Diefenbach, Catherine

Abstract Background: Relapsed/refractory (R/R) Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) remains a significant clinical challenge. We hypothesized that using immune checkpoint blockade to activate the immune cells in the tumor microenvironment, and concurrently targeting tumor cells with the CD30 targeting antibody-drug conjugate brentuximab vedotin (BV) could overcome tumor resistance. E4412 is a Phase 1/2 ECOG-ACRIN sponsored study of the combinations of BV, nivolumab (Nivo), and ipilimumab (Ipi) in patients with R/R HL. Here we present the preliminary safety and response data on the full cohort of patients treated in Phase 1 with BV + Ipi + Nivo (Arms G-I). Methods: Patients with confirmed R/R HL were treated with Nivo 3mg/kg, Ipi 1mg/kg and BV 1.2mg/kg (Arm G) or 1.8mg/kg (Arm H) with a 3+3 design, and an expansion cohort (Arm I) of 9 patients with BV at 1.8mg/kg. BV and Nivo are given every 21 days for 16 cycles; Nivo may be continued for an additional 12 months. Ipi is given every 12 weeks except for the first 2 patients in Arm G who received Ipi every 6 weeks for the first 3 cycles. Dose limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined within the first cycle of therapy. Results: As of 6/30/18 22 patients with a median of 2 prior therapies (range 1-5) have been treated; 7 in Arm G, 6 in Arm H, and 9 in Arm I. Median age was 35, range (19-60); 11 patients were male. Nine patients had prior SCT (1 alloSCT, 8 autoSCT); 1 patient had prior BV. Safety: All 22 enrolled patients are evaluable for safety. There were 3 DLTs, one in each arm. In Arm G one patient experienced grade 4 diabetic ketoacidosis and hyperglycemia, and went off treatment after cycle 1. In Arm H, one patient had transient grade 3 AST elevation; this was of no clinical significance and did not require a delay in therapy. In Arm I a post AlloSCT patient had grade 4 Steven-Johnson syndrome with grade 3 pruritis, rash, and GVHD, and came off therapy. Common toxicities considered at least possibly related to drug, are shown in Table 1, and grade 3 or greater toxicity in Table 2. There were no grade 5 AEs or additional grade 4 AEs. Significant grade 3 AEs were: rash, colitis, gastritis, pancreatitis, and arthritis each in one patient, resulting in dose delays but not discontinuation of therapy. One patient experienced grade 2 angioedema in cycle 1 and came off therapy. No significant infusion reactions were noted. Response: Nineteen of 22 patients are evaluable for response. Three patients discontinued treatment after cycle 1 and are not evaluable for response. For the full population the overall response rate (ORR) was 82% (18/22), with a complete response (CR) rate of 68% (15/22). For patients treated with at least 3 cycles of therapy who were evaluable for response, the ORR is 95% (18/19) with a CR rate of 79% (15/19). Six patients went from treatment to SCT. With a median follow-up of 0.52 years median progression free survival (PFS) has not been reached (Figure 1), and with a median follow-up of 0.82 years overall survival (OS) has not been reached (Figure 2). Conclusion: In this study of the triplet combination of BV, Ipi and Nivo for R/R HL, therapy was generally well tolerated, although more grade 3 AEs were seen than in the doublets. In a heavily pretreated patient population, with 9 patients post SCT, the ORR of 95% and CR rate of 79% in evaluable patients is extremely promising. Data will be updated to include longer term PFS and OS by the time of the meeting. Optimization of this strategy is ongoing in E4412, now a randomized phase 2 study comparing the doublet of BV-Nivo to the triplet of BV-Ipi-Nivo. Disclosures Diefenbach: Trillium: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Denovo: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding. Hong:Merck: Consultancy. Cohen:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Research Funding; 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; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: 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; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; BioInvent: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Advani:Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Autolus: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board, Research Funding; Kura: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cell Medica: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Agensys: Research Funding; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Gilead/Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Kyowa: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Forty Seven: Research Funding. Barta:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck, Takeda, Celgene, Seattle Genetics, Bayer: Research Funding. Svoboda:Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Kyowa: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy. Karmali:AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Kahl:Genentech: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; CTI: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy. Ansell:LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding.

