Heerema, Nyla A.

*equal contribution of AB, RLL, BD and JCB Background: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is common with increasing age, and older adults with AML rarely achieve long-term remission with chemotherapy. Gene discovery studies in older adults with AML have shown that this malignancy is characterized by a multitude of somatic genomic alterations beginning with initiating somatic events followed by acquisition of collaborative transforming mutations. Despite these important biologic insights, current therapeutic approaches to AML remain limited, particularly in adults ≥ 60 years of age. The Beat AML trial was designed to assess the feasibility of using genetic profiling to assign patients (pts) to molecularly defined, subtype-specific therapies within 7 days of the initial diagnosis in a multi-center clinical trial setting, and to delineate the role of molecularly informed first-line treatment of AML with mechanism based novel therapies. Methods: Treatment-naïve patients with AML were enrolled in this prospective trial which offered accelerated cytogenetic and comprehensive mutational testing within 7 days followed by treatment assignment using these molecular data. Pt eligibility included age ≥ 60 years with non-APML AML, no known CNS leukemia, no prior hypomethylating agent (HMA) therapy and no clinical need for emergent therapy. Eligible pts were profiled by local cytogenetics analysis and using a central next generation sequencing (NGS) assay (Foundation Medicine, Inc.) with all molecular data required for treatment assignment (TA) obtained < 7 days. TA was made centrally using a pre-determined algorithm considering somatic cytogenetic and molecular alterations in the dominant clone, available targeted therapeutics for specific AML subsets, and the likelihood of cure with intensive chemotherapy. Results: From November 2016 to January 2019, 487 pts with a suspected diagnosis of AML had enrolled at 14 clinical sites; 395 were eligible for the study (77% of the patients not eligible for the study had an alternative diagnosis). The median age of eligible patients was 72 years (range: 60 to 92) with 38% being≥ 75 years and 16% with treatment-related AML. From the 395 eligible patients, 374 (94.7%) were centrally assigned to the different cytogenetic/genomic groups within 7 days. The most common groups were TP53 mutated (19%) and marker negative (18%) molecular groups. The Beat AML trial is dynamic by design, thereby allowing different arms to open over time; all trial arms are designed to evaluate for substantial clinical efficacy in small, molecularly defined patient subsets. As shown in Figure 1, 224 patients (57%) had a TA and consented to a BEAT AML sub-study. Of the remaining 171 patients, 103 received standard therapy defined as induction therapy (7+3) or hypomethylation agent (25 before TA and 78 after TA), 28 received an alternative investigational agent (5 before TA and 23 after TA), 38 received palliative care, and 2 had an unknown treatment status and are grouped with the palliative care patients in subsequent analyses; 9 patients died before TA (2 who received standard therapy and 7 in the palliative care group). Demographic, clinical, performance and molecular characteristics were not largely different between pts who elected targeted therapy as part of the BEAT AML trial versus those who elected standard therapy. As shown in Figure 2, the overall survival was significantly longer for patients enrolled in a targeted therapy arm as part of the BEAT AML trial compared to those who elected standard therapy. (p<0.0001). The 30-day estimated death rate was 3.7% (95% CI: 1.9-7.2) for patients electing treatment on a BEAT AML sub-study, 20.4% (95% CI: 13.0-31.2) for those receiving standard therapy, 0% for those receiving an investigational therapy, and 72.6% (95% CI: 57.8-85.7) for the palliative care group. Conclusion: Our data support the feasibility of a rapid precision medicine approach in older patients with previously untreated AML. Patients with AML who elected treatment assigned based upon cytogenetic and molecular alterations in the dominant clone using a novel precision medicine approach had significantly improved overall survival versus those who elected standard of care treatment. Disclosures Levine: Gilead: Consultancy; Prelude Therapeutics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Isoplexis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Qiagen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Loxo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Imago Biosciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; C4 Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria; Lilly: Honoraria. Mims:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PTC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Borate:Novartis: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. Stein:Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas Pharma US, Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PTC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bioline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Patel:France Foundation: Honoraria; Dava Oncology: Honoraria; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Baer:Takeda: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; AI Therapeutics: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding. Stock:Daiichi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Research to Practice: Honoraria; UpToDate: Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Deininger:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ascentage Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; TRM: Consultancy; Sangoma: Consultancy; Fusion Pharma: Consultancy; Adelphi: Consultancy; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Humana: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Sangamo: Consultancy; Blueprint: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Blum:Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Astellas,: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; AmerisourceBergen: Consultancy. Schiller:Amgen: Other, Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Constellation Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Eli Lilly and Company: Research Funding; FujiFilm: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; J&J: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; Pfizer Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership, Research