Search

Purpose:Venetoclax-based therapy is a standard-of-care option in first-line and relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Patient management following venetoclax discontinuation remains nonstandard and poorly understood.Experimental Design:To address this, we conducted a large international study to identify a cohort of 326 patients who discontinued venetoclax and have been subsequently treated. Coprimary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival for the post-venetoclax treatments stratified by treatment type [Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi), PI3K inhibitor (PI3Ki), and cellular therapies].Results:We identified patients with CLL who discontinued venetoclax in the first-line (4%) and relapsed/refractory settings (96%). Patients received a median of three therapies prior to venetoclax; 40% were BTKi naïve (n = 130), and 81% were idelalisib naïve (n = 263). ORR to BTKi was 84% (n = 44) in BTKi-naïve patients versus 54% (n = 30) in BTKi-exposed patients. We demonstrate therapy selection following venetoclax requires prior novel agent exposure consideration and discontinuation reasons.Conclusions:For BTKi-naïve patients, selection of covalently binding BTKis results in high ORR and durable remissions. For BTKi-exposed patients, covalent BTK inhibition is not effective in the setting of BTKi resistance. PI3Kis following venetoclax do not appear to result in durable remissions. We conclude that BTKi in naïve or previously responsive patients and cellular therapies following venetoclax may be the most effective strategies.See related commentary by Rogers, p. 3501

Supplemental Figure 2: Progression free survival of patients without prior BTKi exposure who had progressed on venetoclax and were then treated with BTKi.

Supplemental Figure 1: Overall survival of entire cohort from initiation of venetoclax.

Chylous ascites is a rare condition found in 1 in 20 000 patients admitted to hospital with abdominal distention. It is caused by a limited number of pathologies but can, in rare situations, be idiopathic. Its management is difficult and usually involves correcting the primary pathology, making idiopathic chylous ascites particularly difficult to manage. We present a case of idiopathic chylous ascites extensively investigated over a period of several years. An incidental finding of B cell lymphoma was initially suspected to have been the primary cause of the ascites; however, after successful treatment of this condition, the patient’s ascites did not resolve. Diagnostic difficulties and management are discussed and an overview of the diagnostic process is outlined through this case.

Relapsed or refractory primary central nervous system lymphoma (rrPCNSL) confers a poor prognosis with no accepted standard of care. Very few prospective studies have been conducted in this patient group. This study was a multicenter phase 1/2 study that investigated thiotepa in combination with ifosfamide, etoposide, and rituximab (TIER) for the treatment of PCNSL relapsed or refractory to high-dose methotrexate-based chemotherapy. A 3 + 3 design investigated the recommended phase 2 dose of thiotepa for a single-stage phase 2 cohort by assessing the activity of 2 cycles of TIER against rrPCNSL. The primary outcome was overall response rate. The dose-finding study demonstrated that 50 mg/m2 of thiotepa could be safely delivered within the TIER regimen. No dose-limiting toxicities were encountered in phase 1, and TIER was well-tolerated by the 27 patients treated in phase 2. The most common grade 3 to 4 toxicities were neutropenia (56% of patients) and thrombocytopenia (39%). An overall response was confirmed in 14 patients (52%), which met the prespecified threshold for clinically relevant activity. The median progression-free survival was 3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2 to 6 months) and overall survival 5 months (95% CI, 3 to 9 months). Exploratory analyses suggest a greater benefit for thiotepa-naïve patients. Six patients successfully completed autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) consolidation, with 4 experiencing durable remissions after a median follow-up of 50 months. The TIER regimen can be delivered safely and is active against rrPCNSL. When it is followed by ASCT, it can provide durable remission and long-term survival. However, for the majority of patients, prognosis remains poor, and novel treatment strategies are urgently needed. This trial was registered at https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search as EudraCT 2014-000227-24 and ISRCTN 12857473.

The management of older individuals (≥60 years) with primary central nervous system lymphoma remains a clinical challenge. Identification of optimal therapy and delivering adequate dose intensity are two of the major issues in treating elderly patients. Premorbid performance status and comorbidities influence individualised treatment approaches and geriatric assessment tools are increasingly utilised. Optimal induction treatment remains high-dose methotrexate-based immunochemotherapy, delivery is feasible in the majority of patients and the goal of treatment remains achieving complete remission. Consolidation strategies are also relevant in the elderly, aiming to maximise duration of response and quality of life (QoL). Potential options include high-dose therapy with haematopoietic stem cell consolidation, non-myeloablative chemotherapy and whole-brain radiotherapy. Efficacy of novel agents, such as Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors and lenalidomide, have been reported; these represent an alternative for elderly patients unfit for chemotherapy. Prognosis remains poor, improvement of outcomes in this age group is urgently needed.

Observational studies with long-term follow-up of patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) are scarce. Patient data over a period of four decades were retrospectively analysed from databases at Not-tingham University Hospitals Trust, UK. The cohort was delineated by two distinct therapeutic eras; the first from 01/01/1982 to 31/12/2010 (n = 147) and the second 01/01/2011 to 31/07/2020 (n = 125). The median age at diagnosis was significantly older in the second era compared to the first (69 and 65 years respectively, P = 0·003). The 3-, 6-and 12-month overall survival (OS) rates in the second era were significantly higher compared to the first, at 85%, 77%, 62% versus 56%, 49%, 38% respectively (log-rank test P < 0·0001). On multivariate analysis, high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX)-based induction protocols employed in the second era were associated with improved OS compared to those used in the first [hazard ratio (HR) 0·40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0·28–0·57]. Within the second era, superior OS rates were seen with the use of intensive HD-MTX protocols (including consolidation with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation) compared to non-intensive HD-MTX schedules (HR 0·47, 95% CI 0·22–0·99). Initiating chemotherapy within 14 days of biopsy and use of rituximab were independently associated with improved OS and progression-free survival during the second era. These data suggest that prompt treatment initiation and use of intensive HD-MTX-and rituximab-based protocols have resulted in improved survival outcomes for patients.

International audience; Purpose: Immune checkpoint blocker (ICB) associated myocarditis (ICB-myocar-ditis) may present similarly and/or overlap with other cardiac pathology including acute cor-onary syndrome presenting a challenge for prompt clinical diagnosis.Methods: An international registry was used to retrospectively identify cases of ICB-myocarditis. Presence of coronary artery disease (CAD) was defined as coronary artery steno-sis >70% in patients undergoing coronary angiogram.Results: Among 261 patients with clinically suspected ICB-myocarditis who underwent a coro-nary angiography, CAD was present in 59/261 patients (22.6%). Coronary revascularization was performed during the index hospitalisation in 19/59 (32.2%) patients. Patients undergoing coro-nary revascularization less frequently received steroids administration within 24 h of admission compared to the other groups (p = 0.029). Myocarditis-related 90-day mortality was 9/17 (52.7%) in the revascularised cohort, compared to 5/31 (16.1%) in those not revascularized and 25/156 (16.0%) in those without CAD (p = 0.001). Immune-related adverse event-related 90-day mortality was 9/17 (52.7%) in the revascularized cohort, compared to 6/31 (19.4%) in those not revascularized and 31/156 (19.9%) in no CAD groups (p = 0.007). All-cause 90-day mortality was 11/17 (64.7%) in the revascularized cohort, compared to 13/31 (41.9%) in no revas-cularization and 60/158 (38.0%) in no CAD groups (p = 0.10). After adjustment of age and sex, coronary revascularization remained associated with ICB-myocarditis-related death at 90 days (hazard ratio [HR] = 4.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.84-8.84, p < 0.001) and was margin-ally associated with all-cause death (HR = 1.88, 95% CI, 0.98-3.61, p = 0.057).Conclusion: CAD may exist concomitantly with ICB-myocarditis and may portend a poorer outcome when revascularization is performed. This is potentially mediated through delayed diag-nosis and treatment or more severe presentation of ICB-myocarditis.

Introduction Brentuximab vedotin (BV)-CHP is the new standard regimen for first-line treatment of systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma (sALCL). We undertook a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients diagnosed with sALCL, treated in routine practice, to serve as a benchmark analysis for comparison BV-CHP efficacy in routine practice. Methods Patients aged 16 years or older with sALCL treated in seven UK and Australian centres and from 14 additional centres from the UK Haematological Malignancy Research Network database (n = 214). Treatment allocation was clinician choice and included best supportive care (BSC). Main outcomes were time to treatment failure (TTF) and overall survival (OS). Multivariable analysis for predictors of both TTF and OS was also undertaken. Results The median age 52 years (range 16–93), 18% ECOG ≥ 3 and 40% of cases were ALK positive. CHOP (cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, vincristine, prednisolone) was employed in 152 (71%) of patients and CHOEP (CHOP + etoposide) in 4% of patients. For CHOP-treated patients overall response rate (ORR) was 65% and complete response (CR) 47%. Only 9% of patients underwent autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). With 57 months median follow-up, 4-year TTF and OS were 41.2% (95% CI 33.1–49.1) and 58.9% (95% CI 50.3–66.5) respectively. Multivariable analysis showed ALK+ status was independently associated with superior TTF (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.21–0.63) but not OS (0.44, 95% CI 0.18–1.07). Discussion We present a retrospective analysis with mature follow-up of one of the largest multicentre populations of sALCL available, comparable to similar large retrospective studies. ALK status remains a strong predictor of outcomes. Conclusion These data serve as a robust benchmark for BV-CHP as the new standard of care for sALCL. Similar real-world evidence with BV-CHP will be desirable to confirm the findings of ECHELON-2. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01764-0.

Infection-related morbidity and mortality are increased in older patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) compared with population-matched controls. Key predictive factors for infection-related hospitalization during treatment with rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) and deaths as a result of infection in older patients during and after treatment with R-CHOP remain incompletely understood. For this study, 690 consecutively treated patients age 70 years or older who received full-dose or attenuated-dose R-CHOP treatment were analyzed for risk of infection-related hospitalization and infection-related death. Median age was 77 years, and 34.4% were 80 years old or older. Median follow-up was 2.8 years (range, 0.4-8.9 years). Patient and baseline disease characteristics were assessed in addition to intended dose intensity (IDI). Of all patients, 72% were not hospitalized with infection. In 331 patients receiving an IDI ≥80%, 33% were hospitalized with ≥1 infections compared with 23.3% of 355 patients receiving an IDI of 80% across the whole cohort. Primary quinolone prophylaxis independently reduced infection-related admission. A total of 51 patients died as a result of infection. The 6-month, 12-month, 2-year, and 5-year cumulative incidences of infection-related death were 3.3%, 5.0%, 7.2%, and 11.1%, respectively. Key independent factors associated with infection-related death were an International Prognostic Index (IPI) score of 3 to 5, Cumulative Illness Rating Scale for Geriatrics (CIRS-G) score ≥6, and low albumin, which enabled us to generate a predictive risk score. We defined a smaller group (15%) of patients (IPI score of 0-2, albumin >36 g/L, CIRS-G score

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

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

Anti-cluster of differentiation 20 (CD20) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have shown promise in follicular lymphoma (FL) as post-induction therapy, by enhancing antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC). However, cytotoxic cells are reduced after this treatment. We hypothesised that ex vivo expanded lymphokine-activated killer (LAK) cells administered to FL-remission patients are safe and improve anti-CD20 efficacy. This open, prospective, phase II, single-arm study assessed safety and efficacy of ex vivo expanded LAK cells in 20 FL-remission patients following rituximab maintenance. Mononuclear cells were obtained in odd rituximab cycles and stimulated with interleukin 2 (IL-2) for 8 weeks, after which >5 × 108 LAK cells were injected. Patients were followed-up for 5 years. At the end of maintenance, peripheral blood cells phenotype had not changed markedly. Natural killer, LAK and ADCC activities of mononuclear cells increased significantly after recombinant human IL-2 (rhIL-2) stimulation in all cycles. Rituximab significantly enhanced cytotoxic activity. No patients discontinued treatment. There were no treatment-related serious adverse events. Three patients had progressed by the end of follow-up. After a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 59.4 (43.8-70.9) months, 85% of patients remained progression free. No deaths occurred. Quality-of-life improved throughout the study. Post-induction LAK cells with rituximab seem safe in the long term. Larger studies are warranted to confirm efficacy.

Systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (sALCL) is a rare T-cell lymphoma associated with poor prognosis after relapse. The immunoconjugate brentuximab vedotin (BV) first became available for relapsed sALCL in England in 2013, following the results of a pivotal phase II study. We present a population-based study describing outcomes of relapsed sALCL in England after BV, using Public Health England data. We obtained information on all relapsed/refractory (r/r) sALCL patients ≥18 years treated with BV monotherapy in England between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2019. The final cohort comprised 127 patients with a median age of 60 years (range 19-89). Eighteen (14·2%) had received stem cell transplant in first remission. Median two-year overall survival (OS) was 46·6%. The vast majority of deaths (59) occurred within 18 months, with very few events after this. Receipt of BV as second line compared to third or fourth line was associated with significantly improved survival (two-year OS 50·3% vs 29·7%, P = 0·03). There was no difference in OS for different subgroups, including anaplastic lymphoma kinase status, age, gender, or receipt of stem cell transplantation in first response. We report excellent survival following treatment with BV in a real-world setting, comparable with previous clinical trial data.

Central nervous system (CNS) relapse following R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisolone) occurs in 2-5% of patents with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Many patients aged ≥70 years are unsuitable for high-dose methotrexate (HDMTX) prophylaxis and therefore often receive stand-alone intrathecal prophylaxis. The CNS international prognostic index (CNS-IPI) is a clinical CNS relapse risk score that has not specifically been validated in elderly patients. The value of CNS prophylaxis in patients aged ≥70 years remains uncertain. Data on 690 consecutively R-CHOP-treated DLBCL patients aged ≥70 years were collected across 8 UK centres (2009-2018). CNS prophylaxis was administered per physician preference. Median age was 77·2 years and median follow-up was 2·8 years. CNS-IPI was 1-3 in 60·1%, 4 in 23·8%, 5 in 13·0% and 6 in 3·3%. Renal and/or adrenal (R/A) involvement occurred in 8·8%. Two-year overall CNS relapse incidence was 2·6% and according to CNS-IPI, 1-3:0·8%, 4:3·6%, 5:3·8% and 6:21·8%. Two-year CNS relapse incidence for R/A was 10·0%. When excluding HDMTX (n = 31) patients, there remained no change in unadjusted/adjusted CNS relapse for intrathecal prophylaxis effect according to CNS-IPI. CNS-IPI is valid in elderly R-CHOP-treated DLBCL patients, with the highest risk in those with CNS-IPI 6 and R/A involvement. We observed no clear benefit for stand-alone intrathecal prophylaxis but observed an independent increased risk of infection-related admission during R-CHOP when intrathecal prophylaxis was administered.

Background The increasing incidence of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in ageing populations places a significant burden on healthcare systems. Co‐morbidity, frailty, and reduced organ and physiological reserve contribute to treatment‐related complications. The optimal dose intensity of R‐CHOP to optimize outcome across different ages with variable frailty and comorbidity burden is unclear. Objectives and Methods We examined the influence of intended (IDI) and relative (RDI) dose intensity of the combination of cyclophosphamide and doxorubicin, age and comorbidity on outcomes for DLBCL patients ≥70 years in a representative, consecutive cohort across eight UK centres (2009–2018). We determined predictors of survival using multivariable Cox regression, and predictors of recurrence before death using competing risks regression. Results Progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly inferior in patients ≥80 vs. 70–79 years (P < 0.001). In contrast, 2‐year cumulative relapse incidence, when accounting for non‐relapse mortality as a competing risk, was no different between 70–79 vs. ≥80 years (P = 0.27) or comorbidity status (CIRS‐G: 0–6 vs. >6) (P = 0.27). In 70–79 years, patients with an IDI ≥80% had a significantly improved PFS and OS (P < 0.001) compared to IDI < 80%. Conversely, in patients ≥80 years, there was no difference in PFS (P = 0.88) or OS (P = 0.75) according to IDI 80%) (P = 0.04) but not for patients ≥80 years comparing IDI (P = 0.32). Conclusion ‘R‐mini‐CHOP' provides adequate lymphoma‐specific disease control and represents a reasonable treatment option in elderly patients ≥80 years aiming for cure.

Systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma (sALCL) is a rare T-cell lymphoma associated with poor prognosis after relapse. The immuno-conjugate Brentuximab Vedotin (BV) first became available for relapsed sALCL in England in 2013, following the results of a pivotal phase II study. We present a population-based study describing outcomes of relapsed sALCL in England after BV, using Public Health England (PHE) data. We obtained information on all relapsed/refractory (r/r) sALCL patients ≥18 years treated with BV monotherapy in England between 1st Jan 2014-31st Dec 2019. The final cohort comprised 127 patients with a median age of 60 years (range 19-89). 18 (14.2%) had received stem cell transplant in first remission. Median 2-year overall survival (OS) was 46.6%. The vast majority of deaths (59) occurred within 18 months, with very few events after this. Receipt of BV as second line compared to third or fourth line was associated with significantly improved survival (2-year OS 50.3% vs 29.7%, p = 0.03). There was no difference in OS for different subgroups, including ALK status, age, gender, or receipt of SCT in first response. We report excellent survival following treatment with BV in a real-world setting, comparable with previous clinical trial data.

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) presenting in elderly, unfit patients represents a clinical challenge. Front-line 'attenuated' or low-intensity immunochemotherapy is often employed, although outcomes are relatively unexplored. We report outcomes of attenuated immunochemotherapy in 95 patients with MCL across 19 centres in the UK and Ireland considered unfit for full-dose rituximab-bendamustine or rituximab-cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisolone (R-CHOP). Regimens examined were rituximab-cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisolone (R-CVP) (n = 19), dose-attenuated R-CHOP (n = 22), dose attenuated rituximab-bendamustine (n = 24) and rituximab-chlorambucil (n = 30). The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary outcomes included overall response, overall survival (OS) and toxicity. The median (range) age was 79 (58-89) years and 50% were aged ≥80 years. The median (range) Cumulative Illness Rating Scale-Geriatric score was 6 (0-24). The median PFS for all patients was 15 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 8·7-21·2) and median OS was 31·4 months (95% CI 19·7-43·2). By multivariable analysis (MVA), the only clinical factor associated with an inferior PFS was blastoid morphology [hazard ratio (HR) 2·90, P = 0·01). Notably, higher treatment intensity (R-CHOP/R-bendamustine composite) provided an independently superior PFS compared with R-CVP/R-chlorambucil (MVA HR 0·49, P = 0·02). Factors associated with inferior OS by MVA were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (HR 2·14, P = 0·04), blastoid morphology (HR 4·08, P = 0·001) and progression of disease at

High-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) is increasingly used as prophylaxis for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) at high risk of central nervous system (CNS) relapse. However, there is limited evidence to guide whether to intercalate HD-MTX (i-HD-MTX) between R-CHOP-21 (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone given at 21-day intervals) or to give it at the end of treatment (EOT) with R-CHOP-21. We conducted a retrospective, multicenter analysis of 334 patients with DLBCL who received CNS prophylaxis with i-HD-MTX (n = 204) or EOT HD-MTX (n = 130). Primary end points were R-CHOP delay rates and HD-MTX toxicity. Secondary end points were CNS relapse rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. The EOT group had more patients with a high CNS international prognostic index (58% vs 39%; P < .001) and more concurrent intrathecal prophylaxis (56% vs 34%; P < .001). Of the 409 cycles of i-HD-MTX given, 82 (20%) were associated with a delay of next R-CHOP (median, 7 days). Delays were significantly increased when i-HD-MTX was given after day 9 post–R-CHOP (26% vs 16%; P = .01). On multivariable analysis, i-HD-MTX was independently associated with increased R-CHOP delays. Increased mucositis, febrile neutropenia, and longer median inpatient stay were recorded with i-HD-MTX delivery. Three-year cumulative CNS relapse incidence was 5.9%, with no differences between groups. There was no difference in survival between groups. We report increased toxicity and R-CHOP delay with i-HD-MTX compared with EOT delivery but no difference in CNS relapse or survival. Decisions on HD-MTX timing should be individualized and, where i-HD-MTX is favored, we recommend scheduling before day 10 of R-CHOP cycles.

There is a Blood Commentary on this article in this issue., Key Points Both watch-and-wait and treated CLL patients have high mortality rates when admitted for COVID-19. Receiving a BTKi for CLL at COVID-19 diagnosis severe enough to require hospitalization did not influence case fatality rate in this study., Given advanced age, comorbidities, and immune dysfunction, chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients may be at particularly high risk of infection and poor outcomes related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Robust analysis of outcomes for CLL patients, particularly examining effects of baseline characteristics and CLL-directed therapy, is critical to optimally manage CLL patients through this evolving pandemic. CLL patients diagnosed with symptomatic COVID-19 across 43 international centers (n = 198) were included. Hospital admission occurred in 90%. Median age at COVID-19 diagnosis was 70.5 years. Median Cumulative Illness Rating Scale score was 8 (range, 4-32). Thirty-nine percent were treatment naive (“watch and wait”), while 61% had received ≥1 CLL-directed therapy (median, 2; range, 1-8). Ninety patients (45%) were receiving active CLL therapy at COVID-19 diagnosis, most commonly Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi’s; n = 68/90 [76%]). At a median follow-up of 16 days, the overall case fatality rate was 33%, though 25% remain admitted. Watch-and-wait and treated cohorts had similar rates of admission (89% vs 90%), intensive care unit admission (35% vs 36%), intubation (33% vs 25%), and mortality (37% vs 32%). CLL-directed treatment with BTKi’s at COVID-19 diagnosis did not impact survival (case fatality rate, 34% vs 35%), though the BTKi was held during the COVID-19 course for most patients. These data suggest that the subgroup of CLL patients admitted with COVID-19, regardless of disease phase or treatment status, are at high risk of death. Future epidemiologic studies are needed to assess severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection risk, these data should be validated independently, and randomized studies of BTKi’s in COVID-19 are needed to provide definitive evidence of benefit., Visual Abstract

The MATRix chemoimmunotherapy regimen is highly effective in patients with newly diagnosed primary diffuse large B-cell lymphoma of the central nervous system (PCNSL). However, nothing is known about its feasibility and efficacy in everyday practice, where patients are more often older/frailer than those enrolled in clinical trials. We conducted a retrospective study addressing tolerability/efficacy of MATRix in 156 consecutive patients with newly diagnosed PCNSL treated outside a clinical trial. Median age and ECOG Performance Status of considered patients were 62 years (range 28–78) and 2 (range 0–4). The overall response rate after MATRix was 79%. Nine (6%) treatment-related deaths were recorded. After a median follow-up of 27.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 24.4–31.9%), the two-year progression-free and overall survival were 56% (95% CI 48.4–64.9%) and 64.1% (95% CI 56.7–72.5%) respectively. Patients not eligible for the IELSG32 trial were treated with lower dose intensity and had substantially worse outcomes than those fulfilling inclusion criteria. This is the largest series of PCNSL patients treated with MATRix outside a trial and recapitulates the IELSG32 trial outcomes in the non-trial setting for patients who fit the trial criteria. These data underscore the feasibility and efficacy of MATRix as induction treatment for fit patients in routine practice.

Background: In the treatment of advanced Hodgkin lymphoma, it is increasingly common UK practice to modify escalated BEACOPP (eBPP) by removing oral procarbazine and replacing it with intravenous dacarbazine (250mg/m2 D2-3) to reduce haematopoietic stem cell and gonadal toxicity. However, published data of the "escalated BEACOPDac (eBPDac)" regimen are very limited. Methods: This is a retrospective study of 225 patients from 20 centres in the UK, Ireland and France who were treated with eBPDac first line for advanced stage Hodgkin Lymphoma. Toxicity outcomes were compared with 58 matched patients treated with eBPP at 4 UK centres and survival outcomes were compared with 2073 eBPP patients in the HD18 trial 1 and with 1088 patients aged 18-59y in the RATHL trial 2,3. Most eBPDac patients were treated as per HD18 protocol. The 34 patients treated in Paris followed the AHL2011 protocol with two courses of eBPDac given upfront and if iPET2 negative were deescalated to 4 cycles of ABVD. Toxicity outcomes: Toxicity was compared between eBPDac patients (n=225; median follow-up 22.1 months) and matched real-world UK eBPP patients (n=58; median follow-up 52.7 months) over the first 4 cycles. eBPP and eBPDac patients were well matched with no significant differences in age (median 23 y vs 26 y), sex, stage (stage 3/4 82% vs 83%) and international prognostic score (IPS 3+ 74% vs 65%). 55% of eBPDac patients received only 4 cycles (vs 12% of eBPP patients; p Disease outcomes: The eBPDac patients (n=225) were younger than the HD18 patients (median age 26 y vs 35 y, p Figure 1 shows Kaplan-Meier plots for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The PFS at 22 months (median follow-up) of eBPDac patients was 94.9% (91.7-98.3%) which is similar to HD18 3 year PFS of 92.3% (91.1-93.5%) and appears superior to RATHL 5 year PFS 81.4% (78.9-83.7%). The difference in PFS between eBPDac and RATHL is most marked in IPS3+ patients. The OS rates with all 3 regimens are excellent, with 22 month eBPDac OS estimate of 98.9% (97.4-100%). Summary/Conclusion: Accepting the limitations of a retrospective study, we suggest that substituting dacarbazine for procarbazine is unlikely to compromise the efficacy of eBPP and may have some toxicity benefits. Despite the clear preference of clinicians to offer this regimen to high-risk advanced stage patients, with nearly 2 years median follow-up we have observed similar PFS and OS compared to HD18 but superior survival estimates compared with 18-59y RATHL patients, suggesting that eBPDac is highly efficacious for the treatment of Hodgkin lymphoma. References: 1Borchmann P et al. Lancet 2017; 390:2790-2802 2Johnson P et al. NEJM. 2016; 374:2419-2429 3Russell J et al. Ann Hematol 2021; 100:1049-1058 Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Brice: MSD: Research Funding; Amgen: Other: Travel/accommodations/expenses; Roche: Other: Travel/accommodations/expenses; Takeda: Research Funding. Menne: Kite/Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel grant, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel grants; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel grants; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Travel grants; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel grants; Bayer: Other: Travel grants; Kyowa Kirin: Other: Travel grants; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Atara: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Other: Honoraria for Lectures; Roche: Other: Honoraria for Lectures. Osborne: Roche: Other; Takeda: Other; Pfizer: Other; Servier: Other; Gilead: Other; Novartis: Other; MSD: Other. Ardeshna: Gilead, Beigene, Celegene, Novartis and Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead, Beigene, Celegene, Novartis and Roche: Honoraria; Norvartis, BMS, Autolus, ADCT, Pharmocyclics and Jansen: Research Funding. Collins: Pfizer: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Beigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celleron: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck Sharp & Dohme: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau. Cwynarski: Adienne, Takeda, Roche, Autolus, KITE, Gilead, Celgene, Atara, Janssenen: Other. Davies: Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Acerta Pharma/AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; BioInvent: Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel to scientific conferences, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel to scientific conferences, Research Funding. Furtado: Abbvie: Other: Conference support. Gallop-Evans: Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kyowa-Kirin: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Iyengar: Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: conference support, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: conference support, Speakers Bureau; Beigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Other: conference support; Janssen: Other: conference support, Speakers Bureau. Linton: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Aptitude Health: Honoraria; Hartley Taylor: Honoraria; University of Manchester: Current Employment; Celgene: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; Genmab: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Martinez-Calle: Abbvie: Other. McKay: Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Honoraria, Other: Travel Support; KITE: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel Support; Beigene: 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. Nagumantry: Takeda, Alexion, Abbvie: Other. Shah: Abbvie, Janssen and Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Uttenthal: Jazz: Other; Takeda: Other; Roche: Other. McMillan: Pfizer: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Follows: Janssen, Abvie, Roche, AZ: Other.

Purpose: Venetoclax-based therapy is a standard-of-care option in first-line and relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Patient management following venetoclax discontinuation remains nonstandard and poorly understood. Experimental Design: To address this, we conducted a large international study to identify a cohort of 326 patients who discontinued venetoclax and have been subsequently treated. Coprimary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival for the post-venetoclax treatments stratified by treatment type [Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi), PI3K inhibitor (PI3Ki), and cellular therapies]. Results: We identified patients with CLL who discontinued venetoclax in the first-line (4%) and relapsed/refractory settings (96%). Patients received a median of three therapies prior to venetoclax; 40% were BTKi naïve (n = 130), and 81% were idelalisib naïve (n = 263). ORR to BTKi was 84% (n = 44) in BTKi-naïve patients versus 54% (n = 30) in BTKi-exposed patients. We demonstrate therapy selection following venetoclax requires prior novel agent exposure consideration and discontinuation reasons. Conclusions: For BTKi-naïve patients, selection of covalently binding BTKis results in high ORR and durable remissions. For BTKi-exposed patients, covalent BTK inhibition is not effective in the setting of BTKi resistance. PI3Kis following venetoclax do not appear to result in durable remissions. We conclude that BTKi in naïve or previously responsive patients and cellular therapies following venetoclax may be the most effective strategies. See related commentary by Rogers, p. 3501

Gene regulation through DNA methylation is a well described phenomenon that has a prominent role in physiological and pathological cell-states. This epigenetic modification is usually grouped in regions denominated CpG islands, which frequently co-localize with gene promoters, silencing the transcription of those genes. Recent genome-wide DNA methylation studies have challenged this paradigm, demonstrating that DNA methylation of regulatory regions outside promoters is able to influence cell-type specific gene expression programs under physiologic or pathologic conditions. Coupling genome-wide DNA methylation assays with histone mark annotation has allowed for the identification of specific epigenomic changes that affect enhancer regulatory regions, revealing an additional layer of complexity to the epigenetic regulation of gene expression. In this review, we summarize the novel evidence for the molecular and biological regulation of DNA methylation in enhancer regions and the dynamism of these changes contributing to the fine-tuning of gene expression. We also analyze the contribution of enhancer DNA methylation on the expression of relevant genes in acute myeloid leukemia and chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms. The characterization of the aberrant enhancer DNA methylation provides not only a novel pathogenic mechanism for different tumors but also highlights novel potential therapeutic targets for myeloid derived neoplasms.

In this study we have interrogated the DNA methylome of myelofibrosis patients using high-density DNA methylation arrays. We detected 35,215 differentially methylated CpGs corresponding to 10,253 genes between myelofibrosis patients and healthy controls. These changes were present both in primary and secondary myelofibrosis, which showed no differences between them. Remarkably, the majorities of differentially methylated CpGs were located outside gene promoter regions and showed a significant association with enhancer regions. This enhancer aberrant hypermethylation showed a negative correlation with the expression of 27 genes in the myelofibrosis cohort. Of these, we focused on ZFP36L1 gene and validated its decreased expression and enhancer DNA hypermethylation in an independent cohort of patients and myeloid cell-lines. In vitro reporter assay and 5' azacitidine treatment confirmed the functional relevance of the enhancer hypermethylation of ZFP36L1. Furthermore, in vitro rescue of ZFP36L1 expression had an impact in cell proliferation and induced apoptosis in SET-2 cell line indicating a possible role of ZFP36L1 as a tumor suppressor gene in myelofibrosis. We describe the DNA methylation profile of myelofibrosis, identifying extensive changes in enhancer elements and revealing ZFP36L1 as a novel candidate tumor suppressor gene.

This retrospective study evaluates the impact of rituximab on PTLD response and survival in a single-centre cohort. PTLD cases between 1984 and 2009, including heart, kidney, liver and lung transplant recipients, were included. Survival was analysed taking into account the type of PTLD (monomorphic vs. polymorphic), EBV infection status, IPI score, Ann Arbor stage and use of rituximab. Among 1335 transplanted patients, 24 developed PTLD. Median age was 54 yr (range 29-69), median time to diagnosis 50 months (range 0-100). PTLD type was predominantly late/monomorphic (79% and 75%), mostly diffuse large B-cell type. Overall response rate (ORR) was 62% (66% rituximab vs. 50% non-rituximab; P = 0.5). R-CHOP-like regimens were used most frequently (72% of patients treated with rituximab). Median overall survival was 64 months (CI 95% 31-96). OS was significantly increased in patients treated with rituximab (P = 0.01; CI 95% rituximab 58-79 months; non-rituximab 1-30 months). Post-transplant immunosuppression regimen had no effect on survival or time to PTLD, except for cyclosporine A (CyA), which associated with increased time to PTLD (P = 0.02). Rituximab was associated with increased survival in our single-centre series, and it should be considered as first-line therapy for PTLD patients. The possible protective effect of CyA for development of PTLD should be prospectively evaluated.

Gene regulation through DNA methylation is a well described phenomenon that has a prominent role in physiological and pathological cell-states. This epigenetic modification is usually grouped in regions denominated CpG islands, which frequently co-localize with gene promoters, silencing the transcription of those genes. Recent genome-wide DNA methylation studies have challenged this paradigm, demonstrating that DNA methylation of regulatory regions outside promoters is able to influence cell-type specific gene expression programs under physiologic or pathologic conditions. Coupling genome-wide DNA methylation assays with histone mark annotation has allowed for the identification of specific epigenomic changes that affect enhancer regulatory regions, revealing an additional layer of complexity to the epigenetic regulation of gene expression. In this review, we summarize the novel evidence for the molecular and biological regulation of DNA methylation in enhancer regions and the dynamism of these changes contributing to the fine-tuning of gene expression. We also analyze the contribution of enhancer DNA methylation on the expression of relevant genes in acute myeloid leukemia and chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms. The characterization of the aberrant enhancer DNA methylation provides not only a novel pathogenic mechanism for different tumors but also highlights novel potential therapeutic targets for myeloid derived neoplasms.

Delayed lymphocyte and T-cell immune reconstitution following bendamustine-rituximab (BR) for indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL) has been described, but no information is available for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL). We present a population-based retrospective analysis of immune reconstitution and risk of infection following BR. Outcomes included timing/correlates of CD4+ recovery and risk of ≥grade 3 infections. Consecutively treated patients (1 April 2014 to 31 January 2017) were included (n = 295),with a median age of 65 years (range 33-92); 57% were 1st line treatments. Median cumulative bendamustine dose was 1080 mg/m2 (range 140-1440 mg/m2 ). CD4/CD8/CD19/NK subsets were available for 148 patients. Median follow-up was 24 months. Median times to lymphocyte count (ALC) recovery (≥1 × 109 /l) and CD4+ recovery (≥0·2 × 109 /l) were 26 and 24 months, respectively. Bendamustine total dose >1080 mg/m2 (hazard ratio [HR] 0·4; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0·2-0·8), end-of-treatment ALC ≤0·4 × 109 /l (HR 0·53; 95% CI: 0·3-0·9) and CD4+ 3 years was a significant risk factor for ≥grade 3 infections (Odds ratio 3·4; 95% CI: 1·4-6·9). CD4+ recovery after BR is unexpectedly delayed and late recovery is associated with risk of serious infections. Monitoring CD4+ following BR could identify patients at high risk of delayed infections.