Citations

Abstract Background: PTLD is the most common malignancy, other than non-melanoma skin cancer, complicating solid organ transplantation (SOT) and has been one of the most commonly observed fatal consequences in SOT. The clinical presentations, management strategies, histologies, causes of death and outcomes are diverse (Dierickx D, Habermann TM. N Engl J Med 2018;378:549-62). The 2017 WHO Classification of Tumours of Haematopoietic and Lymphoid Tissues has redefined the categories as non-destructive PTLDs (plasmacytic hyperplasia, infectious mononucleosis, and florid follicular hyperplasia), polymorphic PTLD, monomorphic PTLD: B-cell neoplasms (diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, Burkitt lymphoma, high-grade B-cell lymphoma, plasmablastic lymphoma, plasma cell myeloma, plasmacytoma, and other) and T-cell neoplasms (peripheral T-cell lymphoma NOS, hepatosplenic T-cell lymphoma, other), and classic Hodgkin lymphoma (CHL) PTLD. We report the outcomes and long-term follow-up of patients from a single institution based on these categories whose pathology was retrospectively reviewed and reclassified based on the WHO 2017 classification. Methods: Patients with SOT who were diagnosed with PTLD at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN) were identified through the Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Data base and the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER). The histology was re-reviewed in 80% of the cases (RLK) and classified according to the WHO Classification of Tumours of Haematopoietic an Lymphoid Tissues 2017. Cases were considered "PTLD, unclassified" if the histology could not be confidently classified based on pathology material available for review. Indolent small B-cell lymphomas were not included among the PTLDs except for EBV-positive marginal zone lymphoma. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the association of clinical factors in overall survival (OS). Results: 233 patients diagnosed with PTLD between 1987 and 2017 were identified. The median age at the time of diagnosis of PTLD was 54 years (range 16 to 84) with 85 patients (36%) over the age of 60. 156 (67%) were male. The transplanted organs were kidney (41%), kidney/pancreas (5%), liver (29%), heart (9%), lung (7%), and other (8%). PTLD occurred late (more than one year after transplantation) in 66%. There were 69 stage I, 19 stage II, 8 stage III, and 128 stage IV patients. 84% presented with extranodal disease. 21% had involvement of the engrafted organ. 64% of the patients developed a PTLD that was EBV positive by in situ hybridization. Initial approaches to management included reduction of immunosuppression (N=55), chemotherapy/immunochemotherapy (N=71), reduction in immunosuppression with rituximab (N=58), single agent rituximab (N=14), and radiation therapy (N=5). At a median follow-up of 87 months (range 9-289), 139 (60%) patients had died. All six CHL-PTLD patients are alive, two of whom had an event. The median overall survival (OS) was 85 months (95% CI: 39-144) in 177 monomorphic B-cell lymphoma PTLD, 95.5 months (95% CI: 40-not reached) in 24 polymorphic PTLD, and 60 months in 8 non-destructive PTLD cases. In contrast, the median overall survival was 12 months (95% CI: 4-200) in 8 monomorphic T cell and 3 months (95% CI: 1-unreached) in 9 unclassified PTLD cases. Conclusion: PTLD is a heterogeneous group of immunodeficiency-associated lymphoproliferative disorders. The overall survival in non-destructive, polymorphic, and monomorphic PTLD were similar. Monomorphic T/NK cell types had inferior outcomes. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Maurer: Morphosys: Research Funding; Nanostring: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Ansell:Celldex: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding. Cerhan:Celgene: Research Funding; Nanostring: Research Funding; Jannsen: Other: Scientific Advisory Board.

