Link, Brian K.

ABSTRACT One quarter of patients with diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who achieve a complete response following front‐line therapy will eventually experience disease relapse. Existing prognostic models use baseline factors to predict outcomes from the start of initial therapy and are not intended for use following completion of treatment. We developed a conditional event‐free survival (cEFS) tool that predicts a patient's risk of lymphoma recurrence after completing front‐line therapy taking into consideration baseline risk characteristics plus the time the patient has been in remission. Model development used pooled and harmonized data from two observational cohorts and four randomized trials of patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL treated with immunochemotherapy and either achieving a complete response or not experiencing an event within 12 weeks of end of therapy. Cox proportional‐hazards regression modeling with backwards stepwise selection was utilized for model development. External validation was performed using a large independent data registry. In total, data from 2757 patients were used for model development. The risk of experiencing an event at a time point after having survived a period of time could be computed parsimoniously using four basic predictors: age, ECOG performance status grade, Ann Arbor stage, and lactate dehydrogenase level. C‐index in the model development cohort was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.63–0.68), compared to 0.64 (95% CI, 0.62–0.66) in the external validation cohort. We believe that this dynamic risk prediction tool will not only aid clinicians in providing data‐driven recommendations for surveillance, but also assist patients themselves with key decisions, such as family planning.

ABSTRACT Soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor 2 (sTNFR2) is a member of the TNF superfamily whose normal bodily distribution is largely limited to low level expression on lymphoid cells. It has emerged as an important inducible receptor that activates a signaling pathway for cancer growth. We evaluated sTNFR2 as a prognostic biomarker for overall survival (OS) in newly diagnosed lymphoma using a prospective cohort study with banked pretreatment serum samples. sTNFR2 was higher in 1513 lymphoma patients compared to 499 age and sex matched controls ( p < 0.0001). Using Kaplan–Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios [HR] (high vs. low tertile), higher levels of sTNFR2 at diagnosis were associated with inferior OS across all seven major lymphoma subtypes: Hodgkin lymphoma ( p < 0.0001; HR = 12.6), diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma ( p < 0.0001; HR = 2.6), follicular lymphoma ( p = 0.00017; HR = 2.5), mantle cell lymphoma ( p < 0.0001; HR = 4.2), small lymphocytic lymphoma ( p = 0.012; HR = 2.4), marginal zone lymphoma ( p = 0.0012; HR = 3.1), and T‐cell lymphoma ( p < 0.0001; HR = 3.1). Using CITE‐seq profiling of tumor microenvironment tissue, we sought to identify cellular source(s) of circulating sTNFR2. In tumor tissue from follicular lymphoma, high TNFR2‐expressing cells were found to be T‐regulatory (Treg) cells, suggestive of a Treg‐driven cancer. In tissue from a case of marginal zone lymphoma, high TNFR2 expression was found on CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, B cells, and monocytes but also directly on tumor cells. We conclude sTNRF2 is a strong prognostic biomarker of OS across major lymphoma subtypes and may be useful to guide therapeutic choices, including targeted therapies against immunosuppressive TNFR2‐expressing Tregs.

Summary Evidence for an association between insulin‐like growth factors (IGF) and multiple myeloma (MM) is inconsistent. We examined total IGF‐I concentrations and risk of MM by combining baseline serological data among UK Biobank participants ( n = 444 187; 732 incident MM) with a two‐sample Mendelian randomisation (MR) analysis using identified genetic variants associated with circulating total IGF‐I and IGF‐binding protein 3 (IGFBP‐3) in the InterLymph consortium (2434 MM and their 2567 controls). Finally, additional lymphoid neoplasm (LN) subtypes were included for comparison with the main hypothesis. Circulating IGF‐I level was positively associated with MM risk Hazard ratio‐HR‐per one standard deviation‐SD‐increase (HR 1‐SD = 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01–1.22; p ‐value = 0.03), especially closer to diagnosis. Genetically inferred IGF‐I levels were associated with increased MM risk (odds ratio [OR] = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.05–1.54) but not with any other LNs. Genetically inferred IGFBP‐3 levels showed no associations with any LN evaluated. Corroborating previous findings, in a secondary analysis, IGF‐I levels were associated with the risk of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) in males with higher body mass index (HR 1‐SD in obese male = 1.36, 95% CI: 1.14–1.61). Our serological and MR analyses suggest a contributing role of IGF‐I in the susceptibility of MM; the CLL/SLL findings warrant further investigation considering sex‐specific adiposity.

