Search

Purpose: Patients with Relapsed or Refractory (R/R) Peripheral T cell Lymphomas (PTCL) have a poor prognosis. Bendamustine (B) and Brentuximab Vedotin (Bv) have shown interesting results in this setting. However, little information is available about their efficacy in combination. Patients and Methods: This multicenter and retrospective study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of BBv in patients with non-cutaneous R/R PTCL among 21 LYSA centers in France and Belgium. The primary objective was the overall response rate. Results: Eighty-two patients with R/R PTCL were included. The best ORR was 68%, with 49% of patients in CR. In multivariable analysis, only the relapse status after the last regimen (relapse vs refractory) was associated with the response with an ORR of 83% vs 57% (OR=3.70 (95%CI:1.3-10.5); p=0.014). Median DoR was 15.4 (0.6-50.2) months for patients in CR. With a median follow-up of 22 (0-52) months, the median PFS and OS were 8.3 and 26.3 months respectively. Moreover, patients in CR, who underwent an allogeneic transplant, had a better outcome than patients who did not with a median PFS and OS of 19.3 versus 4.8 months (p=0.0005) and NR versus 12.4 months (p=0.0013) respectively. Fifty-nine percent of patients experienced grade 3/4 adverse events which were mainly hematologic. Conclusion: BBv is highly active in patients with R/R PTCL and should be considered as a one of the best option of immunochemotherapy salvage combination in this setting and particularly as a bridge to allogeneic transplant for eligible patients.

After T-cell replete haploidentical stem cell transplantation, GVHD prophylaxis with post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PT-Cy) is now evaluated in unrelated donor (UD) transplants, where antithymocyte globulin (ATG) remains standard. We report the outcome of patients transplanted from HLA-10/10 matched unrelated donor (MUD) treated with PT-Cy (n=30), in comparison with a historical cohort treated with ATG (n=64). In the PT-Cy group, we observed lower 2-4 acute GVHD (23% vs. 45%, p=0.014), lower chronic GVHD (all grades: 13% vs 33%, p=0.029; moderate to severe: 10% vs. 27%, p=0.039) but no difference in the relapse (20% vs. 11%, p=0.628), non-relapse mortality (3% vs 11%, p=0.169), progression free survival (77% vs 78%, p=0.638) and overall survival (87% vs 83%, p=0.602). Neutrophil (19 vs 17 days, p=0.049) and platelet (26 vs 10 days, p

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) is a valid option in patients with refractory lymphomas. HLA haploidentical stem cell transplantation (haplo-SCT) expanded the accessibility to allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. The aims of study were to retrospectively assess the toxicity and efficacy of haplo-SCT using nonmyeloablative conditioning in patients with advanced lymphoma. In total, 147 patients with advanced lymphoma at 2 partner institutions were included. Patients received a uniform nonmyeloablative conditioning regimen and graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), GVHD, nonrelapse mortality, and GVHD, relapse-free survival (GRFS). Median follow-up was 39 months (range, 6 to 114 months). The median age was 46 years (range, 19 to 71 years). Sixty-five percent of patients were in complete remission (CR) at transplantation. Cumulative incidence of grade II to IV acute GVHD was 30% (95% confidence interval [Cl], 23% to 38%). Two-year cumulative incidence of all grades of chronic GVHD was 13% (95% CI, 8% to 20%). Two-year cumulative incidence of disease relapse was 19% (95% CI, 14% to 27%), with a higher incidence in patients not being in CR at allo-HCT (CR versus not CR: 12% versus 33%, P = .006). Two-year PFS, OS, and GRFS were 66% (95% CI, 59-75), 73% (95% CI, 66-81), and 56% (95% CI, 48-65), respectively. Haplo-SCT with post-transplantation cyclophosphamide may be considered a valid option for patients with aggressive lymphoma and deserves further evaluation.

Background CT and fluorine 18 (18F) fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET/CT performances following immune therapy are not well known in patients with relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma (RRHL). Purpose To compare CT and PET/CT for prognostic value of early response evaluation following nivolumab therapy. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included patients from 34 institutions who underwent early imaging response evaluation from July 2013 to April 2017. Three experienced readers classified imaging response by using Cheson et al and 2016 Lymphoma Response to Immunomodulatory Therapy Criteria as follows: complete (metabolic) response, partial (metabolic) response, stable disease or no metabolic response, or progressive (metabolic) disease. Primary CT and PET assessments were performed at a median of 2.0 months (interquartile range, 1.7-3.7 months) after nivolumab initiation. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to determine the relationship of primary CT and PET assessment response categories to overall survival (OS). Agreements between primary and secondary imaging assessments were assessed by using κ analysis. Results A total of 45 patients (median age, 37 years; range, 18-77 years; 25 men) underwent a primary assessment using CT and PET/CT; 36 patients also underwent a subsequent assessment. Eleven patients (24%) died after a median follow-up of 21.2 months. CT and PET response categories were associated with OS (P = .03 for primary CT assessment; P = .02 for primary PET assessment). There was no pseudoprogression at primary CT and PET assessments. At the primary assessment, response categories by using CT were reclassified by using PET in 44% (20 of 45) of patients. Among these, 55% (11 of 20) were reclassified to complete metabolic response (complete metabolic response rate: 29% [13 of 45 patients] vs complete response rate: 4% [two of 45 patients]), with a 2-year OS probability of 100%. At the secondary assessment, complete response rate using CT increased to 17% (six of 36 patients), hence a better agreement with PET (κ = 0.78; P < .001). Conclusion Early CT and PET/CT at a median of 2 months after initiation of nivolumab predicted overall survival in relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma. Early PET detected additional patients with complete metabolic response. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Scott and Wang in this issue.

