Reeder, Craig B.

Abstract Introduction: Approximately 75% of myelofibrosis (MF) patients develop anemia during evolution of the disease process predicting decreased survival. Previous studies exploring the effect of danazol in the treatment of anemia in MF demonstrate responses in anemia of 30-55%. Ruxolitinib has demonstrated improvement in MF related splenomegaly, symptom burden, and even survival yet improvements in cytopenias are uncommon. We designed a phase II multicenter pilot study to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of combination therapy with ruxolitinib and danazol in MF patients with anemia. Methods: This is a pre-planned interim analysis of a Simon optimum two-stage phase II trial designed to include a minimum of 10 and a maximum of 27 patients. Participants received ruxolitinib 10mg (plat >75 x10x9) BID or 5mg (plat <75 x10 x9) BID with danazol 200mg orally TID. Dose escalation was allowed after completion of 28 days for lack of response or for disease progression. Patients without progression were continued for 6 cycles at 56 days each. Treatment modifications were based on adverse events including thrombocytopenia, leukopenia, and elevation in creatinine and transaminases. Treatment responses were evaluated by the IWG-MRT response criteria (Blood 2013). Patient reported outcome questionnaires (MPN-SAF and EORTC QLQ-C30) were administered at baseline, prior to treatment cycles, and at study discontinuation. Results: Patients: Ten of the 12 evaluable patients enrolled (median age 70.5, range 57-78, M:F ratio 4:1) are included in this analysis. Eight patients had primary MF (PMF), 1 had post essential thrombocytosis (ET) MF, and 1 had post polycythemia vera (PV) MF. Jak2 V617F mutation was positive in 30%. At the time of enrollment 40% had received an erythrocyte transfusion in the last month and all were DIPSS Int-2 or higher. Median baseline hemoglobin was 9.0 g/dL (range 8.3 - 12.4). Median baseline platelet level was 172 x10 (9)/L (range 56 - 346). Most (90%) had received prior therapy and many were refractory to multiple lines of therapy prior to enrollment. Three (30%) patients had previously participated in a JAK inhibitor clinical trial. Tolerability: Among 6 patients who have completed treatment, median duration of treatment was 39 days (range 24-287) with treatment discontinuation due to progression of disease in 2 patients, allogeneic stem cell transplant in 1, alternative treatment in 1, unrelated adverse event (hyponatremia) in 1, and unrelated death (leukemic transformation with intracranial hemorrhage) in 1. Hematologic Grade 3 or > adverse events included anemia (60%), neutropenia (20%), and leukopenia (10%). Non-hematologic Grade 3 or > adverse events included electrolyte abnormalities (20%), edema (10%), infection (10%), and intracranial hemorrhage (10%). Efficacy: Treatment response per IWG-MRT response criteria included stable disease (SD) in 8/10 (80%), clinical improvement in 1/10 (10%), and progressive disease (PD) in 1 (10%). The median change in hemoglobin and platelet count from baseline was -0.05 g/dL (range -0.5 - 1.8) and 28.5 x10(9)/L (range -143 – 118) respectively, however 4/10 (40%) and 7/10 (70%) had improvement at some point during treatment in level of anemia and/or thrombocytopenia. The median follow-up time was 2 months (range 0.9-9.4). Among 6 patients with a baseline and at least one post-baseline MPN-SAF TSS, 2/6 (30%) of patients had at least a 10-point (clinically meaningful) improvement, with 1 of the 2 achieving the stricter 50% improvement from baseline. Responses might have been confounded due to impact of prior therapies. Conclusions: On interim analysis, ruxolitinib and danazol combination therapy demonstrates modest additional clinical benefit, however in a group of exceedingly high risk MF patients with significant anemia and prior single agent JAK inhibitor failures. Preliminary data suggests improvement in anemia and/or thrombocytopenia in some treated patients however only one clinical improvement per IWG-MRT criteria was observed. Combination therapy was well tolerated with no major incremental toxicity attributable to the addition of danazol. Maturation of data is needed to fully evaluate efficacy of ruxolitinib and danazol combination therapy prior to continuation of accrual. Disclosures Mascarenhas: Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Research Funding. Reeder:Millennium, Celgene, Novartis: Research Funding. Tibes:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Mesa:Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Gilead: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Ns Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; Cti: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction New treatment strategies are improving outcomes for patients with Hodgkin (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) but achieving durable responses and cure in the relapsed patient remain a challenge. Both the mTORC1 inhibitor everolimus (RAD001) and the IMiD, lenalidomide (LEN) have efficacy as single agents in patients with relapsed and refractory (R/R) HL and NHL. Individually, LEN and RAD present a low toxicity profile and in combination may offer synergistic therapeutic efficacy by unique mechanisms of action. A phase I/II clinical trial of RAD and LEN was designed to explore the tolerability, toxicity and to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of this combination for the Phase II study. The results of phase I/II data are reported here. Methods MC0981 was activated on January 10, 2011. In phase I, the study enrolled a total of 25 patients and RAD 5 mg daily + LEN 10 mg/d X 21d in a 28-day cycle was defined as the MTD. The phase II opened on May 14, 2013, and closed on Feb 19, 2014, during which 33 patients were enrolled and were treated until progression of disease. Eligibility required age ≥18, biopsy proven