Wang, Yucai

8026 Background: CLL progression and CLL-related complications (infections and second malignancies) were the leading cause of death (COD) in a prospective cohort of CLL patients (Strati, BJH 2017). The CLL-IPI integrates major clinical and molecular prognostic factors and stratifies patients into 4 risk groups with distinct prognosis. It is unknown if COD differs according to CLL-IPI risk group in patients with newly diagnosed CLL. Methods: Patients diagnosed with CLL between 1/2000-12/2019 and seen within 1 year of diagnosis were identified from the Mayo Clinic CLL database. Cumulative incidences of cause-specific death were analyzed using Gray’s test, with deaths from different causes treated as competing events and deaths from unknown causes excluded. Results: 1276 patients were included in this study. The median age at diagnosis was 63 years (range 24-92), and 880 (69%) were male. Based on CLL-IPI score, 449 (35%) had low risk disease, 443 (35%) had intermediate risk disease, and 384 (30%) had high/very high risk disease. Median follow-up time for the study was 6 years; 286 deaths occurred. The COD was CLL progression in 99 (35%), infection in 16 (6%), second malignancy in 47 (16%), CLL-unrelated in 59 (21%), and unknown in 65 (23%) patients. The rates of death due to CLL progression were higher (17.3% at 5 years; 30.3% at 10 years) than the rates due to CLL-related complications (5.7% at 5 years; 12.9% at 10 years) or due to CLL-unrelated causes (8.6% at 5 years; 16.9% at 10 years) in the CLL-IPI high/very high risk group, but not the CLL-IPI low or intermediate risk group (Table). A higher CLL-IPI risk group was associated with a higher rate of death due to CLL progression ( P < 0.001), as well as a higher rate of death due to CLL-related complications ( P = 0.013), and CLL-unrelated causes ( P < 0.001). Conclusions: Causes of death in newly diagnosed CLL patients differ according to their CLL-IPI risk group. In patients with high/very high risk CLL, improving CLL disease control with novel agents seems justified. In patients with low/intermediate risk CLL, there should be increased efforts to reverse immune dysfunction to reduce infections and second malignancies. [Table: see text]

7556 Background: The frontline treatment for advanced follicular lymphoma has evolved with the introduction of maintenance therapy, bendamustine (Benda), obinutuzumab (G), and lenalidomide (Len). We conducted a network meta-analysis of phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to identify the regimens with superior efficacy. Methods: Data were extracted from 7 RCTs (FOLL05, StiL NHL1, BRIGHT, PRIMA, GALLIUM, StiL NHL7, and RELEVANCE). Progression-free survival (PFS) was compared between 11 regimens with different immunochemotherapy and maintenance strategies. To incorporate direct and indirect comparisons, random-effects Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted after adjusting for study-wise variation. The posterior inference was derived based on Markov chain Monte Carlo methods and implemented using JAGS v4.3.0. Pairwise comparison of hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% credible intervals (CIs) were calculated. Results: PFS HRs of other regimens compared to the reference regimen are summarized in the Table. Compared to Rituximab(R)-Benda, R-CHOP had inferior PFS, R-CHOP-R, G-CHOP-G, and R-Len-R had similar PFS, while R-Benda-R, R-Benda-R4 and G-Benda-G had better PFS. Compared to R-CHOP-R, G-CHOP-G and R-Len-R had similar PFS, while R-Benda-R, R-Benda-R4 and G-Benda-G had better PFS. In addition, the PFS for G-Benda-G was similar to R-Benda-R4 (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78-1.09) but better than R-Benda-R (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.75-0.97). Conclusions: Compared with the commonly used R-Benda and R-CHOP-R regimens, G-CHOP-G, R-Benda-R and R-Benda-R4 had better PFS, while the chemotherapy-free regimen R-Len-R had similar PFS. [Table: see text]

