Citations

Abstract Abstract 4160 We propose that the pathophysiology of marginal zone B-cell lymphomas (MZL) could allow for their classification into lymphoid organs located in MZL and extra-nodal MZL of MALT type; the former category encompassing splenic MZL (SMZL) and nodal MZL (NMZL). The rarity of these lymphomas and difficulty in distinguishing them from other low-grade B-cell lymphoma such as lymphoplasmacytic lymphomas hampers further understanding of disease biology. In an attempt to better characterize the genetic basis of these entities and compare acquired genetic changes based on this categorization we performed array-based comparative genomic hybridization (using the 244A array, Agilent) in a cohort of MZL cases. In total we analyzed 101 MZL, including 46 MALT (including 8 cases with t(11;18)(q21;q21)), 35 SMZL and 20 NMZL. Overall, 90.1% cases have copy-number abnormalities (CNA). Genomic complexity was greatest in MALT without t(11;18)(q21;q21)(4 CNA), followed NMZL (3.5 CNA), SMZL (3 CNA) and MALT with t(11;18)(q21;21)(1 CNA). Seventeen minimal deleted regions (MDRs) and 9 minimal amplified regions (MARs) were defined based on the presence in at least one entity with a frequency of 10% or higher. Gains of chromosomes 3, 12 and 18 were found in all entities. Deletion of 6q was the most common abnormality in MALT (21.1%) and, to less extent, SMZL and NMZL. Biallelic and focal monoallelic deletions on 6q23.3-q24.1 identified TNFAIP3 as the sole gene inside the common MDR between entities. Deletion of chromosome 13 was observed in all entities, but NMZL and MALT were characterized by whole chromosome deletions, whereas focal deletions on 13q14.3 (MIR16-1/MIR15A) were identified in SMZL. A subset of abnormalities was shared for more than one entity: deletions 9p21.3 (CDKN2A) and 11q21-q22 (ATM) were found in NMZL and SMZL but not in MALT; deletion 7q32.1-q33 was the most common CNA in of SMZL but was also found in MALT; gain of 6p was found in MALT and NMZL but not in SMZL. Other CNA were only found in one entity such as deletion of 17p13.3-p12 (TP53) in SMZL, deletion of 15q25.3-q26.2 in NMZL. In addition to 17% of cases with the t(11;18)(q21;q21), extra copies of MALT1, focal amplifications of REL and/or monoallelic/biallelic deletions of TNFAIP3 were identified in an additional 46% of MALT lymphomas. These CNA were identified alone or in combination, but all of them were mutually exclusive with the t(11;18)(q21;21), thus totalizing 63% of MALT lymphomas with abnormalities affecting regulator genes from the NF-kB signaling pathway. Moreover, depending on the anatomic site of the MALT lymphoma, the prevalence of CNA affecting the NF-kB pathways varies from 50% in lacrimal glands to 75% in salivary glands. Abnormalities affecting regulator genes of the NF-kB signaling pathways were identified in a significantly lower frequency in NMZL (30%) and SMZL (31%) entities, suggesting its differential role in the pathogenesis of different entities. Using this high-resolution approach we show that while many abnormalities are shared unique patterns of genomic gains and losses characterize subgroups of MZL. Extranodal MZL seems to have a higher propensity of constitutive genetic upregulation of NF-kB pathways. Furthermore, this study remarks the importance of this pathway also in the subgroup of MALT lymphomas without translocations affecting the pathway. Disclosures: Fonseca: Genzyme: Consultancy; Medtronic: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; AMGEN: Consultancy; Otsuka: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Intellikine: Consultancy; Cylene: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; FISH probes prognostication in myeloma: Patents & Royalties.

Abstract Background: Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) remains challenging particularly in the relapsed/refractory setting, where patients often show chemoresistance. Novel molecular-based therapies have shown impressive and durable activity in that setting, although primary and acquired resistance remains problematic. A recent retrospective series of 114 patients who had failed ibrutinib (median of 4.7 month exposure) showed very short median overall survival of 2.9 months after ibrutinib cessation (Martin et al. Blood 2015). Here we report the results from the observationalMCL-004 study investigating outcomes of patients treated with lenalidomide (an IMiD® immunomodulatory agent) after failing ibrutinib; patients were either relapsed, progressed, refractory, or intolerant to ibrutinib. The objective here is to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of lenalidomide monotherapy or a lenalidomide-containing regimen in relapsed/refractory MCL after ibrutinib failure or intolerance. Methods: MCL-004 is a multicenter study in patients with MCL who relapsed/progressed after or were refractory/intolerant to ibrutinib, and were subsequently treated with lenalidomide. With patient informed consent, data were collected retrospectively from patients who, after their disease failed to respond to ibrutinib, received lenalidomide-based therapy from March 1, 2009 to June 9, 2015. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed overall response rate (ORR) based on 2007 International Working Group criteria, with required patient monitoring and routine imaging. Results: Thirty patients were enrolled at 7 US sites and 1 EU site, including patients receiving lenalidomide monotherapy (n=8), lenalidomide + rituximab (n=8), and lenalidomide + other treatment (n=14). Lenalidomide + other treatment included combination with rituximab, carfilzomib, and dexamethasone (n=3); other combinations were given in ≤2 patients. Patients had a median age of 69 years (range, 50-84), and median time from last dose of ibrutinib to first dose of lenalidomide was 1.3 weeks (range, 0.1-21.7). All patients received ≥2 prior lines of therapy, and 83% received ≥3 prior therapies (median prior therapies, 3.5; range, 2-8). With prior ibrutinib, the best responses achieved were 10% complete response (CR), 43% partial response (PR), 3% stable disease, 40% relapse/progressive disease (PD), and 3% unknown. Primary reasons for ibrutinib discontinuation were 50% relapse/PD, 40% refractory, and 10% intolerance. Patients received a median of 2 cycles (range, 1-11) of lenalidomide-based treatment. Eight patients' disease responded (4 CR, 4 PR), resulting in an ORR of 27% (95% CI, 12%-46%). Five of 8 maintained their response at data cut-off (3 CR, 2 PR). ORR was similar for patients with relapse/PD vs. those refractory to ibrutinib (29% vs. 33%, respectively). Median duration of response (DOR) was 18 weeks (95% CI, 2.9-25+) for all patients. Median DOR was not reached in patients who previously relapsed/progressed with ibrutinib compared with a median of 11 weeks for those whose disease was refractory to ibrutinib. Most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were 33% fatigue; 27% nausea; and 23% each dyspnea, neutropenia, dizziness, or rash. In general, TEAEs were less common with lenalidomide monotherapy. The most frequently reported serious AEs were pneumonia, dyspnea, deep vein thrombosis, hypotension, and acute kidney injury (7% each). At data cutoff, 15 patients (50%) had died, mostly due to MCL and none due to second primary malignancy. Conclusions: Most patients received ≥3 prior lines of treatment, and median time from last dose of ibrutinib to first dose of lenalidomide was short. Lenalidomide-based treatment showed clinical activity in this difficult-to-treat patient population, including 27% ORR and 13% CR. No new safety signals for lenalidomide were identified. Overall, our results show that lenalidomide is active in a selected group of patients with relapsed/refractory MCL that previously failed ibrutinib. Disclosures Wang: BeiGene: Research Funding; Asana BioSciences: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Martin:Acerta: Consultancy; Teva: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses. Goy:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Writing support, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; infinity: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Research Funding; Acerta: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hamadani:Takeda: Research Funding. Ghosh:Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; SGN: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Reeder:Millennium: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Barnett:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Casadebaig Bravo:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Schuster:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Janssen Research & Development: Research Funding; Nordic Nanovector: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Hoffman-LaRoche: Research Funding.

Motexafin gadolinium (MGd, Xcytrin®) is a novel anti-cancer drug that selectively concentrates in cancer cells and disrupts redox dependent pathways by targeting oxidative stress related proteins such as thioredoxin reductase and metallothioneins. MGd has been shown to generate reactive oxygen species and induce apoptosis in tumor cells. We initiated a study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of MGd in two B-cell malignancies, relapsed/refractory LG and relapsed/refractory CLL or CLL/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL). MGd was given intravenously (IV) at 6mg/kg/day for 3 days q 2 weeks for LG and 5mg/kg/day for 10 days q 3 weeks for CLL/SLL. Ten patients (pts) with LG (2 grade 1, 5 grade 2, 1 grade 3 follicular, 2 marginal zone), 2 pts with CLL/SLL and 1 pt with CLL have been enrolled. Median age was 64.5 yrs (range 44–77), median prior treatment regimens was 3.5 (range 1–6) and median time from diagnosis to treatment was 52 mo. Many LG pts had failed prior aggressive treatment regimens including: CHOP (4), ICE (1), HyperCVAD(1), auto-bone marrow transplant (1); all failed rituxamab and 6 failed Zevalin. CLL/SLL and CLL pts had failed rituxamab (3), fludarabine (2), and R-CHOP (1). MGd related adverse events included skin and urine discoloration (6 and 4 pts), diarrhea, nausea, vesiculobullous rash, peripheral neuropathy (3 pts each). MGd related ≥gr 3 adverse events included skin rash (3 pts), fatigue, neuropathy, photosensitivity (1 pt each). Importantly, no MGd-related myelosuppression was observed. In 12 evaluable pts, there have been three PRs of 2+, 5+ and 8 months duration (2 follicular, 1 CLL). Two pts had SD (follicular, SLL) one of these had resolution of lymphoma related autoimmune hemolytic anemia. Responses occurred after ≤2 cycles of therapy and were seen in patients after extensive prior treatment (mean 4.3 prior regimens, range 3–7). MGd is a non-myelosuppressive drug with single agent activity in LG and CLL/SLL.

Abstract Abstract 2699 Poster Board II-675 Introduction: High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplant (SCT) is a standard treatment option for younger patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphomas (a-NHL) who fail to respond, or relapse after initial therapy. For patients who relapse after SCT there are few effective treatment options and prognosis remains poor (Vose et al Blood. 80(8):2142–8, 1992). A second SCT was shown to achieve only marginal responses and at an increased risk of toxic death (Lenain et al Hematol J. 5(5):403–9, 2004). Therefore, new approaches are needed for treatment of patients in this poor prognostic group. Lenalidomide (Revlimid®) is an immunomodulatory agent that has shown clinical activity in treatment of several B-cell malignancies. Two phase 2 studies of lenalidomide monotherapy in patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) a-NHL were conducted in the US (NHL-002; Wiernik et al JCO 26:4952–7, 2008) and internationally (CC-5013 NHL-003). In an extended follow-up of the NHL-002 study, the overall response rate (ORR) was 35%, which included 12% of patients with a complete response (CR), and a median duration of response (DR) lasting 10.4 months (Wiernik et al 2008 EHA. Abst: 764). Comparable efficacy was observed in the larger confirmatory, phase 2, NHL-003 study of lenalidomide in a similar patient population. The goal of this analysis was to learn the ORR and DR to lenalidomide in patients with a prior SCT. Methods: Patient data from both phase II studies were pooled for this report. Eligibility for both studies was similar – patients with R/R a-NHL, which included diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), transformed lymphoma (TL), and follicular lymphoma grade III (FL-III), with measurable disease (≥ 2 cm), and ≥ 1 prior treatment regimen. Patients received oral lenalidomide 25 mg once daily on days 1–21 of a 28-day cycle. Protocol defined treatment continued for up to 52 wks in NHL-002, or until disease progression in NHL-003. Primary endpoint was ORR; secondary endpoints included DR, progression-free survival (PFS), and safety. Results: 87 patients with a prior SCT (14 patients from NHL-002; 73 patients from NHL-003) were included in this analysis. Median age of patients was 61 yrs (range, 23–76), with a median of 4 prior therapies (range, 2–12). The ORR to lenalidomide was 39% (34/87), with 13% (11/87) CR/CRu and 26% (23/87) partial response (PR). Median PFS for all 87 patients was 3.8 months (95% CI, 2.6, 5.6) and the DR for 34 responders was 9.7 months (95% CI, 4.2, 16.3). Responses occurred in 15 of 52 patients (29% ORR; 10% CR/CRu) with DLBCL, 12 of 19 patients with MCL (63% ORR; 26% CR/CRu), and in 6 of 10 patients with TL (60% ORR; 10% CR/CRu). The table summarizes responses for patients who did not have a transplant, for those who had a SCT anytime prior to lenalidomide; as the last therapy prior to lenalidomide; and not as last therapy prior to lenalidomide. Most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (44%), thrombocytopenia (33%), and anemia (9%). Eighteen (20.6%) patients discontinued treatment due to adverse events. Patients with a prior history of SCT appeared to have a significantly higher rate of thrombocytopenia, all grades (51% v 30%; P = 0.001), and grades 3 or 4 (33% v 16%; P = 0.002). Patients with a prior SCT were also more likely to experience a dose reduction/interruption due to thrombocytopenia compared with those without a prior SCT (25% v 14%; P = 0.027). Conclusions: Based on a pooled dataset from two phase II studies, oral lenalidomide monotherapy appears to be a well tolerated and active therapy resulting in durable responses in patients with R/R a-NHL who had a prior SCT. Furthermore, the potential of achieving a response to lenalidomide appears to be independent of prior history of SCT. Disclosures: Vose: Celgene: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide for the treatment of relapsed/refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. . Czuczman:Celgene: Research Funding. Zinzani:Celgene: Research Funding. Tuscano:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Pietronigro:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ervin-Haynes:Celgene: Employment. Witzig:Celgene: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Lenalidomide (Revlimid®), an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD®), was recently approved in the US for treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and myelodysplastic syndromes associated with a deletion 5q[31] cytogenetic abnormality. Lenalidomide also has demonstrated activity in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma while thalidomide, a less potent IMiD®, has activity in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma as both monotherapy and in combination with rituximab. Aim: To assess the safety and activity of lenalidomide monotherapy in subjects with relapsed/refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL). Methods: Subjects with relapsed/refractory aggressive NHL following at least 1 prior treatment regimen with measurable disease are eligible. Subjects receive 25 mg lenalidomide orally once daily on Days 1–21 every 28 days and continue therapy for 52 weeks as tolerated or until disease progression. Response and progression are evaluated using the IWLRC methodology. Results: As of July 25, 2006, 32 subjects of a planned 40 have enrolled and 31 have received drug. Twenty-two subjects are currently evaluable for tumor response. The median age of the 22 response-evaluable subjects is 65 (46–83) and 13 are female. Histology is diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [DLBCL] (n=12), follicular center lymphoma grade 3 [FL] (n=3), mantle cell lymphoma [MCL] (n=5) and transformed [TSF] (n=2). Median time from diagnosis to lenalidomide monotherapy is 2.3 (0.7–7) years and median number of prior treatment regimens per subject is 2 (1–6). Seven subjects (32%) exhibited an objective response (2 complete responses unconfirmed (CRu) and 5 partial responses (PR)), 6 had stable disease (SD) for a tumor control rate (TCR) of 59% and 9 progressive disease (PD). Responses were produced in each of the aggressive histologic subtypes studied: DLBCL (3/12), FL (1/3), MCL (2/5) and TSF (1/2). Five of 11 subjects (45%) with 1–2 prior treatment regimens had an objective response, as did 2 of 3 subjects (67%) who had received a prior stem cell transplant. Median time-to-response was 2 months. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 18 of 31 (58%) subjects receiving drug. These were predominantly Grade 3 hematological events (neutropenia, thrombocytopenia) with only 4 subjects (13%) experiencing a Grade 4 adverse reaction. Conclusion: Preliminary results indicate that lenalidomide monotherapy is active with manageable side effects in relapsed/refractory aggressive NHL.

Abstract Abstract 1618 Introduction: Primary breast lymphoma is a rare type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), representing about 1% of breast tumors and 2% of extranodal NHL. Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common primary subtype presenting in the breast. Due to the low incidence of primary breast DLBCL, outcome data is limited. The aim of this study was to retrospectively assess the natural history of primary breast DLBCL in the pre and post rituximab eras, with specific emphasis on the incidence of local, systemic and central nervous system (CNS) relapses. Methods: Data was retrospectively collected on patients with primary breast DLBCL from seven USA academic medical centers. Institutional review board approval was obtained at each participating site. Patients were identified through institutional databases and tumor registries at each site. Charts were reviewed to obtain demographic and clinical variables including treatment history and dates of relapse and death when applicable. Only patients with stage I/II disease (involvement of breast and localized lymph nodes) were included. All histologies apart from primary DLBCL were excluded. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the diagnosis date to the date of death or last follow-up. Time to Progression (TTP) was calculated from diagnosis data until the date of pathological evidence of recurrence or death. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics, and survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Between 1984 and 2012, 75 patients were identified who met the eligibility criteria. The median age was 62 years (range 17–87); 81% presented with a palpable mass; 12% had their disease detected incidentally by mammography; 4% presented with B-symptoms; 59% had right breast involvement; 67% had stage I and 33% had stage II disease. The stage-adjusted international prognostic index (IPI) score was 0 in 28% of patients, 1 in 41%, 2, in 25%, 3 in 4% and 4 in 1%. 91% of patients were treated with chemotherapy; 31% of these were treated in the pre-rituximab era and 69% received rituximab. Radiation therapy (RT) was utilized in 68% of patients and was the only treatment modality in 8% of those receiving RT. 8% of patients received CNS prophylaxis with intrathecal chemotherapy. After a median follow-up of 4.5 years (range 0.6 – 20.6 years), the Kaplan-Meier estimated median TTP was 10.4 years (95% CI 6.2 – 14.6 years) and the median OS was 14.6 years (95% CI 6.5 – 22.6 years). The 5-year TTP and 5-year OS were 65% (95% CI 53–77%) and 75% (95% CI 64–86%) respectively. Among the patients who relapsed, 67% occurred within the first 2 years. A total of 7 relapses in the breast were observed, none in patients treated with combination of chemotherapy and RT. In univariate analysis, rituximab exposure was not associated with any difference in TTP or OS. The stage-adjusted IPI was associated with OS; the 5-year OS was 88% (95% CI 79–98%) in patients with a score of 0–1 versus 48% (95% CI 25–71%) in those with a score of 2–4 (log rank p < 0.001). The very limited-disease group with a stage-adjusted IPI of 0 had a 5-year OS of 94% (95% CI 83–100%) compared to all others who had a 5-year OS of 67% (95% CI 52–81%; log rank p = 0.001). There was no difference in TTP and OS in patients with solitary versus multiple breast masses or between patients with tumors less than versus more than 7cm. Patients receiving RT in addition to chemotherapy had a longer TTP than those who did not (log rank p = 0.03), but RT was not associated with an improved OS. Patients who relapsed and underwent stem cell transplant (SCT) had similar OS to those who never relapsed. Ten patients (13%) had CNS relapse (3 with leptomeningeal disease, 5 with brain parenchymal disease and 2 with both). All CNS relapses occurred within the first 2.8 years from the time of diagnosis. There was no difference in the rate of CNS relapse in the patients who received IT prophylaxis versus those who did not. Conclusions: In this multicenter study, the largest published to date, primary breast DLBCL appears to have a worse prognosis than early-stage DLBCL in nodal or other extranodal sites. RT was associated with improved TTP. Patients who relapsed were successfully salvaged with SCT, and had similar survival times to those who never relapsed. A high CNS relapse rate (∼1 in 8 patients, including parenchymal disease in 70%) was observed. The small numbers preclude definitive conclusions on the value of intrathecal prophylaxis or the utility of rituximab. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

SummaryBendamustine (B) with rituximab (R) is a standard frontline treatment for medically fit follicular lymphoma (FL) patients. The safety and efficacy of maintenance rituximab (MR) after BR induction has not been formally compared to observation for FL, resulting in disparate practice patterns. Prospective trials have shown benefit of MR after R‐CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) or R‐CVP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisone), yet recent data from the GALLIUM study comparing outcomes of patients treated with chemotherapy with R or obinutuzumab (G) showed higher than anticipated fatal adverse events with BR/BG. In order to assess the efficacy and tolerability of MR after BR, we retrospectively collected data on 640 newly diagnosed patients treated with FL. We found that patients who achieved partial remission (PR) after ≥4 cycles of BR had improved duration of response (DOR) with MR vs. no maintenance, whereas those in complete remission did not. These findings were confirmed in a validation cohort. In the entire study population, the known fatal adverse event rate after BR was 2·5% and did not significantly differ in those receiving MR versus no maintenance. [Correction added on 14 January 2019, after online publication: The preceding sentence has been corrected in this current version.] Within the limitations inherent to retrospective analysis, these data suggest that FL patients with a PR to BR experience prolongation of remission with MR with an acceptable safety profile.