Citations

Abstract BACKGROUND A major impediment to improving neuro-oncology outcomes is poor clinical trial accrual. METHODS We convened a multi-stakeholder group including Society for Neuro-Oncology, Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology, patient advocacy groups, clinical trial cooperative groups, and other partners to determine how we can improve trial accrual. RESULTS We described selected factors contributing to poor trial accrual and possible solutions. We focused on patient and community factors, disparities, physician and provider factors, clinical trial factors, and site and organizational factors CONCLUSIONS We will implement strategies with the intent to double accrual to neuro-oncology trials over the next 5 years.

AbstractPrimary cutaneous follicle center cell lymphoma is the most prevalent type of primary cutaneous B‐cell lymphoma and usually portends a favorable prognosis. Typically, the diagnosis can be rendered based on characteristic histopathologic features and immunohistochemical profile. Rarely, a diagnostically challenging variant with a predominant spindle morphology mimicking other malignant spindle cell neoplasms may be encountered. Even more unusual is the presence of a prominent myxoid stroma in this rare sarcomatoid variant of follicle center cell lymphoma. Herein, we present a case of a 52‐year‐old man with a slowly enlarging cyst‐like lesion on the chin with histopathologic examination revealing a malignant, predominantly spindled neoplasm within an abundant myxoid stroma. Following a broad panel of immunohistochemical stains, the strong positive staining of the spindle cells for LCA (CD45), CD20, and Bcl‐6 confirmed the diagnosis of follicle center cell lymphoma. We present this distinctive rare subtype of cutaneous follicle center cell lymphoma to increase awareness of this variant and to discuss challenging histopathologic mimics to consider while highlighting the utility of immunohistochemistry stains to avoid misdiagnosis.

Objectives: Cerebral autosomal-dominant arteriopathy with subcortical infarcts and leukoencephalopathy (CADASIL) is inherited microangiopathy characterized by recurrent subcortical infarcts. A majority of those with CADASIL report coexistent migraine with aura. The authors aim to quantitatively describe migraine-related disability within a CADASIL cohort. Methods: A cross-sectional analysis was performed in a cohort of CADASIL. The Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) quantified migraine-related disability. Further metrics obtained include first and last migraine, aura semiology, and therapeutic measures. Results: Twenty-four individuals were included [63% (15/24) female individuals; mean age, 56 y; range, 34 to 81 y]. Fifty-four percent (13/24) reported migraine, whereas 46% (11/24) reporting varying degrees of migraine-related disability. MIDAS Questionnaire scores appeared bimodal: 58% (14/24) scored 0 to 5, 7% (1/24) scored 6 to 10, 7% (1/24) scored 11 to 20 and 33% (8/24) scored over 20. Severe disability was associated with the multiplicity of aura semiologies and poor response to pharmacologic prophylaxis. Conclusions: A bimodal distribution of migraine-related disability was observed. A third of individuals had a severe disability and appeared medically refractory to medical migraine prophylactic measures. This study may serve as a reference point for future trials quantitatively gauging response of novel migraine treatment strategies within this unique population.

OBJECTIVES: Preoperative decision-making for differentiating malignant from benign lesions in the gallbladder remains challenging. We aimed to create a diagnostic nomogram to identify gallbladder cancer (GBC), especially for incidental GBC (IGBC), before surgical resection. METHODS: A total of 587 consecutive patients with pathologically confirmed gallbladder lesions from a hospital were randomly assigned to a training cohort (70%) and an internal validation cohort (30%), with 287 patients from other centers as an external validation cohort. Radiological features were developed by the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator logistic regression model. Significant radiological features and independent clinical factors, identified by multivariate analyses, were used to construct a nomogram. RESULTS: A diagnostic nomogram was established by age, CA19.9, and 6 radiological features. The values of area under the curve in the internal and external validation cohorts were up to 0.91 and 0.89, respectively. The calibration curves for probability of GBC showed optimal agreement between nomogram prediction and actual observation. Compared with previous methods, it demonstrated superior sensitivity (91.5%) and accuracy (85.1%) in the diagnosis of GBC. The accuracy using the nomogram was significantly higher in GBC groups compared with that by radiologists in the training cohort ( P < 0.001) and similarly in each cohort. Notably, most of the IGBC, which were misdiagnosed as benign lesions, were successfully identified using this nomogram. DISCUSSION: A novel nomogram provides a powerful tool for detecting the presence of cancer in gallbladder masses, with an increase in accuracy and sensitivity. It demonstrates an unprecedented potential for IGBC identification.

