Citations

Clear

2390 citation(s) found for "Yu, Lin".

Utilizing Multiparametric Flow Cytometry to Identify Patients with Primary Plasma Cell Leukemia at Diagnosis
Evans, Laura A. , Nandakumar, Bharat , Lacy, Martha Q. , Hayman, Suzanne R. , Kapoor, Prashant , Fonder, Amie , Hobbs, Miriam, Hwa, Yi L. , Warsame, Rahma , Kourelis, Taxiarchis , Lust, John A., Kyle, Robert A. , Kumar, Shaji , Jevremović, Dragan , Buadi, Francis K. , Dispenzieri, Angela , Dingli, David , Go, Ronald S. , Leung, Nelson , Muchtar, Eli , Lin, Yi , Siddiqui, Mustaqeem , Gertz, Morie A. , Rajkumar, S. Vincent , Gonsalves, Wilson I.

Mayo Clinic

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 4334-4334

10.1182/blood-2019-126777 Get It

INTRODUCTION: Primary plasma cell leukemia (pPCL) is the most aggressive form of multiple myeloma (MM). Recently, pPCL has been defined by as few as >5% circulating plasma cells (cPCs) detected morphologically on a peripheral blood smear. However, this technique may not be sufficiently sensitive and is dependent on inter-observer bias to properly identify and quantify cPCs. Multiparametric flow cytometry (MFC) provides a readily available and highly sensitive method to identify and quantify cPCs. However, an optimal quantitative cutoff for cPCs by MFC to define the presence of pPCL has not been established to date. Thus, this is the first study to date that determines an optimal cutoff of cPCs/ microliter that could identity patients with pPCL at diagnosis. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated all newly diagnosed MM patients seen at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester from January 2007 to December 2017 who had their peripheral blood samples evaluated morphologically by peripheral blood smear and immunophenotypically by MFC prior to beginning therapy. Patients with a peripheral blood smear detecting >5% cPCs were classified as having pPCL. Six-color MFC was performed on peripheral blood mononuclear cells by isolated by Ficoll gradient, and stained with antibodies to CD45, CD19, CD38, CD138 and cytoplasmic Kappa and Lambda immunoglobulin light chains. The data was collected using Becton Dickinson FacsCanto II instruments collecting 150,000 events and analyzed using the BDFacs DIVA Software. The gating strategy employed first used the expression of CD38, CD138, and cytoplasmic immunoglobulin light chains to identify all plasma cells in the specimen. The cPCs were then discriminated from polyclonal/normal plasma cells based on differential CD19 and CD45 expression. The cPCs detected were reported as the number of clonal events/150,000 collected total events and converted to the absolute number of cPCs/microliter using their absolute lymphocyte count and monocyte count determined at the time of the blood draw for cPC MFC assessment. A receiver operator curve (ROC) was performed to determine the absolute cPCs/microliter by MFC that best identified those patients with >5% cPC on their peripheral blood smear. Survival analysis was performed by the Kaplan-Meier method and differences assessed using the log rank test. RESULTS: A total of 591 patients were included in this analysis of which 59% were male and the median age was 66 years (range: 27 - 95) with 22% being 75 years of age or older. From this cohort, 133 (24%) patients had high risk FISH cytogenetics, 172 (30%) were classified as ISS 3 at diagnosis, 83 (15%) had an elevated LDH level and 61 (17%) had a plasma cell labeling index (PCLI) of 2% or greater. There were 65 (11%) patients with any amount of cPCs detectable by peripheral blood smear of which only 22 (4% of the total population) met criteria for pPCL with >5% cPCs. With MFC, 403 (68%) patients had detectable cPCs. The median number of cPCs per microliter was 0.81 (0 - 10,455) with 273 (46%) having >1 cPC/microliter. A ROC analysis determined that the presence of >50 cPCs/microliter by MFC was the optimal cutoff to identify patients with >5% cPCs by blood smear with approximately a specificity of 94% and a sensitivity of 86%. The presence of >50 cPCs/microliter by MFC was associated with higher presence of high risk FISH