7526 Background: Stem cell transplant (SCT) was considered to be beneficial in CLL patients with Richter transformation (RT). We report a single center experience of SCT for RT. Methods: CLL patients with biopsy-confirmed RT to DLBCL who underwent SCT were identified from Mayo Clinic CLL database, and clinical information was abstracted by chart review. Survival analysis was done with the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Twenty-four of 204 RT patients underwent SCT, 20 autologous and 4 allogeneic. The median lines of prior CLL therapy was 1 (range 0-4). Only 4 patients were exposed to ibrutinib prior to RT. The median age at RT diagnosis was 62 (range 41-73). Five of 17 (29%) patients had bulky disease (≥ 5 cm), 12 of 20 (60%) had elevated LDH, and 6 of 15 (40%) had TP53 disruption (del(17p) or TP53 mutation). The median lines of RT therapy prior to SCT was 2 (range 1-4); treatments included R-CHOP-like alone (n = 7), platinum-based alone (n = 1), both R-CHOP-like and platinum-based (n = 11), novel agents (n = 2), and high dose MTX-based (n = 3). Response prior to SCT was CR in 12 (50%) and PR in 12 (50%) patients. The median time from RT diagnosis to SCT was 6.8 months (range 3.3-42.3). After a median follow-up of 52.7 months after SCT, there were 10 RT relapses, 4 CLL progression, and 11 deaths (7 RT, 1 CLL and 3 unrelated). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 28.5 months (95% CI 8.3-NA; 1-year PFS 61.8%, 2-year PFS 50.5%). The median post-SCT survival was 56.3 months (95% CI 30.6-76.6; 2-year survival 82.0%, 4-year survival 65.6%). Elevated LDH was associated with worse PFS (median 8.9 months vs NA, P= 0.014) and a trend of worse post-SCT survival (53.7 vs 67.4 months, P= 0.153). Other factors including age, prior CLL treatment (untreated vs treated), bulky disease, response prior to SCT, and TP53 disruption were not associated with PFS or post-SCT survival. Among the 4 allogeneic SCT patients, 1 had RT relapse 10.5 months after SCT and was treated with venetoclax, ibrutinib and obinutuzumab and remained alive at last follow-up (12.9 months after SCT). All 3 other patients remained in remission and alive at last follow up (15.6, 16.1 and 108.5 months after SCT, respectively). Conclusions: SCT may benefit select RT patients. The role of SCT in the novel agent era needs further study.

INTRODUCTION Mutations in BTK and PLCG2 have been reported to occur in ~80% of CLL patients (pts) who have progression of disease on ibrutinib therapy (Woyach, JCO 2017; Ahn, Blood 2017). These mutations are described as appearing months before actual relapse and thus considered as a potential predictive biomarker for future relapse (Quinquenel, Blood 2019). However, the outcomes of these pts after disease progression are not well described. In this study, we seek to investigate time to next therapy and overall survival (OS) following progression among CLL pts on ibrutinib therapy with and without these resistance mutations. METHODS Between 10/2012 and 6/2019, we identified 34 pts in the Mayo Clinic clinical CLL resource who progressed while receiving ibrutinib therapy and also had testing for BTK and PLCG2 mutation performed as part of routine clinical practice at either NeoGenomics Laboratories or The Ohio State University. OS was calculated from time of ibrutinib progression to last known alive or death date; OS was plotted using Kaplan Meier methods and was compared using the log-rank test between various groups (e.g., mutation positive vs negative; CLL progression vs Richter's). Cumulative incidence of time to next treatment in those who had a treatment after progression was adjusted for the competing risk of death. RESULTS Of 34 pts who progressed while receiving ibrutinib, 26 pts experienced CLL progression and 8 pts had Richter's transformation; baseline characteristics in Table 1A. The presence of a BTK or PLCG2 mutation was found in 20/34 (59%) pts (specific mutations in Table 1B). BTK mutation alone was present in 9 pts, 7 pts had PLCG2 mutation alone, and 4 pts had both mutations. Median time between a positive test and start of next therapy was 4 months (range 1-19 months) and did not vary between BTK vs PLCG2 mutations. Among the 26 pts with CLL progression, 18 (69%) pts had a mutation present: BTK alone (n=8), PLCG2 alone (n=6), both (n=4). Therapy following progression on ibrutinib in these pts was as follows: venetoclax (n=16; 11 pts who continued ibrutinib in combination), idelalisib (n=4), investigational treatments (n=2), continued ibrutinib alone (n=2), dose-adjusted EPOCH-R (etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and rituximab; n=1), and