Abstract Background Secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR) impacts outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) but whether it is a specific therapeutic target in heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is less clear. Purpose The aims of this study were to investigate whether surgical or trans-catheter intervention reduces SMR and improves outcomes compared to optimal medical therapy in HFpEF patients. Methods We retrospectively identified 120 HFpEF patients with moderate-to-severe or greater SMR from January 1, 2007, until December 31, 2017. Moderate-to-severe SMR was defined as an effective regurgitant orifice area of >0.3cm2, and/or a regurgitation volume of >45ml per beat. Those with primary mitral regurgitation, endocarditis, HFrEF, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, congenital heart disease, and history of valve intervention were excluded. All-cause mortality was analyzed and correlated to clinical and echocardiographic characteristics. Amongst the 120 patients, 36 received surgical or trans-catheter procedure in addition to medical therapy (procedure group) and 84 patients received optimal medical therapy only (conservative treatment group). The median follow-up period was 864 (15–3553) days. Results Patients in the procedure group were younger (75±8 vs 81±10, P=0.0002) and with fewer comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index 7.0±2.4 vs 8.0±2.0, P=0.022) compared to the conservative treatment group. In addition, the procedure group had larger left ventricular end-diastolic diameters and higher SMR volume at baseline. During follow-up, SMR decreased by ≥2 grades in 75% of patients (27/36) in the procedure group compared to 20% of patients (12/60) in the conservative treatment group. After adjusting for age and comorbidities, the procedure group showed better overall survival compared to the conservative treatment group (HR 0.37; 95% CI 0.17–0.80; P=0.011). On multivariate analysis for the different groups (procedure group vs. conservative treatment group) (HR 0.40; 95% CI 0.17–0.91; P=0.019), increasing Charlson Comorbidity Index (HR 1.16; 95% CI 1.02–1.32; P=0.028) and average mitral E/e' ratio (HR 1.06; 95% CI 1.01–1.11; P=0.031) were independent predictors of increased all-cause mortality. Kaplan-Meier Survival Curve Conclusion Among heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction and moderate-to-severe or severe SMR, surgical or trans-catheter mitral-valve repair or replacement resulted in lower all-cause mortality compared to conservative treatment after 9 years of follow-up.

Abstract Objective QTc interval prolongation can lead to life-threatening complications such as torsade de pointes (TdP), ventricular tachycardia (VT), and sudden cardiac death (SCD). It can occur with various tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) but comparative analyses on the incidence and complication rates are scarce. We thus conducted a comprehensive analysis of TKI use and QTc prolongation in clinical practice. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the electronic medical records of all cancer patients who were treated with TKI between 01/2005 and 12/2018 at our institution. QTc prolongation was defined as a QTc ≥450 ms or 460 ms among male or female patients, respectively. For each type of TKIs, we determined the administration rate and incidence of QTc interval prolongation. We also studied the frequency of QTc prolongation ≥500 ms, the rate of increase of the QTc interval by ≥60 ms, and the development of complications (VT, TdP, and SCD). Results In the present study, we analyzed the data of 685 cancer patients (431 male and 254 female), including 299 patients with RCC, 188 with chronic leukemia, 55 with acute leukemia, 65 with thyroid cancer, 48 with lung cancer and 39 with GIST. These patients received 902 TKI administrations and QTc prolongation was reported in 1/3 of these (289 administrations). The highest frequency was seen with imatinib, nilotinib, and dasatinib (30, 40 and 50%). Among cases of QTc prolongation, a QTc interval ≥500 ms was documented in 53 (18.3%) and QTc progression ≥60 ms in 72 (25%). Complications were found in 14 cases (5%) including VT in 9, TdP in 2 and SCD in 3 administrations. Table 1 demonstrates the findings for each TKI. Findings for TKIs in all patients Total Prolonged QTc QTc ≥500 QTc progression ≥60 VT SCD TdP Imatinib 165 54 13 10 2 Nilotinib 75 33 8 19 Dasatinib 115 58 10 16 2 1 Sunitinib 134 31 1 2 1 1 Pazopanib 165 36 5 6 2 1 Others 248 77 16 18 2 1 1 Conclusion The current findings suggest that TKI therapy leads to QTc prolongation in 1/3 of patients on average and most commonly with the Bcr-Abl TKIs, imatinib, nilotinib, and dasatinib. While SCD is rare (1%) it can still evolve and in 5% of all QTc prolongations with TKIs are potentially life-threatening. These data support recommendations for serial ECGs in cancer patients undergoing TKI therapy. Acknowledgement/Funding None