relapsed or refractory NHL or HL, ECOG PS 0- 2, measurable disease, Hb >9g/dl, ANC ≥1200/uL, platelet ≥ 50,000/uL, creatinine ≤1.5xULN and willingness to sign informed consent. Women of child bearing potential had pregnancy testing and all patients followed recommendations for contraception. Follow up data was analyzed as of July 2014. Results A total of 58 patients were enrolled to this study and fifty five are evaluable for analysis (2 never started therapy, 1 deemed ineligible). The median age was 62 years (21-82) and 38 (69.1%) were male. Sixty-five percent had stage IV disease and 42% had 4 or more prior treatments including stem cell transplantation in 49%. Histologies included HL (n=10) and NHL (n=45 with 23 DLBCL, 2 FL-III, 5 LPL, 3 MCL, 2 MF, and 3 other). At least 1 Gr≥3 adverse event was seen in 74.5% of patients. The most common Gr≥3 toxicities were hematologic - neutropenia (30.9%), and thrombocytopenia (21.8%), and anemia (10.9%). Nine of 55 patients (16%) had Gr≥3 infection; 2 with skin infection, 1 with cholecystitis, 1 with lung infection, 1 with pharyngitis 1 with otitis externa, 1 with otitis media, and 1 with pleural infection and 1 with upper respiratory tract infection. Seven patients discontinued treatment due to adverse events. At this time, 44% (25/55) remain progression-free. A documented tumor response, as overall response rate (ORR) was seen in 20% (11/55) with 1CR, 8PR, and 2MR; 17 remain on therapy; and 22 deaths have occurred with a median survival of 15.0 months (95% CI 7.5-NR). Median follow up time was 5.5 (range, 0.7- 41.0) months. The median duration of response (DOR) in those responding is 19.4 months. Conclusions In a heavily pretreated population with baseline compromised bone marrow function, the combination of everolimus and lenalidomide is feasible with a modest ORR and a surprisingly long DOR. Future studies in more defined groups of NHL or HL are necessary to better predict which patients will be long-term responders. This trial is sponsored by Novartis and Celgene Disclosures Off Label Use: mTORC1 inhibitor (Everolimus) and the Immunomodulatory (IMiD) drug Lenalidomide for patients with Heavily Pretreated Relapsed Lymphoma . Mikhael:Onyx: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Nowakowski:Celgene, Morphosis: Consultancy. Witzig:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Reeder:Millennium, Celgene, Novartis: Research Funding.

Background: The DIAL study is testing the efficacy of dual immunomodulation in patients with advanced aggressive B cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (B-NHL). Sponsored by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP), the trial combines the use of a programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitor (nivolumab) with an agonist of the CD27 receptor (varlilumab) in a randomized phase 2 design. CD27, a co-stimulatory receptor, regulates T cell activation in the context of T cell receptor (TCR) engagement through interaction with CD70. T cell exhaustion plays a major role in immune evasion in B-NHL. Varlilumab is an agonistic IgG1 monoclonal antibody that recognizes CD27 leading to prevention or reversal of exhaustion in pre-clinical models. Varlilumab also demonstrates direct anti-tumoral activity in xenograft models of human lymphoma cell lines via antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity. Phase 1 data supports the safety and tolerability of single-agent varlilumab in advanced hematologic malignancies (NCT01460134). We hypothesize that CD27 activation synergizes with PD-1 inhibition resulting in a superior anti-lymphoma effect compared to PD-1 blockade alone. The study will also evaluate the effect of these agents on tumor and immune cells using immunohistochemistry (IHC), mass cytometry (CyTOF), multiplex ELISA, imaging mass cytometry (IMC), and whole exome sequencing. Methods: The trial is enrolling patients with advanced aggressive B-NHL. Standard inclusion criteria and prior treatment with at least 2 lines of standard therapy are required. Prior autologous stem cell transplant and/or chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy is allowed. Patients with active CNS disease are excluded. Eligible patients are randomized to treatment with single-agent nivolumab (group 1) or dual immunotherapy with nivolumab and varlilumab. Group 1 is allowed to cross-over at the time of progression. Nivolumab will be administered intravenously (IV) every 2 weeks (240 mg) for 4 months followed by monthly dosing thereafter (480 mg). Varlilumab will be given IV every 4 weeks (3 mg/kg). Response assessment will be done by PET-CT scan every 12 weeks. Primary outcome is overall response rate (ORR) according to the LYRIC criteria. The trial will enroll 48 patients per arm, allowing 80% power to detect at least 20% increase in ORR in the experimental arm (group 2) assuming a 25% ORR in the control arm (group 1). The trial is registered (NCT03038672) and open to participation to members of the Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network (ETCTN) and Early Drug Development Opportunity Program (EDDOP). Figure Disclosures Tun: BMS: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Mundi-pharma: Research Funding; DTRM Biopharma: Research Funding. Bartlett:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Autolus: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding. Kline:Merck: Honoraria; Merck: Research Funding. Awan:Janssen: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Lazaryan:Kadmon: Consultancy. Ansell:Affimed: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Regeneron: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Trillium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding. Diefenbach:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Denovo: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; MEI: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding.