Summary Family history of haematological malignancy (FHHM) reflects inherited susceptibility to non‐Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), but its prognostic significance remains poorly understood. We used a cohort study of 1994 NHL patients to evaluate associations between FHHM and clinical outcomes across lymphoma subtypes. We estimated associations, adjusted for sex and lymphoma‐specific prognostic index, of self‐reported FHHM in a first‐degree relative with overall survival (OS), event‐free survival (EFS) and lymphoma‐specific survival (LSS) using multivariable Cox regression models and with failure to achieve EFS at 24 months (EFS24) using logistic regression. FHHM prevalence was 12.8%, and the median follow‐up among survivors was 12.0 years. FHHM was not associated with OS. In subtype‐specific analyses, FHHM was associated with inferior LSS (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11–3.53) in follicular lymphoma (FL); this association and the association with EFS24 failure strengthened among those treated with front‐line immunochemotherapy (EFS24 failure odds ratio = 2.57, 95% CI 1.08–5.99; LSS HR = 2.68, 95% CI 1.09–6.58). In mantle cell lymphoma, FHHM was associated with inferior EFS (HR = 1.70, 95% CI 1.02–2.85). Interaction testing did not demonstrate significant heterogeneity of FHHM effects by lymphoma subtype. FHHM may be associated with adverse outcomes in select NHL groups, particularly FL. These findings warrant further investigation of germline and environmental factors potentially contributing to more aggressive FLs.

Abstract Over the past decade, classification systems using high-throughput genetic data have been developed to identify molecular subtypes of DLBCL. Although not a primary goal, these classifiers were also proposed as prognostic factors in their respective publications. To date, however, no study has directly compared these classifiers' ability to predict overall (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) in the same cohort. Herein, we sought to systematically compare predictive performance, benchmarked against the IPI, of several current established molecular classifiers and evaluate if any add significant independent prognostic information beyond the IPI. WES (including paired germline filter) and RNAseq data from newly diagnosed DLBCL patients (N=432; 2018 WHO criteria) in the Mayo Clinic/University of Iowa Lymphoma Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) were available for analysis (WES n=112, RNAseq n=40, or both n=280). The number of cases able to be classified (including as unclassified) for each classifier was as follows: IPI (432, 100%), cell-of-origin (COO, by Hans algorithm; 346, 80.1%), refined COO (by gene expression with Dark Zone Signature; 320, 100%), Haematological Malignancy Research Network (HMRN; 349, 89.0%), B-cell state (320, 100%), Lymphoma Ecotype (320, 100%), Lymphoma Microenvironment (LME; 320, 100%), Tumor microenvironment (TME26; 320, 100%), SubLymE (312, 97.5%), LymphGen (358, 91.3%), and DLBclass (223, 58.2%). OS was defined as time from diagnosis to all-cause death while EFS was defined as time from diagnosis to disease progression, initiation of second-line treatment, or all-cause death. We calculated Harrell's c-statistics for each Cox proportional hazards model evaluating the discriminative performance of each classifier in predicting OS/EFS. Using bootstrap validation, we obtained optimism-corrected c-statistics, which we report in the results. We performed likelihood ratio tests (LRT) comparing a univariable Cox model with IPI alone and models including both IPI and a given classifier to assess if a classifier provided independent prognostic information beyond the IPI. All patients were treated with immunochemotherapy (IC) with curative intent, 247 (57%) were male, median age at diagnosis was 65 years (IQR 55-72 years), 390 (96%) were White, 209 (60%) had GCB subtype by Hans, 22 (5.1%) had MYC double-hit by FISH (MYC and BCL2 or BCL6), and 162 (37.9%) had an IPI ≥ 3. The median follow-up was 7.0 years, 167 (39%) experienced an event, and 137 (32%) died. In a univariable Cox model, the c-statistic for IPI predicting OS was 0.66 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.70). All other classifiers had c-statistics of ≤0.56. The c-statistic for IPI predicting EFS was 0.64 (95% CI 0.60-0.69), and all other classifiers had c-statistics of ≤0.58. The univariate DLBclass results for OS and EFS were not significantly impacted when restricted to cases with confidence &gt;0.7 (n=136). In Cox models of IPI alone versus IPI plus an individual classifier, the only classifier that provided statistically significant, independent information for OS was TME26 (LRT p=0.02). Adjusting for IPI, patients who were TME26-negative had significantly inferior OS compared to TME26-positive cases (HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.07-2.47; p=0.02). For EFS, DLBclass (restricted to confidence &gt;0.7) added significant prognostic information beyond IPI (LRT p=0.02). This finding was largely driven by C5 subtype; relative to C1 subtype and adjusting for IPI, C5 subtype had significantly inferior EFS (HR 5.53, 95% CI 1.81-17.0; p=0.003). In summary, we compared prognostic performance of multiple DLBCL molecular classifiers with respect to OS and EFS in a single real-world, prospective cohort of newly diagnosed, IC-treated DLBCL. Our data supports two key findings: all classifiers had modest performance for prognosis, and none individually outperformed the IPI in predicting OS nor EFS. Second, only TME26 and DLBclass (confidence &gt;0.7) provided additional prognostic information beyond that captured by the IPI for OS and EFS, respectively. This finding suggests that the tumor immune microenvironment and characteristics of C5 DLBCLs (ABC-subtype, CD79B mutations) can potentially offer significant independent information for predicting survival and response to front-line immunochemotherapy. If replicated, these findings could inform risk-adapted treatment approaches and aid in identifying high-risk patients for enrollment in genomically-informed clinical trials.

Abstract Background: Despite recent therapeutic advances in AS cHL, PET-adaptive chemotherapy-based regimens remain a first-line treatment option, especially for patients (pts) without access to novel agents. Most PET-adaptive regiments start with either 2 cycles of escBEACOPP (escBEACOPP2) or ABVD (ABVD2) prior to interim PET assessment (iPET), followed by treatment de-escalation or intensification by iPET result. There have been no direct comparisons of escBEACOPP2 vs ABVD2 PET-adaptive regimens. Additionally, the AS-Hodgkin Lymphoma International Prognostication Index (A-HIPI) score (Rodday JCO 2023) has not been fully explored in escBEACOPP2 regimens. Therefore, we utilized multiple analytic approaches to compare outcomes of PET-adaptive escBEACOPP2 and ABVD2 regimens, while adjusting for and assessing the effect of the baseline A-HIPI score. Methods: Through the global HoLISTIC Consortium (www.hodgkinconsortium.com), we obtained individual patient data from 4 AS clinical trials of newly diagnosed cHL pts treated with PET-adaptive escBEACOPP2 (AHL2011) or ABVD2 (SWOG0816, RATHL, HD0607) regimens. Pts were restricted to age 18 to 65 years (y), stage IIB-IV, and PET-adapted treatment arms. Positive iPET was based on Deauville score &gt;3. Treatment effects of escBEACOPP2 vs ABVD2 (reference) on 5y progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were first evaluated using Cox models. Importantly, baseline disease risk was adjusted for using the 5y PFS or OS A-HIPI score (including stage, sex, age, bulk, lymphocyte count, albumin, white blood cell count), where higher scores indicate higher predicted risk (scale 1-100). The A-HIPI was modeled per 1 standard deviation (SD) increase. Our multistate model (MSM) comprised 4 health states: diagnosis, sustained remission at 1yr, treatment failure, and death from any cause. Pts all started in the diagnosis state and transitioned to other states without return to prior states. We assessed the impact of treatment on transitions (except binary sustained remission at 1y) that involved ≥5 pts per treatment group, adjusting for A-HIPI for all transitions. All effects are reported as adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: 2,381 AS cHL pts were included (n=372 for escBEACOPP2, n=2009 for ABVD2). For escBEACOPP2 and ABVD2 groups (median follow-up 60 and 56 months), respectively, the mean baseline A-HIPI scores (i.e., predicted 5y PFS event rate) were 25.1 (SD=6.3) and 22.9 (SD=6.5), the rates of positive iPET were 11.3% and 17.0%, 5y PFS was 87.0% and 79.5%, and 5y OS was 96.3% and 94.6%. In Cox models, escBEACOPP2 was associated with significantly improved PFS compared to ABVD2 (aHR=0.54, 95% CI=0.39-0.73); the aHR for OS was 0.67 (95% CI=0.37-1.19). Notably, higher risk A-HIPI score was associated with significantly worse PFS (aHR=1.42, 95% CI=1.31-1.54) and OS (aHR=1.60, 95% CI=1.47-1.76), independent of treatment. In the MSM, the effect of escBEACOPP2 compared to ABVD2 regimens was modeled in 3 transitions with adjustment for A-HIPI score: those treated with escBEACOPP2 had lower likelihood of treatment failure with (aHR=0.38, 95% CI=0.22-0.66) or without (aHR=0.61, 95% CI=0.40-0.92) sustained remission at 1y; the aHR for treatment failure to death was 0.55 (95% CI=0.25-1.22). Higher risk baseline A-HIPI score was associated with higher likelihood of treatment failure and death without sustained remission at 1y (aHR=1.43, 95% CI=1.28-1.61 and aHR=2.50, 95% CI=1.80-3.49, respectively). Furthermore, higher risk baseline A-HIPI score was associated with higher likelihood of treatment failure after achieving sustained remission at 1y (aHR=1.29, 95% CI=1.12-1.48) as well as death after treatment failure (aHR=1.54, 95% CI=1.27-1.86). Conclusions: Comparing newly diagnosed adult AS cHL PET-adaptive regimens with adjustment for baseline A-HIPI score, we found pts treated with escBEACOPP2 on AHL2011 had improved PFS versus pooled pt data from 3 ABVD2 trials. Using MSM, we further demonstrated that escBEACOPP2 was associated with a lower likelihood of treatment failure with or without achieving sustained remission at 1yr. In addition, baseline A-HIPI score was associated with PFS and OS, which was independent of treatment. Finally, higher baseline A-HIPI scores maintained prognostic impact throughout the disease course, including increased risk of treatment failure for pts in remission at 1yr and death after treatment failure.

Abstract Introduction: Outcomes for FL have markedly improved, and the 10-year (yr) overall survival (OS) for patients (pts) diagnosed in the rituximab era is about 80%. Historically, FL is the leading cause of death in the first decade after diagnosis (dx); however, modern outcomes beyond 10 yrs after dx remain unknown. Here we report long-term outcomes of FL from a large prospective cohort of pts with FL from the rituximab era. Methods: Pts with biopsy-proven FL 1-3A at dx were prospectively enrolled within 9 months of dx from 2002-2015 in the MER. Outcomes of interest were OS, event-free survival (EFS), histologic transformation (HT), and cause of death. HT was defined as subsequent biopsy-proven FL 3B, diffuse large B cell lymphoma, or high-grade B cell lymphoma. Analyses were performed using Cox models and KM curves; cause of death was evaluated using a competing risk approach. A subset analysis was performed in younger (18-59 yrs) vs older (60+ yrs) pts. A landmark analysis was conducted in pts alive at 10 yrs. Results: 1,155 pts with FL 1-3A were enrolled in the MER from 2002-2015. Median age at dx was 60 yrs (IQR 51-69). Clinical characteristics were: 67% stage III/IV, 12% grade 3A, 4% ECOG PS 2-4, and 19% elevated LDH. Initial management was 35% observation (obs), 12% R-monotherapy (R-mono), 39% immunochemotherapy (IC; 43% R-CHOP, 28% R-CVP, 27% BR), and 14% other. FLIPI scores were 40% low, 33% intermediate (int), and 27% high; FLIPI24 risk categories were 49% low, 25% int, and 26% high. At a median follow-up of 14 yrs (IQR 11-18 yrs), 751 events, 148 HTs, and 402 deaths were observed. EFS estimates (95% CI) were: 10-yr: 40% (37-43), 15-yr: 31% (28-35), and 18-yr: 27% (24-31). 15 yr & 18 yr EFS by initial txs were 22% (18-27) & 18% (14-25) for obs, 30% (23-40) & 18% (11-30) for R-mono, and 40% (35-46) & 38% (33-45) for IC. The incidence (95% CI) of HT was 12% (10-14) at 10 yrs, 13% (11-16) at 15 yrs, and 14% (12-17) at 18 yrs. OS (95% CI) for the entire cohort was 77% (75-80%) at 10 yrs, 63% (60-66) at 15 yrs, and 55% (51-59) at 18 yrs. The incidence of non-lymphoma-related death (non-LRD) surpassed lymphoma-related death (LRD) after 12 yrs in pts with known cause of death. Estimates (95% CI) for LRD were 11% (10-13) at 10 yrs, 14% (12-17) at 15 yrs, and 16% (14-19) at 18 yrs, while estimates for non-LRD were at 8% (7-10) at 10 yrs, 17% (15-20) at 15 yrs, and 22% (19-26) at 18 yrs. Among pts diagnosed before age 60, LRD remained the predominant cause of mortality into the second decade following dx, with incidences (95% CI) of LRD vs. non-LRD of 7% (5-9) vs 3% (2-4) at 10 yrs, 10% (8-13) vs 5% (3-8) at 15 yrs, and 13% (9-17) vs 6% (4-10) at 18 yrs, respectively. In patients age &gt;60 non-LRD was the predominant cause of mortality in the second decade. Incidence of LRD vs. non-LRD in those aged ≥60 at dx were 15% (13-19) vs 13% (10-16) at 10 yrs, 18% (15-22) vs 28% (24-32) at 15 yrs, and 20% (16-24) vs 35% (31-41) at 18 yrs, respectively. In the landmark analysis of pts alive at 10 yrs from dx (n=720), median age was 69 yrs (IQR 60-77). 63 pts (9%) had HT prior to landmark. The median number of prior treatments was 1 (IQR 1-2, range 1-8). Risk of death (95% CI) was 19% (15-22) in the next 5 yrs (i.e. 15 yrs from dx) and 29% (24-33) in the next 8 yrs (18 yrs from dx). The risk of LRD vs non-LRD was 4% (3-6) vs 12% (9-15) at 5 yrs and 7% (3-9) vs 18% (10-23) at 8 yrs.Conclusions: Long-term outcomes for pts with FL remain excellent into the second decade from dx. HT risk decreases significantly after 10 yrs, though late HTs still occur. At 15 yrs from dx, 40% of pts remained alive and event-free after 1L IC. Nearly a quarter of pts observed at dx remained treatment-free. The most common cause of death after 10 yrs from dx was from non-lymphoma causes, notably in older pts aging into their 70s and 80s. While younger pts have a lower overall risk of LRD compared to older pts, FL represents the leading cause of death in this population during the second decade following dx. These results provide critical insights into the natural history of FL diagnosed in the modern era.

Abstract Despite a characteristic indolent course, a substantial subset of follicular lymphoma (FL) patients has an early relapse with a poor outcome. Thus far, efforts to identify factors that predict survival have been unsuccessful. However, we and others have demonstrated the prognostic relevance of CD4+ T cells in the tumor microenvironment (TME) of FL and developed a bio-clinical risk model (called BioFLIPI) that offers improved risk stratification (Mondello et al, BCJ 2021). However, the mechanisms defining different BioFLIPI scores remain to be fully understood. To identify the programs associated with the BioFLIPI scores, we first interrogated the RNA-seq of purified B cells from 67 newly diagnosed FL1-3A (BioFLIPI 1 n=21; BioFLIPI 2-3 n=36; BioFLIPI 4 n=10). We found 1,156 upregulated genes and downregulation of 930 genes in BioFLIPI 4 vs 1, including well-known immune molecules such as CD70, IL10RA, CD69, and CCR6 (FDR&lt;0.05). Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) using the MSigDB confirmed a negative enrichment in multiple immune response and interferon gamma signatures and revealed striking positive enrichment for cell proliferation and antigen presentation pathways in BioFLIPI 4 compared to BioFLIPI 1 tumors. The same pathways were dysregulated in BioFLIPI 2-3 but a lower magnitude. To investigate the somatic mutations associated with different BioFLIPI scores, we performed WES of the same 67 FLs and further expanded this cohort for a total of 90 patients (BioFLIPI 1 n=26; BioFLIPI 2-3 n=51; BioFLIPI 4 n=13). We found enrichment for mutations in several regulators of the germinal center in BioFLIPI 4 and 2-3, such as MEF2B (p=0.029), FOXO1 (p=0.038) and IRF8 (p=0.035), suggesting the cooperation of multiple oncogenic events promoting lymphomagenesis. In contrast, BioFLIPI 1 tumors harbored a higher rate of mutations in TNFRSF14 gene, known to enhance anti-lymphoma immune response. To investigate whether BioFLIPI modulates immune signatures of the microenvironment, we performed TME deconvolution by applying CIBERSORTx to bulk RNA-seq of these 67 FLs. We found that FLs with BioFLIPI 4 and 2-3 were enriched for CD4+ Tcm exh (p=0.02), Tem exh (p=0.04), Tfhexh (p=0.07) and NK cells (p=0.01) compared to BioFLIPI 1. In line with this data, CyTOF performed on a subset of these patients (BioFLIPI 1 n=12; BioFLIPI 2-3 n=25; BioFLIPI 4 n=6) confirmed progressive increase of CD4+ Tcm exh (p=0.006), Tem exh (p=0.009) and Tfh exh (p=0.025) cells from BioFLIPI 1 to BioFLIPI 4. Single cell RNA/BCR-seq of 21 FLs (BioFLIPI 1 n=6; BioFLIPI 2-3 n=12; BioFLIPI 4 n=3) corroborated a higher abundance of Tem exh, cytotoxic (CTL) Tem exh, Tfhexh and NK cells in BioFLIPI 4 and 2-3. Conversely, CD8+ naïve T cells were prevalent in BioFLIPI 1 tumors. Differential gene expression in T cell clusters from BioFLIPI 4 vs BioFLIPI 1 FL revealed a marked upregulation of multiple immune genes involved in antigen presentation (e.g., HLA-DRB, HLA-DQA, HLA-DPA/B) and immune response (e.g., ETS1, TNFSF8, IL7R). GSEA showed a positive enrichment for antigen presentation signatures and negative enrichment for TNFα signaling and Oxphos metabolism. Similar findings were observed in BioFLIPI 2-3 FLs. Using CellChat analysis, we found a stronger interaction between malignant B cells and Tem exh and CTL Tem exh cells in BioFLIPI 4 and 2-3 vs BioFLIPI 1 tumors. This was linked to an increased strenght of MHCI-CD8 interaction and concordant decrease of MHCII-CD4. Notably, the suppressive BTLA-TNFRSF14 signaling axis was present in BioFLIPI 4 and 2-3 but not in BioFLIPI 1 FLs. This was accompanied by a decreased signaling through TNF/LTA-TNFRSF1B, CD80/CD86-CD28/CTLA4. Linking the BioFLIPI-specific immunogenicity to lymphomagenesis, we found that FL patients with BioFLIPI 4 had two-three folds higher risk of transformation to an aggressive lymphoma (12% vs 7%) or death (21% vs 3%) than those with BioFLIPI 1, suggesting that this immune dysfunction favors the expansion of a dominant tumor clone and promotes a more aggressive form of FL. Collectively, our findings demonstrate that BioFLIPI scores in FL reflect distinct patterns of tumor immunogenicity that shape the TME. Notably, high BioFLIPI scores are paradoxically associated with enhanced antigen presentation alongside a suppressed immune response. This suggests a sustained antigen-specific T cell response that may drive immune exhaustion, promote tumor progression, and ultimately lead to histologic transformation

Abstract Background: Prognostication for patients with non-transformed relapsed/refractory (R/R) follicular lymphoma (FL) is not well defined. Progression of disease within 24 months (POD24) and number of lines of prior therapy are commonly used to benchmark outcomes and for trial eligibility in this space. However, a comprehensive model for risk prediction in R/R FL is lacking. Here we utilize patients from the LEO Consortium for Real World Evidence (CReWE) and Iowa/Mayo Clinic Lymphoma SPORE MER to develop a clinical prediction model for R/R FL. Methods: Patients with grade 1-3A FL were prospectively enrolled at diagnosis in the MER and/or initiated second line or later therapy (2L+) for non-transformed FL at one of the 8 LEO Centers from a previous LEO CReWE study (Casulo et al, Lancet Haem 2022). All available lines of therapy were abstracted; lines of therapy after histologic transformation were not used in the analyses. A management plan of observation was considered as a type of therapy in the 1L setting but not in the 2L+ setting. Clinical variables and outcomes were abstracted at each line of therapy. Variables considered for modeling included demographics, clinical labs, treatment history, and pertinent clinical variables (including FLIPI and FLIPI24 components). Multiple imputation was used to address missing data in modeling; beta-2 microglobulin (B2M) was unable to be imputed due to the amount of missing data. Index therapy was defined as the date of initiation of a line of therapy (2L, 3L or 4L) for non-transformed FL. The primary endpoint for model development was the time from index therapy until the histologic transformation or lymphoma-related death (HT/LD). Cox proportional hazards models were used for model development. Modeling was first performed separately for each line of therapy and then evaluated across lines. Bootstrapping on imputed datasets was used to assess optimism in model performance. Results: N=1001 patients initiated 2L+ therapy and were utilized for modeling. Of these patients, N=654 initiated 3L and N=344 initiated 4L therapy. Median age at index therapy was (60, 61, and 62) for lines 2-4, respectively. Median follow-up by line of therapy was 8.2, 6.1, and 6,1 years and number of HT/LD events for modeling was 272, 154, and 88, respectively. Observed outcomes decreased modestly as the line therapy increased: median event-free (1.6, 1.5, and 1.2 years) and overall survival (17.6 years, 14.5 years, and 12.3 years), for lines 2-4, respectively. 5-year estimates of HT/LD by line of therapy were 21.6% (95% CI: 18.9-24.3), 23.7% (95% CI: 19.9-27.4) and 29.3% (95% CI: 23.3-34.7), respectively. A clinical prediction model was independently developed for each line of therapy; the final model for each line consisted of the same variables: increasing age, male sex, higher LDH, lower hemoglobin, higher white blood cell count, prior immunochemotherapy exposure, and shorter time since initial diagnosis. The parameter estimates for these variables were broadly similar across the different lines of therapy. The model output is an individual patient's risk of HT/LD. Patients with high-risk FLP-R, as defined using the upper quartile of FLP-R risk scores for each line, had observed 5 year HT/LD rates of 43%, 44% and 51% in lines 2-4, respectively. In contrast, patients with the lower quartile of FLP-R risk scores had observed 5 year HT/LD rates of 10%, 6% and 8% in lines 2-4, respectively. The optimism-corrected c-statistic for the FLP-R model across all lines of therapy was 0.685. This added significant information beyond FLIPI diagnosis (c=0.533) FLIPI at index line (c=0.563), the line of therapy (c=0.525), POD24 status (c=0.578), or all 4 variables combined (c=0.614). Conclusions: The FLP-R model identifies a group of patients with non-transformed FL in the R/R setting who are at very high risk of transformation and/or lymphoma-related death across lines of therapy. FLP-R features 4 of the 5 components of the 1L FLIPI24 prediction model (B2M was unavailable for modeling) with the addition of sex, treatment history and time since initial diagnosis. The number of prior therapies is not sufficient to identify high-risk populations for clinical trial enrichment in the R/R FL setting and model discrimination for FLP-R was greatly improved over FLIPI and/or POD24 across lines of therapy. A Shiny app will be provided for model implementation; external validation is planned.

Abstract Background: Rural/nonmetropolitan (nonmetro) counties face known barriers to comprehensive cancer care compared with metropolitan (metro) counties, which may impact the outcomes for lymphoma patients. We evaluated the impact metro vs nonmetro status on outcomes after a diagnosis of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in the context of clinical, demographic, and lifestyle factors. Methods: Of 7724 participants enrolled in the prospective LEO cohort study from 2015-2020, 7610 (98.5%) had their county of residence at diagnosis assigned a RUCC (2013) code. We compared outcomes of participants from metro (defined as RUCC 1-3, which are central counties with ≥1 urban areas of ≥50,000) vs nonmetro counties (RUCC 4-9, which are counties with smaller urban areas as well as completely rural). We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) from univariable and multivariable Cox models for associations of metro status with overall survival (OS). Cause of death (lymphoma [including treatment related], non-lymphoma, unknown) was assessed using a competing risk approach. Results: Compared with metro counties (N=6096), LEO participants from nonmetro counties (N=1514) were older (median age 64 vs 62 years; p&lt;0.001), more likely to be non-Hispanic white (94% vs 75%; p&lt;0.001) and married (84% vs 75%; p&lt;0.001), and less likely to have completed graduate or professional school education (16% vs 27%; p&lt;0.001). There were no notable differences (&gt;5%) by metro status for sex, employment status, NHL subtype, stage, performance status, abnormal lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), international prognostic index (IPI), number of comorbidities, time from diagnosis to treatment interval (DTI) or participation in a clinical trial. Compared with LEO participants from metro counties, those from nonmetro counties had inferior OS at 5 years (74.5% vs 78.4%; HR=1.23, CI 1.10-1.37; p&lt;0.001). The OS association only slightly attenuated after adjustment for age, sex, race/ethnicity and NHL subtype (HR=1.20, CI 1.07-1.34; p=0.002), and held in models that adjusted for clinical prognostic factors (stage, NHL subtype, IPI, DTI), socioeconomic status (SES; education, marital status), health status (comorbidity, frailty), or lifestyle factors (smoking, body mass index). Using a competing risk model, the cumulative incidence of death at 5 years due to lymphoma (16.9% vs 14.1%; p=0.002) and non-lymphoma (5.9% vs 3.9%; p=0.002) was higher for participants from nonmetro vs metro counties, respectively. For participants &lt;65 years, nonmetro vs metro status had inferior OS (HR=1.40, CI 1.17-1.67; p&lt;0.001). This association remained after adjustment for age, sex, race/ethnicity and NHL subtype (HR=1.36, CI 1.14-1.63; p&lt;0.001), as well as after adjustment for clinical prognostic, SES, health status, or lifestyle factors. The cumulative incidence of death at 5 years due to lymphoma was higher in participants from nonmetro vs metro counties (15.1% vs 11.5%; p=0.002), while there was no difference by metro status for non-lymphoma related deaths (2.1% vs 1.7%; p=0.47). In contrast, for participants age 65+ years, there was no differences by metro status for OS (HR=1.04, CI 0.91-1.20; p=0.56). After adjustment for age, sex, race/ethnicity and NHL subtype, participants from nonmetro areas had inferior OS (HR=1.12, 0.97-1.29) although this was not statistically significant (p=0.13), and was attenuated in models adjusting for clinical, health status, or lifestyle factors. The cumulative incidence of death at 5 years due to lymphoma was no different in participants from nonmetro vs metro counties (18.9% vs 18.0%; p=0.37), while non-lymphoma related deaths were higher in nonmetro counties (9.9% vs 6.8%; p=0.017). Conclusion: LEO participants from nonmetro vs metro counties had inferior OS overall, although this was predominately observed for younger (&lt;65 years) participants. These associations did not appear to be explained by demographic, NHL subtype, clinical, SES, health status, or lifestyle factors. Of particular note, the risk of death due to lymphoma was higher in nonmetro areas for participants &lt;65 years but not those 65+ years, while the risk of death due to other causes was higher in nonmetro areas for participants 65+ years but not those &lt;65 years. These findings require further study, particularly related to barriers to care, and suggest the potential need for age-specific strategies to optimize outcomes for NHL patients from nonmetro/rural areas.