Abstract Background: Modern clinical practice places time restrictions on the amount of information and processing that can be done in a typical office visit. Meeting patient needs within the healthcare system is challenging, contributing to patient (pt) and clinician dissatisfaction and potential suboptimal outcomes. We developed an electronic point-of-care case management system for cancer patients. The system's goal is to obtain patient-reported quality of life (PROQOL) outcomes and provide clinicians with information regarding QOL issues to address. We tested this system in a prospective randomized study against usual care (UC). The primary objective was to determine if PROQOL system would improve mean QOL over time. Methods: Eligible pts were adults with multiple myeloma (MM) or light amyloidosis (AL), seen at Mayo Clinic. Pts were randomized 2:1 to PROQOL system or usual care. PROQOL system was offered prior to every visit. Pts select from various categories about their single biggest concern, and receive a printed list of actionable resources based on selected concern. Clinicians also receive the PROQOL results to review with pts. Providers and pts randomized to PROQOL completed a "was it worth it survey" (WIWI). An 8 item Linear Analogue Self-Assessment was used to assess QOL, the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included distribution of choices of most important concern and their relationship to demographic and clinical variables. The study was powered to detect a 0.5 standard deviation difference in QOL between groups. Results: There were 233 patients enrolled (171 MM, 62 AL) in this study between July 1, 2016 and April 17, 2018. Median age was 65 years (range 31-87), and 59% were male. Median time from diagnosis to study consent was 37 months (PROQOL 36.3 versus UC 39.6). Median follow up for all patients was 15 months (range: 0.7-22 months), and median follow up for PROQOL pts was 16 months and 14 months for UC pts (p=0.027). There were 25 pts that have died since enrollment and 208 alive. No statistical significant difference in QOL between PROQOL and UC (median QOL 7 vs 7, p=0.75). The most prevalent main concerns selected were Physical Health (37%) and Cancer and Diagnosis (27%), the pattern remained even when pts were given the option to pick a second major concern 26% and 20% respectively. No other concern was listed more than 8% at baseline. All category selections and percentages are shown in the Figure. The average time to complete the instrument was 6 minutes. Pts found the PROQOL system was worth their time (75%), they would choose it again (87%) and recommend it to others (82%). Eighty-two percent of clinicians did not think the PROQOL tool negatively impacted their practice and 75% believed they may see improvement in pt wellbeing. Discussion: The PROQOL system was well received by pts and clinicians but did not improve QOL relative to UC in this study. The PROQOL demonstrates that majority of patients strongly desire more information regarding ongoing therapy, clinical trials, prognosis and toxicity. Further investigation is needed to understand whether communication is limited by time or mechanism of information delivery, such as verbal or written, or whether it should be undertaken in a separate allied health care visit. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Gertz: spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria. Kumar:Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dingli:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction Axi-cel is an autologous anti-CD19 CAR T-cell therapy approved by the US FDA 10/18/2017, for the treatment of adults with relapsed or refractory (r/r) large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL), transformed lymphoma (tFL), and high-grade B-cell lymphoma (HGBCL) who have failed at least two prior systemic lines of therapy. In the pivotal ZUMA-1 trial, 108 patients (pts) with r/r DLBCL were treated with axi-cel: the best overall response rate (ORR) was 82% and complete response (CR) rate was 58%. At a median follow-up of 15.4 months, 42% of the pts had ongoing remission (Neelapu and Locke et al. NEJM 2017). Grade 3 or higher cytokine release syndrome (CRS) by Lee criteria and neurologic events (NEs) occurred in 13% and 31% of the pts, respectively. Here, we evaluated the real world outcomes of pts treated with standard of care axi-cel under the commercial FDA label. Methods and Results Seventeen US academic centers contributed data to this effort independently of the manufacturer. As of 6/30/2018, 211 pts were leukapheresed with intention to manufacture commercial axi-cel. Of these, 165 (78%) pts completed axi-cel infusion as of 6/30/18 and a further 23 (11%) pts are scheduled for axi-cel infusion in July 2018. Of the 