Background: Combinations of alkylating agents with proteasome inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy in newly diagnosed and relapsed multiple myeloma (MM), with melphalan or cyclophosphamide combinations being some of the commonly used regimens for initial treatment of MM. Ixazomib (Ixa) is an oral proteasome inhibitor that is approved for use in combination with lenalidomide for patients with relapsed MM. We examined if Ixa can be effectively combined with cyclophosphamide (Ctx) in order to develop a less expensive, all oral regimen for patients with relapsed MM. Patients and Methods: Patients with relapsed MM, who were proteasome inhibitor naïve OR have received less than 6 cycles of therapy with bortezomib and had a better than PR with no progression at the time of discontinuation, were enrolled. The primary objective was to determine overall response rate (ORR). Treatment consisted of Ixa 4mg PO days 1, 8, 15; Ctx 300 mg/m2 PO days 1, 8, 15, 22 and dexamethasone (Dex) 40 mg PO weekly in a 28-day cycle. Overall, 37 patients were accrued; data on 33 eligible patients were available for analysis as of July 18, 2019. Results: The median age was 71 (48-89), 61% were male and the median duration from diagnosis was 46 months (mos). Median number of prior lines of therapy was 4 (range 1-5), 76%, 42% and 67% respectively had a prior IMiD, proteasome inhibitor or stem cell transplant, respectively. At data cutoff, 22 (67%) had progressed, 4 (12%) had died and the median follow up of those alive was 21.3 mos. Fourteen patients are still receiving treatment, with median of 8.5 cycles. Most common reason for treatment discontinuation was disease progression (10 pts; 53%). The ORR was 60% including 6% CR and 24% VGPR. The median event free survival was 11.3 mos (95%CI: 9.0 - 26.8). Overall, 401 cycles have been administered across the study, with dose modifications/ hold required for Ixa, Ctx, and Dex in 9 (27%), 14 (42%), and 22 (67%) patients respectively, the most common reason being hematologic toxicity. A grade 3 or higher adverse event at least possibly attributed to the study drugs was seen in 77% of patients, hematologic in 67% and non-hematologic in 30%. (Table 1) The most commonly observed hematologic toxicities included thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, lymphopenia and anemia; for non-hematologic was nausea, diarrhea, peripheral neuropathy toxicity and fatigue. Conclusions: The combination of Ixa, Ctx and Dex (ICd) offers a convenient, all oral regimen for treatment of relapsed disease not refractory to proteasome inhibitors. The regimen has good efficacy in this group f heavily pretreated patients, with an acceptable toxicity profile. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:Ionis: Honoraria; Spectrum: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Prothena: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria. Ailawadhi:Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Bergsagel:Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Ionis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Fonseca:AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, Celgene, Kite, Janssen, Juno, Merck, Pharmacylics, Sanofi, Takeda: Other: Consultant/Advisor; Prognosticatin of MM based on Genetic Categorization by FISH: Patents & Royalties; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Other: Scientific Advisory Board. Dingli:alexion: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Kapoor:Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Cellectar: Consultancy; Janssen: Research Funding. Chanan-Khan:AbbVie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic: Employment; Ascentage: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding. Larsen:Janssen Oncology: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Russell:Imanis: Equity Ownership. Stewart:Roche: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Ionis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Ono: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding.

