Search

Autoimmune cytopenias (AICs) affect 5% to 9% of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Targeted drugs—ibrutinib, idelalisib, and venetoclax—have a prominent role in the treatment of CLL, but their impact on CLL-associated AICs is largely unknown. In this study, we evaluated the characteristics and outcome of preexisting AICs and described the incidence, quality, and management of treatment-emergent AICs during therapy with targeted drugs in patients with CLL. We collected data from 572 patients treated with ibrutinib (9% in combination with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody), 143 treated with idelalisib-rituximab, and 100 treated with venetoclax (12% in combination with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody). A history of preexisting AICs was reported in 104 (13%) of 815 patients. Interestingly, 80% of patients whose AICs had not resolved when treatment with a targeted drug was started experienced an improvement or a resolution during therapy. Treatment-emergent AICs occurred in 1% of patients during ibrutinib therapy, in 0.9% during idelalisib therapy, and in 7% during venetoclax therapy, with an estimated incidence rate of 5, 6, and 69 episodes per 1000 patients per year of exposure in the 3 treatment groups, respectively. The vast majority of patients who developed treatment-emergent AICs had unfavorable biological features such as an unmutated IGHV and a del(17p) and/or TP53 mutation. Notably, despite AICs, 83% of patients were able to continue the targeted drug, in some cases in combination with additional immunosuppressive agents. Overall, treatment with ibrutinib, idelalisib, or venetoclax seems to have a beneficial impact on CLL-associated AICs, inducing an improvement or even a resolution of preexisting AICs in most cases and eliciting treatment-emergent AICs in a negligible portion of patients.

Introduction Ibrutinib is the only once-daily Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor with significant survival benefit vs chemo- and /or immunotherapy in multiple phase 3 studies of patients (pts) with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). It has profoundly changed the treatment landscape of CLL with the longest follow-up. However, seven years (yrs) after ibrutinib was approved in Italy by regulatory agencies for CLL treatment, available data on the patterns of care of such pts in the setting of clinical practice is limited. Herein we present the first interim analysis (IA) of EVIdeNCE (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03720561), a multicenter, observational clinical study designed to describe the current management of pts receiving ibrutinib in real-world setting in Italy in terms of retention rate: the study's primary end point. Methods EVIDENCE 312 treatment-naïve (TN) 38% and relapsed/refractory (R/R) 62% pts with CLL according to the iwCLL diagnosis criteria observed at 39 Italian hematological institutions in the period between November 2018 and October 2019. Inclusion criteria were treatment with ibrutinib according to the European Summary of Product Characteristics as per routine clinical practice started within the previous 3 months. The purpose of this IA is to provide demographics and disease characteristics at baseline and a preliminary evaluation of ibrutinib retention rate after one year of follow-up, along with its safety profile. Results The median age of pts at the time of ibrutinib initiation was 71.0 yrs (range 41.0-89.0), with 60% ≥70 yrs, 63.2% male, and 90% with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance 0-1. Baseline Rai stage 0-I, II, and III-IV accounted for 18.3%, 29.7% and 52.1% pts, respectively. Patients in stage IV were observed in 40% of the R/R and 27% in TN subgroup. Considering 120 pts with known mutational status, del(17p) and/or TP53 mutation were present in 50.0% of pts (TN=52.1%, R/R=48.6%), while IGHV was unmutated in 35.0% (TN=33.3% and R/R=36.15) and mutated in 15.0% (TN=14.6%, R/R=15.3%). At baseline, 62.9% of pts had comorbidities and 30.6% presented with a history of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). A CIRS score ≥6 was observed in 28.5% of pts. The median time from CLL diagnosis to the start of ibrutinib was 5.1 yrs (TN 1.75 yrs vs R/R 7.27 yrs). At least 1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) of any grade was experienced by 70.7% of pts. Frequencies were as follows: infections (30.8%; COVID-19 infections 3.2%), arthralgia (10.8%), neutropenia (9.3%), fatigue (8.4%), diarrhea (7.7%), atrial fibrillation (7.4%; grade 3-4, 4.2%), fever (7.1%), rash (6.4%), anemia (6.1%) and hypertension (4.2%). Mild bleeding TEAEs were reported in 16.1% of pts with no major bleeding event. TEAEs were more frequent in the elderly (≥65 yrs) while no significant differences in the rate of TEAEs were recorded in TN and R/R pts (69.7% vs 71.4%, respectively). Serious TEAEs were reported in 21.9% of pts. Overall in intention to treat (ITT), 32 deaths (10%) were observed (TN=8, R/R=24). The most common causes of death were infections (3.5%) and progressive disease (PD) (1.9%). Permanent discontinuation was observed in 56 (18%) of the pts (TN=17.2%, R/R=18.7%) and it mostly occurred within the first 6 months. Main causes of discontinuation were toxicity (6.1%), PD (3.8%) or death (3.5%). Temporary interruptions (≤ 3 months without therapy and/or dose modifications) during the whole observation period occurred in 30.3% (TN=35.3%, R/R=27.2%) and 37.7% (TN=37.5%, R/R=37.8%) of pts, respectively, mainly determined by toxicity and clinical judgment. Finally, in this first IA after 17.3 months (range 1.1 - 27.0) median follow-up, the ibrutinib retention rate (calculated as the ratio between the number of patients who retained ibrutinib treatment over the total number of patients at risk) at 1-year was 81.9% [95% confidence interval (CI), 77.2% - 86.1%] with no difference between TN 83.2% (95% CI, 75.2% - 89.4%) and R/R 81.2% pts (95% CI, 74.9% - 86.4%). Conclusions EVIDENCE is the first real-world study of ibrutinib use in CLL clinical practice in Italy. Ibrutinib retention rate at one-year suggests a better knowledge and expertise of hematologists in the management of ibrutinib-related toxicities that may result in an improved long-term outcome of pts with CLL. Disclosures Molica: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astrazeneca: Honoraria. Scarfo: Astra Zeneca: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel grants. Murru: Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel and accommodation; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Sportoletti: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Frigeri: Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau. Sanna: Janssen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy. Coscia: Janssen: Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria. Reda: Abbvie: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Tafuri: Novartis: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Grugnetti: Janssen: Current Employment. Magarotto: Janssen: Current Employment. Mauro: Tskeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau.

Introduction Non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (NPLD) is considered a good alternative to conventional doxorubicin for the treatment of older patients (pts) with aggressive lymphomas and/or at high risk for cardiological toxicity. The use of R-COMP for the treatment of older pts with DLBCL has been supported by several small retrospective studies . In this report we describe the characteristics and outcomes of pts who were prospectively enrolled in the Elderly Project (EP) and who were treated with R-COMP and compared them with pts treated with conventional R-CHOP. Methods. This analysis was conducted starting from the dataset of the EP study. The use of NPLD was allowed according to 648/96 law, treatment decision was left to physician discretion and was independent of frailty status. For the purposes of this analysis, we included all pts who were treated with full doses of R-CHOP and R-COMP. The study endpoint were progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). A propensity score analysis was conducted to account for the main confounding factors. Results Overall 691 out of 1163 pts of the EP were treated with R-CHOP (383; 55%) or R-COMP (308; 45%); median age was 71 and 76 years for R-CHOP and R-COMP, respectively (p < 0.001) (Table 1). Pts were similarly distributed among different IPI groups for R-COMP or R-CHOP. Based on simplified Geriatric Assessment (sGA) 88%, 11% and Conclusions Data from the prospective observational EP study did not show significant differences in terms of efficacy comparing R-COMP to standard R-CHOP. The higher frequency of UNFIT and FRAIL pts among those treated with NPLD suggests R-COMP is a good strategy to offer a curative treatment to these groups of pts. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Merli: EUSA Pharma: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead Science: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Celgene: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses. Tucci: janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gentili: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rigacci: Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Gilead Science: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Menarini: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Cavallo: ROCHE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Fabbri: Servier/Pfizer: Honoraria; Takeda: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Takeda: Honoraria. Puccini: Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ferrero: Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morphosys: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; EUSA Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Speakers Bureau; Clinigen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Zilioli: Roche, Italfarmaco: Consultancy, Honoraria; MSD, Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations; Gentili, Takeda, Gilead, Servier: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Other: travel expenses, accommodation. Nassi: Takeda: Consultancy; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Musuraca: Janssen, Incyte, Roche: Consultancy; Janssen, Roche, Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen, Roche, Incyte: Honoraria. Flenghi: Janssen: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Roche: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses. Marcheselli: sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Luminari: Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Janssen: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Regeneron: Consultancy; GENELAB SRL: Consultancy.

Introduction: Management of elderly patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) is challenging. A simplified Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (sCGA) based on ADL (Activity of Daily Living), IADL (Instrumental ADL) and CIRS-G (Comorbidity Index Rating Scale for Geriatrics) scales has demonstrated to be better than clinical judgement to stratify patients' outcome but has never been included in initial assessment. To further assess the impact of sCGA on patients' outcome, we conducted a prospective observational study on a large series of elderly patients with DLBCL. Methods: Patients were enrolled if 65 year old or older, with an untreated de novo DLBCL. sCGA was available at a web based platform that classified patients as FIT, UNFIT, and FRAIL, as shown in Table 1. Treatment choice was left at physician discretion. According to anthracycline dose, therapy was classified as curative (≥70% of full anthracycline dose), intermediate ( Results: From December 2013 to December 2017, 1353 patients have been registered by 37 centres and 1207 were eligible. Median age was 76 years (65-94), 68% had stage III-IV, and 55% had an International Prognostic Index(IPI) ≥3; 500 (42%), 304 (25%), and 403 (33%) were classified as FIT, UNFIT and FRAIL, respectively. Data on treatment were available in 1164 patients: rituximab was used in 96% of patients; treatment was curative in 89%, 53%, and 36% of FIT, UNFIT, and FRAIL patients, respectively; intermediate in 10%, 39%, and 31%, palliative in 0%, 8%, and 33% of patients. The OS was available in 1158 out 1164 cases. With a median follow up of 30 months (1-59) 3y-OS was 64% (95% CI 61% to 67%). According to sCGA the OS was significantly different among the 3 geriatric groups. Correlation with OS was improved when sCGA was integrated with age < or ≥ 80 years to define 3 groups of patients (Table 2): FIT and UNFIT younger than 80 years (sCGA Group 1; 55%, 3 yr OS 75%), UNFIT ≥ 80 years and FRAIL younger than 80 years (sCGA Group 2: 28%, 3yr OS 58%), FRAIL ≥ 80 years (sCGA Group 3: 17%; 3yr OS 43%). Univariable and multivariable analysis for OS was conducted using the 3 sCGA groups and other clinical and laboratory features. The 3 sCGA groups were shown as independent prognostic factors with IPI and with anemia (Hb < 12 g/dl). We used results of multivariable analysis to build a categorical prognostic index assigning different weights to prognostic features based on their Hazard Ratio (HR) (Table 3). The Elderly Prognostic Index (EPI) was defined as the score obtained from the sum of the weights and allowed to define 3 risk groups: Low Risk (LR: score 0-1; 23% of patients); Intermediate Risk (IR; score 2-4; 48%); High Risk (HiR; score 5-7; 29%). The 3 EPI risk groups had a different 3 year OS of 87%(95%CI 81-91), 69%(95%CI 63-73), and 42% (95%CI 36-49); HR for IR vs LR 2.57 (1.72, 3.84); HiR vs LR 6.21(4.17 -9.25), HiR vs IR 2.42 (1.91-3.05) (Figure1). Regarding treatment modality, curative, intermediate and palliative therapies were adopted in 89%, 10%, and 1% of the LR group; 70%, 24%, 7% of the IR group, and 37%, 35%, 28% of the HiR group. The model was internally validated by means of 1000 procedures confirming good performance (slope shrinkage 0.935 and c-Harrell 0.675 in validation sample compared with 0.682 in training sample). The EPI was also tested in an external validation data set that was identified from the pivotal study of sCGA in DLBCL (N=172 patients, Tucci A. et al, Leuk Lymph, 2015) (Figure 1). Conclusion: Using data from this large prospective observational study on elderly DLBCL patients we were able to build a new prognostic index that allows to identify 3 risk groups with significant differences in terms of 3 years OS. The EPI is the first index that integrates geriatric assessment with clinical features and contributes to improving management and clinical research in elderly patients with DLBCL. Disclosures Spina: Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fee; Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Mundipharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Roche: Other: lecture fee; Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fee; GILEAD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fee; Celgene: Other: lecture fee; BMS: Other: lecture fee; Sanofi Genzyme: Other: lecture fee; CTI: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fee; Menarini: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fee, Research Funding; Takeda: Other: lecture fee; Janssen-Cilag: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fee; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Merli:Janssen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel Expenses; Gilead: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses. Cavallo:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ladetto:Roche: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; J&J: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; ADC Therapeutics: Honoraria; Acerta: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Chiappella:Celgene: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Speakers Bureau; Teva: Speakers Bureau. Nassi:Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy. Ferrero:Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Servier: Speakers Bureau; EUSA Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Luminari:ROCHE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CELGENE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Grant; GILEAD: Other: Lecturer; TAKEDA: Other: Travel Grant.

Autoimmune cytopenias (AIC) affect 4-7% of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Targeted drugs (i.e. ibrutinib, idelalisib and venetoclax) have recently entered the therapeutic armamentarium for CLL showing excellent results in terms of efficacy. The activity of these compounds in CLL-associated AIC is largely unknown, due to the exclusion of patients with active AIC from the pivotal clinical trials and to the paucity of studies directly investigating the role of these novel inhibitors in this setting. Also, no guidelines are available to direct the management of patients who develop AIC during the treatment with targeted drugs. The purposes of this study were 1) to evaluate the characteristics and outcome of pre-existing AIC in patients with CLL treated with ibrutinib, idelalisib or venetoclax in the real-life setting, and 2) to describe the incidence, quality and management of treatment-emergent AIC during therapy with targeted drugs. We retrospectively collected data from patients with CLL treated with ibrutinib (n=379), idelalisib (n=100), or venetoclax (n=49) in 11 Italian centers. AIC status was defined as active when it was not controlled with current medical management, controlled/improved when blood counts did not reach the normal values or if subclinical hemolysis was still present, and resolved in the presence of a complete blood count normalization. Pre-existing AIC was reported in 38/379 (10%) of ibrutinib-treated patients, 20/100 (20%) of idelalisib-treated patients and 6/49 (12%) of patients who received venetoclax (Table 1). At the time of the start of ibrutinib, pre-existing AIC was considered active in 8/38 (21%) patients, controlled in 11/38 (29%) and resolved in 19/38 (50%). Among patients with active AIC, ibrutinib treatment induced AIC improvement in 1 patient and a resolution in 4. In addition, during ibrutinib treatment, in 1 patient active AIC was initially controlled but subsequently relapsed at CLL recurrence, in 1 patient concomitant steroid administration was required to maintain AIC controlled and in 1 patient AIC remained stable without needing additional therapy. Controlled AIC remained stable in 3 patients, improved in 3 and resolved in 5. Among 19 patients with a resolved AIC at the time of the start of ibrutinib, only 1 had an AIC relapse during ibrutinib therapy, which was successfully managed with steroids. At the time of the start of idelalisib, pre-existing AIC was considered active in 5/20 (25%) patients, controlled in 7/20 (35%) and resolved in 8/20 (40%). During idelalisib treatment, AIC improved in 2 patients with active AIC and in 1 patient with controlled AIC, and resolved in 2 patients with active AIC and in 5 patients with controlled AIC. No recurrence was observed in 7/8 patients who had resolved AIC at the time of the start of idelalisib. Overall, a recurrence or worsening of a pre-existing AIC occurred in 3/20 patients. In the venetoclax cohort, at treatment initiation, pre-existing AIC was active in 2/6 (33%) patients, controlled in 1/6 (17%) and resolved in 3/6 (50%). Active AIC resolved with venetoclax treatment in 1 patient and improved, albeit with concomitant steroid therapy, in the second. The patient with controlled AIC remained stable but needed additional AIC-directed therapy. AIC recurrence was observed in 1/3 patients with resolved AIC and was successfully treated with steroids. Regarding treatment-emergent AIC, they occurred in 8/379 (2%) patients during ibrutinib therapy, in 4/100 (4%) during idelalisib and in 7/49 (14%) during venetoclax (Table 1). Treatment-emergent AIC significantly correlated with pre-existing AIC in the three cohorts (p In conclusion, this study based on a large, multicenter, retrospective real-life analysis shows that 1) ibrutinib, idelalisib and venetoclax can induce an improvement or even a resolution of pre-existing AIC in CLL patients, and that 2) treatment-emergent AIC during targeted drugs administration is a rare event, which in most patients is manageable without requiring treatment interruption. Disclosures Trentin: ABBVIE: Honoraria, Other: board; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Board; gilead: Consultancy; Roche: Honoraria, Other: Board. Tedeschi:Janssen spa: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; SUNESIS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mauro:Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jannsen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Shire: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Foà:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shire: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Boccadoro:Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Research Funding. Coscia:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract 3747 Poster Board III-683 Background despite the prognosis of aggressive non-Hodgkin Lymphoma has considerably improved over the past decades, the treatment of elderly patients with NHL is still a difficult challenge for the clinician. A retrospective EORTC study conducted in patients with aggressive NHL and age above 70 years showed that about half of patients received an aggressive treatment and that only 15% of investigators employed full-dose regimens from the first cycle. We here present the preliminary data of CHOP-like regimen delivered as first-line or salvage therapy to elderly or young patients with NHL and not eligible for more aggressive therapy. Patients and methods from July 2006 to January 2009, 27 pts (M/F:11/16) with a median age of 71 years (range: 53-84) were included in the study. Twenty-four pts (88%) were more than 65 yo, 18 (66%) had high-grade and 9 (34%) an indolent lymphoma. Stage III-IV disease according to Ann Arbor staging occurred in 18 pts (66%) whereas aaIPI, evaluated only for pts with aggressive NHL, was 3 2 in 9 pts (18%). ENS involvement ≥ 1 was present in 11 (41%) and BM involvement in 13 pts (48%). Most of pts (60%) had ECOG PS ≥ 1. Twenty out of 27 pts (74%) received COMP±R as first-line treatment and 7 (26%) as salvage therapy; all but one of pre-treated pts had received more than 1 line of chemotherapy (range 2-4). Twenty-five (92%) pts had co-morbidity with more than 1 disease in 44% of cases. Median LVEF was 59% (range: 35-80%). COMP±R regimen consisted of cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m2 IV d1, vincristine 1.4 mg/m2 IV d1 (capped at 2mg), liposome-encapsulated doxorubicin (MyocetÒ) at the dose of 50 mg/m2 IV d1 and Prednisone 100 mg/die PO d 1-5 with or without Rituximab at dose of 375 mg/m2 d8 at first course and at d1 of subsequent courses according to B or T-cell lymphoma phenotype respectively. To pts with early stage disease were planned 4 courses of COMP±R±IF-RT while those with advanced stage of disease received six courses of chemotherapy delivered every 3 weeks. Median number of cycles delivered was 5.6 (range: 4-8). All patients completed the planned treatment and most of them (92%) received G-CSF at dose of 300 mg/die as primary (67%) or secondary (25%) prophylaxis. ESA support was need in 8 pts (30%). Results complete response (CR) was achieved in 21 (78%) and partial response (PR) in 3 (11%) of pts with an ORR of 89%; three pts had stable (n=2) or progressive disease (n=1). The regimen was safe and well tolerated with dose reduction occurring in 9 pts (34%). None of pts developed cardiac toxicity. The mainly adverse events recorded was neutropenia occurring in 15% of pts and febrile neutropenia in 6 pts (23%). Extra-haematological toxicity was mild (WHO grade 1-2) and recorded in 18% of pts. There was no treatment-related fatal toxicity. With a median follow-up of 15 months (range 6-33) the OS and EFS was 93% and 89% respectively. Conclusion COMP±R regimen shows to be safe and effective in a group of elderly patients both as first line or salvage therapy. However more patients and longer follow-up is required to assess definitively the role of this regimen in elderly patients with untreated aggressive NHL. A prospective phase II trial is ongoing at our Institution. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract 4795 Introduction Radioimmunotherapy (RIT) has emerged as an important treatment options for patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Yttrium-90 ibritumomab tiuxetan (Zevalin®) consist of ibritumomab, a murine monoclonal antibody to CD20, conjugated to the metal chelator tiuxetan for retention of the beta emitter Yttrium-90. Clinical trials with this agent have demonstrated significant activity in indolent NHL with mild toxicity. The median age of NHL patients included in these trials is mainly < 65 years. Our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of Zevalin as treatment option for patient > 65 years old with indolent NHL. Patients and Methods Between November 2005 to June 2009 fifteen patients, five males and ten females, median age 76 years (range 67-82), with indolent NHL (13 follicular and 2 small lymphocytic) were treated with Zevalin. Six patients had stage IV disease, five stage III and four stage II. All patients received an initial infusion of rituximab at a dose of 250 mg/m(e)2 on day 1 and a second infusion at same dose on day 8 followed by a weight-based dose of Zevalin (median dose 1006 MBq; range 668-1260). Eight patients perfomed Zevalin as consolidation after first line therapy with Rituximab plus chemotherapy (6 R-CHOP, 1 R-FN, 1 R-COMP): of these three were in complete remission (CR) and five in partial remission (PR). Seven patients perfomed Zevalin in relapse (four in first and three in second relapse). Results After RIT 13 of 15 patients were evaluable. Overall response rate was 92% (10 CR, 2 PR); in particular all patients in first line of treatment achieved CR. One patient had stable disease. At a median follow-up of 15 months (range 2-34), all patients are alive in persistent CR or PR. One of two patients in PR achieved CR after successive therapy. Treatment was well tolerated; transient thrombocytopenia (grade 3-4) was seen in 9 patients and transient neutropenia (grade 3-4 ) in 6 patients. Only one patient developed herpex-zoster virus infection. Conclusion In our experience, Zevalin produces high response rate (up to 90%) and durable remission without severe toxicity in older patients with indolent NHL. Notably, in first-line treatment, RIT resulted in PR-to-CR conversion in all five patients in PR after the R-chemotherapy. The favourable safety profile of this regimen makes it an effective consolidation treatment for older patients who, because of age and comorbidity, are not eligible for intensive treatment as high-dose therapy and stem cell transplantation. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Background and aim: In the last decade HDT-ASCT has significantly improved progression-free and overall survival of patients with MM. Achievement of CR or good partial response and the tumor reduction attained with the induction pretransplant chemotherapy have been shown to be the most relevant prognostic factors for long-term survival. In recent years, novel drugs such as thalidomide and bortezomib have been introduced in the treatment of MM. Bortezomib (B) (VelcadeÒ) as a single agent, gives a response rate ranging from 35% to 50%, including up to a 9% CR rate in relapsed/refractory patients, and of 40%, with a 10% CR rate in the up-front setting. Thalidomide (T) has been identified as the first independently active agent in MM since the introduction of melphalan and prednisone and currently represent the milestone of initial treatment in elderly patients. Since B and T target different molecular pathways, we started a phase II trial in order to assess efficacy, toxicity and rate of PBSC collection after VTD regimen delivered as induction pretransplant chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed MM. Patients and Methods: from June 2007 to July 2008 14 pts (M/F: 11/3) with a median age of 56 years (range: 42–71) were enrolled in the study; six pts (43%) were more than 60 yo and 7 pts had a previous history of M-GUS lasting in median 54 months. At time of treatment there were 71%, 22% and 7% having Durie and Salmon staging III, II and I respectively, while ISS was 1 in 22%, 2 in 50% and 3 in 28% of cases. One pt had renal impairment, extensive bone disease was documented in 78% of cases with 2 pts showing extramedullary disease. Sixty-five percent of pts (9/14) had IgG MM, 14% IgA, 7% light chain, and 14% non secretory myeloma. Unfavourable cytogenetic was recorded in 36% (5/14) of cases. Bortezomib was administered at 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1,4, 8, 11 as short IV infusion, thalidomide at daily dose of 100 mg PO and Dexamethasone (40 mg/die PO) the day of bortezomib infusion and the day after (640 mg for each cycle) every 4 weeks for 3–4 courses. All patients received deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis consisting of aspirin 100 mg daily (44%), low molecular weight heparin (28%) and low dose warfarin (28%). Following VTD regimen patients underwent to high-dose cyclophosphamide (4 g/m2) with G-CSF support and peripheral stem cell harvest. MEL 200 was given as conditioning regimen. All patients received standard dose of zoledronic acid monthly. Results: At present time all patients are evaluable for VTD and PBSC collection while 10 for response after transplant. After 3 courses of VTD 93% of pts achieved more than a partial response including 57% of CR and 36% of VGPR. One pt achieved a PR. VTD regimen resulted well tolerated with main toxicity consisting of WHO grade III peripheral neuropathy recorded in 37 % of pts. There were no pts with relevant hematologic toxicity or other non-hematologic toxicities and there were no chemotherapy reduction or delay because of toxicity. None of pts developed DVT. A sufficient amount of CD34+ cells (median 6.5 × 106/kg; range: 2.7–11.6) was collected in 13 of 14 evaluable pts after a median of 1.4 aphaeresis (range:1–2). One pt failed to collect after CTX and was treated with HD-Ara-C obtaining an adequate number of CD34+ cells for transplant. The median CD 34+ cells infused in the 10 transplanted pts was 3.3 ×106/kg (range: 2.0 – 4.7). Times to platelet (20×109/L) and granulocyte (500×109/L) recovery were 13 and 10 days respectively. After HDC and ASCT 7 of 10 patients presented CR (70%) and 2 (20%) a VGPR with an ORR of 90%. One pt presented progression disease after 6 months from transplant. Conclusion: these very preliminary data suggest that VTD regimen given as pretransplant chemotherapy is effective and well tolerated regimen; the capacity to give high response rate in a short time without to compromise PBSC collection makes VTD regimen a good option for initial treatment of newly diagnosed MM patients although more pts and longer follow-up are needed to assess the real impact on survival of this regimen.

The achievement of a clinical response to the first part of induction chemotherapy has been considered for predicting survival in patients with aggressive non Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). In April 2000, the Gruppo Italiano Studio Linfomi (GISL) started the LA05 trial with the aim of assessing different treatment modalities according to response to 4 initial courses of chemotherapy (CT) assessed according to the international response criteria for NHL. Untreated Patients younger than 65 years with histologically confirmed diagnosis of aggressive NHLs were eligible to the study. All stages and all IPI groups were allowed. After 4 courses of CT patients achieving at least a PR >75% were to be treated with two additional courses of CT (group 1); those achieving PR 75%, 49 (19%) achieved a PR 75% was 74%, 62% and 42%, for patients with an initial IPI of 0–1, 2 or 3+. At the end of treatment program, a CR was achieved in 57% of cases and a PR in 14%. After a median follow-up of 21 months (range 1–73), the 2-year OS was 69% (IC 95% 62–75), being 85%, 65% and 25% for group 1, 2 and 3 respectively (p75% after the first part of initial CT overcomes the prognostic role of IPI in patients with aggressive NHL.