cytogenetics, ISS 3 classification, elevated LDH and PCLI > 2%. The median time to next treatment (TTNT) for patients with and without >5% cPCs by peripheral blood smear was 18 months vs. 30 months (P < 0.001). The median TTNT for patients with and without >50 cPCs/microliter by MFC was 19 months vs. 30 months (P < 0.01). The median overall survival (OS) for patients with and without >5% cPCs by peripheral blood smear was 25 months vs. 71 months (P < 0.001; Fig 1A). The median OS for patients with and without >50 cPCs/microliter by MFC was 38 months vs. 71 months (P < 0.01; Fig 1B). CONCLUSION: This is the largest study that attempts to identify an optimal cutoff of cPCs/microliter by MFC for diagnosing pPCL patients. The presence of >50 cPCs/microliter is an optimal cutoff by MFC that best predicts for the presence of >5% cPCs by peripheral blood smear. However, there remains discordance in the OS outcomes between the two cutoffs by different methodologies for pPCL. This could signify the presence of biological processes associated with the presence of >5% cPCs when detected by peripheral blood smear that are not captured by MFC. Disclosures Dispenzieri: Pfizer: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Intellia: Consultancy; Akcea: Consultancy; Alnylam: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:Karyopharm: Research Funding; Rigel: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; alexion: Consultancy. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Kapoor:Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectar: Consultancy; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria. Leung:Aduro: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Omeros: Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Research Funding. Russell:Imanis: Equity Ownership. Gertz:DAVA oncology: Speakers Bureau; Ionis/Akcea: Consultancy; Alnylam: Consultancy; Prothena Biosciences Inc: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Annexon: Consultancy; Appellis: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Abbvie: Other: personal fees for Data Safety Monitoring board; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Teva: Speakers Bureau; Johnson and Johnson: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Proclara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; i3Health: Other: Development of educational programs and materials; Springer Publishing: Patents & Royalties; Amyloidosis Foundation: Research Funding; International Waldenstrom Foundation: Research Funding. Kumar:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding.
INNV-33. BARRIERS TO ACCRUAL AND ENROLLMENT IN BRAIN TUMOR TRIALS
Lee, Eudocia Q. , Chukwueke, Ugonma , Hervey‐Jumper, Shawn L. , DeGroot, John, Leone, Pablo, Chang, Susan M. , Arons, David, Oliver, Kathy , Verble, Kay, Musella, Al , Willmarth, Nicole E. , Doherty, Lisa, Gaffey, Sarah, Halkin, Thomas, Friday, Bret Edward Buckley, Fouladi, Maryam , Macdonald, David R., Peñas-Prado, Marta , Vogelbaum, Michael A. , Sahebjam, Solmaz , Sandak, David, Reardon, David A. , Wen, Patrick Y. , Armstrong, Terri S. , Alexander, Brian M. , Bates, Amanda, Galanis, Evanthia , Lin, Nancy U. , Mehta, Minesh P. , Bent, Martin J. van den , Weller, Michael , Wen, Patrick Yung

Mayo Clinic

Neuro-Oncology | November 11, 2019 | Volume: 21 | Issue: Supplement_6 | Pages: vi137-vi137

10.1093/neuonc/noz175.574 Get It

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.
Cutaneous spindled follicle center cell lymphoma with abundant mucin: A diagnostic pitfall
Li, Lin , Majerowski, Jacquelyn , Sokumbi, Olayemi , Sokumbi, Olayemi

Mayo Clinic

Journal of Cutaneous Pathology | November 6, 2019 | Volume: 47 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 394-397

10.1111/cup.13609 | PMID 31693188 Get It

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.
A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Migraine-Related Disability in CADASIL
Badi, Mohammed K. , Klaas, James P. , Glover, Patrick , Rozen, Todd D. , Huang, Josephine F. , Goldstein, Eric D , Lin, Michelle P, Badi, Mohammed , Goldstein, Eric , Lin, Michelle , Meschia, James F.