Introduction Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia (WM) is a rare, incurable, indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma that is preceded by an IgM monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (IgM MGUS). In recent years, better understanding of the pathobiology of WM and IgM MGUS has strengthened the hypothesis that they may represent different stages of the same disease. Studying the relationship between these two conditions is the essential first step to understanding the mechanisms driving the malignant transformation from IgM MGUS to WM. Recently long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) have garnered significant recognition for their roles in the regulation of gene expression and cellular function. lncRNA can regulate gene expression of neighboring protein-coding genes through multiple mechanisms such as by recruiting chromatin modifiers and increasing accessibility of genes to transcription proteins, or by directly binding to enhancers or promoters. Here we present the first analysis of the lncRNA expression profile in patients with WM compared to IgM MGUS. Methods Twenty-one patients with untreated WM (n=14) and IgM MGUS (n=7) seen at Mayo Clinic were included in this analysis. Malignant cells were isolated from bone marrow samples using CD19 and CD38 positive selection. Total RNA was extracted and sequencing was performed using the Illumina HiSeq4000 NGS platform. Differentially expressed lncRNAs in WM compared to IgM MGUS were defined as log2 fold change (FC) > 1.0 (upregulated) or < -1.0 (downregulated) and a false discovery rate (FDR) < 0.05. The nearest gene to each lncRNA was also identified and their gene expression was detected. Using the Ingenuity Pathway Analysis software and taking into account the transcriptional expression and known function of these genes, a correlation between cell function and disease analysis was performed. Results A total of 119 lncRNAs were differently expressed between WM and IgM MGUS (17 transcripts were upregulated in WM, while 102 were downregulated in WM). Sixteen unique genes were identified as the nearest gene to 17 upregulated lncRNAs, while 18 genes were identified as the nearest genes to the top 18 downregulated lncRNAs in WM compared to IgM MGUS. Several of the upregulated lncRNA in WM were in proximity to known oncogenes. The well-known oncogenic lncRNA PVT1 was found to be upregulated in WM compared to IgM MGUS (log2 FC 1.35, FRD 0.04). PVT1 is overexpressed in several malignancies and associated with inhibition of apoptosis and increased cell proliferation. PVT1 is in close proximity to MYC and co-expression of PVT1-MYC has been described in multiple cancers. PVT1 also potentiate MYC amplification by increasing MYC protein stability, therefore promoting malignant cell growth. The lncRNA TCB1D27, also upregulated in WM compared to IgM MGUS, is located in close proximity to the oncogene TNFRSF13B (TACI), which was found to be overexpressed in WM patients (log2 FC 1.61, FDR <0.001). TACI is a receptor for BLyS/BAFF, which modulates the development of normal B-cells and plays a role in various B-cell malignancies. In fact, BLyS/BAFF level is known to be increased in WM and to promote survival and proliferation of WM B cells. The upregulated lncRNA RP11-25K21.1 in WM is located in close proximity to the oncogene FCGR2B (CD32B), which was also upregulated in WM compared to IgM MGUS (log2 FC 1.59, FDR 0.001). Overexpression of CD32B was previously shown to be associated with inferior outcomes in DLBCL and FL patients, presumably secondary to an increased internalization and clearance of rituximab due to increased CD32B expression on malignant cells. Several other upregulated lncRNAs in WM compared to IgM MGUS are also in proximity of other oncogenes such as PCED1B, POLD3, CLLU1, and SMAD7. Finally, we considered the expression of the nearest genes and their reported cell function and association with diseases. Several genes that are known to have a role in the cell proliferation and/or neoplasm development were noted to be upregulated in WM (figure 1). Conclusion We present the first report of lncRNAs expression in WM and IgM MGUS in addition to a concurrent analysis of the gene expression of the nearest protein-coding genes. Several known oncogenes are in proximity of overexpressed lncRNAs in WM compared to IgM MGUS that could indicate potential implications in the pathobiology of these diseases and the mechanism driving the malignant transformation to WM. Disclosures Paludo: Celgene: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Verily Life Sciences: Research Funding; Verily Life Sciences: Research Funding. Dasari:The Binding Site: Patents & Royalties: US Patent Rights on Mass Spectroscopy Licensing agreement with The Binding Site, Research Funding. Kapoor:Celgene: Honoraria; Cellectar: Consultancy; Janssen: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Gertz:Amyloidosis Foundation: Research Funding; i3Health: Other: Development of educational programs and materials; Medscape: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Ionis/Akcea: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Appellis: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Teva: Speakers Bureau; Alnylam: Consultancy; Prothena Biosciences