Search

The use of novel small molecule inhibitors alone or in combination with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) has raised a number of questions on efficacy, tolerability, long-term treatment adherence in patients with heterogeneous clinical features. To fill this gap, we designed a study focusing on treatment sequencing in patients with CLL in order to (i) compare the outcome of patients treated with chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) combinations in first-line versus those receiving Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi); (ii) characterize the efficacy and tolerability of venetoclax-based regimens; (ii) understand the impact of treatment sequencing when it comes to chemo-free options including venetoclax after BTKi and vice versa. Data from consecutive sets of patients diagnosed with CLL between 2000-2020 attended at 77 institutions affiliated with ERIC were collected and analyzed. Collected variables included: demographics, clinical stage at diagnosis, IGHV gene somatic hypermutation status; cytogenetic status for chromosomes 11q, 13q 17p and 12 determined by fluorescence in situ hybridization; TP53 gene mutation status; treatment; treatment response; discontinuation; reason for discontinuation; death. We included 9173 patients with a diagnosis of CLL who received at least one line of treatment. The median age at diagnosis was 67 years with a male:female ratio of 1.9. The median follow-up was 78 months (IQR, 48-120 months). Regarding novel targeted agents, 1860/9173 (20.2%) patients had received at least one line of treatment with BTKi (ibrutinib, n=1788; acalabrutinib, n=72) over the disease course; 631/9173 (6.9%) with venetoclax; and, 447/9173 (4.9%) with the PI3K inhibitor idelalisib. Seventy-nine patients were treated with both BTKi and venetoclax (59 BTKi followed by BCL2i, 20 vice versa). At last follow-up, 5870/9173 patients (64.0%) were alive, 3229/9173 (35.2%) died and 74/9173 (0.8%) were lost to follow-up. Patients treated with BTKi in first-line were enriched for TP53 aberrations [del(17p) 27.6%, TP53 mutation 26.3%] and unmutated IGHV genes (69%) and obtained an ORR of 87.7%. Of these, 136 (26.3%) discontinued treatment after a median of 1.2 years (0.07-5.98); main reasons of discontinuation were toxicity (40.5%) and failure (26.2%). Among 631 patients treated with venetoclax at any line, 100 (15.8%) received BCL2 +/- anti-CD20 as first-line; 170 (26.9%) as second line (125 previously treated with CIT, 27 with BTKi); and, 361 as third or subsequent line. ORR ranged between 71.5% (≥3 lines) with 30.5% CR/CRi to 90.3% (first-line) with 68.1% CR/CRi. Treatment discontinuation was due to toxicity in 28.6% of patients treated in the first-line, and 17.6% and 21.8% of patients treated in second and third-or-higher-line, respectively. Disease progression led to treatment discontinuation in 14.3%, 20.6% and 33.6% in first, second and third-or-higher line, respectively. CIT was used as front-line treatment in 5465 patients (59.6%). Of these, 2070 (37.9%) and 1018 (18.6%) patients received a second and third line of treatment, respectively. The great majority (865/1086 cases, 79.7%) of patients who received a second line before 2014 were retreated with CIT, most commonly Bendamustine-Rituximab (284/1086, 26.1%) and Fludarabine-Cyclophosphamide-Rituximab (252/1086, 23.2%); alemtuzumab monotherapy was used in 55/1086 (5%) of patients. After 2014, 415/984 patients (42.1%) were retreated with BTKi; 93 (9.5%) with venetoclax; 70 (7.2%) with idelalisib; 50 (5%) with Alemtuzumab monotherapy, and 315 (32%) with CIT. Similarly, in the third-or-higher line of treatment, most patients (86.3%) were retreated with CIT before 2014, while BTKi, BCL2i, and PI3Ki were mainly used after 2014 (in 43.1%, 15.7% and 14.7% of cases, respectively). Finally, our cohort included 1075 patients with TP53 aberrations. The ORR of patients receiving BTKis (n=171) as first-line of treatment was 86.5% (22.2 CR+64.3 PR), while the ORR with venetoclax +/- anti-CD20 (n=15) was 91% (45.5% CR+45.5 PR). Patients treated with CIT (n=694) had an ORR of 68.7% (28.3% CR+40.4% PR). In conclusion, in a large international study we provide real world data regarding the selection and sequencing of treatment in CLL, charting a major shift in treatment patterns before and after the introduction of novel trargeted agents and confirming their efficacy even in high-risk CLL. Disclosures Scarfo: Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel grants; Astra Zeneca: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria. Iacoboni: BMS/Celgene, Gilead, Novartis, Janssen, Roche: Honoraria. Collado: Abbvie,: Other: pharmaceutical Company, Research Funding; Janssen: Other: Pharmaceutical Company, Research Funding. Galimberti: AbbVie, Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel grants; Incyte: Speakers Bureau. García-Serra: AbbVie: Other: Educational grands; Janssen: Other: Educational grants; Novartis: Other: Educational grants. Gozzetti: Janssen: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria. Hatzimichael: Amgen, Roche, Genesis, Novartis, Bristol Mayer Squibb, Celgene, Pfizer: Consultancy; Abbvie, Amgen, Bristol Mayer Squibb, MSD, Gilead, Janssen Cilag, Genesis Pharma, Roche, Takeda: Honoraria. Herishanu: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Medison: Honoraria. Jaksic: Roche, Oktal-Pharma/Celtrion, Sandoz: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kater: Janssen, AstraZeneca: Other: Ad Board, steering committee, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Other: Ad Board, Research Funding; BMS, Roche/Genentech: Other: Ad Board, , Research Funding; Genmab, LAVA: Other: Ad Board, Steering Committee. Kotsianidis: Astellas: Other: NONE, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genesis: Consultancy, Other: NONE; Janssen Hellas: Consultancy, Other: NONE, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Hellas: Consultancy, Other: NONE, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis Hellas: Consultancy, Other: NONE, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Other: NONE, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Kreitman: NIH: Patents & Royalties: Moxetumomab Pasudotox; Genentech: Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding; AstraZeneca/MedImmune: Research Funding; Innate: Research Funding; GSK/Novartis: Research Funding; Array BioPharma/Pfizer: Research Funding. Laribi: BeiGene: Other: Personal Fees; Jansen: Research Funding; Novartis: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding; Astellas Phama, Inc.: Other: Personal Fees; AstraZeneca: Other: Personal Fees; Le Mans Hospital: Research Funding; Takeda: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding; IQONE: Other: Personal Fees. Lopez-Garcia: Roche: Other: Speaker Honoraria, Travel and accommodation grants; Novonordisk: Other: Speaker Honoraria; Fresenius: Other: Speaker Honoraria; Celgene: Other: Speaker Honoraria; Abbvie: Other: Speaker Honoraria, Advisor, Travel and accommodation grants; Janssen: Other: Speaker Honoraria, Advisor, Travel and accommodation grants, Research Funding. Milosevic: Roche: Honoraria; Abbvie,: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Sandoz: Honoraria. Reda: Beigene: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Ruchlemer: AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Šimkovič: Janssen, Gilead, Roche, AstraZeneca, and AbbVie: Other: consultancy fees, advisory board participation fees, travel grants, and honoraria; University Hospital Hradec Kralove: Current Employment; AbbVie: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Merck: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Eli Lilly: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; J&J: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Gilead: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses. Špaček: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Gilead, Janssen, and Roche: Honoraria. Tadmor: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Visentin: Italfarmaco and Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Vassilakopoulos: AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Dr. Reddy's: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Other: Travel; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Integris: Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel; Genesis Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Vitale: Janssen: Honoraria. Yáñez: Gilead-Kite, Janssen, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Beigene, Roche, Pfizer, Jazz, BMS, and Merck: Other: Advisory board participation fees ; Janssen, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Gilead-Kite, Roche, Pfizer, and Merck: Speakers Bureau. Antic: AbbVie, Janssen, and Roche: Honoraria. Coscia: Janssen: Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other. Cuneo: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Gaidano: Beigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Astrazeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Guièze: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astrazeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria. Laurenti: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; BeiGene: Honoraria. Murru: Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel and accommodation; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Sportoletti: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Tam: Beigene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Loxo: Honoraria; Beigene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria. Trněný: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Celgene: Consultancy; 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, General Hospital in Prague: Current Employment; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Portola: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses. Bosch Albareda: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Lilly: Honoraria. Doubek: Janssen-Cilag, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Gilead, Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Chatzidimitriou: Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Ghia: AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Acerta/AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; ArQule/MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria; BeiGene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene/Juno/BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sunesis: Research Funding. Stamatopoulos: AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic required reevaluation of the therapeutic approach and added emotional stress for patients with hematological malignancies at high risk of contracting the virus. We aimed to evaluate how it affected such patients during the second lockdown in Israel.Methods: This national survey included Hebrew-speaking patients with hematological malignancy. This included three tools with 28 items of socio-demographic and medical baseline characteristics, management of hematological disease, and evaluation of emotional coping during COVID-19 pandemic; the Hebrew version of the Patient Health Questionnaire 9; and 3 qualitative open-ended questions. Data was analyzed by mixed methods which combined both quantitative and qualitative thematic analyses.Results: 408 patients responded to the survey. The management of their hematological disease included a decrease in the number of visits to the hematology clinic (37.0%), delay of some treatment schedules (9.1%), and prescription of replacement therapies permitting less visits to the clinic (2.2%). The frequency and intensity of “feeling afraid” regarding COVID-19 infection was increased (mean±SD: 4±1 to 5±2 in a 1-7 Likert scale), and a high rate of depression was recorded, which appeared to be more evident in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) (pConclusion: The management of hematological malignancies during pandemics should always take into consideration patients' fears, as well as the development of depression related to isolation and loneliness, in addition to the high risk of severe disease. Patients with CML had a high rate of depression which obviously needs to be managed very carefully during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Standard treatment options in classic HCL (cHCL) result in high response rates and near normal life expectancy. However, the disease itself and the recommended standard treatment are associated with profound and prolonged immunosuppression, increasing susceptibility to infections and the risk for a severe course of COVID-19. The Hairy Cell Leukemia Foundation (HCLF) has recently convened experts and discussed different clinical strategies for the management of these patients. The new recommendations adapt the 2017 consensus for the diagnosis and management with cHCL to the current COVID-19 pandemic. They underline the option of active surveillance in patients with low but stable blood counts, consider the use of targeted and non-immunosuppressive agents as first-line treatment for cHCL, and give recommendations on preventive measures against COVID-19.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a neoplastic plasma-cell disorder characterized by clonal proliferation of malignant plasma cells. Despite extensive research, disease heterogeneity within and between treatment-resistant patients is poorly characterized. In the present study, we conduct a prospective, multicenter, single-arm clinical trial (NCT04065789), combined with longitudinal single-cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) to study the molecular dynamics of MM resistance mechanisms. Newly diagnosed MM patients (41), who either failed to respond or experienced early relapse after a bortezomib-containing induction regimen, were enrolled to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a daratumumab, carfilzomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone combination. The primary clinical endpoint was safety and tolerability. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival. Treatment was safe and well tolerated; deep and durable responses were achieved. In prespecified exploratory analyses, comparison of 41 primary refractory and early relapsed patients, with 11 healthy subjects and 15 newly diagnosed MM patients, revealed new MM molecular pathways of resistance, including hypoxia tolerance, protein folding and mitochondria respiration, which generalized to larger clinical cohorts (CoMMpass). We found peptidylprolyl isomerase A (PPIA), a central enzyme in the protein-folding response pathway, as a potential new target for resistant MM. CRISPR–Cas9 deletion of PPIA or inhibition of PPIA with a small molecule inhibitor (ciclosporin) significantly sensitizes MM tumor cells to proteasome inhibitors. Together, our study defines a roadmap for integrating scRNA-seq in clinical trials, identifies a signature of highly resistant MM patients and discovers PPIA as a potent therapeutic target for these tumors. Integration of longitudinal single-cell analysis of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma patients in a prospective clinical trial uncovers new pathways of drug resistance and identifies potential actionable targets.

