Search

We reviewed the literature (January 2010-June 2021) on the effectiveness of debulking strategies before venetoclax initiation in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia to reduce tumor burden, downgrade tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) risk, and avoid hospitalization. Low TLS incidence and reduced TLS risk based on tumor burden were reported following debulking in clinical trials. Real-world observational studies reporting debulking regimens recorded no TLS events, and those without debulking strategies had greater TLS incidence. Debulking prior to venetoclax considerably reduces TLS incidence. Further clinical trials and real-world studies may provide additional evidence on effectiveness of debulking in reducing TLS incidence and hospitalization need.

Objectives The combination of lenalidomide + rituximab (R2) has shown complementary clinical activity and is a tolerable regimen in both untreated and relapsed or refractory (R/R) indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), as well as mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), an uncommon but aggressive form of NHL. The MAGNIFY phase 3 trial previously reported an ORR of 54% in patients with R/R MCL (Sharman J, et al. Hematol Oncol. 2019). Presented here are updated analyses from this trial. Materials and methods MAGNIFY is a multicenter, phase 3b trial (NCT01996865) in patients with R/R follicular lymphoma (FL) grades 1–3b, transformed FL, marginal zone lymphoma, and MCL. Lenalidomide 20 mg on d 1–21 of a 28-d cycle + rituximab 375 mg/m2/wk cycle 1 and then every 8 wk starting with cycle 3 (R2) is given for 12 cycles followed by 1:1 randomization in patients with stable disease, partial response, or complete response/complete response unconfirmed (CR/CRu) to R2 vs rituximab maintenance for 18 mo. The primary end point is progression-free survival (PFS) by 1999 International Working Group (IWG) criteria. Secondary end points include safety, CR rate, duration of response (DOR), duration of CR (DOCR), time-to-response (TTR), time-to-next antilymphoma therapy, and overall survival. This analysis evaluates the interim primary endpoint of overall response rate (ORR) by 1999 IWG criteria and safety of R2 induction in patients with MCL in the induction intention-to-treat population. Results As of August 28, 2020, 73 patients with MCL were enrolled (median age, 70.0 y [range, 51–88]); 89% had stage III/IV disease, and 41% had bulky disease (> 7 cm or > 3 cm ×3 lymph nodes). All patients had received prior rituximab-containing therapy, with 25 (34%) rituximab refractory (progression ≤ 6 mo after last rituximab dose). Seven patients (10%) had received prior ibrutinib. Median follow-up was 31.7 mo for patients still alive. ORR was 51%, with 34% CR rate (CR + CRu). Response rates were similar in patients refractory to rituximab (ORR = 48%, CR/CRu = 32%) and patients not refractory to rituximab (ORR = 52%, CR/CRu = 35%). Median DOR was 31.6 mo; median DOCR was not reached; median TTR was 2.8 mo, and median PFS was 28.0 mo, with 1-year PFS rate of 57%. The most common treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of any grade were neutropenia (51%), fatigue (44%), diarrhea (32%), constipation (28%), cough (28%), dyspnea (26%), and nausea (26%). Grade 3/4 neutropenia was 46%; all other grade 3/4 TEAEs were ≤ 11%. Discussion R2 is an active and tolerated regimen with durable responses among patients with R/R MCL and mostly naive to Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy. Conclusions These results suggest that R2 should be considered as a therapeutic option for patients with R/R MCL.

