Search

Progression of disease within 24 months (POD24) from diagnosis in marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) was shown to portend poor outcomes in prior studies. However, many patients with MZL do not require immediate therapy, and the time from diagnosis-to-treatment interval can be highly variable with no universal criteria to initiate systemic therapy. Hence, we sought to evaluate the prognostic relevance of early relapse or progression within 24 months from systemic therapy initiation in a large US cohort. The primary objective was to evaluate the overall survival (OS) in the two groups. The secondary objective included the evaluation of factors predictive of POD24 and the assessment of cumulative incidence of histologic transformation (HT) in POD24 versus non-POD24 groups. The study included 524 patients with 143 (27%) in POD24 and 381 (73%) in non-POD24 groups. Patients with POD24 had inferior OS compared to those without POD24, regardless of the type of systemic therapy received (rituximab monotherapy or immunochemotherapy) at diagnosis. After adjusting for factors associated with inferior OS in the univariate Cox model, POD24 remained associated with significantly inferior OS (HR = 2.50, 95% CI = 1.53–4.09, p = 0.0003) in multivariable analysis. The presence of monoclonal protein at diagnosis and those who received first-line rituximab monotherapy had higher odds of POD24 on logistic regression analysis. Patients with POD24 had a significantly higher risk for HT compared to those without POD24. POD24 in MZL might be associated with adverse biology and could be used as an additional information point in clinical trials and investigated as a marker for worse prognosis.

Patients with hematologic malignancies have impaired humoral immunity secondary to their malignancy and its treatment, placing them at risk of severe coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) infection and reduced response to vaccination.The authors retrospectively analyzed serologic responses to initial and booster COVID-19 vaccination in 378 patients with hematologic malignancy and subsequently tracked COVID-19-related outcomes.Seroconversion occurred in 181 patients (48%) after initial vaccination; patients who had active malignancy or those who were recently treated with a B-cell-depleting monoclonal antibody had the lowest rates of seroconversion. For initial nonresponders to vaccination, seroconversion after a booster dose occurred in 48 of 85 patients (56%). The seroconversion rate after the booster was similar for patients on (53%) and off (58%) active therapy (p = .82). Thirty-three patients (8.8%) developed a COVID-19 infection, and there were three COVID-19-related deaths (0.8%). Although no significant association was observed between postvaccination seroconversion and the incidence of COVID-19 infection, no patient with seroconversion died from COVID-19, and no patient who received tixagevimab/cilgavimab (N = 25) was diagnosed with a COVID-19 infection.Booster vaccinations can promote seroconversion in a significant proportion of patients who are seronegative after the initial vaccination course regardless of the specific vaccine or on/off treatment status at the time of revaccination. Although postvaccination seroconversion may not be associated with a decrease in any (including asymptomatic) COVID-19 infection, the authors' experience suggested that effective vaccination (including a booster), supplemented by passive immunization using tixagevimab/cilgavimab in case of lack of seroconversion, effectively eliminated the risk of COVID-19 death in the otherwise high-risk population.Patients with hematologic malignancy, especially lymphoma, have an impaired response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. In this single-institution review, less than one half of the patients studied made detectable antibodies. For those who did not make detectable antibodies after initial vaccination, over one half (65%) were able to produce antibodies after booster vaccination. By the end of February 2022, 33 of the original 378 patients had a documented COVID-19 infection. The only deaths from COVID-19 were in those who had undetectable antibodies, and no patient who received prophylactic antibody therapy developed a COVID-19 infection.

Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) combines a marker of inflammation and reduced cell turnover to reflect age related alterations in the immune system. Whether NLR can serve as a biomarker of frailty and predict survival among older adults with Multiple Myeloma (MM) is unknown.We used an electronic health record-derived database to identify older adults (age ≥ 60y) with incident MM diagnosed between 1/2011 and 2/2020, with known pre-treatment absolute neutrophil and lymphocyte count up to 90 days before the start of therapy. The calculated NLR values were stratified into quartiles (Q1-Q4). We constructed a previously validated, simplified frailty index combining age, comorbidity and ECOG performance status. We measured the association between NLR quartiles and this frailty index using a logistic regression, adjusted for age, sex and race/ethnicity. We used Kaplan Meier methods and multivariable Cox regression to assess the impact of NLR on overall survival adjusting for potential confounders.We identified 1729 older adults with newly diagnosed MM, at a median age of 73y (IQR: 67-78y). The median NLR was 2.13 (IQR: 1.44 to 3.31). Of the 1135 evaluable patients, 55% met criteria for frailty. Multivariable analysis revealed a 2.1-fold higher odds of frailty (95%CI = 1.42-3.10, p 0.001) for patients in the NLR Q4 group vs. NLR Q1 group. In a multivariable analysis, adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, M-protein type, stage, high risk cytogenetics, baseline creatinine, LDH and type of first line therapy, patients in NLR Q4 group had a 1.51 times increased hazards of death (95%CI = 1.15-1.98, p 0.002) when compared to those in NLR Q1 group.NLR, a readily available laboratory biomarker, is associated with frailty measured using a simplified frailty index as well as inferior overall survival among older adults with MM. Future studies should explore its value as a screening tool to identify frail older adults with MM.

PURPOSE: To examine the impact of global risk, a measure comprising age, comorbidities, function, and cognitive statuses, on treatment selection and outcomes among older home care recipients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. METHODS: From SEER-Medicare, we selected home care recipients diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in 2011-2015, who had pretreatment Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS) evaluations. We created a global risk indicator categorizing patients as low-, moderate-, or high-risk on the basis of OASIS assessments. We examined the association of global risk with receipt of therapy and among chemotherapy recipients, with mortality, emergency department visits, hospitalization, and intensive care unit admission within 30 days from first treatment in logistic models, reporting adjusted odds ratios (OR) with 95% CI. We compared overall survival across risk groups estimating adjusted hazard ratios. RESULTS: Of the 1,232 patients (median age, 80 years), 65% received chemotherapy. High-risk patients ( v moderate-risk) were less likely to receive any chemotherapy (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.64) and curative regimens (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.86) if treated, although even in the moderate-risk group, only 61% received curative regimens. High-risk patients were more likely to experience acute mortality (OR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.43 to 3.52), emergency department visits (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.83), hospitalization (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.19 to 2.17), or intensive care unit admission (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.04 to 2.22) and had inferior overall survival (hazard ratio, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.78). CONCLUSION: Global risk on the basis of OASIS is easily available, suggesting a potential way to improve patient selection for curative treatment and institution of preventive measures.

In HER2-positive breast cancer (HER2+ BC), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) with dual HER2-targeted therapy achieves high pathologic complete response (pCR) rates. Anthracycline-free NACT regimens avoid toxicities associated with anthracyclines, but every 3-week TCHP also has substantial side effects. We hypothesized that a weekly regimen might have equivalent efficacy with less toxicity; we also investigated whether poorly responding patients would benefit from switching to AC. Patients with clinical stage II–III HER2+ BC received weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC2 with every 3-week trastuzumab and pertuzumab (wPCbTP), with the option of splitting the pertuzumab loading dose. After 12 weeks, responding patients continued wPCbTP for another 6 weeks, while non-responders switched to AC. Dose modifications and post-op therapy were at investigator discretion. In 30 evaluable patients, the pCR rate was 77% (95% CI 58–90%); 12/14 (86%) in ER-negative and 11/16 (69%) in ER-positive. Only two patients transitioned to AC for non-response, of which one achieved pCR. There were no episodes of febrile neutropenia or grade ≥ 3 peripheral neuropathy, though several patients who continued wPCbTP stopped before week 18. Split-dose pertuzumab was associated with less grade ≥ 2 diarrhea (40%) than the standard loading dose (60%). pCR rates with our regimen were as high as reported with TCHP with fewer grade ≥ 3 toxicities, though diarrhea remains a concern. Too few patients had a suboptimal response to adequately test switching to AC. The wPCbTP regimen should be considered an alternative to TCHP as neoadjuvant therapy for HER2+ BC. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02789657.

GSK-3β is a serine/threonine kinase implicated in tumorigenesis and chemotherapy resistance. GSK-3β blockade downregulates the NF-κB pathway, modulates immune cell PD-1 and tumor cell PD-L1 expression, and increases CD8 + T cell and NK cell function. We report a case of adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (ATLL) treated with 9-ING-41, a selective GSK-3β inhibitor in clinical development, who achieved a durable response. A 43-year-old male developed diffuse lymphadenopathy, and biopsy of axillary lymph node showed acute-type ATLL. Peripheral blood flow cytometry revealed a circulating clonal T cell population, and CSF was positive for ATLL involvement. After disease progression on the 3

Ibrutinib is effective in the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) with an overall response rate (ORR) of 48%. However, factors associated with response (or lack thereof) to ibrutinib in R/R MZL in clinical practice are largely unknown. To answer this question, we performed a multicenter (25 US centers) cohort study and divided the study population into three groups: “ibrutinib responders”—patients who achieved complete or partial response (CR/PR) to ibrutinib; “stable disease (SD)”; and “primary progressors (PP)”—patients with progression of disease as their best response to ibrutinib. One hundred and nineteen patients met the eligibility criteria with 58%/17% ORR/CR, 29% with SD, and 13% with PP. The median PFS and OS were 29 and 71.4 months, respectively, with no difference in PFS or OS based on the ibrutinib line of therapy or type of therapy before ibrutinib. Patients with complex cytogenetics had an inferior PFS (HR = 3.08, 95% CI 1.23–7.67, p = 0.02), while those with both complex cytogenetics (HR = 3.00, 95% CI 1.03–8.68, p = 0.04) and PP (HR = 13.94, 95% CI 5.17–37.62, p p = 0.03). In this largest study to date evaluating outcomes of R/R MZL treated with ibrutinib, we show that patients with primary refractory disease and those with PP on ibrutinib are very high-risk subsets and need to be prioritized for experimental therapies.

PURPOSE Burkitt lymphoma (BL) has unique biology and clinical course but lacks a standardized prognostic model. We developed and validated a novel prognostic index specific for BL to aid risk stratification, interpretation of clinical trials, and targeted development of novel treatment approaches. METHODS We derived the BL International Prognostic Index (BL-IPI) from a real-world data set of adult patients with BL treated with immunochemotherapy in the United States between 2009 and 2018, identifying candidate variables that showed the strongest prognostic association with progression-free survival (PFS). The index was validated in an external data set of patients treated in Europe, Canada, and Australia between 2004 and 2019. RESULTS In the derivation cohort of 633 patients with BL, age ≥ 40 years, performance status ≥ 2, serum lactate dehydrogenase > 3× upper limit of normal, and CNS involvement were selected as equally weighted factors with an independent prognostic value. The resulting BL-IPI identified groups with low (zero risk factors, 18% of patients), intermediate (one factor, 36% of patients), and high risk (≥ 2 factors, 46% of patients) with 3-year PFS estimates of 92%, 72%, and 53%, respectively, and 3-year overall survival estimates of 96%, 76%, and 59%, respectively. The index discriminated outcomes regardless of HIV status, stage, or first-line chemotherapy regimen. Patient characteristics, relative size of the BL-IPI groupings, and outcome discrimination were consistent in the validation cohort of 457 patients, with 3-year PFS estimates of 96%, 82%, and 63% for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk BL-IPI, respectively. CONCLUSION The BL-IPI provides robust discrimination of survival in adult BL, suitable for use as prognostication and stratification in trials. The high-risk group has suboptimal outcomes with standard therapy and should be considered for innovative treatment approaches.

Central nervous system (CNS) involvement in Burkitt lymphoma (BL) poses a major therapeutic challenge, and the relative ability of contemporary regimens to treat CNS involvement remains uncertain. We described prognostic significance of CNS involvement and incidence of CNS recurrence/progression after contemporary immunochemotherapy using real-world clinicopathologic data on adults with BL diagnosed between 2009 and 2018 across 30 US institutions. We examined associations between baseline CNS involvement, patient characteristics, complete response (CR) rates, and survival. We also examined risk factors for CNS recurrence. Nineteen percent (120/641) of patients (age 18-88 years) had CNS involvement. It was independently associated with HIV infection, poor performance status, involvement of ≥2 extranodal sites, or bone marrow involvement. First-line regimen selection was unaffected by CNS involvement (P=0.93). Patients with CNS disease had significantly lower rates of CR (59% versus 77% without; P

Background Newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients have many available treatment options. While lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVD) is the preferred initial treatment for many patients, several other agents may provide similar efficacy with less toxicity and improved ease of administration. Methods We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the all-oral regimen of ixazomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone with the use of metronomic cyclophosphamide dosing in the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Results The study was stopped prior to planned enrollment due to slow recruitment, with 12 patients available for final analysis. The overall response rate was 58.3% with 2 patients achieving a very good partial response (16.7%) and 5 patients achieving a partial response (41.7%). Median progression-free survival was 16 months, and median overall survival was 43 months. There were no episodes of grade 3 or greater peripheral neuropathy. Grade 3 or greater dermatologic toxicity was experienced in 50% of patients. Conclusion Although limited enrollment prevented full efficacy evaluation, our data do not support further study of metronomic cyclophosphamide in combination with ixazomib and dexamethasone in the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. The activity of this regimen in the relapsed/refractory setting requires further study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02412228).

Introduction Burkitt lymphoma (BL) is an ultra-aggressive B-cell lymphoma which represents ~1% of adult and ~30% of pediatric lymphomas.1 Apart from the sporadic variant predominant in the United States (US), BL may occur as immunodeficiency-associated or endemic variants. BL is curable in most patients with short-course, dose-intense immunochemotherapy. Molecular underpinning of BL has been well understood, but not yet translated into targeted therapy. About 90% show MYC rearrangement with an immunoglobulin gene (the classical IGH-MYC t(8;14), IGK, or IGL) but otherwise BL has fewer karyotypic abnormalities than other high-grade lymphomas. Commonly mutated genes include the centroblastic transcription factor TCF3 (25%, activating mutations) or its inhibitor ID3 (60%, inactivating mutations), cell cycle regulators CCND3 (30%) and CDKN2A/B (10%), as well as TP53 (35%).2 Of note, tonic PI3K-AKT-mTOR signaling contributes to BL sustained cell survival. The prognostic impact of specific molecular features remains undefined.

Background. BL is a rare, high-grade B-cell lymphoma that is often studied in trials with small sample sizes. Historical definitions of "low-risk BL" vary between studies, use arbitrary cutoffs for lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and identify a small favorable group, leaving >80-90% of patients (pts) in an undifferentiated "high-risk" category. A validated prognostic index will help compare study cohorts and better define good-prognosis pts for whom reduced treatment would be appropriate vs a poor-prognosis group in need of new approaches. Herein, we constructed and validated a simplified prognostic model for BL applicable to diverse clinical settings across the world. Methods. We derived the BL-IPI from a large real-world evidence cohort of US adults treated for BL in 2009-2018 (Evens A, Blood 2020). Progression-free survival (PFS) from diagnosis until BL recurrence, progression, death, or censoring was the primary outcome. We first determined the best prognostic cutoffs for age, LDH (normalized to local upper limit normal, ULN), hemoglobin (Hgb), and albumin. Independent risk factors were ascertained by forward stepwise selection into Cox regression from candidate variables: age, sex, HIV+ status, ECOG performance status (PS) ≥2, advanced stage (3/4), involvement of >1 extranodal site, bone marrow, central nervous system (CNS), values of LDH, Hgb, and albumin. Derivation models used multiple imputation to mitigate bias from missing data and reported hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). BL-IPI groups, defined by inspection of survival curves, were compared using log-rank test for trend. We validated performance of the BL-IPI in an external retrospective dataset of BL pts treated contemporaneously in centers from the United Kingdom, Scandinavia, Canada, and Australia. Results. Characteristics of pts in the derivation (N= 633) and validation (N=457) cohorts are shown in the Table. Age ≥40 years (yr), LDH >3xULN, Hgb 3xULN, low Hgb, and low albumin were associated with inferior PFS in univariate tests. In the multivariable model age ≥40 yr, LDH >3xULN, PS ≥2, and CNS involvement were selected as 4 independent prognostic factors; adding stage did not enhance the model. The model was simplified to 3 groups with 0 (low risk; 18% of pts), 1 (intermediate risk; 36% of pts; HR=3.14; 95%CI, 1.61-6.14), or 2-4 factors (high risk; 46% of pts; HR=6.52; 95%CI, 3.48-12.20; Fig A) with 3 yr PFS of 92%, 72%, and 53%, respectively (P Among pts with stage III/IV (historically classified as "high-risk" and constituting 78% of all pts in the cohort), the BL-IPI further discriminated subgroups with 3 yr PFS of 87%, 71%, and 52%, respectively (P In the international validation cohort, fewer pts had CNS involvement; most received CODOX-M/IVAC+R; and PFS/OS estimates at 3 yr were higher. BL-IPI categories were of similar size (low-risk 15%, intermediate-risk 35%, high-risk 50%), and provided similar risk discrimination (Harrell's C=.65 in both datasets). PFS at 3 yr was 96%, 82%, and 63%, respectively (P Conclusions. BL-IPI is a novel prognostic index specific to BL, which was validated to allow for simplified stratification and comparison of risk distribution in geographically diverse cohorts. The index identified a low-risk group with PFS >90-95%, which could be targeted with future strategies for treatment de-escalation. Conversely, only about 55-60% of pts in the high-risk group achieved cure with currently available immunochemotherapy. Disclosures Olszewski: Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding. Jakobsen:Takeda: Honoraria. Collins:ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celleron: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Taekda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses , Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria; Celgene: Research Funding. Cwynarski:Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support; Atara: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support, Speakers Bureau. Bachanova:Incyte: Research Funding; Karyopharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Research Funding; FATE: Research Funding; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gamida Cell: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Danilov:Abbvie: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Nurix: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Takeda Oncology: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Bayer Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Verastem Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Aptose Biosciences: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Rigel Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Diefenbach:Trillium: Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; MEI: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Denovo: Research Funding. Epperla:Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Verastem Oncology: Speakers Bureau. Farooq:Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria. Feldman:Pfizer: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Viracta: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Rhizen: Research Funding; Corvus: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Amgen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Other, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Eisai: Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gerrie:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astrazeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Sandoz: Consultancy. Jagadeesh:Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Debiopharm Group: Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Verastem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kamdar:BMS: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau. Karmali:Takeda: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Honoraria; BMS/Celgene/Juno: Honoraria, Other, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead/Kite: Honoraria, Other, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Khan:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Klein:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lossos:Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria; Stanford University: Patents & Royalties; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Other; Janssen Biotech: Honoraria; NCI: Research Funding; Janssen Scientific: Consultancy, Other. Lunning:ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Legend: Consultancy; Acrotech: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Aeratech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Curis: Research Funding; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Martin:I-MAB: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Teneobio: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Cellectar: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Regeneron: Consultancy. Martinex-Calle:Abbvie: Other: Travel grant. Naik:Celgene: Other: advisory board; Sanofi: Other: advisory board. Palmisiano:Genentech: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding. Phillips:Beigene: Honoraria; Roche: Research Funding. Phillips:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Other: travel expenses; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cardinal Health: Consultancy. Portell:Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Reddy:Celgene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; KITE Pharma: Consultancy. Yazdy:Abbvie: Consultancy; Genentech: Research Funding; Octapharma: Consultancy; Bayer: Honoraria. Smith:Bristol Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Ayala: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Ignyta: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; De Novo Biopharma: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Millenium/Takeda: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Bayer: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma BV: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy. Cheah:Celgene, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Abbvie, MSD: Research Funding; Celgene, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, MSD, Janssen, Gilead, Ascentage Pharma, Acerta, Loxo Oncology, TG therapeutics: Honoraria. El-Galaly:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current Employment, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Evens:Research To Practice: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Mylteni: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Background The frequency of coinfections and their association with outcomes have not been adequately studied among patients with cancer and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a high-risk group for coinfection. Methods We included adult (≥18 years) patients with active or prior hematologic or invasive solid malignancies and laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) infection, using data from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19, NCT04354701). We captured coinfections within ±2 weeks from diagnosis of COVID-19, identified factors cross-sectionally associated with risk of coinfection, and quantified the association of coinfections with 30-day mortality. Results Among 8765 patients (hospitalized or not; median age, 65 years; 47.4% male), 16.6% developed coinfections: 12.1% bacterial, 2.1% viral, 0.9% fungal. An additional 6.4% only had clinical diagnosis of a coinfection. The adjusted risk of any coinfection was positively associated with age >50 years, male sex, cardiovascular, pulmonary, and renal comorbidities, diabetes, hematologic malignancy, multiple malignancies, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, progressing cancer, recent cytotoxic chemotherapy, and baseline corticosteroids; the adjusted risk of superinfection was positively associated with tocilizumab administration. Among hospitalized patients, high neutrophil count and C-reactive protein were positively associated with bacterial coinfection risk, and high or low neutrophil count with fungal coinfection risk. Adjusted mortality rates were significantly higher among patients with bacterial (odds ratio [OR], 1.61; 95% CI, 1.33–1.95) and fungal (OR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.28–3.76) coinfections. Conclusions Viral and fungal coinfections are infrequent among patients with cancer and COVID-19, with the latter associated with very high mortality rates. Clinical and laboratory parameters can be used to guide early empiric antimicrobial therapy, which may improve clinical outcomes.

The "triplet" regimen of lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVD) showed survival advantage over lenalidomide-dexamethasone (RD) in clinical trials, but older patients with myeloma often receive doublet regimens (RD or bortezomib-dexamethasone, VD), or VD plus cyclophosphamide (VCD). We compared these first-line regimens using real-world data from Medicare beneficiaries receiving therapy between 2007 and 2015. In each comparative analysis, we balanced confounding characteristics using a propensity score. Outcomes included overall (OS) and event-free survival (EFS, reporting hazard ratios [HR] with 95% confidence intervals [CI]), adverse events, and costs. We identified 6076 patients with median age 76 and median OS of 2.6 years. In the comparison of RVD vs RD/VD doublets, RVD showed significantly better OS (HR = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.72-0.95) and EFS (HR = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.61-0.76). So, RVD was associated with more frequent hospitalizations, anemia, and neuropathy, but no increase in thromboembolism or secondary cancers. Costs were higher with RVD. In the comparison of RD vs VD, RD demonstrated better EFS (HR = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.68-0.81) and marginally better OS (HR = 0.91; 95% CI, 0.83-0.99). And, RD resulted in significantly more thromboembolic events, less neuropathy, and no significant difference in hospitalizations, transfusions, or secondary cancers. In the comparison of VCD vs VD, we observed no significant difference in any outcome. Superior survival favors RVD over doublet regimens, but even in 2015 RVD was applied for only about 25% of Medicare beneficiaries with myeloma. For patients not eligible for RVD due to toxicity, VCD offers no survival benefit over VD. Lenalidomide-dexamethasone may be the preferred line doublet considering its advantage over VD.

In a large observational study in patients with COVID-19 and cancer, survival was not significantly influenced by receipt of COVID-19 treatments, except hydroxychloroquine plus any other treatment, which was associated with reduced survival., Among 2,186 U.S. adults with invasive cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, we examined the association of COVID-19 treatments with 30-day all-cause mortality and factors associated with treatment. Logistic regression with multiple adjustments (e.g., comorbidities, cancer status, baseline COVID-19 severity) was performed. Hydroxychloroquine with any other drug was associated with increased mortality versus treatment with any COVID-19 treatment other than hydroxychloroquine or untreated controls; this association was not present with hydroxychloroquine alone. Remdesivir had numerically reduced mortality versus untreated controls that did not reach statistical significance. Baseline COVID-19 severity was strongly associated with receipt of any treatment. Black patients were approximately half as likely to receive remdesivir as white patients. Although observational studies can be limited by potential unmeasured confounding, our findings add to the emerging understanding of patterns of care for patients with cancer and COVID-19 and support evaluation of emerging treatments through inclusive prospective controlled trials. Significance: Evaluating the potential role of COVID-19 treatments in patients with cancer in a large observational study, there was no statistically significant 30-day all-cause mortality benefit with hydroxychloroquine or high-dose corticosteroids alone or in combination; remdesivir showed potential benefit. Treatment receipt reflects clinical decision-making and suggests disparities in medication access. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1426

Objectives Multiple clinical trials have established a role for adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Adjuvant FOLFIRINOX increases survival as compared with gemcitabine but with increased toxicity. FOLFOX+nab-paclitaxel (FOLFOX-A) was developed by the Brown University Oncology Research Group (BrUOG) as an alternative to FOLFIRINOX. This phase II trial explored the feasibility and toxicity of adjuvant FOLFOX-A in patients who have completed resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Patients and methods Patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were eligible. The primary objective was to determine the feasibility of adjuvant FOLFOX-A. Patients experiencing grade 2 neuropathy received a 20% reduction of oxaliplatin. Secondary end points were disease-free survival, and overall survival. Results Between June 2014 and October 2018, 25 patients were enrolled following surgical resection. The median number of cycles completed was 9.5. Median disease-free survival was 19.7 months (95% confidence interval, 10.3 to not reached) and median overall survival was 53.5 months (95% confidence interval, 24.2 to not reached). The most common treatment-related grade 3 or greater adverse events were fatigue (58%), nausea (13%), and neutropenia (26%). Fourteen patients had grade 2 neuropathy (58%) and 1 patient (4%) had grade 3 neuropathy. Only 2 patients (8%) had grade 3 diarrhea. Conclusions Adjuvant FOLFOX-A is a feasible multi-agent adjuvant treatment regimen and, with further validation, could be an alternative to FOLFIRINOX.

The MAF translocations, t(14;16) and t(14;20), are considered as adverse prognostic factors based on few studies with small sample sizes. We report on their prognostic impact in a large group of 254 patients - 223 (87.8%) with t(14;16) and 31 (12.2%) with t(14;20). There were no intergroup differences in survival estimates. Median progression-free survival was 16.6 months for t(14;16) and 24.9 months for t(14;20) (

Genomic studies have revealed molecular mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis of Burkitt’s lymphoma, including the ID3/TCF3-dependent centroblast gene expression program, tonic PI3K-AKT-mTOR signaling, and deregulation of cell cycle and apoptosis through mutations in cyclin D3, CDKN2A, or TP53. Unfortunately, these advances have not been translated into treatment, which relies on dose-intense cytotoxic chemotherapy. While most patients achieve long-term survival, options for relapsed/refractory disease are lacking, as Burkitt lymphoma is often excluded from clinical trials of novel approaches. The lower-intensity, dose-adjusted EPOCH plus rituximab (DA-EPOCH-R) regimen constitutes a major advance allowing for treatment of older and HIV-positive patients but needs augmentation to better address the central nervous system involvement. Furthermore, DA-EPOCH-R provides a platform for the study of targeted or immunotherapeutic approaches while de-escalating cytotoxic agents and their associated adverse effects. In this review we discuss the epidemiology and molecular genetics of BL, first-line treatment considerations, and potential novel treatment strategies.

In H+BC, neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) with dual HER2-targeted therapy achieves high pathologic complete response (pCR) rates, but the most common anthracycline-free regimen, every 3-week docetaxel and Cb with T and P (TCHP), causes significant hematologic and non-hematologic toxicities. We conducted a pilot study to assess the efficacy and toxicity of a weekly anthracycline-free regimen, and to assess whether patients (pts) with a suboptimal response to this regimen benefit from switching to doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC). Methods Pts with clinical stage II-III H+BC receive wP 80 mg/m2 and Cb AUC 2 weekly with every 3-week T and P (wPCbTP). Investigators may split the week 1 loading dose of P (840 mg) into two weekly doses, and hold the 2nd dose for early onset toxicity, particularly diarrhea. Pts are restaged after 12 weeks with ultrasound or MRI. Responding pts receive another 6 weeks of wPCbTP, while nonresponders are switched to AC x 4, followed by surgery. Study participation is complete after a 3-month post-op visit. Dose modifications and post-op therapy are at investigator discretion. Results Enrollment (30 pts) is complete. Pathologic findings are available for 23 pts; the other 7 are due to undergo surgery by 10/2019. No pts have required switching to AC for suboptimal response at week 12; 2 have been switched for toxicity (1 each for diarrhea and recurrent cytopenias). pCR (T0/isN0) rates are tabulated below: Pt grouppCR% (95% CI)All18/2378 (56-92) %ER(-)10/1191 (59-100) %ER(+)8/1267 (35-90) %Operable (Stage IIA-IIIA)14/1782 (57-96) %Inoperable (Stage IIIB-C)4/667 (22-96) % In 23 pts, grade 3/4 toxicities observed include neutropenia (10/2, but no febrile neutropenia), anemia (3/0), thrombocytopenia (1/0), diarrhea (4/1), and 5 cases of grade 2 (but no grade ≥3) peripheral neuropathy. One pt each has required hospitalization for recurrent urinary tract, port site or breast infections while not neutropenic. wP has been dose-reduced for neuropathy after week 12 in 8 pts. Two pts discontinued Cb after hypersensitivity reactions in week 10. Treatment was discontinued during weeks 12-18 in 8 pts. P was held during weeks 1-6 for diarrhea in 5 pts and discontinued before week 12 in 3 pts; splitting the loading dose of P has not substantially reduced the incidence or severity of diarrhea. Conclusions Treatment with wPCbTP is associated with a high pCR rate (78%), comparable to those reported with TCHP in multicenter phase II-III trials, and is generally well tolerated, with fewer grade ≥3 toxicities, though diarrhea remains a concern. In some pts, cumulative toxicities make it difficult to continue treatment beyond week 12. Thus far, we have failed to identify a subset of pts in whom to test the efficacy of switching to AC after a suboptimal response to wPCbTP. This regimen appears to be worth exploring further, though we might consider switching to a less toxic regimen, or taking pts with an excellent response to surgery, after week 12. Supported by LifeCycle and the Lura Cook Hull Trust Citation Format: Mary Lorraine Lopresti, Jessica J. Bian, Bachir J Sakr, Rochelle S Strenger, Robert D. Legare, Mary Anne Fenton, Sabrina M Witherby, Don S Dizon, Sonali V Pandya, Ashley R Stuckey, David A Edmondson, Jennifer S Gass, Christine M Emmick, Theresa A Graves, Marlene Cutitar, Adam J Olszewski, William M Sikov. Neoadjuvant weekly paclitaxel (wP) and carboplatin (Cb) with trastuzumab (T) and pertuzumab (P) in HER2-positive breast cancer (H+BC): A Brown University oncology group (BrUOG) study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-16-19.

Background We conducted an investigator-initiated, phase I trial of vincristine sulfate liposomal injection (VSLI) in combination with bendamustine and rituximab (BR) for indolent B-cell (BCL) or mantle cell lymphoma. Methods Participants received 6 cycles of standard BR with VSLI at patient-specific dose determined by the Escalation with Overdose Control (EWOC) model targeting 33% probability of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was the primary endpoint; secondary endpoints included rates of adverse events (AEs), overall response rate (ORR), and complete response (CR). Vincristine sulfate liposomal injection is FDA approved for the treatment of patients with recurrent Philadelphia chromosome-negative (Ph−) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Results Among 10 enrolled patients, VSLI was escalated from 1.80 to 2.24 mg/m2, with one DLT (ileus) at 2.04 mg/m2. Two patients discontinued VSLI early. The most common AE included lymphopenia (100%), constipation, nausea, infusion reaction (each 60%), neutropenia, and peripheral neuropathy (50%). Grade 3/4 AE included lymphopenia (90%), neutropenia (20%), and ileus (10%), with prolonged grade ≥2 lymphopenia observed in most patients. Calculated MTD for VSLI was 2.25 mg/m2 (95% Bayesian credible interval: 2.00-2.40). Overall response was 100% with 50% CR. With median follow-up 26 months, 4/10 patients experienced recurrence and 1 died. Conclusion Vincristine sulfate liposomal injection at 2.25 mg/m2 can be safely combined with BR for indolent B-cell lymphoma, but given observed toxicities and recurrences, we did not pursue an expanded cohort. Clinical Trials Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02257242.

We examined outcomes of 244 patients with marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) diagnosed in 2010-2020, of which 25 (10%) expressed CD5. CD5 expression was present in 22% of splenic, 8% of nodal, and 5% of extranodal MZL, and showed frequent blood/bone marrow involvement, elevated lactate dehydrogenase, and TP53 deletions. CD5 expression was not associated with progression-free or overall survival, but it conferred a significantly higher risk of histologic transformation (22% versus 4% at 5 years, p = 0.002). Among patients receiving first-line rituximab monotherapy, CD5 expression was associated with lower response rate (30% versus 77%, p = 0.006), PFS (25% versus 45% at 3 years, p = 0.003) and OS (44% versus 77%, p = 0.010), whereas CD5 status did not significantly affect outcomes of patients receiving bendamustine with rituximab (P for interaction = 0.012 for progression-free survival). CD5-positive MZL may have a propensity to leukemic dissemination, histologic transformation, and may derive benefit from first-line bendamustine/rituximab rather than rituximab alone.

This retrospective case series study examines immune response of adults with hematologic malignant disease who were vaccinated with 1 of 3 FDA-authorized COVID-19 vaccines between February and April of 2021.

BACKGROUND Salvage immunochemotherapy followed by high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation is the standard-of-care second-line treatment for patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma after first-line R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone). Outcomes after receipt of second-line immunochemotherapy in patients with aggressive B-cell lymphomas who relapse or are refractory to intensive first-line immunochemotherapy regimens (etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and rituximab [R-EPOCH], rituximab, hyperfractionated cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone alternating with methotrexate and cytarabine [R-HyperCVAD], rituximab, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, and high-dose methotrexate alternating with ifosfamide, etoposide, and cytarabine [R-CODOX-M/IVAC]) remain unknown. METHODS Outcomes of patients with non-Burkitt, aggressive B-cell lymphomas and relapsed/refractory disease after first-line treatment with intensive immunochemotherapy regimens who received platinum-based second-line immunochemotherapy were reviewed retrospectively. Analyses were performed to determine progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from the time of receipt of second-line immunochemotherapy. RESULTS In total, 195 patients from 19 academic centers were included in the study. The overall response rate to second-line immunochemotherapy was 44%, with a median PFS of 3 months and a median OS of 8 months. Patients with early treatment failure (primary refractory or relapse

The 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) classification has designated two categories of high-grade B-cell lymphoma (HGBCL): HGBCL with MYC and BLC2 and/or BCL6 rearrangements (often referred to as...

Cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) poses unique treatment challenges, given its range of presentations and numerous systemic therapy options. These options often lack comparative evidence or are characterized by low response rates and short remission duration in relapsed/refractory disease. The approval of mogamulizumab, a humanized, glycoengineered IgG1κ monoclonal antibody targeting the chemokine receptor type 4 (CCR4) chemokine receptor, brings a novel tool into the spectrum of treatment options for advanced CTCL and adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (ATLL). CCR4 is expressed in almost all cases of ATLL, and in a majority of CTCLs, particularly when blood involvement is present. In a Phase III randomized trial, mogamulizumab was associated with 28% overall response rate among patients with relapsed CTCL, median progression-free survival of 7.7 months, and median duration of remission of 14.1 months. Responses are more frequent among patients with Sezary syndrome and within the blood compartment. Common adverse effects include rash and infusion reactions, which are usually low grade. Sentinel reports indicate that exposure to mogamulizumab may result in severe or refractory graft vs host disease after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation, highlighting the need for vigilance and expert management. Further research may establish incremental efficacy of combining mogamulizumab with cytotoxic or immunomodulatory agents in CTCL, ATLL, and possibly other lymphomas and even solid tumors.

Objectives: To examine the use of splenectomy, chemotherapy, and subsequent overall survival (OS) in contemporary patients with splenic lymphomas.Methods: We analyzed records of 6450 patients with ...

e21017 Background: KRAS is the most commonly mutated oncogene in lung adenocarcinoma. Different KRAS mutations (mts) have unique prognostic and therapeutic implications. New drugs to target KRAS G12C have raised interest in studying the unique clinical and molecular characteristics of the different KRAS subtypes. We sought to evaluate the clinical outcomes of KRAS G13C/D (*) mutant (mut) non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) patients (pts), compared to those with G12C and other non-G12C mutations. Methods: We identified 255 KRAS mt NSCLC pts at Brown University-Lifespan Cancer Institute that were diagnosed between 06/2016 to 12/2021. Demographics, therapies and outcomes were retrospectively recorded. Progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was compared using log-rank test. For clinical relevance, we divided pts into G12C, G13*, and other non-G12C groups. Treatments (tt) received were divided into chemotherapy alone and immune-checkpoint inhibitor (IO) containing regimens. Results: Across the KRAS cohort (n = 255), median age was 71 years and 62% were females. Most pts had advanced disease (85%) at diagnosis (dx) and > 90% were smokers. Most common KRAS mt was G12C (42%), and 7% of pts had G13*. Compared to other KRAS mut groups, G13 * had worse PFS counted from dx (median 4 vs 12 m, p = .037). When comparing outcomes of any tt among pts with G13*, G12C and other non-G12C KRAS mut, G13 group had the worst PFS (2.1 vs 10.3 vs 6.4 m, p = .004) and OS (4.1 vs 27.8 vs 18.1 m, p = .027). When treated with IO-based regimens, pts with G13 had also worse outcomes than those with other KRAS mts: PFS 1.8 vs 7.3 m, respectively, (p < 0.001) and OS 1.8 vs 16.5 m, respectively (p = .006). Within the G13 group, pts who received IO-based regimens had worse PFS (1.8 vs 7.9 m, p = .037) and OS (1.8 vs 16.1 m, p = .093), compared to chemotherapy alone. While response to all systemic therapies was poor in G13* group (disease control rate [DCR] 10%, p = .004), DCR was particularly low with IO-based tt in G13* (0%) compared to other groups (p = .023). Conclusions: Pts with KRAS G13C/D had poor survival and response to therapies in comparison with G12C and other non-G12C KRAS mts, particularly with IO-containing regimens. Recently (Judd et al, MCT-21-0201), STK11 and KEAP1 were reported to be frequently co-mutated with KRAS G13* (37.3 and 12.6%) compared to other KRAS mts, and this genotype may confer primary resistance to IO. We hypothesize that the poor outcomes and immune resistance in G13* mut may be secondary to higher prevalence of STK11 and KEAP1 co-mutations. Larger data sets should confirm our observations and correlate them with PD-L1 scores and co-mutations.[Table: see text]

e21116 Background: For patients with unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), chemoradiation followed by 1 year of durvalumab is standard of care. Treatment-induced pneumonitis can be life-threatening. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and systemic immune inflammation index (SII, defined as platelet x neutrophil / lymphocyte counts) are calculated from the CBC and have been studied as inflammatory biomarkers in a variety of settings. This study assessed trends in these indices among patients treated for stage III NSCLC. Methods: We reviewed medical records of adults with stage III NSCLC who completed chemoradiation and durvalumab from 1/2017 to 9/2021 as part of routine care. Patients who developed non-pneumonitis immune toxicity were excluded. NLR, PLR and SII were calculated at dates of first and last radiation dose and first durvalumab dose. For patients who developed pneumonitis, indices were also calculated at each of 8 weeks leading up to pneumonitis onset, defined as the first diagnostic CT scan and graded as 1-5 based on CTCAE criteria. Indices were compared between the pneumonitis and no pneumonitis group using rank-sum test. P values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant without adjustment for multiple testing. The slope of linear trend for each index was examined via log-gamma generalized linear regression model using a random intercept for each patient and robust standard error. Results: Of 65 patients who received chemoradiation followed by durvalumab, 2 were excluded because they were on clinical trial and 28 were excluded for non-pneumonitis immune toxicity. Among the 35 patients eligible for analysis, median age was 67 years; 20 (57%) were female; 6 (17%) were current smokers; 15 (43%) had COPD; and 17 (49%) developed pneumonitis (2 G1; 11 G2; 3 G3; 0 G4; 1 G5). In the pneumonitis group, NLR (p = 0.022), PLR (p = 0.007) and SII (p = 0.001) showed a statistically significant linear increase in the 5 weeks preceding pneumonitis onset. There were no differences in clinical characteristics, SII, NLR or PLR between the pneumonitis and no pneumonitis groups at the 3 time points examined. Conclusions: In this exploratory analysis, patients who developed pneumonitis showed a linear increase in inflammatory indices for 5 weeks before pneumonitis onset, suggesting information hidden in routine blood tests can anticipate development of a life-threatening complication. Our hypothesis-generating study will need validation in a larger prospective analysis with a control group. Future directions may also include examination of selected acute phase reactants or cytokines.

e19540 Background: Bendamustine plus rituximab (BR) is the preferred first-line immunochemotherapy for follicular lymphoma (FL) due to its efficacy and generally favorable adverse effect profile. However, it often causes prolonged lymphopenia, and impaired lymphocyte recovery after BR therapy has been recognized as a risk factor for opportunistic infections. On the other hand, little is known about the impact of profound lymphopenia on the overall treatment outcomes of BR. We examined the relationship between lymphopenia and treatment response in patients with FL who received BR at our institution. Methods: We retrospectively identified patients who received BR as first-line therapy for FL at the Lifespan Cancer Institute between October 2008 and November 2020. We used log-transformed absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) as the potential prognostic variable, integrated as the area under curve based on all available laboratory tests over the typical duration of BR (6 months). Outcomes included complete response to BR determined by post-treatment positron emission tomography or computed tomography, survival, and occurrence of hospitalization or herpes zoster on therapy. The association between ALC and survival or binary endpoints was examined using Cox or logistic models, respectively, adjusting for age, sex, cumulative bendamustine dose, and baseline ECOG performance status (PS). Results: We included 53 patients followed for a median of 69 months from start of BR. At treatment initiation, most patients had a PS of 0-1, stage III or IV disease, and high-risk lymphoma as defined by the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI) (Table). We observed an association between higher ALC during treatment and increased rates of CR (adjusted odds ratio, 2.50, 95% CI 1.04 – 6.00; p = 0.040), longer progression free survival (PFS) (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.53, 95% CI 0.31 – 0.92, p = 0.023), and overall survival (OS) (HR, 0.45, 95% CI 0.23 – 0.87, p = 0.018). Higher ALC values during treatment and 1 month after treatment initiation were also associated with lower probability of hospitalization (p = 0.048 and p = 0.028, respectively). We did not find a statistically significant association between ALC and rates of zoster infection, but the number of observed events was low (n = 6). Conclusions: Our results suggest an association between higher ALC values during bendamustine therapy and improved treatment outcomes. Improvement in PFS, OS, and hospitalization rates with higher ALC values may be due relative preservation of nutritional balance and immune reserve. The association with survival should be confirmed in larger datasets and its potential mechanism elucidated.[Table: see text]

High-grade B-cell lymphoma (HGBL), not otherwise specified (NOS), is a recently introduced diagnostic category for aggressive B-cell lymphomas. It includes tumors with Burkitt-like or blastoid morphology that do not have double-hit cytogenetics and that cannot be classified as other well-defined lymphoma subtypes. HBCLs, NOS, are rare and heterogeneous; most have germinal center B-cell phenotype, and up to 45% carry a single-hit MYC rearrangement, but otherwise, they have no unifying immunophenotypic or cytogenetic characteristics. Recent analyses using gene expression profiling (GEP) revealed that up to 15% of tumors currently classified as diffuse large B-cell lymphoma display an HGBL-like GEP signature, indicating a potential to significantly expand the HGBL category using more objective molecular criteria. Optimal treatment of HGBL, NOS, is poorly defined because of its rarity and inconsistent diagnostic patterns. A minority of patients have early-stage disease, which can be managed with standard R-CHOP–based approaches with or without radiation therapy. For advanced-stage HGBL, NOS, which often presents with aggressive disseminated disease, high lactate dehydrogenase, and involvement of extranodal organs (including the central nervous system [CNS]), intensified Burkitt lymphoma–like regimens with CNS prophylaxis may be appropriate. However, many patients diagnosed at age >60 years are not eligible for intensive immunochemotherapy. An improved GEP- and/or genomic-based pathologic classification that could facilitate HGBL-specific trials is needed to improve outcomes for all patients. In this review, we discuss the current clinicopathologic concept of HGBL, NOS, and existing data on its prognosis and treatment and delineate potential future taxonomy enrichments based on emerging molecular diagnostics.

Objectives To determine the relationship of self-care task disabilities with the use of systemic cancer therapies for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in nursing home patients. Materials and Methods Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database linked with Minimum Data Set assessments, we identified nursing home residents with advanced NSCLC from 2011 to 2015. We considered disability in activities of daily living (ADL) including dressing, personal hygiene, toilet use, locomotion on unit, transfer, bed mobility, and eating. We estimated the association between ADL disabilities and receipt of systemic cancer therapies within 3 months of diagnosis. Results Of the 3174 patients, 2702 (85.2%) experienced disability in one or more ADLs and 64.7% had disability in 5–7 ADLs. A total of 415 (13.1%) patients received systemic therapy. There was a strong association between disability in each ADL and receipt of therapy including dressing (OR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.42–0.65]), toileting (odds ratio, OR, 0.52 [95% confidence interval, CI, 0.42–0.65]), personal hygiene (OR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.39–0.59]), transfers (OR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.41–0.64]), bed mobility (OR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.44–0.69]), locomotion (OR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.46–0.71]), or eating (OR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.31–0.67]). Compared to patients having no ADL disability, patients were less likely to receive chemotherapy if they had disability in 1–2 ADLs (OR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.66–1.37]), 3–4 ADLs (OR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.56–1.15]), or 5–7 ADLs (OR, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.33–0.56]). Conclusions Systemic cancer therapy is not commonly used in this population and is strongly predicted by disability in self-care tasks.

Data addressing prognostication in patients with HIV related Burkitt lymphoma (HIV-BL) currently treated remain scarce. We present an international analysis of 249 (United States: 140; United Kingdom: 109) patients with HIV-BL treated from 2008 to 2019 aiming to identify prognostic factors and outcomes. With a median follow up of 4.5 years, the 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 61% (95% confidence interval [CI] 55% to 67%) and 66% (95%CI 59% to 71%), respectively, with similar results in both countries. Patients with baseline central nervous system (CNS) involvement had shorter 3-year PFS (36%) compared to patients without CNS involvement (69%; P < .001) independent of frontline treatment. The incidence of CNS recurrence at 3 years across all treatments was 11% with a higher incidence observed after dose-adjusted infusional etoposide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone, cyclophosphamide (DA-EPOCH) (subdistribution hazard ratio: 2.52; P = .03 vs other regimens) without difference by CD4 count 100/mm3. In multivariate models, factors independently associated with inferior PFS were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 2-4 (hazard ratio [HR] 1.87; P = .007), baseline CNS involvement (HR 1.70; P = .023), lactate dehydrogenase >5 upper limit of normal (HR 2.09; P < .001); and >1 extranodal sites (HR 1.58; P = .043). The same variables were significant in multivariate models for OS. Adjusting for these prognostic factors, treatment with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, and high-dose methotrexate, ifosfamide, etoposide, and high-dose cytarabine (CODOX-M/IVAC) was associated with longer PFS (adjusted HR [aHR] 0.45; P = .005) and OS (aHR 0.44; P = .007). Remarkably, HIV features no longer influence prognosis in contemporaneously treated HIV-BL.

Context Mosun, a full-length, humanized, IgG1 CD20×CD3 bispecific antibody, demonstrated efficacy/safety in relapsed/refractory DLBCL (NCT02500407; Schuster, et al. ASH 2019). The phase I/II multicenter GO40554 (NCT03677154) study showed similar results for elderly/unfit patients with first-line DLBCL intolerant of full-dose chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) (Olszewski, et al. ASH 2020). Objective To describe updated GO40554 study data. Methods Two safety-evaluation cohorts were assessed (Mosun 13.5 mg and 30 mg), then a 30 mg expansion phase. Patients were aged ≥80 years; 60–79 years with impairment in ≥1 activity of daily living (ADL); instrumental ADL; or impaired cardiac, renal, or liver function. Patients received optional pre-treatment with prednisone (+/– vincristine), then intravenous mosun in step-up doses on days (D)1 (1 mg), 8 (2 mg), and 15 (full-dose: 13.5/30 mg) of cycle (C)1, and full (C1D15) dose on D1 of each 21-day cycle for eight cycles, continuing for ≤17 cycles. Results As of January 15, 2021, 40 patients received mosun (13.5 mg safety cohort, n=8; 30 mg safety cohort, n=7; 30 mg expansion, n=25). Median age: 84 (range 67–100) years; 50% with Ann Arbor Stage III–IV, 80% with IPI score ≥2. Of 40 treated patients, 27 (67.5%) had ≥1 mosun-related adverse event (AE); 15 (37.5%) had a grade 3–4 AE. Most common treatment-emergent AE: cytokine release syndrome (CRS; n=9, 22.5%); five patients had neutropenia (12.5%). Six (15%) patients had grade 1 CRS per ASTCT (Lee, et al. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2019); three (7.5%) had grade 2 CRS, all managed with supportive care, fluids for hypotension, steroids, or low-flow oxygen, as required (no tocilizumab, vasopressors, high-flow oxygen, or intensive care). 14 (35%) patients discontinued due to progressive disease (PD). Overall response rate for efficacy-evaluable patients (n=31): 67.7%; complete response (CR) rate: 41.9%. Responses with 13.5 mg mosun: CR: 37.5%; PR: 37.5%; PD: 25%; with 30 mg mosun: CR: 43.5%; PR: 21.7%; stable disease/PD: 34.8%. Four durable responses were observed ≥12 months from start of therapy in 13 patients with CR (11 ongoing). Conclusions Mosun showed promising efficacy, including durable responses, and tolerable safety for elderly/unfit patients with 1L DLBCL; it should be further evaluated as a chemotherapy-free backbone for patients unable to tolerate standard CIT.

Objectives First-line regimens in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) combine a fluoropyrimidine with oxaliplatin (FOLFOX/XELOX) or irinotecan (FOLFIRI). There is limited efficacy data to guide the selection of one treatment over the other. This study investigated whether mutations affecting DNA damage response (DDR) could differentially influence the response to oxaliplatin and irinotecan-containing regimens. Methods We retrospectively analyzed 49 patients with mCRC for whom treatment outcomes and results of comprehensive genomic profiling of tumors were available. Specimens with at least 1 pathogenic mutation involving BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM, BARD1, BRIP1, CDK12, CHEK1, CHEK2, FANCL, PALB2, PPP2R2A, RAD51B, RAD51C, RAD51D, or RAD54L were classified as DDR-mutated, while those without mutations were DDR-wild-type (WT). We compared the overall survival (OS), disease control rate, and response rate (RR) between the DDR-mutated and DDR-WT groups. Results DDR mutations occurred in 11 patients (22%). First-line treatment with an oxaliplatin-containing regimen was administered to 33 patients (31 FOLFOX, 2 XELOX), while 16 patients received FOLFIRI. Among DDR-mutated cases, first-line treatment with FOLFOX/XELOX correlated with a statistically significant improvement in median OS compared with FOLFIRI (3.4 vs.1.8 y; P=0.042) and numerically higher RR (50% vs. 33%; P=0.58). No significant difference in OS (2.4 vs. 2.5 y; P=0.42), RR, disease control rate was observed between the 2 regimens in patients with DDR-WT tumors. Conclusions Mutations in DDR genes were present in 22% of patients with mCRC. In patients with DDR-mutated tumors, initial treatment with FOLFOX/XELOX correlated with improved OS and a numerically higher RR compared with FOLFIRI.

When the COVID-19 pandemic began, formal frameworks to collect data about affected patients were lacking. The COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) was formed to collect granular data on patients with cancer and COVID-19 at scale and as rapidly as possible. CCC19 has grown from five initial institutions to 125 institutions with >400 collaborators. More than 5,000 cases with complete baseline data have been accrued. Future directions include increased electronic health record integration for direct data ingestion, expansion to additional domestic and international sites, more intentional patient involvement, and granular analyses of still-unanswered questions related to cancer subtypes and treatments.

128 Background: mCRPC with alterations in genes associated with homologous recombination (HR) DNA repair (e.g., BRCA1/2) is sensitive to poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi). Preclinical studies showed that PI3K inhibitors (PI3Ki) impairs HR and sensitize cancer cells to PARPi even in the absence of HR gene mutations. These results support our hypothesis that dual PI3K and PARP inhibition may improve clinical outcomes in progressive mCRPC. We describe preliminary results of a phase Ib/II study investigating safety of the combination of copanlisib (pan-class I PI3Ki) and rucaparib (PARP-1, -2 and -3 inhibitor). Methods: Enrollment criteria included progressive mCRPC, prior androgen inhibitors (abiraterone, enzalutamide, and/or apalutamide); prior taxane chemotherapy was allowed. HR-deficiency was not required for the phase Ib. The phase I followed a standard 3+3 escalation design. Dose schema: rucaparib (continuous oral administration twice daily) 400mg (dose level [DL] -1, 1), 500mg (DL 2) or 600mg (DL 3,4) and intravenous copanlisib (45mg D1, D15 (DL -1, -2); 45mg, D1, D8, D15 (DL 1, 2, 3); 60mg, D1, D8, D15 (DL 4); 28-day cycle). Adverse events (AE) were graded by CTCAE v5.0. The primary aim of the phase I was to establish the MTD and the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of copanlisib in combination with rucaparib. Results: Eleven pts were enrolled with a median age of 63 (55-78) and median PSA of 12 ng/mL (0.018–2,101). Seven pts (63%) received prior chemotherapy (docetaxel [7], cabazitaxel [3]). Pathogenic HR mutations included BRCA1 (1), BRCA2 (3), CDK12 (1), and FANCA (1). Treatment-related AE included grade 2 (G2) leukopenia (30%), G2 anemia (20%), G2 rash (20%). Two dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed in DL 1: G3 rash and G3 AST/ALT elevation attributed to both drugs. Six pts were treated at DL -1 without DLTs. The RP2D was rucaparib 400mg BID with copanlisib 45mg (D1, D15; 28-day cycle). There were 2 confirmed PSA50 responses among 7 evaluable pts (28%). One pt had BRCA2 loss and 1 had PALB2 VUS (ongoing PSA response for 14 mo). Three stable disease and 1 partial response were observed among 6 pts evaluable by RECIST 1.1. Conclusions: The combination of rucaparib and copanlisib is well tolerated. The RP2D was rucaparib 400mg BID with copanlisib 45mg (D1, D15; 28-day cycle) with signal of efficacy. Enrollment in a phase 2 expansion cohort in HR-mutated mCRPC is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT04253262.

Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2004-2015), we compared adjuvant chemotherapy use and survival for three common solid tumors in patients with and without history of lymphoma (DLBCL: diffuse large B cell, HL: Hodgkin lymphoma). Among patients with breast (

Most patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) are diagnosed at age 60 years or older. Challenges to effective therapy among older individuals include unfavorable biologic features of DLBCL, geriatric vulnerabilities, suboptimal treatment selection, and toxicities of cytotoxic chemotherapy. Wider application of geriatric assessments may help identify fit older patients who benefit from standard immunochemotherapy without unnecessary dose reductions. Conversely, attenuated regimens may provide a better balance of risk and benefit for selected unfit or frail patients. Supportive care with the use of corticosteroid-based prephase, prophylactic growth factors, and early institution of supportive and palliative care can help maximize treatment tolerance. Several novel or emerging therapies have demonstrated favorable toxicity profiles, thus facilitating effective treatment for elderly patients. In the relapsed or refractory setting, patients who are not candidates for stem cell transplantation can benefit from newly approved options including polatuzumab vedotin-based combinations or tafasitamab plus lenalidomide, which may have higher efficacy and/or lower toxicity than historical chemotherapy regimens. Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy has been successfully applied to older patients outside of clinical trials. In the first-line setting, emerging immunotherapy options (bispecific antibodies) and targeted therapies (anti-CD20 antibodies combined with lenalidomide and/or B-cell receptor inhibitors) may provide chemotherapy-free approaches for DLBCL. Enrolling older patients in clinical trials will be paramount to fully examine potential efficacy and toxicity of these strategies. In this review, we discuss recent advances in fitness stratification and therapy that have expanded curative options for older patients, as well as future opportunities to improve outcomes in this population. Implications for Practice Management of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in older patients poses challenges due to aggressive disease biology and geriatric vulnerability. Although R-CHOP remains standard first-line treatment, geriatric assessment may help evaluate patients' fitness for immunochemotherapy. Corticosteroid prephase, prophylactic growth factors, and early palliative care can improve tolerance of treatment. Novel salvage options (polatuzumab vedotin-based combinations, tafasitamab plus lenalidomide) or chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy should be considered in the relapsed or refractory setting for patients ineligible for stem cell transplantation. Emerging immunotherapies (bispecific antibodies) and targeted therapies provide potential first-line chemotherapy-free approaches, which need to be rigorously assessed in clinical trials that involve geriatric patients.

Objectives Clinical trials have suggested that patients with myeloma treated with lenalidomide may have an increased risk of second primary malignancies (SPM). Whether such risks are of significant relevance in the real-world clinical practice, particularly among older patients receiving first-line lenalidomide based therapy, remains unclear. Methods Using Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare database, we identified adults ≥ 65 years with plasma cell myeloma diagnosed in 2007–2015 who received at least one oral anti-myeloma agent. We defined first-line lenalidomide-containing therapy as use within 90 days of diagnosis. SPM was defined as a malignancy reported to a cancer registry > 90 days after myeloma diagnosis. We computed cumulative incidence of SPM (with death being a competing event) and compared SPM rates between patients treated with or without first-line lenalidomide using a Fine-Gray's model, adjusting for age, sex, race, ethnicity, prior malignancy, and histologic subtype. Results Of 9850 Medicare beneficiaries, 4009 (41%) received first-line lenalidomide. During median follow up of 5.0 years, 423 patients (4.3%) developed SPM, including 361 solid tumors (85%) and 61 hematologic malignancies (14%). The cumulative incidence of any SPM at 5 years was similar among those who received first-line lenalidomide and those who did not (5.3% vs 4.4%; sub-hazard ratio, SHR 1.06, P = .53). Consistent results were seen in the risk of solid tumor (4.7% vs 3.6%; SHR 1.13, P = .24) or hematologic malignancy (4.7 vs 3.6%, SHR 0.73; P = .72). Conclusion First-line lenalidomide therapy among older adults with myeloma was not associated with a significantly increased risk of any SPM.

Purpose Novel parenteral (bortezomib) and oral (lenalidomide) therapies have improved survival in myeloma, but the standard Medicare benefit covers only parenteral drugs. We examined the association between prescription drug coverage, receipt of therapy, and survival among Medicare beneficiaries with myeloma. Methods Using SEER-Medicare data, we identified enrollment in a Medicare Part D plan (PDP) or other creditable prescription drug coverage (OCC) among 9,755 beneficiaries who were diagnosed with myeloma in 2006 to 2011. We examined the receipt of active myeloma therapy and that of classic cytotoxic agents or bortezomib as first-line regimen and overall survival. We report relative risk (RR) for binary outcome comparisons and 3-year restricted mean survival time (RMST) ratios, with 95% CI, adjusting for baseline patient- and disease-related characteristics. Beneficiaries with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, a cancer that is uniformly treated with parenteral chemotherapy, served as a comparison cohort. Results Compared with beneficiaries without prescription drug coverage, PDP or OCC enrollees were more likely to receive active myeloma care, and PDP enrollees were less frequently treated with parenteral agents (adjusted RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.93) or classic cytotoxic agents in particular (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.76). Overall survival was significantly better for beneficiaries with PDP coverage (adjusted RMST ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.20) or OCC (RMST ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.21). In contrast, we observed no survival differences by prescription drug coverage status in the control cohort with lymphoma. Conclusion Prescription drug coverage is associated with decreased use of classic cytotoxic chemotherapy and better survival among Medicare beneficiaries with myeloma, which suggests improved access to all existing treatment options. As oral targeted agents increasingly replace parenteral chemotherapy in oncology, adjustments in coverage policy are needed to ensure access to optimal treatment.

A 59-year-old man presented with a 3-week history of pain in the abdomen and back, along with night sweats. He had a history of insulin-dependent diabetes and coronary artery disease with prior ste...

Background In this study, we sought to estimate the association between oral oncology parity law adoption and anticancer medication use for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia or multiple myeloma. Methods This was an observational study of administrative claims from 2008 to 2017. Among individuals initiating tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for chronic myeloid leukemia or immunomodulatory drugs for multiple myeloma, we compared out-of-pocket spending, adherence, and discontinuation before and after parity among individuals in fully insured plans (subject to parity) vs self-funded plans (exempt from parity) using propensity-score weighted difference-in-differences regression models. Results Among patients initiating TKIs (N = 2082) or immunomodulatory drugs (N = 3326) there were no statistically significant differences in adherence or discontinuation associated with parity. The proportion of patients with initial out-of-pocket payments of $0 increased in fully insured plans after parity from 5.7% to 46.1% for TKIs and from 10.9% to 48.8% for immunomodulatory drugs. Relative to changes in self-funded plans, those in fully insured plans were 4.27 (95% CI = 2.20 to 8.27) times as likely to pay nothing for TKIs and 1.96 (95% CI = 1.40 to 2.73) times as likely to pay nothing for immunomodulatory drugs after parity. Similarly, the proportion paying more than $100 decreased from 30.3% to 24.7% for TKIs and 30.6% to 27.5% for immunomodulatory drugs in fully insured plans after parity. Relative to changes in self-funded plans, those in fully insured plans were 0.74 (95% CI = 0.54 to 1.01) times as likely to pay more than $100 for TKIs and 0.85 (95% CI = 0.68 to 1.06) times as likely to pay more than $100 for immunomodulatory drugs after parity. Conclusions Among patients initiating TKIs or immunomodulatory drugs, parity was not associated with better adherence or less discontinuation of therapy but yielded decreased patient out-of-pocket payments for some patients.

The introduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) has transformed chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) into a chronic disease with long‐term survival exceeding 85%. However, resistance of CML stem cells to TKI may contribute to the 50% relapse rate observed after TKI discontinuation in molecular remission. We previously described a model of resistance to imatinib mesylate (IM), in which K562 cells cultured in high concentrations of imatinib mesylate showed reduced Bcr‐Abl1 protein and activity levels while maintaining proliferative potential. Using quantitative phosphoproteomic analysis of these IM‐resistant cells, we have now identified significant upregulation of tumor progression locus (Tpl2), also known as cancer Osaka thyroid (COT1) kinase or Map3k8. Overexpression of Tpl2 in IM‐resistant cells was accompanied by elevated activities of Src family kinases (SFKs) and NF‐κB, MEK‐ERK signaling. CD34+ cells isolated from the bone marrow of patients with CML and exposed to IM in vitro showed increased MAP3K8 transcript levels. Dasatinib (SFK inhibitor), U0126 (MEK inhibitor), and PS‐1145 (IκB kinase (IKK) inhibitor) used in combination resulted in elimination of 65% of IM‐resistant cells and reduction in the colony‐forming capacity of CML CD34+ cells in methylcellulose assays by 80%. In addition, CML CD34+ cells cultured with the combination of inhibitors showed reduced MAP3K8 transcript levels. Overall, our data indicate that elevated Tpl2 protein and transcript levels are associated with resistance to IM and that combined inhibition of SFK, MEK, and NF‐κB signaling attenuates the survival of IM‐resistant CML cells and CML CD34+ cells. Therefore, combination of SFK, MEK, and NF‐κB inhibitors may offer a new therapeutic approach to overcome TKI resistance in CML patients.

In aggressive lymphomas, discrepancies in survival reported from experimental and observational studies may reflect selective non-enrolment of high-risk patients in trials. We examined the association between time from diagnosis to chemotherapy and overall survival in diffuse large B-cell (DLBCL), Burkitt (BL), mantle cell (MCL) and peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL), using National Cancer Data Base records of 130 549 patients treated in 2004-2014. Across the histologies, patients who started chemotherapy within 7 days of diagnosis had more often high International Prognostic Index (IPI) or advanced-stage disease. The discrepancy in 3-year survival between groups treated within 7 or >30 days from diagnosis ranged from 14% in BL to 30% in MCL. After adjusting for the IPI, time to treatment was significantly associated with shorter overall survival. Using the group treated >30 days from diagnosis as reference, patients treated within 7 days had a hazard ratio of 1·38 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1·28-1·48] in DLBCL, 1·42 (95% CI, 1·22-1·66) in BL, 2·23 (95% CI, 1·79-2·78) in MCL and 1·46 (95% CI, 1·18-1·81) in PTCL. Time from diagnosis to treatment may reflect high-risk features uncaptured by standard prognostic assessments. Clinical trials should accommodate patients who need urgent therapy to improve external validity and detect treatment effects in high-risk groups.

Background: The term HGBL, NOS was introduced by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2016 for aggressive B-cell lymphomas with Burkitt lymphoma-like (BLL) or blastoid cytomorphology that lack double-hit genetics and do not meet criteria for other entities. Diagnostic patterns and prognosis of these rare tumors are not well understood. We examined the characteristics and outcomes of patients (pts) with HGBL, NOS diagnosed in 17 academic centers across the United States. Methods: We collected retrospective data on HGBL, NOS cases diagnosed by academic hematopathologists in 2017-2021; 8 centers performed a local review by lymphoma pathology experts to confirm fulfillment of the WHO criteria; pathology reports were reviewed centrally. We excluded pts not tested for MYC rearrangement (MYC-R), any double/triple-hit, diffuse large B-cell, or lymphoblastic lymphomas. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) and cytogenetic tests were done locally. Outcomes included rates of complete response (CR), progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) estimated with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Among 126 pts with HGBL, NOS, median age was 64 years (range 18-91), 67% were male, and 3 were HIV+. Advanced stage was present in 68%, poor performance status (PS, ECOG ≥2) in 21%, high serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) in 68%, extranodal (EN) sites in 79%, central nervous system (CNS) involvement in 6%, and International Prognostic Index (IPI) ≥ 3 in 55%. Cytomorphology was reported as BLL in 59 (47%) cases, blastoid in 28 (22%), and unspecified in 39 (31%). By IHC, 83% had germinal center B-cell (GCB) phenotype. Using cases with available data, CD10 was expressed in 79%, BCL6 in 81%, MUM1/IRF4 in 48%, MYC in 73%, BCL2 in 55% (dual MYC/BCL2 expressor [DEL]: 37%), CD5 in 13%, and median Ki-67 was 95%. MYC-R (single-hit) was detected in 27% (Fig A), MYC extra copies (EC) in 9%, BCL2-R in 13%, and BCL6-R in 10%. MYC-EC were present in 16% of cases with BCL2-R or BCL6-R, and BCL2/BCL6-EC in 12% of those with MYC-R. Blastoid tumors were more likely than BLL to involve >1 EN site or to have BCL2-R (Fig B). 9 cases were assessed by next generation sequencing and 5 (56%) had a TP53 mutation. Cases which underwent confirmatory pathology review (N=74) did not differ from others clinically but more often had a well-defined HGBL morphology (77% vs 58%, P=.031) and less often MYC-R (20% vs. 37%, P=.004). The most common first-line regimens (among treated pts, N=121) were DA-EPOCH-R (50%) and RCHOP (35%), with few pts receiving HyperCVAD/MA (5%) or CODOX-M±IVAC (2%); 97% received rituximab, and 44% CNS prophylaxis. Pts selected for DA-EPOCH-R vs. RCHOP were younger (median 61 vs. 68 years, P=.006), more often had stage 3/4 (P=.04), BLL morphology (56% vs. 29%, P=.009) or MYC-R (31% vs. 14%, P=.06). CR was attained in 62% of pts, whereas 20% had progressive disease. The most frequent salvage regimens (± rituximab) included ICE (N=12), DHAP (N=6), and GemOx (N=5). 3 pts underwent autologous, and 3 allogeneic transplant (2/3 subsequently relapsed). 13 received chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cells, with response noted in 7 (54%) and CR in 4 (31%); HGBL relapsed in 3/7 (43%) responders. With median follow-up of 2.7 years, 39% of pts relapsed, and 33% died. Of 49 observed relapses, 13 (27%) involved the CNS. PFS estimate at 2 years was 51% (95% CI, 42-60%) and OS was 68% (95% CI, 58-76%; Fig C). PFS and OS were not significantly associated with age or PS, but stage and LDH were prognostic (Fig D-G). Furthermore, PFS did not differ by BLL/blastoid morphology, MYC-R status or DEL status, but non-GCB tumors had somewhat worse PFS (Fig H-J). We observed no significant PFS (or OS) difference between pts selected for RCHOP vs. DA-EPOCH-R (P=.83 for PFS, Fig K; P=.55 for OS) in aggregate or in any subset, except for de novo tumors with BLL morphology (N=41), where DA-EPOCH-R showed a superior 2-year PFS (73% vs 38% for RCHOP, P=.027; stratified by IPI: P=.040, Fig L). Conclusions: HGBL, NOS, as diagnosed in current academic practice, is highly heterogeneous, highlighting the need to classify high-grade lymphomas using molecular rather than morphologic features. Considering poor survival in all age groups (except for few pts with early stage and normal LDH), lack of prognostic significance of MYC-R, DEL status, or cytomorphology, HGBL, NOS needs prospective trials to delineate prognostic biomarkers, the role of intensified chemotherapy, and novel therapeutic approaches. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Landsburg: Triphase: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: DSMB member; ADCT: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hughes: Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: 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; Genzyme: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sandoval-Sus: SeaGen, Janssen, MassiveBio, TG: Other: Advisory Board; BMS: Other: Advisory Board, Speakers Bureau. Kothari: Incyte pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria. Torka: TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Smith: Acerta Pharma BV: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; De Novo Biopharma: Research Funding; Ignyta (spouse): Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; KITE pharm: Consultancy; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp: Research Funding; Ayala (spouse): Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb (spouse): Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Consultancy. Epperla: Genzyme: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Other: Ad Board; Beigene: Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Speakers Bureau. Bond: Kite/Gilead: Honoraria. Naik: Sanofi: Other: Virtual Advisory Board Member ; Takeda: Other: Virtual Advisory Board Member ; Kite: Other: Virtual Advisory Board Member. Kamdar: ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; KaryoPharm: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Celgene (BMS): Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Genetech: Other; Celgene: Other; SeaGen: Speakers Bureau. Haverkos: Viracta Therapeutics: Consultancy. Karmali: BMS/Celgene/Juno: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; Janssen/Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; EUSA: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Morphosys: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Vose: Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria, Research Funding. Olszewski: PrecisionBio: Research Funding; Celldex Therapeutics: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Acrotech Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; Genmab: Research Funding.

Background: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is a potentially curable cancer, predominantly affecting older patients. Functional limitations and comorbidities make its management challenging among those with advanced age. Approximately 23% of Medicare beneficiaries do not receive curative chemoimmunotherapy (Hamlin et al, Oncologist, 2014), and the treatment rates decrease with increasing age (Williams et al, Cancer, 2015). Treatment may be particularly difficult for older nursing home (NH) residents who are physiologically frail and have significant functional limitations. The goal of this study is to describe patterns of cancer-directed therapies and outcomes among NH residents with DLBCL in the United States and dissect the association between functional impairment and receipt of treatment. Methods: We used the SEER-Medicare registry to identify Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with DLBCL in 2011-2015, who had Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments within 120 days prior to diagnosis or treatment. The MDS is routinely performed in NHs and includes multiple geriatric domains, including physical and cognitive function. We used the Morris activities of daily living (ADL) scale to quantify functional limitations in 7 activities (bed mobility, dressing, eating, locomotion on unit, personal hygiene, toileting, and transfers). We characterized limitations based on dependency in ADLs: no disability (0 ADLs), moderate disability (1-4 ADLs), or severe disability (5-7 ADLs). We used the Cognitive Function Scale (CFS) to characterize cognition as intact, mild, or moderate to severe impairment. We used multivariable logistic regression to compare the receipt of chemoimmunotherapy (including receipt of curative multiagent, anthracycline-containing regimen), 30-day mortality, and 30-day hospitalization, respectively, between the NH and non-NH population, reporting the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We used multivariable Cox regression to compare overall survival (OS) between these two populations, reporting hazard ratio (HR) with 95% CI. Within the NH population, we examine the association of receipt of chemotherapy with functional and cognitive impairment, respectively. All models were adjusted for age, sex, race, stage, comorbidities, Medicaid dual coverage, and type of NH stay (long vs. short stay). Results: Among 11,128 patients with DLBCL, 718 received care in NHs (median age 82 years, 59% women, 90% White, 50% stage III/IV disease). Compared with non-NH patients, NH residents were less likely to receive any chemoimmunotherapy (41% vs. 69%, OR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.29-0.41) or, when treated, curative regimens (47% vs. 71%, OR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.37-0.72) (Fig. 1A-1B). NH residents had high rates of 30-day mortality after therapy (18% vs. 7%, OR: 1.99, 95% CI: 1.43-2.77) and 30-day hospitalization (58% vs. 43%, OR: 1.51, 95% CI: 1.18-1.93), and had short median OS of 3.7 months (versus 31.7 months for non-NH residents; HR: 1.36, 95% CI: 1.11-1.65) (Fig. 1C). Rates of disability and cognitive impairment were high, 20% had moderate disability, 60% had severe disability and 17-26% had mild or moderate to severe cognitive impairment. Compared with patients with no ADL disability, those with severe disability were less likely to receive any chemoimmunotherapy (38% vs. 50%, OR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.38-0.89) (Fig. 2A-2B). Compared with those with intact cognitive function, patients with mild (39% vs. 47%, OR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.45-0.97) and moderate to severe (24% vs. 47%, OR: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.19-0.51) impairment, respectively, were less likely to receive chemoimmunotherapy (Fig. 2C). Conclusions: In this population-based study, over half of NH residents with DLBCL did not receive chemoimmunotherapy, and 47% of chemotherapy recipients received curative regimens. Despite treatment, NH residents had higher rates of early mortality and hospitalization, and short median survival (only 3.7 months). These findings indicate a need for alternative treatment strategies for patients in NHs, particularly those with high levels of disability. Routinely collected NH assessment data revealed strong associations between receipt of chemotherapy, functional limitations, and cognitive impairment among NH residents with DLBCL. These findings suggest that structured assessment of function and cognition may improve patient selection for curative therapy. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Olszewski: TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; PrecisionBio: Research Funding; Celldex Therapeutics: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; Acrotech Pharma: Research Funding; Genmab: Research Funding. Panagiotou: International Consulting Associates, Inc: Other: Personal fees.

Introduction: While an association between AI diseases and the development of lymphoma (LYM) is known, the impact of AI diseases on patient (pt) outcome across varying LYM subtypes, including the role of immunosuppressive medications (ISM), is not well understood. Methods: We conducted a large, multicenter, RWE retrospective analysis of adult pts with a diagnosis (dx) of lymphoma (LYM) between 1/2000 and 12/2020 and a pre-existing AI disease (see full list AI in Table 1). We examined baseline clinical features at LYM diagnosis, underlying AI disease characteristics, type/duration of ISM, LYM therapy received and survival outcomes. Multinomial regression models adjusted for age and sex identified associations between LYM subtypes, AI diseases, and ISM exposure, and were reported as relative risk ratio (RRR). Survival rates were estimated by Kaplan-Meier. Univariate associations of baseline factors with survival in cases with non-missing data were examined by Cox model and stratified by International Prognostic Index (IPI). Results: In total, 785 pts were identified across 14 North American institutions, of which 694 pts with complete data were included in the final analysis. Rheumatoid arthritis was the most common AI disease (30%) (Table 1). Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) was the most common histologic subtype (n=303, 44%), and it was the most prevalent histology for nearly every AI disease. The median duration between AI disease and LYM diagnosis was 108 months (mo) (1-816 mo). Several associations were found between specific AI diseases and LYM subtypes, including: Hashimoto's thyroiditis with marginal zone lymphoma (MZL, RRR 2.78 (95% CI 1.14-6.78, P=0.024), Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia (RRR 7.12 (95% CI 1.07-47.3, P=0.031), and follicular lymphoma (RRR, 2.71, 95% CI 1.01-7.24, P=0.047); Polymyalgia rheumatica with CLL/SLL (RRR 21.27 (95% CI 4.57-98.96), P=0.0001) and MZL (RRR 6.62 (95% CI 1.38-31.80), P=0.018); Psoriasis with peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL, RRR 3.85 (95% CI 1.21-12.22), P=0.022); and Inflammatory bowel disease with CLL/SLL (HR 4.60 (95% CI 1.72-12.34), P=0.002). Overall, 402 (58%) pts had ISM exposure prior to LYM dx, with 279 (40%) pts on active ISM at time of LYM dx. The most commonly used ISM agent was methotrexate (26%); the median duration of ISM prior to LYM diagnosis was 60 mo (1-480). Compared with DLBCL pts, those diagnosed with PTCLs were more likely to have had exposure to TNF-α inhibitors (RR 1.89, 95% CI 1.23-2.89, P=0.004) or apremilast, a phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor (RR 19.2, 95% CI 2.6-149.9, P=0.005). Rituximab +/- chemotherapy was used as frontline therapy in the majority of B-cell LYM pts, including 90% of DLBCL. Of LYM pts on ISM at initial dx, 41% had a reduction in immunosuppression (RIS), of whom 81% stopped ISM completely (Table 1). Only 10% of pts who underwent RIS were reported to have a flare of AI disease during initial therapy, compared with 7% of pts who had a flare despite no RIS (P=NS). Survival by histology is depicted in Figure A/B. For DLBCL pts (n=303), survival appeared overall comparable to historically reported outcomes in the general DLBCL population. Neither antecedent use of ISM nor duration of ISM were associated with pt outcomes (data not shown). However, a survival advantage was identified among DLBCL pts whose ISM was stopped completely during frontline therapy compared with pts who were not on ISM at diagnosis (Figure C/D). In addition, 10 DLBCL pts underwent 100% RIS +/- rituximab with therapeutic intent and did not receive cytotoxic chemotherapy as part of frontline therapy. Among these, 4 pts (mean age 62 years (26-84); ISM: n=2 MTX, and 1 each azathioprine and etanercept/MTX; EBV+ 2/4) achieved complete remission and remain disease-free at time of last follow-up at 5, 74, 105, and 221 months post-DLBCL dx. Conclusions: Altogether, we identified several novel histologic associations of AI diseases with LYM histologic subtypes. Furthermore, prior receipt of TNF-α inhibitor or a phosphoediesterase 4 inhibitor were associated with a diagnosis of PTCL. For DLBCL pts with antecedent AI disease, complete cessation of ISM during frontline LYM therapy appeared to be associated with improved survival. Finally, there were a small number of select DLBCL pts who garnered long-term disease-free survival using RIS +/- rituximab as frontline therapy, similar to the treatment paradigm in post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorders. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Olszewski: TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; PrecisionBio: Research Funding; Celldex Therapeutics: Research Funding; Acrotech Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; Genmab: Research Funding. Feldman: Alexion, AstraZeneca Rare Disease: Honoraria, Other: Study investigator. Karmali: Karyopharm: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS/Celgene/Juno: Consultancy, Research Funding; EUSA: Consultancy; Janssen/Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding. Lunning: TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Myeloid Therapeutics: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy; Celgene, a Bristol Myers Squibb Co.: Consultancy; Legend: Consultancy; Acrotech: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. Palmisiano: Genentech: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Foundation One: Consultancy. Danilov: Bristol-Meyers-Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda Oncology: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; SecuraBio: Research Funding; Rigel Pharm: Honoraria. Barta: Kyowa Kirin: Honoraria; Acrotech: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Seagen: Honoraria. Lansigan: Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Savage: Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Other: Institutional clinical trial funding; Roche: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional clinical trial funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional clinical trial funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Beigene: Other: Institutional clinical trial funding; Genentech: Research Funding.