Nowakowski, Grzegorz S.

CD19 directed chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CART) therapy has shown remarkable activity in B cell lymphoma and acute lymphoblastic leukemia leading to the approval of two CART therapies. With the emergence of therapeutic anti-CD19 antibodies for the treatment of B cell malignancies, it remains to be elucidated whether such antibodies would interfere with the ability of CD19 targeting CARTs to exert their anti-tumor effect in a subsequent therapy. To address a part of this question, we investigated the potential for functional interference between the monoclonal anti-CD19 antibody tafasitamab (MOR208) and CD19 directed CART cells (CART19). CART19 cells were generated through lentiviral transduction of healthy donor T cells with a second generation CD19 CAR construct (FMC63-CD8h-CD8TM-41BBζ) which is similar to the construct used for the FDA-approved CART tisagenlecleucel. Tafasitamab, is an Fc-enhanced humanized monoclonal antibody which mediates antibody-dependent cellular toxicity (ADCC), antibody-dependent cellular phagocytosis (ADCP) and direct cytotoxicity. It is currently being studied in phase 2 and 3 clinical trials in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in combination with the immunomodulatory agent lenalidomide (L-MIND) and the chemotherapeutic drug bendamustine (B-MIND). As a first step we confirmed the relevance of the tested CD19-positive target cell lines, JEKO (mantel cell lymphoma), Ly7 (DLBCL) and NALM-6 (ALL) based on functional activity of tafasitamab and CART19. In a 24 hours ADCC (tafasitamab titration plus natural killer (NK) cells; Figure 1A) and T cell cytotoxicity assays (CART19, E:T titrations; data not shown) distinct activity was observed for both therapies on all tested cell lines. Secondly, we studied whether the observed CART19 activity may be influenced by tafasitamab in case of a direct CD19 binding competition between tafasitamab and the CAR. To test for such binding competition we incubated the CD19+ cell lines NALM6 or JEKO with up to 100 µg/ml tafasitamab, to saturate the receptors. Subsequent flow cytometry analysis using the FMC63 antibody (carrying the same CD19 binding domain as contained in CART19) failed to detect CD19 expression, indicating a direct binding competition between FMC63 and tafasitamab (Figure 1B). Next, to investigate the potential impact of such binding competition on CART19 cell effector functions, we co-cultured tafasitamab CD19+ JEKO cell line at increasing concentrations of up to 100µg/ml, and then added CART19 cells at different effector to target ratios to the cell culture. The presence of tafasitamab, binding to the CD19 antigen, did not affect important CART cell effector functions such as antigen specific killing (Figure 1C), degranulation (Figure 1D), cytokine production or proliferation of CART19 (Figure 1E). In summary, our studies indicate that CART19 continue to exhibit potent antigen specific effector functions despite presence of tafasitamab and the related competition for CD19 binding. Besides the presented in vitro work the questions of therapeutic sequencing of tafasitamab and CART19 is being studied in xenograft models and will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Sakemura: Humanigen: Patents & Royalties. Cox:Humanigen: Patents & Royalties. Schanzer:MorphoSys AG: Employment. Endell:MorphoSys AG: Employment, Patents & Royalties. Nowakowski:Selvita: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; NanoString: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kay:MorphoSys: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Other: DSMB; Celgene: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board; Agios: Other: DSMB. Kenderian:Novartis: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Tolero: Research Funding; Humanigen: Other: Scientific advisory board , Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Lentigen: Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Research Funding.

Introduction: New Diffuse Large B-cell (DLBCL) treatments remain a clinical need despite the success of rituximab combined with CHOP chemotherapy (RCHOP), which results in durable responses in 60-70% of patients. Those refractory to, or who relapse following, first-line therapy have a very poor outcome, with only 20% surviving beyond 5 years. Rationally-targeted frontline strategies are needed, especially for those with high-risk disease. Significant advances have been made in the genomic classification of DLBCL, but none have impacted the design of phase III trials for untreated DLBCL patients. Building on new genetic profiling studies to personalize clinical treatment, an NCI initiative, could allow clinicians to add targeted therapies to the RCHOP backbone based on individual tumor signatures. The phase II ECOG-ACRIN1412 trial, which compared RCHOP combined with lenalidomide (R2CHOP) versus RCHOP showed significantly superior event free survival (EFS) and overall survival benefits for those treated with R2CHOP. Herein, we report the profile of a high-risk ABC/non-GCB subset of DLBCL driven by genomic alterations in inflammatory genes that are susceptible to front-line R2CHOP, but continue to experience poor outcome with RCHOP alone. Methods: We studied a total of 196 DLBCL patients. 47 were treated with R2CHOP from an investigator-initiated, open-label, single-arm phase II study (NCT00670358). 149 were newly diagnosed DLBCL cases treated with RCHOP, or R-immunochemotherapy (herein called RCHOP), and followed prospectively through the Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) of the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic SPORE that served as a contemporary cohort. Patients from each treatment group were divided based on their event free survival at 24 months (EFS24). DNA alterations within these populations were identified through whole exome sequencing (WES). Variants were analyzed for their presence in EFS24 achievement or failure groups in both RCHOP and R2CHOP. Both tumor and germline sequencing was performed for 47/47 R2CHOP cases and 49/149 RCHOP cases. Gene expression data from the PanCan panel of 730 B-cell-related genes was analyzed to determine gene expression profiles characteristic of the high-risk/R2CHOP-profile on 59 available non-GCB DLBCL cases (45 RCHOP; 14 R2CHOP). A two-sided comparative marker analysis T statistic test was applied to assess what genes displayed differential expression based on achieving EFS24 in both R2CHOP and RCHOP populations. Positive values represented associations with achieving EFS24 and negative values were associated with cases of EFS24 failure. Results: Three genes were enriched in the RCHOP cases that failed EFS24 but achieved EFS24 with R2CHOP among non-GCB patients: PIM1, SPEN, and MYD88 (L265P), herein referred to as Responder Alterations. In R2CHOP cases, patients with a Responder Alteration had a better overall EFS (P = 0.051) compared to wild type patients. In contrast, RCHOP treated patients with a Responder Alteration in their tumor had a significantly worse overall EFS (P = 0.0004) compared to patients without a mutation. Together, PIM1, SPEN, or MYD88 (L265P) mutations were present in 38.0% (30/79) of all non-GCB cases. Collective R2CHOP and RCHOP EFS24 differential gene expression T values were significantly different for 18 previously-defined signatures. The R2CHOP cases that achieved EFS24 were enriched for genes involved in cell cycle, JAK-STAT, cytokine signaling, and NF-κB pathways based on these signatures and ontology analyses. Lastly, cases with WES and PanCan data were analyzed together to observe differential gene expression patterns between cases with and without signature mutations. These data suggest that R2CHOP disrupts tumors reliant on IRF4, NF-κB, and STAT transcription factors, leading to a loss of proliferative feedback systems. Conclusions: Our combined analysis of DNA and RNA across R2CHOP and RCHOP treatment cohorts identifies a high-risk non-GCB phenotype that encompasses approximately 38% of non-GCB patients, is capable of sustaining JAK-STAT and NF-κB signaling, and is sensitive to R2CHOP. Our study lays the groundwork for a precision therapy approach in DLBCL in which DNA or RNA profiles can be used to identify patients early in treatment who may not benefit from the current standard of care, RCHOP, and who would benefit from the addition of lenalidomide or other targeted agents. Disclosures Gandhi: Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Ansell:LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding. Cerhan:Celgene: Research Funding; NanoString: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Nowakowski:Curis: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; NanoString: Research Funding; Selvita: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Novak:Celgene Coorperation: Research Funding.

Introduction: The use of PET-CR as a surrogate endpoint would expedite the development of novel therapies and enable better estimates of sample size based on early outcomes of a trial. Previous studies have reported an association between end-of-therapy (EOT) PET results and long-term progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients receiving standard first-line chemoimmunotherapy. We have also previously shown that the overall predictability of PET-CR for PFS and OS in these trials is similar to that in 18 literature-based studies. (15-ICML 2019, P195). To assess the potential for PET-CR as a surrogate endpoint in registration trials, we conducted a prospectively designed individual patient-level-data meta-analysis of available clinical trials. Methods: We synthesized patient-level data from three prospective phase II and III trials (GOYA [NCT01287741], GATHER [NCT01414855], MAYO [NCT00670358]) conducted in previously untreated DLBCL patients, using a Bayesian hierarchical model. We considered the two treatment arms in GOYA (GOYA-R-CHOP [rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone] and GOYA-G-CHOP [obinutuzumab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone]) separate; hence a total of four arms, excluding patients without baseline PET scans. We investigated the relationship between PET-CR and long-term survival outcomes overall and within patient subgroups. We used Kaplan-Meier plots to compare survival endpoints by PET-CR status. We considered hypothetical RCTs that have PET-CR and PFS as endpoints to show how our model of the relationship between PET-CR and PFS can be used to predict the trial outcome. Results: We included 1496 patients (GOYA-R, GOYA-G, GATHER, MAYO, respectively: 665, 669, 100, 62). EOT PET-CR status was determined by the Lugano criteria in GOYA and by IHP in the other two studies. The overall rate of PET-CR was 72%; respectively 72%, 73%, 62% and 74% per arm. Panel A of the Figure shows Kaplan-Meier plots of PFS by PET-CR status. The Bayesian modeled hazard ratio (HR) comparing PET-CR versus nonCR was 0.13 (95% CI: 0.10, 0.15). The model can be used in planning a clinical trial as follows. Suppose a new therapy improves the PET-CR rate from 70% to 85%. Based on our model the expected HR for PFS treatment effect would be 0.71 (95% CI: 0.58, 0.84). The trial sample size required to demonstrate such an improvement with 90% power is about 650 patients, assuming an accrual rate of 50 patients per month and a minimum follow-up time of 12 months. Panel B of the Figure shows the model-based PFS HR and its CI (shaded) as it depends on the PET-CR rate of the new therapy. This plot also shows the estimated total trial sample size (in red), again assuming the relationship between PET-CR and PFS in our model. However, our model may not apply for the new therapy; and the trial could have an adaptive design with final sample size tailored to the accruing information about PET-CR and PFS and their relationship for the therapies in the trial. Conclusions: Achieving an EOT PET-CR in newly diagnosed DLBCL is highly predictive of favorable outcome in the populations we considered. The estimated HR is 0.13 for PFS, PET-CR versus nonCR, and it is 0.10 for OS. Based on our model, a treatment that improves PET-CR rate could be reasonably expected to have a benefit on PFS and OS, for the populations we considered. Whether a new therapy, with a different mechanism of action, that improves PET-CR rate will extend PFS in a clinical trial is less clear. An adaptive trial could be initiated based on our model as a hypothesis. This hypothesis can be verified or updated using accruing information in the trial itself. Our model can also help in planning clinical trials for re-estimating sample size during the trial and considering early stopping for futility. Further work should investigate the applicability of PET-CR in predicting PFS and/or OS for treatments that have different mechanisms of action and for other populations of patients. Acknowledgements: This work was funded by Genentech/Roche. Disclosures Berry: Berry Consultants, LLC: Consultancy, Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Berry Consultants, LLC is a company that provides statistical design and analysis services to pharmaceutical companies (including Genentech/Roche), medical device companies, U.S. NIH cooperative groups, patient advocacy groups, and international consortia. Broglio:Berry Consultants LLC: Employment. Ward:Hoffmann La Roche: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mattiello:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Employment. Sahin:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Employment, Equity Ownership. Nielsen:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Employment, Equity Ownership. McGlothlin:Berry Consultants, LLC: Consultancy, Employment. Elliott:Berry Consultants, LLC: Employment. Sehn:Lundbeck: Consultancy, Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Morphosys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Apobiologix: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Acerta: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; TEVA Pharmaceuticals Industries: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Ortho: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; TEVA Pharmaceuticals Industries: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria; Morphosys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Lundbeck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Acerta: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Ortho: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria. Trněný:Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Honoraria. Vitolo:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Juno Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Speakers Bureau. Martelli:Servier: Honoraria; F. Hoffman-La Roche, Celgene, Janssen, Sandoz, Novartis, Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Honoraria; F. Hoffman-La Roche, Celgene, Janssen, Sandoz, Novartis, Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kostakoglu:F. Hoffman-La Roche: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy. Nowakowski:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; Selvita: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; NanoString: Research Funding.

Purpose The development of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a relatively rare but a clinically important adverse event in the treatment of lymphoma, particularly in individuals receiving anthracyclines. There are few studies assessing the role of germline genetic susceptibility as a predictor of CVD in this setting. We evaluated the association of 24 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from candidate genes involved in anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity, CVD, and venous thromboembolism with new-onset CVD in a prospective cohort of lymphoma patients treated in the modern era. Methods All patients were from the Mayo component of the Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) of the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic Lymphoma SPORE. Enrollment from 2002-2015 was offered to patients with newly diagnosed lymphoma who were age ≥18 years. Clinical, pathology and treatment data were abstracted using a standard protocol, and participants provided a peripheral blood sample, from which DNA was extracted. All patients were prospectively contacted every 6 months for the first 3 years from diagnosis and then annually thereafter to assess disease status, re-treatment and development of new morbidities, including CVD. Reported CVD events included congestive heart failure (CHF), coronary heart disease (CHD), arrhythmia, valvular heart disease (VHD), and other CVD. These events were identified during follow-up and validated against medical records. Genotyping was conducted using a custom Illumina iSelect platform with rigorous quality controls. For each SNP, Cox regression was used to estimate Hazard Ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) with time to first CVD, using death without CVD as a competing risk. HRs were also obtained for time to CHF, using death without CVD as a competing risk. We also modeled these events for all patients and for patients receiving frontline anthracyclines. Each SNP was modeled as having a log-additive (per minor allele) effect in the regression model. An ordinal test was used to assess the trend, with a nominal P<0.05 considered statistically significant. Results There were a total of 3,063 newly diagnosed lymphoma patients (excluding chronic lymphocytic leukemia) with no history of CVD at time of lymphoma diagnosis, of which 1280 had genotype data available for analysis. The median age at diagnosis was 59 years (range, 18-95) and 56% were male. The most common subtypes were follicular (26.3%), diffuse large B-cell (23.2%), Hodgkin (11.3%), marginal zone (11.2%), mantle cell (6.3%) and T-cell (5.4%) lymphoma. Anthracycline-based chemotherapy as initial therapy was used in 52% of individuals. At a median follow-up of 6.9 years (range, 0.1-17.1), 363 (30.7%) patients died, and 173 (13.5%) had new-onset CVD after lymphoma diagnosis. There were 234 incident CVD events in the 173 patients: 49 CHD, 50 CHF, 27 VHD, 103 arrhythmias, and 5 other CVD. Results are shown in the Table. When assessing all CVD, F5 (rs4524) (HR=1.28, 95% CI=1.03-1.58) and F11 (rs4253399) (HR=1.30, 95% CI=1.06-1.61) were associated with CVD at P<0.05; both associations attenuated slightly when restricted to anthracycline-treated patients (F5 HR=1.18, 95% CI=0.89-1.57; F11 HR=1.23, 95% CI=0.92-1.65). F11 was more strongly associated with CHF (HR=1.55, 95% CI=1.03-2.34) and CHF in anthracycline-treated patients (HR=1.64, 95% CI=0.98-2.76). NCF4 (rs1883112) was marginally associated with lower risk of CVD overall (HR=0.81, 95% CI=0.66-1.00), and this association strengthened when restricted to anthracycline-treated patients (HR=0.67, 95% CI=0.49-0.91) and showed similar trends in HRs for CHF (HR=0.77, 95% CI=0.51-1.16) and CHF in anthracycline-treated patients (HR=0.72, 95% CI=0.41-1.28), although neither estimate was statistically significant at P<0.05. Finally, while XDH (rs2236168) was not associated with all CVD (HR=1.00, 95% CI=0.81-1.23), it was associated with CHF (HR=0.66, 95% CI=0.47-0.93) overall, but attenuated in anthracycline-treated patients (HR=0.81, 95% CI=0.55-1.18). Conclusions In this exploratory study of candidate SNPs from the literature, we found limited evidence for a role of germline genetic variability in predicting risk of CVD or CHF in a cohort of lymphoma patients, especially after accounting for multiple testing. To fully address this hypothesis, future studies will need larger sample sizes and more comprehensive genetic assessment. Disclosures Maurer: Celgene: Research Funding; Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nanostring: Research Funding. Nowakowski:NanoString: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Selvita: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cerhan:Celgene: Research Funding; NanoString: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

299 Background: In 2011, ASCO launched a forum for the oncology research community to facilitate and promote the implementation of quality clinical research. The ASCO Research Community Forum (RCF) was created to provide a solution-oriented venue for research sites to address common challenges with conducting clinical trials. It offers in-person and virtual forums and resources to learn and share best practices with peers on a variety of topics, including site quality assessment and improvement, research site operations, and clinical trial access and accrual. Methods: An assessment was performed to measure the ASCO RCF output and to gather information on its potential impact on the cancer community. Results: The ASCO RCF has provided an in-person venue for physicians and research administrators with a steady increase in attendance, from 52 attendees in 2012 to 159 in 2018. Multi-stakeholder meetings and manuscripts have promoted best practices and solutions to address challenges with implementing quality clinical trials. Tools and resources to facilitate best practices and quality improvement at trial sites have been accessed by a range of types of research sites from across the U.S. and internationally. Its web-based library of resources was accessed over 27,000 times in 2018, alone. An online forum was launched in 2019 to provide a new opportunity to connect and impact the research community. Conclusions: The ASCO RCF is a productive and esteemed resource for the cancer research community. In-person and virtual forums, along with practical tools, promote access and accrual to clinical trials by facilitating networking, developing solutions, and providing education and resources. The ASCO RCF impact has extended from community-based oncology practices to larger research networks and academic centers across the U.S. and internationally. Its efforts to promote and facilitate access to quality clinical trials align with the vision and mission of ASCO to conquer cancer through research, education, and promotion of the highest quality patient care.

Abstract Background: IRAK4 kinase activity is required for toll-like receptor (TLR) and interleukin-1 receptor (IL-1R) signaling in a variety of myeloid and lymphoid cell types. Recruitment of IRAK4 to these receptors and its subsequent activation is facilitated by the MYD88 adaptor protein. The MYD88-L265P activating mutation is prevalent in DLBCL (~30% in ABC subtype) and WM (>90%). MYD88- L265P leads to constitutive activation of NF-κB signaling that is associated with worse prognosis. In MCL, dysregulation of B-cell receptor (BCR) and TLR pathway components correlate with constitutive NF-κB signaling. CA-4948 is a small molecule inhibitor of IRAK4 kinase that modulates the TLR and IL-1R signaling cascades. CA-4948 is being developed as a novel agent for the treatment of hematologic cancers with dysregulated IRAK4 signaling and is currently in a Ph1 trial for R/R NHL (clinicaltrials.gov NCT03328078). In preclinical studies, CA-4948 demonstrates pharmacodynamic and antitumor activity in in vitro and in vivo models with MYD88 alterations, and was previously shown to have a synergistic anti-tumor activity when combined with venetoclax in vivo. To further guide CA-4948's clinical development in NHL, we report here nonclinical studies exploring a twice-daily dosing schedule in DLBCL xenograft models. We also investigated the use of an ex-vivo whole-blood TLR-stimulation assay as a surrogate PD response biomarker. Additionally, we tested the efficacy of CA-4948 alone or in combination with the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib in DLBCL and MCL tumor models. Furthermore, preliminary PK and PD data from the first-in-human Ph1 trial are presented. Methods: Mice bearing DLBCL PDX tumors were orally administered CA-4948 twice-daily (BID) with 37.5 or 75 mg/kg doses and once-daily (QD) with 75 or 150 mg/kg doses. The ex-vivo whole blood assay involved TLR-stimulation of blood isolated at various time-points after CA-4948 administration. For the drug combination studies, mice bearing subcutaneous tumors of a MYD88-L265P DLBCL cell line or six MCL cell lines were treated. Results: (1) CA-4948 exhibited dose-dependent tumor growth inhibition in two DLBCL PDX xenograft tumor models with BID dosing showing equal or enhanced efficacy as compared to the equivalent total daily QD dose. The BID schedule was well tolerated with only a slight body weight loss as compared to the equivalent total QD dose schedule. (2) Overall, in mouse, the ex-vivo blood assay showed a time and exposure dependent relationship with the level of cytokine production after TLR-stimulation. A similar CA-4948 dose-dependent inhibition of TLR-stimulated cytokine production was observed in healthy human whole blood samples in which CA-4948 was spiked into the blood sample. Based on these findings, CA-4948 exposure levels capable of inhibiting TLR-stimulation are anticipated to be readily achievable in clinical studies. This was also supported by preliminary clinical PD data showing post treatment, on-target, reduced release of NF-κB-associated cytokines in 2 of 4 patients treated so far. (3) In xenograft efficacy studies using MCL models, single agent CA-4948 and ibrutinib exhibited anti-tumor activity and showed an additive effect when combined in the majority of the models known to have BCR-driven constitutive canonical NF-kB signaling (REC-1, MINO, and JeKo-1). Interestingly, neither CA-4948, ibrutinib, nor the combination had anti-tumor activity in Z-138 and GRANTA-591 xenograft models, consistent with these cell lines having activated NF-κB through the alternative NIK signaling pathway. (4) The human QD PK data (n=4) demonstrated that CA-4948: was rapidly absorbed, Tmax 1-3 hr, and t1/2 of 3.6 -6.8 hr. The bioavailability and exposure, as assessed by Cmax and AUC, is within the expected range compared to non-clinical PK and did not show any evidence of accumulation after QD dosing for 15 consecutive days. Conclusion: These results provide a rationale for CA-4948 BID dosing and incorporating the use of an ex-vivo whole-blood TLR-stimulation assay as a surrogate PD response biomarker, the former of which will be evaluated in the current Ph1 dose escalation soon and the latter of which is currently being implemented in the Ph1 trial for patients with advanced NHL. The murine xenograft results further support exploration of CA-4948 as monotherapy and in combination with canonical and alternative NF-κB pathway-targeted agents in DLBCL and MCL. Disclosures Booher: Curis, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Patel:Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics/Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Lunning:Celgene: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Genzyme: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Portola: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy. Samson:Curis, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Atoyan:Curis, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ma:Curis, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Xu:Curis, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dellarocca:Curis, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Modafferi:Curis, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Borek:Curis, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhang:Curis, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Parker:Curis, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Whitney:Curis, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wang:Curis, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Tuck:Curis, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Younes:Merck: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; J&J: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding.

Abstract Backgroud. The treatment landscape of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) has significantly changed in last decades. Improvement in diagnosis and understanding of disease biology has been coupled with emergence of new therapeutic options, including targeted agents. While MCL outcome data comes primarily from clinical trials (CT), the impact of therapeutic advances on pattern of care (POC) and outcome in MCL in the general population is not well characterized. This study sought to characterize changes in pattern of care and outcomes of patients with MCL in a prospective observational series in the rituximab era. Methods. The study included consenting adult patients with newly diagnosed MCL that were prospectively enrolled into the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) Molecular Epidemiology Resource, from 09/01/2002 to 06/30/2015. Demographic, clinical and prognostic factors were abstracted, and all patients were actively followed for re-treatment, relapse and death. Since bendamustine-rituximab (BR) regimen starting to be used in 2010, we defined patients enrolled from 09/01/2002 to 12/31/2009 as era 1 and those enrolled 01/01/2010 to 06/30/2015 as era 2. Baseline characteristics and outcomes, evaluated in terms of event free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS) and cause of death, were analyzed and compared between the two eras identified. Results. 348 patients with newly diagnosed MCL were enrolled. Five patients had no available data for front-line treatment and were excluded. The analysis was thus conducted on 343 patients: 169 patients were diagnosed in era 1 with a median follow-up of 131.2 months vs. 174 in era 2 with a median follow-up of 58.9 months. Baseline clinical characteristics and MIPI score were similar across the two eras ( Table 1). Frontline induction treatment was significantly different in the two eras. BR use was 0 vs 49 (28.2% ), R-CHOP/CHOP like regimen in 89 (52.7%) vs 45 (25.9%), high-dose cytarabine (HiDAC)-based therapy in 1 (0.6%) vs 28 (16.1%), intensified regimens (HyperCVAD) in 16 (9.5%) vs 8 (4.5%), other regimens (including R-cladribine, R-fludarabine-mitoxantrone, rituximab monotherapy) in 35 (20.7%) vs 13 (7.5%) patients in era 1 vs era 2 respectively. Non-systemic treatment (observation, surgery or radiation only) was performed in 25 (14.8%) vs 31 (17.8%), while 9 (8%) vs 12 (7.7%) patients were enrolled in clinical trials, in era 1 vs era 2 respectively. Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) as consolidation of first line treatment or use of Rituximab maintenance was not different between Era 1 and Era 2. Among the entire cohort of 343 MCL patients, 3y-EFS and 3y-OS were 51.9% (95% IC 46.7-57.6) and 73.5 (95% CI 68.8-78.4), respectively (Figure 1). 3y-EFS was 45.9% (95% CI 39.0-54.1%) vs 58.4 (95% CI, 51.2-66.6%) in Era 1 vs Era 2 (HR 0.69 (0.51-0.92), p=0.006), 3y-OS was 70.9% (95% CI, 63.4-78.1%) vs 76.1% (95% CI, 69.7-83.1%) in Era 1 vs Era 2 (HR 0.87 (0.61-1.24), p=0.26), respectively (Figure 1). In a univariate analysis, high risk simplified MIPI was prognostic of lower EFS and OS in both the era groups. Conclusion. The BR regimen entered front line therapy of MCL resulting in decline of R-CHOP use in the MER. While rates of ASCT remain similar over the two eras, high dose cytarabine usage in induction therapy has increased. While POC in MCL continue to evolve, the introduction of bendamustine and high-dose citarabine based regimens resulted in an improvement in EFS but not OS in this observational cohort-based analysis. Findings in this study are important for design and planning of future clinical trials incorporating novel agents in induction therapy of MCL. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Cohen: Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BioInvent: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BioInvent: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Research Funding. Witzig:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Cerhan:Celgene: Research Funding; Jannsen: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Nanostring: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: The majority of subjects with a diagnosis of primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCSNL) have diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) as their histology. However, there are a sub-set of PCSNL patients who present with other histologies. This retrospective study was conducted to evaluate histological morphology, risk factors and clinical course in subjects with non-diffuse large B-cell primary CNS lymphoma. Methods: We used the Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Database to search for patients with PCSNL during the time period from January 1995 to June 2018. One hundred and fifty nine patients met the criteria and underwent record review. One hundred and nine patients were excluded as they had PCSNL with DLBCL histology (N=47, 43%), secondary central nervous system lymphoma (N=56, 51%) and post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorders (PTLD) with DLBCL morphology (N=6, 5%). We identified fifty patients with PCSNL Non-DLBCL histology, by evaluating the biopsy reports. We abstracted clinical data and outcomes for these groups through medical chart review. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate survival. Results: The mean age of the study population was 70 ± 11.3 years and 66% were male. Of the 50 patients, the most common histology was low grade CNS lymphoma (N=14, 28%) while Hodgkin's lymphoma (N= 1, 2%), Burkitt's lymphoma (N= 1, 2%) and histiocytic lymphoma (N= 1, 2%) were the least common. The frequencies of other PCSNL Non-DLBCL histology are demonstrated in Table1. Most patients showed good ECOG performance status of 0-2 and four patients had ECOG performance status of grade 3 (N=4, 8%). Six of the patients were immunocompromised (N=6, 12%), PPD positive tuberculosis; corticosteroids and PTLD with DLBCL histology were the causes for the immunocompromised state. The location of the CNS lymphoma included brain (N=24, 50%); spinal cord (N=9, 18%); orbits (N=5, 10%); deep structures which included brainstem, cerebellum, cerebellopontine angle and cauda equina (N=5, 10%); leptomeninges (N=4, 8%) and neural involvement which included sciatic, peroneal and facial nerve (N=3, 6%). CSF examination revealed increased protein levels (N=10, 20%), malignant cells (N=11, 22%), negative cytology (N=14, 28%) and unknown or not done (N=15, 30%). Most patients presented with neurological symptoms such as seizures, peripheral neuropathy (numbness/weakness/tingling), headache, confusion & cognitive disturbances (memory changes), gait disturbances (difficulty with balance/ataxia), visual disturbances (blurry vision) and paraplegia, but none of them presented with B-cell symptoms such as fever, night sweats and weight loss. Treatment modalities included chemotherapy, radiation and surgery. Fourteen patients underwent radiation therapy (N=14, 28%); three of the patients had undergone surgery of which the patient with peripheral T-cell lymphoma had undergone a complete excision, the patient with marginal zone lymphoma had undergone debulking with subtotal craniotomy and the patient with MALT lymphoma had undergone resection with gamma knife. Table 2 demonstrates the various chemotherapy drugs used and the distribution of frequency of biopsy, radiation and surgical treatment in the different pathology of PCSNL Non-DLBCL. The median overall survival period using Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that Burkitt's Lymphoma had the least median time survival of less than a month and PTLD had the highest median survival of 146.25 months (p=0.0017). Table 3 shows the median survival time for all the different pathology's of PCSNL Non-DLBCL. Conclusion: This retrospective study reinforces the critical need for a histologic diagnosis when a patient is diagnosed with PCNSL. PCSNL is considered to be DLBCL but there are other histology's that could potentially be PCSNL and the treatment should be tailored to the individual patient's histology. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Introduction Primary testicular lymphoma (PTL) and testicular involvement of systemic lymphoma (secondary testicular lymphoma, STL) are uncommon. Most testicular lymphomas are aggressive B-cell lymphomas and portend a high risk of extranodal relapse, including CNS relapse. As such, when testicular lymphoma is identified, the management strategy is often changed to include CNS prophylaxis. It is, therefore, essential to evaluate testicular involvement in diagnosis and staging. F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG PET/CT) is a standard imaging modality to stage aggressive lymphoma. Physiologic testicular FDG activity can be challenging to distinguish from involvement by lymphoma given a wide range of normal. An imaging threshold for testicular PET uptake would be clinically relevant and would help guide management. We compare testicular FDG avidity in testicular lymphoma with physiologic testicular FDG avidity. Methods Records of patients (pts) diagnosed with PTL or STL from 2002-2018 enrolled in the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic Lymphoma SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource were reviewed, yielding 36 pts with testicular lymphoma. Physiologic testicular avidity by FDG PET/CT was determined from analysis of 70 randomly selected patients who received FDG PET/CT from 2013-2018 prior to treatment for non-lymphoma indications including pulmonary nodule, lung carcinoma, head & neck squamous cell carcinoma, gastrointestinal carcinomas, and metastatic melanoma, without known hematologic malignancy, testicular pathology, or history of testicular infection/surgery by medical chart review. Imaging parameters compared in this analysis were SUVmax and SUVmean. All FDG PET/CT exams were reviewed centrally by a nuclear medicine radiologist and a radiology resident. Results Of the 36 pts with testicular lymphoma, 19 had an orchiectomy prior to FDG PET/CT and 7 pts did not have a staging FDG PET/CT scan. Of the 10 pts with intact testes at the time of staging FDG PET/CT, 1 pt with low-grade lymphoma was excluded. 9 pts with aggressive lymphomas were included in this analysis: 7 pts with diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and 1 pt each with Burkitt lymphoma and peripheral T-cell lymphoma, not otherwise specified. Testicular lymphoma was diagnosed by orchiectomy in 3 pts, and by percutaneous biopsy in 3 pts. 3 pts did not have tissue sampling of testes or scrotal contents, but had an overtly FDG-avid testicle highly suggestive of lymphomatous involvement. These 3 pts had biopsy-proven lymphoma in parotid, bone marrow, and stomach, respectively, with mean testicular SUVmax 6.8 among the 3 pts. The median age in this analysis cohort was 62 years (range 35-88). Of the 7 analyzed DLBCL pts, 6 were non-germinal center B-cell, and 1 was germinal center B-cell. The 70 control pts had a median age of 55 years (range 18-90). In known testicular lymphoma cases and control pts, SUVmax and SUVmean were assessed from the most FDG-avid testicle. Median SUVmax for the testicular lymphoma cases was 13.3 (range 5.5-29.9), compared to a median of 3.8 (range 2.1-5.5) for controls (Wilcoxon p <0.0001). Median SUVmean for testicular lymphoma was 9.2 (range 3.3-18.6), compared to a median of 3.1 (range 1.8-4.8) for controls (Wilcoxon p <0.0001) (Figure). Based on this dataset, an SUVmax cutoff of 5.0 has a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 66.3-100) and a specificity of 98.6% (98% CI 92.3-99.9) for the detection of testicular involvement by an aggressive lymphoma. Conclusions FDG PET/CT shows significantly greater FDG avidity for testicular aggressive lymphomas as compared with physiologic testicular FDG uptake in this single institution study with centralized radiology review of cases and controls. Testicular FDG avidity greater than an SUVmax 5.0 in staging aggressive lymphoma is highly suggestive for testicular involvement, warranting follow-up clinical exam and ultrasound, at a minimum. In addition, testicles with SUVmax <5.0 in a patient with known lymphoma but no symptoms or signs of testicular involvement should be considered negative for the purposes of staging and treatment planning. A pragmatic limitation of this study is that most patients with testicular involvement of lymphoma underwent orchiectomy prior to FDG PET/CT scan, which decreased our sample size. Larger, pooled studies would be helpful to validate these clinically relevant findings. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Witzig: Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Cerhan:Celgene: Research Funding; Jannsen: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Nanostring: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Outcomes of multidisciplinary and molecular tumor boards have been reported. Lymphoma specific tumor board outcomes have not been reported in the molecular era. In addition, the utility of multi-site, interactive tumor boards using videoconference technology are not widely reported. We prospectively followed the outcomes of a multidisciplinary multi-site lymphoma tumor board in the molecular era and during a change in the revision of the World Health Organization Classification in first published in 2016. Methods: The Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Tumor Board is a component of the international Mayo Clinic Care Network (MCCN). The format includes the clinical case presentation, presentation of radiology and hematopathology findings by the appropriate specialist, proposed treatment options, review of the literature pertinent to the case, and discussion followed by recommendations. Requirement for presentation includes having a diagnosis of lymphoma with pathology reviewed at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN (MCR). Pathology and radiology material, when relevant to the case, are required to be reviewed at MCR and presented by MCR pathologists/radiologists. Patients must be presented prospectively, and have active clinical issues or questions to be addressed. Four cases are presented per 60-minute meeting. 309 consecutive highly selected cases with a diagnosis of lymphoma were presented at the Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Tumor Board from 2014 to 2018. The pathology material was independently reviewed by the presenting hematopathologists and radiology material by the presenting radiologist. Participants are office based and included multiple members of the health care team which also incudes pharmacists, clinical research associates affiliated with lymphoma research, and physicians in training. Recommendations were prospectively tracked for changes in radiology interpretation, pathologic diagnosis, and treatment approaches. Actual follow-up of all patients after the meeting was not allowed in the MCCN. Participation in the meeting can be either via in-room attendance at MCR, video conference at a participating MCCN site, or via non-participatory live-stream online. Results: 309 cases were presented were presented from 2014-2018. 258 cases were from MCR, and 51 were not physically seen at MCR. 16 cases were presented at a subsequent meeting for further recommendations in the course of their disease after the initial presentation. 54% of patients presented had changes in some aspect of their care as a result of the meeting. Changes in radiologic interpretation occurred in 5 (1.6%) patients. The pathologic diagnosis changed in 27 (8.7%). Additional testing was recommended in 44 (14%). Clinical management changes were recommended in 90 (29%) cases. These included alterations in treatment approach in 43 (14%), change from undecided to pursuit of treatment 10 (3%), change from undecided regarding treatment approach to further diagnostic testing 4 (1.3%), change from observation to treatment 9 (3%), change from treatment to observation 4 (1.3%), and treatment to further tests in 2 (0.6%) Site in room average attendance (internal/external) was 16.8/8.6. Non-participatory live-stream attendance was not possible to track. In an annual electronic evaluation of this activity, 93% of the responders reported an improvement in knowledge and competence, and 100% recommended no changes to the format of the conference. Enhancements over time have included Continuous Medical Education credit, an in room microscope, and real-time radiology images. Selected cases will now be on line on an international web site. Conclusion: In this highly selected group of lymphoma cases from multiple sites over a 4-year period, 54% of the (167/309) case presentations resulted in changes to some aspect of care as a direct result of this tumor board. A multidisciplinary lymphoma tumor board approach was of value, efficacious, and meaningfully impacted lymphoma patients while substantially enhancing interdisciplinary interactions. Disclosures Ansell: Celldex: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding.