kite: Current Employment. Bot: Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: Travel support. Mattie: Kite: Current Employment. Kim: Gilead Sciences: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment. Filosto: Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment; Tusk Therapeutics: Patents & Royalties: or other intellecular property; Gilead Sciences: Other: stock or other ownership . Kenderian: Humanigen, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract Anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T (CART19) cell therapy has resulted in unprecedented outcomes in patients with relapsed/refractory B-cell malignancies, which led to the FDA approval for several indications. However, CART19 cell therapy is limited by the development of severe life-threatening toxicities, as well as by the limited rates of durable response. It has become apparent that myeloid cells contribute to the development of both CART cell toxicity and also to the inhibitory tumor microenvironment. We and others have identified that granulocyte-monocyte-colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) depletion results in decreased myeloid activation, reduced toxicities, and enhancement of CART19 cell therapy efficacy in pre-clinical models. Furthermore, we observed that GM-CSF knockout (GM-CSF k/o) in CART19 cells resulted in the improvement of their functions (in vitro and in vivo). These findings suggest that there is also a direct effect of GM-CSF on CART19 cells, which is independent of the GM-CSF impact on myeloid cell activation. To further evaluate this, we first examined GM-CSF receptor alpha (GM-CSFRα) expression by flow cytometry on resting and activated CART19 cells (using FMC63-41BBζ). When CART19 cells were stimulated with either anti-CD3/CD28 beads or lethally irradiated (120 Gy) CD19 + Nalm6 cells (B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia cancer cell line), GM-CSFRα expression was upregulated upon both T cell receptor (TCR) (data not shown) and CAR stimulation (Figure 1A). Having demonstrated that GM-CSFRα is significantly upregulated on stimulated CART19 cells, we aimed to determine the impact of GM-CSF neutralization (clinical-grade anti-GM-CSF antibody, lenzilumab, 10 µg/mL) versus GM-CSFRα blockade (research-grade antibody, 10 µg/mL) on CART19 cell function and CART cell-monocyte interactions. An IgG isotype antibody was used as a control antibody. Neither the GM-CSF neutralizing antibody, nor GM-CSFRα blocking antibody, had any impact on CART19 cell antigen-specific killing against the CD19 + JeKo-1 cells (mantle cell lymphoma cancer cell line), in the presence or absence of CD14 + monocytes (ratio 1:1:1) isolated by magnetic beads from healthy donors (Figures 1B-C). Next, we compared the effects of GM-CSF neutralization versus GM-CSFRα blockade on CART19 cell antigen-specific proliferation. Here, CART19 cells were co-cultured with lethally irradiated CD19 + cell line JeKo-1 at 1:1 ratio in the presence of 10 µg/mL of the GM-CSF neutralizing antibody, increasing doses of the GM-CSFRα blocking antibody (10-100 µg/mL), or an IgG control. The absolute number of CART cells was measured by flow cytometry on day 5. GM-CSF neutralization did not affect CART19 cell proliferation, but GM-CSFRα blocking antibody significantly inhibited CART19 cell proliferation in a dose-dependent manner. Then, we assessed the effects of GM-CSF neutralizing antibody (20 µg/mL) versus GM-CSFRα blocking antibody (20 µg/mL) on CART19 cell antigen-specific proliferation in the presence of healthy donor monocytes (ratio 1:1:0.5) on day 3. Flow cytometric analysis revealed that GM-CSF neutralization, but not GM-CSFRα blockade, mitigated monocyte-suppression of CART19 antigen-specific proliferation (Figure 1E). In summary, our findings indicate significant differences on CART cell functions and CART cell-monocyte interactions when a specific cytokine, GM-CSF, is neutralized compared to blocking its receptor. Further mechanistic studies are ongoing to assess the functions of GM-CSFRα k/o and GM-CSF k/o CART cells. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Sakemura: Humanigen: Patents & Royalties. Parikh: Pharmacyclics, MorphoSys, Janssen, AstraZeneca, TG Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, AbbVie, and Ascentage Pharma: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, AstraZeneca, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Verastem Oncology, and AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kay: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; CytomX Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Dava Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Morpho-sys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Rigel: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Behring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sunesis: Research Funding; Targeted Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Juno Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Meyer Squib: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncotracker: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Durrant: Humanigen Inc.: Current Employment. Ahmed: Humanigen Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Chappell: Humanigen Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Divested equity in a private or publicly-traded company in the past 24 months. Cox: Humanigen: Patents & Royalties. Kenderian: Humanigen, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

AbstractMonoclonal B‐cell lymphocytosis (MBL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) are clonal B‐cell disorders associated with an increased risk of infections and impaired vaccination responses. We investigated the immunogenicity of recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) in these patients. Individuals with MBL/untreated CLL and Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi)‐treated CLL patients were given two doses of RZV separated by 2 months. Responses assessed at 3 and 12 months from the first dose of RZV by an anti‐glycoprotein E ELISA antibody assay and by dual‐color Interferon‐γ and Interleukin‐2FLUOROSPOT assays were compared to historic controls matched by age and sex. About 62 patients (37 MBL/untreated CLL and 25 BTKi‐treated CLL) were enrolled with a median age of 68 years at vaccination. An antibody response at 3 months was seen in 45% of participants, which was significantly lower compared to historic controls (63%, p = .03). The antibody response did not significantly differ between MBL/untreated CLL and BTKi‐treated CLL (51% vs. 36%, respectively, p = .23). The CD4+ T‐cell response to vaccination was significantly lower in study participants compared to controls (54% vs. 96%, p < .001), mainly due to lower responses among BTKi‐treated patients compared to untreated MBL/CLL (32% vs. 73%, p = .008). Overall, only 29% of participants achieved combined antibody and cellular responses to RZV. Among participants with response assessment at 12 months (n = 47), 24% had antibody titers below the response threshold. Hypogammaglobulinemia and BTKi therapy were associated with reduced T‐cell responses in a univariate analysis. Strategies to improve vaccine response to RZV among MBL/CLL patients are needed.