Search

Background Primary bone diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is a variant of extranodal non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) that is relatively rare, accounting for 3-15% of extranodal NHL and less than 1% of all NHL. Patients often present with pain and swelling or pathologic fracture of the affected area of the skeleton, and B symptoms are often less prevalent. Many cases are limited stage at presentation. Patients are usually treated with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) or similar induction therapy. Based on older studies showing improved outcomes associated with the addition of radiation (many completed prior to the rituximab era), patients often still receive combined-modality therapy today. However, it remains unknown whether consolidative radiation therapy (RT) confers additional benefit following rituximab-based chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) induction. We sought to address this question in a multicenter retrospective study. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of outcomes in a modern cohort of patients who underwent treatment for primary bone DLBCL using chemotherapy regimens in the rituximab era either with or without consolidative RT. Data was collected from 13 academic medical centers in the U.S., with patients treated between 2005 and 2019. Patients were identified using each institution's hematologic malignancy registries. Analysis was limited to patients with primary bone DLBCL, with stage I-II disease (primary site +/- locoregional lymph nodes) that could be encompassed in a radiation field. Patients who received CIT alone or CIT followed by RT were included. Treatment selection was at the treating physician's discretion. Electronic medical records were reviewed for: demographics, chemotherapy regimens, radiation treatments, and PET scan data. Local IRB approval was obtained at sites. All data was distributed in a de-identified fashion. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS), and relapse-free survival (RFS). Secondary outcomes included: response after induction CIT induction and the need for additional therapies. Chi-square test analysis was used to compare categorical variables and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used for continuous and ordinal measures. Survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between groups via the log-rank test. Multi-variable analysis (MVA) for OS and RFS was performed using RT vs no RT, PET status post CIT (negative vs positive) and rituximab in induction (Y/N) as variables. Results A total of 127 patients were included: 91 who received CIT and radiation (RT group), and 36 who received CIT alone (no RT group). The median age of patients at diagnosis in the RT group and no RT group was 58.5 and 57.0, respectively. For CIT, the majority of patients received R-CHOP (84%). Despite focusing on 2005-2019, a small percentage of patients (5 - 14%) in each group (RT and no RT) did not receive rituximab with their induction therapy. The OS at 10 years was 74.5% in the RT group and 86.5% in the no RT group (p = 0.29). The RFS at 10 years was 70.9% in the RT group and 78.2% in the no RT group (p = 0.85). Among the 91 patients who received RT, 67 (77.0%) received a dose of 36 Gy or higher. There was no difference in OS (p = 0.63) or RFS (p = 0.90) in patients who received > 36 Gy vs < 36 Gy of radiation. On MVA for OS, RT was not associated with improved OS, although rituximab as part of induction was (p = 0.048). On MVA for RFS, neither RT nor rituximab were associated with improved RFS. For rituximab the trend was in the direction of rituximab benefit (p = 0.11). Conclusion Our results demonstrate that, in the rituximab era, patients with limited stage primary bone DLBCL have excellent outcomes overall. In this study, neither RFS or OS appeared to be improved with the addition of consolidative RT. Rituximab, however, was associated with improved OS on MVA. Outcomes do not appear to differ based on the dose of RT (> 36 Gy vs < 36 Gy). Our data suggests that RT may have less benefit for primary bone DLBCL in the rituximab era, although it is possible that a subset of patients may benefit from consolidative radiation therapy. A larger data set would likely be needed to evaluate this. We plan to present data regarding PET responses at the meeting. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Lunning: Acrotech: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Myeloid Therapeutics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy; Celgene, a Bristol Myers Squibb Co.: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Legend: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. Cashen: Secura Bio, ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy. Bartlett: Autolus: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: 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; Seagen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Caimi: XaTek: Patents & Royalties: Royalties from patents (wife); Amgen Therapeutics.: Consultancy; ADC Theraputics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Rodgers: MJH Lifesciences: Consultancy. Barr: Morphosys: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Abbvie/Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Epperla: Verastem: Speakers Bureau; Beigene: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Other: Ad Board; Genzyme: Honoraria. Hill: AstraZenica: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene (BMS): Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel Support, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gentenech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte/Morphysis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Karmali: BMS/Celgene/Juno: Consultancy, Research Funding; Epizyme: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Janssen/Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; EUSA: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Portell: Acerta/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Aptitude Health: Honoraria; Morphosys: Honoraria; Targeted Oncology: Honoraria; SeaGen: Research Funding; BeiGene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Kite: Honoraria, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; VelosBio: Research Funding. Fenske: Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Servier Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; KaryoPharm: Consultancy; CSL Therapeutics: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Biogen: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Kite (Gilead): Speakers Bureau; Beigene: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy.

Background: Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL) is an aggressive form of Non Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL) and typically presents in patients over the age of 60 years. Bendamustine and rituximab (BR) combination is one of the standard treatments for MCL and is given to patients for whom high dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell rescue is planned in the first remission. Progression free survival (PFS) with BR is approximately 36 months (Rummel M Lancet 2013; Flinn IW Blood 2014) and the regimen is overall well tolerated. Venetoclax (VEN) is an orally available inhibitor of BCL2, an anti-apoptotic protein highly expressed in several NHL. Single agent activity has mostly been studied in a Phase I study (in various NHL histologies) where 28 MCL patients were enrolled. Overall response rate was 75% (21 of 28) but complete response (CR) rate was only 21% (6 of 28). Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) has been associated with VEN and initial dosing requires a ramp up period (Davids MS JCO 2018). VEN has also been combined with other agents in MCL with promising activity (Tam CS NEJM 2018) VEN has been studied as a chemotherapy sensitizer and has shown pre-clinical synergy with chemotherapy. In Follicular lymphoma, BR+VEN was studied at 800mg PO continuous daily dosing and showed an excessive Grade 3-4 adverse event (AE) rate of 78% compared to historical studies of 46% (Zinzani ASH 2016). We hypothesize that, in MCL, VEN can be safely combined with BR at a lower dose and intermittent dosing with improvements to the response rate based on historical controls and maintain a better safety profile. Study Design: This Phase II single arm, multicenter study evaluates VEN at a max dose of 400mg with BR (Bendamustine 90mg/m2 IV day 1 and 2; rituximab 375mg/m2 IV or SQ equivalent day 1) for six 28-day cycles in untreated patients with MCL over the age of 60 years (NCT03834688). Cycle 1 will include a VEN dose titration over the 4 week course (20mg D1-7, 50mg D8-14, 100mg D15-21, and 200mg D22-28). For Cycles 2-6, VEN will be given at 400mg daily x 10 days starting with day 1. Participants are followed for 6 cycles, though will be followed for progression and survival afterward. Participants may receive maintenance rituximab at investigator's discretion. Eligible participants, age 60 years or older, must have biopsy proven untreated MCL with t(11;14) or cyclin D1 expression, though a short course of steroids is allowed for symptomatic MCL. They must have adequate organ function and not require any prohibited concomitant medications. Primary outcome is CR rate as assessed by the Lugano criteria. We estimate a historical CR rate of BR after induction of about 70%. A 15% increase in this rate, to 85% CR, is considered promising for the combination. To achieve this goal, the study will enroll 56 participants (53 eligible) to achieve a 90% power to detect the difference with a 10% Type I error rate. We will also evaluate PFS and overall survival. TLS is an AE of interest and will be evaluated after 19 participants have been enrolled and treated during cycle 1. Minimal residual disease (MRD) will be assessed throughout the study. MRD from peripheral blood will be compared to bone marrow aspirates in all participants undergoing bone marrow aspirate at the end of treatment. Tumor samples at screening and progression will be collected for future study. This study is conducted through PrECOG and is funded by Genentech, a member of the Roche Group. Venetoclax is co-developed by Genentech and AbbVie. The study is slated to open in Fall of 2019 at 10 US sites. Figure Disclosures Portell: AbbVie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding. Bennani:Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board. Naik:Celgene: Other: Advisory board. Parsons:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau. Kahl:BeiGene: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: Venetoclax is not approved for use in MCL.