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

Abstract Background The international prognostic score (IPS) (Hasenclever et al., NEJM 1988) uses 7 factors (age> 45, male sex, hemoglobin<10.5, stage IV, leukocytosis > 15,000, and lymphopenia< 600) to predict a 5 year freedom from progression (FFP) of 42%-84% and overall survival (OS) of 56%-89% for patients with advanced HL. Constructed from a retrospective analysis of patients treated before 1992, the IPS continues to be the most commonly used risk stratification index for advanced HL. Recent studies suggest that the predictive range of the IPS has narrowed due to improved outcomes of patients treated with current therapy (Moccia et al. JCO 2012). In this report we prospectively evaluated the ability of the individual components of the IPS to predict outcome in patients enrolled on the US Intergroup trial E2496. Methods All seven IPS (IPS-7) variables were recorded for all patients at study entry. FFP was defined as the time from study entry to disease progression or relapse; deaths that occurred during remission that were not preceded by disease progression/relapse were censored. OS was defined as the time from study entry to death from any cause. Kaplan-Meier methodology was used to construct survival curves. Univariate and multivariate analysis (MVA) was performed using Cox proportional-hazards models. We subsequently constructed an alternative prognostic score utilizing the factors which were significant on MVA (PS-3). Results From 1996-2006, 854 patients with advanced HL, were randomized to treatment with either ABVD or Stanford V, with no significant differences in outcome (Gordon et al, JCO 2013). While the IPS-7 remained prognostic it did not stratify the lowest risk patients (0-1 risk factor) or patients with 3-5 risk factors, as its predictive range was narrowed due to improved clinical outcomes (Fig 1a and 2a). Table 1 shows the univariate and multivariate analysis for IPS-7 and outcomes. In contrast to the original IPS-7, on MVA, only two factors, hemoglobin and stage were significant for FFP, and three factors for OS: hemoglobin, stage, and age. We then evaluated a new 3 factor score (PS-3) utilizing variables significant on the MVA. The PS-3 was significant for both FFP (p=0.0001) and OS (p<.0001) and clearly separated patients into 4 distinct risk groups with either: 0, 1, 2 or 3 risk factors. The five year FFP was 83%, 74%, 68%, and 63% and OS was 95%, 85%, 75%, and 52% for patients with 0, 1, 2, and 3 risk factors, respectively (Table 2, Fig 1b and 2b). Conclusion In E2496, for patients with advanced HL, the PS-3 may stratify patients more clearly compared to IPS-7 and provide a simpler model to assess risk. Studies comparing PS-3 with IPS-7, and are ongoing. The incorporation of novel biomarkers and biologic factors into PS-3, as well as validation with other data sets is warranted. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

PURPOSE Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a B-cell lymphoma characterized by cyclin D1 expression. Autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT) consolidation after induction chemotherapy is often used for eligible patients; however, the benefit remains uncertain in the rituximab era. Herein we retrospectively assessed the impact of AHCT consolidation on survival in a large cohort of transplantation-eligible patients age 65 years or younger. PATIENTS AND METHODS We retrospectively studied transplantation-eligible adults age 65 years or younger with newly diagnosed MCL treated between 2000 and 2015. The primary objective was to assess for improved progression-free survival (PFS) with AHCT consolidation and secondarily to assess for improved overall survival (OS). Cox multivariable regression analysis and propensity score–weighted (PSW) analysis were performed. RESULTS Data were collected from 25 medical centers for 1,254 patients; 1,029 met inclusion criteria. Median follow-up for the cohort was 76 months. Median PFS and OS were 62 and 139 months, respectively. On unadjusted analysis, AHCT was associated with improved PFS (75 v 44 months with v without AHCT, respectively; P < .01) and OS (147 v 115 months with v without AHCT, respectively; P < .05). On multivariable regression analysis, AHCT was associated with improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.54; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.66; P < .01) and a trend toward improved OS (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.01; P = .06). After PSW analysis, AHCT remained associated with improved PFS (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.84; P < .05) but not improved OS (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.1; P = .2). CONCLUSION In this large cohort of younger, transplantation-eligible patients with MCL, AHCT consolidation after induction was associated with significantly improved PFS but not OS after PSW analysis. Within the limitations of a retrospective analysis, our findings suggest that in younger, fit patients, AHCT consolidation may improve PFS.

Key PointsINCB040093 was active across lymphoma subtypes, and the addition of itacitinib provided substantial activity in classic Hodgkin lymphoma. INCB040093 ± itacitinib had a manageable safety and tolerability profile; severe hepatic adverse effects were less common with the combination.