Citations

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

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

Clinical success with intravenous (IV) oncolytic virotherapy (OV) has to date been anecdotal. Here, we conducted a phase 1 clinical trial of systemic OV therapy and investigated the mechanisms of action in responding T-cell lymphoma (TCL) patients. A single IV dose of VSV-IFNβ-NIS was administered to patients with relapsed refractory hematologic malignancies to determine safety and efficacy across 4 dose levels (DL). Correlative studies were undertaken to evaluate viremia, virus shedding, virus replication and immune responses. Fifteen patients received VSV-IFNβ-NIS (7 multiple myeloma, 7 TCL, 1 acute myeloid leukemia); 3 patients were treated at each DL1 through DL3 (0.05, 0.17, and 0.5 x 1011 TCID50), and 6 at DL4 (1.7 x 1011 TCID50). There were no dose limiting toxicities. 3 of 7 patients with TCL had RECIST responses: a 3-month PR at DL2, a 6-month PR and a durable CR ongoing at 20 months at DL4. Viremia peaked at the end of infusion and no infectious virus shedding was detected. Plasma interferon-β levels, a biomarker of VSV-IFNβ-NIS replication, peaked between 4h and 48h post infusion. The patient with CR had robust viral replication with increased ell free DNA in her plasma, a very high peak IFNβ level of 18,213 pg/ml, a strong anti-VSV neutralizing antibody response, and increased numbers of tumor reactive T-cells. VSV-IFNβ-NIS as a single agent was effective in patients with TCL resulting in durable disease remissions in heavily pretreated patients. Correlative analyses suggest that responses may be due to a combination of direct oncolytic tumor destruction and immune-mediated tumor control. Further clinical testing is warranted. (This trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03017820).

AbstractErdheim–Chester disease (ECD) is a histiocytic neoplasm that predominantly harbors mitogen‐activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway variants. MAPK inhibitors typically are effective treatments, but mutations outside the MAPK pathway, such as CSF1R variants, may cause refractory ECD. We describe a patient with a novel somatic mutation in CSF1R (CSF1RR549_E554delinsQ) that resulted in refractory ECD affecting the central nervous system. Cell model studies, RNA sequencing analysis, and in silico protein modeling suggested that she had a gain‐of‐function mutation occurring in a region critical for autoinhibition. The patient was treated with pexidartinib, a CSF1R inhibitor, and has had a complete clinical and metabolic response lasting more than 1.5 years to date. To our knowledge, this is the first report to describe successful treatment of a patient with ECD by using an agent that specifically targets CSF1R. This case also highlights the critical role of individualized molecular profiling to identify novel therapeutic targets in ECD.

Abstract Introduction Histiocytic disorders pose significant diagnostic and management challenges for the clinicians due to diverse clinical manifestations and often non-specific histopathologic findings. Herein, we report the tumor board experience from the first-of-its-kind Histiocytosis Working Group (HWG). Materials and Methods The HWG was established in June 2017 and consists of experts from 10 subspecialties that discuss cases in a multidisciplinary format. We present the outcome of tumor board case discussions during the first 2 years since its inception (June 2017-June 2019). Results Forty cases with a suspected histiocytic disorder were reviewed at HWG during this time period. Average number of subspecialties involved in HWG case discussion was 5 (range, 2-9). Histiocytosis Working Group tumor board recommendations led to significant changes in the care of 24 (60%) patients. These included change in diagnosis (n = 11, 27%) and change in treatment (n = 13, 33%). Conclusion Our report highlights the feasibility of a multidisciplinary tumor board and its impact on outcomes of patients with histiocytic disorders.