Funding; Sangamo Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol Myer Squibb: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Biomed Valley Discoveries: Research Funding. Olin:Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Revolution Medicine: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Clovis: Research Funding; Ignyta: Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding; Mirati Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Spectrum: Research Funding. Foran:Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding. Lin:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Traer:AbbVie: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Notable Labs: Equity Ownership. Odenike:AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Janssen Oncology: Research Funding; Oncotherapy: Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; CTI/Baxalta: Research Funding. Arellano:Gilead: Consultancy. Vergilio:Roche Holding AG: Equity Ownership; Foundation Medicine: Employment. Brennan:Foundation Medicine: Employment. Vietz:Foundation Medicine: Employment. Druker:ALLCRON: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Research Funding; Aileron Therapeutics: #2573, Constructs and cell lines harboring various mutations in TNK2 and PTPN11, licensing fees , Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Burroughs Wellcome Fund: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cepheid: Consultancy, Honoraria; The RUNX1 Research Program: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GRAIL: Equity Ownership, Other: former member of Scientific Advisory Board; Patient True Talk: Consultancy; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (antibody royalty): Patents & Royalties: #2524, antibody royalty; Pfizer: Other: PI or co-investigator on clinical trial(s) funded via contract with OHSU., Research Funding; Merck & Co: Patents & Royalties: Dana-Farber Cancer Institute license #2063, Monoclonal antiphosphotyrosine antibody 4G10, exclusive commercial license to Merck & Co; OHSU (licensing fees): Patents & Royalties: #2573, Constructs and cell lines harboring various mutations in TNK2 and PTPN11, licensing fees ; Amgen: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aptose Biosciences: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Beta Cat: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Stock options; Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Vivid Biosciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Stock options; Beat AML LLC: Other: Service on joint steering committee; CureOne: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Other: former member of Scientific Advisory Board; ICON: Other: Scientific Founder of Molecular MD, which was acquired by ICON in Feb. 2019; Monojul: Other: former consultant; Novartis: Other: PI or co-investigator on clinical trial(s) funded via contract with OHSU., Patents & Royalties: Patent 6958335, Treatment of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors, exclusively licensed to Novartis, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: PI or co-investigator on clinical trial(s) funded via contract with OHSU., Research Funding. Byrd:Novartis: Other: Travel Expenses, Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Acerta: Research Funding; Ohio State University: Patents & Royalties: OSU-2S; Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Background The phase 3 trial A041202 solidified the Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase (BTK) inhibitor ibrutinib as a standard of care for older patients with previously untreated CLL by showing superior progression-free survival (PFS) as compared with bendamustine plus rituximab. While ibrutinib is highly effective in previously untreated CLL, there do remain disadvantages to this therapy, specifically the low rate of complete response (CR) and therefore the need for continuous administration, which increases cost and toxicity. In older patients especially, toxicities with ibrutinib are common; 17% of patients had atrial fibrillation and 29% had grade 3 or higher hypertension on the A041202 study. Thus, strategies to decrease the exposure time to ibrutinib are of interest. Venetoclax is an inhibitor of BCL2 that has shown efficacy as a single agent and in combination with monoclonal antibodies, specifically the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody obinutuzumab for patients with previously untreated CLL. One significant advantage to venetoclax is the ability to produce CRs and minimal residual disease negative (MRD-) responses. In this study, we compare ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab (IO) to ibrutinib plus venetoclax plus obinutuzumab (IVO) with a response-dependent discontinuation. While other studies have been designed with the goal of discontinuation of ibrutinib through combinations with venetoclax, no other study has been presented using a response-dependent discontinuation strategy. Study Design and Methods A041702 is a randomized phase 3 study led by the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology that is currently enrolling through the NCI National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN). CLL patients age 70 years or older who are previously untreated and in need of therapy are eligible. Previous treatment of autoimmune complications with steroids or rituximab is allowed. Patients must have intermediate- or high-risk Rai stage, ECOG performance status 0-2, ANC ≥ 1000/mm3 unless due to marrow involvement, and platelets ≥ 30,000/mm3. CrCl must be ≥ 40 mL/min and AST/ALT ≤ 2.5x upper limit of normal. Patients with hepatitis B must have undetectable viral load, and patients must not have an intercurrent illness that is expected to limit survival to < 5 years. Warfarin and strong inhibitors or inducers of CYP3A4/5 are not permitted. Patients are initially preregistered to the study and submit a peripheral blood sample for central FISH analysis of del(17p). Patients who are registered are randomized 1:1 to Arm 1 (IO) or Arm 2 (IVO), and are stratified by Rai stage and presence of del(17p). IO consists of I daily starting cycle 1 day 1, and O dosed as standard starting cycle 1 day 1 and continuing to cycle 6 day 1. IVO consists of IO as in Arm 1, with V starting cycle 3 day 1 with standard 5-week ramp-up and continuing until cycle 14 day 28. At the end of 14 cycles, patients in both arms undergo response evaluation with central peripheral blood