23 remaining pts, 7 (3%) received axi-cel therapy on ZUMA-9 expanded access trial (NCT03153462) due to non-conforming cell therapy product, 15 (7%) pts died before axi-cel infusion (14 from lymphoma progression and 1 from sepsis) and 1 (1%) patient attained CR from bridging therapy and was not infused. Safety was evaluable in 163 pts receiving axi-cel. Grade ³3 CRS and NEs occurred in 7% and 31% of pts. Tocilizumab was administered in 62% of pts and 57% received corticosteroids. Outside of lymphoma progression, 3 deaths occurred post-axi-cel; 1 due to HLH, 1 due to systemic candidiasis, and a third due to septic shock. There were no grade 5 NEs observed. Response assessment was done for pts infused with axi-cel and who were re-staged at day 30 and/or day 100, or were deemed to have clinical progression. Of 112 pts evaluable at day 30, ORR was 79% with 50% CR, 29% PR, 6% SD and 14% with PD. Of 39 pts evaluable at day 100, 59% of pts had ongoing response (CR 49%, PR 10%). At the time of abstract submission, more detailed patient characteristics and treatment course data were available in 134/165 pts infused. Median age was 59 (range 21-82) with 57% male. Performance status (PS) was ECOG 0-1 (81%), ECOG 2 (16%) and ECOG 3 (3%). By histology, 61% of pts had DLBCL including HGBCL, 31% had tFL and 8% PMBCL. Thirty-one percent had a prior autologous stem cell transplant. Bridging therapy between apheresis and infusion was given in 56% of patients, the majority of which consisted of chemotherapy. Sixty-six of 134 (49%) would not have met eligibility criteria for ZUMA-1 at the time of leukapheresis. Common criteria that would have made these patients ineligible for ZUMA-1 included ECOG PS >1 (n = 22), platelets <75k (n = 17), GFR <60 (n =12), active DVT/PE (n = 13), liver enzyme abnormalities (n = 10), a history of CNS lymphoma (n = 8), recent checkpoint inhibitor therapy (n = 7), ejection fraction <50% (n = 4), prior CD19 CAR T therapy (n = 4), and prior allogeneic transplant (n=2). Median time from leukapheresis to start of conditioning chemotherapy was 21 days and median time from leukapheresis to axi-cel infusion was 26 days. Median hospitalization period was 14 days. Conclusions This multicenter retrospective study delineates the real world outcomes of axi-cel CAR T-cell therapy for r/r aggressive B-cell lymphoma when used as a standard of care. Though limited by relatively short follow up, 30 day responses in the real world setting are comparable to the best responses observed on the pivotal ZUMA-1 clinical trial (Table 1). Importantly, safety appears comparable to the ZUMA-1 trial despite nearly half the pts failing to meet ZUMA-1 eligibility criteria. Updated results including PFS and OS will be presented at the meeting. L.J.N. and M.D.J. contributed equally; D.B.M., S.S.N. and F.L.L. contributed equally. Disclosures Nastoupil: Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; TG Therappeutics: Research Funding; Karus: Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; Juno: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Spectrum: Honoraria. Lunning:Celgene: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Portola: Consultancy; Genzyme: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy. Reagan:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. McGuirk:Gamida Cell: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Fresenius Biotech: Research Funding; Bellicum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria, Other: speaker, Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Honoraria, Other: travel accommodations, expenses, speaker ; Pluristem Ltd: Research Funding. Deol:Novartis: Consultancy; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Hill:Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Andreadis:Gilead: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Employment; Astellas: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Juno: Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Munoz:Pfizer: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Juno: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Consultancy; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Westin:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Apotex: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vose:Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Legend Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.: Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria; Epizyme: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Incyte Corp.: Research Funding. Miklos:Genentech: Research Funding; Kite - Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics - Abbot: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Research Funding. Locke:Kite Pharma: Other: Scientific Advisor; Cellular BioMedicine Group Inc.: Consultancy; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Other: Scientific Advisor.

Abstract Introduction Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia (WM) is a rare disease accounting for only 1-2% of all hematologic malignancies and with an overall annual, age-adjusted incidence of approximately 3.5 to 5.5 cases per million-person years. With approximately 13,000 active hematologist/oncologists in the US, most of who are in the community oncology setting, it's estimated that a hematologist/oncologist will only diagnose a WM case approximately every 8 years. Therefore, the clinical experience of a general hematologist/oncologist in the management of WM is likely very limited compared to more prevalent malignances. Previous studies in the setting of rare cancers suggest a correlation between higher volume of care and improved outcomes. Therefore, we explored the volume-outcome relationship in WM using the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB). Methods Patient-level data from the NCDB, a nationwide, facility-based, database covering approximately 70% of all newly diagnosed cancer cases in the US, was queried for all new WM cases diagnosed between 2004 and 2014. Only patients requiring treatment were included. Treatment facilities were divided into quartiles based on the average annual volume of newly diagnosed cases of WM seen. Cox regression was used to analyze the association between facility WM volume and survival, adjusted by demographics (sex, age, race), socioeconomic status (income, education, insurance type), geography (area of residence, treatment facility type, travel distance), comorbidity factors (Charlson-Deyo score), and year of diagnosis. Time-to-event analysis was calculated from frontline therapy initiation date using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test. Results A total of 3,732 patients with WM treated in 831 facilities were included. The median age at diagnosis was 70 years and 75% of the patients were treated within 20 miles from their residency zip code. Patient characteristics per treatment facility volume quartile are shown in table 1. The median annual facility volume was 1 new WM patient/year (range 0.1 to 21). The median follow-up from frontline treatment was 5 years. The unadjusted median OS by facility volume was: Q1: 6.5 years (95% CI: 5.7-7.4), Q2: 7 years (95% CI: 6.3-8.2), Q3: 8.2 years (95% CI: 7.1-8.9), and Q4: NR (95% CI: 8.5-NR), p<0.0001 (figure 1). The estimated 5-year OS by facility volume was: Q1: 56%, Q2: 61%, Q3: 64%, Q4: 71%, p<0.0001. Multivariate analysis including all variables showed in Table 1 demonstrated that facility volume was independently associated with all-cause mortality. Compared to patients treated at Q4 facilities, patients treated at lower-quartiles facilities had a higher incremental risk of death (Q3 hazard ratio [HR], 1.07 [95% CI: 0.88 to 1.29] p=0.46; Q2 HR, 1.34 [95% CI: 1.11 to 1.63] p=0.002; Q1 HR, 1.52 [95% CI: 1.23 to 1.88] p=<0.0001). Conclusion Our results suggest that a volume-outcome relationship exits in WM as patients treated initially at higher-volume facilities had a lower risk of mortality. Although differences in the underlying disease biology, referral patterns after initial therapy, or cumulative treating-physician experience could not be assessed, these potential biases would only underestimate the magnitude of the volume-outcome relationship reported. Disclosures Ansell: Celldex: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding. Gertz:Medscape: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Ionis: Honoraria; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy. Reeder:Affimed: Research Funding. Witzig:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.