Abstract Background: While extranodal involvement by mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is relatively common, involvement of the central nervous system (CNS) is rare (&lt;5% of cases), with limited treatment options. We report the outcomes of 36 patients (pts) with CNS involvement compared to 72 matched control MCL pts without CNS involvement. Methods: MCL pts with CNS involvement seen at Mayo Clinic between 1/1995-9/2020 were identified using the Mayo Data Explorer tool. CNS involvement was defined by tissue biopsy confirmed CNS MCL, CSF analysis demonstrating lymphoma cells, and/or neuroimaging findings compatible with CNS involvement. A 2:1 control group of MCL pts without CNS involvement, matched by age (+/- 2 years) and year of diagnosis (+/- 1 year), was selected among all MCL cases. Medical records were reviewed for baseline characteristics, treatment modalities, and outcomes. Kaplan-Meier method was used for time to event analysis. Wilcoxon test was used to compare continuous variables and Chi square test was used for categorical variables. Results: Out of 1,753 pts with MCL, 36 (2%) had evidence of CNS involvement, including 4 pts with CNS involvement at initial MCL diagnosis. Baseline characteristics of pts with CNS involvement (CNS MCL group) and those without CNS involvement (control group) are shown in Table 1. At MCL diagnosis, non-CNS extranodal involvement was seen in 30 (83%) pts in the CNS MCL group (24 pts with 1 site and 6 pts with ≥ 2 sites), with bone marrow being the most common extranodal site of involvement (n=24, 67%). For the control group, 54 (75%) pts had extranodal involvement (44 pts with 1 site and 10 pts with ≥ 2 sites), and bone marrow was also the most common extranodal site of involvement (n=50, 69%). Notably, advanced stage disease (stage 3-4) was more commonly seen in the CNS MCL group (n=32, 97%) than in the control group (n=59, 83%) (p=0.04) at MCL diagnosis. Blastoid variant was present in a higher proportion of pts in the CNS MCL group (n=11, 31%) compared to the control group (n=8, 11%) (p=0.02). The CNS MCL group also presented with a higher median serum LDH at diagnosis (239 U/L [range 153-1901] vs. 187 U/L [range 124-588], p=0.02), and higher Ki-67 (40% [range 15-100] vs. 30% [range 10-90], p=0.04) compared to the control group. The most common frontline treatment regimen was anthracycline-based therapies (i.e. R-CHOP, Nordic regimen, R-hyperCVAD) for both groups (58% in CNS MCL group and 56% in control group). 14 (39%) pts in the CNS MCL group underwent autologous stem cell transplant in CR1 vs. 31 pts (43%) in the control group. Similar use of rituximab maintenance was seen in both groups (31% in CNS MCL group and 25% in control group). Median total lines of therapy from initial MCL diagnosis was 3 (range 1-9) in CNS MCL group and 2 (range 1-9) in the control group. The median follow-up from MCL diagnosis was 134 months (95% CI:119-163) for the entire cohort. Median OS from MCL diagnosis was 50.3 months (95% CI: 20.9-71.1) for the CNS MCL group compared to 97.1 months (95% CI: 82.6-192.7; p=&lt;0.001) for the control group (Figure 1). Median time from MCL diagnosis to CNS involvement was 25 months (range 0-167). Median OS from CNS involvement was 4.7 months (95% CI: 2.3-6.7). At last follow up, 31 (86%) pts were deceased from the CNS MCL group, compared to 38 (52%) pts in the control group. For the CNS MCL group, the causes of death were CNS lymphoma in 10 (32%) pts, systemic lymphoma in 9 (29%) pts, treatment-related complication in 7 (23%) pts, and other/unknown in 5 (16%) pts. For the control group, the causes of death were systemic lymphoma in 15 (39%) pts, treatment-related in 2 (5%) pts, and other/unknown in 21 (55%) pts. Conclusion: In pts with MCL, CNS involvement is associated with worse outcomes as evident by a shorter median OS from initial MCL diagnosis (50 months vs. 97 months). Involvement of the CNS by lymphoma is an important contributor for the shorter OS as suggested by the median OS of only 5 months from CNS involvement. Advanced stage, blastoid variant, elevated LDH, and elevated Ki67 at MCL diagnosis were features more commonly seen in the CNS MCL cohort. Validation of risk factors at initial MCL diagnosis associated with CNS involvement and exploring the role of CNS prophylaxis are important topics for further investigation. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Paludo: Karyopharm: Research Funding. Wang: Novartis: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MorphoSys: Research Funding; InnoCare: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; LOXO Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Bennani: Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory Board; Daichii Sankyo Inc: Other: Advisory Board; Kyowa Kirin: Other: Advisory Board; Vividion: Other: Advisory Board; Kymera: Other: Advisory Board; Verastem: Other: Advisory Board. Nowakowski: Celgene, MorphoSys, Genentech, Selvita, Debiopharm Group, Kite/Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene, NanoString Technologies, MorphoSys: Research Funding. Witzig: Karyopharm Therapeutics, Celgene/BMS, Incyte, Epizyme: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene/BMS, Acerta Pharma, Kura Oncology, Acrotech Biopharma, Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding. Habermann: Seagen: Other: Data Monitoring Committee; Tess Therapeutics: Other: Data Monitoring Committee; Incyte: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Morphosys: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Loxo Oncology: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Eli Lilly & Co.,: Other: Scientific Advisor. Ansell: Bristol Myers Squibb, ADC Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Regeneron, Affimed, AI Therapeutics, Pfizer, Trillium and Takeda: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Activation of extracellular-signal regulated kinase (ERK) is almost universal in histiocytic disorders and is driven by genomic alterations in the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) and phosphoinositide 3-kinases (PI3K) pathways. While BRAFV600E mutations are well described in histiocytic disorders, less is known about BRAF fusions. The goal of our study is to describe the frequency and clinical characteristics of patients harboring BRAF fusions. Methods: We included patients with a diagnosis of histiocytic disorder seen at our institution from November 2016-June 2021. Only those who had adequate BRAF testing were included. The following were considered adequate BRAF testing: 1) unequivocally positive BRAF V600E immunostain with or without molecular confirmation; 2) successful multigene next generation sequencing (mostly Tempus â or FoundationOne â) if BRAF V600Eimmunostain was equivocal or negative. We also searched the literature for similar cases and compared BRAF fusions found in histiocytic disorders to those found in solid tumors and other hematologic conditions. Results: One hundred and twenty-six patients were included in this study. BRAF fusions were detected in 7 (6%) patients. The median follow-up for these patients was 1.4 years (95% CI: 0.4-not reached). The frequency according to disease subtypes is as follows: Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD; 2/46 [4%]), Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH; 1/41 [2%]), adult or juvenile xanthogranuloma (AXG/JXG; 4/7 [57%]), and histiocytic or Langerhans cell sarcoma (HS/LCS; 0/9 [0%]). The median age at diagnosis for our study cohort was 34 years (range, 7-81 years) and 5 were females. The clinical characteristics and nature of BRAF fusions of our 7 patients plus additional 13 cases from the literature are shown in Table 1. For the final cohort of 20 patients with BRAF-fusions, the median age was 16 years (range, 0.5-81 years) and most (56%) were females. The distribution by histiocytic subtypes is as follows: AXG/JXG (45%), LCH (40%), ECD (10%), HS/LCS (5%). Two patients received cobimetinib as frontline treatment in our cohort and achieved partial responses. Of these two patients, one completed 12 cycles (12 months) of cobimetinib and had a sustained PR while the other patient received 2 cycles before having to hold therapy due to intolerable adverse effects despite dose reduction. From literature review, another patient (LR-12) received cobimetinib as second line treatment and achieved complete response. We found 15 unique BRAF gene fusions with 4 being recurrent. Except for AGAP3-BRAF, none of these BRAF fusions in histiocytosis has been reported in solid tumors or hematologic conditions to date. Conclusions: BRAF gene fusions occur rarely (&lt;5%) in histiocytic disorders. The only exception is AXG/JXG where more than half of the patients harbor BRAF gene fusions. These gene fusions are mostly distinct to histiocytosis and not found in solid tumors or other hematologic conditions. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Bennani: Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory Board; Daichii Sankyo Inc: Other: Advisory Board; Kyowa Kirin: Other: Advisory Board; Vividion: Other: Advisory Board; Kymera: Other: Advisory Board; Verastem: Other: Advisory Board.