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

Background: For fit CLL patients (pts), continuous BTK inhibitor treatment is replacing CIT as standard of care in frontline setting, particularly in pts with unfavorable prognostic factors. The time limited combinations venetoclax plus obinutuzumab (GVe) and venetoclax plus rituximab (RVe) have produced high rates of undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD), which strongly associates with long progression-free survival (PFS) both in frontline and relapsed setting. For frontline therapy GVe is approved in this setting based on data from the CLL14 trial in an unfit population. However, data from a fit cohort are not yet available. The GAIA (CLL13) trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of three Ven+CD20 antibody-based regimens in comparison to CIT as a frontline treatment for fit pts with CLL and without TP53 mutation/deletion. Methods: Treatment-naïve fit (CIRS ≤6, normal creatinine clearance with ≥ 70ml/min) CLL pts requiring therapy were eligible. Based on known poor response to CIT, pts with TP53 aberrations were excluded. Pts were randomized in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive six courses of CIT (FCR for pt ≤65 years: fludarabine 25 mg/m² d1-3, cyclophosphamide 250 mg/m² d1-3, rituximab 375 mg/m² d1 cycle 1 and 500 mg/m² d1 cycle 2-6; BR for pt >65 years: bendamustine 90mg/m² d1-2, rituximab) or one of three venetoclax (V) combinations (standard ramp-up from cycle 1 d22, 400 mg/d cycle 2-12): V and rituximab (375/500mg/m² d1 cycle 1-6) [RVe], V and obinutuzumab (1000 mg d1, 8, 15 cycle 1 and d1 cycle 2-6) [GVe], or V, obinutuzumab and ibrutinib (420 mg/d cycle 1-12, if MRD-detectable continued until cycle 36) [GIVe] . Pts were stratified according to country, Binet stage and age (≤ 65/> 65 years). The co-primary endpoints of the trial are (1) the rate of uMRD ( Trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02950051). Results: A total of 926 pts (CIT: 229 (150 FCR, 79 BR), RVe: 237, GVe: 229, GIVe: 231) with a median age of 61 years (range 27-84) were accrued between 12/2016 and 09/2019. The majority of pts were in advanced Binet stage (B: 37.8%, C: 35.6%) and unmutated IGHV status was present in 56%. Fourteen pts did not receive study treatment (13 FCR, 1 GVe) and were not included in the safety population. The data cut for the first co-primary endpoint analysis was February 28, 2021. The median observation time was 27.9 months. The co-primary endpoint uMRD in PB at MO15 was met as the rate of uMRD in ITT population was significantly higher in GVe compared to CIT: 86.5% (97.5% CI 80.6-91.1) vs 52.0% (CI 44.4-59.5; p The most common grade 3-5 treatment-emergent AE were neutropenia (50.5% of all pts), thrombocytopenia (12.2%), tumor lysis syndrome (7.5%), infusion-related reaction (7.2%), febrile neutropenia (6.5%) and pneumonia (5.3%)). Atrial fibrillation and bleeding events occurred more frequently in GIVe while infusion-related reactions were most common in the GVe arm (Table 1). The absolute numbers of second malignancies were 33, 19, 22 and 21 for CIT, RVe, GVe and GIVe. Fatal AEs occurred in 5, 7, 6 and 9 of the patients. Conclusions: The time-limited therapies of GVe and GIVe provided superior uMRD rates in PB at MO 15 compared to CIT. In addition, uMRD rates in BM and CRR were higher in GVe and GIVe in particular than in CIT. All arms showed a good safety profile in this fit pt population. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Eichhorst: AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Speakers Bureau; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Speakers Bureau; Hexal: Speakers Bureau; ArQule: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oxford Biomedica (UK): Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Consultant Department I for Internal Medicine: Consultancy; University Hospital of Cologne: Current Employment. Kater: Genmab, LAVA: Other: Ad Board, Steering Committee; Janssen, AstraZeneca: Other: Ad Board, steering committee, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Other: Ad Board, Research Funding; BMS, Roche/Genentech: Other: Ad Board, , Research Funding. Von Tresckow: Celgene: Other: travel grant; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Other; Roche: Honoraria, Other: Reasearch support, travel grant; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Reasearch support, travel grant; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: advisory board, travel grant. Staber: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Tadmor: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Poulsen: Janssen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy. Janssens: Sanofi: Consultancy; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Beigene, AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Trael Grant, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie, Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Noesslinger: Roche: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie,: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Jaeger: Norvartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS/Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Frederiksen: Abbvie: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Alexion: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Hebart: Roche: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Simon: Gilead: Other: Travel support. Fink: AbbVie: Other: travel grant; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Fischer: Abbvie: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Other: Travel Grants. Kreuzer: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Ritgen: Abbvie: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Chugai: Consultancy; MSD: Consultancy, Other: Travel support; Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Celgene: Other: Travel support. Brüggemann: Amgen: Other: Advisory Board, Travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Other: Advisory Board; Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Levin: Roche, Janssen, Abbvie: Other: Travel Expenses, Ad-Board. Stilgenbauer: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Sunesis: Other: Research Support; AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Sunesis: Consultancy; AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Sunesis: Honoraria; AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Sunesis: Research Funding. Hallek: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. OffLabel Disclosure: Ibrutinib in combaintion with Venetoclax + Obinutuzumab is not approved.

Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) have an impaired antibody response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. Here, we evaluated the antibody response to a third BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in patients with CLL/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) who failed to achieve a humoral response after standard 2-dose vaccination regimen. Anti–severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies were measured 3 weeks after administration of the third dose. In 172 patients with CLL, the antibody response rate was 23.8%. Response rate among actively treated patients (12.0%; n = 12/100) was lower compared with treatment-naïve patients (40.0%; n = 16/40; OR = 4.9, 95% CI 1.9-12.9; P < .001) and patients off-therapy (40.6%; n = 13/32; OR = 5.0, 95% CI 1.8-14.1; P < .001), (P < .001). In patients actively treated with Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitors or venetoclax ± anti-CD20 antibody, response rates were extremely low (15.3%, n = 9/59, and 7.7%, n = 3/39, respectively). Only 1 of the 28 patients (3.6%) treated with anti-CD20 antibodies

This national Israeli multicenter retrospective study aimed to characterize the clinical course of COVID-19 infection among patients with hematological malignancies, with special emphasis on treatment efficacy and outcome. Clinical and laboratory data from haemato-oncological patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from 16 medical centers were centrally reported. Multivariate regression analyses were used to determine variables associated with severe disease, hospitalization, and mortality. In total, 313 patients were included: 103 (35.7%) developed severe/critical respiratory infection, 178 (61.4%) were hospitalized, and 60 (20.0%) died. Age > 70 years was associated with severe/critical disease (p = 0.036) and mortality (p = 0.023), hypertension with severe/critical disease (p = 0.046) and hospitalization (p = 0.001), active haemato-oncological treatment with hospitalization (p = 0.009), and remdesivir treatment was associated with decreased mortality (p = 0.021). Convalescent plasma, enoxaparin, and corticosteroids resulted in no clinical benefit. In conclusion, COVID-19 infection seems particularly severe in patients with hematological malignancies, and of all examined therapies, remdesivir appears to be the most effective.

Background Major advances in the treatment of patients with hairy cell leukemia (HCL) have been made following the introduction of purine analogues. The major significant short-term toxicity of cladribine therapy are neutropenia and neutropenic fever (NF) which may be life-threatening. Aim In this retrospective study, we compared the incidence and duration of neutropenia and hospitalization in patients with HCL treated with cladribine followed by peg-filgrastim as primary prophylaxis versus daily filgrastim given “on demand” according to absolute neutrophil count (ANC). Methods Medical records of patients with HCL diagnosed and followed in 12 medical centers in Israel during 1985–2015 were examined for details of disease at diagnosis. The efficacy of peg-filgrastim and filgrastim was assessed by evaluating the incidence of neutropenia (ANC 9 ]/L), number and length of hospitalizations, and number of days from the last day of therapy to recovery of ANC to >1.0 × 10 [ 9 ]/L. Results The study population included 202 patients with HCL, 159 of whom (80.7%) were treated with cladribine; 78 patients (49%) required hospitalization for the administration of broad-spectrum antibiotics due to NF. Twenty-eight (19%) patients were treated with peg-filgrastim as primary prophylaxis, while 74 (64%) received filgrastim “on demand” due to neutropenia. Median length of hospitalization, and nadir duration were 8 and 18 days respectively (p = 0.71, p = 0.44). Conclusions Infectious complications post-cladribine treatment remain high. No difference was found in terms of incidence of NF, number of febrile days, and nadir duration in patients receiving primary peg-filgrastim prophylaxis compared to filgrastim given on demand. Both approaches are justifiable, and the choice remains at the physician’s discretion.

The efficacy of polatuzumab vedotin in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma outside clinical study are undetermined. This retrospective study examined the efficacy and safety of polatuzumab vedotin administered in real life settings. Forty-seven patients, 31 with

Background Lenalidomide and ixazomib maintenance improve long-term outcomes in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. However, there is less evidence to support bortezomib (BTZ) maintenance therapy, and real-life data on maintenance are scarce. We investigated the efficacy and safety of BTZ maintenance therapy in NDMM. Patients and Methods A retrospective multisite study was performed in 6 medical centers in Israel. All consecutive patients with NDMM diagnosed between January 1, 2010, and July 3, 2019, who received a BTZ-based induction, with or without an autologous transplantation, followed by BTZ maintenance therapy, were identified. Maintenance therapy was defined as BTZ (1.3 mg/m2) once every 2 weeks, administered subcutaneously alone or with dexamethasone, or weekly BTZ monotherapy. Results A total of 105 patients were identified, 58 of whom had received a transplant (transplant eligible) and 47 who had not (not transplant eligible). During BTZ maintenance therapy, 96% had one or more adverse event, 11.5% had grade 3 or higher adverse events, and 11.5% discontinued treatment due to toxicity. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 45 and 91.5 months, respectively; 4-year survival was 88%. Adverse cytogenetics was associated with worse PFS (24 vs. 46 months, P = .001). In subgroup analysis, adverse cytogenetics were associated with worse PFS (P Conclusion Analysis of multisite real-life data showed that BTZ maintenance therapy is safe, well tolerated, and effective. Median PFS was similar to that reported with alternative maintenance strategies. Our findings further support its use among patients with adverse cytogenetics, it may also be relevant for patients with lenalidomide-intolerant disease.

