Citations

AbstractHistological transformation in Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) is an uncommon complication, with limited data, particularly regarding the impact of MYD88 L265P mutation on transformation. We examined risk factors and outcomes associated with transformation in WM, highlighting the role of MYD88 L265P mutation. Patients with WM seen at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA and University Hospital of Reims, France, between 01/01/1996 and December 31, 2017 were included; 50 (4.3%) of 1147 patients transformed to a high‐grade lymphoma, with median time‐to‐transformation of 4.5 (range 0‐21) years in the transformed cohort. The MYD88 L265P mutation status was known in 435/1147 (38%) patients (406 with non‐transformed WM and 29 patients in transformed cohort). On multivariate analysis, MYD88 WT status alone was an independent predictor of transformation (odds ratio, 7[95%CI: 2.1‐23]; P = .003). Additionally, the MYD88 WT status was independently associated with shorter time‐to‐transformation (HR 7.9 [95%CI: 2.3‐27; P = .001]), with a 5‐year transformation rate of 16% for MYD88 WT vs 2.8% with MYD88 L265P mutated patients. Patients with transformation demonstrated a significant increase in risk of death compared to patients who did not transform (HR 5.075; 95%CI: 3.8‐6.8; P < .001). In conclusion, the MYD88 WT status is an independent predictor of transformation and associated with a shorter time‐to‐transformation. Additionally, transformation conferred an inferior overall survival in patients with WM.

Introduction Novel high-risk groups have been identified in adult ALL, including secondary (sALL) and Philadelphia-like ALL (Ph-like, based on CRLF2, IgH, ABL2, JAK2 and other tyrosine kinase translocations), and those with minimal residual disease >0.1% (MRD+) after induction therapy. Novel targeted therapies are now routinely incorporated into 1st line regimens, including tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BCR-ABL1-pos), rituximab (CD20+) and blinatumomab (Blina) for MRD+. The impact of these novel high risk groups and therapies after alloHCT is unknown; therefore, we evaluated their impact on overall survival (OS), relapse rate (REL), non-relapse mortality (NRM) and acute and chronic GVHD. Methods We evaluated pts receiving 1st Allo-HCT for ALL at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Phoenix, and Jacksonville) from 2008-2018 for outcomes of interest, specifically the impact of novel therapies and risk groups. Associations of patient factors with outcomes were examined using univariable (UVA) and multivariable (MVA) Cox proportional hazards regression models, where the cause-specific hazard of the given outcome was modeled to account for the competing risk of death. Results We identified 261 consecutive AlloHCT recipients during the study period. Median age at transplant was 48 years (18-72) and 147 (56.3%) were male. The median comorbidity (HCT-CI) score was 2 (0-8). 213 pts (81.6%) had B-lineage ALL, of which 85 (32.6%) were BCR-ABL-pos, 17 (6.5%) Ph-like (identified by FISH), 16 (6.1%) hypoploidy/near triploidy (Hy/Tri), and 67 (25.7%) pre-B ALL NOS. The remaining 48 (18.4%) had T-ALL. 30 pts (11.5%) had sALL (i.e. prior chemo/radiotherapy for another malignancy). HyperCVAD was the most common 1st line regimen (68.2%). 243 (93.1%) pts achieved Complete Remission (CR1) after induction therapy, and 203 (77.8%) were in CR1 at the time of alloHCT. Blina was administered for MRD+ in 14 pts (5.4%), and for relapsed/refractory ALL (R/R) in 13 (27% of R/R pts), 7 of whom received Blina as initial therapy for R/R. Donors were matched unrelated in 149 (57.1%), matched related in 98 (37.5%), and haploidentical in 14 (5.4%). Peripheral blood (PB) grafts were used in 233 (89.3%). 103 (54.5%) were donor:recipient (D:R) sex-matched, and 86 D:R mismatched [47 (24.9%) M:F; and 39 (20.6%) F:M]. Myeloablative conditioning was used for the majority (78.5%) mostly with Cy/TBI (60.5%). Standard GVHD prophylaxis regimens were used. Outcomes Median follow-up after transplant was 22.4 months (0.5-135), and 51 (19.5%) had REL. The 1, 2 and 5-year survival rates were 71.9%, 64.9%, and 54.1%, respectively (Figure 1). Acute GVHD developed in 144 (55.2%) and chronic GVHD in 100 (38.3%). Ph-like ALL, Blina for MRD+, Blina for R/R, sALL and CD20-pos had no independent impact on OS. In contrast, age>60, Hy/Tri, and >CR1 at alloHCT were associated with worse OS in UVA, however, in MVA only pre-B ALL NOS was associated with better OS. Female:male D:R status was associated with inferior OS. Blina for R/R disease was associated with increased risk of REL in UVA [HR 5.26 95% CI (1.33, 20.00), p=0.017], whereas other novel high risk groups had no impact on REL. In contrast, T-ALL, Hy/Tri and >CR1 at AlloHCT were associated with increased REL in UVA, but only T-ALL and Hy/Tri continued to predict for increased REL in MVA. Secondary ALL was associated with increased NRM in UVA [HR 1.96 95% CI (1.07, 3.57), p=0.028], whereas other novel high risk groups had no impact on NRM. In contrast, age>60, >CR1 at AlloHCT and D:R sex mismatch were associated with higher NRM in UVA, but only sex mismatch and >CR1 at AlloHCT were associated with higher NRM in MVA. TBI use was associated with higher risk of acute GvHD (p=0.008) and ATG use with lower risk chronic GVHD (p<0.001). Similarly non-PB grafts were associated with a lower risk of chronic GVHD (p=0.005). Results for OS, REL, NRM, acute and chronic GVHD analysis are shown in Table 1. Conclusion Novel high risk groups (CD20+, Ph-like and sALL) do not appear to adversely impact OS after alloHCT, although sALL was associated with increased risk of NRM. Interestingly, pre-B-ALL NOS appear to be associated with favorable OS. Novel targeted therapies also do not independently predict outcome, with the exception of Blina for R/R ALL which may be associated with REL after subsequent alloHCT (a subgroup for whom novel maintenance strategies should be explored). Our analysis highlights the importance of allo-HCT for novel high risk ALL subgroups. Disclosures Patnaik: Stem Line Pharmaceuticals.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kharfan-Dabaja:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Foran:Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Introduction There have been few recent therapeutic advances in T-acute lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoma (T-ALL/LBL), a rare and aggressive malignancy. Intensive chemotherapy +/- allogeneic transplantation (AlloHCT) can effect cure, realized by only a minority of adults. In distinction to B-ALL, there have been no safe/effective targeted therapies developed in T-ALL/LBL. We therefore performed a focused tissue array to identify novel tumor proteins, including CCR4; evaluated together with established immunophenotypic (IP) T-ALL/LBL subtypes [early-T-precursor (ETP), early non-ETP (Pre/Pro-T), common & late thymocyte]. We evaluated the clinical phenotype and outcome together with clinical and epidemiologic data in patients diagnosed at the 3-site Mayo Clinic Cancer Center (MCCC: Rochester, MN; Phoenix, AZ; and Jacksonville, FL). Methods Following IRB approval, we identified 50 consecutive T-ALL/LBL patients from 1997 -2019 diagnosed at the 3-site MCCC. Available remnant leukemia/lymphoma paraffin blocks were identified (n=28). Using immunohistochemistry (IHC) we evaluated expression of leukemic antigens of interest (CCR4, CD47, BCL2, BCL6, PD-L1, CD38 and CD123); these were selected based on clinical availability of novel targeted agents, approved or in development for other indications. Tissue array studies were performed and interpreted by a single hematopathologist (L.J) blinded to clinical data, using positive and negative controls, according to standard techniques. We also evaluated the clinical and epidemiological parameters, including different IP subtypes [ETP: CD1a-, sCD3- & CD8-, Pre/Pro-T: CD1a-, sCD3- & CD8+ or CD8- (11 marker T-ALL IP score was used to distinguish CD8- ETP vs. Pre/Pro-T), thymic: CD1a+ and mature: CD1a- & sCD3+] (Khogeer et al., Br J Haematol., 2019) & the presence of the unique MLLT10-PICALM fusion (n=6), as well as therapy and outcome. Comparisons of characteristics and outcomes of interest were made using a Wilcoxon rank sum test (continuous characteristics) or Fisher's exact test (categorical characteristics), unadjusted Cox proportional hazards regression models (overall survival), or unadjusted logistic regression models (complete remission after first line treatment). Results We identified the expression of novel targetable tissue proteins in all adult T-ALL/LBL cases [Table 1]. BCL2, CD38 & CD47 were expressed in majority of the cases, and CCR4 [Fig. 1] was expressed in 11/28 (39.3%) cases. CCR4 expression was significantly more common in the Pre/Pro-T (75%) vs. other IP subtypes (19%) (p=0.011); there was no other association of CCR4 expression with clinical characteristics/outcomes. We also observed differences in T-ALL vs. T-LBL, specifically T-ALL patients were more likely to be male (71% vs. LBL 38.9%, p=0.038). Surprisingly, T-LBL patients were more likely to have a family history of leukemia/lymphoma (41.2% vs. T-ALL 0%, p<0.001). In addition, a significantly different distribution of IP subtype in T-LBL was noted [Table 2]. Not surprisingly, T-LBL patients were more likely to receive 1st line Hyper-CVAD therapy (88.2% v. T-ALL 43.3%, p=0.005), & had a longer delay from diagnosis to initiation of therapy (median 14 vs. 4 days, p=0.012), however this did not appear to impact clinical outcome. In contrast, we observed an important association of IP subtype with outcome after therapy, including complete remission (p=0.035), & a trend suggesting differences in survival (p=0.069) [Table 3]. However, MLLT10-PICALM was not associated with any unique clinical features or with outcome (death, p=0.85; CR, p=0.98), although 4/6 patients underwent AlloHCT, suggesting an important role of AlloHCT in this subgroup. No other significant association of epidemiologic risk factors with phenotype or outcome was noted. Conclusion Using focused tissue array we have identified expression of tumor associated proteins in T-ALL/LBL including CCR4 (Pre/Pro-T IP) & others, which may be targets of therapeutic agents like mogamulizumab. Furthermore, our analysis demonstrates an important clinical impact of IP subtype in T-ALL/LBL, as well as important clinical & therapeutic differences in T-ALL vs. LBL. This study will help guide development of targeted clinical trials in T-ALL/LBL (CCR4 trial already in development). Further analyses are planned to determine the clinical & epidemiologic association of genetic lesions in this cohort. Disclosures Foran: Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Background: A variety of risk factors have been described in multiple myeloma and current risk assessment incorporates ISS stage with specific FISH results and serum LDH (R-ISS). However, this model does not include all the current abnormalities described as prognostic for survival in multiple myeloma. Importantly, the impact of many of these high-risk abnormalities are not uniform. We examined if we can better integrate FISH results into a risk assessment tool to better predict the outcomes of newly diagnosed MM. Patients and methods: We studied a cohort of 1316 patients with FISH done within 6 months of diagnosis of MM, in whom results for commonly observed abnormalities were available. We specifically examined the individual impact of common translocations involving chromosome 14, MYC rearrangements, chromosome 1q gain (single or multiple duplication) and del13q/monosomy 13. A risk assessment system was developed, weighting each abnormality according to their Risk Ratio and integrating ISS stage and serum LDH into the final model construction. Overall survival was calculated from diagnosis, with those alive at last follow up being censored. Results: We first examined the impact of each of the above FISH abnormalities: 1) high risk translocations [t(4;14), t(14;16), or t(14,20)], 2) trisomies, 3) t(11;14), 4) MYCrearrangements, 5) del13q/monosomy 13, and 6) 1q gain . Each of the abnormalities, except for t(11;14), was prognostic for survival (Table 1 with the risk ratios). For 1q gain, the median OS was NR, 105 mos and 79 mos respectively for no abnormality, duplication of 1 copy and duplication of multiple copies, (p<0.001). On multivariate analysis, t(11;14) and trisomies were no longer prognostic for overall survival (Table 1). The cumulative impact of abnormalities demonstrated worsening survival in the presence of increasing numbers of abnormalities (Figure 1). Including ISS stage 3 and LDH > ULN as additional variables for prognostication indicated both were individually prognostic for OS. In a multivariate analysis, including these two and FISH abnormalities, 1q gain and LDH were not independently prognostic. The final model consisted of HR translocations, MYCrearrangements, del17p/monosomy 17, del13q/monosomy 13, and ISS stage 3. Each of these variables was weighted using their risk ratio and a composite score was developed using 998 patients for whom all variables were available (range: 0-7.9; median 1.8). Three patient groups were characterized: group 1 (0; 32%), group 2 (1-4; 58%) and group 3 (>4; 10%) with a median OS of 53 mos, 106 mos, and NR, respectively, p <0.001 (Figure 2). Conclusion: Using the most relevant FISH and laboratory factors, in a large cohort of patients, we refined the current system to develop a risk stratification system that predicts survival in patients with newly diagnosed MM treated with contemporary treatment regimens. This needs validation in future studies. Disclosures Kumar: Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gertz:International Waldenstrom Foundation: Research Funding; Annexon: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amyloidosis Foundation: Research Funding; Abbvie: Other: personal fees for Data Safety Monitoring board; i3Health: Other: Development of educational programs and materials; Springer Publishing: Patents & Royalties; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Proclara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ionis/Akcea: Consultancy; Alnylam: Consultancy; Prothena Biosciences Inc: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Appellis: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Teva: Speakers Bureau; Johnson and Johnson: Speakers Bureau; DAVA oncology: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy. Dispenzieri:Akcea: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Intellia: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Alnylam: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:alexion: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Kapoor:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Cellectar: Consultancy. Leung:Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Research Funding; Omeros: Research Funding; Aduro: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bergsagel:Celgene: Consultancy; Ionis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy.

Abstract Introduction Del(17p) detected by fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) of bone marrow plasma cells (BMPCs) is an adverse prognostic factor in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). While the natural history and prognostic factors in patients with del (17p) detected at diagnosis have been studied, the outcomes of patients who acquire del (17p) later in their course are not known. We aimed to define the outcomes of MM patients who acquire del(17p). Methods We reviewed the Dysproteinemia database at Mayo Clinic, MN to identify 80 patients with MM who had their first FISH test negative for del (17p), but acquired del(17p) later in the course of the disease. Sixty (75%) patients had their first FISH within 6 months (mo) of diagnosis; 20 (25%) patients had their first FISH more than 6 mo after diagnosis of MM. Del(17p) included del(17p13.1) and/or monosomy 17. We identified 2 control patients for each case, who were diagnosed during the same time period, but did not demonstrate del (17p) at any time during follow-up. Results Characteristics of patients at acquisition of del(17p) are shown in Table 1. Of these, 76 patients had relapsed and/or refractory MM; in 4 patients, del (17p) was detected after having attained a response to prior therapy. Seventy (87.5%) patients had del (17p13.1); 5 (6.3%) patients had monosomy 17; 1 (1.2%) patient had both del (17p13.1) and monosomy 17. Four (5.0%) patients had relative loss of 17p. High-risk translocations (HRT) [t(4;14), t(14;16) and t(14;20)] were present in 14 (17.5%) patients. The percentage of PCs with del(17p) were available in 75 patients. The median percentage of PCs with del(17p) was 76 (range, 9-100). Sixty two (77.5%) patients received exclusively chemotherapy as subsequent treatment; stem cell transplant (SCT) was part of the next treatment in 16 (20%) patients (allogeneic SCT in 1). Among 71 evaluable patients, ≥very good partial response and ≥partial response were attained in 24 (33.8%) and 35 (49.2%) patients respectively. The median progression free survival (PFS) from detection of del (17p) was 5.7 mo (95% CI, 3.5-7.8); overall survival (OS) was 18.2 mo (CI, 13.1-27.5). From a comparable time point, the OS for 160 controls was 56.2 mo (CI, 37.1-75.3) (P<0.001). The results were similar when patients were stratified based on variables at diagnosis such as age, presence of HRT, international staging system (ISS) stage, serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and PC proliferative rate, and proteasome inhibitor (PI)-containing induction and SCT within a year of diagnosis and before acquisition of del(17p). Evaluating outcomes from initial diagnosis, PFS in the acquired del (17p) and control groups were 23.0 (CI, 20.2-25.8) and 30.2 (CI, 26.7-33.9) mo (P=0.028) and OS were 68.2 (CI, 50.8-74.8) and 111.6 (CI, 103.4-127.8) mo respectively (P<0.001). High LDH at baseline [OR- 4.31 (CI, 1.34-13.86)] predicted acquisition of del(17p) while presence of HRT showed borderline significance [OR- 2.02 (0.90-4.54)]. Age ≥65 yrs, ISS III vs. I/II stage, t(11;14), any trisomy, monosomy 13, BMPC%, initial therapy and SCT in first year and before acquiring del (17p) were not predictive. We performed univariable analysis with variables at detection of del(17p) such as age ≥65 vs. <65 years, serum creatinine >2 vs. ≤2 mg/dL, BMPC% ≥50 vs. <50%, ISS III vs. I/II stage, elevated vs. normal LDH, presence vs. absence of a HRT, presence vs. absence of monosomy 13, presence vs. absence of any trisomy, high vs. low PC proliferation rate, PI and immunomodulatory drug (IMiD)-refractoriness and percentage of PCs with del(17p) as independent variables to determine their association with PFS and OS. ISS stage III, high PC proliferative rate and PI and IMiD-refractoriness were selected after univariable analysis and included in the multivariable Cox proportional hazards model. A higher PC proliferative rate alone predicted shorter OS. None of the above factors were associated with shorter PFS. The median OS in those with high PC-proliferative rate from detection of del(17p) was 10.9 mo (CI, 6.0-17.1) vs. 37.2 mo (CI, 18.2-47.5) in those with low PC proliferative rate (P=0.005). Conclusion The prognosis of patients who acquire del (17p) is poor with OS of 6.5 years against 9 years from diagnosis in patients who do not acquire del (17p). This was valid across prognostic sub-groups. High PC proliferative rate was the only factor which impacted OS once patients acquired del(17p). Disclosures Kapoor: Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Gertz:Research to Practice: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; annexon: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Prothena: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria; Apellis: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; 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. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Kumar:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: 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; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, 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; Janssen: 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; 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; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: IgM light chain amyloidosis (AL) is a rare complication of IgM associated disorders, with very limited data on biology and outcomes. Our study compares the clinical characteristics, laboratory findings and outcomes in a large cohort of patients with IgM vs. non-IgM AL to delineate the underlying disease biology of this entity. Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed AL (2006-15) were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional database and grouped by IgM heavy chain. Bone marrow (BM) morphology was reviewed by an expert hematopathologist (RLK). FISH testing included probes for t(11;14) and trisomies of odd numbered chromosomes. MYD88L265P testing was carried out by allele specific PCR and CXCR4WHIM mutation testing was performed by bridged nucleic acid (BNA)-enhanced Sanger sequencing. Results: Patients with IgM AL comprised 6.6% (75/1128) of the study cohort. Baseline characteristics are listed in Table 1. IgM AL patients were older and had a higher proportion of males. They had less frequent cardiac involvement (60 vs. 75%) and less frequent involvement of > 1 organ. Light chain burden was lower in this group (dFLC 12.5 vs. 22.7 mg/dL), while there was no difference in BM clonal cell percentage (10% each). Morphology: BM morphology in 71 patients with IgM AL revealed a pure plasma cell disorder (PPCD type) in 25% (n=18); low-grade B-cell lymphoma (LGBCL) with plasmacytic features (LPL type) in 62% (n=44) [well defined LPL: 38% (n=27), LGBCL with plasmacytic features: 24% (n=17)]; LGBCL, other: 6% (n=4). In the remaining 7%, three patients had other diagnoses and no BM disease in two patients. Median clonal cell % in LPL vs. PPCD type IgM AL was 20% vs. 5%, p<0.001. Genetics: In patients with IgM AL vs. non-IgM AL, t(11;14) was present in 27% vs. 49%, p=0.009 and trisomies in 9% vs. 24% of patients, p=0.06, respectively. In the IgM AL cohort, MYD88 mutation was seen in 56% (23/41) & CXCR4 mutation in 15% (5/34; S388 type: 3, other: 2) of patients. Importantly, MYD88 and CXCR4 mutations were found only in patients with LPL morphology, while t(11;14) was found only in the PPCD morphology group. There were no patients with both t(11;14) and MYD88 abnormalities (N=26 for both tested). Mutations seen in the LPL vs. PPCD type IgM AL were: MYD88, 88% (22/25) vs. 0% (0/14), p<0.001 and CXCR4, 26% (5/19) vs. 0% (0/13), p=0.02. Conversely, t(11;14) was seen in 0% (0/18) in LPL type vs. 60% (9/15) in PPCD type IgM AL, p <0.001. Treatment details were known in 63 patients with IgM AL; rituximab-based: 21 (33%), bortezomib/alkylator: 16 (25%), transplant 17 (27%), steroids: one and no treatment: 8 (13%). Treatment in IgM AL LPL type (n=36) was: rituximab based: 16 (44%),bortezomib/alkylator: 5 (14%), transplant: 10 (28%) and none: 5 (14%). In PPCD type [n=17), treatment was rituximab based: 2 (12%), bortezomib/alkylator: 8 (47%), transplant: 7 (41%). At 6 months, very good partial response or better was observed in 26% (10/39) vs. 41% (270/660) of patients with IgM vs. non-IgM AL, p=0.05. There was no difference in overall survival (OS) when all patients with IgM AL were compared to non-IgM AL (Fig 1a). However, when stratified by early (Stage 1/2) or advanced (stage 3/4) 2012 Mayo stage, patients with IgM AL fared worse (Fig 1b-c). On multivariate analysis, IgM AL was an independent predictor for inferior OS [HR with 95% CI: 1.6 (1.1-2.4), p=0.02] after adjusting for age, Mayo 2012 stage and type of therapy (transplant vs. not). However, when OS was adjusted for 6 month VGPR, there was no difference in OS for IgM AL vs. non IgM AL, p=0.2. In the IgM AL cohort, patients with LPL type IgM AL had inferior OS compared with PPCD type IgM AL, 21 vs. 82 months, p=0.01 (Fig 1d). Conclusions: Patients with IgM AL have distinct clinical and genetic features, with lower rates of cardiac involvement and a lower frequency of t(11;14) or trisomies compared with non-IgM AL. Even though IgM AL is a rare entity, we were able to delineate two distinct sub-types of IgM AL: LPL type and PPCD type, with implications for therapy and outcomes. Along with unique morphologic findings, presence of MYD88 and CXCR mutations was only seen in LPL type IgM AL and t(11;14) in PPCD type IgM AL. Despite lower cardiac involvement, IgM AL was associated with inferior OS outcomes, likely due to lower response rates, particularly in LPL IgM AL group, which had the lowest OS. Therapeutic approaches targeted towards disease biology to achieve deep responses are needed in this disorder. Disclosures Sidana: Janssen: Honoraria. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: 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; Celgene: 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; Janssen: 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; Roche: Research Funding; Novartis: 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; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; 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. Gertz:Abbvie: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Apellis: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: Limited data exist regarding histological transformation in patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM). In this study, we present the disease characteristics, outcomes and risk factors for histological transformation in WM. Methods: Patients with WM seen at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN between January 1996 and December 2017 were included. Patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma in the setting of WM were considered to have transformation. Univariate analysis for comparing baseline characteristics of transformed versus non-transformed WM was performed using Wilcoxon, Fisher's exact and Chi square tests, as appropriate. Multivariate analysis was performed using logistic regression analysis. Cox proportional hazard method was used to assess the impact on time-to-transformation. All time-to-event analyses were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Of 1014 patients with WM, 42 patients (4.1%) developed histological transformation. The median follow-up for the entire cohort was 9.5 years (95% CI: 8.8-10.5 years). The cumulative probability of transformation was 2.3% at 5 years, 5.3% at 10 years and 8.5% at 15 years from diagnosis of WM, respectively. There was no difference in the 5-year cumulative probability of transformation in patients with WM diagnosed between 1996-2000 (2.1%), 2001-2005 (2.9%), 2006-2010 (2.7%) and 2011-2015 (3.8%), p=0.61.The disease characteristics, laboratory parameters and histology at transformation are outlined in Table 1. In patients with DLBCL histology (n=39), Revised-International Prognostic Index was calculable in 28 patients, with 50% (n=14), 46% (n=13) and 4% (n=1) of DLBCL belonging to poor, good and very good risk groups, respectively. For DLBCL histology, 18 patients were classifiable using Hans algorithm into germinal center B-cell (GCB) type (n=3, 17%) and non-GCB type histology (n=15, 83%). The median lines of therapy received prior to transformation for the entire cohort was 2 (range 0-9), with 5 (11%) patients not having received any therapy for WM before transformation. Number of lines of alkylator-based therapy used prior to transformation [median 1 line (range 0-4)] was comparable to that used in patients in whom WM did not occur [median 1, (range 0-6); p=0.78]. The median time-to-transformation from diagnosis of WM was 4.8 years (95% CI: 2.6- 6.8 years). Overall survival (OS) from transformed disease was 3.2 years (95% CI 1.1-3.9 years). The 10-year OS of patients with WM who transformed was lower (46%) compared to patients without transformation (60%) with a trend towards statistical significance (p=0.08), Figure 1. The MYD88L265P mutation status was available in 333 patients in the entire cohort (22/42 pts in the transformed cohort and 311/972 in the non-transformed cohort. Of the 22 patients in the transformed WM cohort, 13 (59%) exhibited MYD88WT genotype and 9 (41%) exhibited MYD88L265P genotype. The risk of transformation was higher in patients with MYD88WT status [Odds ratio 6.3 (95% CI: 2.6-15.5); p<0.0001]. Additionally, serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) was higher at diagnosis of WM in patients who transformed, Table 2. On multivariate analysis, MYD88WT status remained an independent predictor of disease transformation [p=0.003; odds ratio 10 (95% CI: 2.1-48)]. On univariate Cox proportional hazard analysis for identifying predictors of time-to-transformation, only MYD88WT mutational status was associated with shorter time-to-transformation with a 5-year transformation rate of 15.5 % for MYD88WT versus 2.6 % with MYDL265P mutated patients [risk ratio 6.2 (95% CI: 2.5-16.4); p<0.0001]. Treatment-related details in the transformed cases were available for 37 (90%) patients; R-CHOP was the most common (41%) frontline therapy for transformation; 33% patients underwent autologous stem cell transplantation for transformed disease during their disease course. Conclusion: Histological transformation is an uncommon event in WM but confers poorer survival. MYD88WT genotype is independently associated with histological transformation a shorter time-to- transformation in patients with WM. Disclosures Ansell: Trillium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Gertz:Apellis: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; janssen: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy. Dingli: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.; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. 