Objectives Relapse is expected when treating patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) and marginal zone lymphoma (MZL), with a shortened response associated with each relapse. Lenalidomide combined with rituximab (R2) has shown enhanced activity, with a recently reported median progression free-survival (PFS) of 39.4 months in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma, including those with FL and MZL (Augment; J Clin Oncol. 2019;37:1188). Materials and methods MAGNIFY is a multicenter, phase 3b trial (NCT01996865) in patients with R/R follicular lymphoma (FL) grades 1–3b, transformed FL (tFL), MZL, and mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). Lenalidomide 20 mg on d 1–21 of a 28-d cycle + rituximab 375 mg/m2/wk cycle 1 and then every 8 wk starting with cycle 3 (R2) is given for 12 cycles followed by 1:1 randomization in patients with stable disease, partial response, or complete response/complete response unconfirmed (CR/CRu) to R2 vs rituximab maintenance for 18 mo. The primary end point is progression-free survival (PFS) by 1999 International Working Group criteria. Secondary end points include safety, CR rate, duration of response (DOR), duration of CR, time-to-response, time-to-next antilymphoma therapy, and overall survival. Data presented here focus on induction R2 in efficacy-evaluable patients with MZL compared with the overall population of FL grades 1–3a+MZL (not including FL grade 3b, tFL, or MCL) receiving ≥ 1 treatment with baseline/post-baseline assessments. Results As of August 28, 2020, 394 patients with FL grades 1–3a and MZL enrolled; 76 (19%) had MZL. The median age of patients with MZL was 68 years (range, 46–90), 68 (89%) had stage III/IV disease, and 72 (95%) had prior rituximab-containing therapy. Overall response rate in the MZL and overall population was 66% and 75% with 39% and 44% having a CR/CRu. Median DOR was 38.6 months (95% CI, 29.4–not reached [NR]) and NR (95% CI, 38.6–NR). The median PFS was 40.9 months (95% CI, 27.8–NR) and 41.2 months (95% CI, 38.7–NR). In the MZL population, 43 patients (57%) have completed 12 cycles of R2, and 42 (55%) have been randomized and entered maintenance. Twenty-eight patients (37%) prematurely discontinued both lenalidomide and rituximab, primarily due to adverse events (AEs; n = 11; 14%) and progressive disease (n = 6; 8%). The most common (≥ 20%) all-grade AEs were neutropenia (49%), fatigue (43%), diarrhea (37%), thrombocytopenia (24%), constipation (24%), and anemia (22%). Most common (≥ 10%) grade 3/4 AEs were neutropenia (41%; 1 patient [1%] had febrile neutropenia), thrombocytopenia (13%), and leukopenia (13%). Discussion R2 is active with a tolerable safety profile in patients with R/R MZL. The efficacy and safety profile of R2 in patient with MZL were similar to results observed in the overall MAGNIFY population. Conclusions These results suggest that R2 should be considered as a therapeutic option for patients with R/R MZL.

Summary Purpose Brentuximab vedotin (BV) is an anti-CD30 antibody-drug conjugate used in the treatment of several types of lymphomas. Expression of the target antigen has also been reported on a variety of malignant tumors of nonlymphoid origin. This phase 2, open-label study evaluated the safety and antitumor activity of BV in patients with CD30-expressing nonlymphomatous malignancies. Methods Patients were dosed with 1.8 or 2.4 mg/kg BV once every three weeks. Antitumor activity was assessed at Cycles 2, 4, and every 4 cycles thereafter. Patients with stable disease or better were eligible to continue treatment until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or study closure. Results Of the 2693 patients screened, 3.8% had solid tumors with CD30 expression and 63 eligible patients with solid tumors enrolled in this study. The most common CD30 positive solid tumors were testicular cancer and mesothelioma. Both subtypes had more than one patient with an objective response. The median duration of BV exposure was 6.1 weeks. The disease control rate, defined as achieving stable disease or better at any point during the study, was 55%. The objective response rate was 11%, with a median duration of response of 2.92 months. The most common adverse events reported were fatigue (57%), nausea (33%), and decreased appetite (32%). Conclusion The safety profile of BV in patients with solid tumors was similar to the known safety profile of BV. In solid tumors, BV had modest activity as a single agent, which was similar to other second-line treatments already available to patients. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10637-019-00768-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are immunoconjugates and comprise a monoclonal antibody that is chemically attached to a cytotoxic drug (or payload) via a stable chemical linker. Since the approval of the first ADC in 2000, there are now nine different approved agents and over 100 ADCs in the drug-development pipeline.This review briefly describes the ADCs approved for treatment of lymphoma and their distinguishing factors in terms of target, linker and payload. The clinical implications of the use of ADCs are also considered. Here, we focus on polatuzumab vedotin, an ADC targeted to CD79b, which is approved for the treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (R/R DLBCL) who have received at least one (EU approval) or two (US approval) prior therapies and are not eligible for bone marrow transplantation. The characteristics of polatuzumab vedotin are discussed and clinical data are presented. The future of polatuzumab vedotin clinical development, and ADCs in general, are also considered.ADCs represent a significant advance in the treatment of lymphoma. Polatuzumab vedotin has shown clinical efficacy and a tolerable safety profile in both first-line and R/R DLBCL; future studies are planned to further investigate this ADC.

The CLL-IPI is a risk-weighted prognostic model for previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), but has not been evaluated in patients with relapsed CLL or on novel therapies. We evaluated the CLL-IPI in 897 patients with relapsed/refractory CLL in 3 randomized trials testing idelalisib (PI3Kδ inhibitor). The CLL-IPI identified patients as low (2.2%), intermediate (12.8%), high (48.7%), and very high (36.2%) risk, and was prognostic for survival (log-rank p65, β2-microglobulin >3.5mg/L, unmutated immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region gene, and deletion 17p/TP53 mutation were independently prognostic, but Rai I-IV or Binet B/C was not. The CLL-IPI is prognostic for survival in relapsed CLL and with idelalisib therapy. However, low/intermediate risk is uncommon, and regression parameters of individual factors in this risk-weighted model appear different in relapsed CLL. Reassessment of the weighting of the individual variables might optimize the model in this setting.

Summary Background Clinically validated prognostic models for overall survival do not exist for patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) who are on targeted therapies. We aimed to create a prognostic model to identify high-risk individuals who do not achieve a good outcome with available targeted therapies. Methods In this retrospective, pooled cohort study, 2475 patients with CLL treated between June 22, 2012, and Sept 23, 2015, in six randomised trials of ibrutinib, idelalisib, and venetoclax, or at the Mayo Clinic CLL Database (MCCD) were included. Eligible patients had CLL, were previously treated, were aged 18 years or older, had ECOG performance status 0–1, and required further treatment as per the international workshop on CLL 2008 criteria. There was heterogeneity in other eligibility criteria. We evaluated 28 candidate factors known to affect the overall survival of these patients and applied univariate and multivariate analyses to derive the risk score in a training dataset (n=727) of patients treated with ibrutinib or chemoimmunotherapy. We validated the score in an internal-validation dataset (n=242) of patients treated with ibrutinib or chemoimmunotherapy and three external-validation datasets (idelalisib or chemoimmunotherapy dataset, n=897; venetoclax or chemoimmunotherapy dataset, n=389; and the MCCD [including patients treated with heterogeneous therapies], n=220), applying C-statistics as a measure of discrimination. Findings The derived model consisted of four factors (one point each; serum β2-microglobulin ≥5 mg/dL, lactate dehydrogenase >upper limit of normal, haemoglobin Interpretation We present the first validated risk score to predict overall survival in patients with relapsed or refractory CLL treated with targeted therapy. The model is applicable to patients treated with all currently approved targeted therapies (ibrutinib, idelalisib, and venetoclax) and chemoimmunotherapy. This tool allows the identification of a well defined cohort of previously treated patients with CLL who are at high risk of death, and could be used in future prospective trials to test therapeutic options for these patients with an unmet clinical need. Funding Lymphoma Research Foundation, Lymphoma Research Fund (Andrew D Zelenetz), and National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute.

Context: For patients with metastatic papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) refractory to radioactive iodine (RAI) treatment, systemic chemotherapy has limited efficacy. Such tumors frequently harbor BRAF V600E, and this alteration may predict responsiveness to vemura-fenib treatment. Objective: We report a metastatic PTC patient refractory to RAI treatment that underwent genomic profiling by next-generation sequencing. The sole genomic alteration identified was BRAF V600E on a near diploid genome with trisomy 1q. With vemurafenib treatment, the patient experienced a dramatic radiographic and clinical improvement, with the duration of an ongoing antitumor response exceeding 23 months. Design: Hybridization capture of 3,769 exons of 236 cancer-related genes and the introns of 19 genes frequently rearranged in cancer was applied to >50 ng of DNA extracted from a formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded biopsy of a lymph node containing metastatic PTC and was sequenced to a high, uniform coverage of ×616. Results: A BRAF V600E alteration was identified with no other somatic genomic alterations present within a near diploid tumor genome. The patient initially received vemurafenib at 960 mg twice daily that was reduced to 480 mg twice daily due to rash and diarrhea and has experienced an ongoing antitumor response exceeding 23 months by both PET-CT and dedicated CT imaging. Conclusions: Genomic profiling in metastatic, RAI-refractory PTC can reveal a targetable BRAF V600E alteration without compounding somatic alterations, and such patients may derive a more prolonged benefit from vemurafenib treatment. Prospective clinical trials are ongoing to confirm our preliminary observation.

TPS7571 Background: Rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (R-CHOP) remains the standard of care in pts with previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) but outcomes remain poor in pts with high-risk disease. Pola is an antibody–drug conjugate targeting CD79b; it delivers the antimitotic agent monomethyl auristatin E. Addition of pola to bendamustine and R in pts with transplant-ineligible DLBCL resulted in improved OS (Sehn et al, 2018). In front-line treatment of DLBCL, pola is being evaluated as a replacement for vincristine within the R-CHOP regimen. In a phase Ib/II study in pts with higher risk DLBCL, pola + R-CHP demonstrated promising efficacy and a safety profile similar to that observed in the R-CHOP arm of the GOYA study (Tilly et al, 2017; Vitolo et al, 2017). The phase 3 POLARIX study investigates pola + R-CHP in untreated DLBCL. Methods: POLARIX is an ongoing, international, randomized, double-blind, active-placebo-controlled, phase 3 study in pts with previously untreated DLBCL. Pts aged 18–80 years with CD20-positive DLBCL (including DLBCL not otherwise specified, GCB, and ABC subtypes), ECOG performance status 0–2, and IPI score 2–5, are stratified by IPI score (2 vs 3–5), bulky disease and geographical region and randomized (1:1). Pts receive 6 cycles of either: pola 1.8 mg/kg on Day 1 plus R-CHP (standard dosing schedule) plus vincristine placebo; or pola placebo plus R-CHOP (standard dosing schedule). R monotherapy is administered in cycles 7 and 8 (both arms). PET-CT and CT scans are obtained at screening, after 4 cycles (planned interim assessment), and 6–8 weeks after end of study treatment. Follow-up will continue for 5 years after treatment. Primary endpoint: investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS; Lugano classification). Secondary endpoints: independent review committee-assessed PET-CT complete response rate at end of treatment, event-free survival, 2-year PFS rate, and OS. Enrolment began Nov 2017. This trial is currently recruiting, and plans to enrol 875 patients in 24 countries. Clinical trial information: NCT03274492.

Introduction: Maintenance and/or improvements in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) are important in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). GIBB (NCT02320487) is an ongoing, open-label, single-arm Phase II study of the combination of obinutuzumab (GA101; G) and bendamustine (B) (BG) in patients with previously untreated CLL. A previous report from the GIBB study demonstrated an investigator-assessed objective response rate of 89.2%, a complete response rate of 49.0%, and no unexpected safety signals with BG (Sharman et al. ASCO 2017). Here, we present the HRQoL data from GIBB. Methods: In the GIBB trial, patients received BG by intravenous infusion over six 28-day cycles: obinutuzumab 100mg on Day (D)1, 900mg on D2, and 1000mg on D8 and D15 of Cycle 1, then 1000mg on D1 of Cycles 2-6; B 90mg/m2 on D2-3 of Cycle 1, and on D1-2 of Cycles 2-6. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life - Core (EORTC QLQ-C30) questionnaire includes a global health status measure, 5 functional scales (physical, emotional, cognitive, social, and role functioning), 8 symptom scales/items (fatigue, nausea and vomiting, pain, dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, and diarrhea), and an item on financial difficulties (Aaronson et al. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993). The EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire-Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia 16 (QLQ-CLL16) is a 16-item module, specific to CLL, containing 4 multi-item scales (fatigue, treatment side effects, disease symptoms, and infection) and 2 single items (social activities and future health worries; EORTC website, accessed July 25, 2017). Both questionnaires were completed by patients on D1 of Cycles 1 (baseline), 3, and 6, at the end of induction treatment (defined as +28 days from D1 of Cycle 6 or early treatment termination visit), at the response visit (defined as 2-3 months after the end of induction treatment, for all patients who received study treatment and had not experienced disease progression), and every 3 months thereafter at follow-up visits. HRQoL scores were linear transformed to a 0-100 point scale. Mean baseline scores and mean score changes at each visit were evaluated. A threshold of ≥10-point change in score represents a clinically meaningful difference. Results: Of 102 patients enrolled in the trial, 98 completed a questionnaire at baseline and at least one other questionnaire during a follow-up visit. Questionnaire completion rates were 86.7%, 77.6%, 80.6%, and 86.7% at Cycles 3, 6, at the end of induction treatment, and at the response visit, respectively. Median age was 61 years and 68.4% of patients were male. According to the EORTC QLQ-C30 (Figure 1), clinically meaningful improvements were observed for global health status at the response visit, and for role functioning at the end of induction treatment and at the response visit. A trend was observed for improvement in emotional functioning. The greatest improvement in HRQoL score was observed for fatigue (mean baseline score: 37.64), with mean changes from baseline of −4.01, −5.48, −11.67, and −16.34 at Cycles 3, 6, at the end of induction treatment, and at the response visit, respectively. Improvements were also observed for insomnia (mean baseline score: 33.33), with mean changes from baseline of −6.59, −9.09, −9.7, and −10.98, respectively. There was no worsening in other patient-reported symptoms or functional status over time. Similarly, with the EORTC QLQ-CLL16 (Figure 2), clinically meaningful improvements in symptoms were observed for fatigue, disease symptoms, and future health worries during treatment, at the end of induction treatment and/or at the response visit. The greatest change at the response visit was observed for fatigue (−21.23) and future health worries (−20.24). A positive trend was also observed for improvements in the social activities scale. Conclusions: We previously reported that BG is an effective regimen for first-line treatment of CLL with no unexpected safety signals. In addition, the HRQoL data from the GIBB trial suggest that BG treatment improves patient HRQoL. Several clinically meaningful improvements were observed in HRQoL, including global health status, functioning, symptoms, and future health worries at the time of the response visit. Disclosures Sharman: Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: GIBB is sponsored by Genentech Inc. Third-party editorial support, under the direction of Anthony Masaquel, was provided by Lynda McEvoy of Gardiner-Caldwell Communications, and was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Yimer: Juno pharma: Equity Ownership; Bellucum Pharma: Equity Ownership. Babu: Alexion: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy. Li: Genentech: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mun: Genentech: Employment, Equity Ownership. Trask: Genentech: Employment, Other: stock. Masaquel: Genentech Inc.: Employment, Other: I Receive Roche stock options. Reyes: Genentech Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Multiple myeloma is commonly associated with genomic alterations that result in hyperactivation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway. BRAF (v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B) V600E activating mutations have been observed in 4% of multiple myeloma cases. Patients with BRAF V600Eemutated myeloma may have an unusually aggressive clinical course associated with prominent extramedullary disease and a short duration of response to standard therapies. Vemurafenib, a BRAF V600Eespecific inhibitor and an FDA approved agent for treatment of melanoma, also has clinical activity in BRAF V600E mutationepositive multiple myeloma.

Introduction: Opportunistic infections such as Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) occur commonly in immunocompromised hosts such as patients (pts) with cancer (especially hematological malignancies such as chronic lymphocytic leukemia [CLL] and indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma [iNHL]) or those receiving immunosuppressive therapies (such as steroids, chemotherapy). Recently, an increased risk of PJP infection was identified in 3 ongoing phase 3 studies evaluating idelalisib, administered in combination with the standard regimens rituximab (R) or bendamustine and rituximab (BR), in front-line CLL and early-line iNHL. Subsequently, a comprehensive analysis evaluating PJP infection across the clinical development program was performed to identify possible risk factors for developing PJP infection, including age, concomitant therapy (co-therapy) administered, geographic distribution of PJP infection, and regional use of prophylaxis. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 2198 pts receiving study treatment with idelalisib alone or in combination with co-therapy (anti-CD20 antibody or BR) and pts receiving only co-therapy (anti-CD20 ± bendamustine) (n = 1391 and 807, respectively) across 8 studies (frontline/relapsed CLL and relapsed iNHL) between 2010 and 2016 was performed. PJP infection was defined based on MedDRA high-level term of pneumocystis infections. In this analysis, other parameters were included for evaluation of risk of developing PJP infection-prophylaxis for PJP, geographic region, age, and CD4 count. Results: The overall incidence of PJP infection was 2.5% in pts on idelalisib ± co-therapy vs 0.2% in pts receiving only anti-CD20 antibody alone or BR alone (relative risk = 12.5). The median time to PJP event was 141 days since initiation of IDELA or co-therapy. The incidence of PJP infection was similar, irrespective of pt age. In the pt population receiving IDELA ± co-therapy - prophylaxis for PJP reduced the incidence of infection to 1.3% (from 3.4% in pts not receiving prophylaxis). Additionally, analysis by type of co-therapy received - the incidence of PJP infection was 2.2% vs 3.1% with IDELA + BR and IDELA + anti-CD20 alone respectively. A correlation between CD4 count ( Conclusion: There is a small but increased risk of PJP infection during treatment with idelalisib within the clinical trial program. These data suggest that prophylaxis for PJP may reduce the risk of infection by as much as 60%. Administration of PJP prophylaxis is now recommended in all pts receiving treatment with idelalisib. Disclosures Sehn: roche/genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; seattle genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; TG therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; lundbeck: Consultancy, Honoraria; janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Hallek:Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; F. Hoffmann-LaRoche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Jurczak:Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Celltrion, Inc: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding. Brown:Infinity: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Sun BioPharma: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy. Barr:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy. Catalano:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead Sciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Coutre:Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding. Furman:Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Lamanna:Gilead Sciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Zelenetz:Gilead Sciences: Research Funding. Sharman:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Adewoye:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kim:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Flinn:Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding; RainTree Oncology Services: Equity Ownership. Salles:Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Introduction: Entospletinib is an orally bioavailable, selective inhibitor of spleen tyrosine kinase. Targeting the B-cell receptor (BCR) signaling pathway with Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) and PI3Kd inhibitors (BTKi and PI3Kdi), approved for treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), has been a successful therapeutic strategy. Entospletinib is active in CLL and preclinical data suggest that entospletinib may be effective even in the context of resistance to BTKi, including that conferred by activation of PLCγ2 (Liu et. al. Blood 2015). Methods: This is an ongoing phase 2 trial (NCT01799889) of entospletinib in CLL and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The study protocol includes 2 CLL cohorts for patients who have been previously treated with BTKi or PI3Kdi and 2 additional cohorts for patients with Richter's transformation who have had analogous prior treatment. Patients were treated with entospletinib monotherapy (400 mg BID) and evaluated using modified Hallek/IWG-CLL criteria every 2 to 3 months as previously described (Sharman et. al. Blood 2014). Results: As of June 28, 2016, 34 patients have been enrolled, and 33 have been treated. Of the 28 patients without Richter's transformation, 23 were previously treated with a BTKi (22 ibrutinib, 1 CC-292) and 5 with a PI3Kdi (idelalisib). Median number of prior treatments was 3 (1-7) for patients with prior BTKi and 5 (3-8) for prior PI3Kdi treatment. In total, 35% of the BTKi patients and 60% of the PI3Kdi patients had either a TP53 mutation or del17p; 75% did not have IgHV hypermutation. A median of 2 months (0-14) had elapsed since the prior treatment; 17 patients had progressive disease on prior therapy, while 11 discontinued prior therapy due to intolerance. Thirteen of the 28 patients enrolled without Richter's transformation remain on study with a median PFS of 5.6 months for the prior BTKi cohort and a median PFS of 6.9 months for the prior PI3Kdi cohort. Of the 15 patients who have stopped therapy, 9 discontinued due to disease progression, 5 discontinued due to an AE, and 1 withdrew consent. Overall, 19 patients were evaluable for response (15 BTKi/4 PI3Kdi; Table 1). Of the 6 patients who achieved a PR, all lacked IgHV hypermutation and 3 had either a TP53 mutation or del17p, and 3 had progressed on prior therapy. Following Richter's transformation, 5 patients have been treated with entospletinib (3 with prior BTKi therapy and 2 with prior PI3Ki). The interval since prior treatment was short ( All patients on study experienced a treatment-emergent AE (TEAE) and 49% experienced a serious AE (SAE; Table 2). Only 1 SAE, pancreatitis, was attributed to entospletinib. The most common TEAEs and laboratory abnormalities are listed in Table 2. Additional Grade ≥3 TEAEs reported in more than 1 patient included sepsis (3), atrial fibrillation (2), dehydration (2), neutropenia (2), pneumonia (2), respiratory failure (2), and urinary tract infection (2). The only TEAE attributable to entospletinib that led to discontinuation of treatment was fatigue. Five patients died on study; 2 from progressive disease and 1 each from heart failure, Guillain-Barre syndrome, and cardiac arrest; 3 of these 5 patients died within 30 days of the last dose of study drug [disease progression (2), cardiac arrest (1)]. Conclusion: Early experience from this trial with ongoing enrollment demonstrates that entospletinib has clinical activity following therapy with either BTKi or PI3Kdi. Continued investigation of treatment with entospletinib following progression after therapy with BCR signaling pathway inhibitors is warranted. Disclosures Sharman: Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Shustov:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; SPECTRUM: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria. Smith:Celgene: Honoraria; Spectrum: Honoraria; Abbvie: Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria. Kolibaba:Cell Therapeutics: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Pharmcyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding. Abella-Dominicis:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhang:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mitra:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yasenchak:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Awan:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Innate Pharma: Research Funding; Novartis Oncology: Consultancy.

Introduction: Idelalisib (IDELA) is a targeted PI3Kd inhibitor approved as monotherapy in relapsed follicular lymphoma and in combination with rituximab in relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Increased rates of adverse events (AEs) were recently observed in the IDELA vs placebo arms of randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating IDELA added to standard therapies in front-line CLL and early-line indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL). AEs leading to death were mainly infectious and included pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) and cytomegalovirus (CMV). This analysis across trials in the relapsed population evaluated whether quantitative changes in lymphocyte subsets may have contributed to these AEs. Methods: Peripheral blood immunophenotypic data available for analysis from patients (pts) (n = 1,480) treated in 5 IDELA RCTs were analyzed. Three studies (n = 787) included pts with relapsed CLL (NCT01569295: IDELA + bendamustine-rituximab [BR] vs placebo + BR; NCT01539512: IDELA + R vs placebo + R and NCT0165902: IDELA + ofatumumab [O] vs placebo + O) and 2 studies (n = 693) included R/R iNHL pts (NCT01732913: IDELA + R vs placebo + R and NCT01732926: IDELA +BR vs placebo + BR). Absolute numbers of T (CD4+ and CD8+), B (CD19+) and NK (CD16+/CD56+) cells were analyzed longitudinally in both IDELA and placebo pts across the 5 studies. Lymphocyte subsets were analyzed separately in those who died and then correlated with specific grade ≥3 AEs including infections, febrile neutropenia, and respiratory (acute respiratory failure, pneumonitis) events. Analysis was conducted within individual study and for all studies combined. Of note, samples were collected more frequently during the first 6 months (during combination therapy) and collection times varied among the 5 studies. Results: There was no specific trend noted with the CD8+ T-cells between treatment groups across the studies. Generally, NK-cells were decreased to a similar degree in both IDELA and placebo pts at weeks 10 to 12 with recovery starting around week 24. There were no differences in median NK- and CD8+ T-cell counts between pts with grade ≥3 AEs and no AEs within either group. In both BR trials, CD4+ T-cells nadir to 900 cells/µL. Conclusion: Within 5 RCTs evaluating IDELA vs placebo in combination with an anti-CD20 mAb or BR in R/R CLL or iNHL, there was no correlation between grade ≥3 AEs and NK- or CD8+ T-cell counts. Median CD4+ T-cells in pts on the BR trials were lower in both groups in those with and without AEs, compared with non-BR trials. In addition, pts with PJP and CMV infections were noted to have CD4+ T-cells Figure 1 Figure 1. Incidence of PJP and CMV Infections and Correlation with CD4 Count. Disclosures Sharman: Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Salles:Mundipharma: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Jurczak:Celltrion, Inc: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding. Jones:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; PCYC: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Owen:Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria; Lundbeck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding. Munugalavadla:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dreiling:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Xiao:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rao:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Flinn:Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding; RainTree Oncology Services: Equity Ownership. O'Brien:Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Introduction: Entospletinib (GS-9973) is an orally bioavailable, selective inhibitor of spleen tyrosine kinase (Syk). Syk is a mediator of B-cell receptor signaling in normal and transformed B-cells. Targeting the B-cell receptor (BCR)-signaling pathway has been the focus in many types of B-cell related hematological malignancies including mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). Methods: This reports the MCL cohort in a phase 2 trial that more broadly evaluated the efficacy and safety of entospletinib (800 mg BID) in patients with relapsed and refractory hematological malignancies (NCT01799889). Tumor response was assessed per Cheson 2007 criteria with imaging planned at weeks 8, 16, 24, and then every 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was PFS at week 16. All efficacy data were assessed by an Independent Review Committee. Results: A cohort of 39 patients with MCL was enrolled. The median age was 72 years (range: 49-92), 64% were male, and a median number of prior regimens were 2 (range: 1-6). Prior therapy included anti-CD20 antibodies (95%), alkylating agents (95%; bendamustine 44%), and anthracyclines (77%). Three patients (8%) have received ibrutinib either as investigational drug (n = 1) or as an approved drug (n = 2), and 1 patient (3%) received idelalisib. Median duration of treatment was 21 weeks (range: 1-87), with 1 patient continuing on treatment. Thirty-five (90%) patients were evaluable for tumor response. Four patients (10%) discontinued prior to initial tumor assessment: death (n = 1), disease progression (n = 2) and investigator's discretion (n = 1). The most common TEAEs (any grade/≥gr 3, independent of causality) and common lab abnormalities are summarized in Table 1. There were 4 TEAEs that led to study drug discontinuation (all n = 1): cardiac arrest, pruritus, pyrexia, and maculopapular rash. Six deaths were reported, none of which were related to study drug. The ORR was 15% (90% CI: 6.9%, 28.1%), with 6 (15%) patients achieving a PR and 23 (59%) patients maintaining a stable disease. The PFS rate at week 16 was 66% (95% CI: 46%, 79%). Median PFS was 5.6 months (95% CI: 3.6 months, 8.9 months). These results are based on data analysis of June 28, 2016. Conclusion: Entospletinib was well tolerated and demonstrated modest activity in patients with relapsed or refractory MCL. Further development of entospletinib in MCL will focus on the development of combination therapy. Figure 1 Waterfall Plot of Best % Change from Baseline in SPD. Figure 1. Waterfall Plot of Best % Change from Baseline in SPD. Figure 2 Kaplan-Meier Curve of Progression-Free Survival. Figure 2. Kaplan-Meier Curve of Progression-Free Survival. Disclosures Sharman: Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kolibaba:Amgen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Cell Therapeutics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Pharmcyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding. Shustov:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; SPECTRUM: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Nay:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory board; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory board; Amgen: Other: Advisory board; Lyndbeck: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria. Zhang:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Shi:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Forero:University of Alabama at Birmingham: Research Funding. Assouline:BMS: Speakers Bureau; Lundbeck: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau.

Conclusions: LDCT lung cancer screening is an uncommon practice at an academic medical center despite guideline recommendations. Furthermore, PCPs report ordering chest x-ray, a non-recommended screening test, more often than LDCT. Cost, potential harm, and patients’ lack of knowledge were the most commonly perceived barriers. However, PCP knowledge of LDCT guidelines was strongly associated with ordering LDCT. Educational interventions are critical to increasing LDCT screening and should specifically address effectiveness, guideline recommendations, cost, and potential harms. Author Disclosure: J. Lewis: None. W.J. Petty: None. J.A. Tooze: None. D.P. Miller: None. C. Chiles: None. A.A. Miller: None. K.E. Weaver: None.