Mayo Clinic

The Neurologist | November 4, 2019 | Volume: 24 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 161-164

10.1097/nrl.0000000000000253 | PMID 31688705 Get It

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.
Development and Validation of a Nomogram for Early Detection of Malignant Gallbladder Lesions
Chen, Mingyu , Cao, Jiasheng , Bai, Yang , Tong, Chenhao, Lin, Jian , Jindal, Vishal , Yang, Sherry X. , Pesce, Antonio , Panaro, Fabrizio , Ariche, Arié, Memeo, Riccardo , Bekaii‐Saab, Tanios , Cai, Xiujun , Group, Written on behalf of the AME Gallbladder Cancer Collaborative, Bekaii-Saab, Tanios S , Barchi, Leandro Cardoso , Nadalin, Silvio , Kai, Keita , Group, Written on behalf of the AME Gallbladder Cancer Collaborative, Memeo, Riccardo

Mayo Clinic

Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology | October 30, 2019 | Volume: 10 | Issue: 10 | Pages: e00098

10.14309/ctg.0000000000000098 | PMID 31663905 Get It

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.
P2601Trans-catheter or surgical mitral valve procedure versus conservative treatment in heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction
Lin, Grace , Sun, X, Nkomo, Vuyisile T. , Pislaru, Sorin V.

Mayo Clinic

European Heart Journal | October 21, 2019 | Volume: 40 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: No page available

10.1093/eurheartj/ehz748.0925 Get It

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.
P5717Risk of QTC interval prolongation among cancer patients treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors
Rmilah, Anan Abu, Lin, Guan‐Ling , Hermann, Joan, Rmilah, Anan Abu , Hermann, J

Mayo Clinic

European Heart Journal | October 21, 2019 | Volume: 40 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: No page available

10.1093/eurheartj/ehz746.0658 Get It

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
Patient-Reported Outcome Driven Case Management System for Hematology — a Prospective Study
Warsame, Rahma , Fruth, Briant, Croghan, Katrina, Engebretson, Ann, Kourelis, Taxiarchis , Aug, Sarah, Ellingson, Sara A., Irlbeck, Colleen, Muchtar, Eli , Kumar, Shaji , Lust, John A., Hayman, Suzanne R. , Lacy, Martha Q. , Fonder, Amie , Hobbs, Miriam, Hwa, Yi L. , Thompson, Carrie A. , Kyle, Robert A. , Buckner, Jan C. , Sloan, Jeff A. , Muchtar, E , Gertz, Morie A. , Buadi, Francis K. , Go, Ronald S. , Gonsalves, Wilson I. , Rajkumar, S. Vincent , Leung, Nelson , Dingli, David , Lin, Yi , Dispenzieri, Angela

Mayo Clinic

Blood | October 14, 2019 | Volume: 132 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 719-719

10.1182/blood-2018-99-118744 Get It

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.
Axicabtagene Ciloleucel (Axi-cel) CD19 Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T-Cell Therapy for Relapsed/Refractory Large B-Cell Lymphoma: Real World Experience
Dahiya, Saurabh , Lunning, Matthew A. , Lekakis, Lazaros J. , Oluwole, Olalekan O. , Deol, Abhinav , Sehgal, Alison R. , Hill, Brian T. , Cashen, Amanda F. , Rapoport, Aaron P. , Miklos, David B. , Neelapu, Sattva S. , Oluwole, Olalekan O , Miklos, David B , Nastoupil, Loretta J. , Jain, Michael D. , Spiegel, Jay Y. , Ghobadi, Armin , Lin, Yi , Reagan, Patrick Michael , McGuirk, Joseph P. , Goy, Andre Henri , Andreadis, Charalambos Babis , Muñoz, Javier , Westin, Jason R. , Chavez, Julio C , Bennani, N. Nora , Vose, Julie M. , Locke, Frederick L.

Mayo Clinic

Blood | October 14, 2019 | Volume: 132 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 91-91

10.1182/blood-2018-99-114152 Get It

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.