International audience

Background: Advanced cutaneous T-cell lymphomas (CTCLs) remain an unmet medical need. Brentuximab vedotin (BV), an anti-CD30 antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) linked to monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE), do not deliver significant long-term improvements in patient outcomes. More recently, mogamulizumab and anti-KIR3DL2 provided encouraging results but new targeted therapies are needed. Inducible Co-Stimulator (ICOS), a T-cell costimulatory receptor involved in the development of CTCLs, arouses interest. Methods: We used immunohistochemistry to study ICOS expression in skin biopsies of 23 patients with early-stage mycosis fungoides (MF), 12 with transformed MF (TMF) and 17 with Sézary Syndrome (SS), at diagnosis or in relapse. Skin samples from 12 patients with B-cell lymphomas, 14 with CD30 + lymphoproliferative disease (LPD), 12 with primary cutaneous CD4+ small/medium T-cell lympho-proliferative disorder and 13 with angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL) were used as controls. ICOS expression by circulating Sézary cells and regulatory T cells (Tregs) in patients with SS was evaluated using flow cytometry and compared to healthy donors (HD) lymphocytes. In 5 patients with SS, we also analyzed concomitant biopsies from involved nodes. Then, we investigated the efficacy of anti-ICOS ADCs generated by coupling murine anti-ICOS 314.8 monoclonal antibodies with MMAE and pyrrolobenzodiazepine (PBD), in comparison to BV. We used ICOS + CTCL cell lines (MyLa, MJ and HUT78), murine xenograft models with MyLa and ICOS + Patient Derived Xenografts (PDXs) from patients with SS and AITL. In order to identify the best anti-ICOS clone that we should develop for a clinical trial, we evaluated the affinity of the antibody on the receptor, the internalization capacity of the antibody using pHAb Reactive Dyes kit (Promega®), and the ability of the antibody to act as an ADC using a secondary conjugate (Mab-ZAP kit, Advanced Targeting Systems®). Results: ICOS was highly expressed by the cutaneous atypical lymphocytic infiltrates in respectively 61%, 75% and 88% of patients with early-stage MF, TMF and SS, such as in all the involved nodes. Double staining experiments which were performed in both skin and lymph node revealed that ICOS expression appears mainly restricted to neoplastic CD4 + T-cells, with rare ICOS +CD8 + T-cells in the tumor micro-environment. ICOS expression by circulating Sézary cells was strong: 69 ± 7.3% versus 38.8 ± 7.1% of non-tumoral CD4 + cells (p In CTCL cell lines, we observed a significant dose-dependent decrease in cell viability in the presence of anti-ICOS-MMAE (IC50 = 8.2ng/mL) and anti-ICOS-PBD (IC50 = 1.2ng/mL) ADCs. In a mouse xenograft model (MyLa), anti-ICOS-MMAE ADCs provided a longer overall survival (OS) than BV (HR=15.2; CI95%: 3.2-71.1; p Among 8 different anti-ICOS clones, clone 314.8 had the best affinity on MyLa and MJ cell lines. Clones 53.3, 293.1, 92.17, 88.2 and 279.1 also had good affinity to receptor, whereas clones 145.1 and 121.4 had poor affinity. Using the internalization pHAb reactive dyes kit, we found that clones 314.8, 53.3, 92.17, 88.2 internalized significantly better and faster than the other ones. In order to verify if there is a correlation between internalization capacity and ADC effect, clones 53.3, 92.17 and 145.1 were coupled to MMAE. While anti-ICOS-53.3 and anti-ICOS-92.17 ADCs had similar efficacy to anti-ICOS-314.8 ADCs on MyLa, anti-ICOS 145.1 ADCs resulted in significantly lower cell death. Finally, all clones showed good ability to act as ADCs with Mab-ZAP, excluding clones 279.1, 145.1 and 121.4. Discussion: ICOS is a promising therapeutic target because it is expressed both by tumor T-cells and regulatory T-cells. We report for the first time the strong and frequent expression of ICOS in CTCLs, as well as the preclinical efficacy of anti-ICOS ADCs on CTCL cell line and PDXs. These results could be extended to the spectrum of follicular variant peripheral T-cell lymphomas. Conclusion: Collectively, our findings provide the preliminary basis for a therapeutic trial Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Lopez: Emergence Therapeutics: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Bagot: Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Olive: ImCheck Therapeutics: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Emergence Therapeutics: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alderaan Biotechnology: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

International audience; Anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibodies yield high response rates in patients with relapsed/refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL), but most patients will eventually progress. Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) after PD-1 blockade may be associated with increased toxicity, raising challenging questions about the role, timing, and optimal method of transplantation in this setting. To address these questions, we assembled a retrospective cohort of 209 cHL patients who underwent alloHCT after PD-1 blockade. With a median follow-up among survivors of 24 months, the 2-year cumulative incidences (CIs) of non-relapse mortality and relapse were 14 and 18%, respectively; the 2-year graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and relapse-free survival (GRFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival were 47%, 69%, and 82%, respectively. The 180-day CI of grade 3-4 acute GVHD was 15%, while the 2-year CI of chronic GVHD was 34%. In multivariable analyses, a longer interval from PD-1 to alloHCT was associated with less frequent severe acute GVHD, while additional treatment between PD-1 and alloHCT was associated with a higher risk of relapse. Notably, post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy)-based GVHD prophylaxis was associated with significant improvements in PFS and GRFS. While awaiting prospective clinical trials, PTCy-based GVHD prophylaxis may be considered the optimal transplantation strategy for this patient population.

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against programmed cell death 1 (PD-1), such as nivolumab and pembrolizumab, are associated with high response rates in patients with relapsed or refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). To date, no prognostic factor for overall survival (OS) has been established with these agents in HL. We examined whether the first early response assessment evaluated using 18F-FDG PET/CT may be associated with OS in this setting. Methods: This retrospective study included 45 patients from 34 institutions. In a masked, centralized review, 3 independent radiologists classified PET/CT scans obtained at a median of 2.0 mo (interquartile range, 1.7-3.7 mo) after nivolumab initiation using existing criteria (i.e., 2014 Lugano classification and 2016 LYRIC). Patients were classified according to 4 possible response categories: complete metabolic response (CMR), partial metabolic response (PMR), no metabolic response (NMR), or progressive metabolic disease (PMD). Because the OS of patients with NMR and PMR was similar, they were grouped together. OS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between groups using log-rank testing. Results: Eleven patients (24%) died after a median follow-up of 21.2 mo. The classification was identical between Lugano and LYRIC because all 16 progression events classified as indeterminate response per LYRIC were confirmed on subsequent evaluations. Both Lugano and LYRIC classified patients as CMR in 13 cases (29%), PMD in 16 (36%), NMR in 4 (9%), and PMR in 12 (27%). The 2-y OS probability was significantly different in patients with PMD (0.53; 95% confidence interval [95%CI], 0.32-0.87), NMR or PMR (0.80; 95%CI, 0.63-1.00), and CMR (1.00; 95%CI, 1.00-1.00) in the overall population (P = 0.02, 45 patients), as well as according to a landmark analysis at 3 mo (P = 0.05, 32 patients). Conclusion: In relapsed or refractory HL patients treated with anti-PD-1 mAbs, the first early PET/CT assessment using either Lugano or LYRIC predicted OS and allowed early risk stratification, suggesting that PET/CT might be used to develop risk-adapted strategies.

The treatment of advanced-stage cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) remains an unmet medical need. Mogamulizumab, anti-KIR3DL2, and brentuximab vedotin (BV), an anti-CD30 antibody–drug conjugate (ADC) coupled with monomethyl-auristatin-E (MMAE), provided encouraging results, but new targeted therapies are needed. Inducible T-cell costimulator (ICOS), a T-cell costimulatory receptor, is a promising therapeutic target, not only because it is expressed by malignant T cells in CTCL but also because of its connection with the suppressive activity of regulatory T (Treg) cells. Immunohistochemical analysis revealed that ICOS was widely expressed by malignant cells in skin biopsy specimens from 52 patients with mycosis fungoides and Sézary syndrome (SS), as well as in involved node biopsy specimens from patients with SS. Furthermore, flow cytometry demonstrated its strong expression by circulating tumor cells in all our patients with SS. Percentages of ICOS+ Treg cells were significantly higher in patients with SS than in healthy donors. We then investigated the preclinical efficacy of anti-ICOS ADCs generated by coupling murine anti-ICOS monoclonal antibodies with MMAE and pyrrolobenzodiazepine. In 3 CTCL cell lines (Myla, MJ, and HUT78), we observed a significant dose-dependent decrease in cell viability in the presence of anti-ICOS ADCs. In addition, anti-ICOS-MMAE ADCs had an in vitro and in vivo efficacy superior to BV in a mouse xenograft model (MyLa). Finally, we assessed the efficacy of anti-ICOS ADCs in ICOS+ patient-derived xenografts from patients with SS and angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma. Collectively, our findings provide the preliminary basis for a therapeutic trial.

Background CT and fluorine 18 (

International audience; Introduction: Patients with relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma (R/R HL) experience high response rates upon anti-PD1 therapy. In these patients, the optimal duration of treatment and the risk of relapse after anti-PD1 discontinuation are unknown.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients with R/R HL who responded to anti-PD1 monotherapy and discontinued the treatment either because of unacceptable toxicity or prolonged remission. A machine learning algorithm based on 17 candidate variables was trained and validated to predict progression-free survival (PFS) landmarked at the time of discontinuation of anti-PD1 therapy.Results: Forty patients from 14 centers were randomly assigned to training (n = 25) and validation (n = 15) sets. At the time of anti-PD1 discontinuation, patients had received treatment for a median duration of 11.2 (range, 0-time to best response was not statistically significant in discriminating patients with PFS lesser or greater than 12 months). Considering PFS status as a binary variable (alive or dead) at a specific time point (12 months) is convenient, intuitive and allows for comparing the value of potential predicting variables in these two groups of patients. Nonetheless, this approach has two drawbacks: first, it binarizes outcome; second, it excludes patients alive with a time to last follow up lesser 12 months. Therefore, it is less powerful to demonstrate statistically significant association with PFS even if it exists 5 months. Patients discontinued anti-PD1 treatment either because of prolonged remission (N = 27, 67.5%) or unacceptable toxicity (N = 13, 32.5%). Most patients were in CR (N = 35, 87.5%) at the time of anti-PD1 discontinuation. In the training set, the machine learning algorithm identified that the most important variables to predict PFS were patients' age, time to best response, and presence or absence of CR. The performance observed in the training set was validated in the validation set.Conclusion: In this pilot, proof of concept study using a machine learning algorithm, we identified biomarkers capable of predicting the risk of relapse after anti-PD1 discontinuation (age, time to best response, quality of response). Once confirmed, these simple biomarkers will represent useful tools to guide the management of these patients.

Background: Breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BI-ALCL) is a rare form of T-cell lymphoma arising adjacent to a breast implant, recently recognized as a provisional entity in the 2017 revised World Health Organization (WHO) lymphoma classification. The pathogenesis of this entity remains elusive even if gene alterations in epigenetic modifiers and JAK-STAT signaling are frequent. ECHELON 2 trial (Horwitz S et al. The Lancet 2019) has set BV-CHP as a new standard of treatment for CD30-positive peripheral T-cell lymphoma, mainly in systemic ALCL patients (pts) but not in BIA-ALCL. Our objective is to describe a series of pts with BIA-ALCL included in the LYSA registry focusing on the use of BV CHP as front-line chemotherapy for patient requiring chemotherapy. Methods: since 2016, a national multidisciplinary meeting has been implemented by the French Cancer Agency to better define therapeutic strategies for newly diagnosed cases after histologic confirmation. Meanwhile, BIA-ALCL registry was funded by the LYSA to collect ambispectively, in France and more recently in Belgium, patient clinical data including reasons for breast implantation, implant manufacturer, treatment and outcome. Results: from 2009 to 2021 , 85 pts (73 in France and 12 in Belgium) gave their informed consent to participate to the registry. Median age was 57 years (range 29-82) at diagnosis. In 39 out of 85 pts (45.9%) the first implant followed a mastectomy for breast cancer. In this analysis, only implants in the breast(s) where the lymphoma occurred have been considered. Five pts (5.9%) had bilateral lymphoma and 80 pts had unilateral lymphoma (35 left side and 45 right side), 35 pts were implanted once (41.2%), 35 twice (41.2%) and 15 pts (17.6%) 3 times or more. The median period between first implant and BIA-ALCL diagnosis was 12.2 years (range 4.1-40.5), and 7 years (range 0.2-25.4) from last implant to diagnosis. The clinical presentation was seroma in 64 pts (75.3%), breast tumor mass with or without seroma in 18 pts (21.1%) and 3 pts were diagnosed without any mass or seroma (1 contiguous lymph node involvement, 2 in the context of systematic implant removal). The two main clinical presentation (i.e. seroma and tumor mass) were most often correlated with the two distinct histological subtypes (in "situ/mixed" (n=62) or "infiltrative" (n=21)). For 2 pts, histological subtype was not available. The majority of pts were Ann Arbor stage I-II (n=65, 76.5%), and 18 (21.2%) pts were stage IV. Stage was unknown in 2 pts. Considering available information, almost all patients had at least one silicone-filled (n=76) and at least one textured implant (n=85) with Biocell texturation (n=61, 71.8%). No patient had only smooth implant. Implant removal with total capsulectomy was performed in 66 patients and 25 underwent chemotherapy based on CHOP or CHOP-like (4 to 6 cycles) chemotherapy regimens (n=13), BV-CHP (6 cycles) (n=10) and others (n=2). Among the patients receiving chemotherapy, CR was obtained in 21 pts (84%) and in 2 pts failed to respond (8%). Among the patients treated with BV-CHP, 8 pts achieved CR (80%) and 2 pts were not yet evaluated at the time of analysis. No limiting toxicity was noted. After a median follow-up of 28.6 months, 78 pts are alive and free of evolutive disease and 8 are lost to follow up. Seven pts died, either from lymphoma progression alone (n=2) or associated with concomitant active breast cancer (n=2), one from breast cancer alone, one from lung epidermoid cancer and one due to myocardial infarction. Patients with an "infiltrative" histological subtype have a significantly worse outcome with a 2y-PFS of 73.8% vs 96.7% for other subtypes ("in situ/mixed subtypes") (p=0.0039, HR=5.3) and a 2y-OS of 78.7% vs 100% (p=0.0022, HR=8.5). With a median follow-up of one year, the 10 patients treated with BV-CHP are alive and free of evolutive disease at the time of analysis. Conclusions: We report on the basis of a limited series of patients that 6 cycles of BV-CHP provide an excellent disease control in patients with BIA-ALCL requiring chemotherapy. Confirmation of these results on a larger series of patients with a longer follow-up is needed. Such observation provides basis for a prospective trial in order to determine if treatment with BV-CHP could be installed as a standard of care for higher risk patients with BIA-ALCL, as those presenting with tumor mass and /or infiltrative subtype. Disclosures Le Bras: Novartis: Honoraria; Celgene BMS: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite Gilead: Honoraria. Bachy: Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Daiishi: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy. Bonnet: Roche: Consultancy. André: AbbVie: Other: Travel/accomodation/expenses; Roche: Other: Travel/accomodation/expenses, Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding; Celgene: Other: Travel/accomodation/expenses; Bristol-Myers-Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Travel/Accommodations/Expenses; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: Travel/Accommodations/Expenses; Incyte: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding. Haioun: Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Servier: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Miltenyi: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Methods : This multicentric retrospective study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and the safety of the combination of BBV in patients with non-cutaneous R/R PTCL among 21 LYSA centers in France and Belgium. The primary objective was to evaluate the best overall response rate (ORR) (complete response (CR) and partial response (PR)). Secondary objectives were progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), duration of response (DoR), impact of transplantation on outcome, and safety. Patients treated between January 2013 and October 2020 were reviewed and all the data were collected through an electronic questionnaire sent to all the physicians. Results : Eighty two patients with R/R PTCL (40 angioimmunoblastic lymphoma (AITL), 2 T-cell lymphoma with TFH phenotype ,13 PTCL not otherwise specified (PTCL NOS), 5 Alk+ anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL), 17 Alk- ALCL, , 1 Extranodal NK-/T-cell lymphoma, 3 Enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma (EATL), 1 subcutaneous panniculitis) were included. Median age at beginning of BBV was 60 years, most of patients were male (61%), had advanced stage (88%) and an IPI ≥ 2 (79%). Half of patients were refractory to their last treatment. Median number of prior regimens was 1 (range 1 to 6). The best ORR was 71%, with 51% of patients in CR. In multivariable analysis, only the relapse status after the last regimen (relapse vs refractory) was associated with ORR, relapsed patients having a better ORR (83% vs 57% in refractory patients, p=.014, OR=3.70 (95%CI:1.3-10.5)). Median DoR was 15.4 months in patients with CR but differed significantly whether patients were transplanted or not (Not reached vs 8.4 months, p=.0055). Twenty-two patients (30% of patients ≤ 70 years of age) were transplanted (6 autologous and 16 allogenic). With a median follow-up of 9 months, the median PFS and OS were 8.3 and 26.3 months respectively. In multivariable analysis, only 2 factors had a significant impact on PFS and OS: best response (CR/PR vs SD/PD with a median PFS of 17.4 vs 1.9 months, p Fifty-nine percent of patients experienced a grade 3 to 4 adverse event which was mainly hematologic toxicity. Treatment had to be stopped in 11% of patients. Conclusion: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study reporting on the combination of BBV in the treatment of R/R PTCL in such a large cohort. The results are very encouraging with a high response rate, long DoR in responding patients and a very good outcome. Furthermore, patients in CR who are eligible for transplant have the best outcome, making this combination a good candidate as salvage therapy before transplant consolidation in these high-risk lymphomas with limited treatment options. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Bouabdallah: Kite/Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria. Herbaux: Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Brice: MSD: Research Funding; Amgen: Other: Travel/accommodations/expenses; Roche: Other: Travel/accommodations/expenses; Takeda: Research Funding. Sibon: Abbvie: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; iQone: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy. Laribi: AstraZeneca: Other: Personal Fees; AbbVie: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding; IQONE: Other: Personal Fees; Astellas Phama, Inc.: Other: Personal Fees; BeiGene: Other: Personal Fees; Takeda: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding; Novartis: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding; Le Mans Hospital: Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding. Damaj: roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. OffLabel Disclosure: Brentuximab Vedotin and Bendamustine

Background: Immunochemotherapy induction followed by rituximab maintenance is the standard of care in previously untreated symptomatic follicular lymphoma (FL). The phase 3 RELEVANCE study of chemotherapy-free combination immunotherapy with lenalidomide and rituximab (R 2) showed promising activity comparable to standard rituximab + chemotherapy (R-chemo) options (Morschhauser, F and Fowler, NH, et al. N Engl J Med. 2018). Reported here are the results of the second interim analysis. Methods: RELEVANCE is a global, randomized, phase 3 trial (NCT01650701) of R 2 vs R-chemo followed by rituximab in patients with previously untreated grade 1-3a FL requiring therapy according to GELF criteria. Lenalidomide dose was 20 mg/d, d2-22/28 for 6-12 cycles (c), continued in responders at 10 mg/d for a total of 18 c. Rituximab dose was 375 mg/m 2 weekly c1 and d1 c2-6 and continued in responders for 12 additional c (q8wk). R-chemo was given per investigator's choice of standard R + cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP), R + bendamustine (R-B), or R-CVP, followed by 12 c of rituximab (q8wk). Co-primary endpoints were complete response (CR)/CR unconfirmed (CRu) at 120 wk and progression-free survival (PFS) by independent review committee (IRC) based on 1999 IWG criteria. The prespecified second interim analysis was done after 75% of total PFS events were reached. Results: 1030 patients with high tumor burden were randomized to R 2 (n = 513) and R-chemo (n = 517; 72% R-CHOP, 23% R-B, 5% R-CVP); baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. As of October 30, 2020, at median follow-up of 72 mo, 6-year PFS, according to IRC assessment using FDA censoring rules, was 60% for R 2 and 59% for R-chemo with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.03 (95% CI, 0.84-1.27). Data according to investigator assessment and EMA censoring rules are shown in the table. Median PFS was not reached for both groups. CR/CRu rates at 120 wk by IRC was 48% for R 2 and 53% for R-chemo (P = 0.10). Secondary endpoints, including overall survival, event free survival, and time to next antilymphoma treatment, were also similar in both groups. 162 (32%) R 2 and 166 (32%) R-chemo patients experienced progression/relapse according to investigator assessment of which 107 and 99 patients received additional treatment(s), respectively. Histological transformation was documented in 13/513 patients the R 2 group and 11/517 patients in the R-chemo group over the 72 mo follow-up period. ORR and overall survival after subsequent treatment(s) for relapse/progression were similar in both groups. The overall safety profile in both groups was consistent with the 1st interim analysis. The number of patients with second primary malignancies (SPMs) were similar between both groups, occurring in 57 (11%) R 2-treated and 67 (13%) R-chemo-treated safety population patients. The total number of SPMs was 64 in the R 2 group and 87 in the R-chemo group, with invasive SPM accounting for 43 (67%) and 52 (60%), respectively. Grade 5 adverse events were reported in 9 (2%) R 2 and 6 (1%) R-chemo treated patients. Conclusions: R 2 continues to demonstrate comparable efficacy vs R-chemo in patients with previously untreated grade 1-3a FL requiring therapy with similar 6-year PFS (60% and 59%) and 6-year OS (89% in both groups). Also, response and overall survival after subsequent treatment were similar in both groups. The overall safety profile of both groups was consistent with the previous analysis, with no new safety signals detected. R 2 provides a chemo-free alternative to R-chemo based on immunotherapy/immunomodulation. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Morschhauser: Chugai: Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZenenca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genmab: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria; Epizyme: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Nastoupil: Bayer: Honoraria; Denovo Pharma: Other: DSMC; Gilead/Kite: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Honoraria; Caribou Biosciences: Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; IGM Biosciences: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: DSMC, Research Funding; Epizyme: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Feugier: Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Astrazeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Palomba: Wolters Kluwer: Patents & Royalties; Lygenesis: Honoraria; Pluto: Honoraria; Ceramedix: Honoraria; Priothera: Honoraria; Nektar: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy; Seres: Honoraria, Other: Stock, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Rheos: Honoraria; Magenta: Honoraria; Juno: Patents & Royalties; BeiGene: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; WindMIL: Honoraria; Notch: Honoraria, Other: Stock; PCYC: Consultancy. Bachy: Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Daiishi: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy. Libby: Genentech: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding. Casasnovas: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Flinn: Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Curis: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Pfizer: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Loxo: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Agios: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Great Point Partners: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Yingli Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Nurix Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; ArQule: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Celgene: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Iksuda Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Seagen: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Forma Therapeutics: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Rhizen Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; IGM Biosciences: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Incyte: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Forty Seven: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: All Consultancy and Research Funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Calithera Biosciences: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Merck: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Teva: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Trillium Therapeutics: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Triphase Research & Development Corp.: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Century Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Hutchison MediPharma: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Vincerx Pharma: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Sarah Cannon Research Institute: Current Employment; Servier Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Yingli Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Seagen: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Servier Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Haioun: Amgen: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Roche: Consultancy, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy; Miltenyi Biotec: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria; Servier/Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Ysebaert: Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Roche: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding. Bartlett: Celgene: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Autolus: Research Funding; Seagen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Brice: MSD: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Ribrag: Nanostring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PharmaMar: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Research Funding; Argen-X: Research Funding; Epizyme: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Martin Garcia-Sancho: Celgene: Honoraria, Other: travel; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Takeda: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy; Kern Pharma: Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Eusa Pharma: Consultancy; Clinigen: Consultancy; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/Accommodations/Expenses; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/Accommodations/Expenses. Lopez-Guillermo: Roche, Gilead/Kite, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen, AbbVie, Spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Larouche: Gilead: Consultancy. Ando: Astellas Pharma: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Chugai Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda Pharmaceutical: Research Funding. Maria: Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company), Research Funding; Astrazeneca: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company). André: Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding; Roche: Other: Travel/accomodation/expenses, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: Travel/Accommodations/Expenses; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers-Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Travel/Accommodations/Expenses; AbbVie: Other: Travel/accomodation/expenses; Celgene: Other: Travel/accomodation/expenses; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding. Sehn: Genmab: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Debiopharm: Consultancy. Izutsu: Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Symbio: Honoraria; Solasia: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Ono Pharmaceutical: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Huya Biosciences: Research Funding; Genmab: Honoraria, Research Funding; Fuji Film Toyama Chemical: Honoraria; Eisai: Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria, Research Funding; Chugai: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Beigene: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Yakult: Research Funding; Allergan Japan: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria. Cartron: Roche, Celgene-BMS: Consultancy; Danofi, Gilead, Novartis, Jansen, Roche, Celgene-BMS, Abbvie, Takeda: Honoraria. Fowler: Bristol Myers Squibb, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, TG Therapeutics and Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BostonGene, Corp: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Salles: Velosbio: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Morphosys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Loxo: Consultancy; Regeneron: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Rapt: Consultancy; Kite/Gilead: Consultancy; Ipsen: Consultancy; Miltneiy: Consultancy; Genmab: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Genentech/Roche: Consultancy; Debiopharm: Consultancy; Allogene: Consultancy; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria.

Background. Muscle depletion (MD) assessed by computed tomography (CT) has been shown to be a predictive marker in solid tumors, but has not been assessed in non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas. Despite software improvements, MD measurement remains highly time-consuming and cannot be used in clinical practice. Methods. This study reports the development of a Deep-Learning automatic segmentation algorithm (DLASA) to measure MD, and investigate its predictive value in a cohort of 656 diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients included in the GAINED phase III prospective trial (NCT01659099). Results. After training on a series of 190 patients, the DLASA achieved a Dice coefficient of 0.97 ± 0.03. In the cohort, the median skeletal muscle index was 50.2 cm2/m2 and median muscle attenuation (MA) was 36.1 Hounsfield units (HU). No impact of sarcopenia was found on either progression free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS). Muscular hypodensity, defined as MA below the tenth percentile according to sex, was associated with a lower OS and PFS, respectively (HR = 2.80 (95% CI 1.58–4.95), p &lt, 0.001, and HR = 2.22 (95% CI 1.43–3.45), p &lt, 0.001). Muscular hypodensity appears to be an independent risk factor for mortality in DLBCL and because of DLASA can be estimated in routine practice.

International audience

The oncogenic events involved in breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BI-ALCL) remain elusive. To clarify this point, we have characterized the genomic landscape of 34 BI-ALCLs (15 tumor and 19 in situ subtypes) collected from 54 BI-ALCL patients diagnosed through the French Lymphopath network. Whole-exome sequencing (n = 22, with paired tumor/germline DNA) and/or targeted deep sequencing (n = 24) showed recurrent mutations of epigenetic modifiers in 74% of cases, involving notably KMT2C (26%), KMT2D (9%), CHD2 (15%), and CREBBP (15%). KMT2D and KMT2C mutations correlated with a loss of H3K4 mono- and trimethylation by immunohistochemistry. Twenty cases (59%) showed mutations in ≥1 member of the JAK/STAT pathway, including STAT3 (38%), JAK1 (18%), and STAT5B (3%), and in negative regulators, including SOCS3 (6%), SOCS1 (3%), and PTPN1 (3%). These mutations were more frequent in tumor-type samples than in situ samples (P = .038). All BI-ALCLs expressed pSTAT3, regardless of the mutational status of genes in the JAK/STAT pathway. Mutations in the EOMES gene (12%) involved in lymphocyte development, PI3K-AKT/mTOR (6%), and loss-of-function mutations in TP53 (12%) were also identified. Copy-number aberration (CNA) analysis identified recurrent alterations, including gains on chromosomes 2, 9p, 12p, and 21 and losses on 4q, 8p, 15, 16, and 20. Regions of CNA encompassed genes involved in the JAK/STAT pathway and epigenetic regulators. Our results show that the BI-ALCL genomic landscape is characterized by not only JAK/STAT activating mutations but also loss-of-function alterations of epigenetic modifiers.

Long-term efficacy of anti-PD1 therapy and the need for a consolidation with allogenic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) remain unclear in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) Hodgkin lymphoma (HL).We retrospectively analysed 78 patients with R/R HL treated with nivolumab in the French Early Access Program and compared their outcomes according to subsequent allo-HSCT.After a median follow-up of 34.3 months, the best overall response rate was 65.8%, including 38.2% complete responses (CRs). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.1 months. Patients reaching a CR upon nivolumab had a significantly longer PFS than those reaching a partial response (PR) (median = not reached vs 9.3 months, p 0.001). In our cohort, 13 patients who responded (i.e. in CR or PR) to nivolumab monotherapy underwent consolidation with allo-HSCT. Among responding patients, none of those who underwent subsequent allo-HSCT (N = 13) relapsed, whereas 62.2% of those who were not consolidated with allo-HSCT (N = 37) relapsed (p 0.001). There was no difference in overall survival (OS) between the two groups. Five of 6 patients who were not in CR at the time of transplantation (4 PRs and 1 progressive disease) converted into a CR after allo-HSCT.Most patients with R/R HL treated with anti-PD1 monotherapy eventually progressed, notably those who did not achieve a CR. Patients undergoing consolidation with allo-HSCT after anti-PD1 therapy experienced prolonged disease-free survival compared with non-transplanted patients, but this difference did not translate into a benefit in OS. This information should be considered when evaluating the risk/benefit ratio of allo-HSCT after anti-PD1 therapy.

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against programmed cell death 1 (PD-1), such as nivolumab and pembrolizumab, are associated with high response rates in patients with relapsed or refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). To date, no prognostic factor for overall survival (OS) has been established with these agents in HL. We examined whether the first early response assessment evaluated using

8029 Background: Hodgkin Lymphoma (HL) treatment in the elderly is a challenge, as standard ABVD is able to cure no more than 60% of the patients (p.). Bendamustine (Be), and Brentuximab Vedotin (BV), are well-tolerated and effective drugs in relapsing HL, but only preliminary data exist in 1st line treatment of the elderly (Evens AM 2018). Methods: HALO is a prospective international multicenter open-label phase I/II study (NCT02467946) to assess the safety and efficacy of Be-BV in advanced-stage elderly HL p. Briefly, BV 1.2 mg/kg on D1, and Be 90 mg/m2 on D1-2 were administered Q3W for 6 cycles. The primary endpoint was the feasibility and the efficacy of Be-BV. Results: Between July 2015 and February 2019, 59/60 p. consecutive enrolled received at least 1 Be-BV cycle, and are valuable for primary endpoint. One p. was excluded because a histological review showing angioimmunoblastic T-Cell Lymphoma. The mean age was 70.32 (62-79), and M/F ratio 41/18. The Ann-Arbor stage was IIB in 12, III in 14 and IV in 33 patients, B-symptoms (y/n) 40/19. IPS was 0-2 in 19 and ≥ 3 in 40 p., P.S. (ECOG) was 0-1 in 53, 2 in 6 p., nonetheless most of them were frail, as ADL was ≥ 6 in 47 (79%) and IADL was ≥ 8 in 42 (71%) p. Most frequent co-morbidities were cardio-vascular disease (45) metabolism disorders (31) prostatic adenoma (11). 163 treatment-related adverse events (WHO 3-4) were recorded: neutropenia and lymphopenia, (134), infections (7), cutaneous reactions (5), liver toxicity (2). No case of grade > 2 peripheral neuropathy was recorded. Out of 59 p., 41 concluded and 18 interrupted the treatment for toxicity (8), progression (5), treatment failure (2), CMV reactivation (3). The latter was recorded in 17 p., 12/17 received valgancyclovir. 4 p. died with CMV viremia. After a mean follow-up of 20.6 (0.3-46.5) months, 37/59 (63%) were in CR, while 22 (37%) have progressed (5) or relapsed (17). The 2-y OS and PFS in ITT analysis were 83% (95% CI 71-96) and 54% (95% CI 41-72) and in PP 89% (95%CI 75-100) and 78% (95%CI 64-96), respectively. 22 p. had a PFS event: 5 progression (2 deaths), 17 relapse (8 deaths). 10 p. died for recurrent HL (5), sepsis (1), secondary malignancy (2), respiratory insufficiency (1) and unknown (1). Conclusions: The Be-BV combination, a novel anthracycline-free regiment for first line treatment of HL in elderly, proved effective in unselected, frail, poor-risk, HL p. aged more than 60 in daily hospital real life. The CMV reactivation is frequent and should be treated with preemptive antiviral therapy upon detection of CMV DNA in plasma. Clinical trial information: NCT02467946 .

Background: Nivolumab demonstrated remarkable activity in patients with relapse or refractory (R/R) Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). However, long term efficacy and the need for a consolidation with allogenic stem cell transplantation remain unclear. Patient and method: We retrospectively analyzed 78 patients with R/R HL treated with nivolumab in the French Early Access Program and compared their outcome according to subsequent alloHSCT. Results: After a median follow-up of 31.5 months, the best overall response rate was 64%, including 37.3% complete response (CR). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.1 months and median overall survival (OS) was not reached. At 3 years, PFS and OS rates were 35% and 65%, respectively. Patients reaching a CR upon nivolumab had a significantly longer PFS than those reaching a PR (median = not reached vs 10.1 months). In our cohort, 17 patients underwent consolidation with allogenic stem cells transplantation (alloHSCT) after nivolumab therapy (Figure 1). At the time of transplantation, 8 patients were in CR, 5 in partial response (PR) and 4 had progressed of whom 3 received a salvage therapy before alloHSCT. Interestingly, 6 out of 7 patients who were not in CR at the time of transplantation (5 PR and 1 progressive disease) converted into a CR after alloHSCT. At the time of analysis, 14 patients were alive and 13 remained disease-free after a median follow-up of 30.4 months. One-year OS and PFS from alloHSCT were 82% and 76%, respectively. Among responding patients (i.e. in CR or PR) after nivolumab monotherapy, those who underwent subsequent alloHSCT (N=13) had a better outcome than those who were not consolidated with alloHSCT (N=35) (Figure 2). In the transplanted group, none of the patients relapsed whereas in the non-transplanted group 60% of the patients relapsed (p Conclusions: Although patients who achieve a CR upon anti-PD1 therapy may experience prolonged remissions, most R/R HL patients treated with anti-PD1 antibody eventually progress or relapse. Our study demonstrates unprecedented disease-free survival in patients undergoing consolidation with alloHSCT after anti-PD1 therapy. Interestingly, alloHSCT post anti-PD1 can convert incomplete responses into CR in most cases. Despite expected toxicities, alloHSCT after anti-PD1 therapy appears manageable and safe in most patients. Our results suggest that consolidation with alloHSCT may represent a good option in patients treated with anti-PD1, notably in patients who are unable to achieve a CR. Disclosures Herbaux: Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Stamatoullas:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd, Cambridge, MA, USA: Consultancy. Brice:bristol myers squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Houot:bristol myers squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria.

To the editor: Anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (anti-PD-1) antibodies demonstrated remarkable efficacy in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). In the 2 largest prospective studies that evaluated the anti-PD-1 antibodies nivolumab (CHECKMATE-205)[1][1] and

International audience; The paradigm of response in Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) was developed in cytotoxic chemotherapies and its use as a reference model for immune-modulatory regimens, which restores the immune system's anti-tumor capacity, is questioned.

Initial clinical trials demonstrated that lenalidomide monotherapy has a significant activity against some subtypes of lymphoma, but in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) its activity is limited. The combination of lenalidomide with rituximab may be a promising therapeutic strategy. We retrospectively analyzed clinical outcomes in 17 patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) DLBCL treated with lenalidomide, 25 mg/day for 21/28 days and rituximab, 375 mg/m(2) on day 7 of every lenalidomide cycle, for a maximum of 12 months. The overall response rate (ORR) was 41.2% with 35.3% complete response (CR), while median response duration was 26.5 months at a median follow-up of 24.9 months. Two patients with CR relapsed after 4 and 27 months of CR, and another four are actually in CR at + 13, + 23, + 24 and + 29 months. The estimated 24-month overall survival (OS) was 45% and progression-free survival (PFS) was 38%. Adverse events were manageable and mostly included thrombocytopenia and neutropenia. Lenalidomide-rituximab is active in R/R DLBCL with an important percentage of continuous CR.

Introduction Patients with relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma (R/R HL) experience high response rates upon anti-PD1 therapy. In these patients, the optimal duration of treatment and the risk of relapse after anti-PD1 discontinuation are unknown. Furthermore, the efficacy of anti-PD1 re-treatment in patients who relapse after anti-PD1 discontinuation remains to be determined. Here, we investigated the risk of relapse in patients who responded to anti-PD1 therapy and discontinued the treatment, as well as the efficacy of anti-PD1 re-treatment in patients who relapsed after anti-PD1 discontinuation. Methods We retrospectively analyzed patients with R/R HL who responded to anti-PD1 monotherapy (concomitant radiotherapy was permitted) and discontinued the treatment either because of unacceptable toxicity or prolonged remission (based on the clinician's decision). Patients who discontinued because of relapse/progression or underwent consolidation with allogenic stem cell transplantation [alloSCT] were not included. A random forest machine-learning algorithm was trained to predict relapse using 14 candidate biomarkers. Finally, we analyzed the outcome of patients who relapsed after anti-PD1 discontinuation and their response to anti-PD1 re-treatment. Results We included 32 patients from 13 Centers in France, Portugal and Belgium. Patients' characteristics are summarized in Table 1. At the time of anti-PD1 discontinuation, patients had received either nivolumab (N=27, 84.4%) or pembrolizumab (N=5, 12.5%) for a median duration of 14.6 (range, 0-33.5) months. Patients discontinued anti-PD1 treatment either because of prolonged remission (N=23, 71.9%) or unacceptable toxicity (N=9, 28.1%). Most patients were in CR (N=29, 90.1%) at the time of anti-PD1 discontinuation. After a median follow-up of 20.8 months (range, 0.7-47.6) from anti-PD1 discontinuation, 21 (65.6%) patients had not relapsed/progressed. All 3 patients who were in PR at the time of anti-PD1 discontinuation had relapsed. Among the 29 patients who were in CR at the time of anti-PD1 discontinuation, the estimated disease-free survival was 64.3% (CI 95, 46.6-88.7%) at 24 months (Figure 1). Three patients died: two from disease progression and one from severe GVHD while in CR. Interestingly, 4 patients remain in CR more than 3 years after anti-PD1 discontinuation although these patients had received only short courses of anti-PD1 ( Among the 11 patients who relapsed, 7 were re-treated with (the same) anti-PD1 (Figure 2). Five achieved a CR, 1 achieved a PR and one patient has not been evaluated yet (but is in clinical response). Conclusion A significant proportion of patients experience prolonged remissions after anti-PD1 discontinuation and thus might be cured. Using a machine-learning algorithm, we identified biomarkers capable of predicting the risk of relapse after anti-PD1 discontinuation. These biomarkers are currently being validated in an independent set of patients. Finally, among patients who relapse after anti-PD1 discontinuation, re-treatment with anti-PD1 appears to be efficient. Disclosures Manson: Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Brice:Takeda France: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria. Herbaux:Janssen: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria. Silva:Abbvie Inc: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen Cilag: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Stamatoulas Bastard:Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy. Houot:Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Merck Sharp Dohme: Honoraria.

Introduction: Anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are highly active in relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL), but most patients (pts) will still relapse. Given this, allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) remains an important option for pts after PD-1 blockade, as it offers the possibility of cure. Prior reports have suggested that alloHSCT after PD-1 mAbs may be associated with severe immune-related complications including acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), veno-occlusive disease (VOD) and cytokine release/febrile non-infectious syndrome (CRS). Prior studies of alloHSCT after PD-1 blockade in cHL have been limited by the small number of pts and short follow-up, preventing an accurate assessment of long-term outcomes and complications, risk factors for early toxicity, and the impact of transplant strategies such as choice of GVHD prophylaxis. We therefore assembled a large retrospective international cohort of cHL pts who underwent alloHSCT after PD-(L)1 blockade to better answer these questions, including an assessment of the impact of post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) on efficacy and toxicity. Methods: Medical records and databases were reviewed at 26 European and United States transplant centers to identify pts with cHL who underwent an alloHSCT any time after receiving a PD-1 or PD-L1 mAb. Response assessment was performed by local investigators according to Lugano 2014 criteria. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), cumulative incidence (CumInc) of relapse (CIR), non-relapse mortality (NRM), acute (a) and chronic (c) GVHD were estimated, as was the association between baseline variables and these outcomes. Results: Between 2014 and 2019, 150 pts were identified who underwent alloHSCT after a median of 10 (range, 1-74) doses of nivolumab (n=118), pembrolizumab (n=31), or avelumab (n=1). The median age was 31 (range 17-68) and pts had received a median of 4 (range, 2-11) lines of therapy prior to PD-(L)1 blockade. 138 pts (92%) had failed BV and 111 (74%) autologous HSCT. The best overall response to PD-(L)1 mAbs was CR for 62 pts (41%), PR for 55 (37%), SD for 17 (11%), PD for 15 (10%) and unknown for 1 (1%). Median time from last dose of PD-(L)1 mAb to alloHSCT was 80 days (range, 17-756) with 70 pts (47%) receiving intervening systemic therapy. At alloHSCT, 90 pts were in CR (60%), 45 in PR (30%), 5 in SD (3%), and 10 in PD (7%). Donors were haploidentical (n=71, 47%), matched sibling (n=29, 19%), matched unrelated (n=39, 26%), mismatched unrelated (n=7, 5%), cord blood (n=2, 1%), or unknown (n=2, 1%). Stem cell source was bone marrow (n=38, 25%), peripheral blood (n=110, 73%), or cord blood (n=2, 1%). GVHD prophylaxis included PTCy in 88 pts (59%) (69/71 (97%) with haploidentical donors; 19/79 (24%) with other donors). With a median post-alloHSCT follow-up for survivors of 23.8 months (range, 1-67), the 2y OS and PFS were 79% (95CI 71-86%) and 65% (95CI 55-73%), respectively, while the 2y CumIncs of relapse and NRM were 21% (95CI 13-29%) and 14%, (95CI, 8-22%), respectively (Fig. 1A-B). 27 pts have died, 3 due to disease and 24 to NRM, including aGVHD (n=7) and VOD (n=2). Veno-occlusive disease (VOD) occurred in 5 pts (day 100 CumInc 4%) and 29 pts (19%) developed CRS (grade 1 n=16; grade 2 n=7; grade 3 n=4; grade 4 n=2). The 6-month CumIncs of grade 2-4, grade 3-4 and grade 4 aGVHD were 39%, 16% and 8%, respectively. Hyperacute GVHD (onset ≤ 14 days after alloHSCT) occurred in 4% of pts and was fatal in 2 pts. The 2y CumInc of cGVHD was 45%. Neither receipt of > 10 doses (median) of anti-PD-(L)1 mAb nor undergoing alloHSCT ≤80 days (median) after last dose of PD-(L)1 mAb were associated with PFS or OS. However, pts with a shorter time to transplant (≤80 days) appeared to have a higher risk of severe (grade 3-4) aGVHD (6m CumInc 24% vs 9%, p=0.006). Recipients of PTCy in this cohort had lower 2y CumIncs of cGVHD (34% vs 58%, p=0.01) and relapse (12% vs 31%, p=0.02), superior 2y PFS (76% vs 54%, p=0.015), and similar rates of severe aGVHD (15% vs 18%, p=0.5), 2y NRM (12% vs 16%, p=0.5), and 2y OS (82% vs 78%, p=0.6). Conclusions: With extended follow-up of a large international cohort, our results argue that alloSCT performed after PD-(L)1 mAbs is a feasible strategy associated with an excellent PFS and a very low CIR for this disease. The use of PT-Cy appears to be associated with improved outcomes and may at present represent the optimal transplant strategy in this pt population. Figure Disclosures Corradini: kite: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; KiowaKirin: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Ho:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Omeros Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jaglowski:Kite: Consultancy, Other: advisory board, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: advisory board, Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy, Other: advisory board; Unum Therapeutics Inc.: Research Funding. Herrera:Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding. Blaise:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Pierre Fabre medicaments: Honoraria; Molmed: Consultancy, Honoraria. Hamadani:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Sanofi Genzyme: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Research Funding; Otsuka: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Medimmune: Consultancy, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Ansell:LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Affimed: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Regeneron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding. Nieto:Astra-Zeneca: Research Funding; Affimed: Consultancy; Affimed: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Feldman:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Portola Pharma: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Research Funding; Eisai: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Research Funding; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Corvus: Research Funding; Viracta: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. McGuirk:ArticulateScience LLC: Other: Assistance with manuscript preparation; Bellicum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gamida Cell: Research Funding; Pluristem Ltd: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Fresenius Biotech: Research Funding. Mohty:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding. Stamatoulas Bastard:Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy. Houot:Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Merck Sharp Dohme: Honoraria. Manson:Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Orvain:Incyte: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Other: Travel & accommodations; Pfizer: Other: Travel & accommodations. Bouabdallah:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Frigault:Novartis: Consultancy; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria; Nkarta: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Juno/Celgene: Consultancy; Foundation Medicine: Consultancy; Xenetic: Consultancy. Chen:Takeda: Consultancy; Kiadis: Consultancy; Magenta: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy. Lynch:T.G. Therapeutics: Research Funding; Rhizen Pharmaceuticals S.A: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Johnson Graffe Keay Moniz & Wick LLP: Consultancy. Smith:AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta Pharma BV: Research Funding; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb (spouse): Research Funding; Denovo Biopharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Ignyta (spouse): Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Ayala (spouse): Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Byrne:Karyopharm: Research Funding. Cohen:Hutchison: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb Company: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc.: Research Funding; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; UNUM: Research Funding; ASH: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Lymphoma Research Foundation: Research Funding. Svoboda:AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kyowa: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Santoro:Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Speakers Bureau; Arqule: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Speakers Bureau; Abb-Vie: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy; Lilly: Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Speakers Bureau; Eisai: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Armand:Sigma Tau: Research Funding; Otsuka: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Tensha: Research Funding; Affimed: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Adaptive: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Infinity: Consultancy; Genentech: Research Funding. Zinzani:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Portola: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Immune Design: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy; Eusapharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Kyowa Kirin: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Carlo-Stella:Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations; Genenta Science srl: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: Travel, accommodations, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Rhizen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Janssen Oncology: Honoraria; MSD: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Other: Travel, accommodations; Takeda: Other: Travel, accommodations.

Introduction: allogeneic transplantation (allo-HSCT) is a curative treatment for patients with advanced lymphoma. Haploidentical (haplo-SCT) transplantation extended the accessibility to allo-HSCT, overcoming the issue of donor availability. However, alternative donor allo-HSCT is still considered at higher risk of non-relapse mortality due to the HLA disparity and thus an anticipated higher incidence of GVHD. In this context, the use of a non myeloablative conditioning (NMAC) regimen combined with post transplantation cyclophosphamide (PT-Cy) based GVHD prophylaxis may reduce procedure related toxicity. The aim was to evaluate the toxicity and efficacy of haplo-SCT using NMAC with PT-Cy in advanced lymphoma patients. Methods: We here report the retrospective experience of a bicentric transplantation program. We analyzed a cohort of lymphoma patients undergoing Haplo-SCT and homogeneously receiving NMAC and PT-Cy. Inclusion criteria were: 1) first allo-HSCT for advanced lymphoma between 2009 and 2018; 2) haploidentical donor; 3) NMAC (fludarabine cyclophosphamide and 2 gray TBI GVHD prophylaxis consisted of PT-Cy day+3 and +4 , cyclosporine A and MMF starting from day +5. Multivariate analyses included age, disease type (NHL vs HL), HCT-CI (< vs ≥ 3), graft source (PBSC vs BM), disease status at haplo-SCT (CR vs other). Results: One hundred forty seven patients (73 NHL; 74 HL) with a median age of 46 years (range: 19-71) were included. PBSC (peripheral blood stem cell) was used as graft source in 96 patients (65%). Patients received a median number of 3 conventional chemotherapy lines before haplo-SCT (1-8). Sixty-five (44%) had relapse after Auto-HCT. At the time of haplo-SCT, 96 patients (66%) were in complete remission. The cumulative incidences of day+100 grade 2-4 and 3-4 acute GVHD were 30% and 3%, respectively. The cumulative incidences of 2-year chronic and moderate or severe chronic GVHD were 13% and 8%, respectively. With a median follow up of 39 months (6-114), 2-year NRM was 14%, with a trend for higher risk in patients with HCT-CI ≥ 3 (HR 0.39, 95CI [0.15-1.04] p = 0.061) while age was not associated with an increased risk of NRM (HR 1.01, 95CI [0.98-1.05], p = 0.450). Two-year cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) was 21% and 18% in HL and NHL patients, respectively. Disease status at the time of haplo-SCT was strongly associated with relapse (HR 2.99, 95CI [1.41-6.35], p = 0.004) In HL patients, 2-year PFS, OS and GRFS were 65%, 77% and 57%, respectively, while corresponding values in NHL patients were 65%, 69% and 55%, respectively. Two-year PFS and GRFS were significantly higher in patients who underwent haplo-SCT in CR (PFS: CR vs. no CR: 72% vs. 55%, p=0.045; GRFS: CR vs. no CR: 63% vs. 42%, p=0.010). There was a trend for better 2-year OS in CR (OS: CR vs. no CR: 78% vs. 63%, p=0.063. Conclusion: We confirm the feasibility of haplo-SCT using NMAC and PT-Cy with low incidence of GVHD (notably severe forms) and NRM. In addition, we observed a relatively low incidence of relapse (19%) in this cohort of heavily pretreated patients, underlining a potent graft-versus-lymphoma effect after haplo-SCT, leading to promising survivals, including high rate of GRFS (>50%), suggesting a preserved long term quality of life in survivors. We conclude that NMAC haplo-SCT with PT-Cy should be considered as a valuable curative option for advanced lymphoma patients, with a favorable toxicity profile and promising long term survival. Figure Disclosures Stoppa: celgene: Other: travel fees, lecture fees; takeda: Other: travel fees. Carlo-Stella:MSD: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Other: Travel, accommodations; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; Genenta Science sr: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: Travel, accommodations, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, Research Funding; Rhizen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Other: Travel, accommodations; Janssen Oncology: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria. Chabannon:EBMT: Other: Working Party Chair, Board member; Fresenius Kabi: Other: research support; Miltenyi Biotech: Other: research support; Terumo BCT: Other: speaker's fees; Celgene: Other: speaker's fees; Novartis: Other: speaker's fees; Gilead: Other: speaker's fees, hospitalities; Sanofi SA: Other: research support, speaker's fees, hospitalities. Santoro:Takeda: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Speakers Bureau; Abb-Vie: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Arqule: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Lilly: Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Speakers Bureau; Eisai: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy. Blaise:Sanofi: Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Molmed: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pierre Fabre medicaments: Honoraria.

A 66-year-old woman presented in 2012 with an unintentional 10 kg weight loss, intermittent fevers, skin rash, generalized lymphadenopathy and hyper. Evaluation revealed histologically proven perip...

The aim of our study was to assess whether large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) in adolescents and young adults (AYA) should be considered as a clinocopathological entity, and to evaluate the prognostic value of age. Fifty-five patients aged > 15–30 years were fully matched to 365 adult patients aged 31–65 years. We found a high incidence of primary mediastinal thymic LBCL subtype (33% vs. 5%), while histological transformation was rare (2% vs. 14%). LBCL in AYA presented with a bulky mediastinal mass (51% vs. 21%), and the lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) value was significantly higher (73% vs. 54%). The complete response rate to chemotherapy was similar in the two groups. Five-year overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) of AYA were 73% and 68%, respectively. The matched-control analysis showed no difference for either OS or EFS. LBCL in AYA presents with some critical features which differ from those of older adults. However, the outcome is equivalent to that observed in older patients.

Conditioning regimen including fludarabine, intravenous busulfan (Bx), and 5 mg/kg total dose of rabbit antithymocyte globulin (r-ATG) (FBx-ATG) results in low incidence of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and non-relapse mortality (NRM) after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (Allo-HSCT) from HLA-matched related or unrelated donors (MUD). However, whether this platform produces similar results in the setting of one mismatch unrelated donor (MMUD) Allo-HSCT is not known. We retrospectively analyzed patients aged less than 65 years who were diagnosed with hematological malignancies and received FBx-ATG regimen prior to Allo-HSCT from MUD (N = 74) or MMUD (N = 40). We compared outcome of MUD versus MMUD patients. There was no difference in the cumulative incidence of grades II–IV acute GVHD (MUD: 34% vs. MMUD: 35%, P = 0.918), but MMUD patients developed more grade III–IV acute GVHD (MUD: 5% vs. MMUD: 15%, P = 0.016). The cumulative incidences of overall chronic GVHD (MUD: 33% vs. MMUD: 22%, P = 0.088) and extensive chronic GVHD (MUD: 20% vs. MMUD: 19%, P = 0.594) were comparable. One-year NRM was similar in both groups (MUD: 16% vs. MMUD: 14%, P = 0.292); similarly, progression-free survival (MUD: 59% vs. MMUD: 55%, P = 0.476) and overall survival (MUD: 63% vs. MMUD: 61%, P = 0.762) were not different between both groups. With a median follow up of 24 months, 35 of 74 MUD patients (47%) and 19 of 40 MMUD patients (48%) were free of both disease progression and immunosuppressive treatment. We conclude that the FBx-ATG regimen results in low incidences of NRM and GVHD in both MUD and the MMUD recipients. Am. J. Hematol. 89:83–87, 2014. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.