Abstract Background: Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD) is characterized by multi-organ infiltration of clonal histiocytes bearing activating mutations predominantly in the MAPK pathway. The diagnosis of ECD is clinico-pathologic; histopathologic findings alone are often non-specific. Characteristic pathognomonic finding of ECD is the symmetric osteosclerosis of the distal femur and proximal tibia/fibula, seen in &gt;90% of cases, and referred to herein as classic ECD (C-ECD). There is a paucity of data on the phenotypic and mutational differences between C-ECD and non-classic ECD (NC-ECD). Determining phenotypic patterns may allow for earlier suspicion and diagnosis. Methods: Patients who met the revised ECD criteria proposed by Haroche J et al (Blood 2020;135:1311-1318) and had full body imaging that included the lower legs (18-FDG-PET/CT or CT/bone scan) were included. ECD diagnosis was made when &gt;1 major criteria plus &gt;1 minor criteria were present. Major criteria: 1) symmetric meta-diaphyseal osteosclerosis in legs; 2) "hairy kidneys"; "coated aorta", right atrial pseudotumor, xanthelasma, exophthalmos; or osteosclerosis of paranasal sinuses. Minor criteria: 1) histologic finding of typical foamy histiocytes (CD68+/CD163+/CD1a-) associated with fibrosis; 2) mutation/gene fusion of BRAF, CSF1R, or MAPK/PI3K pathways. We compared the organ involvement and BRAF V600Emutational status between C-ECD and NC-ECD. Results: A total of 105 patients were included. The median age at diagnosis was 57 years (range, 38-81) and most were males (62%). Majority had 18-FDG-PET/CT (83%) and BRAF V600E testing (65%). The main organ systems involved were skeletal (83%), renal (64%), adrenal (44%), and pulmonary (42%). Central diabetes insipidus (DI), "hairy kidneys", and "coated aorta" were present in 27 (26%), 54 (51%), and 44 (42%) patients, respectively. Among those tested, BRAF V600E mutation was found in 48/67 (72%) by immunohistochemistry. In our cohort, most patients (n=87. 83%) had C-ECD. NC-ECD had significantly lower number of organs/systems involved compared with C-ECD (median 3 vs 6, p=0.002). C-ECD had significantly higher rates of involvement of paranasal sinuses (51%/7%, p=0.002), DI (26%/0%, p=0.02), and similar rates of lung (44%/43%), cardiac (34%/14%), and skin (14%14%) involvement when compared to NC-ECD. BRAF V600E was significantly more common in C-ECD (88%/30%, p=0.004). Thirty-nine (37%) patients underwent next generation sequencing, of whom 33 (31%) had successful testing. In C-ECD, 3 patients had mutations other than BRAF V600E, these included: NRAS, MAP2K1, and MEF2C-FLT3 fusion. In NC-ECD, 5 patients had mutations other than BRAF V600E, these included: MAP2K1, KRAS, and NF1. Conclusions: Our study suggests distinct differences in clinical presentation and molecular findings exist between C-ECD and NC-ECD. C-ECD has a higher degree of organ involvement and harbor BRAF V600E more frequently than NC-ECD. Further analysis of histopathologic findings and outcomes in this cohort may provide insights into these ECD subsets that can optimize future management of this disease. Figure 1: Sites of involvement of classical Erdheim-Chester Disease (C-ECD) versus non-classical Erdheim-Chester Disease (NC-ECD) Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Vassallo: Bristol-Myers-Squibb: Research Funding; Sun Pharma.: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding. Tobin: Mayo Clinic Center for MS and Autoimmune Neurology: Research Funding; Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; National Institutes of Health: Research Funding. Bennani: Verastem: Other: Advisory Board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory Board; Vividion: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Board; Daichii Sankyo Inc: Other: Advisory Board; Kyowa Kirin: Other: Advisory Board.