Kharfan‐Dabaja, Mohamed A.

Abstract Blastic plasmacytoid dendritic cell neoplasm (BPDCN) is a rare hematologic malignancy with historically poor outcomes and no worldwide consensus treatment approach. Unique among most hematologic malignancies for its frequent cutaneous involvement, BPDCN can also invade other extramedullary compartments, including the central nervous system. Generally affecting older adults, many patients are unfit to receive intensive chemotherapy, and although hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is preferred for younger, fit individuals, not all are eligible. One recent therapeutic breakthrough is that all BPDCNs express CD123 (IL3Rα) and that this accessible surface marker can be pharmacologically targeted. The first-in-class agent for BPDCN, tagraxofusp, which targets CD123, was approved in December 2018 in the United States for patients with BPDCN aged ≥2 years. Despite favorable response rates in the frontline setting, many patients still relapse in the setting of monotherapy, and outcomes in patients with relapsed/refractory BPDCN remain dismal. Therefore, novel approaches targeting both CD123 and other targets are actively being investigated. To begin to formally address the state of the field, we formed a new collaborative initiative, the North American BPDCN Consortium (NABC). This group of experts, which includes a multidisciplinary panel of hematologists/oncologists, hematopoietic stem cell transplant physicians, pathologists, dermatologists, and pediatric oncologists, was tasked with defining the current standard of care in the field and identifying the most important research questions and future directions in BPDCN. The position findings of the NABC’s inaugural meetings are presented herein.

Outcomes of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) for adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) have improved over time. Studies have shown that total body irradiation (TBI) is the preferable type of myeloablative conditioning (MAC). However, outcomes based on central nervous system (CNS) involvement, namely CNS-positive versus CNS-negative, have not been compared. Here, we evaluated outcomes of 547 patients (CNS-positive = 96, CNS-negative = 451) who were allografted in the first complete remission (CR1) between 2009 and 2019. Primary endpoint was leukemia-free survival (LFS). Median follow-up was not different between the CNS-positive and CNS-negative groups (79 versus 67.2 months, P = 0.58). The CNS-positive group were younger (median age 31.3 versus 39.7 years, P = 0.004) and were allografted more recently (median year 2012 versus 2010, P = 0.003). In both groups, MAC was the preferred approach (82.3% versus 85.6%, P = 0.41). On multivariate analysis, the CNS-positive group had higher incidence of relapse (RI) (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.58 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.06-2.35], P = 0.025), but no adverse effect on LFS (HR = 1.38 [95% CI = 0.99-1.92], P = 0.057) or overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.28 [95% CI = 0.89-1.85], P = 0.18). A subgroup multivariate analysis limited to CNS-positive patients showed that a TBI-based MAC regimen resulted in better LFS (HR = 0.43 [95% CI = 0.22-0.83], P = 0.01) and OS (HR = 0.44 [95% CI = 0.21-0.92], P = 0.03) and lower RI (HR = 0.35 [95% CI = 0.15-0.79], P = 0.01). Another subgroup analysis in CNS-negative patients showed that MAC-TBI preparative regimens also showed a lower RI without a benefit in LFS or OS. While a MAC-TBI allo-HCT regimen may not be suitable to all, particularly for older patients with comorbidities, this approach should be considered for patients who are deemed fit and able to tolerate.

Summary The prognosis of relapsed/refractory (R/R) anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) is poor. Large studies evaluating outcomes of allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplantation (allo‐HCT) in systemic R/R ALCL are not available. Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) database, we evaluated outcomes of 182 adults (aged ≥18 years) with R/R ALCL undergoing allo‐HCT between 2008 and 2019. Non‐relapse mortality (NRM), disease relapse/progression (REL), progression‐free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were modelled using Cox proportional hazards models. The median (range) follow‐up of survivors was 62 (3–148) months. The 1‐year NRM was 18%. The 5‐year REL, PFS and OS were 32%, 41% and 56% respectively. On multivariable regression analysis African American race (hazard ratio [HR] 2.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.6–4.8; p < 0.001) and refractory disease at allo‐HCT (HR 3.2, 95% CI 1.6–6.2; p < 0.001) were predictive of inferior OS. Similarly, African‐American race (HR 2.1, 95% CI 1.3–3.4; p = 0.003), other minority race (HR 2.5, 95% CI 1.2–5.3; p = 0.02) and refractory disease (HR 2.2, 95% CI 1.2–4.3; p = 0.01) were predictive of inferior PFS. These data, demonstrate that allo‐HCT can result in durable disease control in a sizable proportion of patients with R/R ALCL. Refractory disease and racial minority status predicted inferior allo‐HCT outcomes. Whether the inferior outcomes of racial minorities with R/R ALCL after allo‐HCT are driven by differences in disease biology or disparities in post allo‐HCT care, or both, requires further investigation.