Abstract Introduction: Our group (Porrata et al, BBMT 2016; 22: 1017-1023) previously published that the infusion of autograft natural killer (NK) cells correlates with survival post-autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) patients. A limitation of our previous study was the lack of killer-immunoglobulin-like receptor (KIR) analysis. Thus, we set up to investigate if the infusion of autograft activating and inhibitory KIR affects survival in NHL. Methods: From December 2007 to October 2010, 122 NHL patients participated in our Phase III clinical trial. A total of 111 patients finished the trail and samples were available for analysis. We analyzed the content of the autograft for inhibitory and activating KIR using flow cytometry analysis of each apheresis collection. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed from the date of transplant. Results: With a median follow-up of 82.8 months (range: 2.1-122.3 months), patients infused with an activating NKp30 (CD158b-CD337+) KIR ≥ 0.09 x 109 cells/kg experienced superior OS and PFS vs < 0.09 x 109 cells/kg: [OS: median was not reached vs 39.8 months, 5 years OS rates of 95% (95%CI, 56%-98%) vs 43% (95%CI, 22%-48%), p < 0.0001, respectively; and PFS: median was not reached vs 12.7 months, 5-years PFS rates of 77% (95%CI, 65%-86%) vs 13% (95%CI, 6%-24%), p < 0.0001, respectively]. Patients infused with the inhibitory KIR2DL2 (CD158b+CD337-) KIR < 0.066 x 109 cells/kg experienced superior OS and PFS vs ≥ 0.066 x 109 cells/kg : [OS: median was not reached vs 48.2 months, 5 years OS rates of 86% (95%CI, 75%-93%) vs 44% (95%CI, 31%-88%), p < 0.0001, respectively; and PFS: median was not reached vs 25.6 months, 5-years PFS rates of 62% (95%CI, 49%-74%) vs 31% (95%CI, 20%-44%), p < 0.0002, respectively]. We combined NKp30 and KIR2DL2 into NKp30/KIR2DL2 ratio. Patients infused with an NKp30/KIR2DL2 ratio ≥ 1.8 experienced superior OS (Figure 1) and PFS (Figure 2) vs < 1.8 : [OS: median was not reached vs 33.4 months, 5 years OS rates of 95% (95%CI, 86%-98%) vs 33% (95%CI, 21%-47%), p < 0.0001, respectively; and PFS: median was not reached vs 14.9 months, 5-years PFS rates of 76% (95%CI, 63%-85%) vs 14% (95%CI, 7%-27%), p < 0.0001, respectively]. Multivariate analysis revealed that the NKp30/KIR2DL2 ratio was an independent predictor for OS [HR = 0.03, 95%CI 0f 0.01-0.07, p < 0.0001] and PFS [HR = 0.17, 95%CI 0f 0.09-0.31, p < 0.0001]. Conclusion: The NKp30/KIR2DL2 ratio provides a platform to develop an immunocompetent autograft to improve clinical outcomes in NHL patients undergoing ASCT. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Ansell: LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Genetic alterations at 9p24.1 resulting in overexpression of programmed death-1 (PD-1) ligands are near-universal in cHL (Roemer et al, J Clin Oncol 2016); cHL may thus be uniquely sensitive to PD-1 blockade. Nivolumab (nivo), an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, was associated with an objective response rate (ORR) of 69% in relapsed/refractory (R/R) cHL after auto-HCT and irrespective of prior brentuximab vedotin (BV) in the phase 2 CheckMate 205 study (Armand et al, J Clin Oncol 2018; NCT02181738). Whether some patient (pts) can derive very long clinical benefit, whether depth of response predicts long-term outcome, whether treatment (Tx) can be interrupted in complete remission (CR), and whether the safety profile of nivo in R/R cHL changes with prolonged Tx all remain unclear. We therefore present an updated analysis of CheckMate 205, focusing on long-term efficacy and safety. Methods: This international, single-arm, multi-cohort study enrolled pts aged ≥18 y with R/R cHL after auto-HCT. Pts were BV naïve (Cohort A), had prior BV failure after auto-HCT (Cohort B), or had received BV before and/or after auto-HCT (Cohort C). Pts received nivo 3 mg/kg every 2 wk until disease progression (PD)/unacceptable toxicity. Pts in Cohort C discontinued nivo after 1 y in CR and could resume if they relapsed within 2 y of the last dose. Primary endpoint was ORR per independent radiology review committee (IRC); additional endpoints included duration of response (DOR) per IRC, progression-free survival (PFS) per IRC, overall survival (OS), and safety. Time to next Tx (TTNT: time from first dose to next systemic Tx or death) was an exploratory post-hoc analysis. Responses were assessed using International Working Group 2007 criteria. Results: In total, 243 pts were enrolled to Cohorts A (n=63), B (n=80), and C (n=100). Baseline characteristics have been previously described (Armand et al, J Clin Oncol 2018). At data cut-off, minimum follow-up was 31 mo and 49 pts (20%) were still on Tx; the most common reason for discontinuation was PD (35%). Median duration of Tx was 14 mo. ORR per IRC was 71% (65%, 71%, 75% in Cohorts A, B, C, respectively) with a best overall response (BOR) of CR in 21% (32%, 14%, 20% in Cohorts A, B, C, respectively). Among 51 pts who achieved CR, 20 had CR as the first response and 31 improved from partial remission (PR), mostly (n=28/31) within 1 year of first PR. Median time to response was 2 mo, and to CR was 4 mo. Within the first 6, 12, and 18 mo, 68%, 71%, and 71% of pts, respectively, achieved a response. Median DOR was 18 mo overall, and was 32 and 13 mo in pts with a BOR of CR and PR, respectively. Among responders, 64%, 44%, 31%, and 21% of pts had a DOR of at least 6, 12, 18, and 24 mo, respectively. Overall, 11 pts in Cohort C discontinued with persistent investigator-assessed CR; 2 reinitiated nivo due to PD. Median (95% CI) PFS per IRC among all pts was 15 (11-19) mo (Figure A), and was 17, 12 and 15 mo in Cohorts A, B, and C, respectively. Median OS was not reached in any cohort; 24-mo OS rates were 90%, 86%, and 86% in Cohorts A, B, and C, respectively, and were similar among pts in CR, PR, or with stable disease (SD; Figure B). Median TTNT was 29, 27, and 20 mo in Cohorts A, B, and C, respectively. The most common Tx-related adverse events (AEs) of