Background: Prolymphocytic leukemia (PLL) is a rare cancer with incidence of 0.48/1,000,000. It is comprised of 2 subtypes, T or B cell. It generally is associated with a poor median OS of 1-3 years. However, some patients have an initial smoldering course not requiring treatment. Limited population data exists describing the outcomes of PLL. We studied PLL patients who met a definition of smoldering, not requiring treatment within 180 days of diagnosis, using the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB). Methods: Patient level data were obtained from the NCDB Participant User File. The NCDB collects hospital cancer registry data representing 70% of newly diagnosed cancer cases in the US population. We identified PLL patients (ICD-O: 9832 PLL, NOS, ICD-O: 9833 B-PLL, and ICD-O: 9834 T-PLL) diagnosed in 2004-2015 for demographics, disease and treatment characteristics. We included patients diagnosed from 2004-2013 in the overall survival (OS) analyses. Patients who received no treatment as part of their first course of treatment and who did not have a subsequent treatment within 180 days were considered smoldering PLL. Results: From 2004-2015, 1606 patients were diagnosed with PLL and 451(28%) were smoldering PLL. Of the 1606 patients, T-PLL represented 781(49%), B-PLL 480(30%), and PLL, NOS 345(21%). Of the 451 smoldering PLL patients observed as T-PLL represented 48%(215), B-PLL 29%(133), and PLL, NOS 23%(103). The median age at diagnosis was 69 [59 - 78] years. There was a male predominance with 60 % males. The median OS for the entire cohort was 20.6 months. The % 5yr overall survival (OS) for smoldering PLL was 40% vs 29%(for non-smoldering). Within the PLL subtypes PLL, NOS and B-PLL were associated with better 5yr OS 38.56% and 35.53%, compared to T-PLL 12.89%. Only 65(4%) patients underwent an early stem cell transplant(SCT). Conclusions: We identified a population of patients not needing treatment within 180 days of diagnosis representing smoldering PLL with a significantly improved OS. Additionally, PLL, NOS and B-PLL were associated with an improved OS. The use of early SCT is low in PLL. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Background: Intravascular large B cell lymphoma (IVLBCL) is a rare and aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma lacking any prior US based population studies. We aimed to conduct a population based study of IVLBCL in the US and compare characteristics and survival to diffuse large B cell lymphoma, not otherwise specified (DLBCL, NOS). Methods: We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries from 2000 to 2013 to calculate incidence rates (case/1,000,000) and age-adjusted to the US 2000 standard population. We collected patient level data from the NCDB Participant User Files using ICD-O-3 histology code 9680 with ICD-O-3 primary site modifier C499 and analyzed for demographic and clinical characteristics as well as overall survival (2004-2013). Chi-Square test was used to compare the characteristics of patients with IVLBCL to that of DLBCL, NOS. Overall survival analysis was performed using Kaplan- Meier method and compared by log rank. Overall survival (OS) of IVLBCL was compared to propensity-matched cohort of DLBCL, NOS. Multivariate analysis was conducted using weighted Cox Proportional Hazard regression model. Results: In the years 2000-2013, the overall crude incidence rate of IVLBCL was 0.093 (case/1,000,000) and age-adjusted incidence rate of IVLBCL was 0.095 (case/1,000,000). A total of 388 IVLBCL patients were identified in NCDB database. Patients with IVLBCL (n=388), compared to DLBCL, NOS (n=155,436), were more likely to be of age ≥ 65 (64.2% vs 56.9%, p=0.0039), female (51.8% vs 46.5, p=0.036), diagnosed at advanced stage (stage IV, 51.5% vs 33.4%, p Conclusions: This is the largest series of IVLBCL reported to date. Our study provides characteristics and OS of a large cohort of this rare entity, which can be used for patient education and may provide background information for future research. In the Rituximab era, the OS of patients with IVLBCL is comparable to DLBCL, NOS. In addition, our study also reports predictors of OS in patients with IVLBCL. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Background: The myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) includes a diverse group of clonal hematopoietic stem cell malignancies primarily affecting older individuals. It is characterized by bone marrow failure, peripheral blood cytopenias, and reduced survival. Treatment is based on prognostic scoring system and the pathology. Higher-risk disease carries a significant risk of progression to Acute Myelogenous Leukemia (AML). In these patients, treatment includes either an allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT) or a hypo-methylatingagent. Elderly patients with MDS usually are not a suitable candidate for allogeneic stem cell transplant given their age and other associated comorbidities. In this subset of patients, hypomethylatingagents, namely azacitidineor decitabineare the preferred treatment options. The effect of the introduction of therapeutic advances has not been well understood at the population level.We conducted this study to compare relative survival rates of elderly patients (≥65 years) with MDS in pre- and post- hypomethylatingagent era. Methodology: We utilized the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER-18) database to identify patients diagnosed with MDS. MDS subtype, namely Refractory anemia with excess blasts [Code: 9983/3] and Refractory anemia with excess blasts in transformation [Code: 9984/3] have the highest risk rate of transformation to AML. We opted to focus on these high risk MDS subtype. We limited our analysis to patients who are ≥ 65 years of age. On May 19, 2004, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approvedazacitidinefor MDS. We defined our timeframes as follows: pre-hypomethylatingera (from 1994 to 2003) and post-hypomethylatingera (from 2005 to 2011). We analyzed one- and two-year relative survival rates (RS) of MDS patients. Several cohorts categorized by race (Caucasians and African Americans), gender and age (65-80, ≥ 80) were compared to assess the survival differences across our two defined eras. Z-test was used to compare the survival rates. Results: The database comprised of 2,665 patients (691 in pre and 1,974 in post). Overall there was an improved survival in post-hypomethylatingera (1-year: 43.8±2.0% vs. 50.2±1.2, Z-score= 2.993, p-value=0.0028; 2-year: 22.3±1.7 vs. 26.9±1.1, Z score= 3.202, p value=0.0014). There was a significant improvement in 1-year RS for males and 2-year RS for females. Elderly Caucasians also had survival benefit in post-hypomethylatingera. There was no survival benefit observed for African Americans however this did not reach statistical significance. A survival benefit was observed for elderly (65-79 years) and very elderly (≥ 80 years, only 2-year RS) population. Conclusion: The survival of myelodysplastic syndrome has improved significantly in post-hypomethylatingera. Improvements in supportive care, utilization of allogeneic stem cell transplant, andhypomethylatingagetnsmay all have contributed to this observation. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Background: Erythropoiesis Stimulating Agents (ESAs) are FDA approved for chemotherapy induced anemia and anemia of chronic kidney disease. These indications are more frequent in patients with multiple myeloma. Use of ESAs has been associated with an increased risk of heart attack, stroke, venous thromboembolism (VTE), and all-cause mortality. In patients with cancer, ESA's have been associated with worse progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) Previous research regarding ESA use in patients with multiple myeloma has been limited and conflicting. In this study, we evaluate the effects of ESA use in patients with multiple myeloma. Additionally, we examined the frequency of ESA usage after the 2007 FDA safety update revising product labeling for ESAs. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients diagnosed with active multiple myeloma between January 1st, 2000 and December 31st, 2015 at Gundersen Health System in La Crosse Wisconsin. Collected data include patient demographics, medications, lab tests, comorbidities, and the dates of any VTE, stroke, or myocardial infarction. Both a logistic regression and a matched case-control analysis were used to compare rates of complications in patients using ESAs to those that did not. ESA effect on median survival time was also calculated for each International Staging System (ISS) stage of disease. Results:There were 278 patients included for demographic analysis (Table 1), of which 268 were included in the logistic regression analysis and 124 (62 pairs) in the matched case-control analysis. A logistic regression model constructed via stepwise selection found that bone lesions at diagnosis (Odds Ratio (OR): 2.5 [1.2-5.1]), antiplatelet drug use (OR: 3.7 [1.2-11.3]) and ESA use (OR: 4.7 [2.2-9.9]) were associated with increased risk of VTE in our patient population. Use of an Angiotensin Converting Enzyme (ACE) inhibitor (OR: 0.4 [0.2-0.9]) was associated with a decreased risk of VTE. Increased odds of VTE with ESA usage (OR: 5.9 [1.9 - 18.8]) were also noted in the matched case-control analysis. There was no association found between rate of stroke and ESA usage in either logistic or matched case-control analysis. No significant association between ESA use and overall survival was noted in either logistic or matched case-control analysis. When comparing outcomes based upon pre and post FDA revised product labeling, we found a 50% reduction in ESA usage within our institution. In this same time period, the percentage of patients with multiple myeloma developing VTEs has been significantly reduced (18.6% vs 12.8% [p Conclusions: In our population, the use of ESAs in multiple myeloma patients was associated with increased risk of VTE. No significant association between ESA use and overall survival was noted. The observed decrease in both ESA use and rate of VTE in patients with myeloma after the 2007 revised safety labelling by the FDA may reflect practice changes in response to this revision at our institution. Further study in a prospective large multicenter dataset with further control of confounding variables is warranted. Table 1 Table 1. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Introduction Retrievable inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are frequently used to prevent pulmonary embolus (PE). Indwelling filters can be associated with complications; timely removal is recommended. In our institution, activated trauma (AT) patients are enrolled in a prospective protocol and tracked by the trauma team, who refer for retrieval as soon as feasible. Interventional radiology maintains a database for traumatic injury (TI) and medical (M) patients and calls them for retrieval at 90 days. To this end, the primary goal of this study was to assess different retrieval patterns between Level 1 and 2 trauma patients, traumatic injury patients not triggering trauma response, and those with medical indications for IVC filters. An additional analysis to examine rates of recurrent thrombosis stratified for filter retention and anticoagulation status was performed. Methods A retrospective chart review was performed for all patients who had an IVC filter placed between January 2005 and March 2015 at Gundersen Medical Center in La Crosse, WI. Data were collected regarding patients' demographics, risk factors for thrombosis, indications for and details of filter type and placement, post-placement anticoagulation, filter retrieval, and complications arising from filter placement, retention, and retrieval. Patients were divided into AT, TI, and M groups. AT consisted of Level 1 or 2 traumas triggering management by trauma service, TI patients had lesser trauma not triggering trauma team referral, and M patients had filters for medical indications. Those who were lost to follow up or died within 30 days were excluded from all analysis except demographics. Those with permanent filters were omitted from retrieval analysis. Results Of the 633 charts reviewed, 4 were excluded for lack of data, 41 were lost to follow-up and 68 died within 30 days. Table 1 summarizes patient category characteristics. Activated trauma patients were younger and had their filter retrieved more often (p Discussion Higher rates of DVT in patients with a filter in place are in line with current research associating IVC filters with DVT formation. We observed that patients on lifelong anticoagulation had a higher rate of recurrent thrombosis but increased risk factors for thrombosis, thus identifying a higher risk group for thrombotic events. AT patients in a protocol setting had higher IVC filter retrieval rates compared to the M and IT patients with routine efforts at retrieval. The large gap between M/TI and AT filter retrieval is associated with but not fully explained by the increased risk factors and age of the M and IT groups. Protocolized retrieval of IVC filters increases retrieval rates. Further research is warranted in assessing the impact of protocolized retrieval in the medical and traumatic injury populations. Table 1. Patient Category Characteristics Patient Category N (%) Age (median, range) Retrieval Rate (%) Activated trauma (AT) 195 (31%) 41 (15-92) 78% Traumatic injury (TI) 74 (11.8%) 44 (16-93) 43% Medical (M) 360 (57.2%) 68 (17-101) 38% Disclosures Parsons: Celgene: Speakers Bureau.