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

OBJECTIVE To evaluate disease characteristics and long-term outcomes in patients requiring second-line treatment following fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR), for relapsed/refractory disease (R/R), or following discontinuation due to toxicities. METHOD A retrospective analysis of 126 chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients treated with frontline FCR: 63 received second-line treatment (41 relapsed, nine refractory [SD/PD], 13 prior toxicity). Time to next treatment (TTNT) was calculated from beginning FCR to initiation of second-line therapy. Overall and event-free survival was calculated from initiation of salvage treatment (OS2/EFS2). RESULTS Median follow-up for the entire cohort was 67 and 37 months from second-line therapy. TTNT

Background/aim In chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) the absolute neutrophil count (ANC) has generally been reported to be within normal limits and leukocytosis is due to absolute lymphocytosis. However, other cell types such as neutrophils and monocytes may also exceed the normal range in this disorder. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the frequency and prognostic value of neutrophilia defined as an ANC>7×109/l and monocytosis- an absolute monocyte count (AMC)>1×109/l in 113 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Materials and methods We analyzed clinical and laboratory data from the records of patients with CLL followed in the Hematology unit of a tertiary hospital in Israel. Patients were categorized according to their ANC and AMC before treatment and their data compared. Results In 24 (21%) patients, neutrophilia was present at diagnosis while 40 (35%) had monocytosis. We identified that 9% of cases had neutrophilia with normal AMC. This subgroup of patients had a better prognosis with lower mortality rate, longer time-to-treatment interval and a higher rate of complete or partial response to treatment compared to patients without neutrophilia or monocytosis. Conclusion The presence of neutrophilia without monocytosis before treatment appears to be associated with a more favorable prognosis in CLL. These observations still need to be confirmed and validated in a larger cohort of patients.

Background: Overexpression of the nuclear export protein exportin 1 (XPO1) mediates the functional inactivation of tumor suppressor proteins (TSPs), facilitates the export of oncogene mRNA thus facilitating oncoprotein expression, is associated with poor prognosis in multiple myeloma (MM), and contributes to immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) resistance. Selinexor is an oral, first-in-class, selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE) compound that by blocking XPO1 forces the nuclear retention and activation of TSPs and nuclear retention and inactivation of oncoproteins. 1 Selinexor is approved with low-dose dexamethasone ± bortezomib for patients with previously treated MM. Pomalidomide plus dexamethasone (Pd) has an overall response rate (ORR) of ~30% and median PFS (mPFS) of ~4 months in patients with MM refractory to bortezomib and lenalidomide. We hypothesized that selinexor could be safely combined with Pd (XPd) and would improve the combination's efficacy. Methods: In the XPd arm of the multi-arm Phase 1b/2 STOMP study, selinexor was evaluated at 60, 80, or 100 mg in combination with Pd. Study objectives were to determine the maximum tolerated dose and recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) and to assess the safety and activity of the XPd regimen. The dose of selinexor 60 mg once weekly (QW), pomalidomide 4 mg once daily (days 1-21), dexamethasone 40 mg QW (XPd-60) was the lowest evaluated dose of selinexor in combination with the approved dose of Pd, and in light of the marked efficacy of that dose (ORR 65%), Phase 2 cohorts at a lower (40 mg weekly) dose of selinexor (XPd-40), were evaluated. Of the 19 patients enrolled at XPd-40 and evaluable for efficacy, 12 patients were enrolled into STOMP and 7 patients were enrolled at the same dose level and similar inclusion criteria into a parallel study XPORT-MM-028. Results: As of 14 July 2021, 39 patients were enrolled into the 60 (N=20) and 40 (N=19) mg selinexor dose levels in combination with Pd: 19 males, median age 66.0 years (range 37-85 years), median number of prior lines of therapy 2 (range 1-9). 85% of patients had MM refractory to a proteasome inhibitor (PI; bortezomib or carfilzomib or ixazomib), 79% to an IMiD (thalidomide or lenalidomide or pomalidomide), 33% to an anti-CD38 mAb (daratumumab or isatuximab); 26% had triple class refractory disease. Common hematologic, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) consisted of (all grades, grade ≥3) neutropenia (72%, 59%; and two cases of grade 3 [G3] febrile neutropenia one in each of the dose levels), and anemia (51%, 15% all G3). Non-hematologic TEAEs were reversible and included fatigue (56%, 10% all G3) and nausea (49%, 0%). On XPd-60, the RP2D (N=20), ORR was 65% (1 stringent complete response [sCR], 5 very good partial responses [VGPR], 7 PR); mPFS was 8.9 months (95% CI, 7.6 - NE, median follow-up 8.3 months). In patients treated at XPd-40 (N=19), ORR was 42% (3 VGPR, 5 PR); mPFS was not reached (95% CI, 5.7 - NE, median follow-up 2.8 months). Among patients who had received anti-CD38 mAb, the ORR was 64% overall and 100% at the RP2D (1 sCR, 2 VGPR, 3 PR). All patients who had MM refractory to pomalidomide (N=3; all at the 60 mg dose level) responded with 1 VGPR and 2 PR. For the 21 responders across both dose levels, median time to response was 1.0 months (95% CI 1.0 - 2.0) and median duration of response was not reached (95% CI: 8.0, NE). Conclusions: Selinexor, once weekly, can be safely combined with Pd in patients with relapsed MM. The all-oral combination of XPd is highly active with an ORR of 65% at XPd-60, the RP2D, and an ORR of 42% at XPd-40 dose level (compared to expected ORR ~30% for Pd). The high ORR that was achieved at the RP2D, including in patients previously treated with anti-CD38 mAb, supports XPd-60 as a promising therapy with no significant cross-resistance to anti-CD38, PIs or lenalidomide. No new safety signals were identified. The most common TEAE, neutropenia, is a common AE of Pd and was managed effectively with standard G-CSF. The regimen leverages the concept of mechanism switching from an anti-CD38 mAb-based regimen to a selinexor-based regimen. These data support the new Phase 3 study (XPORT-MM-031) with an all-oral combination of XPd vs elotuzumab-Pd in patients who have been previously treated with lenalidomide, a PI, and an anti-CD38 mAb. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures White: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Antengene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Forus: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria. Chen: Astrazeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Beigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy. Baljevic: BMS/Celgene: Consultancy; Exelixis: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Other: Advisory Board; BMS/Celgene: Other: Advisory Board; Amgen: Research Funding; Janssen Research: Other: Advisory Board; Oncopeptides: Other: Advisory Board. Tuchman: Caelum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi / Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Shattuck Labs: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy. Bahlis: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria. Schiller: Eli Lilly: Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ambit: Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding; Cyclacel: Research Funding; Geron: Research Funding; Genentech-Roche: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Trovagene: Research Funding; Gamida Cell Ltd.: Research Funding; Bio: Research Funding; Pfizer: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; Deciphera: Research Funding; Regimmune: Research Funding; Delta-Fly: Research Funding; FujiFilm: Research Funding; Tolero: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Kaiser Permanente: Consultancy; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Arog: Research Funding; Actuate: Research Funding; Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Elevate: Research Funding; Samus: Research Funding; PrECOG: Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ono-UK: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sangamo: Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Mateon: Research Funding; Pharma: Consultancy; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Johnson & Johnson: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Biomed Valley Discoveries: Research Funding; ASH foundation: Other: Chair-unpaid; Sellas: Research Funding; Ono: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Ariad: Research Funding; Leukemia & Lymphoma Society: Research Funding; Bluebird Bio: Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingleheim: Research Funding; Cellerant: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Research Funding; National Marrow Donor Program: Research Funding; NIH: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Pharmamar: Research Funding; UC Davis: Research Funding; UCSD: Research Funding; Evidera: Consultancy; NCI: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Lipe: Seagen Inc.: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; sanofi: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; amgen: Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Harpoon: Research Funding. Kotb: Akcea: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company; Amgen: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria. Sutherland: Celgene: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy. Bensinger: Amgen, BMS, Janssen, Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; BMS, Janssen, Poseida, Regeneron, Trillium: Research Funding. Madan: Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau. Sebag: Janssen: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Venner: GSK: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Leblanc: BMS/Celgene Canada: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Canada: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen Canada: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi Canada: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda Canada: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene/BMS: Research Funding. Monge: Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Tadmor: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. DeCastro: Karyopharm: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Van Domelen: Karyopharm: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Zhang: Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Mishal: Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Bentur: Karyopharm Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Shah: Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Shacham: Karyopharm: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Patents & Royalties: (8999996, 9079865, 9714226, PCT/US12/048319, and I574957) on hydrazide containing nuclear transport modulators and uses, and pending patents PCT/US12/048319, 499/2012, PI20102724, and 2012000928) . Kauffman: Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Gasparetto: Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy; Oncopeptite: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Connect Registry: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Introduction: In previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), treatment with ibrutinib plus rituximab improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to the standard fludarabine, cyclophosphamide and rituximab (FCR) chemoimmunotherapeutic regimen, based on the results of the phase III ECOG-E1912 trial. The improvement in PFS with ibrutinib plus rituximab was observed in patients with unmutated immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region gene (IGHV) but not in those with an IGHV mutated profile. However, the efficacy of ibrutinib compared to FCR has not yet been investigated in the real-world setting. Methods: A multi-center retrospective "real-world" study to compare the efficacy of front-line ibrutinib monotherapy versus standard FCR in patients with CLL. Demographic and clinical data of the FCR cohort were retrieved from the Israeli CLL Study Group database and of the ibrutinib from the Italian multicenter "Campus CLL" network and the CLL database of the department of hematology at the Sourasky Medical Center. Patients with a documented del(17p) or those who are participating in clinical trials were excluded. In order to fit both treatment samples, the maximum follow-up was censored at 48 months. IBM SPSS Statistics was used to analyze PFS and OS by Kaplan Meier Estimator, Log-Rank test and Cox Regression. In order to control for differences in patients' characteristics, the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method with stabilized weights and truncation of 5% extreme score was applied by R. Results: A total of 235 patients who had been front-line treated with either FCR (n=136, 57.9%) or ibrutinib (n=99, 42.1%) were included (Table 1). Most patients were males (n=160, 68.1%), had an unmutated IGHV status (n=115, 70.6%) and were Binet stage B/C (n=191, 83.8%). By FISH, the most frequent abnormality was del(11q) (n=45, 23.1%) followed by trisomy12 (n=34, 17.4%) and del(13q) (n=43, 22.1%). Median time to first treatment was 29.4 months (IQR, 11.9-56.2), and it was not significantly different between ibrutinib (median=24.9 months, IQR 10.3-46.6) and FCR (median=34.0 months, IQR 13.8-60.1; p=0.101). Patients treated with FCR were younger than those treated with ibrutinib (median=58.4 years vs. 71.9 years; p65 years (n=100, 3-year PFS 89.4% vs. 53.1%; HR=3.9, 95% CI [1.6-9.9], p=0.002), Binet stage B/C (3-year PFS: 90.5% vs. 67.8%; HR=3.5, 95% CI [1.7-7.5], p Conclusions: In a real-world setting, front-line treatment with ibrutinib improves PFS and OS in patients with CLL. Similar to the results of the phase III ECOG-E1912 trial, the improvement in PFS was preferentially observed in patients with unmutated IGHV. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Herishanu: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Medison: Honoraria. Goldschmidt: AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Fineman: AbbVie: Research Funding. Mauro: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Tskeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Reda: Abbvie: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Ruchlemer: AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Sportoletti: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Laurenti: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; BeiGene: Honoraria. Shvidel: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Coscia: Janssen: Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other; AstraZeneca: Honoraria. Tadmor: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Varettoni: AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; beigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Aviv: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Murru: Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel and accommodation; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Rossi: Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Verastem: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Cellestia: Honoraria, Research Funding. Gaidano: Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Beigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astrazeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Cuneo: AbbVie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Gattei: abbVie: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Menarini: Research Funding.

Background: In early studies of venetoclax (ven) in CLL, severe tumor lysis syndromes (TLS) were observed leading to the implementation of multiple safety measures including a 5-week ramp up schedule. Since then, studies have consistently reported low rates of TLS in ven-treated patients (pts), most likely as a result of strict prophylactic and laboratory monitoring measures. Various lead-in regimens prior to the administration of ven were shown to be feasible and effective in reducing the risk of TLS in pts with CLL. However, no comparison of different pretreatment regimens has been performed so far in a prospective randomized trial. Using the set-up of the GAIA trial, we compared TLS incidence and formal TLS risk reduction between 3 different ven-based combinations. Methods: The phase 3 GAIA (CLL13) trial compared 3 different time-limited ven-based combinations against standard chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) in fit, treatment-naïve pts with CLL. Pts were randomized to receive CIT (FCR in pts ≤65 years; BR in pts >65 years), ven and rituximab (RVe), ven and obinutuzumab (GVe), or ven, obinutuzumab and ibrutinib (GIVe). In RVe, GVe and GIVe, ven was added at cycle 1 day 22 (ramp up day 1) after a 21-day pretreatment with rituximab (1 dose), obinutuzumab (3 doses) or obinutuzumab (3 doses) plus ibrutinib (continuous) (Figure 1A). The safety population (i.e. all pts who received study treatment) of the ven-containing arms was used for this analysis. TLS was reported according to Cairo-Bishop criteria (Cairo M, Bishop M. Br J Haematol. 2004). For TLS risk evaluation, the most recent available CT/MRI and absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) were used. TLS risk was evaluated at baseline and at ramp up day 1, before the first dose of ven. The patients were categorized retrospectively according to the following TLS risk categories: high (any lymph node [LN] with largest diameter ≥10 cm or any LN with largest diameter ≥5 cm and ALC ≥25 G/L), intermediate (any LN ≥5 cm to Results: The safety population of all ven-containing arms comprised of 696 pts (RVe: 237, GVe: 228, GIVe: 231). Baseline TLS risk was high in 22%, 23% and 19% of pts in the RVe, GVe and GIVe arm, intermediate in 62%, 65%, 67% and low in 10.5%, 14.7% and 12.4% of pts, respectively. After the first 21 days of treatment (i.e. at ramp up day 1), the fraction of pts with a reduction in TLS risk varied between the treatment arms with 31.7% (RVe), 71.4% (GVe) and 47.3% (GIVe) of pts decreasing by at least one TLS risk category (Figure 1B). With regard to TLS risk reduction, GVe was superior to RVe (p In total, 36, 30 and 19 cases of TLS occurred in 29 (12.2%), 26 (11.4%) and 19 (8.2%) pts in the RVe, GVe and GIVe arm. The majority of TLS cases were categorized as CTC grade 3 (28 [RVe], 19 [GVe], 12 [GIVe]), only few CTC grade 4 TLS were reported (1 [RVe], 2 [GVe], 3 [GIVe]). There were no cases of fatal TLS and no pts requiring dialysis due to TLS. In the obinutuzumab arms the majority of TLS cases occurred before ramp up day 1 (GVe: 76.7%, GIVe: 68.4%), i.e. before any venetoclax intake, in contrast 80.6% of TLS cases in the RVe arm were reported during ven ramp up (Figure 2). While there was no significant difference in the cumulative TLS incidence between the treatment arms (p=0.334), there was an increase in TLS occurring after ramp up day 1 in the RVe arm compared to GVe (p Conclusions: This analysis represents the first comparison of the formal TLS risk reduction and actual TLS incidence of different ven-based combinations in a randomized trial. GVe led to the highest TLS risk reduction, while the lowest number of TLS cases occurred in the GIVe arm. Most TLS cases in the GVe and GIVe arms occurred before the start of ven. RVe was least effective in reducing TLS risk and in contrast to the obinutuzumab-containing arms, the vast majority of TLS cases was reported during the ven ramp up. The relatively high incidence of TLS in comparison to other trials might partly be a consequence of using different reporting criteria (Cairo-Bishop vs Howard criteria). No fatal TLS occurred in any of the treatment arms. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Von Tresckow: AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: advisory board, travel grant; Celgene: Other: travel grant; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Other; Roche: Honoraria, Other: Reasearch support, travel grant; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Reasearch support, travel grant. Niemann: Novo Nordisk Foundation: Research Funding; CSL Behring, Genmab, Takeda, Octapharma: Consultancy; Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kater: Abbvie: Honoraria, Other: Ad Board, Research Funding; Janssen, AstraZeneca: Other: Ad Board, steering committee, Research Funding; Genmab, LAVA: Other: Ad Board, Steering Committee; BMS, Roche/Genentech: Other: Ad Board, , Research Funding. Staber: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Tadmor: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Levin: Roche, Janssen, Abbvie: Other: Travel Expenses, Ad-Board. Poulsen: Janssen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy. Janssens: Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Trael Grant, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy; Beigene, AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie, Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Noesslinger: AbbVie: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Jansen: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria. Simon: Gilead: Other: Travel support. Fink: AbbVie: Other: travel grant; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Fischer: Abbvie: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Other: Travel Grants. Wendtner: Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-LaRoche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support, Research Funding; Janssen Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support, Research Funding. Ritgen: MSD: Consultancy, Other: Travel support; Chugai: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Celgene: Other: Travel support. Brüggemann: Amgen: Other: Advisory Board, Travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Other: Advisory Board; Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Stilgenbauer: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Sunesis: Honoraria; AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Sunesis: Other: Research Support; AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Sunesis: Research Funding; AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Sunesis: Consultancy. Hallek: Roche: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Mundipharma: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Eichhorst: Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Speakers Bureau; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Speakers Bureau; Hexal: Speakers Bureau; ArQule: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oxford Biomedica (UK): Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, accomodation, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Consultant Department I for Internal Medicine: Consultancy; University Hospital of Cologne: Current Employment. OffLabel Disclosure: The combination of obinutuzumab, venetoclax and ibrutinib is not approved for the treatment of CLL

Background: The BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax in combination with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody (rituximab or obinutuzumab) has demonstrated superior outcomes and manageable safety as compared to chemo-immunotherapy in phase III clinical trials for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Moreover, venetoclax-based regimens induced high rates of undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD). Prospective data on the effectiveness of venetoclax-based regimens specifically with regard to achieving uMRD in a real-world setting are still lacking. Here we report the first interim analysis for efficacy and safety of an ongoing nationwide real-world study of venetoclax based therapy for CLL/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). Method: A prospective observational nationwide multicenter study. Treatment-naïve (TN) and relapsed/refractory (R/R) CLL/SLL patients were enrolled in 13 medical centers in Israel. The primary endpoint was clinical response, per physician assessment 12-months after the initiation of venetoclax treatment. Key secondary endpoints included progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and uMRD as assessed at a central laboratory by 8-color flow-cytometry. Results: Between February 10, 2019, and Jun 17, 2021 (data cut), 199 CLL/SLL patients were enrolled from 13 medical centers in Israel to receive venetoclax based therapy. The study included 83 TN and 116 R/R evaluable CLL/SLL patients with a median age of 69 years (range, 34-85) and 70.5 years (range, 25-91), respectively (Table 1). R/R patients had received a median of one prior therapy with a range up to 8, of these patients 60 (51.7%) were previously treated with a B-cell receptor inhibitor (BCRi) including ibrutinib in 52 (44.8%) and idelalisib in combination with rituximab in 6 (5.2%). TN patients had been treated with venetoclax in combination with obinutuzumab (92.8%) or rituximab (4.8%) and R/R patients received either venetoclax with rituximab (60.3%) or obinutuzumab (9.5%), venetoclax monotherapy (25.8%) or triple therapy with venetoclax, rituximab and ibrutinib in 5 (4.3%). Dose escalation of venetoclax to the recommended dose of 400 mg daily was achieved in 80.7% (n=67) of TN and 81% (n=94) of R/R patients. The median duration of ramp-up was 38 and 42 days in TN and R\R patients, respectively. Prior to therapy, tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) risk was considered high in 12% and 29.3% of TN and R/R patients, respectively (Table 1). Laboratory TLS occurred in one TN patient and 4 R/R patients, whereas 3 of the R/R patients experienced clinical TLS. Nineteen TN and 75 R/R patients had a follow-up of at least 12 months or discontinued study prematurely. The 12-month overall response rate (ORR) for TN and R/R patients was 89.5% [complete response (CR) 13 (68.4%), partial response (PR) 4 (21.1%)] and 73.3% [CR 37 (49.3%), PR 18 (24%)], respectively. In the R/R cohort, the 12-month ORR among assessed patients was 67.6% (25/37) in BCRi-exposed versus 85.7% (30/35) in BCRi-naïve patients. At 12 months, peripheral blood uMRD ( Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were reported in 34.9% of TN patients and 43.9% R/R patients. The most frequent grade ≥3 AEs documented were neutropenia (TN: 19.2% and R/R 17.2%), infections (TN: 4.8% and R/R: 21.5%) and febrile neutropenia (TN: 2.4% and in R/R: 2.6%). COVID-19 occurred in 7 patients including one death. At the time of data cut, 10 deaths occurred, one TN and 9 R/R patients. Causes for death included infections (5 patients), disease progression (2 patients), acute myeloid leukemia/ myelodysplastic syndrome (2 patients) and a soft-tissue sarcoma (1 patient). Conclusions: This first interim analysis of our ongoing prospective real-world study of venetoclax-based treatment for TN and R/R CLL/SLL, demonstrates high efficacy together with a high proportion of undetectable MRD levels and a favorable toxicity profile. These efficacy results are comparable to those reported in previous Phase III clinical trials for CLL, with no new safety signals. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Herishanu: AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria. Goldschmidt: AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Itchaki: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Levi: AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Aviv: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Fineman: AbbVie: Research Funding. Dally: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Tadmor: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Ruchlemer: AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Abadi: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Shvidel: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Braester: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Cohen: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Frankel: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ofek: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Berelovich: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Grunspan: AbbVie: Current Employment, Other: May hold equity. Benjamini: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Simple Summary Richter transformation is a significant and devastating complication of chronic lymphocytic leukemia. While its pathogenesis has been well-studied in terms of genetic and molecular changes and its diagnosis has been made easier by imaging and pathological techniques, its treatment is still an issue. Most patients are resistant to chemo-immunotherapy, and even novel agents do not seem to improve the prognosis in a significant way. Therefore, new combinations and novel drugs are currently being tested. In the current review, we summarize new data about the pathophysiology, biological, and clinical basis of Richter transformation, as well as the different treatments of this condition. Abstract Richter transformation (RT) is a poorly understood complication of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) with a dismal prognosis. It is associated with a switch in histopathology and biology, generally with a transformation of the original CLL clone to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) or less frequently to Hodgkin’s variant of Richter transformation (HVRT). It occurs in 2–10% of CLL patients, with an incidence rate of 0.5–1% per year, and may develop in treatment-naïve patients, although it is more common following therapy. In recent years, there has been a deeper understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of RT that involves the inactivation of the TP53 tumor suppressor gene in 50–60% of cases and the activation of aberrations of NOTCH1 and MYC pathways in about 30% of cases. Compared to the preceding CLL, 80% of cases with DLBCL-RT and 30% of HVRT harbor the same IGHV-D-J rearrangements, indicating a clonal evolution of the disease, while the remaining cases represent de novo lymphomas that are clonally unrelated. Despite advances in understanding the molecular variations and the pathogenesis of the disease, there is still no significant improvement in patient outcomes. However, if no clinical trials were designed for patients with RT in the past, now there many studies for these patients that incorporate new drugs and novel combinations that are being explored. In this review, we summarize the new information accumulated on RT with special emphasis on results involving the novel therapy tested for this entity, which represents an unmet clinical need.

Decreased absolute lymphocyte counts (ALCs) following frontline therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia may be associated with disease control, even in patients without evidence of minimal residual disease. We studied the prognostic significance of ALCs during the first year following treatment with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR). We evaluated 99 patients who achieved a partial response without lymphocytosis ( 1.8 vs not reached for ALC ≤ 0.7 at 9 months, P

In recent years, there have been major advances in the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) particularly since the development of novel therapeutic agents, mostly “biological drugs.” One of the obvious advantages of these agents is the decreased rate of infectious complications occurring during the course of therapy, compared to the use of standard immuno-chemotherapy regimens. Here, we describe 3 patients with CLL and 1 with mantle cell lymphoma who developed severe life-threatening pneumonias, during monotherapy with ibrutinib. The first case was a 70-year-old woman with relapsed CLL who developed bilateral pneumonia with hypoxia 1 week after starting ibrutinib. She did not respond to broad-spectrum antibiotics and was treated empirically with trimethoprim-sulphamethoxazole and improved. In the second case, we describe a 76-year-old woman with relapsed CLL who developed recurrent pneumonia after 3 years of treatment with ibrutinib. Presuming that ibrutinib was the cause of pneumonitis with secondary infection, it was stopped with subsequent improvement. The third patient a 67 year-old man died because of severe bilateral necrotizing pneumonia due to invasive aspergillosis and mucormycosis with pulmonary hemorrhage. The fourth patient with relapsed mantle cell lymphoma died because of severe bilateral pneumonia, caused by pseudomonas and candida, despite receiving appropriate antibiotics. From this experience, we hypothesize that the etiology of severe pneumonia associated with ibrutinib treatment is probably multifactorial, involving factors like preexisting immune-suppression, drug induced pneumonitis and infections. We suggest that patients with CLL or other lymphoproliferative disorders with suspected pneumonia during monotherapy with ibrutinib should be very carefully evaluated and need to undergo complete diagnostic workup to establish an exact diagnosis. Understanding which patients with CLL or lymphoma treated with kinase inhibitors are at a higher risk for developing pulmonary complications could be one of the important future challenges, when selecting the best available therapy for these patients.

Background: The outcome of elderly patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) is poor and treatment options in these high-risk groups are limited. Recently, venetoclax combinations with hypomethylating agents or low dose cytarabine were approved to treat patients with AML ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. However limited prospective data is available on the safety and efficacy of venetoclax treatment in routine clinical practice. Israel is among the first countries to have approved venetoclax-based combinations as first line therapy for AML and this treatment is fully reimbursed via the national health system. Here we present the initial results of a prospective, multicenter, nationwide trial that sought to assess the use of venetoclax-based therapy in a real-world setting. Methods: A prospective observational nationwide multicenter trial. Newly diagnosed patients with AML were enrolled at the time of venetoclax-based therapy initiation. Demographic, clinical and patient-related baseline characteristics were documented. Treatment patterns, safety and efficacy outcomes are reported. Patient related outcomes were assessed at baseline and after cycle 3 using the EQ-5D-5L and EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaires. Results: A total of 70 patients were enrolled between August 2019 and June 2020 (data cut off) with a median age of 75 years (range 45-88) and a median follow-up of 74 days (8-232). Two-thirds of patients were males (62.9%). Over one-quarter (28.6%) of patients had an ECOG performance status of 2 or higher; the median modified Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was 0 (range 1-4) with 27.1% with a CCI ≥2. De-novo AML was documented in 44.3%, secondary AML was diagnosed in 52.8% (secondary to MDS (27.1%), MPNs (11.4%) and therapy related AML (14.3%)). European LeukemiaNet (ELN) risk category was favorable, intermediate and adverse in 8.6%, 30% and 42.9%, respectively (Table 1). Time from diagnosis to initiation of therapy was 8 days (median, range 1-38). The main reasons for choosing venetoclax-based low intensity therapy as reported by treating physicians were patient related factors (mainly age>75 years, performance status) in the majority of cases and adverse disease biology predicting poor response to intensive chemotherapy in 17.1%. Of the 57 patients with available data, 38 (67%) initiated therapy in an inpatient setting with a median hospitalization duration of 12 days (range 1-62 days) and 19 (33%) patients started therapy as outpatients. By data cutoff, of 63 patients that initiated therapy 45, 23 and 7 patients completed cycle 1, cycle 3 and cycle 6 assessments, respectively. Complete remission (CR) or CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi) was achieved in 23/44 (52.3%) patients that were assessed for best response. Of responding patients, 6 (23%, 5 CRi and 1 Partial Remission (PR)) went on to receive an allogeneic transplantation (median age 70.5 years). Ninety percent of patients received venetoclax in combination with hypomethylating agents (azacytidine n=56, decitabine n=1). The full dose of 400mg was administered in 87% of cases with a median ramp-up duration of 3 days. Dose interruptions, dose modifications and dose discontinuations during follow-up were frequent and occurred in 41%, 35% and 27%, respectively. During therapy 63.5% of patients experienced adverse events (AE) of any grade; severe AE's were recorded in 41.3% of patients. Febrile neutropenia was documented in 22.2% and Tumor Lysis Syndrome (TLS) was documented in 2 patients (grade 2; 3.2%). Early death rates at 30 and 60 days were 6.3% and 11.1%, respectively. Conclusion: In the real-world setting venetoclax-based therapies are effective and associated with manageable toxicity including in the outpatient setting. In routine practice patient-related factors and disease-related factors (disease-risk) both seem to play a role in choice of therapy. Venetoclax treatment in real-life practice in Israel appears to follow general recommendations, is tolerable with approximately 90% of patients achieving target dose. These observational data are expected to provide information on patient selection patterns, efficacy and safety and patient related outcomes in patients not in clinical trial. Table Disclosures Wolach: AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Fees for lectures and Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Fees for lectures and Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Fees for lectures and Consultancy; Amgen: Other: Fees for lectures and Consultancy; Janssen: Other: Fees for lectures and Consultancy. Levi:Abbvie Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding. Canaani:Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Tadmor:AbbVie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Medison: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Neopharm: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; 6. Novartis Israel Ltd., a company wholly owned by Novartis Pharma AG: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Tavor:Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hellmann:Abbvie: Research Funding. Stemer:Abbvie: Research Funding. Cohen:Abbvie Inc: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Afik:Abbvie Inc: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ofek:Abbvie Inc: Current Employment. Banayan:Abbvie Inc: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Kan:Abbvie Inc: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Grunspan:Abbvie Inc: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ofran:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Moshe:Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Substantial progress in the treatment of Multiple Myeloma (MM) extends survival for many patients (Pts), though most Pts eventually relapse and become therapy refractory. Patients with induction resistant multiple myeloma (IRMM), either primary refractory or early (≤18 months) relapse, have a particularly compromised survival. New treatment strategies and molecular biomarkers for patient stratification and effective clinical care are needed. We previously reported outcomes of KYDAR (NCT04065789) single-arm prospective clinical trial, in which pts primary resistant to a bortezomib-based induction achieved high rates of durable responses when treated with carfilzomib/daratumumab/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Cohen YC et al. Blood (2019) 134 (Suppl 1): 982). We applied comprehensive single cell RNA-seq analysis of plasma cells (PCs) obtained from longitudinal bone marrow aspirate samples, taken from KYDAR participants (n=34), compared to newly diagnosed MM Pts (n=15) and to healthy controls (n=11). We discovered a novel MM resistance signature differentially expressed between IRMM and newly diagnosed MM groups. This "gene module is enriched for several pathways that were perturbed in the IRMM Pts, including mitochondrial stress genes, the ER and UPR pathway, and the proteasome machinery. Furthermore, differential gene expression analysis between KYDAR responders and non-responders unveil potentially druggable escape mechanisms. These include upregulation of genes associated with immune regulation, proteasome, apoptotic and ER-stress pathways, e.g. Cyclophilin A (PPIA) creating an elaborated signature and potential target list of pathways and escape mechanisms from a highly potent quadruple therapy. This signature includes many novel genes which were not previously described in the context of MM (Fig 1A). Here we report external validation of this novel resistance signature among 908 MM Pts in the MMRF CoMMpass dataset. We found that our genes signature expression follows a normal distribution with no apparent sub-populations in naïve patients, but when examining Pts after multiple relapses, we detected gradient increase in our signature with a clear bi-model distribution (Fig. 1B). The prevalence of high module-1 expression was 5% in newly diagnosed Pts vs 14% in Pts in 3rd or subsequent relapse (p 200) Pts (n = 68) compared with the rest of the population (n = 711) revealed a striking hazard-ratio of 3.9 (2.22 - 6.87) with p-value = 4.57x10-17 (Fig 1C). Module-1 was highly predictive of treatment outcome in KYDAR trials, beyond FISH cytogenetics (Fig 1D). We hypothesized that PPIA may function as a protective resistance gene in MM malignant cells, by accelerating protein folding pathways and reducing stress associated to proteasome inhibitors. In order to test whether PPIA is merely a marker for highly resistant patients or has a causal role in MM resistance to proteasome inhibitors, we used Cyclosporine A (CsA), a known inhibitor of PPIA, in a series of in vitro experiments, to explore it's potential synergy with carfilzomib, a proteasome inhibitor, on RPMI-8226 and U266B MM cell lines, expressing high levels of PPIA. Using MTS proliferation assay, we found that the combined CsA and carfilzomib therapy was significantly more effective than carfilzomib alone. Apoptosis as measured by Propidium Iodide, DAPI and Annexin V FITC staining, was dramatically increased in the combination therapy setting compared to carfilzomib or CsA monotherapy (Fig 1E). In summary, our study defines a roadmap for combining single cell RNA-seq profiling with clinical trials. We reveal and externally-validate a novel transcriptional signature for therapy resistance. We show inhibition of PPIA, a potential target identified, by CsA, overcomes relative resistance of MM cell lines to carfilzomib. We anticipate that such studies will significantly improve the ability to define mechanism of action of treatment, molecularly characterize the Pts that may benefit from the treatment, and reveal potential novel targets. Disclosures Tadmor: AbbVie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Medison: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Neopharm: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; 6. Novartis Israel Ltd., a company wholly owned by Novartis Pharma AG: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau.

Ixazomib, the first oral proteasome inhibitor (PI), has been approved for the treatment of relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone, based on the TOURMALINE-MM1 phase 3 trial, which demonstrated the efficacy and safety of this all-oral triplet, compared with lenalidomide-dexamethasone. However, clinical trial outcomes do not always translate into real-world outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of ixazomib-based combination for treatment of patients with RRMM in a real-world setting. All consecutive RRMM patients who received at least one cycle of ixazomib-based treatment combination between June 2013 and June 2018 were identified. Data was extracted from medical charts focusing on demographics, disease characteristics, prior treatment, and responses. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), safety, and tolerability. A total of 78 patients across 7 sites were retrospectively included. Median follow-up was 22 months. Median age was 68 (range 38–90). Sixty-four percent received ixazomib in 2nd line, 19% in 3rd line. Overall, 89% of patients had been exposed to PIs (bortezomib 87%) prior to IRd, 41% to IMiDs. Twenty-nine (48%, of 60 available) had high (t(4:14), t(14:16), del17p) or intermediate (+1q21) risk aberrations. Most patients (82%) received ixazomib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone. An exploratory assessment for disease aggressiveness at diagnosis was classified by a treating physician as indolent (rapid control to protect from target organ damage not required) vs aggressive (imminent target organ damage) in 63% vs 37%, respectively. Treatment was well tolerated, with a low discontinuation rate (11%). Median PFS on ixazomib therapy was 24 months (95% CI 17–30). PFS was 77% and 47% at 12 and 24 months, respectively. Median OS was not reached; OS was 91% and 80% at 12 and 24 months, respectively. Higher LDH, older age, and worse clinical aggressiveness were associated with worse PFS, whereas a deeper response to ixazomib (≥ VGPR) and a longer response to first-line bortezomib (≥ 24 m) were associated with an improved PFS on ixazomib. No effect on PFS was found for cytogenetic risk by FISH, ISS/rISS, and prior anti-myeloma treatment. Ixazomib-based combinations are efficacious and safe regimens in RRMM patients in the real-world setting, regardless to cytogenetic risk, with a PFS of 24 months comparable with clinical trial data. This regimen had most favorable outcomes among patients who remained progression-free more than 24 months after a bortezomib induction and for those who have a more indolent disease phenotype.

BACKGROUND Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is frequently accompanied by immune dysregulation. AIMS In this multicenter prospective study, we investigated whether heavy + light chains (HLC: IgGκ, IgGλ, IgAκ, IgAκ, IgMκ, IgMλ) and IgG subclasses (IgG1, IgG2, IgG3, and IgG4) could be used as novel prognostic markers of immunoparesis in 105 treatment-naive patients with CLL. RESULTS Heavy + light chains immunoparesis of ≥1, ≥2, and ≥3 isotypes was evident in 74 (70%), 58 (55%), and 36 (34%) patients, respectively. Severe HLC immunoparesis was identified in 40 (38%) patients. Of the IgG subclasses, IgG1 and IgG2 were most frequently suppressed, affecting 46 (44%) and 36 (34%) patients, respectively; 63 (60%) patients had low levels of at least one IgG subclass. In multivariate analysis, severe HLC immunoparesis (hazard ratio [HR]: 36.5; P = .010) and ΣFLC ≥ 70 mg/L (HR: 13.2; P = .004) were the only factors independently associated with time to first treatment (TTFT). A risk model including these variables identified patients with 0, 1, and 2 risk factors and significantly different TTFT (P

[Background]: Maintenance therapy following autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) can delay disease progression and prolong survival in patients with multiple myeloma. Ixazomib is ideally suited for maintenance therapy given its convenient once-weekly oral dosing and low toxicity profile. In this study, we aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of ixazomib as maintenance therapy following ASCT. [Methods]: The phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled TOURMALINE-MM3 study took place in 167 clinical or hospital sites in 30 countries in Europe, the Middle East, Africa, Asia, and North and South America. Eligible participants were adults with a confirmed diagnosis of symptomatic multiple myeloma according to International Myeloma Working Group criteria who had achieved at least a partial response after undergoing standard-of-care induction therapy followed by high-dose melphalan (200 mg/m²) conditioning and single ASCT within 12 months of diagnosis. Patients were randomly assigned in a 3:2 ratio to oral ixazomib or matching placebo on days 1, 8, and 15 in 28-day cycles for 2 years following induction, high-dose therapy, and transplantation. The initial 3 mg dose was increased to 4 mg from cycle 5 if tolerated during cycles 1–4. Randomisation was stratified by induction regimen, pre-induction disease stage, and response post-transplantation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by intention-to-treat analysis. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of ixazomib or placebo, according to treatment actually received. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02181413, and follow-up is ongoing. [Findings]: Between July 31, 2014, and March 14, 2016, 656 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive ixazomib maintenance therapy (n=395) or placebo (n=261). With a median follow-up of 31 months (IQR 27·3–35·7), we observed a 28% reduction in the risk of progression or death with ixazomib versus placebo (median PFS 26·5 months [95% CI 23·7–33·8] vs 21·3 months [18·0–24·7]; hazard ratio 0·72, 95% CI 0·58–0·89; p=0·0023). No increase in second malignancies was noted with ixazomib therapy (12 [3%] patients) compared with placebo (eight [3%] patients) at the time of this analysis. 108 (27%) of 394 patients in the ixazomib group and 51 (20%) of 259 patients in the placebo group experienced serious adverse events. During the treatment period, one patient died in the ixazomib group and none died in the placebo group. [Interpretation]: Ixazomib maintenance prolongs PFS and represents an additional option for post-transplant maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, This study was sponsored by Millennium Pharmaceuticals, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company.

Cytogenetic abnormalities are a recognized factor in the pathogenesis of multiple myeloma (MM). While chromosomal translocations involving the IGH gene have been investigated and reported, the implications of deletions or amplifications in the IGH gene have been less frequently examined. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 260 patients with MM from Northern Israel. Fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis of separated CD-138 positive cells was done on bone marrow samples collected between 2016 and 2018. We used IGH break apart probes to identify IGH abnormalities and performed statistical analysis of clinical and prognostic features, comparing the different cytogenetic groups. Deletions in the variable region of the IGH (IGHv) were found in 17.3 % (n = 45) of patients and correlated with significantly worse progression free survival (PFS) after two years of follow up (p = 0.008), as well as with a worse response to 1st line treatment (p = 0.037). The median PFS was 7.1 and 17.7 months in patients with and without IGHv deletion, respectively. PFS differences remained significant (p = 0.017) in subgroup analysis of patients with high-risk cytogenetics (n = 108, 19 with IGHv deletion). Overall survival was not significantly different in the two groups. Constant region (IGHc) amplifications, were less frequently found (6.15 %, n = 16), yet significantly correlated with worse PFS after two years of follow up (p = 0.023). This difference remained valid in the high-risk subgroup (p = 0.001). In Conclusion, we identified that deletion of the IGH variable region and amplification in the IGH constant region, are both associated with poor prognosis and inferior outcome in MM.

Several studies have demonstrated the prognostic value of neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in patients with solid tumors and non–Hodgkin lymphoma. In contrast, there is only sparse data on its prognostic role in patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). The aim of our study was to establish whether NLR could serve as an independent prognostic factor in a cohort of 990 patients with nodular sclerosis (NS)-cHL. After analysis of the log hazard ratio (HR) as a function of NLR, we chose the value 6 as cutoff. Patients with NLR >6 had a worse progression-free survival and overall survival compared to those with NLR ≤6; 84% vs 75% and 92% vs 88%, at 5 years, with an HR of 1.65 and 1.82, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that the risk remained high with HR 1.44 and HR 1.54 in progression-free survival and overall survival, respectively. In summary, our study shows that NLR is a robust and independent prognostic parameter in NS-cHL, both in early and advanced disease. It is inexpensive and simple to apply. Thus, we conclude that NLR, possibly in combination with the international prognostic score and absolute monocyte count, is a useful guide for physicians treating NS-cHL patients.

Background: Richter's transformation (RT) is a rare complication of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL), usually into clonally related diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Currently there is no effective therapy to RT and CLL relapse after targeted therapy. Chimeric antigen receptor-modified T (CART) cells directed to CD19+ B-cell malignancies have promising results in relapsed DLBCL. However, its effectiveness in CLL relapse after targeted therapy and RT is less clear and no systematic reports are available. Methods: From July 2019 to May 2020 we enrolled eight CLL patients with disease transformation after chemoimmunotherapy and therapy with BTK and/or BCL2 inhibitors as part of single center phase 2 CAR T-cell therapy in B-cell malignancies (NCT02772198). Following lymphodepletion consisting of cyclophosphamide and fludarabine patients received an infusion of locally produced 1x106 CD19-CART- cells/kg, which were generated by modifying autologous T cells with retroviral vector encoding a CAR comprising FMC63 anti-CD19 ScFv linked to a CD28 costimulatory domain, and CD3-zeta intracellular signaling domain. Results: All 8 patients (pts) were relatively young with median age at CLL diagnosis of 56y (47-62). Disease transformation developed after a median of 8 years (range 1-16) from CLL diagnosis. Patients treated with CD19-CAR T-cells at median age of 64 y (54-73) having median comorbidity G-CIRS score 2 (0-5), performance status ECOG 1 (0-2) and CCT 66ml/min (26-89). Pts had history of CLL with del17p/TP53 in 83%, 5/6 available, del11q 2/6 prior to transformation. Disease transformation included RT in 6 pts with DLBCL, 1 accelerated CLL and 1 prolymphocytic transformations. Among RT pts 67% (4/6) had advanced stage DLBCL, 50% (3/6) extarnodal and 33% (2/6) bulky disease. Patients received median of 3 (0-5) CLL therapies and 2 (1-3) large cell lymphoma directed therapy. CLL therapies included chemoimunotherpay: 5 Fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, rituximab/obinutuzumab (FCR/FCO), 1 bendamustin rituximab (BR); 5 dual targeted therapy (ibrutinib and Venetoclax), 2 ibrutinib only, 1 venetoclax only. Last CLL treatment was Venetoclax in 71% (5/7) and ibrutinib in 29% (2/7) with 32 (range 15-39) months duration on ibrutinib and 10 (2-17) months on venetoclax. The reason for ibrutinib discontinuation was CLL progression (PD) in 5, disease transformation in 2, and venetocalx discontinuation due to progressive disease (PD) - 4 and transformation - 2. Post transformation all RT pts were treated with R-CHOP, second line tx 2, one patient with prolymphocytic transformation was treated with alemtuzumab, allo-SCT, ibrutinib and venetoclax. All pts had PD before treatment with CAR T-cells, 63% (5/8) had elevated LDH and 5/8 evaluable PET CT before treatment had deauville score (DS) 5 with median SUVmax 8.7 (3.7-21). After infusion of CAR T-cells 7 patients had cytokine release syndrome (CRS), 4 grade 1 and 3 grade 3-4 that required tocilizumab. Three patients had CNS toxicity, two grade 3. Seventy five percent (6/8) developed neutropenia, (3/8) grade 3-4, all neutropenia resolved except in one patient that succumbed to PD, 2 pts had infections (campylobacter and H1N1 influenza, each). There were no fatalities due to CAR T-cell toxicity. There were two fatalities due to disease progression. All 71% (5/8) responders achieved complete response with DS1 in PET CT scan on day 28. After median follow up duration of 6 (4-10) months, 2 patients proceeded to allo-SCT. Conclusion: CD19-CART-cell therapy in CLL patients with disease transformation is safe and has high complete remission rate with promising clinical response. Long term remission rate after CD19-CART-cell therapy for RT needs to be further evaluated in more patients. Disclosures Benjamini: Abbvie Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding. Tadmor:AbbVie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Medison: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Neopharm: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; 6. Novartis Israel Ltd., a company wholly owned by Novartis Pharma AG: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Fineman:Abbvie Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding. Jacobi:Novartis: Consultancy. Avigdor:Takeda, Gilead, Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen, BMS: Research Funding.

Background/aim In this retrospective study, we summarized the national Israeli experience with hairy cell leukemia (HCL) in a large cohort of patients with a long follow-up. Patients and methods Demographic data, and relevant laboratory and clinical parameters were analyzed, emphasizing the outcome after first-line treatment with cladribine. Results Data on 203 patients was collected from 12 medical centers during 1985-2015. Mean and median follow-up were 7.5 years and 5.18 years (interquartile range=0.1-40 years), and 5- and 10-year survival were 96% and 90.62%, respectively. The median age of diagnosis was 55.5 years for Jews and 49 years for Arabs (p=0.021), and most patients were males (81.77%); 52.2% were Ashkenazi Jews, 36.1% Sephardic Jews and 11.7% were Arab, Druze or other ethnicity. Cladribine was given to 159 patients (80.7%%) and most (62%) received intravenous (i.v.) and 38% received subcutaneous (s.c.) therapy. Overall survival and time to next treatment were not significantly different between the two schedules (i.v., s.c.). In univariate analysis of a variety of factors, only age >65 years had a negative impact on outcome, with shorter overall survival. It is of interest that Arab patients with HCL were diagnosed at an earlier age, but had a similar clinical course and outcome to both Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews.

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is a disease of elderly patients. The fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR) regimen is considered the treatment of choice for young fit patients with CLL; however, this combination is toxic for older patients. At the time this study was first planned and initiated, there was no standard chemo-immunotherapy regimen regarded as standard therapy for the less fit elderly patient with CLL. Here, we conducted a single-arm, phase II trial to examine the efficacy and safety of lower-dose fludarabine and cyclophosphamide combined with a standard dose of rituximab (LD-FCR) in elderly patients with previously untreated CLL. Forty patients received LD-FCR and were included in the efficacy analysis. Two patients treated with FC alone were only included in the safety analysis. The median age was 72.7 years (range, 65.0 to 85.0). The overall response and complete response rates were 67.5% and 42.5%, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 35.5 months (95% CI, 29.27-41.67). Two patients (4.8%) died during the study period. Hematological toxicities and infections were the most common complications encountered; grade 3 to 4 treatment-related neutropenia occurred in 20 (47.6%) patients. During the entire study follow-up, 26 patients (61.9%) had all grades of infection including six (14.3%) with neutropenic fever and eight (19%) with grade 3 to 4 non-neutropenic infections. In conclusion, LD-FCR is an effective and relatively safe regimen for previously untreated patients with CLL. It has the advantage of being both "time and cost limited" and, even in the era of novel agents, can still be considered when planning treatment for elderly patients without high-risk biomarkers. However, recent results in fit elderly patients using the combination of bendamustine and rituximab which have achieved longer PFS with good safety profile must be taken into consideration in this regard.

Background Invasive fungal diseases (IFD) are life-threatening infections most commonly diagnosed in acute leukaemia patients with prolonged neutropenia and are uncommonly diagnosed in patients with lymphoproliferative diseases. Objectives Following the initial report of aspergillosis diagnosed shortly after beginning ibrutinib for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, a survey was developed to seek additional cases of IFD during ibrutinib treatment. Methods Local and international physicians and groups were approached for relevant cases. Patients were included if they met the following criteria: diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia/non-Hodgkin lymphoma; proven or probable IFD; and ibrutinib treatment on the date IFD were diagnosed. Clinical and laboratory data were captured using REDCap software. Result Thirty-five patients with IFD were reported from 22 centres in eight countries: 26 (74%) had chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. The median duration of ibrutinib treatment before the onset of IFD was 45 days (range 1-540). Aspergillus species were identified in 22 (63%) of the patients and Cryptococcus species in 9 (26%). Pulmonary involvement occurred in 69% of patients, cranial in 60% and disseminated disease in 60%. A definite diagnosis was made in 21 patients (69%), and the mortality rate was 69%. Data from Israel regarding ibrutinib treated patients were used to evaluate a prevalence of 2.4% IFD. Conclusions The prevalence of IFD among chronic lymphocytic leukaemia/non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients treated with ibrutinib appears to be higher than expected. These patients often present with unusual clinical features. Mortality from IFD in this study was high, indicating that additional studies are urgently needed to identify patients at risk for ibrutinib-associated IFD.

International audience; This is a pivotal, multicenter, open-label study of moxetumomab pasudotox, a recombinant CD22-targeting immunotoxin, in hairy cell leukemia (HCL), a rare B cell malignancy with high CD22 expression. The study enrolled patients with relapsed/ refractory HCL who had ≥2 prior systemic therapies, including ≥1 purine nucleoside analog. Patients received moxetumomab pasudotox 40 µg/kg intravenously on days 1, 3, and 5 every 28 days for ≤6 cycles. Blinded independent central review determined disease response and minimal residual disease (MRD) status. Among 80 patients (79% males; median age, 60.0 years), durable complete response (CR) rate was 30%, CR rate was 41%, and objective response rate (CR and partial response) was 75%; 64 patients (80%) achieved hematologic remission. Among complete responders, 27 (85%) achieved MRD negativity by immunohistochemistry. The most frequent adverse events (AEs) were peripheral edema (39%), nausea (35%), fatigue (34%), and headache (33%). Treatment-related serious AEs of hemolytic uremic syndrome (7.5%) and capillary leak syndrome (5%) were reversible and generally manageable with supportive care and treatment discontinuation (6 patients; 7.5%). Moxetumomab pasudotox treatment achieved a high rate of independently assessed durable response and MRD eradication in heavily pretreated patients with HCL, with acceptable tolerability.

Del17p is a genomic imbalance occurring in ∼7%-10% of myeloma at diagnosis newly diagnosed myeloma patients (NDMM) and comprises a poor prognostic factor. The goal of this study is to analyze real world data and outcomes among NDMM patients carrying 17p deletion. We report an observational, retrospective, multicenter study. Sixty consecutive patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma in the 8 participating centers diagnosed between 1/2008 and 1/2016 proven to carry 17p deletion by means of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) were identified. Most received a bortezomib-based induction, over half underwent autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT); 30% of the patients gained early access to new novel agents via clinical trials, access programs or private insurance. Overall response rate (ORR) after induction was 85%; 94% for transplant eligible (TE); and 75% for transplant ineligible (NTE), and declined in subsequent treatment lines, 64% achieved ≥ VGPR. Median overall survival (OS) was 43 months; median progression free survival (PFS) was 11 months, 19 months for TE and 7 for NTE. In multivariate analysis: higher M-Spike, presence of extramedullary disease, and >50% of cells baring del17p were associated with adverse PFS; Autologous HCT and higher hemoglobin were associated with longer PFS; OS was 59 months for patients with early access to newer agents. Older age and higher M-Spike levels were associated with adverse OS, Autologous HCT was associated with favorable OS, 59.7 vs 28.7 months for NTE patients. Despite the improvement achieved with autologous HCT and new novel agents, the prognosis of patients with 17p deletion is still inferior, emphasizing the need for novel approaches.

Primary plasma cell leukemia (PPCL) is a rare form of multiple myeloma with a dismal prognosis. This retrospective multi-center study examines the national experience of PPCL in the era of novel agents. During 2002-2016, thirty-nine patients with PPCL were identified in 11 Israeli centers. One-fifth of them died in the first 2 months after diagnosis. The overall survival (OS) of those who survived the first 3 months was 22.5 months. About 70% of patients received at least one type of immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) and similarly proteasome inhibitor (PI) during treatment. There was a survival advantage for those who received IMiD but not for those who received PI or other type of standard dose chemotherapy. In multivariate analysis, low performance status and increased uric acid were also associated with shorter OS. In conclusion, this study demonstrates favorable impact of treatment with IMiDs and hematopoietic cell transplantation on the survival of PPCL patients.

BACKGROUND Primary splenic diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (PS-DLBCL), an uncommon type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, has been investigated only in small patient series before the rituximab era. The therapeutic role of splenectomy in addition to immunochemotherapy is unknown. METHODS The databases of 7 medical centers in Israel were searched for patients diagnosed with PS-DLBCL in 1982-2013, and clinical, treatment, and outcome data were collected for 87 patients. The mean patient age was 59.6 years; 57.5% were male. RESULTS Patients presented with abdominal pain (81%), B symptoms (59%), splenomegaly (84%), splenic masses (97%), and high lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels (84%); 61% had stage I or II disease. The diagnosis was made with core-needle biopsy in 46 patients and with diagnostic splenectomy in 39 patients. Eighty patients (92%) were treated with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone; 68 (78%) received rituximab. A complete response was achieved in 67 patients (77%), and a partial response was achieved in 8 (9%). At 5 years, the overall survival (OS) rate was 77%, and the progression-free survival (PFS) rate was 67%. When patients were stratified by splenectomy at diagnosis, the OS rates were 91% for splenectomized patients and 68% for nonsplenectomized patients (P = .08), and the PFS rates were 85% and 55%, respectively (P = .02). The respective values for the subgroup with early-stage disease were 96% and 63% for OS (P = .009) and 90% and 51% for PFS (P = .01). In a multivariate analysis, a low Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and splenectomy independently predicted better PFS (P

Introduction Azacitidine (AZA) dose reduction is a common practice in cytopenic patients. However, a correlation between AZA dose and infection complications has never been studied. Patients and Methods Higher-risk patients with myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukemia treated with AZA in 18 Israeli hospitals between the years 2008 and 2011 were included in a former national survey. To reveal the effect of AZA dosage on infection risk we limited our analysis to the infection rate after the first AZA dose alone. We excluded subsequent cycles of AZA from the analysis, because infectious events during these cycles might be related to other cofactors such as disease response to AZA therapy. Results After the first AZA cycle, infectious events were more frequent after doses of 75 mg/m 2 for 7 days than 75 mg/m 2 for 5 days (36/106 [34%] and 10/67 [14.9%], respectively; P = .008), regardless of the patient's age. Of the 46 recorded infectious events, the causative pathogen was identified as bacterial in 25 (54.3%) and as viral or fungal in 2 (4.3%) and 2 (4.3%) cases, respectively. No pathogen was identified in 17 (37%) cases. Infections were significantly more prevalent among patients who presented with platelet counts P = .012) and poor risk cytogenetics (40.7% vs. 19.8%; P = .008). Conclusion Reduction of AZA dose might decrease infection rate and therefore should be considered in patients with high infection risk.

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the fludarabine-cyclophosphamide-rituximab regimen for young physically fit patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia in the "real-life" setting. We specifically focused on the impact of dose reduction on patient outcomes. The patient cohort consisted of 128 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (≤ 70 years) treated at 10 Israeli centers with front-line fludarabine-cyclophosphamide-rituximab. We defined reduced chemotherapy as two-thirds or less of the total indicated dose. Patients treated with rituximab were divided into two groups and compared: those who received full dosages of 375 mg/m(2) or 500 mg/m(2), and patients given less than six cycles with either dose. Overall and clinical complete response rates (92.8% and 70.4%), as well as toxicities and overall survival (median not reached at 6 years), were similar to other reported clinical trials, but progression-free survival was shorter (42.5 months). Almost 50% of patients had some dose reduction of chemotherapy, 21% receiving less than two-thirds of the indicated dose, while close to 30% did not complete six cycles of rituximab. Reduced doses of chemotherapy and rituximab were independently associated with shorter progression-free survival (hazard ratio 3.6, P0.0001 for reduced chemotherapy; hazard ratio 2.5, P=0.003 for incomplete-treatment with rituximab). Achieving a complete response was associated with longer overall survival but was not linked to the given dose of chemoimmunotherapy. In younger physically fit patients, front-line fludarabine-cyclophosphamide-rituximab therapy in the "real-life" setting achieves long remissions (albeit shorter than in clinical trials) and prolonged overall survival. However, dose reductions are commonly administered and may impact outcome.

The majority of patients with CLL will suffer from infections during their disease, accounting for approximately 60% of deaths in CLL. Patients are predisposed to infection due to immune defects related to the primary disease, and as a result of therapy. The range of infectious complications has evolved alongside therapeutic advances in the treatment of CLL. More recently several novel therapeutic compounds have been introduced in CLL, whose unique safety profiles will probably have an impact on the prophylaxis and management of infections in these patients. Areas covered: This review describes the pathogenesis of infections due to intrinsic CLL or therapy-related immunosuppression, and elightens the importance of proactive and reactive infection management as a key focus of patient care. Infections related to conventional chemotherapy, immunochemotherapy with monoclonal antibodies, target therapies with B-cell receptor pathway inhibitors and Bcl-2 antagonists are reviewed. Expert commentary: Despite the importance of infection management and prevention in high-risk patients, there are only limited infection risk-assessment guidelines that can be easily used in clinical practice to guide more appropriate infection prophylaxis and its management. Here we provide an overview of suggested prophylaxis management of infection, and include key prophylactic interventions that we feel should be performed in CLL patients routinely.

Richter's syndrome (RS) is the rare development of an aggressive lymphoid malignancy in a patient with pre-existing chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Data on RS is sparse and mostly derived from case reports or small series of patients and only a few larger cohorts have been published. The purpose of this large retrospective study was to summarize our national experience with RS in CLL, examine possible risk factors, and analyze relevant demographic, laboratory and clinical parameters, including results of therapy and outcome. We first evaluated data obtained from 119 patients with RS diagnosed during 1971–2010 from 12 medical centers in Israel. The final cohort summarized consisted of 81 patients with RS who developed only diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) after exclusion all cases with insufficient data and those who were not DLBCL. Median overall survival from time of diagnosis of RS was 8 months; after applying the Richter score, patients could be stratified into three prognostic groups, while all other clinical and laboratory parameters evaluated had no prognostic significance. Prior therapy for CLL had no impact on RS survival (P = 0.8) and patients with therapy “naive” RS and those who had already received chemotherapy prior to developing RS, had the same survival. The addition of rituximab to chemotherapy for RS improved 2 years overall survival from 19% in the chemotherapy alone arm to 42% (P value of 0.001). Although prognosis of patients with RS remains dismal, this retrospective observation provides support for the use of chemo-immunotherapy in DLBCL-RS. Am. J. Hematol. 89:E218–E222, 2014. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Objectives Hypogammaglobulinemia, commonly encountered in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), is one of the main causes of morbidity and mortality; however, its prognostic significance in patients diagnosed in early stages of disease remains uncertain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictive power of hypogammaglobulinemia at Bonet stage A. Methods Using the database of the Israeli CLL Study Group, we analyzed the relationship between low serum levels of IgG, IgA, and IgM; the presence of paraproteinemia, as well as other well-recognized prognostic markers in CLL; and time to first treatment (TTT) and overall survival. A total of 1113 patients consecutively diagnosed during the last 25 yrs with Binet stage A CLL were evaluated, and baseline information on serum immunoglobulin levels was found in 857 of the cases. Results Overall survival times correlated with age >65 yr, male gender, the presence of lymphadenopathy, high serum beta 2-microglobulin (b2m), CD38 and ZAP-70 expression, but not with low levels of immunoglobulin or the presence of paraproteinemia. By univariate analysis, patients with low IgA levels had a shorter TTT; however, on multivariate analysis, the presence of lymphadenopathy (P 0.02), b2m (P 0.04), CD38 (P

Background Patients (Pts) with induction resistant Myeloma, either primary refractory or those relapsing early after completing induction, have dismal prognosis. To elucidate clinical and molecular pathways of refractoriness, we designed a clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a quadruple salvage regimen of Carfilzomib (CFZ)/ lenalidomide (LEN)/dexamethasone (DEX) / daratumumab (DARA) (KRD-D) in newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) Pts with primary or secondary induction resistance (KYDAR trial) . Using a high resolution molecular tool of massively-parallel single-cell RNA-sequencing (MARS-seq) calibrated for this trial, we aimed to identify gene expression signatures associated with clinical response and resistance. Methods Population included forty NDMM Pts treated with a bortezomib-containing induction regimen, who either: i) Failed to achieve a minimal response after 2 cycles or a partial response after 4 cycles (Group A), ii) Had early relapse within 18 months from starting of therapy (group B) AND were not candidates (at screening) for autologous transplant. Following informed consent, all Pts were enrolled to receive KRD-D treatment in eighteen 28-day (d) cycles (Cy) or until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. CFZ: 56 mg/m2 IV days 1,8,15 (Cy 1-9), d 1,15 (Cy 10-18). LEN: 25 mg (Frail: 15mg) d1-21; Dex 40mg (Frail: 20mg) weekly; DARA: IV 16mg/Kg weekly (Cy 1-2), q14d (Cy 3-6), q28d. After 18 cycles, Pts continued to receive DARA/Len. We applied longitudinally our calibrated protocol for scRNA-seq of MM PC (Ledergor et al 2018) to 31 KYDAR Pts at different time points, and compared them to NDMM and to healthy age and sex matched controls. Pts with partial response or better (IMWG criteria) after 3 cycles were defined as "responders". Primary efficacy endpoints were safety and tolerability. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR); progression free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results Forty Pts were enrolled across 13 medical centers in Israel. Data on 36 Pts with a cutoff date of June 2nd 2019 are presented and will be further updated at the meeting. Patients had highly aggressive MM characteristics (Table): 78% had intermediate/high risk FISH abnormalities, 39% had extramedullary disease, and 38% were frail. At a current median follow-up of 4 months (range 1-12m), 20 Pts are still under active therapy. Of the 16 Pts that discontinued therapy: 9 had progressed, 2 had an adverse event (AE), 1 died, and 3 discontinued due to other causes. All Pts had at least 1 AE, most were grade 1-2; There were 90 treatment emergent AE (TEAEs) and 18 regimen related grade 3-4 AEs. TEAEs occurring in ≥2 Pts included neutropenia (38%), thrombocytopenia (26%), infections (21%), anemia (18%), pneumonia (15%), diarrhea (9%) and rash (9%). Durable and deep responses were achieved (Fig. A). ORR was 91% (30/34): near CR-stringent CR 24% / very good partial response 47% / partial response 21% / stable disease 3% / progressive disease 6%. At median follow-up PFS is 85% and OS is 97%. Applying MARS-seq, we profiled a total of 39,492 PC sampled from 11 control subjects, 12 newly diagnosed MM patients and 31 KYDAR Pts at different time points. We classified the different cell groups based on expression levels of the most variable genes and used the differentially expressed genes to annotate malignant PC types (Fig. C). We identified multiple genes and pathways that are differentially expressed between healthy controls, NDMM and induction-refractory KYDAR Pts (Fig D). Importantly comparing the responder and non-responder Pts, in the KYDAR trial we identify statistically significant genes for responding and non-responding group, including critical immune checkpoints and regulatory genes in the proteasome, and apoptotic pathways (Figure E). Conclusions KRD-D quadruple regimen was safe and well tolerated, and provided an effective salvage in a cohort of induction resistant MM Pts, with an ORR of 91%, with deep responses achieved in 71%, equivalent to 2nd line triplet regimens in non-selected MM. Single cell analysis showed a dramatic change in the PC transcriptome following therapy. Furthermore, differences in gene expression patterns between responders and non-responders unveil potentially druggable escape mechanisms used by the highly resistant tumors including immune checkpoints that may serve as perspective biomarkers and therapeutic targets. Disclosures Cohen: Janssen Â: Consultancy; Amgen Â: Consultancy, Research Funding; Neopharm Â: Consultancy; Takeda Â: Consultancy; Madison Â: Consultancy; VBL Therapeutics Â: Employment. Ledergor:Immunai: Consultancy.