and bone marrow MRD testing. Patients on IO then continue I indefinitely. Patients on IVO who are in a bone marrow MRD- CR discontinue all therapy, and those who are not continue I indefinitely. The primary objective of the study is to compare PFS between IO and IVO using the strategy of response-dependent discontinuation. There is 90% power to detect a hazard ratio for PFS of 0.55 (corresponding to 5-year PFS rates of 70% and 82.187% for IO and IVO, respectively), at a one-sided significance level of 0.025 by a log-rank test. This design requires 128 events and 431 total evaluable patients assuming uniform accrual over the course of 3 years and minimum follow-up of 5 years. The study includes two interim analyses for superiority when 50% and 75% of the expected number of events have been observed and three interim analyses for futility when 25%, 50%, and 75% of the expected number of events have been observed. Conclusions A041702 is an ongoing phase 3 clinical trial using a novel response-dependent discontinuation method. Results of this study have the potential to change the standard of care for older patients with previously untreated CLL. The study is expected to accrue for 3 years beginning January 2019, and we welcome participation from sites throughout the NCTN. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, UG1CA189823, U24CA196171; U10CA180820 (ECOG-ACRIN); https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03737981 Disclosures Woyach: Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Loxo: Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; Verastem: Research Funding. Lozanski:Beckman Coulter: Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics Inc.: Research Funding; Genentec: Research Funding. Ding:Merck: Research Funding; DTRM Biopharma: Research Funding. Hill:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celegene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; TG therapeutics: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Stone:Argenx, Celgene, Takeda Oncology: Other: Data and Safety Monitoring Board/Committee: ; Novartis, Agios, Arog: Research Funding; AbbVie, Actinium, Agios, Argenx, Arog, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Biolinerx, Celgene, Cornerstone Biopharma, Fujifilm, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Ono, Orsenix, Otsuka, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sumitomo, Trovagene: Consultancy. Byrd:Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Research Funding; Ohio State University: Patents & Royalties: OSU-2S; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Other: Travel Expenses, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Other: Travel Expenses, Speakers Bureau; Ohio State University: Patents & Royalties: OSU-2S; Acerta: Research Funding; Novartis: Other: Travel Expenses, Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Research Funding; Ohio State University: Patents & Royalties: OSU-2S; TG Therapeutics: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Acerta: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Background: NGS of myeloid mutations is an integral part of AML clinical decision-making. There is currently no information regarding concordance between NGS panels in AML using samples from the same patient across various platforms in different diagnostic laboratories. To study this important question, we analyzed NGS of myeloid mutations in diagnostic samples from The Beat AML Master Trial (BAMT) for newly diagnosed older AML patients, and compared variant calls made between institutional laboratories enrolling the study subject with those made by Foundation Medicine (FM), the central laboratory used for treatment assignment in this precision medicine trial. Methods: We identified newly diagnosed AML patient samples (peripheral blood (PB) and/or bone marrow (BM)) from 2 lead institutions in the BAMT(Ohio State, OSU and Oregon Health and Sciences University, OHSU) that were analyzed by both the institutional and by FM from Nov 15, 2016 to Apr 15, 2019. Samples sent to both laboratories >3 days apart were excluded. Samples were analyzed at the institutional laboratories using their respective NGS mutational panels and by FM using the FoundationOne®Heme(FMH) NGS panel which utilizes capture based sequencing. The OSU NGS assay utilizes sequencing on Illumina MiSeq. The OHSU NGS assay employs semiconductor-based sequencing (Ion Torrent PGM platform). The variant allele frequency (VAF) sensitivity for detection for all 3 laboratories range from 1-2%. We evaluated the ability to identify mutations in 8 genes : FLT3, IDH1/ 2, NPM1, TET2, DNMT3A, WT1 and TP53 used in treatment assignment in theBAMT. A detection cutoff of 2% was used to define the presence or absence of a mutation. Overall, agreement was defined as the number of times the local and central laboratories made the same call divided by the total number of patients. Sensitivity was defined as the number of present calls made locally divided by the number of present calls made centrally, and specificity as the number of absent calls made locally divided by the number of absent calls made centrally. The overall kappa statistic, controlling for institution, provided another measure of agreement between local and central calls, where a value of 1 indicates perfect agreement. Results: 194 patient samples were identified using methods above and analyzed locally at the screening institution (125 at OSU, 69 at OHSU) and centrally at FM. Type of tissue analyzed for variants between local site and FM were 59 PB, 129 BM, and 6 with BM/PB mismatch. Overall agreement in presence/absence calls between local and central results for each of the 8 genes was over 95% (Table 1). There was perfect agreement for NPM1. The sensitivity was above 94% for all genes except TP53 (88.6%) and WT1 (63.6%). Failure to detect a mutation locally was primarily due to reporting of all TP53 variants, including variants of unknown significance (VUS) (5) by FM as agreed upon in the study protocol, detection at low levels below local site sensitivity cutoff (1), detection of variants in a portion of gene not covered at the local site(1)and possible artifact (1). For the WT1 gene, discordance in 5 samples included VUS (3) reported by FM ,a variant detected in a portion of the gene not covered at the local site(1).and difference in leukemic tissue analyzed with mutation not detected by the central laboratory on a PB sample, and present at