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:Merck: 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; 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; Celgene: 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; Roche: 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; Novartis: 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. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: The revised international prognostic scoring system (IPSS-R) for myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) is widely accepted and has been validated in multiple studies. Patients with adverse cytogenetics do poorly and that is reflected in this scoring system by having the highest score for cytogenetics; 2 for intermediate, 3 for poor and 4 for very poor. Little is known about the effect of marrow blasts in adverse cytogenetic in the high-grade MDS defined by IPSS-R intermediate (>3), high (>4.5) and very high (>5). The goal is to examine the effect of marrow blast percentage on outcome in patients with adverse cytogenetics that is present in the high-grade MDS. Methods: We performed data collection from the Mayo clinic records for patients with confirmed MDS after obtaining appropriate IRB approval. Patients were divided based on their total IPSS-R score and we extracted high-grade MDS cases with intermediate, high and very-high IPSS-R only. Cytogenetics and baseline CBC were available for analysis. We calculated the survival difference in patients with blasts <5% and patient with blasts of 5% to 19% for every group. Survival estimates were calculated by Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank testing using JMP v.13. Results: Our database had 1300 patients with confirmed MDS, 41% (N=536) are high-grade MDS. From those, the median age was 70 and 70% were males. Median bone marrow blast was 6% (0-19). Baseline hemoglobin is 9.2 g/dL, WBC 2.7, ANC 1.05, and platelets 69. Their cytogenetics were 1% very good, 31% good, 23% intermediate, 16% poor and 29% very poor. The total IPSS-R groups were 39%,31%, and 30% for the intermediate, high, and very-high groups respectively. The overall survival (OS) for the high-grade MDS with marrow blast <5% was 12.3 months and for patients with marrow blasts ≥5% 11.4 months (P=.4). At each high-grade MDS; intermediate, high and very high, there were no statistically significant differences for patients with marrow blasts below or above 5%. In term of risk of progression to AML, patients with blasts ≥5% were at higher risk of progression compared with <5% (25% vs 10% , P<.001), with no statistically significant difference in term of time-to-AML progression. Conclusion: The percentages of bone marrow blasts had no impact on overall survival among patients with high grade MDS. However, patients with ≥5% marrow blasts are at a higher risk for progression to AML. Disclosures Al-Kali: Novartis: Research Funding.

AbstractThe median survival in primary systemic (AL) amyloidosis is less than 18 months. No published series of patients with AL amyloidosis have reported survival of more than 10 years. The records of all Mayo Clinic patients with a diagnosis of AL amyloidosis between January 1, 1966 and March 1, 1987 were reviewed. Patients with secondary amyloidosis, familial amyloidosis, senile systemic amyloidosis, and localized amyloidosis were excluded. During the 21 years of the study, 841 patients with AL amyloidosis were seen. Of these, 29 were excluded because the diagnosis was made at autopsy, and 2 others were excluded because no follow-up data were available. Actuarial survival for the 810 patients was 51% at 1 year, 16% at 5 years, and 4.7% at 10 years. Thirty patients survived for 10 years or more after the histologic diagnosis of AL amyloidosis; all received alkylating-agent therapy. In 14 patients, the monoclonal protein disappeared from the serum or urine. Of 10 patients with nephrotic syndrome, 4 had an objective response. Congestive heart failure, older age, creatinine value of 2 mg/dL or more, bone marrow plasma cell value of 20% or more, platelet count of 500 × 109/L or less, and the presence of peripheral neuropathy were underrepresented in the 10-year survivors and are unfavorable prognostic features. Five percent of patients with AL amyloidosis survived for 10 years or more.