unknown (n=1). Twelve of the 26 pts with CLL progression on ibrutinib, including 8 pts with a prior resistance mutation detected, had subsequent progression of disease on the aforementioned next line therapy. Treatment of these patients consisted of the following: restarted ibrutinib in addition to current treatment of venetoclax (n=5), venetoclax (n=2), pembrolizumab (n=2; 1 pt with continued ibrutinib), obinutuzumab with continued ibrutinib (n=1), gemcitabine and vinorelbine with continued ibrutinib (n=1), and no further treatment (n=1). Among the 8 pts with Richter's transformation as the initial progression event on ibrutinib after mutation testing, 1 pt had a BTK mutation and 1 pt had a PLCG2 mutation. Treatments following progression on ibrutinib included multi-agent chemoimmunotherapy (n=3; 2 pts received rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone [R-CHOP] with continued ibrutinib and 1 pt received doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine [ABVD] alone), pembrolizumab (n=3; 1 pt in combination with continued ibrutinib), venetoclax in combination with continued ibrutinib (n=1), and venetoclax and obinutuzumab (n=1). The median time to next treatment (second line of treatment beyond ibrutinib) for the 31 pts who started another therapy following progression on ibrutinib was 16.7 months (95% CI 9.6-NE; Figure 1A) and was not significantly different for pts with or without a resistance mutation (p=0.57). Median OS for all 26 pts with CLL progression was 28.7 month and there was no difference according to presence or absence of a resistance mutation (median 28.7 months vs 18.2 months, p=0.53; Figure 1B). The 8 pts with Richter's transformation had a median OS of 7.1 months (95% CI 2.0-NE). CONCLUSION Approximately 60% of pts tested in this progression cohort had a BTK or PLCG2 mutation at time of or preceding progression on ibrutinib therapy. OS and time to next therapy did not differ statistically between pts with mutated vs non-mutated clones; however, caution should be applied with the conclusions given the limited sample size. Disclosures Ding: DTRM Biopharma: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Kenderian:Novartis: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Tolero: Research Funding; Humanigen: Other: Scientific advisory board , Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Lentigen: Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Research Funding. Kay:MorphoSys: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Other: DSMB; Celgene: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board; Agios: Other: DSMB. Parikh:Ascentage Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding.

Background: The 2008 International Working Group for CLL (IWCLL) criteria define MBL as a clonal B-cell disorder with a peripheral blood B-cell count of <5 x 109/L, in the absence of cytopenias(s), lymphadenopathy and/or organomegaly on physical examination, and no other concomitant lymphoproliferative disorder. In the presence of palpable lymphadenopathy and/or organomegaly, and a B-cell count of < 5 x 109/L, a diagnosis of small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) is established. A study by Gentile et al (Am J Hematol. 2013) reported that 29 out of 62 individuals with clinically identified MBL (42%) had lymphadenopathy identified on CT imaging. Notably, however, after a median follow-up of 35 months, the rate of progression among cases of MBL with lymphadenopathy identified on CT imaging was only 6.9% (2/29 patients), which was no different than in cases of MBL without lymphadenopathy on CT imaging (rate of progression, 9%; 3/33 patients). Our study sought to 1) determine if lymphadenopathy and/or organomegaly detected by imaging studies performed for unrelated reasons in individuals with MBL can identify a subset with shorter time to first CLL therapy (TFT) and overall survival (OS); and 2) compare outcomes of individuals with MBL who have incidentally detected lymphadenopathy/splenomegaly and SLL patients. Methods: We used the Mayo Clinic CLL Database to identify individuals with high-count MBL (absolute B-cell count: 0.5 - 4.9 x 109/L) and divided them into the following three cohorts: a) Cohort A: no imaging studies available at MBL diagnosis; b) Cohort B: imaging studies done within