Abstract Extramedullary disease in acute myeloid leukemia (AML), also known as myeloid sarcoma (MS), is an uncommon presentation of de novo AML. We analyzed medical records of patients in the Mayo Clinic database spanning between 1996 and 2021 who were diagnosed with de novo extramedullary AML. Survival outcomes were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox-proportional hazard models for univariate and multivariate analysis, respectively. With a median follow-up of 20.7 months, 83 patients with de novo MS were identified; 49 presented with synchronous MS and 34 with isolated MS. Next generation sequencing (NGS) revealed RTK-RAS pathway mutations in 44% of patients. Median overall survival (OS) was 25.3 months and 17.8 months in isolated and synchronous MS, respectively (p = 0.49). Variables associated with improved OS on univariate analysis included treatment with intensive chemotherapy (p < 0.001), normal or favorable risk karyotype (p = 0.001), age less than 60 years (p = 0.001), and a complete response to treatment at extramedullary sites (p < 0.0001). On multivariate analysis, normal or favorable risk karyotype (p = 0.001), age less than 60 (p = 0.01), and a complete extramedullary response (p = 0.001) were associated with improved OS. Localized therapy did not provide added survival benefit in isolated MS. Genomic stratification, age, and extramedullary site response are predictive of survival outcomes.

Abstract Intravascular lymphoma (IVL) is a rare extranodal non‐Hodgkin lymphoma. We performed a retrospective analysis of 55 IVL patients who were treated at our institution 2003–2018. Median age at diagnosis was 68 years, and 64% were males. The most frequent presenting symptoms were skin rash 43% and weight loss 30%. MRI brain on IVL patients with CNS involvement (CNS‐IVL) showed multifocal involvement in 76% (13/17). 89% (17/19) of non‐CNS‐IVL patients with abnormal FDG‐PET had biopsy of an avid lesion resulting in definitive diagnosis. The top diagnostic biopsy site was the bone marrow (45%). 56% had multiorgan involvement. Based on CNS involvement, 36.5% (20/55) had CNS‐IVL and 63.5% (35/55) had non‐CNS‐IVL. CNS‐IVL group consists of clinically isolated CNS involvement (CNS‐only IVL) (22%;12/55) and mixed clinical CNS and peripheral site involvement (M‐IVL) (14.5%; 8/55). Non‐CNS‐IVL group consists of clinically isolated skin involvement (skin‐only IVL) (9%; 5/55) and peripheral IVL with or without skin involvement (P‐IVL); (54.5%; 30/55). Skin involvement was predominantly in the lower extremities. Pathologically, 89% (48/54) were B‐cell IVL. Rituximab + high‐dose methotrexate‐based regimen were used in 75% (12/16) of CNS‐IVL patients and RCHOP in 60% (17/28) of non‐CNS‐IVL patients. Estimated 5‐year progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the entire cohort were 38.6% and 52%, respectively. Skin‐only IVL was associated with excellent survival. Platelet count <150x10 9 /L, age > 60Y, and treatment without Rituximab were poor prognostic factors. Further research is necessary to identify novel therapies.

7556 Background: The majority of R/R NHL progressions after CART involve pre-existing sites, suggesting a promising role for bridging radiotherapy (bRT). We assessed the local control rate of disease sites bridged with radiotherapy prior to CART and identified predictors of in-field recurrence. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 35 patients with aggressive B-cell NHL who received bRT between leukapheresis and CART infusion between 2018 and 2021 at a multi-site single institution. bRT local control rate (LC), calculated based on the total number of irradiated sites, was defined from bRT end date. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall-survival (OS) were defined from the date of CART infusion. In-field recurrence was defined as disease relapse occurring within the radiation planning target volume. Kaplan-Meier plots and cox regression modeling were used to estimate the desired output. Results: Median age of the cohort at time of CART infusion was 59 (range 19-73). The median equivalent 2 Gy dose (EQD2) administered was 23.3 Gy (range 4-41 Gy). The median time from end of bRT to CART infusion was 14 days (range 6-42). Five (14%) patients also received bridging chemotherapy with bRT. Among the 34 evaluable patients, 30 (88%) achieved an objective response (59% complete response and 29% partial response). At a median follow-up of 12 months, 1-year PFS was 48% and 1-year OS was 72%. No progression occurred beyond 240 days. On review of treatment plans and pre-treatment PET/CT scans, 59 sites were identified that received bRT prior to CART infusion. The median size and SUVmax of the irradiated sites were 8.7cm (range 1.5-22) and 13 (range 4-46), respectively. Of the 59 irradiated sites, 8 sites (13.6%) in 7 patients had in-field local recurrence, translating to 1-year LC of 84%. No in-field recurrence occurred beyond 180 days. Moreover, no local recurrence occurred in patients who received radiation to all known sites of active disease to EQD2> 30 Gy (n = 4 patients); these patients remained in remission except for 1 who experienced progression outside the bRT field. On univariate analysis, triple hit lymphoma (THL) (OR 22.8, 95% CI: 3.8-138.3; p < 0.001), tumor size (OR 1.25, 95% CI: 1.1-1.4; p < 0.001), specifically ≥ 9cm (OR 9.4, CI: 1.2-77.3; p = 0.036) and SUVmax (OR 1.1, CI: 1.02-1.15; p = 0.008), specifically ≥ 20 (OR 5.6, CI: 1.3-23.7; p = 0.018), were significantly associated with increased risk of in-field recurrence. On multivariate analysis, THL (OR 32.9, CI: 3.2-336.0; p = 0.03) and tumor size (OR 1.3, CI: 1.1-1.6; p = 0.01) retained significant association with in-field recurrence. Conclusions: Bridging radiotherapy prior to CART provides excellent and durable in-field local control for R/R B-cell NHL. Patients with triple hit histology and bulky disease are likely at higher risk of in-field recurrence and may benefit from higher doses of bRT.

e19049 Background: Prognosis of COVID-19 is poor in the setting of immunosuppression. Casirivimab/imdevimab (REGEN-COV), bamlanivimab, and sotrovimab are investigational monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) authorized for treatment of mild/moderate COVID-19 for patients (pts) 12 years or older and who are at high-risk for progression to severe COVID-19. These neutralizing antibodies, against SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins, have been shown to decrease risk of progression to severe disease. Recipients of allogeneic stem cell transplants (allo-SCT) or chimeric antigen T cell therapy (CAR T cell) represent a high risk population. However, treatment outcomes with these MoAbs in these pts are not well described. Methods: This retrospective study included 33 consecutive adult pts who developed mild/moderate COVID-19 and received anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 MoAbs between December 2020 and November 2021. Allo-SCT (N=27) or CAR T cell (N=6) recipients were included, and outcomes were analyzed separately. Pts received REGEN-COV (N=19), bamlanivimab (N=11), or sotrovimab (N=1), missing (N=2). Results: In the allo-SCT cohort (N=27), median age at time of COVID-19 was 55 (23-76) years. Median time from allo-SCT to COVID-19 was 31 (22-64) months. Two pts received CAR T-cell therapy prior to allo-SCT. Diagnoses included leukemia or myeloid diseases (82%), lymphoma (11%), or myeloma (7%). Transplant characteristics are summarized (Table). Thirteen pts were vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 prior to breakthrough COVID-19. Events considered included hospitalization due to COVID-19, disease progression, or death from any cause. The 6-month event-free and overall survivals were 81% and 91%, respectively. In the CAR T cell recipients cohort (N=6), 4 pts received axicabtagene ciloleucel for diffuse large B-cell or follicular lymphoma and 2 received brexucabtagene autoleucel for mantle cell lymphoma. The median follow-up was 8 (1-11) months. Two pts received autologous SCT prior to COVID-19. Median time from CAR T cell therapy to COVID-19 was 10 (3-24) months. Three pts were vaccinated prior to COVID-19. Only 1 pt was hospitalized due to severe COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation leading to death. Conclusions: These results show a potential benefit of MoAbs in high-risk pts, namely allo-SCT or CAR T cell recipients. Future studies should evaluate the role of prophylactic use MoAbs in these populations. A comparative analysis with a matched control cohort (who did not receive MoAbs) will be provided at the meeting. [Table: see text]

1512 Background: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many cancer practices adopted telehealth, including telephone and video appointments. Following a period of initial expansion that began in March 2020, sustained telehealth integration has emerged across the Mayo Clinic Cancer Practice (MCCP) in 2021. The primary objective of this study was to identify factors associated with utilization of telehealth appointments. Methods: A cross-sectional, multi-site, retrospective analysis was conducted across MCCP – a multisite, multiregional cancer practice with tertiary referral campuses in Minnesota, Florida, and Arizona, as well as rural, community-based hospitals and clinics throughout the Upper Midwest. Multivariable models were used to examine the association of patient- and provider-level variables with telehealth utilization. Results: Outpatient appointments conducted in July – August 2019 (n = 32,932) were compared with those from 2020 (n = 33,662) and 2021 (n = 35,486). The rate of telehealth appointment utilization increased from <0.01% in 2019 to 11.0% in 2020 and 14.0% in 2021. The strongest provider-level predictor of telehealth utilization was female physician provider type (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.11; P = 0.0297), a trend consistently observed across career stages, practice locations and settings in 2020 and 2021. Additionally, while the rate of telehealth utilization was not significantly different at referral and community-based campuses in 2020, providers at referral campuses were significantly more likely to utilize telehealth than community-based campuses in 2021 (OR 1.1, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.12; P = 0.0289). Regarding patient-level factors, rural residence (defined by Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes), which accounted for 44.2% of the patient population, was significantly associated with lower telehealth utilization as compared to patients with urban residences, particularly for video appointments (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.07; P < 0.0001). Notably, the disparity in telehealth utilization between rural and urban populations was found to be less pronounced in 2021 as compared to 2020. Conclusions: Multivariable analysis across a multi-site, multi-regional cancer practice identified several factors associated with increased telehealth utilization. These included female physician provider type, referral-based campuses, and patients residing in urban settings. A detailed understanding of the factors that influence telehealth utilization – a method of care delivery which represents a “new normal” across many cancer practices – will be essential to enable continued equitable access to high-quality, high-impact, patient-centered cancer care.