the institutional lab on a BM sample; affecting the overall agreement and specificity but not sensitivity. Specificity was at least 98% for each of the 8 genes. Finally, most discrepancies in reported mutations in FLT3 (n=2), IDH1 (n=1), IDH2 (n=2), DNMT3A (n=4) and TET2 (n=5) were due to reporting of VUS in one laboratory and not by another. Conclusion: Detection of pathogenic myeloid mutations using orthogonal assays showed a high degree of concordance for genes used in therapeutic assignment on the BAMT.The small number of discordant results, in TP53 and WT1, were attributed to the reporting of VUS. This study illustrates the importance of quality control and standardization as NGS continues to be widely utilized in AML for clinical decision making, with a variety of platforms across multiple laboratories. Our next steps involve evaluating the differences in VAFs reported between local and central laboratories when a given mutation is identified, as well as the potential reasons for observed differences and clinical implications of known pathogenic mutations vs putative VUS. Disclosures Borate: Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Vergilio:Foundation Medicine: Employment; Roche Holding AG: Equity Ownership. Stein:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas Pharma US, Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bioline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PTC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Patel:France Foundation: Honoraria; Dava Oncology: Honoraria; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Baer:Astellas: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; AI Therapeutics: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Stock:Daiichi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Research to Practice: Honoraria; UpToDate: Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Schiller:Amgen: Other, Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Biomed Valley Discoveries: Research Funding; Bristol Myer Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Constellation Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Eli Lilly and Company: Research Funding; FujiFilm: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; J&J: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; Pfizer Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership, Research Funding; Sangamo Therapeutics: Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Blum:AmerisourceBergen: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Astellas,: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding. Kovacsovics:Pfizer: Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Foran:Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding. Druker:Pfizer: Research Funding; OHSU (licensing fees): Patents & Royalties: #2573, Constructs and cell lines harboring various mutations in TNK2 and PTPN11, licensing fees ; Cepheid: Consultancy, Honoraria; Aileron Therapeutics: #2573, Constructs and cell lines harboring various mutations in TNK2 and PTPN11, licensing fees , Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ALLCRON: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aptose Biosciences: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Beta Cat: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Stock options; GRAIL: Equity Ownership, Other: former member of Scientific Advisory Board; Patient True Talk: Consultancy; The RUNX1 Research Program: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Vivid Biosciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Stock options; Beat AML LLC: Other: Service on joint steering committee; CureOne: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Other: former member of Scientific Advisory Board; ICON: Other: Scientific Founder of Molecular MD, which was acquired by ICON in Feb. 2019; Monojul: Other: former consultant; Novartis: Other: PI or co-investigator on clinical trial(s) funded via contract with OHSU., Patents & Royalties: Patent 6958335, Treatment of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors, exclusively licensed to Novartis, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: PI or co-investigator on clinical trial(s) funded via contract with OHSU., Research Funding; Pfizer: Other: PI or co-investigator on clinical trial(s) funded via contract with OHSU., Research Funding; Merck & Co: Patents & Royalties: Dana-Farber Cancer Institute license #2063, Monoclonal antiphosphotyrosine antibody 4G10, exclusive commercial license to Merck & Co; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (antibody royalty): Patents & Royalties: #2524, antibody royalty; Burroughs Wellcome Fund: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding. Byrd:Gilead: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Other: Travel Expenses, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Research Funding; Ohio State University: Patents & Royalties: OSU-2S. Levine:C4 Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Isoplexis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Loxo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Qiagen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria; Prelude Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Lilly: Honoraria; Imago Biosciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mims:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PTC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Introduction: The most effective initial therapy for older adults with CLL has not yet been established due to the lack of comparison of chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) and targeted therapy with the Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase (BTK) inhibitor ibrutinib. CIT has been the gold standard since studies showing that addition of CD20 antibody to chemotherapy prolongs survival. Bendamustine plus rituximab (BR) is one standard, more aggressive CIT regimen for patients (pts) age 65 or older. While ibrutinib has been FDA approved for untreated CLL since 2016, it has only been compared to chlorambucil, which is relatively ineffective, and never before to aggressive CIT. Additionally, the benefit of the addition of rituximab to ibrutinib in this setting has not been prospectively studied in a phase 3 trial. As part of a randomized phase 3 trial, the Alliance sought to answer these important clinical questions. Pts and Methods: Alliance A041202 is a multicenter NCI National Clinical Trials Network phase 3 study comparing BR (Arm 1) with ibrutinib (Arm 2) and the combination of ibrutinib plus rituximab (Arm 3) to determine whether ibrutinib-containing regimens are superior to CIT in terms of PFS. Additionally, this study sought to determine if adding rituximab to ibrutinib would prolong PFS over ibrutinib alone. At time of progression, pts on Arm 1 could cross over to Arm 2. Eligible pts were those age ≥ 65 years with previously untreated, symptomatic CLL. Pts had a CrCl ≥ 40 mL/min, bilirubin ≤ 1.5 x ULN, and no significant life-limiting intercurrent illness or need for warfarin treatment. Pts were stratified based upon Rai stage, Zap-70 methylation performed centrally, and del(17)(p13.1) or del(11)(q22.3) by local interphase cytogenetics and were randomized 1:1:1 to each arm. With 166 pts per arm, the trial was powered to detect an improvement in 2-year PFS from 61% in Arm 1 to 75% in Arms 2 or 3 (HR=0.586) using two one-sided log-rank tests with type I error rate of 2.5% and 90% power. The Alliance Data and Safety Monitoring Board approved the data release after meeting the protocol-defined efficacy threshold at a planned interim analysis with a one-sided critical value of 0.001538. These data were locked July 2, 2018; updated results will be presented at the meeting. Results: Between 12/9/2013 and 5/16/2016, 547 pts were registered and randomized (Arms 1: 183, 2: 182, and 3: 182). Median age was 71 years and 67% of pts were men. High-risk Rai stage (stage III/IV) was seen in 54%, unmethylated Zap-70 in 53%, and del(17p) or del(11q) by local FISH in 28%. Local vs centralized FISH was performed for del(11q) and del(17p) with agreement between local and central results in 94% (Kappa=0.80) and 97% (Kappa=0.76) of pts, respectively. 525 (96%) pts were eligible and included in the primary PFS analysis (Arms 1: 176, 2: 178, and 3: 171). With median follow-up of 32 months (mo), median PFS was 41 mo in Arm 1 and has not been reached in Arms 2 or 3 (HR comparing Arm 2 to 1 is 0.40 with one-sided p&lt;0.0001; HR comparing Arm 3 to 1 is 0.41 with one-sided p&lt;0.0001; HR comparing Arm 3 to 2 is 1.01 with one-sided p=0.48). 2-year PFS estimates were 74%, 87% in 2, and 88% in Arms 1, 2, and 3 respectively. At this time, there are no significant differences in overall survival (OS) among arms (p=0.87), median OS has not been reached for any arm, and 2-year OS estimates were 95%, 90%, and 94% in Arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Adverse events (AEs) were compared among arms using Fisher's exact tests. Grade 3+ treatment-emergent AEs were seen in 428 of 537 evaluable pts with 61%, 41%, and 38% of pts experiencing Grade 3+ heme AEs (p&lt;0.0001) and 60%, 72%, and 71% of pts experiencing Grade 3+ non-heme AEs (p=0.03) in Arms 1, 2, and 3 respectively. Grade 5 AEs were seen in 5 (2.8%), 14 (7.8%), and 14 (7.7%) pts (p=0.07). Unexplained or unwitnessed death over the entire observation period was seen in 2 (1.1%), 7 (3.9%), and 4 (2.2%) pts (p=0.24) in Arms 1, 2, and 3 respectively. Conclusions: This international phase 3 trial demonstrates that ibrutinib produces superior PFS to standard CIT in older pts with CLL and justifies it as a standard of care treatment for pts age 65 and older. The addition of rituximab does not prolong PFS with ibrutinib. While ibrutinib represents a major therapeutic advance, toxicities and also cost justify future efforts to reduce the need for long-term continuous treatment. Support: K23CA178183, R01CA183444, U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171, Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01886872 Figure. Figure. Disclosures Ding: Merck: Research Funding. Bartlett:Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; ImaginAB: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Acerta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding. Brander:BeiGene: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: DSMB; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Teva: Consultancy, Honoraria; Acerta: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; DTRM: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding. Barr:AbbVie, Gilead: Consultancy. Parikh:Gilead: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Coutre:Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lozanski:Novartis: Research Funding; BI: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Stem Line: Research Funding; Coulter: Research Funding; Beckman: Research Funding. Larson:Ariad/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; BristolMyers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Erba:Amgen: Research Funding; Juno: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; MacroGenics: Consultancy; Juno: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Juno: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; MacroGenics: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda/Millenium: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda/Millenium: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; MacroGenics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Astellas: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Other: Chair, Data and Safety Monitoring Committee; MacroGenics: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: grant; Astellas: Research Funding; Juno: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Astellas: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: grant; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: grant; Astellas: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Immunogen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Immunogen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Other: Chair, Data and Safety Monitoring Committee; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: grant; Jazz: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Immunogen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Immunogen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda/Millenium: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Other: Chair, Data and Safety Monitoring Committee; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda/Millenium: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Other: Chair, Data and Safety Monitoring Committee. Owen:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria; Teva: Honoraria. Abramson:Bayer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Humanigen: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy.

Abstract The nucleoside analogue pentostatin has clinical activity in B-Cell Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) and has shown significant activity and minimal toxicity when combined with cyclophosphamide for previously treated CLL. Building on this, we initiated a trial in 2002 of combined pentostatin (2mg/m2), cyclophosphamide (600 mg/m2) and rituximab (375mg/m2). Of the 33 enrolled eligible patients included in these analyses, seventeen patients were in the high Rai risk group, 25 were male, and median age for this cohort was 62 yrs (range: 40–79); 17 were non-mutated for the immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region gene, and the majority (67%) were CD38 negative. Only 5 patients had no detectable chromosomal abnormalities by FISH at baseline, 20 had a single FISH anomaly, and 8 had 2 or more FISH anomalies. Of all 28 pts with any anomaly, the following specific abnormalities were detected: 13q- (n=17), +12 (n=8), 11q- (n=7), 17p- (n=2), t(14;18) (n=1), 6q- (n=1), and MDM2 (n=1). Of the 33 patients, 22 had grade 3+ toxicity; 16 patients had non-hematologic toxicity wtih the most common symptoms being nausea (6) and vomiting (4). One patient died on study of grade 5 hypoxia as well as hypotension and this was deemed possibly related to treatment. Almost all patients (32/33; 97%) had a best response of PR or better. Including review of bone marrows done 2 months post-treatment, there were 11 CRs (complete response), 7 nPRs (nodal partial response) and 13 PRs. No differences were observed between type of response and mutation status or CD38+ status. Post-treatment FISH analyses were available on 27 patients; results for 25 patients became normal after treatment. Of the remaining 2, one patient was 13q- x1 and went from 94% to 27.5% abnormal nuclei after treatment; the other is the patient who died on study. To establish minimal residual disease (MRD) post-response, we used three color flow cytometry to detect CD5+/CD19+/CD79b− B cells. This approach found all patients had a reduction in CLL B cells with a median reduction of 91% (range: 5 – 100%). Of interest, all 3 response groups (CR vs. nPR vs. PR) had patients with significant reductions in CLL B cells (i.e., >90%). The nPR group was most variable in terms of MRD (median 47%; range: 5–93%) compared to the CR (median: 91%; range: 42–99.9%) and PR (median: 97%; range: 46–100%) groups. In conclusion this novel regimen of pentostatin, cyclophosphamide and rituximab has demonstrated significant clinical activity irrespective of risk stratification parameters with rapid induction of responses, achievement of minimal residual disease in some, and modest toxicity. Patients continue to be accrued to further explore correlative measures of response to treatment.

Abstract Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) is primarily characterized by the presence of leukemic B lymphocytes resistant to the process of apoptosis. Causes for this resistance include aberrant expression of multiple anti-apoptotic proteins, perhaps including Tcl-1 (1). Tcl-1 is expressed during normal development of both B and T cells and activates Akt to provide a survival signal through phosphorylation and inactivation of apoptotic pathway components. Overexpression of Tcl-1 in the B cells of transgenic mice results in a B-cell leukemia phenotype typical of human CLL, suggesting a primary role for Tcl-1 in CLL tumorigenesis. A recent report showed that Tcl-1 protein expression in CLL cells correlated with other biological parameters, but no data were available as to its clinical relevance (2). We therefore examined Tcl-1 expression in relation to clinical outcome using 51 peripheral blood mononuclear cell samples from a Phase II clinical trial testing the combination of pentostatin, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab in previously untreated CLL patients (Kay et al., ASH 2006). Tcl-1 protein expression was measured by immunoblot using GAPDH as a normalization control across lanes and lysate from a single Tcl-1 transgenic mouse spleen as a normalization control across immunoblots. All samples were run at least in duplicate and digital quantitation was performed using a ChemiDoc instrument (BioRad). Tcl-1 expression in patient cells was calculated in comparison to Tcl-1 expression in the mouse lysate, arbitrarily set to 1.0. Data were analyzed as a continuous measure as well as by specific cutoffs. Higher Tcl-1 expression was associated with failure to achieve a minimal residual disease-negative state after treatment. Specifically, Tcl-1 expression (measured as a continuous variable) was associated with residual disease measured by post-treatment CD5+/CD19+ cell percentages (continuous variable as well as dichotomized by cutpoint of 1.0% for CD5+/CD19+; p=0.03 for both comparisons). For the dichotomized Tcl-1 expression with the cutpoint of 0.275 (second tertile), this variable was marginally significantly associated with whether or not post-treatment CD5+/CD19+ was less than 1.0%. Using this same cutoff, there was also a suggestion that patients with reduced Tcl-1 were more likely to achieve a complete response. Finally, progression-free survival was shorter in patients with increased Tcl-1 expression, although these data did not reach statistical significance in this sample set. Tcl-1 < 0.275 Tcl-1≥ 0.275 p value CD5/CD19≥ 1% 15 10 0.046 CD5/CD19 < 1% 16 2 CR 17 3 0.064 No CR 18 13 Median PFS (mos.) 36.5 17.1 0.137 Statistically significant associations with other parameters including Rai stage, IgVH mutation status, ZAP-70 expression, CD38 expression, and interphase cytogenetics categories were not detected in this sample set. These data further support the clinical relevance of the Tcl-1 mouse model to human CLL, and provide preliminary evidence that Tcl-1 protein expression correlates with clinical outcome of CLL patients treated with chemoimmunotherapy. If validated in larger studies, Tcl-1 expression may serve as a novel prognostic factor.

Abstract BACKGROUND: B-Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) is still uncurable but very powerful new tools are available with the use of chemoimmunotherapy (CIT). Purine nucleoside-based regimens that incorporate rituximab have generated very high levels of overall responses (OR) with significant percentage of those complete responses (CR) in previously untreated CLL. Here we report and update our experience with a phase 2 pentostatin-based CIT regimen for previously untreated CLL as conducted at 2 medical centers. We also studied the association of outcome based on risk stratification parameters and achievement of minimal residual disease. METHODS: Building on prior work of pentostatin in CLL by us (Kay ASH, 2004) and others, we initiated a trial of combined pentostatin (P)(2 mg/m2), cyclophosphamide (C)(600 mg/m2) and rituximab (R)(375 mg/m2) for symptomatic, previously untreated patients (n=65). This PCR regimen is given on a 21-day, 6-cycle schedule. However, the initial cycle of treatment uses thrice weekly rituximab as described by us earlier. In brief, this was rituximab at 100 mg/m2 on day 1, 375 mg/m2 on days 3 and 5 of the first week only. Prophylactic Sulfamethoxazole/Trimethoprim and Acyclovir were given to all patients for 1 year starting on the first cycle of therapy with PCR. All patients were risk stratified using CD38, ZAP-70, immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region gene (IgVH) and FISH panel assessments at entry. RESULTS: These patients were characterized as mostly in high-risk categories. Of 64 evaluable patients, 34 (53%) were high Rai risk (stage 3–4), 71% were non mutated for the IgVH gene, 34% were CD38+ and 34% were ZAP-70+. Thirty patients (52%) had one FISH anomaly, and 21 (36%) had complex FISH defects. Thirty-eight patients (58%) had grade 3+ hematologic toxicity but minimal transfusion needs, and no major infections. NCI Working Group Criteria Responses occurred in 58 (91%) with 26 (41%) complete responses (CR), 14 (22%) nodular partial responses (nodular PR), and 18 (28%) partial responses (PR) patients. Outcome for all 64 patients demonstrates a median progression-free survival of 32.6 months. Importantly, no high risk factor (i.e., age, FISH, IgVH status, CD38+, ZAP-70+) except for del (17p) defect (n=3) precluded attaining a CR or NPR. In contrast, we found this regimen was equally effective in young vs. elderly (>70 yrs) patients and in del(11)(q22.3) vs. other favorable prognostic FISH factors. Examination of outcome among CR and nodular PR patients for PFS by flow cytometry status (negative vs. positive, i.e., ≤ 1 % CD5+/CD19+ vs. ≥ 1 % CD5+/CD19+) demonstrated improvement in progression free survival for patients who attained flow cytometry negativity (p = 0.009). Conclusion: This novel regimen of pentostatin, cyclophosphamide and rituximab for previously untreated CLL demonstrated significant clinical activity despite poor risk-based prognoses with minimal toxicity in terms of bone marrow suppression and/or infections. The additional feature of this approach is the ability to have durable responses for all age groups and even CLL patients with a del(11)(q22.3).

Abstract Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in adolescents and young adults (AYA) is characterized by distinct presenting features and inferior prognosis compared to pediatric ALL. Age, as a continuous variable, is negatively correlated with prognosis, in spite of risk-adapted combination chemotherapy. To better understand the etiology of ALL in this age group, we performed the first genome-wide association study (GWAS) to comprehensively examine germline single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for their association with susceptibility to B-ALL in AYAs. In the discovery GWAS, we compared genotype frequency at 635,297 SNPs between 308 AYA ALL cases (age 16-39 years, treated on the Children’s Oncology Group [COG], the Alliance-Cancer and Leukemia Group B, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, MD Anderson Cancer Center, and St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital trials) vs. 6,661 non-ALL controls. The association between genotypes at each SNP and ALL susceptibility was tested by using a logistic regression model after adjusting for genetic ancestries to control for population stratification. SNPs that reached P≤ 5×10-8 in the discovery GWAS were tested in an independent cohort of 82 AYA ALL cases from the COG protocols and 5,755 non-ALL controls. We identified a single genome-wide significant susceptibility locus on 10p14 signified by two SNPs within the GATA3 gene: rs3824662, P=2.8x10-10, odds ratio (OR)=1.77; rs3781093, P=3.2x10-9, OR=1.73, both of which were validated in the replication cohort (P=1.9x10-8 and P=4.3x10-5, respectively). We also examined the association signals in AYAs for susceptibility loci previously identified in pediatric ALL: ARID5B, IKZF1 and PIP4K2A variants were nominally significant in AYAs in the discovery GWAS and/or in the replication analysis, whereas CEBPE or CDKN2A/CDKN2B were not significant. These results imply both similarities and differences in genetic predisposition to ALL between children and AYAs. At the GATA3 locus, rs3824662 risk variant was over-represented in Philadelphia chromosome (Ph)-like ALL in AYAs (P=0.02), confirming our