Inc: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Annexon: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Abbvie: Other: personal fees for Data Safety Monitoring board; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Johnson and Johnson: Speakers Bureau; DAVA oncology: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Proclara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Springer Publishing: Patents & Royalties; International Waldenstrom Foundation: Research Funding. Novak:Celgene Coorperation: Research Funding. Ansell:Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Regeneron: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia (WM) is a rare disease accounting for only 1-2% of all hematologic malignancies and with an overall annual, age-adjusted incidence of approximately 3.5 to 5.5 cases per million-person years. With approximately 13,000 active hematologist/oncologists in the US, most of who are in the community oncology setting, it's estimated that a hematologist/oncologist will only diagnose a WM case approximately every 8 years. Therefore, the clinical experience of a general hematologist/oncologist in the management of WM is likely very limited compared to more prevalent malignances. Previous studies in the setting of rare cancers suggest a correlation between higher volume of care and improved outcomes. Therefore, we explored the volume-outcome relationship in WM using the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB). Methods Patient-level data from the NCDB, a nationwide, facility-based, database covering approximately 70% of all newly diagnosed cancer cases in the US, was queried for all new WM cases diagnosed between 2004 and 2014. Only patients requiring treatment were included. Treatment facilities were divided into quartiles based on the average annual volume of newly diagnosed cases of WM seen. Cox regression was used to analyze the association between facility WM volume and survival, adjusted by demographics (sex, age, race), socioeconomic status (income, education, insurance type), geography (area of residence, treatment facility type, travel distance), comorbidity factors (Charlson-Deyo score), and year of diagnosis. Time-to-event analysis was calculated from frontline therapy initiation date using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test. Results A total of 3,732 patients with WM treated in 831 facilities were included. The median age at diagnosis was 70 years and 75% of the patients were treated within 20 miles from their residency zip code. Patient characteristics per treatment facility volume quartile are shown in table 1. The median annual facility volume was 1 new WM patient/year (range 0.1 to 21). The median follow-up from frontline treatment was 5 years. The unadjusted median OS by facility volume was: Q1: 6.5 years (95% CI: 5.7-7.4), Q2: 7 years (95% CI: 6.3-8.2), Q3: 8.2 years (95% CI: 7.1-8.9), and Q4: NR (95% CI: 8.5-NR), p<0.0001 (figure 1). The estimated 5-year OS by facility volume was: Q1: 56%, Q2: 61%, Q3: 64%, Q4: 71%, p<0.0001. Multivariate analysis including all variables showed in Table 1 demonstrated that facility volume was independently associated with all-cause mortality. Compared to patients treated at Q4 facilities, patients treated at lower-quartiles facilities had a higher incremental risk of death (Q3 hazard ratio [HR], 1.07 [95% CI: 0.88 to 1.29] p=0.46; Q2 HR, 1.34 [95% CI: 1.11 to 1.63] p=0.002; Q1 HR, 1.52 [95% CI: 1.23 to 1.88] p=<0.0001). Conclusion Our results suggest that a volume-outcome relationship exits in WM as patients treated initially at higher-volume facilities had a lower risk of mortality. Although differences in the underlying disease biology, referral patterns after initial therapy, or cumulative treating-physician experience could not be assessed, these potential biases would only underestimate the magnitude of the volume-outcome relationship reported. Disclosures Ansell: Celldex: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding. Gertz:Medscape: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Ionis: Honoraria; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy. Reeder:Affimed: Research Funding. Witzig:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Abstract Background AFM13 is a bispecific, tetravalent NK cell-engaging antibody construct binding to CD30 on CD30+ tumor cells and CD16A on NK cells. By engaging CD16A-positive NK cells, AFM13 leads to NK cell-mediated killing of CD30-positive lymphoma cells (Reusch et al., 2014) making it an attractive agent to target classical Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). Pembrolizumab is a PD-1 blocking antibody which has shown high single-agent response rates in patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory HL (RRHL; Armand et al., 2016, Chen et al., 2017). AFM13 has shown clinical activity in RRHL as a single agent in a preceding Phase 1 study (Rothe et al., 2015). Preclinical in vivo data of the combination of AFM13 with PD-1 blockade showed synergistic activity and the potential for induction of cross-talk between innate and adaptive immunity (Zhao et al., 2016). We hypothesize that the combination of the two agents could improve outcomes in pts with RRHL. Methods This Phase 1b study is evaluating the safety and tolerability of the combination of AFM13 with pembrolizumab (Keytruda) as salvage therapy after failure of standard therapies including brentuximab vedotin (BV) in HL (NCT02665650). Pts receive escalating doses of AFM13 in combination with pembrolizumab at a dose of 200 mg flat administered every 3 weeks following a classical 3+3 design, followed by enrollment into an extension cohort at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD)/maximum administered dose (MAD). Response assessment is performed every 12 weeks by PET/CT according to the Lugano Classification (Cheson et al., 2014). The main objectives of the study is to ascertain the MTD/MAD along with the preliminary efficacy of the combination. Results As of June 29, 2018, 30 pts have been enrolled into the study. The median age is 34 years (range, 18-73), with a median of 4 (range 3-7) prior lines of therapy. All pts had relapsed or refractory disease (43% relapsed, 57% refractory) and had failed standard treatments including BV and 43% of pts (13/30) had BV as their latest therapy. Thirty seven percent (11/30) had undergone prior autologous stem cell transplantation. All 30 pts have completed the 6-week dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) observation period. Twelve pts were enrolled into the dose escalation cohorts (Cohorts 1 (n=3), 2 (n=3), and 3 (n=6)) and 18 into the Extension Cohort, with a total of 24 patients treated at the MAD (dose level 3). One DLT was observed in Cohort 3 (missing ≥25% of AFM13 during the DLT period) and another observed in the Extension Cohort (G4 infusion-related reaction; IRR). The most common related adverse events (AEs) were IRRs (80%), rash (30%), pyrexia (23%), nausea (23%), diarrhea (20%), fatigue (17%), headache (17%), increased aspartate aminotransferase (13%), and increased alanine aminotransferase (10%). Treatment related G3/4 AEs included IRRs (13%), elevated AST (3%), gastritis (3%), hypotension (3%), nausea (3%), neutropenia (3%), and vomiting (3%). The majority of IRRs were manageable with standard of care measures and did not lead to treatment discontinuations. Included in the efficacy analysis were the best response from 29 evaluable pts who had at least one post-baseline disease assessment as of the data cutoff on June 29, 2018. The overall response rate (ORR) and complete response (CR) rate for evaluable pts treated at the dose and schedule chosen for expansion (n=23; Cohort 3 and Extension Cohort) were 87% and 35% by the investigator-confirmed assessment, respectively. Independent assessment resulted in an ORR of 87% and CR rate of 39% for these pts. Updated data for all 30 patients will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions The combination of AFM13 and pembrolizumab is a well-tolerated salvage therapy in pts with RRHL. IRRs were the most frequently observed adverse events; however, most of these events were of mild or moderate severity and manageable. Both the ORR and CR rate compare favorably to monotherapy pembrolizumab in a similar RRHL population (Chen et al., 2017). The combination of AFM13 and pembrolizumab could be a potential new therapeutic option for HL patients. Disclosures Bartlett: Immune Design: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; ImaginAB: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Acerta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Chen:Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech Inc.: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Merck & Co., Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Domingo-Domenech:Affimed: Research Funding. Forero-Torres:Affimed: Research Funding. Garcia-Sanz:Affimed: Research Funding. Devata:Affimed: Research Funding. Rodriguez Izquierdo:Affimed: Research Funding. Lossos:Affimed: Research Funding. Reeder:Affimed: Research Funding. Sher:Affimed: Research Funding. Choe-Juliak:Affimed: Employment. Prier:Affimed: Research Funding. Schwarz:Affimed: Employment. Strassz:Affimed: Employment. Alland:Affimed: Employment. Ansell:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction Myelofibrosis (MF), both primary myelofibrosis (PMF) and post essential thrombocytosis/polycythemia vera myelofibrosis (post ET/PV-MF), are chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms that are incurable with standard medical therapy. The only potential curative therapeutic modality remains allogeneic stem cell transplant (ASCT), but the optimum conditioning regimen has yet to be defined and may vary due to pre-ASCT factors such as age, donor source, and comorbidities. In the past, traditional myeloablative (MA) regimens have proven toxic. Reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens have generally become the accepted standard of care for patients with PMF or Post PV/ET MF in need of ASCT, but with the potential for increase in relapse especially for high risk disease. The optimal conditioning regimen has yet to be defined. The regimen of Fludarabine, BCNU, and melphalan (FBM) is considered a reduced toxicity regimen that may afford the benefit of reduction in relapse without increase in toxicity and may “bridge the gap” between MA and RIC especially in older patients. Patients with MF have high inflammatory cytokine levels which may act as mediators of MF symptom burden and may further aggravate mediators of acute GVHD, which is one of the most frequent and severe complications of ASCT. Selection of conditioning regimen and GVHD prophylaxis are keys to MF transplant outcomes. We report here the results of 16 patients who received conditioning with FBM with rATG (FBM-A) with PMF and post PV/ET MF. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of all patients from October 2009 to November 2012 with PMF or post ET/PV-MF who underwent an ASCT with FBM-A. Patient demographic and transplant data were analyzed from a comprehensive database. The use of such data for reporting purpose was approved by the Mayo Clinic Arizona Institutional Review Board. Overall survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier. Results There were 16 patients analyzed who had PMF or post PV/ET MF or overlap syndromes. The median follow-up of surviving patients is 20.4 months (range 8 months – 46 months). The median age was 60 (range 47-68 yrs) with 56% of patients being ≥ 60yrs. There were 8 males and 8 females. The JAK2 V617F mutation was present in 64% of patients. 86% were high risk according to the DIPSS system with 14% being intermediate-2 risk. None of the patients underwent splenectomy prior to transplant. The median HCT-CI score was 1.5 with 6 (38%) of the patients having an HCT-CMI ≥3. Donors were related in 10 patients (8 matched, 2 mismatched at 1 antigen) and unrelated in 6 (matched, n=3, 1-antigen mismatch, n=3). GVHD prophylaxis consisted of tacrolimus, MMF, and ATG 2.5 – 5.0 mg/kg. The cumulative incidence of acute GVHD grades III-IV was 15.3% at 6 months, and the cumulative incidence of NIH-defined moderate-to-severe chronic GVHD was 25% at 2 years. No patient has relapsed, and no patient has developed graft failure. There have been 4 deaths, 3 from GVHD, and 1 from infection. Among the 3 patients who died from GVHD, all were unrelated donor transplants, and 2 were mismatched unrelated transplants. The 2-year Kaplan-Meier estimate of overall survival (OS) is 72% (95% CI, 45 – 91%). The cumulative incidence of TRM was 12.6% (95% CI 3.9%-34%) at 1 year. Conclusion The reduced-toxicity regimen of FBM-A in PMF, Post ET/PV MF and overlap syndromes appear to provide the benefit of an ablative regimen with the tolerance of a RIC. The 2-year overall survival of 72% in our series is encouraging in an older population of predominantly high-risk patients. Treatment failure was related predominately to GVHD, which continues to be a significant obstacle to better long-term outcomes, especially in unrelated and mismatched patients. Reduced toxicity ASCT conditioning regimens in the setting of MF warrant further investigation. Disclosures: Reeder: Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction Recent advances in the understanding of the WM pathobiology led to the expansion of our therapeutic options in this disease. A number of targeted drugs are either available or under investigation and are poised to change the chemo-immunotherapy paradigm in the treatment of WM. Now more than ever, an individualized treatment approach for patients with WM is possible, where patient characteristics and preferences can be matched by different treatment goals and side effect profiles. While deep responses have been associated with longer disease-free survival in other hematologic malignancies, data on patients with WM are sparse. We report the impact of depth of response in disease-free and overall survival (OS) in WM. Methods WM patients consecutively seen at Mayo Clinic between 01/1998 and 12/2016 were reviewed for response to therapy and disease burden. The best response achieved after the treatment of interest (TOI) was classified using the IWWM-7 Response Criteria. The included TOI were: BR, DRC, BDR and high-dose chemotherapy followed by ASCT. All time-to-event analyses were performed from the TOI initiation date using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test. A landmark analysis from the date-of-best response was also performed for OS to prevent immortal-time bias. Univariate and multivariate analyses of progression-free survival (PFS) and time-to-next therapy (TTNT) were performed using the Cox regression method. Results A total of 181 patients had disease response assessed after the TOI. Baseline characteristics at time of diagnosis are summarized in table 1. The median follow up from TOI was 3.8 years (95% CI: 3-4), the majority of patients received TOI as salvage therapy [n=112 (63%); median 2nd line (rage 1-11)]. Best response rates with the corresponding 5-year PFS and TTNT are summarized in table 2. The median OS from TOI was longer in patients who achieved at least a PR [median 7.2 years (95% CI: 5-NR) vs 3.7 years (95% CI: 1.6-NR), p=0.01]. A trend towards a longer OS was also seen with deeper responses (PR or better) achieved with frontline therapy [median 5.8 years (95% CI: 5.8-NR) vs 3.4 years (95% CI: 1.6-NR), p=0.24]. Figure 1 shows the correlation between deeper responses with PFS and TTNT. Among patients achieving a PR or VGPR, those with a normal FLC ratio post TOI demonstrated a longer PFS and TTNT [PFS: median NR (95% CI: 3.4-NR) vs 4.9 years (95% CI: 2.8-8.7), p=0.01; TTNT: median NR (95% CI: 3.5-NR) vs 5.2 years (95% CI: 4.2-9.4), p=0.04], figure 2. In a multivariate analysis including normal FLC ratio, normal IgM level and minimal BM involvement (<5%) post TOI, normal FLC ratio remained an independent prognostic factor for longer PFS and TTNT. Similar trends