any grade (G) were fatigue (24%), diarrhea (16%), and rash (12%), each <1% G3-4. Tx-related infections were reported in 15% of pts, 2% G3-4. Tx-related infusion related reactions were reported in 34 pts (14%), <1% G3-4. The most commonly reported immune-mediated AE category was rash, which was G3-4 in 4 pts (2%). In total, 26 pts (11%) experienced an AE of any cause leading to discontinuation. There were no Tx-related deaths. Conclusions: With the longest phase 2-3 study follow-up of a checkpoint inhibitor in R/R cHL to date, nivo was associated with frequent and durable responses regardless of BV Tx history. More than 1 in 5 responders remained in response ≥2 years later. With extended follow-up, additional pts achieved CR in all cohorts. Pts with CR had longer PFS than pts with PR or SD. However, pts with both PR and SD had prolonged OS, unlike pts with PD, which may suggest that clinical benefit duration is not well predicted by conventional response criteria. Nivo continued to be well tolerated, with no new safety signals. Characteristics of long-term responders will be presented. Study support: BMS. Medical writing: A Gill, Caudex, funded by BMS Figure. Figure. Disclosures Armand: Infinity: Consultancy; Affimed: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Otsuka: Research Funding; Adaptive: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Tensha: Research Funding. Younes:Celgene: Honoraria; Genentech: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; J&J: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Curis: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Zinzani:PFIZER: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TG Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Verastem: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; PFIZER: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astra Zeneca: Speakers Bureau; Merck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; SERVIER: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; TG Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Collins:ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celleron: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding. Ramchandren:Merck: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Cohen:Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BioInvent: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. De Boer:Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; EISA: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kuruvilla:Lundbeck: Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Princess Margaret Cancer Foundation: Research Funding; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society Canada: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Trněný:F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board, Research Funding; Sandoz: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board; Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board; Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board. Shipp:Merck: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Sacchi:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sumbul:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment. Ansell:Trillium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding.

Abstract Background Diffuse large B cell lymphoma post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (DLBCL-PTLD) represents a fatal complication after a solid organ transplant (SOT). Approximately 50% of DLBCL-PTLD can be related to Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) infection. However, the EBV status is not taken into account in the DLBCL-PTLD categorization, although increasing evidence suggests its critical role in biological, clinical and prognostic aspects of the disease. In this single center retrospective study, we compared clinical and histological features, as well as outcomes of DLBCL-PTLDs by EBV status. Methods This study focused on patients with SOT who were diagnosed with DLBCL-PTLD at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN). Patients were identified through the Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Data base and the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER), between 1989 and 2017. The histology was re-reviewed (RLK) and classified according to the WHO Classification or Tumours of Haematopoietic and Lymphoid Tissues 2017. Cell of origin (COO) was performed by Hans algorithm. EBV RNA in situ hybridization (EBER) was performed. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the association of clinical factors in overall survival (OS). Results 148 DLBCL-PTLD were identified. The median age at SOT and at the time of PTLD diagnosis were 50 years (range: 15-71) and 56 years (range: 18-82), respectively. The median time to PTLD diagnosis from SOT was 38 months (range: 1-499). The types of SOT included renal (44%), liver (36%), cardiac (9%), renal/pancreas (5%), pancreas (8%), lung (7%) and multiorgan (4%). 62% were stage III-IV, 30% had elevated LDH and 67% had an IPI >1. 88% of patients presented with extranodal disease, and 16% had involvement of the grafted organ. Eighty-three (56%) cases were EBV positive. The COO information was available on 35 cases. The non-GCB subtype was identified in 24 cases and GCB subtype in 11 cases. The initial treatment was as follows: reduction in immunosuppression (12%), immunosuppression reduction with rituximab (26%), rituximab alone (5%), chemotherapy with or without rituximab (35%). Patients with EBV positive PTLD were more likely to have grafted organ involvement (20% vs. 8%, p=0.047) and late PTLD (occurring after 12 months from SOT - 60% vs. 8%, p<0.001) than patients with EBV negative PTLD. There was no association between EBV status and age, sex, stage, LDH, and extranodal site involvement. At a median follow-up of 80 months (range 9-269), 83 patients (56%) had died. The 5-year survival rate from PTLD diagnosis was 56% (95% CI: 48-65%). The median OS was 85 months (95% CI: 37-148). There was no difference in OS in patients with EBV positive PTLD (median OS=84.7 months, HR=1.21, 95% CI: 0.77-1.92) versus patients with EBV negative DLBCL-PTLD (median OS=85.4 months, p=0.41). Conclusion Our study assessed the impact of EBV status on the presentation and clinical outcome of DLBCL-PTLD in a 148-patient single-institution cohort. 56% of cases were EBV positive. EBV positivity was associated with grafted organ involvement and late PTLD diagnosis. Patients with EBV-negative and EBV-positive disease had similar survival from PTLD diagnosis. Disclosures Maurer: Celgene: Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; Nanostring: Research Funding. Cerhan:Nanostring: Research Funding; Jannsen: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Celgene: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Lenalidomide (len) is an immunomodulatory agent with single agent activity in relapsed and refractory peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL). CHOEP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, etoposide, and prednisone) is a common initial regimen. Herein, we report the completed phase II results of the combination of len-CHOEP. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) had newly diagnosed PTCL, ANC ≥1000 cells/mm3, platelets ≥100 K/mm3, and adequate organ function. Based on phase I results [Lunning et al. T-cell Forum 2018] 10 mg of len was chosen for phase II. CHOEP was administered at standard doses with len given on days 1-10 of 21-day cycle for six planned cycles. Mandatory prophylaxis included aspirin (ASA) or alternative thromboprophylaxis and growth factor support per institutional guidelines with each cycle. A PET/CT after two cycles (PET-2) for interim response assessment was required per protocol. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) by PET/CT after 6 cycles (PET-6) of len-CHOEP utilizing the revised Cheson 2007 criteria with secondary endpoints to include toxicity, overall response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS), 2-year PFS, and overall survival (OS). Pts who had CR or partial response (PR) at the end of therapy had the option of len maintenance (10 mg/day for 21 out of 28 days) for 1-year or consolidative autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) without len maintenance. Per protocol pts dosed at 10 mg in phase I (N=8) were included in the phase II analysis. Results: Forty pts with PTCL-NOS (23), ALK negative ALCL (5) and AITL (12) enrolled into the phase II portion. Median age was 62 years (range 24-79) and 21 were male. Thirty (75%) pts completed all 6 cycles. Reasons for discontinuing len-CHOEP early were toxicity (n=6) and progressive disease (PD; n=4). PET-2 was not done in 4/40 pts (n=2 each either not performed or PD). In an intent to treat (ITT) analysis the CR rate at the end of treatment was 48% (19/40; 95CI-32-64%) with an ORR of 68%. In pts who completed 6 cycles (n=30) the CR/ORR rate was 63%/87% respectively. Seven pts (18%) experienced primary treatment failure. Of the 19 pts in CR at end of initial therapy, 14 were in a CR at PET-2 assessment. Two pts in a PET-2 CR discontinued prior to cycle 6 due to toxicity and have not progressed. Five pts converted from a PR to CR after PET-2, but 7 of 13 PRs remained PRs. Responding pts (CR/PR; n=30) proceeded either to an ASCT (n=18), len maintenance (n=10) or neither (investigator/pts preference; n=2). At a median follow up of 13 months (range: 4-23 months), the 1-year estimated PFS and OS is 68% [95% CI--50-80%] and 89% [95%CI--73-96%] respectively. There were five grade (G) 5 events including PD (n=1), secondary malignancy (n=1; AML), sepsis (n=2), and cardiac arrest (n=1). Serious or recurrent adverse events (SAEs or AEs) of interest occurring during any cycle included 38% G 3-4 febrile neutropenia despite mandated GCSF use, 43% G 3-4 anemia, 43% G 3-4 thrombocytopenia (without report of G 3-4 bleeding or bruising despite ASA use), 3% G3-4 rash (all G 23%), and 8% G 3-4 diarrhea (all G 43%). Conclusions: The phase II portion of the study in an ITT population noted an unexpectedly modest 48% CR rate and a high discontinuation rate (15%) due to AEs or SAE. The utility of response at PET-2 and post initial therapy strategy (len maintenance vs ASCT) continue to be monitored for PFS and OS in this limited cohort. Improving frontline outcomes for pts with PTCL remains an unmet need. Disclosures Lunning: Celgene: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Portola: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy; Genzyme: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy. Horwitz:Millennium/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trillium: Consultancy; Mundipharma: Consultancy; Kyowa-Hakka-Kirin: Consultancy, Research Funding; Portola: Consultancy; Aileron Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Innate Pharma: Consultancy; Corvus: Consultancy; Spectrum: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Infinity/Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Forty Seven: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Advani:Janssen Pharmaceutical: Other: Institutional Research Support; Cell Medica: Other: Consultancy/Advisory Role; Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals: Other: Consultancy/Advisory Role; Merck: Other: Institutional Research Support; Forty Seven, Inc: Other: Institutional Research Support; Millenium: Other: Institutional Research Support; Roche/Genentech: Other: Consultancy/Advisory Role, Institutional Research Support; Pharmacyclics: Other: Institutional Research Support; Celgene: Other: Institutional Research Support; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Institutional Research Support; Kura: Other: Institutional Research Support; Infinity: Other: Institutional Research Support; Autolus: Other: Consultancy/Advisory Role; Kyowa: Other: Consulting/Advisory Role; Takeda: Other: Consultancy/Advisory Role; Bristol Myers Squibb: Other: Consultancy/Advisory role and Institutional Research Support; Agensys: Other: Institutional Research Support; Gilead/Kite: Other: Consultancy/Advisory Role; Seattle Genetics: Other: Consultancy/Advisory role, Institutional Research Support; AstraZeneca: Other: Consultancy/Advisory Role. Vose:Epizyme: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Incyte Corp.: Research Funding; Legend Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.: Research Funding. Mehta-Shah:Verastem: Research Funding; Genetech: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Spectrum: Consultancy. Haverkos:Viracta Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Moskowitz:ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Ansell:Merck & Co: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: The pivotal phase 3 ECHELON-1 study demonstrated superior efficacy of brentuximab vedotin plus doxorubicin, vinblastine and dacarbazine (A+AVD) versus doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine and dacarbazine (ABVD) in patients with previously untreated advanced stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) with a 2-year modified progression-free survival (mPFS) of 82.1% in the A+AVD group versus 77.2% in the ABVD group (Hazard Ratio=0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60, 0.98; p=0.04). PN is a known toxicity associated with anti-mitotic agents, including vinblastine and the MMAE component of brentuximab vedotin. In the ECHELON-1 study, the incidence of any-grade PN events was 67% (442 of 662 patients) and 43% (286 of 659 patients) in the A+AVD and ABVD arms, respectively; the incidence of grade ≥3 PN was 11% and 2%, respectively. At the time of the initial analysis, 67% of A+AVD-treated patients had either resolution (43%) or improvement (24%) of PN events. A total of the 92% of ongoing PN events were grade 1 (64%) or grade 2 (29%). Here, we report rates of PN resolution and improvement in patients participating in the ECHELON-1 study after long-term follow-up. Methods: Patients with Stage III or IV cHL were randomized 1:1 to receive up to six cycles of A+AVD (n=664) or ABVD (n=670). Pre-existing PN was an exclusion factor at study entry. Peripheral neuropathy was determined on the basis of a standardized MedDRA query; patients who developed PN were monitored throughout the study and those with ongoing PN at end of treatment were followed for resolution or improvement during the post-treatment follow-up period; follow-up visits were scheduled for every 12 weeks ±1 week until 36 months, then every 6 months until study closure. PN resolution was defined as completely resolved and improvement was defined as improved by ≥1 grade from worst grade as of the latest assessment. Results: At the time of the primary analysis, 51% (226/442) and 61% (174/286) of patients in the A+AVD and ABVD arms, respectively, had resolution or improvement of PN events at EOT. Upon continued follow-up (~10 additional months) for approximately 30 months (range 0-78.5) after end of treatment, 76% (335/442) of patients with PN in the A+AVD arm had either complete resolution (59%, 260/442) or improvement (17%, 75/442) of their PN events compared with 82% (234/286) with either resolution (72%) or improvement (10%) in the ABVD arm. In the A+AVD arm, 90% of ongoing PN cases (n=182) were grade 1/2; grade 1=58% (n=106), grade 2=32% (n=58). Residual grade 3 PN was reported in 9% (n=17) of patients (1 patient with grade 4 PN died before resolution). In the ABVD arm, residual PN (n=81) was grade 1 (65%; n=53), grade 2 (30%; n=24), and grade 3 (5%; n=4). For the subset of patients with PN that had not resolved by end of treatment, the median time to resolution of all PN events from AE start date was 28 weeks for A+AVD and 14 weeks for ABVD, the median time to improvement of PN was 39 weeks for A+AVD and 18.5 weeks for ABVD. Conclusions: After approximately 2.5 years of continued follow-up, PN continues to resolve and improve for patients who were treated with A+AVD or ABVD in the ECHELON-1 study. In both study arms, the majority of ongoing PN cases are grade 1 or grade 2. Further follow-up is ongoing. Disclosures Radford: Celgene: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Equity Ownership; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Equity Ownership. Connors:Takeda: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche Canada: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Bayer Healthcare: Research Funding; NanoString Technologies: Patents & Royalties: Named Inventor on a patent licensed to NanoString Technologies, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; F Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding. Younes:Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; J&J: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Gallamini:Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Ansell:Affimed: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Gopal:Aptevo: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Brim: Consultancy; Spectrum: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Teva: Research Funding; Asana: Consultancy. Flinn:Trillium: Research Funding; Calithera: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Verastem: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; ArQule: Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding. Pettengell:CTI: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Dlugosz-Danecka:Servier: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Engley:Seattle Genetics: Employment. Fenton:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liu:Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Purevjal:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Miao:Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Gautam:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Kuruvilla:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Princess Margaret Cancer Foundation: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Lundbeck: Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society Canada: Research Funding.

Abstract Background Peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs) are aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphomas with poor overall survival rates. The genetics of PTCLs are poorly understood. We have described t(6;14)(p25.3;q11.2) translocations in PTCLs involving the T-cell receptor-alpha (TRA@) and interferon regulatory factor-4 (IRF4) genes and overexpressing IRF4 protein (also called MUM1). IRF4/MUM1 is a lymphoid transcription factor involved in differentiation and growth, the expression of which is tightly regulated in normal T cells. However, nearly half of PTCLs constitutively express IRF4/MUM1 and this expression is associated with adverse overall survival in several PTCL subtypes. Because IRF4/TRA@ translocations are rare among PTCLs (<1%), we investigated the presence of other genetic abnormalities of IRF4 in PTCLs and examined their association with IRF4/MUM1 protein expression. Methods Studies were performed on paraffin tissue sections of PTCL specimens diagnosed by standard WHO criteria. IRF4/MUM1 immunohistochemical staining (IHC) was performed using the MUM1p antibody and considered positive if nuclear staining was present in >30% of tumor cell nuclei. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was performed using breakapart probes constructed from bacterial artificial chromosome DNA that hybridized to loci flanking the IRF4 locus on 6p25.3. Cases with 3 or more fusion signals were considered to have extra copies of the IRF4 gene. In a subset of cases, PCR and Sanger sequencing was performed on DNA extracted from frozen PTCL tumor tissue with primer sets that amplified exons 1 to 10 of the IRF4 gene. Data were analyzed using the chi-square test or t test. Results PTCLs from 277 patients (175 M:102 F; median age, 61 y) were examined by both IHC and FISH. The subtype distribution was: PTCL, not otherwise specified (NOS), 93; anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL), 89; angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL), 27; cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL), 43; and cytotoxic PTCL, 25. IRF4/MUM1 was positive in 116 cases (42%). Extra copies of IRF4 were identified in 18 PTCLs (7%), 83% of which were IRF4/MUM1 protein-positive. In contrast, 39% of cases without extra copies of IRF4 were IRF4/MUM1 protein-positive (p=0.0002). The mean percentage of tumor cells with IRF4/MUM1 staining was 69% in cases with extra copies of IRF4, compared to 30% in cases without extra copies (p=0.0001). Extra copies of IRF4 were seen in 13% of ALCLs, 4% each of PTCLs, NOS and cytotoxic PTCLs, 2% of CTCLs, and 0% of AITLs (p=0.02). Two IRF4/MUM1-positive cases had an IRF4/TRA@ translocation (1%). We selected 30 IRF4/MUM1-positive PTCLs for Sanger sequencing. In this subset, we identified a previously undescribed non-synonymous variant in exon 5 (S309R) in 1 case (3%) without an extra copy of IRF4. Conclusions Extra copies of IRF4 are seen in ∼7% of PTCLs, are significantly associated with IRF4/MUM1 expression, and are preferentially observed in ALCLs. Both IRF4/TRA@ translocations and IRF4 mutations are rare in PTCLs. These data suggest that genetic abnormalities of the IRF4 gene – specifically extra copies of IRF4 – may contribute to IRF4/MUM1 expression in some PTCLs. Since IRF4/MUM1 expression is seen in ∼42% of PTCLs, these data also imply the existence of other regulatory mechanisms. Characterizing these mechanisms may be important clinically, since IRF4/MUM1 has been proposed as a therapeutic target in human cancers but drugs that directly inhibit its function are currently not available. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Introduction Recent advances in the understanding of the WM pathobiology led to the expansion of our therapeutic options in this disease. A number of targeted drugs are either available or under investigation and are poised to change the chemo-immunotherapy paradigm in the treatment of WM. Now more than ever, an individualized treatment approach for patients with WM is possible, where patient characteristics and preferences can be matched by different treatment goals and side effect profiles. While deep responses have been associated with longer disease-free survival in other hematologic malignancies, data on patients with WM are sparse. We report the impact of depth of response in disease-free and overall survival (OS) in WM. Methods WM patients consecutively seen at Mayo Clinic between 01/1998 and 12/2016 were reviewed for response to therapy and disease burden. The best response achieved after the treatment of interest (TOI) was classified using the IWWM-7 Response Criteria. The included TOI were: BR, DRC, BDR and high-dose chemotherapy followed by ASCT. All time-to-event analyses were performed from the TOI initiation date using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test. A landmark analysis from the date-of-best response was also performed for OS to prevent immortal-time bias. Univariate and multivariate analyses of progression-free survival (PFS) and time-to-next therapy (TTNT) were performed using the Cox regression method. Results A total of 181 patients had disease response assessed after the TOI. Baseline characteristics at time of diagnosis are summarized in table 1. The median follow up from TOI was 3.8 years (95% CI: 3-4), the majority of patients received TOI as salvage therapy [n=112 (63%); median 2nd line (rage 1-11)]. Best response rates with the corresponding 5-year PFS and TTNT are summarized in table 2. The median OS from TOI was longer in patients who achieved at least a PR [median 7.2 years (95% CI: 5-NR) vs 3.7 years (95% CI: 1.6-NR), p=0.01]. A trend towards a longer OS was also seen with deeper responses (PR or better) achieved with frontline therapy [median 5.8 years (95% CI: 5.8-NR) vs 3.4 years (95% CI: 1.6-NR), p=0.24]. Figure 1 shows the correlation between deeper responses with PFS and TTNT. Among patients achieving a PR or VGPR, those with a normal FLC ratio post TOI demonstrated a longer PFS and TTNT [PFS: median NR (95% CI: 3.4-NR) vs 4.9 years (95% CI: 2.8-8.7), p=0.01; TTNT: median NR (95% CI: 3.5-NR) vs 5.2 years (95% CI: 4.2-9.4), p=0.04], figure 2. In a multivariate analysis including normal FLC ratio, normal IgM level and minimal BM involvement (<5%) post TOI, normal FLC ratio remained an independent prognostic factor for longer PFS and TTNT. Similar trends were seen when considering treatment naïve and relapsed/refractory patients independently (data not shown). Discussion Our results not only suggest an association between depth of response with PFS and TTNT, but also with OS in patients with WM. A normal FLC ratio (not part of the IWWM-7 response criteria) seems to predict a longer disease-free interval in patients achieving a PR or VGPR. Disclosures Gertz: Ionis: Honoraria; Apellis: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; janssen: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Medscape: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: 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: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; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Ansell:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction Immunoglobulin M monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (IgM MGUS) is a relatively common pre-malignant condition that may progress to Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia (WM), an incurable low-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The acquisition of genomic alterations in a multistep process of progression is likely a central mechanism responsible for the progression of IgM MGUS to WM, leading to increased tumor burden and end-organ damage. The exact role of the immune system in this process is still poorly characterized. The modulation of the immune system by malignant cells leading to anti-lymphoma immunity or immune evasion is a well-stablished principle associated with lymphoma survival and progression, respectively. The understanding of the pathobiology of IgM MGUS and WM has grown significantly over the last few years; however, most of the past research has focused on genetics and flow cytometric analysis of malignant cells. The introduction of CyTOF, a novel platform coupling mass spectometry with single-cell flow cytometry using antibody-metal isotope pairs, has allowed a broader single-cell analysis and the study of functional profiles. We here report the use of CyTOF technology to comprehensively profile the immune system of patients with IgM MGUS and WM. Methods Viably-cryopreserved (DMSO 10%) single-cell suspensions containing peripheral blood mononuclear cells from 15 patients (WM n=9 and IgM MGUS n=6) were used in this study. Recovered cells (1-3 x 106 per sample) were stained with a 30-parameter surface protein CyTOF panel designed to characterize multiple cell types and profile the immune system. Nucleated cellular events were identified using a DNA intercalator conjugated to natural abundance iridium (191Ir and 193Ir). Cisplatin (195Pt) was used for dead-live cell discrimination and calibration beads containing natural abundance cerium (140/142Ce), europium (151/153Eu), holmium (165Ho), and lutetium (175/176Lu) were used for normalization of the instrument signal. CyTOF analysis of normalized files was carried out using the Astrolabe Diagnostics platform. Cell clusters were assigned using the FlowSOM package and differential abundance analysis was performed using the edgeR package. Analysis is adjusted for multiple comparisons. Results The median live single-cell count for the entire cohort was 573,300 (range 50,681 to 869,727), representing a median of 81% (range 39% to 87%) of the total event counts [median 820,800 (range 130,452 to 1,000,000]. The cell count and the proportion of event count was similar in patients with WM or IgM MGUS. T cells represented 45.8% of the total events; granulocytes represented 31.3%; NK cells represented 8.6%; monocytes represented 8.1%; B cells represented 2.4% of the total events for the entire cohort. Figure 1 shows a heat map of different immune cell sub-types proportion per patient sample. A difference was noted in the proportion of monocytes (CD14+, CD16+) and B-cells when comparing patients with IgM MGUS and WM (figure 2). Patients with WM had a higher proportion of monocytes compared to IgM MGUS patients (p=0.05). A higher proportion of B-cells was noted in patients with IgM MGUS when compared to WM (4.2% vs 0.6%, p=0.01). When B-cells were sub-classified as naïve, transitional, non-switched memory, switched memory, and plasmablasts, the proportion of non-switched memory B-cells was higher in IgM MGUS compared to WM (p=0.05). While the results of this pilot study suggest important differences between IgM MGUS and WM as regards the immune repertoire, confirmatory studies are in progress in a larger cohort of patients. Conclusion To our knowledge, this is the first study of mass cytometry in patients with WM and IgM MGUS patients. A higher proportion of monocytes and lower proportion of memory B-cells was noted in patients with WM compared to IgM MGUS. CyTOF study of the immune profile in these patients is feasible and can potentially uncover relationships between cell types not typically associated with the disease progression continuum (IgM MGUS to WM). While definitive conclusion cannot be made using this dataset due to the small sample size, CyTOF is a powerful tool in the study of the immune profile of WM patients. Disclosures Gertz: Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; janssen: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy. Kapoor:Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Reeder:Affimed: Research Funding. Ansell:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: The addition of Rituximab to chemotherapy has significantly improved the outcome of patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Patients treated with immunochemotherapy for DLBCL who achieve EFS24 (event-free for 2 years after diagnosis) have an overall survival equivalent to that of the age- and sex-matched general population. Relapses after achieving EFS24 have been considered to be unusual but have been understudied. We sought to define the rate, clinical characteristics, treatment pattern, and outcomes of such relapses. Methods: 1448 patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL from March 2002 to June 2015 were included. Patients were enrolled in the Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) of the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic Lymphoma SPORE, treated per physician choice (predominantly R-CHOP immunochemotherapy) and followed prospectively. An event was defined as progression or relapse, unplanned re-treatment after initial therapy, or death from any cause. Cumulative incidence of relapse and non-relapse mortality after achieving EFS24 were analyzed as competing events using Gray's test in the EZR software. Post-relapse survival was defined as time from relapse to death from any cause and analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method in SPSS (V22). Results: Among the 1448 patients, 1260 (87%) had DLBCL alone at diagnosis, and 188 (13%) had concurrent indolent lymphoma (follicular lymphoma 115, marginal zone lymphoma 18, chronic lymphocytic leukemia 14, lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma 4, unspecified 37) at diagnosis. After a median follow-up of 83.9 months, 896 patients achieved EFS24. For all 896 patients who achieved EFS24, the cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) was 5.7%, 9.3% and 13.2%, respectively, at 2, 5 and 10 years after achieving EFS24. Patients with concurrent indolent lymphoma at diagnosis had a higher CIR compared to those with DLBCL alone at diagnosis (10.2 vs 4.8% at 2 years, 15.7 vs 8.0% at 5 years, 28.8 vs 9.7% at 10 years, P<0.001; Figure 1). There were a total of 84 patients who relapsed after achieving EFS24. The median age at initial diagnosis was 66 years (range 35-92), and 48 (57%) were male. At diagnosis, 11 (13%) had ECOG PS >1, 37 (50%) had LDH elevation, 62 (74%) were stage III-IV, 14 (17%) had more than 1 extranodal site, and 26 (31%) were poor risk by R-IPI score. There were 58 patients with DLBCL alone at diagnosis who relapsed after achieving EFS24, and 38 (75%) relapsed with DLBCL, 13 (25%) relapsed with indolent lymphoma (predominantly follicular lymphoma), and pathology was unknown in 7 patients. In contrast, there were 26 patients with concurrent indolent lymphoma at diagnosis who relapsed after achieving EFS24, and 9 (41%) relapsed with DLBCL, 13 (59%) relapsed with indolent lymphoma, and pathology was unknown in 4 patients. In the 47 patients who relapsed with DLBCL after achieving EFS24, 45% received intensive salvage chemotherapy, 19% received regular intensity chemotherapy, 9% received CNS directed chemotherapy, and 36% went on to receive autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). In the 26 patients who relapsed with indolent lymphoma after achieving EFS24, 27% were initially observed, 54% received regular intensity chemotherapy, 4% received intensive salvage chemotherapy, and 19% received ASCT after subsequent progression. The median post-relapse survival (PRS) for all patients with a relapse after achieving EFS24 was 38.0 months (95% CI 27.5-48.5). The median PRS for patients who relapsed with DLBCL and indolent lymphoma after achieving EFS24 were 29.9 (19.9-39.9) and 89.9 (NR-NR) months, respectively (P=0.002; Figure 2). Conclusions: Relapses after achieving EFS24 in patients with DLBCL were uncommon in the rituximab era. Patient with DLBCL alone at diagnosis can relapse with either DLBCL or indolent lymphoma (3:1 ratio). Patients with concurrent DLBCL and indolent lymphoma at diagnosis had a significantly higher CIR, and relapses with DLBCL and indolent lymphoma were similar (2:3 ratio). Even with high intensity salvage chemotherapy and consolidative ASCT, patients who relapsed with DLBCL had a significantly worse survival compared to those who relapsed with indolent lymphoma. Late relapses with DLBCL remain clinically challenging, with a median survival of 2.5 years after relapse. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Maurer: Celgene: Research Funding; Nanostring: Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding. Witzig:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Ansell:Takeda: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Cerhan:Celgene: Research Funding; Jannsen: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Nanostring: Research Funding.