one year of MBL with no evidence of lymphadenopathy and/or organomegaly; and c) Cohort C: imaging studies done within one year of MBL with lymphadenopathy and/or organomegaly, attributable to MBL. All individuals with MBL were first seen at Mayo Clinic after 1/1/2002; those with a concomitant lymphoproliferative disorder within 3 months of diagnosis were excluded. Patients with SLL seen during the same time interval were identified as a comparison cohort. We compared the baseline characteristics (Kruskal Wallis for continuous and Chi-square for categorical variables) and TFT and OS across the three MBL cohorts, and patients with SLL. Cumulative incidence of TFT was adjusted for the competing risk of death. Age- and sex-adjusted OS was analyzed using inverse weights methods. Results: 657 individuals with high-count MBL with a median follow-up of 6.7 years were identified: 415 (63%) individuals were in Cohort A, 142 (22%) in Cohort B, and 100 in (15%) Cohort C. Compared to Cohort B, individuals in Cohort C were more likely to have unmutated IGHV, high expression of CD38, and higher beta-2 microglobulin level (Table 1). SLL patients were younger, had higher rate of unmutated IGHV, and had high expression of CD49d compared to MBL individuals in Cohort C (Table 1). There was suggestive evidence of a difference in TFT between Cohorts B and C (estimated 10-year treatment rate 28.3% vs. 41.6%; p=0.16; HR 1.62 95% CI 0.84-3.15). TFT was significantly shorter in SLL patients compared to those with Cohort C (estimated 10-year treatment rate 71% vs. 41.6%, respectively, P<0.001; Figure 1A). There was a trend toward shorter OS in Cohort C compared to Cohort B (estimated 10-year OS rate 53.7% vs. 64.2%, respectively, P=0.09; Figure 1B). In contrast, there was no difference in OS among MBL individuals in Cohort C compared to those with SLL (estimated 10-year OS rate 56.9% vs. 62.6%, P=0.72). Summary/Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate that individuals with MBL who have incidentally identified lymphadenopathy/splenomegaly at diagnosis are more likely to have an unfavorable risk profile, shorter TFT and OS compared to patients who did not have lymphadenopathy/splenomegaly at MBL diagnosis. Additionally, these individuals have a longer TFT but similar OS compared to SLL patients seen during the same time interval. If externally validated, these findings have significant implications for individuals with newly diagnosed MBL. Disclosures Ding: Merck: Research Funding; DTRM Biopharma: Research Funding. Kenderian:Novartis: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Tolero: Research Funding; Humanigen: Other: Scientific advisory board , Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Lentigen: Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Research Funding. Kay:MorphoSys: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Other: DSMB; Celgene: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board; Agios: Other: DSMB. Parikh:AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Ascentage Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Richter transformation (RT) refers to transformation of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) to an aggressive lymphoma, most commonly diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Most studies on the management of RT were either small retrospective series or early phase non-randomized trials before the era of novel agents. The natural history, prognostication and optimal treatment of patients with RT remain undefined. Here we report the clinical characteristics and outcomes of a large series of RT from a single center. Methods: Biopsy-confirmed RT (limited to non-Hodgkin lymphoma) diagnosed from 4/1993 to 4/2018 were identified from the Mayo Clinic CLL database. Clinical characteristics, treatment information and follow-up data were abstracted by chart review. Overall survival (OS) was defined as time from RT diagnosis to death from any cause and analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Statistical analysis was done in SAS 9.4. Results: A total of 204 patients with CLL who developed RT were identified. The median age at CLL diagnosis was 62 years (range 22-85), and 148 (73%) were male. The median time to transformation was 4.7 years (range 0-34.5). Prior to RT, 68 (33.3%) patients received no treatment for CLL, 109 (53.4%) received chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) only, and 27 (13.2%) received at least one novel agent (idelalisib, ibrutinib, or venetoclax) for CLL. The median lines of CLL therapy prior to RT was 2 (range 0-13). The median age at RT diagnosis was 69 years (range 30-88). Pathology of RT was DLBCL and high grade B-cell lymphoma in 193 (94.6%) and 11 (5.4%) patients, respectively. The median LDH was 306 IU/L (range 99-9000). 62/125 (49.6%) patients had bulky disease (≥ 5 cm), and the median PET SUVmax was 13.9 (range 2.9-30.0). 45/131 (34.4%) patients had del(17p) or TP53 mutation, 12 (9.2%) had del(11q), 21 (16.0%) had trisomy 12, 27 (20.6%) had del(13q), and 25 (19.1%) had normal FISH. The CLL and RT were clonally related in 12/21 (57.1%) patients. For the transformed lymphoma, cell of origin by Han's algorithm was germinal center B cell-like (GCB) and non-GCB in 31/100 (31.0%) and 69/100 (69.0%) patients, respectively. EBV was positive in 14/52 (26.9%) patients. The median Ki-67 was 80% (range 10-100). Myc and Bcl-2 were positive by IHC in 31/43 (72.1%) and 83/103 (80.6%) patients, respectively; 27/56 (48.2%) were double-expressors. MYC, BCL2, and BCL6 rearrangement was positive by FISH in 18/68 (26.5%), 10/34 (29.4%), and 4/31 (12.9%) patients, respectively; 8/66 (12.1%) were double/triple-hit. The most common first-line treatment (Table 1 notes) of RT was R-CHOP-like regimen (n=114, 65.5%). Other treatments included R-EPOCH-like (n=6, 3.4%), high-intensity chemotherapy (n=15, 8.6%), novel agents (eg, ibrutinib, venetoclax, pembrolizumab; n=19, 10.9%), other chemotherapy (n=12, 6.9%), and palliative therapy (n=8, 4.6%). Response to first-line treatment was CR in 57 (38.0%), PR in 33 (22.0%), SD in 18 (12.0%), and PD in 42 (28.0%) patients. The median OS of the entire cohort after RT diagnosis was 12.0 months. The median OS for patients who received no prior CLL treatment, CIT only or at least one novel agent for CLL were 65.5, 7.3, and 12.0 months, respectively (P<0.0001; Figure 1). Of note, in patients who received CIT only for CLL, ~10% and 60% received high-intensity and R-CHOP/R-EPOCH-like chemotherapy, respectively, as first-line RT therapy. In contrast, in patients who had prior novel agents for CLL, 56% and 26% were treated with novel agents and R-CHOP/R-EPOCH-like chemotherapy, respectively, as first-line RT therapy. Patients with or without del(17p)/TP53 mutation had a median OS of 8.3 and 12.8 months, respectively (P=0.046). Patients who were treated with high intensity chemotherapy, R-CHOP/R-EPOCH-like regimens, novel agents, and other therapies for RT had a median OS of 35.1, 14.4, 10.9 and 6.1 months, respectively (P=0.02; Figure 2). OS comparisons by CLL/RT clonal relationship, double expressor or double/triple-hit status are shown in Table 1, with no significant differences noted. Conclusions: Over two thirds of RT were the non-GCB subtype, and about half were Myc/Bcl-2 double expressors. Patients who developed RT without prior CLL therapies had a significantly better OS. In contrast, patients who had received prior CLL therapies had poor outcomes. Myc/Bcl-2 double expressor and MYC/BCL2/BCL6 double/triple hit status had no impact on OS. Disclosures Kenderian: Humanigen: Research Funding; Novartis: Patents & Royalties; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Kay:Infinity Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morpho-sys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: 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; Acerta: Research Funding; Cytomx Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Parikh:Janssen: Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding. Ding:Merck: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: The addition of Rituximab to chemotherapy has significantly improved the outcome of patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Patients treated with immunochemotherapy for DLBCL who achieve EFS24 (event-free for 2 years after diagnosis) have an overall survival equivalent to that of the age- and sex-matched general population. Relapses after achieving EFS24 have been considered to be unusual but have been understudied. We sought to define the rate, clinical characteristics, treatment pattern, and outcomes of such relapses. Methods: 1448 patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL from March 2002 to June 2015 were included. Patients were enrolled in the Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) of the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic Lymphoma SPORE, treated per physician choice (predominantly R-CHOP immunochemotherapy) and followed prospectively. An event was defined as progression or relapse, unplanned re-treatment after initial therapy, or death from any cause. Cumulative incidence of relapse and non-relapse mortality after achieving EFS24 were analyzed as competing events using Gray's test in the EZR software. Post-relapse survival was defined as time from relapse to death from any cause and analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method in SPSS (V22). Results: Among the 1448 patients, 1260 (87%) had DLBCL alone at diagnosis, and 188 (13%) had concurrent indolent lymphoma (follicular lymphoma 115, marginal zone lymphoma 18, chronic lymphocytic leukemia 14, lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma 4, unspecified 37) at diagnosis. After a median follow-up of 83.9 months, 896 patients achieved EFS24. For all 896 patients who achieved EFS24, the cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) was 5.7%, 9.3% and 13.2%, respectively, at 2, 5 and 10 years after achieving EFS24. Patients with concurrent indolent lymphoma at diagnosis had a higher CIR compared to those with DLBCL alone at diagnosis (10.2 vs 4.8% at 2 years, 15.7 vs 8.0% at 5 years, 28.8 vs 9.7% at 10 years, P<0.001; Figure 1). There were a total of 84 patients who relapsed after achieving EFS24. The median age at initial diagnosis was 66 years (range 35-92), and 48 (57%) were male. At diagnosis, 11 (13%) had ECOG PS >1, 37 (50%) had LDH elevation, 62 (74%) were stage III-IV, 14 (17%) had more than 1 extranodal site, and 26 (31%) were poor risk by R-IPI score. There were 58 patients with DLBCL alone at diagnosis who relapsed after achieving EFS24, and 38 (75%) relapsed with DLBCL, 13 (25%) relapsed with indolent lymphoma (predominantly follicular lymphoma), and pathology was unknown in 7 patients. In contrast, there were 26 patients with concurrent indolent lymphoma at diagnosis who relapsed after achieving EFS24, and 9 (41%) relapsed with DLBCL, 13 (59%) relapsed with indolent lymphoma, and pathology was unknown in 4 patients. In the 47 patients who relapsed with DLBCL after achieving EFS24, 45% received intensive salvage chemotherapy, 19% received regular intensity chemotherapy, 9% received CNS directed chemotherapy, and 36% went on to receive autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). In the 26 patients who relapsed with indolent lymphoma after achieving EFS24, 27% were initially observed, 54% received regular intensity chemotherapy, 4% received intensive salvage chemotherapy, and 19% received ASCT after subsequent progression. The median post-relapse survival (PRS) for all patients with a relapse after achieving EFS24 was 38.0 months (95% CI 27.5-48.5). The median PRS for patients who relapsed with DLBCL and indolent lymphoma after achieving EFS24 were 29.9 (19.9-39.9) and 89.9 (NR-NR) months, respectively (P=0.002; Figure 2). Conclusions: Relapses after achieving EFS24 in patients with DLBCL were uncommon in the rituximab era. Patient with DLBCL alone at diagnosis can relapse with either DLBCL or indolent lymphoma (3:1 ratio). Patients with concurrent DLBCL and indolent lymphoma at diagnosis had a significantly higher CIR, and relapses with DLBCL and indolent lymphoma were similar (2:3 ratio). Even with high intensity salvage chemotherapy and consolidative ASCT, patients who relapsed with DLBCL had a significantly worse survival compared to those who relapsed with indolent lymphoma. Late relapses with DLBCL remain clinically challenging, with a median survival of 2.5 years after relapse. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Maurer: Celgene: Research Funding; Nanostring: Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding. Witzig:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Ansell:Takeda: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Cerhan:Celgene: Research Funding; Jannsen: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Nanostring: Research Funding.