were seen when considering treatment naïve and relapsed/refractory patients independently (data not shown). Discussion Our results not only suggest an association between depth of response with PFS and TTNT, but also with OS in patients with WM. A normal FLC ratio (not part of the IWWM-7 response criteria) seems to predict a longer disease-free interval in patients achieving a PR or VGPR. Disclosures Gertz: Ionis: Honoraria; Apellis: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; janssen: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Medscape: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Reeder:Affimed: Research Funding. Witzig:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Ansell:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction Immunoglobulin M monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (IgM MGUS) is a relatively common pre-malignant condition that may progress to Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia (WM), an incurable low-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The acquisition of genomic alterations in a multistep process of progression is likely a central mechanism responsible for the progression of IgM MGUS to WM, leading to increased tumor burden and end-organ damage. The exact role of the immune system in this process is still poorly characterized. The modulation of the immune system by malignant cells leading to anti-lymphoma immunity or immune evasion is a well-stablished principle associated with lymphoma survival and progression, respectively. The understanding of the pathobiology of IgM MGUS and WM has grown significantly over the last few years; however, most of the past research has focused on genetics and flow cytometric analysis of malignant cells. The introduction of CyTOF, a novel platform coupling mass spectometry with single-cell flow cytometry using antibody-metal isotope pairs, has allowed a broader single-cell analysis and the study of functional profiles. We here report the use of CyTOF technology to comprehensively profile the immune system of patients with IgM MGUS and WM. Methods Viably-cryopreserved (DMSO 10%) single-cell suspensions containing peripheral blood mononuclear cells from 15 patients (WM n=9 and IgM MGUS n=6) were used in this study. Recovered cells (1-3 x 106 per sample) were stained with a 30-parameter surface protein CyTOF panel designed to characterize multiple cell types and profile the immune system. Nucleated cellular events were identified using a DNA intercalator conjugated to natural abundance iridium (191Ir and 193Ir). Cisplatin (195Pt) was used for dead-live cell discrimination and calibration beads containing natural abundance cerium (140/142Ce), europium (151/153Eu), holmium (165Ho), and lutetium (175/176Lu) were used for normalization of the instrument signal. CyTOF analysis of normalized files was carried out using the Astrolabe Diagnostics platform. Cell clusters were assigned using the FlowSOM package and differential abundance analysis was performed using the edgeR package. Analysis is adjusted for multiple comparisons. Results The median live single-cell count for the entire cohort was 573,300 (range 50,681 to 869,727), representing a median of 81% (range 39% to 87%) of the total event counts [median 820,800 (range 130,452 to 1,000,000]. The cell count and the proportion of event count was similar in patients with WM or IgM MGUS. T cells represented 45.8% of the total events; granulocytes represented 31.3%; NK cells represented 8.6%; monocytes represented 8.1%; B cells represented 2.4% of the total events for the entire cohort. Figure 1 shows a heat map of different immune cell sub-types proportion per patient sample. A difference was noted in the proportion of monocytes (CD14+, CD16+) and B-cells when comparing patients with IgM MGUS and WM (figure 2). Patients with WM had a higher proportion of monocytes compared to IgM MGUS patients (p=0.05). A higher proportion of B-cells was noted in patients with IgM MGUS when compared to WM (4.2% vs 0.6%, p=0.01). When B-cells were sub-classified as naïve, transitional, non-switched memory, switched memory, and plasmablasts, the proportion of non-switched memory B-cells was higher in IgM MGUS compared to WM (p=0.05). While the results of this pilot study suggest important differences between IgM MGUS and WM as regards the immune repertoire, confirmatory studies are in progress in a larger cohort of patients. Conclusion To our knowledge, this is the first study of mass cytometry in patients with WM and IgM MGUS patients. A higher proportion of monocytes and lower proportion of memory B-cells was noted in patients with WM compared to IgM MGUS. CyTOF study of the immune profile in these patients is feasible and can potentially uncover relationships between cell types not typically associated with the disease progression continuum (IgM MGUS to WM). While definitive conclusion cannot be made using this dataset due to the small sample size, CyTOF is a powerful tool in the study of the immune profile of WM patients. Disclosures Gertz: Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; janssen: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy. Kapoor:Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Reeder:Affimed: Research Funding. Ansell:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding.