Search

In B-chronic lymphocytic leukemia (B-CLL), the interaction between leukemic cells and the microenvironment promotes tumor cell survival. The Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor ibrutinib is one of the first-in-class molecules for the treatment of B-CLL patients, however, the emerging mechanisms of resistance to ibrutinib call for new therapeutic strategies. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the ability of ibrutinib plus the MDM2-inhibitor nutlin-3 to counteract the tumor microenvironment protective effect. We observed that primary B-CLL cells cultivated in microenvironment mimicking conditions were protected from apoptosis by the up-regulation of c-MYC and of p53. In the same setting, combined treatments with ibrutinib plus nutlin-3 led to significantly higher levels of apoptosis compared to the single treatments, counteracting the c-MYC up-regulation. Moreover, the combination induced high p53 levels and a significant dissipation of the mitochondrial membrane potential, together with BAX cleavage in the more active p18 form and phospho-BAD down-regulation, that are key components of the mitochondrial apoptotic pathway, enhancing the apoptosis level. Our findings propose a new therapeutic strategy to overcome the tumor microenvironment protection involved in B-CLL resistance to drugs, with possible clinical implications also for other hematologic and solid tumors for which ibrutinib is considered a therapeutic option.

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.

Genome complexity has been associated with poor outcome in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Previous cooperative studies established five abnormalities as the cut-off that best predicts an adverse evolution by chromosome banding analysis (CBA) and genomic microarrays (GM). However, data comparing risk stratification by both methods are scarce. Herein, we assessed a cohort of 340 untreated CLL patients highly enriched in cases with complex karyotype (CK) (46.5%) with parallel CBA and GM studies. Abnormalities found by both techniques were compared. Prognostic stratification in three risk groups based on genomic complexity (0-2, 3-4 >= 5 and abnormalities) was also analyzed. No significant differences in the percentage of patients in each group were detected, but only a moderate agreement was observed between methods when focusing on individual cases (kappa=0.507; P

Introduction: Patients (pts) with CLL may be at particular risk of severe COVID-19 given advanced age and immune dysregulation. Two large series with limited follow-up have reported outcomes for pts with CLL and COVID-19 (Scarfò, et al. Leukemia 2020; Mato, et al. Blood 2020). To provide maximal clarity on outcomes for pts with CLL and COVID-19, we partnered in a worldwide effort to describe the clinical experience and validate predictors of survival, including potential treatment effects. Methods: This international collaboration represents a partnership between investigators at 141 centers. Data are presented in two cohorts. Cohort 1 (Co1) includes pts captured through efforts by European Research Initiative on CLL (ERIC), Italian CAMPUS CLL Program, and Grupo Español de Leucemia Linfática Crónica. The validation cohort, Cohort 2 (Co2), includes pts from US (66%), UK (23%), EU (7%), and other countries (4%). There is no overlap in cases between cohorts. CLL pts were included if COVID-19 was diagnosed by PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 and they required inpatient hospitalization. Data were collected retrospectively 2/2020 - 5/2020 using standardized case report forms. Baseline characteristics, preexisting comorbidities (including cumulative illness rating scale (CIRS) score ≥6 vs. The primary endpoint of this study was to estimate the case fatality rate (CFR), defined as the proportion of pts who died among all pts hospitalized with COVID-19. Chi-squared test was used to compare frequencies; univariable and multivariable analyses utilized Cox regression. Predictors of inferior OS in both Co1 and Co2 were included in multivariable analyses. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival (OS) from time of COVID-19 diagnosis (dx). Results: 411 hospitalized, COVID-19 positive CLL pts were analyzed (Co1 n=281, Co2 n=130). Table 1 describes baseline characteristics. At COVID-19 dx, median age was 72 in Co1 (range 37-94) and 68 in Co2 (range 41-98); 31% (Co1) and 45% (Co2) had CIRS ≥6. In Co1, 48% were treatment-naïve and 26% were receiving CLL-directed therapy at COVID-19 dx (66% BTKi ± anti-CD20, 19% Venetoclax ± anti-CD20, 9.6% chemo/chemoimmunotherapy (CIT), 1.4% PI3Ki, 4% other). In Co2, 36% were never treated and 49% were receiving CLL-directed therapy (65% BTKi ± anti-CD20, 19% Venetoclax ± anti-CD20, 9.4% multi-novel agent combinations, 1.6% CIT, 1.6% PI3Ki, 1.6% anti-CD20 monotherapy, 1.6% other). Most pts receiving CLL-directed therapy had it held at COVID-19 diagnosis (93% in Co1 and 81% in Co2). Frequency of most COVID-19 symptoms/laboratory abnormalities were similar in the two cohorts including fever (88% in both), lymphocytosis (ALC ≥30 x 109/L; 27% vs. 21%), and lymphocytopenia (ALC < 1.0 x 109/L; 18% vs. 28%), while others varied between Co1 and Co2 (p Median follow-up was 24 days (range 2-86) in Co1 and 17 days (1-43) in Co2. CFRs were similar in Co1 and Co2, 30% and 34% (p=0.45). 54% and 43% were discharged while 16% and 23% remained admitted at last follow-up in Co1 and Co2, respectively. The proportion of pts requiring supplemental oxygen was similar (89% vs. 92%) while rate of ICU admission was higher in Co2 (20% vs. 48%, p Conclusions : In the largest cancer dx-specific cohort reported, pts with CLL hospitalized for COVID-19 had a CFR of 30-34%. Advanced patient age at COVID-19 diagnosis was an independent predictor of OS in two large cohorts. This CFR will serve as a benchmark for mortality for future outcomes studies, including therapeutic interventions for COVID-19 in this population. The effect of CLL treatment on OS was inconsistent across cohorts; COVID-19 may be severe regardless of treatment status. While there were no significant differences in distribution of current lines of therapy between cohorts, prior chemo exposure was more common in Co1 vs. Co2, which may account for difference in OS. Extended follow-up will be presented. Disclosures Roeker: American Society of Hematology: Research Funding; Abbott Laboratories: Other: spouse with minority ownership interest ; AbbVie: Other: spouse with minority ownership interest . Scarfo:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Abrisqueta:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Eyre:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support; KITE, AZ, Loxo Oncology at Lilly: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Muntañola Prat:Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel grants; participated in advisory boards; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel grants; participated in advisory boards; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel grants; participated in advisory boards. Villacampa:AstraZeneca: Other: advisory role; Merck Sharp & Dohme: Honoraria. Leslie:AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ADC therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BeiGene: Speakers Bureau; KitePharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/BMS: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics/Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Epizyme: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Allan:Acerta, Genentech, Abbvie, Sunesis, Ascentage, Pharmacyclics, Janssen, AstraZeneca, BeiGene: Consultancy; Celgene, Genentech, Janssen, TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Abbvie, Janssen, AstraZeneca, Pharmacyclics: Honoraria. Furman:Incyte: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Loxo Oncology: Consultancy; Oncotarget: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy. Pagel:BeiGene, Astrazeneca, Loxo Oncology, Gilead: Consultancy. Hernandez-Rivas:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Rovi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Patel:Genentech: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BeiGene: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Motta:Roche: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Lamanna:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Research Funding; Verastem: Research Funding; Bei-Gene: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche-Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vitale:Janssen: Honoraria. Kamdar:Roche: Research Funding. Österborg:BeiGene: Research Funding; Kancera: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Karolinska Univeristy Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden: Current Employment. Hanson:Janssen-Cilag: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria. Eichhorst:ArQule: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; Oxford Biomedica: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-LaRoche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding. Reda:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Varettoni:Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel/accommodations/expenses; AbbVie: Other: Travel/accommodations/expenses; Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Marchetti:Gilead: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Other: Sponsored meetings; Takeda: Other: Sponsored meetings; Pfeizer: Other: Sponsored meetings. Munir:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy, Other: Medical writing support, furnished by Scott Battle, PhD, of Health Interactions, was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland; Alexion: Honoraria. Zabalza:Janssen: Honoraria, Other: travel grants; Roche: Other: travel grants; Novartis: Other: travel grants. Janssens:Amgen: Consultancy, Other: travel grants; speaker fees; Abbvie: Consultancy, Other: travel grants; speaker fees; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: travel grants; speaker fees; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: travel grants; speaker fees; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: travel grants; speaker fees; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: travel grants; speaker fees; Sanofi-Genzyme: Consultancy, Other: travel grants; speaker fees; Roche: Consultancy, Other: travel grants; speaker fees. Niemann:AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; CSL Behring: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sunesis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Danish Cancer Society: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novo Nordisk Foundation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Perini:Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Speakers Bureau. Patten:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Honoraria. Marasca:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Honoraria. Iyengar:Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria. Ferrari:Abbvie: Honoraria. El-Sharkawi:Roche: Other: Conference fees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Itchaki:Abbvie Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding. Ma:Novartis: Research Funding; Juno: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bioverativ: Consultancy, Honoraria; BeiGene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Van Der Spek:AMGEN: Other: Teaching activities. Seymour:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen/Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Rigolin:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Mauro:Roche: Other; Octopharma: Other; Takeda-Shire: Other; Gilead: Other; Janssen: Other; Abbvie: Other. Laurenti:Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria. Levin:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel compensation; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel compensation; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel compensation. Špaček:Gilead: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Walewska:AbbVie: Other: sponsored for educational meetings, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Other: sponsored for educational meetings, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Astra Zeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wiestner:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company; Acerta, Merck, Nurix, Verastem, and Genmab: Research Funding; National Institutes of Health: Patents & Royalties: and other intellectual property. Broom:Gilead: Other: Travel support, Speakers Bureau. Kater:Abbvie: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Ujjani:AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Verastem Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Atara: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; MorphoSys: Consultancy. Vandenberghe:Celgene: Other: sponsorship to attend Lugano lymphoma meeting in 2019; Gilead: Other: travel grants, Research Funding; Abbvie: Other: travel grants, Research Funding; Janssen: Other: travel grants; Roche: Other: travel grants, Research Funding. Chong:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Tessa: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; KITE Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Pu:Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Brown:Janssen, Teva: Speakers Bureau; Gilead, Loxo, Sun, Verastem: Research Funding; Abbvie, Acerta, AstraZeneca, Beigene, Invectys, Juno/Celgene, Kite, Morphosys, Novartis, Octapharma, Pharmacyclics, Sunesis, TG Therapeutics, Verastem: Consultancy. Trentin:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Octapharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shire: Honoraria. Farina:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sanchez:Abbvie: Other: travel grants; Amgem: Other: travel grants; Janssen: Other: travel grants; Celgene: Other: travel grants; Roche: Other: travel grants. Shadman:Abbvie, Genentech, Astra Zeneca, Sound Biologics , Pharmacyclics, Verastem, ADC therapeutics, Beigene, Cellectar, BMS, Morphosys and Atara Biotherapeutics: Consultancy; Mustang Bio, Celgene, Pharmacyclics, Gilead, Genentech, Abbvie, TG therapeutics, Beigene, Astra Zeneca, Sunesis, Beigene: Research Funding. Foglietta:Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria. Jaksic:Roche: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria. Sportoletti:AbbVie: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Barr:Morphosys: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; TG therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie/Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Ruchlemer:Abbvie Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kersting:Celgene: Other: travel grant; Janssen: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding. Huntington:Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; DTRM: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astrazeneca: Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Herishanu:Roche: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Medison: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria. Jacobs:TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Speakers Bureau; Sanofi Genzyme: Speakers Bureau. Portell:BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding. Rambaldi:Sanofi: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Astellas: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); BMS/Celgene: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); University of Milan: Current Employment; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Received travel support., Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support from Gilead.; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company). Research grant from Amgen Inc.; Omeros: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company). Advisory board and speaker fees from Pfizer.. Brander:Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; NCCN: Other; Novartis: Consultancy, Other; Teva: Consultancy, Honoraria; Tolero: Research Funding; NCCN: Other; Novartis: Consultancy, Other; Teva: Consultancy, Honoraria; Tolero: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other, Research Funding; ArQule: Consultancy, Other, Research Funding; Ascentage: Other, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; BeiGene: Other, Research Funding; DTRM: Other, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Juno/Celgene/BMS: Other, Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Other, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other, Research Funding. Rossi:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Other: Advisory board; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alexion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Coscia:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shire: Honoraria, 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, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Coombs:Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; MEI Pharma: Honoraria; LOXO Oncology: Honoraria; Octapharma: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Schuster:Novartis, Genentech, Inc./ F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding; AlloGene, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Genentech, Inc./ F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Juno/Celgene, Loxo Oncology, Nordic Nanovector, Novartis, Tessa Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria. Foà:Abbvie: 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; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Cuneo:Astra Zeneca: Honoraria; Gilead: 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; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Bosch:Jansen: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Astra Zeneca: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria. Stamatopoulos:AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Janssen, Gilead, Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Ghia:Adaptive, Dynamo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company), Research Funding; Celgene/Juno: Consultancy, Honoraria; Lilly: Consultancy, Honoraria; MEI: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sunesis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company), Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; ArQule: Consultancy, Honoraria; Acerta/AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria. Mato:Adaptive: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy; LOXO: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: DSMB, Research Funding.

Complex karyotype (CK) at chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) diagnosis is a negative biomarker of adverse outcome. Since the impact of CK and its subtypes, namely type-2 CK (CK with major structural abnormalities) or high-CK (CK with ≥5 chromosome abnormalities), on the risk of developing Richter syndrome (RS) is unknown, we carried out a multicenter real-life retrospective study to test its prognostic impact. Among 540 CLL patients, 107 harbored a CK at CLL diagnosis, 78 were classified as CK2 and 52 as high-CK. Twenty-eight patients developed RS during a median follow-up of 6.7 years. At the time of CLL diagnosis, CK2 and high-CK were more common and predicted the highest risk of RS transformation, together with advanced Binet stage, unmutated (U)-IGHV, 11q-, and TP53 abnormalities. We integrated these variables into a hierarchical model: high-CK and/or CK2 patients showed a 10-year time to RS (TTRS) of 31%; U-IGHV/11q- /TP53 abnormalities/Binet stage B-C patients had a 10-year TTRS of 12%; mutated (M)-IGHV without CK and TP53 disruption a 10-year TTRS of 3% (P

Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) may be more susceptible to Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to age, disease, and treatment-related immunosuppression. We aimed to assess risk factors of outcome and elucidate the impact of CLL-directed treatments on the course of COVID-19. We conducted a retrospective, international study, collectively including 941 patients with CLL and confirmed COVID-19. Data from the beginning of the pandemic until March 16, 2021, were collected from 91 centers. The risk factors of case fatality rate (CFR), disease severity, and overall survival (OS) were investigated. OS analysis was restricted to patients with severe COVID-19 (definition: hospitalization with need of oxygen or admission into an intensive care unit). CFR in patients with severe COVID-19 was 38.4%. OS was inferior for patients in all treatment categories compared to untreated (p

Fixed-duration treatment with venetoclax (Ven), a highly selective Bcl-2 inhibitor combined with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, showed high efficacy inducing high rates of deep responses with undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD) in patients with previously treated and untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). The efficacy and safety of the Ven and rituximab (VenR) combination have been investigated in a multicenter, prospective study of the GIMEMA group that included young patients with previously untreated CLL (LLC 1518, VERITAS, NCT03455517). The primary endpoint of this study was the CR rate assessed according to the iwCLL criteria. Inclusion criteria were: treatment requirement per iwCLL criteria, age ≤65 years, cumulative Illness rating scale score ≤6, creatinine clearance ≥30 mL/min, and an unfavorable biologic profile with IGHV unmutated and or TP53 disruption. Treatment consisted of the Ven dose ramp-up (from 20 to 400 mg daily, during 5-weeks) followed by Ven 400 mg daily, combined with R for six 28-day courses (375 mg/m2, course 1; 500 mg/m2, courses 2-6). Patients continued with Ven single agent, 400 mg daily, until month 13. Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) prophylaxis measures included hydration, allopurinol, or rasburicase. All patients received PneumocystisJirovecii prophylaxis. G-CSF was given in patients with recurrent and severe granulocytopenia. Adverse events (AEs) were graded according to the CTCAE criteria v.5, TLS events were classified according to Howard's criteria. Response was assessed at months 7 and 15 and included clinical examination, PB evaluation, BM aspirate, BM biopsy, and CT scan. MRD was checked centrally in the PB and BM by a 6/4-color flow-cytometry assay with a sensitivity of at least 10-4 according to the internationally standardized European Research Initiative on CLL. Quantitative MRD results assessed by flow-cytometry were categorized as uMRD (uMRD4; Between October 2018 and May 2020, 77 patients with CLL were included in this study. Two patients were off study before the start of treatment (withdrawal of consent, 1; Covid-19 infection, 1) and were not included in the analysis. The median age was 53.5 years (range 38-65). Binet stage B/C was present in 84% of patients, increased beta-2 microglobulin in 41%. Seventy-one (96%) of patients were IGHV unmutated, while 3 (4%) were IGHV mutated and showed TP53 mutation (Table 1). At the data cutoff of June 30, 2020, 65 (87%) patients completed the ramp-up phase. The planned 400 mg dose of Ven was reached within 5 weeks in 78.5% of patients. Response was assessed in 34 patients at the end of the VenR combination therapy. A response was achieved by 32 (94%) patients. Responses included 20 (59%) CRs, 1 CRi (3%) and 11 (32%) PRs due to residual enlarged nodes (median maximum size, 1.9 cm). Treatment failure due to toxicity was recorded in 2 (6%) patients. Overall, a response with uMRD4 by flow-cytometry in the PB was observed in 26 (76.5%) cases, and in the PB and BM, in 17 (50.0%). The rates of patients with CR and uMRD4 by flow-cytometry in the PB, and both in the PB and BM, were 44%, and 35%, respectively (Table 2). No detectable disease by PCR, both in the PB and BM, was observed in 4 (12%) patients. With a median follow-up of 4.5 months from the start of therapy, no patient has progressed or died. Fifty-three percent of patients were hospitalized during the first seven days of the Ven ramp-up phase. A transient laboratory TLS was observed in 3 patients. Treatment was discontinued after the first dose of Ven in 1 patient with evidence of laboratory TLS associated with severe neurologic toxicity due to the concomitant administration of fentanyl. Selected grade ≥3 AEs included neutropenia in 10 patients (ramp-up phase, 5) and neutropenic fever in 4. Grade ≥3 infection was recorded in 3 patients and was the reason for treatment discontinuation in 1 who developed COVID-19 pneumonia. In conclusion, the preliminary results of this study demonstrate the high efficacy of the front-line VenR combination, which resulted in a high proportion of CRs and responses with uMRD4 in young patients with CLL and an unfavorable biologic profile. Disclosures Mauro: Astrazeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Jannsen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Octopharma: Consultancy. Reda:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Trentin:Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Honoraria; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Octapharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Coscia:Shire: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Sportoletti:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Laurenti:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Gaidano:Astrazeneca: 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; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sunesys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Marasca:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Honoraria; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Murru:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Rigolin:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Scarfo:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Marchetti:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Levato:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: 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; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Galieni:Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Liberati:Verastem: Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Incyte: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Molica:Roche: 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; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Visentin:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Vitale:Janssen: Honoraria. Del Giudice:Janssen: Other: grant for meeting participation; Tolero: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Other: grant for meeting partecipation; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cuneo:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: 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; Astra Zeneca: Honoraria; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Foà:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: 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; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Background. The PI3Kδ inhibitor idelalisib given in combination with rituximab in relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (R/R CLL) has been associated with an objective response in 81% of cases with a median PFS of 20.3 months in a phase-3 clinical trial (Sharman et al, JCO 2019). Because the efficacy of new drugs reported in clinical trials may not translate into similar results in the day-to-day practice, we performed an observational retrospective-prospective study on the efficacy and safety of idelalisib and rituximab (IR) in R/R CLL patients treated outside of clinical trials in Italian centers belonging to the GIMEMA group. Methods. R/R CLL patients treated with IR outside of clinical trials between July 2014 and May 2017 were enrolled. Treatment was initiated at symptomatic progression; treatment response and disease progression were assessed according to the NCI criteria. The data were extracted from the medical files and entered into case record forms (CRF) by each treating physician. Computerized and manual consistency checks were performed by the GIMEMA data center on newly entered forms and queries were issued in case of inconsistencies. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), secondary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR), the percentage of patients on treatment at 12, 24 and 36 months, overall survival (OS) and response to the subsequent anti-leukemic treatment. Results. 149 R/R CLL patients from 35 Italian centers were included in the study. The baseline characteristics are shown in Table 1. At a median follow-up of 39.4 months, the median PFS was 22.9 months (95% CI 20.5-28.8). In univariate analysis, a shorter PFS was associated with ≥3 lines of therapy (p=0.0175) (Fig. 1a). The ORR (CR + PR) was 72.5%. Age ≤70 yrs (p=0.037) and a PS grade 3 during RI treatment were neutropenia (35% of cases), gastrointestinal disorders (17%), infections (17%) and transaminitis (6%). Conclusions. The results hereby observed show that the efficacy of IR in a cohort in a real-life RR/CLL with a long follow-up is superimposable to those reported in the pivotal clinical trial, suggesting that the patient population who received IR in the day-to-day clinical practice mirrored that enrolled in the trial. Advanced clinical stage and 3 or more previous lines of therapy were associated with shorter PFS and OS. Interestingly, PFS and objective measures of efficacy such as the proportion of patients still on treatment at 12, 24 and 36 months, as well as OS, were not influenced by the TP53 status. Furthermore, the majority of patents responded to the subsequent anti-leukemic treatment and relatively durable responses were observed in patients who discontinued IR due to toxicity. Disclosures Rigolin: Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Visentin:Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria. Coscia:Shire: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Farina:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gaidano:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Astrazeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sunesys: 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. Murru:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Varettoni:Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Other: Travel/accommodations/expenses; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel/accommodations/expenses. Sportoletti:Janssen: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria. Laurenti:Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria. Marasca:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: 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; Shire: Honoraria. Marchetti:Takeda: Other: Sponsored meetings; Gilead: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Other: Sponsored meetings; Pfeizer: Other: Sponsored meetings. Mauro:Jannsen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Octopharma: Consultancy; Astrazeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Molica:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Pane:Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Novartis pharma SAS: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Other: Travel Expenses; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Gozzetti:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Galieni:Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Krampera:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Trentin:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Octapharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shire: Honoraria. Montillo:AbbVie: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Astra Zeneca: Honoraria. Foà:Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: 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; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cuneo:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Astra Zeneca: Honoraria; Gilead: 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; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

Background Complex karyotype (CK) is a heterogeneous category with a negative impact in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL). Our group has recently reported that CK patients with major structural abnormalities (i.e. CK2) are characterised by a worse prognosis, as compared to other lesions within CK(CK1). Methods We performed a multicentre retrospective study to test whether the combination of CK subtypes with IGHV status could be a relevant prognostic and predictive tool. Results Among 522 patients 13% harboured CK2, 41% CK1 and/or U-IGHV (U-CK1) and 46% M-IGHV without any CK subtypes (M-noCK). After a median follow-up of 5.8 years, CK2 patients had the shortest TTFT (5-year TTFT 31%, 39 and 81%, p

In a series of 349 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL), we found lower levels of signalling lymphocytic activation molecule family member 1 (SLAMF1) expression in cases with highly complex karyotypes, as defined by the presence of five or more chromosomal abnormalities (CK5; P < 0·001) and with major chromosomal structural abnormalities (P < 0·001). SLAMF1 downregulation was significantly associated with advanced Binet Stage (P = 0·001), CD38 positivity (P < 0·001), high β2 -microglobulin levels (P < 0·001), immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region gene (IGHV) unmutated status (P < 0·001), 11q deletion (P < 0·001), tumour protein p53 (TP53) disruption (P = 0·011) and higher risk CLL International Prognostic Index categories (P < 0·001). Multivariate analysis showed that downregulated SLAMF1 levels had independent negative prognostic impact on time-to-first treatment (P < 0·001) and overall survival (P < 0·001).

Complex karyotype (CK) identified by chromosome-banding analysis (CBA) has shown prognostic value in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Genomic arrays offer high-resolution genome-wide detection of copy-number alterations (CNAs) and could therefore be well equipped to detect the presence of a CK. Current knowledge on genomic arrays in CLL is based on outcomes of single center studies, in which different cutoffs for CNA calling were used. To further determine the clinical utility of genomic arrays for CNA assessment in CLL diagnostics, we retrospectively analyzed 2293 arrays from 13 diagnostic laboratories according to established standards. CNAs were found outside regions captured by CLL FISH probes in 34% of patients, and several of them including gains of 8q, deletions of 9p and 18p (p0.01) were linked to poor outcome after correction for multiple testing. Patients (n=972) could be divided in three distinct prognostic subgroups based on the number of CNAs. Only high genomic complexity (high-GC), defined as ≥5 CNAs emerged as an independent adverse prognosticator on multivariable analysis for time to first treatment (Hazard ratio: 2.15, 95% CI: 1.36-3.41; p=0.001) and overall survival (Hazard ratio: 2.54, 95% CI: 1.54-4.17; p0.001; n=528). Lowering the size cutoff to 1 Mb in 647 patients did not significantly improve risk assessment. Genomic arrays detected more chromosomal abnormalities and performed at least as well in terms of risk stratification compared to simultaneous chromosome banding analysis as determined in 122 patients. Our findings highlight genomic array as an accurate tool for CLL risk stratification.

Ibrutinib represents extraordinary progress in the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). However, treatment-related adverse events limit the benefit of this agent. This observational, multicenter study focused on the incidence, risk factors, and prognostic impact of infections in 494 patients with CLL treated with an ibrutinib-based treatment. Ibrutinib was given to 89 (18%) previously untreated patients (combined with rituximab, 24) and 405 (82%) relapsed/refractory patients. Pneumonia (PN), grade ≥3 non-opportunistic infections (NOI), and opportunistic infections (OI) were recorded in 32% of patients with an overall incidence rate per 100 person-year of 15.3% (PN, 10%, NOI, 3.3%, OI, 2%). Infections were the reason for the permanent discontinuation of ibrutinib in 9% of patients. Patients who experienced pneumonia or a severe infection showed a significantly inferior survival than those who were infection-free (p &lt, 0.0001). A scoring system based on the three factors associated with a significant and independent impact on infections—PN or severe infection in the year before starting ibrutinib, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, ≥2 prior treatments—identified patients with a two- to threefold increase in the rate of infections. In conclusion, the results of this study highlight the adverse impact of infectious events on the outcomes of CLL patients treated with ibrutinib.

In this article, we carry out an overview on the management options available for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients and discuss possible treatment decisions, taking into account the issue of sustainability and availability. Targeted agents have shown to be superior compared with chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) in terms of progression-free survival in high-risk CLL. In the majority of studies, however, continuous treatment was compared with fixed-duration CIT and no overall survival or progression-free survival-2 (time from randomization to second progression or death) advantage could be documented. Meanwhile, a substantial financial burden on both patients and payers has raised issues about affordability and adherence to treatment. Therefore, value-based pricing of new drugs has been used to set up price negotiation policies in several countries, and fixed-duration therapy has shown to be less costly than continuous treatment. Thus, CIT continues to have a role in the treatment of CLL patients with a favorable genetic profile, that is, with a mutated IGHV gene profile and a wild-type TP53. Targeted treatment represents the preferred choice in patients with an unmutated IGHV gene configuration and/or a TP53 disruption, provided that adherence to treatment is guaranteed and bearing in mind that should costly drugs not be available for frontline treatment, new agents can be very effective as first salvage treatment.

Introduction FLT3 receptor gene has been reported to be mutated in about 30% of AML, with two different kinds of mutations identified: in-frame duplications within the juxtamembrane region (FLT3-ITD) and point mutations in the tyrosine kinase domain (FLT3-TKD). In term of prognosis, the proper role of these mutations is still debated. Moreover, FLT3 mutations are often subjected to clonal evolution, thus how to properly monitor FLT3 mutated clones, evaluate minimal residual disease, manage FLT3 inhibitors (FLT3i) are only some of the open issues. FLAM is an observational study involving FLT3 positive AMLs to gain clinical and molecular data useful to ameliorate real-life physicians' management of this disease. Here we report the results of a preliminary analysis of the retrospective phase of the study. Methods The retrospective phase of FLAM multi-center observational study enrolled each AML patient treated in 33 participating Italian centers detected to carry a FLT3 mutation since 2012. Clinical and molecular data were collected in accordance with GCP and Helsinki declaration in electronic case report forms. Results At data cut-off , 1st of July 2020, 289 patients with FLT3 mutation at diagnosis were enrolled in the retrospective phase of FLAM study, being evaluable in this analysis, with a median age at diagnosis of 62 years (min-max: 18-94) and a M:F ratio of 141/148 (Patients' characteristics are summarized in table 1). 29 out 289 (10 %) patients had a low risk AML, 190/289 (65,7 %) had an intermediate risk AML and 27/289 (9,3 %) patients had a high risk AML, according to ELN 2017 risk stratification or ELN 2010 in case of allelic ratio unavailability (43 patients had no available ELN risk at baseline). A more frequent association between FLT3-ITD and normal karyotype and between FLT3-TKD mutation and other cytogenetic alterations not conferring a favorable/adverse risk has been observed (p = 0.045). Among the study population, 255/289 (88 %) patients carried a FLT3-ITD, 32/289 (11 %) a FLT3-TKD point mutation and 2/289 (1 %) patients both mutations. Capillary electrophoresis has been the technical method used to investigate FLT3-ITD in 163 of 226 (72 %) patients with information on the method used, while Sanger Sequencing in 47 out of 226 (21 %) patients and Next generation sequencing (NGS) in 16 out of 226 (7 %) patients. Overall, NGS has been adopted to investigate FLT3 gene status in 18 out of 259 patients (7 %). FLT3-ITD allelic ratio was available in 62 of 257 (24 %) ITD patients and was greater than or equal to 0.5 in 35/62 (56 %) patients. During patients' follow-up, 19/289 (7 %) patients affected by a FLT3 positive AML at diagnosis underwent a disease clonal evolution with a FLT3 negative AML progression or relapse. Regarding treatment options in FLT3-AML, in our cohort FLT3i were administered as first-line of therapy in only 36/289 (13 %) patients, always in a combination, of which in 26/36 (72.2 %) with intensive chemotherapy. As expected, intensive chemotherapy represented the induction regimen in the majority of the patients (211/289, 73 %). On the other hand, FLT3i were administered as rescue therapy in 62/171 (36 %) cases (47/62 single-agent and in 15/62 in combination) and as re-induction therapy in 22/80 (28 %) cases (10/22 single-agent and 12/22 in combination). Overall, a FLT3i has been administered as single-agent 81 times, of which Gilteritinib was the most frequently used (56/81, 69,1 %), followed by quizartinib (18/81, 22,2 %). Among the 52 documented combinations of a FLT3i with other drugs, particularly noteworthy is the administration of Sorafenib, in 20/52 (39 %) cases in this real-life study. Lastly, nine out of 289 (3 %) patients received a FLT3i as maintenance therapy after HSCT. Data regarding the correlation among the different regimens, with a special focus on FLT3i, other molecular features and response/survival are currently under analysis. Conclusions These data coming from a preliminary analysis portray the state of a large multi-center retrospective cohort of FLT3-positive AML patients treated in Italy between 2012 and 2020, including interesting insights regarding technical methods used to characterize the disease and the therapeutic scenario in which FLT3 inhibitors have been developed. Further safety and effectiveness data may reveal beneficial to ameliorate physicians' real-life clinical practice. Acknowledgements: work supported by Daiichi-Sankyo. Download : Download high-res image (459KB) Download : Download full-size image Disclosures Martelli: Amgen: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rigolin: Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Fracchiolla: Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accommodations, expenses, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accommodations, expenses, Speakers Bureau; ABBVIE: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accommodations, expenses; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accommodations, expenses, Speakers Bureau. Bocchia: Incyte: Honoraria; CELGENE: Honoraria. Todisco: Jannsen, Abbvie, Jazz: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Papayannidis: Abbvie, Janssen, Novartis, Amgen, Pfizer: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties. OffLabel Disclosure: Sorafenib is a registered drug for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Due to its multi-targeted tirosine kinase inhibitor effect it demonstrated efficacy in FLT3-AML when administered as an off-label prescription.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a genetically heterogeneous disease, in which the process of tumorigenesis begins and progresses through the appearance and accumulation of a tangle of genomic aberrations. Several are the mechanisms of DNA damage in MM, varying from single nucleotide substitutions to complex genomic events. The timing of appearance of aberrations is well studied due to the natural history of the disease, that usually progress from pre-malignant to malignant phase. Different kinds of aberrations carry different prognostic significance and have been associated with drug resistance in some studies. Certain genetic events are well known to be associated with prognosis and are incorporated in risk evaluation in MM at diagnosis in the revised International Scoring System (R-ISS). The significance of some other aberrations needs to be further explained. Since now, few phase 3 randomized trials included analysis on patient’s outcomes according to genetic risk, and further studies are needed to obtain useful data to stratify the choice of initial and subsequent treatment in MM.

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is a disease of the elderly, characterized by immunodeficiency. Hence, patients with CLL might be considered more susceptible to severe complications from COVID-19. We undertook this retrospective international multicenter study to characterize the course of COVID-19 in patients with CLL and identify potential predictors of outcome. Of 190 patients with CLL and confirmed COVID-19 diagnosed between 28/03/2020 and 22/05/2020, 151 (79%) presented with severe COVID-19 (need of oxygen and/or intensive care admission). Severe COVID-19 was associated with more advanced age (≥65 years) (odds ratio 3.72 [95% CI 1.79–7.71]). Only 60 patients (39.7%) with severe COVID-19 were receiving or had recent (≤12 months) treatment for CLL at the time of COVID-19 versus 30/39 (76.9%) patients with mild disease. Hospitalization rate for severe COVID-19 was lower (p < 0.05) for patients on ibrutinib versus those on other regimens or off treatment. Of 151 patients with severe disease, 55 (36.4%) succumbed versus only 1/38 (2.6%) with mild disease; age and comorbidities did not impact on mortality. In CLL, (1) COVID-19 severity increases with age; (2) antileukemic treatment (particularly BTK inhibitors) appears to exert a protective effect; (3) age and comorbidities did not impact on mortality, alluding to a relevant role of CLL and immunodeficiency.

We report the case of a 71-year-old man affected by testicular large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), treated with right orchiectomy and first-line chemotherapy (R-CHOP, 8 cycles). A complete remission was obtained after therapy. Twenty-two months after the primary diagnosis the patient suddenly presented dyspnoea and superior vena cava syndrome; thus, he underwent a CT scan that revealed a large mass in the right atrium, expanding to the superior vena cava. A differential diagnosis between a neoplastic mass and a clot was proposed. The subsequent MR did not clarify the nature of the mass; therefore, the patient underwent an 18F-FDG PET/CT scan (PET/CT), after a specific preparation to reduce fluoro-deoxyglucose (FDG) myocardial uptake. PET/CT revealed an intense FDG uptake involving the whole mass (SUVmax 9.4), suggestive for neoplasm and confirmed by the subsequent endocardiac biopsy. The patient was treated with 8 cycles of R-COMP, obtaining a complete remission, as indicated by the PET/CT performed after the seventh cycle of therapy. The case that we are reporting highlights that DLBCL can have an uncommon relapse presentation in the atrium. PET/CT, compared to conventional imaging, can be a valuable tool to detect early and better characterize cardiac lesions in order to improve the poor prognosis of these conditions.

Limited information is available on the efficacy of front‐line bendamustine and rituximab (BR) in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) with reduced renal function or coexisting conditions. We therefore analyzed a cohort of real‐world patients and performed a matched adjusted indirect comparison with a cohort of patients treated with ibrutinib. One hundred and fifty‐seven patients with creatinine clearance (CrCl) 6 were treated with BR. The median age was 72 years; 69% of patients had ≥2 comorbidities and the median CrCl was 59.8 mL/min. 17.6% of patients carried TP53 disruption. The median progression‐free survival (PFS) was 45 months; TP53 disruption was associated with a shorter PFS (P = 0.05). The overall survival (OS) at 12, 24, and 36 months was 96.2%, 90.1%, and 79.5%, respectively. TP53 disruption was associated with an increased risk of death (P = 0.01). Data on 162 patients ≥65 years treated with ibrutinib were analyzed and compared with 165 patients ≥65 years treated with BR. Factors predicting for a longer PFS at multivariable analysis in the total patient population treated with BR and ibrutinib were age (HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02‐1.10, P, Bendamustine and Rituximab was a relatively effective first‐line regimen in real‐world untreated CLL patients with reduced renal function or coexisting conditions without TP53 disruption.In a matched‐adjusted indirect comparison with a cohort of CLL patients treated upfront, ibrutinib provided longer PFS than bendamustine and rituximab in those with advanced stage.

Anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells represent the first approved third-line therapy associated with long-term remissions in patients with refractory/relapsed (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Eligibility criteria to identify patients who can successfully receive CAR-T are still debated. For this reason, the aim of this study was to identify factors influencing eligibility and define a realistic patient estimate. Of 1100 DLBCL patients, 137 were included. Based on the Juliet trial inclusion criteria, only 64 patients (46.7%) would be eligible. Median overall survival (OS) was 8.04 months in eligible

In recent years, considerable progress has been made in frontline therapy for elderly/physically unfit patients with CLL. The combination of obinutuzumab and chlorambucil (O-Clb) has been shown to prolong progression free survival (PFS, median PFS-31.5 months) and overall survival (OS) compared to chlorambucil alone. More recently, obinutuzumab given in combination with either ibrutinib or venetoclax improved PFS but not OS when compared to O-Clb. In this retrospective multinational, multicenter co-operative study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of frontline treatment with O ± Clb in unfit patients with CLL, in a “real-world” setting. Patients with documented del (17p13.1)/TP53 mutation were excluded. A total of 437 patients (median age, 75.9 years; median CIRS score, 8; median creatinine clearance, 61.1 mL/min) were included. The clinical overall response rate was 80.3% (clinical complete and partial responses in 38.7% and 41.6% of patients, respectively). Median observation time was 14.1 months and estimated median PFS was 27.6 months (95% CI, 24.2-31.0). In a multivariate analysis, high-risk disease [del (11q22.3) and/or IGHV-unmutated], lymph nodes of diameter > 5 cm, obinutuzumab monotherapy and reduced cumulative dose of obinutuzumab, were all independently associated with shorter PFS. The median OS has not yet been reached and estimated 2-year OS is 88%. In conclusion, in a “real-world” setting, frontline treatment with O-Clb achieves PFS comparable to that reported in clinical trials. Inferior outcomes were noted in patients with del (11q22.3) and/or unmutated IGHV and those treated with obinutuzumab-monotherapy. Thus, O-Clb can be still considered as legitimate frontline therapy for unfit CLL patients with low-risk disease.

The complex karyotype (CK) is an established negative prognostic marker in a number of haematological malignancies. After the introduction of effective mitogens, a growing body of evidence has suggested that the presence of 3 or more aberrations by conventional banding analysis (CBA) is associated with an unfavorable outcome in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Thus, the importance of CBA was recognized by the 2018 guidelines of the International Workshop on CLL, which proposed the introduction of CBA in clinical trials to validate the value of karyotype aberrations. Indeed, a number of observational studies showed that cytogenetic aberrations and, particularly, the CK may have a negative independent impact on objective outcome measures (i.e. time to first treatment, progression free survival, time to chemorefractoriness and overall survival) both in patients treated with chemoimmunotherapy and, possibly, in patients receiving novel mechanism-based treatment. Here, we set out to present the scientific evidence supporting the significance of CK as a prognostic marker in CLL and to discuss the biological basis showing that the CK is a consequence of genomic instability.

Background Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) has a heterogeneous clinical course. Beside patients requiring immediate treatment, others show an initial indolent phase followed by progression and others do not progress for decades. The latter two subgroups usually display mutated IGHV genes and a favorable FISH profile. Patients and methods Patients with absence of disease progression for over 10 years (10–34) from diagnosis were defined as ultra-stable CLL (US-CLL). Forty US-CLL underwent extensive characterization including whole exome sequencing (WES), ultra-deep sequencing and copy number aberration (CNA) analysis to define their unexplored genetic landscape. Microarray analysis, comparing US-CLL with non-US-CLL with similar immunogenetic features (mutated IGHV/favorable FISH), was also carried out to recognize US-CLL at diagnosis. Results WES was carried out in 20 US-CLL and 84 non-silent somatic mutations in 78 genes were found. When re-tested in a validation cohort of 20 further US-CLL, no recurrent lesion was identified. No clonal mutations of NOTCH1, BIRC3, SF3B1 and TP53 were found, including ATM and other potential progression driving mutations. CNA analysis identified 31 lesions, none with known poor prognostic impact. No novel recurrent lesion was identified: most cases showed no lesions (38%) or an isolated del(13q) (31%). The expression of 6 genes, selected from a gene expression profile analysis by microarray and quantified by droplet digital PCR on a cohort of 79 CLL (58 US-CLL and 21 non-US-CLL), allowed to build a decision-tree capable of recognizing at diagnosis US-CLL patients. Conclusions The genetic landscape of US-CLL is characterized by the absence of known unfavorable driver mutations/CNA and of novel recurrent genetic lesions. Among CLL patients with favorable immunogenetics, a decision-tree based on the expression of 6 genes may identify at diagnosis patients who are likely to maintain an indolent disease for decades.

The diagnostic criteria for CLL rely on morphology and immunophenotype. Current approaches have limitations affecting reproducibility and there is no consensus on the role of new markers. The aim o ...

Background Clinical decision-making in patients with relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) is challenging and identification of patients who can benefit the most from a given therapy is of critical importance. The International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) index is one of the most robust scores to evaluate frailty, and it has been validated for patients with newly diagnosed MM. However, little is known on its applicability in the setting of RRMM and of its relationships with patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Objectives The primary objective of this study was to investigate whether the IMWG frailty score is able to detect distinct patient-reported HRQoL profiles in the setting of RRMM. A secondary objective was to assess the prevalence of patient-reported clinically important symptoms by frailty groups (ie., fit, intermediate-fit, and frail). Patients and Methods This was an international (Italy and UK) prospective cohort observational study that consecutively enrolled patients from 30 centers. The patients were eligible if they had received at least 1 prior therapy (but no more than 5) and had RRMM according to IMWG criteria. An additional inclusion criterion at the time of study entry was the availability of all variables incorporated into the IMWG frailty score to allow classification of patients in the following three groups: fit, intermediate-fit and frail. Baseline assessment of HRQOL was mandatory to be included in this study and patients completed a set of well-validated measures including the EORTC QLQ-C30 and its myeloma module (QLQ-MY20). The scores from EORTC QLQ-C30 and MY20 questionnaires were summarized by means and standard deviations, overall and by frailty group. Unadjusted differences in mean scores were compared between frailty groups. We also estimated the adjusted mean differences in HRQoL scores of respectively fit and intermediate groups vs frail patients, using a multivariable linear regression model, adjusting for a number of key potential confounders including: sex, education, time since diagnosis, number of previous lines of therapy, previous transplantation, currently receiving therapy, myeloma status (refractory vs relapsed only) and type of MM at diagnosis (secretory vs else). We also assessed the prevalence of clinically important symptoms, based on previously published evidence-based thresholds, by IMWG frailty group. Results Overall, 365 RRMM patients were enrolled between November 2017 and December 2018. Median age was of 69.7 years (IQR, 62.7-75.0) and 296 had received at least two previous lines of therapy. According to the IMWG frailty score evaluation at study entry, 192 (53%), 85 (23%) and 88 (24%) patients were classified as fit, intermediate-fit and frail. Each group was associated with a clearly distinct patient-reported HRQoL profile with both fit and intermediate-fit groups reporting statistically and clinically meaningful better outcomes (ie., improved functional status and lower symptom burden) than frail patients in the majority of the scales from the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-MY20. For example, mean scores of the EORTC QLQ-C30 physical functioning scale were 71.2, 62.2, and 47.5 for fit, intermediate-fit and frail patients, respectively (p Conclusions: In the setting of RRMM, the IMWG frailty score is able to detect clearly distinct patient-reported HRQoL profiles. Current findings may lay the groundwork for the development of a patient-centered frailty index, which also incorporates HRQoL data, to be used in patients with RRMM treated in real-life. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Efficace: Janssen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Other: Grants (to Institution); Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Grants (to Institution); Takeda: Consultancy. Gaidano: Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Beigene: 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; Astrazeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Petrucci: BMS: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; GSK: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board. Tafuri: Celgene: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Larocca: Amgen: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; GSK: Honoraria; Takeda: Other: Advisory Board. Molica: Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astrazeneca: Honoraria. Gozzetti: Janssen: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria. Vignetti: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Cavo: Novartis: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Accommodations, Speakers Bureau; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squib: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

Refined karyotype-based prognostic stratification of chronic lymphocytic leukemia with a low- and very-low-risk genetic profile

Lenalidomide is a therapeutically effective drug in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Twenty-seven CLL patients were treated with lenalidomide in a phase II clinical trial. Ten patients were grouped as responders (R) and 6 as nonresponders (NR). We evaluated T lymphocytes, NK, monocytes and dendritic cells at baseline and after treatment. A gene expression analysis was performed on 16 CLL samples collected before treatment. The levels of immune cells or immune-related cytokines are not different between R and NR patients. However, CLL patients sensitive to lenalidomide clearly show a peculiar gene expression profile in leukemic cells. The most up-regulated gene (fold change = +23 in R vs. NR) is Wnt inhibitor SHISA homolog 3 (SHISA3). SHISA3highCLL are characterized by a restrained activation of Wnt signaling and sensibility to lenalidomide-induced apoptosis. In conclusion, SHISA3 is a candidate gene for the identification of CLL patients who will benefit of lenalidomide treatment as single agent.

We investigated whether karyotype analysis and mutational screening by next generation sequencing could predict outcome in 101 newly diagnosed chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients with high-risk features, as defined by the presence of unmutated IGHV gene and/or 11q22/17p13 deletion by FISH and/or TP53 mutations. Cytogenetic analysis showed favorable findings (normal karyotype and isolated 13q14 deletion) in 30 patients, unfavorable (complex karyotype and/or 17p13/11q22 deletion) in 34 cases and intermediate (all other abnormalities) in 36 cases. A complex karyotype was present in 21 patients. Mutations were detected in 56 cases and were associated with unmutated IGHV status (p = 0.040) and complex karyotype (p = 0.047). TP53 disruption (i.e. TP53 mutations and/or 17p13 deletion by FISH) correlated with the presence of ≥ 2 mutations (p = 0.001) and a complex karyotype (p = 0.012). By multivariate analysis, an advanced Binet stage (p < 0.001) and an unfavorable karyotype (p = 0.001) predicted a shorter time to first treatment. TP53 disruption (p = 0.019) and the unfavorable karyotype (p = 0.028) predicted a worse overall survival. A shorter time to chemorefractoriness was associated with TP53 disruption (p = 0.001) and unfavorable karyotype (p = 0.025). Patients with both unfavorable karyotype and TP53 disruption presented a dismal outcome (median overall survival and time to chemorefractoriness of 28.7 and 15.0 months, respectively). In conclusion, karyotype analysis refines risk stratification in high-risk CLL patients and could identify a subset of patients with highly unfavorable outcome requiring alternative treatments.

INTRODUCTION. Kinase inhibitors and glycoengineered monoclonal antibody, such as obinutuzumab (G), have significantly changed the treatment landscape of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Both like the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib (IB) and obinutuzumab plus chlorambucil (G-CHL) are approved as first line therapy in CLL patients unfit for a fludarabine-base treatment. While IB has proved to be superior to bendamustine-rituximab in a phase 3 trial and an ongoing retrospective ERIC study, no head-to-head comparison has been done for IB vs G-CHL in a real-world evidence study. The aim of this study was to compared the clinical efficacy of the fixed duration G-CHL treatment vs continuous treatment with IB. METHODS. The inclusion criteria for this observational study were patients with a diagnosis of CLL, requiring treatment according to the iwCLL guideline (Hallek M, Blood 2018) and considered unfit for fludarabine-base therapy by the treating physician belonging to the Italian CLL campus. Patients received ibrutinib 420mg daily until progression or unacceptable toxicity, while G was administrated at 100mg on day 1, 900mg on day 2 and 1000mg on days 8 and 15 of the 1st cycle, then at 1000mg from cycles 2-6. Chlorambucil was administrated according to the local policy. An IGHV gene sequence homology ³98% was considered as unmutated (U-IGHV), as opposed to mutated (M-IGHV). TP53 disruptions (TP53dis) included deletions and mutations. Progression-free survival (PFS), time-to-next treatment (TTNT) and overall survival (OS) were calculated according to the iwCLL 2018 guideline. Minimal residual disease (MRD), assessed by flow cytometry, was considered undetectable when RESULTS. We recruited 284 CLL patients from 16 hematologic centers, 104 were treated with G-CHL and 180 with IB as first-line treatment. Once TP53dis cases were excluded, 102 patients treated with G-CHL and 80 treated with IB were included for further analysis. Among patients managed with G-CHL the median age was 75 years and 20% were older than 80 years, 47% had a CIRS≥6 (range 2-18), 68% had a clearance creatinine After a median follow-up of 21 months, 23 patients relapsed (20 G-CHL, 3 IB), 16 required a subsequent treatment (14 G-CHL, 2 IB) and 17 died (10 G-CHL and 7 IB). Two patients in the IB arm developed Richter syndrome. After 8 months from the start of treatment, the overall response rates in the G-CHL and IB arms were 86% vs 77% (p=0.1480), including 25% vs 6% complete remissions (CR, p=0.0013) and 61% vs 71% partial responses (PR, p=0.6320). Remarkably, an uMRD4 by flow-cytometry was documented in 42% and 9% of G-CHL patients in the peripheral blood and bone marrow, respectively. The median PFS was 33 months for G-CHL arm, but not reached for IB patients. The 24months PFS, TTNT and OS was 67% vs 91% (p=0.0012), 83% vs 97% (p=0.0128) and 89% vs 95% (p=0.5314) for the G-CHL and IB arms, respectively. Interestingly, the depth of response influenced PFS only in the G-CHL arm both in terms of clinical response (the median PFS was 8, 29 and 38 months for no responding, PR and CR patients) and MRD status (the 24 months PFS was 82% vs 50% and 100% vs 58% for uMRD4 vs MRD+ evaluated on peripheral blood and bone marrow). While the PFS was significantly better with IB than with G-CHL in U-IGHV (p=0.007), it was superimposable for M-IGHV patients (p=0.1946). Dose reductions or discontinuations were recorded in 39% and 44% of patients in the G-CHL and IB arms. Atrial fibrillation and infections occurred in 2% and 6% (p=0.0442), and in 25% and 17% (p=0.1455) of patients in the G-CHL and IB arms, respectively. CONCLUSIONS. The Italian experience with G-CHL confirms the marked efficacy and safety of this combination, in particular for patients who reach a CR and/or an uMRD4. The continuous treatment with ibrutinib provides a better disease management in CLL patients unfit for fludarabine-base therapy, but some on them - particularly those with a M-IGHV status - can achieve a long-term disease control with a fixed duration obinutuzumab-based chemoimmunotherapy. Disclosures Visentin: Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria. Mauro:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Octopharma: Consultancy; Astrazeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Jannsen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Vitale:Janssen: Honoraria. Ciolli:Janssen: Honoraria; Abbvie: Research Funding. Sportoletti:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Rigolin:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Murru:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Gozzetti:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Molica:Roche: 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; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Marchetti:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Scarfo:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Honoraria. Reda:Gilead: 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. Coscia:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding; Shire: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Laurenti:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: 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. Pizzolo:Abbvie: Speakers Bureau; janssen: Speakers Bureau. Semenzato:Takeda: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria. Foà:Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: 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; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cuneo:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Trentin:Shire: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Octapharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

INTRODUCTION. Richter syndrome (RS), the transformation of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) into an aggressive lymphoma, is a rare but a life threatening complication. Complex karyotype (CK), defined by the presence of ≥3 chromosomal lesions, is a heterogeneous cytogenetic category associated with a shorter survival in CLL, but its impact on the evolution into a RS has not been investigated. Among CK cases, those with≥5 lesions (highCK) and those with major structural abnormalities [type-2 CK (CK2)] display a more aggressive clinical course. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of CK subtypes on the risk of CLL evolution into a RS. METHODS. We performed a retrospective study in 3 Italian CLL centers. Stimulated cytogenetic with CpG+IL2 was performed in 540 patients within the first year after CLL diagnosis. CK cases with unbalanced translocations, additions, insertions, derivative or marker chromosomes were classified as type-2 CK (CK2). Instead, high-CK cases were those presenting at least 5 chromosome abnormalities. An IGHV gene sequence homology ≥98% was considered as unmutated (U-IGHV), as opposed to mutated (M-IGHV). TP53 disruptions (TP53dis) included deletions and/or mutations. Time to Richter syndrome (TTRS) was calculated from CLL diagnosis to either histologically confirmed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma transformation or last known follow-up visit. Survival curves were compared with the log-rank test and p RESULTS. Among the 540 patients, the median age at diagnosis was 63±12 years, 61% were males, 76% were at Binet stage A, 52% were U-IGHV, 11% had TP53dis, 20% harbored a CK. According to the qualitative classification of CK subtypes, 78/107 (73%) were CK2, whereas, with regards to the number of chromosome lesions, 52/107 (49%) were classified as high-CK. High-CK was present in 63% of CK2 patients. Seventeen % of patients died and 5% developed a RS over a median follow-up of 7 years. Overall, the rate of RS after 5 and 10 years from the diagnosis of CLL was 2.6% and 12%. We observed that patients who developed a RS were more commonly at a more advanced Binet stage at CLL diagnosis (46% vs 23%, p=0.0113) and displayed more frequently an U-IGHV status (79% vs 56%, p=0.0191), TP53 abnormalities (32% vs 10%, p=0.0043), CK2 (46% vs 13%, p By univariate and multivariate analysis, the presence of a CK (overall), of a CK2 and of a high-CK subtypes were all significantly associated with a shorter TTRS, together with U-IGHV status, TP53dis, 11q- by FISH and Binet stage B-C. Patients with a CK2 (HR=5.6 p By integrating the statistically significant variables, we developed a hierarchical model based on HR values (Figure 1): 15% of patients were classified as high-CK and/or CK2, for whom the 10-year TTRS was 31% and the HR 13; 45% were U-IGHV/TP53dis/11q-/Binet B-C and showed a 10-year TTRS of 12% and the HR 3; 40% were M-IGHV without CK and TP53 wild-type, the 10-year TTRS was only 3%. This model was confirmed in multivariate analysis and internally validated (p CONCLUSIONS. We herein identified variables associated with a higher risk of developing a RS and recapitulated them into a RS scoring system. Remarkably, patients harboring a CK subtype at CLL diagnosis have the highest risk of developing a RS and should be carefully monitored during the clinical follow-up. Figure Disclosures Visentin: Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Rigolin:Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Mauro:Octopharma: Consultancy; Astrazeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Jannsen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Foà:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Semenzato:Takeda: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria. Cuneo:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Astra Zeneca: Honoraria; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: 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. Trentin:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Octapharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shire: Honoraria.

BIRC3 is a recurrently mutated gene in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) but the functional implications of BIRC3 mutations are largely unexplored. Furthermore, little is known about the prognostic impact of BIRC3 mutations in CLL cohorts homogeneously treated with first-line fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR). By immunoblotting analysis, we showed that the non-canonical nuclear factor-κB pathway is active in BIRC3-mutated cell lines and in primary CLL samples, as documented by the stabilization of MAP3K14 and by the nuclear localization of p52. In addition, BIRC3-mutated primary CLL cells are less sensitive to flu-darabine. In order to confirm in patients that BIRC3 mutations confer resistance to fludarabine-based chemoimmunotherapy, a retrospective multicenter cohort of 287 untreated patients receiving first-line FCR was analyzed by targeted next-generation sequencing of 24 recurrently mutated genes in CLL. By univariate analysis adjusted for multiple comparisons BIRC3 mutations identify a poor prognostic subgroup of patients in whom FCR treatment fails (median progression-free survival: 2.2 years, P

Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) patients with +12 have been reported to have specific clinical and biologic features. We performed an analysis of the association between demographic, clinical, laboratory, biologic features and outcome in CLL patients with +12 to identify parameters predictive of disease progression, time to treatment, and survival. The study included 487 treatment-naive CLL patients with +12 from 15 academic centers, diagnosed between January 2000 and July 2016, and 816 treatment-na&iuml, ve patients with absence of Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (FISH) abnormalities. A cohort of 250 patients with +12 CLL followed at a single US institution was used for external validation. In patients with +12, parameters associated with worse prognosis in the multivariate model were high Lactate DeHydrogenase (LDH) and &beta, 2-microglobulin and unmutated immunoglobulin heavy-chain variable region gene (IGHV). CLL patients with +12 and high LDH levels showed a shorter Progression-Free-Survival (PFS) (30 months vs. 65 months, p &lt, 0.001), Treatment-Free-Survival (TFS) (33 months vs. 69 months, 0.001), Overall Survival (OS) (131 months vs. 181 months, 0.001) and greater CLL-related mortality (29% vs. 11% at 10 years, 0.001) when compared with +12 CLL patients with normal LDH levels. The same differences were observed in the validation cohort. These data suggest that serum LDH levels can predict PFS, TFS, OS and CLL-specific survival in CLL patients with +12

Recent evidence suggests that complex karyotype (CK) defined by the presence of =3 chromosomal aberrations (structural and/or numerical) identified by chromosome banding analysis (CBA) may be relevant for treatment decision-making in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). However, many challenges towards routine clinical application of CBA remain. In a retrospective study of 5290 patients with available CBA data, we explored both clinicobiological associations and the clinical impact of CK in CLL. We found that patients with =5 abnormalities, defined as high-CK, exhibit uniformly dismal clinical outcome, independently of clinical stage, TP53 aberrations (deletion of chromosome 17p and or TP53 mutations, TP53abs) and the expression of somatically hypermutated (M-CLL) or unmutated (U-CLL) immunoglobulin heavy variable genes (IGHV). Thus, they contrasted CK cases with 3 or 4 aberrations (low-CK and intermediate-CK, respectively) who followed aggressive disease courses only in the presence of TP53abs. At the other end of the spectrum, patients with CK and +12,+19 displayed an exceptionally indolent profile. Building upon CK, TP53abs and IGHV gene somatic hypermutation status, we propose a novel hierarchical model where patients with high-CK exhibit the worst prognosis, while M-CLL lacking CK or TP53abs as well as CK with +12,+19 show the longest overall survival. In conclusion, CK should not be axiomatically considered unfavorable in CLL, representing a heterogeneous group with variable clinical behavior. High-CK with =5 chromosomal aberrations emerges as prognostically adverse, independently of other biomarkers. Prospective clinical validation is warranted before finally incorporating high-CK in risk stratification of CLL.

// Rebecca Voltan 1, * , Erika Rimondi 2, * , Elisabetta Melloni 1 , Gian Matteo Rigolin 3 , Fabio Casciano 1 , Maria Vittoria Arcidiacono 1 , Claudio Celeghini 2 , Antonio Cuneo 3 , Giorgio Zauli 1 , Paola Secchiero 1 1 Department of Morphology, Surgery and Experimental Medicine and LTTA Centre, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy 2 Department of Life Sciences, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy 3 Department of Medical Sciences, Section of Hematology, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy * These authors have contributed equally to this work Correspondence to: Paola Secchiero, email: paola.secchiero@unife.it Keywords: B leukemic cells, Ibrutinib, MDM-2 inhibitors, apoptosis, combination therapy Received: July 20, 2016 Accepted: September 09, 2016 Published: September 20, 2016 ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the anti-leukemic activity of the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor Ibrutinib in combination with the small molecule MDM-2 inhibitor Nutlin-3 in preclinical models. Methods: The potential efficacy of the Ibrutinib/Nutlin-3 combination was evaluated in vitro in a panel of B leukemic cell lines (EHEB, JVM-2, JVM-3, MEC-1, MEC-2) and in primary B-chronic lymphocytic leukemia (B-CLL) patient samples, by assessing cell viability, cell cycle profile, apoptosis and intracellular pathway modulations. Validation of the combination therapy was assessed in a B leukemic xenograft mouse model. Results: Ibrutinib exhibited variable anti-leukemic activity in vitro and the combination with Nutlin-3 synergistically enhanced the induction of apoptosis independently from the p53 status. Indeed, the Ibrutinib/Nutlin-3 combination was effective in promoting cytotoxicity also in primary B-CLL samples carrying 17p13 deletion and/or TP53 mutations, already in therapy with Ibrutinib. Molecular analyses performed on both B-leukemic cell lines as well as on primary B-CLL samples, while confirming the switch-off of the MAPK and PI3K pro-survival pathways by Ibrutinib, indicated that the synergism of action with Nutlin-3 was independent by p53 pathway and was accompanied by the activation of the DNA damage cascade signaling through the phosphorylation of the histone protein H2A.X. This observation was confirmed also in the JVM-2 B leukemic xenograft mouse model. Conclusions: Taken together, our data emphasize that the Ibrutinib/Nutlin-3 combination merits to be further evaluated as a therapeutic option for B-CLL.

Autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA) is one of the most common disease-specific complications of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), occurring in 3–10% of patients, with a higher incidence in advance...

Chromosomal rearrangements involving 3q26 are recurrent findings in myeloid malignancies leading to MECOM overexpression, which has been associated with a very poor prognosis. Other 3q abnormalities have been reported and cryptic MECOM rearrangements have been identified in some cases. By fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis, we investigated 97 acute myeloid leukemia/myelodysplastic syndrome patients with various 3q abnormalities to determine the role and the frequency of the involvement of MECOM. We identified MECOM rearrangements in 51 patients, most of them showed 3q26 involvement by chromosome banding analysis (CBA): inv(3)/t(3;3) (n = 26) and other balanced 3q26 translocations (t(3q26)) (n = 15); the remaining cases (n = 10) showed various 3q abnormalities: five with balanced translocations involving 3q21 or 3q25; two with homogenously staining region (hsr) on 3q; and three with other various 3q abnormalities. Complex rearrangements with multiple breakpoints on 3q, masking 3q26 involvement, were identified in cases with 3q21/3q25 translocations. Furthermore, multiple breaks were observed in two cases with t(3q26), suggesting that complex rearrangement may also occur in apparently simple t(3q26). Intrachromosomal gene amplification was another mechanism leading to MECOM overexpression in two cases with hsr on 3q. In the last three cases, FISH analysis revealed 3q26 involvement that was missed by CBA because of metaphases' suboptimal quality. All cases with MECOM rearrangements showed overexpression by real-time quantitative PCR. Finally, MECOM rearrangements can occur in patients with 3q abnormalities even in the absence of specific 3q26 involvement, underlining that their frequency is underestimated. As MECOM rearrangement has been associated with very poor prognosis, its screening should be performed in patients with any 3q abnormalities.

Hemophagocytic Lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) is a rare syndrome characterized by ineffective T-cell and NK response. We report the clinical course of a patient with relapsed CLL who developed acute symptoms soon after starting ibrutinib. Hyperpyrexia, splenomegaly, hyperferritinemia, hypertriglyceridemia, cytopenias, and a typical cytokine pattern, i.e. high interleukin (IL)−6, IL10 and IL18, were consistent with a diagnosis of HLH. Coexistent Epstein Barr virus reactivation was documented. Ibrutinib-induced impairment of NK degranulation, associated with EBV reactivation and CLL-related immunodeficiency may have contributed to the development of HLH in our patient., Highlights • This is the first report describing a case of well-documented HLH in relapsed CLL under ibrutinib. • There was a strict temporal association between ibrutinib start and HLH. • The patient had concomitant EBV reactivation, a known possible trigger of HLH. • The effect of ibrutinib on NK and T-cell was a possible contributing factor to the onset of HLH.

Introduction. The association of Azacitidine (AZA) and Lenalidomide (LEN), either administered concurrently or sequentially, has proven effective in Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS), however the optimum dose and schedule remains unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination vs the sequential use of AZA and LEN in higher-risk MDS pts. Primary endpoint: ORR, defined as the Rate of Complete Remission (CR), Partial Remission (PR), Marrow Complete Remission (mCR), and Hematological Improvement (HI), following the IWG criteria (Cheson, 2006). Moreover, the aim of this analysisis is to enucleate the clinical and biological features of pts who showed long-lasting (≥ 20 cycles) responses. Methods. This is a randomized, phase II, multicenter, open label study, including pts with MDS with IPSS risk High or Intermediate-2, without previous treatment with AZA or LEN. ARM 1 (combined treatment): AZA: 75 mg/m2/day (days 1-5) I.C. + LEN: 10 mg/day (days 1-21), orally, every 4 weeks. ARM 2 (sequential treatment): AZA: 75 mg/m2/day (days 1-5) I.C. + LEN: 10 mg/day (days 6-21), orally, every 4 weeks. The induction treatment was planned for 8 cycles. For responder pts the same treatment was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Results. From March 2013, 44 pts (27 males), median age: 72 (48-83 yrs) were enrolled, from 13 hematologic Centers. 21 pts were randomly assigned to ARM 1, and 23 pts to ARM 2. Treatment was given for a median of 8.5 (1-68) cycles; in ARM 1: 9 (1-68) cycles; in ARM 2: 8 (1-63) cycles, respectively. Median follow-up: 15 (2-77) months. 10/44 pts (22.7%) did not complete at least 6 cycles of treatment for causes other than disease progression, and were not considered evaluable for response. Among the 34/44 pts (77.3%) evaluable for response, 26/34 pts (ORR: 76.5 %) showed a favourable response to treatment. Intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis: ORR: 59.1%. First response was observed after a median of 2 (1-8) cycles. The Best Response achieved was: CR: 8 pts (23.5%) (ITT: 18.1%), PR: 1 pt (2.9%) (ITT: 2.2%), mCR: 3 pts (8.8%) (ITT: 6.8%), HI: 8 pts (23.5%) (ITT: 18.1%), mCR+HI: 6 pts (17.6%) (ITT: 13.6%). Median duration of hematologic response: 10.5 months. 37 pts (84.1%) died , and 20 pts (45.4%) showed progression to AML. Grade >2 non haematological toxicity: 54.5%. Median OS: 15 months. OS was significantly longer in responder pts as compared to the other pts (28 vs 7 months, p2 non haematological toxicity (ARM 1: 66.7%; ARM 2: 43.5%), AML incidence (ARM 1: 33.3%; ARM 2: 56.5%; p=0.2150) and OS (ARM 1: 14 months; ARM 2: 16 months). However, among responder pts, sequential treatment showed a longer clinical benefit, as compared to combined treatment. Responder pts of ARM 2 showed a significantly longer median duration of response (18 vs 6 months, p=0.0481), a longer median duration of therapy (28 vs 10 months, p=0.0870; 20 vs 10 cycles, p=0.1181), more long-lasting (≥ 20 cycles) responses (34.8% vs 9.5%, p=0.1017) and a longer OS (35 vs 26 months, p=0.3868), as compared to responder pts of ARM 1. Overall, 10/44 long-responder pts (22.7%) received ≥ 20 cycles; 5/10 pts (50%) achieved CR. IPSS risk: Intermediate-2 (8 pts); High (2 pts); IPSS-R risk: Intermediate (2 pts); High (6 pts); Very High (2 pts); IPSS cytogenetic risk: Good (5 pts); Intermediate (3 pts); Poor (2 pts); IPSS-R cytogenetic risk: Good (5 pts); Intermediate (4 pts); Very Poor (1 pt); 4/6 patients with altered karyotype achieved cytogenetic remission; it is noteworthy that the only 3 pts of the entire series who showed no gene mutations at baseline are included in this subset of long-responders pts, while 5/10 pts showed at baseline ≥ 1 prognostically unfavorable gene mutations (none with TP53 mutations), with variable VAFs during treatment. Moreover all long-responder pts showed a common gene mutation on SOD2 gene, and mutations on PLCG2 gene. Conclusions. Our results confirm the efficacy of both AZA+LEN treatment regimens in higher-risk MDS pts, in terms of ORR and OS, although sequential treatment was associated with a longer clinical benefit among responder pts. A subset of pts (22,7 %) with less unfavorable cytogenetic and molecular characteristics showed a long-lasting response to treatment. Disclosures Finelli: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Crugnola:BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Rigolin:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Cavo:Jannsen, BMS, Celgene, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Takeda, Amgen, Oncopeptides, AbbVie, Karyopharm, Adaptive: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Although sometimes presenting as an indolent lymphoma, mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is an aggressive disease, hardly curable with standard chemo-immunotherapy. Current approaches have greatly improved patients' outcomes, nevertheless the disease is still characterized by high relapse rates. Before approval by EMA, Italian patients with relapsed/refractory MCL were granted ibrutinib early access through a Named Patient Program (NPP). An observational, retrospective, multicenter study was conducted. Seventy-seven heavily pretreated patients were enrolled. At the end of therapy there were 14 complete responses and 14 partial responses, leading to an overall response rate of 36.4%. At 40 months overall survival was 37.8% and progression free survival was 30%; disease free survival was 78.6% at 4 years: 11/14 patients are in continuous complete response with a median of 36 months of follow up. Hematological toxicities were manageable, and main extra-hematological toxicities were diarrhea (9.4%) and lung infections (9.0%). Overall, 4 (5.2%) atrial fibrillations and 3 (3.9%) hemorrhagic syndromes occurred. In conclusions, thrombocytopenia, diarrhea and lung infections are the relevant adverse events to be clinically focused on; regarding effectiveness, ibrutinib is confirmed to be a valid option for refractory/relapsed MCL also in a clinical setting mimicking the real world.

To clarify whether karyotype aberrations (KA) involving regions not covered by the standard fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) panel have independent prognostic relevance, we evaluated KA by conventional cytogenetics in a learning cohort (LC; n = 166) and a validation cohort (VC; n = 250) of untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients. In the VC, novel mitogens were used to improve metaphase generation and TP53, NOTCH1, and SF3B1 mutations were assessed. KA undetected by FISH were found in 35 and 35% of the cases in the LC and VC, respectively. In addition to FISH, KA allowed reclassification of 23 and 26% of cases in the LC and VC, respectively, into a higher cytogenetic risk group. By multivariate analysis, both in the LC and VC, KA other than isolated 13q deletion correlated with a shorter time to first treatment (TFT; P < 0.001 and 0.003, respectively), while a complex karyotype predicted a worse overall survival (OS, P = 0.015 and 0.010, respectively). In the VC, where a comprehensive biologic assessment was performed, a shorter TFT was also predicted by stage (P < 0.001), IGHV mutational status (P = 0.05), and del(17p)/TP53 mutations (P = 0.033) while stage (P = 0.023) and del(17p)/TP53 mutations (P = 0.024) independently predicted a shorter OS. FISH results did not independently impact on TFT and OS, in the LC and VC cohorts; this was also the case for NOTCH1 and SF3B1 mutations in the VC. We suggest that in CLL, conventional karyotyping with novel mitogens could be more effective than FISH for the detection of KA allowing for a more precise refinement of prognosis.