previous report of Ph-like ALL susceptibility variants in GATA3 (Nat Genet 45:1494). Importantly, even after excluding Ph-like cases, rs3824662 remained associated with the risk of developing ALL in AYAs, suggesting that the influence of the GATA3risk variant on ALL susceptibility in AYAs extends beyond the predisposition to Ph-like subtype. We next examined the relationship between GATA3 risk allele frequency and age at diagnosis in a cohort of unselected childhood and adolescent ALL cases enrolled in the COG P9900 protocols (N=1,827). Dividing patients into four consecutives age groups (<5, 5-10, 10-15 and >15 years), we observed a clear progressive increase in the risk allele frequency at rs3824662 (P=6.29×10-11) with increasing allelic odds ratio (i.e. relative risk of ALL conferred by each copy of the risk allele). This correlation between genotype and age was evident regardless of genetic ancestry, although the risk variant was more common among individuals with higher Native American ancestry. In contrast, the frequency of ALL susceptibility variant in ARID5B decreased progressively with increasing age at diagnosis (P=0.006), whereas PIP4K2A, CDKN2A/CDKN2B, IKZF1 and CEBPE variants were not related to age. Finally, we compared rs3824662 risk variant frequency by age in the COG P9900 protocols after stratifying the ALL cases into TCF3-PBX1, ETV6-RUNX1, hyperdiploid, MLL-rearranged and B-other. There was a trend that the risk allele was more frequent in cases older than 16 years compared to those below 16 in the five subtypes examined. In conclusion, we have identified inherited GATA3 genetic variants that strongly influence ALL susceptibility in adolescent and young adults, indicating potential age-related differences in ALL biology. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 1614 Poster Board I-640 Background Cytogenetic abnormalities in B-cell CLL are important prognostic indicators for predicting disease progression and treatment response. Until recently, only interphase cytogenetics has been readily applicable to clinical use in CLL due to the inability of traditional mitogens to promote effective metaphase cytogenetic identification. Recently, cytokine or CpG oligonucleotide stimulation has been utilized to promote efficient metaphase analysis. One concern with this approach is the actual clonality and reproducibility of such clones when examined by different cytogenetic laboratories. The CLL Research Consortium (CRC) conducted a prospective trial to test (1) whether CpG would enhance detection of abnormal clones and (2) whether the CRC cytogenetic laboratories would achieve similar results when testing the same patient samples. Methods Initially, one laboratory compared stimulation of CLL cells using CpG versus pokeweed mitogen (PWM) + 12-O-tetradecanoyl-phorbol-13-acetate (TPA) in the same samples. To test the reproducibility of CpG stimulation, fresh blood samples from 1 normal control and 12 CLL patients were collected at one site and distributed (blinded to phenotype and prior cytogenetic results) to 5 CRC cytogenetic laboratories where they were cultured for 3 days using CpG stimulation, harvested, banded and analyzed utilizing standard laboratory procedures. When possible, each laboratory analyzed 20 metaphases per case. Interphase FISH analysis for CLL (including probes for chromosomes 6q, 11q, 12, 13q, 17p, and IGH/CCND1) was also done on each sample. Results In the PWM+TPA versus CpG comparison, more cases were found to have clonal abnormalities with CpG stimulation (147 of 229, 64%) than with PWM+TPA (110 of 229, 48%; P=0.0005). All clonal abnormalities detected in the PWM+TPA cultures were also observed in the CpG cultures. In the 5-laboratory CpG comparison, the results were compiled and compared to the concurrent FISH results. The CpG karyotypes were concordant with the FISH results. The control case had a normal CpG-stimulated karyotype in all 5 laboratories. Three cases exhibited a complex karyotype; one of these also exhibited 11q-, one had 17p-, and one had neither. The cytogenetic descriptions varied modestly among labs, but all identified the complex clones. Every case including the control exhibited some nonclonal abnormal cells, but no pattern was detected among the 5 labs. When an abnormal clone was found by only 1 or 2 labs, it was present in only a very small number of cells. A small 13q- clone was observed in 2 cases in 1 and 2 labs (3 of 20 and 5 of 50 cells, respectively), and was confirmed by interphase FISH. A single lab found 2 of 30 cells with a t(12;15) in one case. Conclusions Abnormal clones in CLL are more readily detected with CpG stimulation than with traditional B-cell mitogens. The clonal abnormalities revealed by CpG stimulation are consistent with the “gold standard” interphase FISH results, and are reproducible among different cytogenetic laboratories. We have no evidence that CpG oligonucleotides create new clonal B-cell populations in vitro during 3 days of cell culture. CpG stimulation in vitro reveals clonal cytogenetic abnormalities and complexity in CLL that should be evaluated as potential independent prognostic parameters. Disclosures Kay: Biogenc-Idec, Celgene, Genentech, genmab: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech, Celgene, Hospira, Polyphenon Pharma, Sanofi-Aventis: Research Funding.