Search

Summary Background Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and high-risk features have poorer outcomes on ibrutinib than those without high-risk features. The aim of this study was to assess the benefit of adding ublituximab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, to ibrutinib therapy in this population. Methods We did a randomised, phase 3, multicentre study (GENUINE) of patients aged 18 years or older with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia with at least one of 17p deletion, 11q deletion, or TP53 mutation, at 119 clinics in the USA and Israel. Eligible patients had received at least one previous chronic lymphocytic leukaemia therapy and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or lower. We randomised patients (1:1) using permuted block randomisation with a block size of four and stratified by previous lines of therapy (one vs two or more) to receive ibrutinib alone or ibrutinib in combination with ublituximab. Treatment allocation was not masked to patients or investigators. Ibrutinib was given orally daily at 420 mg for all cycles. Ublituximab was given intravenously in 28-day cycles, with increasing doses during cycle 1 (≤150 mg on day 1, 750 mg on day 2, and 900 mg on days 8 and 15) and continuing at 900 mg on day 1 of cycles 2–6. After cycle 6, ublituximab was given at 900 mg every three cycles. The study was initially designed with co-primary endpoints of progression-free survival and overall response rate but due to protracted patient accrual, the protocol was amended to have a single primary endpoint of independent review committee-assessed overall response rate (defined as the proportion of patients who had a partial response, complete response, or complete response with incomplete marrow recovery according to the 2008 International Workshop on CLL criteria) in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was evaluated in the population of patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02301156 , and the final analysis is presented. Findings 224 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 126 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive ublituximab plus ibrutinib (n=64) or ibrutinib alone (n=62) between Feb 6, 2015, and Dec 19, 2016. After a median follow-up of 41·6 months (IQR 36·7–47·3), the overall response rate was 53 (83%) of 64 patients in the ublituximab plus ibrutinib group and 40 (65%) of 62 patients in the ibrutinib group (p=0·020). 117 patients, including 59 in the ublituximab plus ibrutinib group and 58 in the ibrutinib group, received at least one dose of treatment and were included in safety analyses. Most adverse events were grade 1 or 2. The most common grade 3 and 4 adverse events were neutropenia (11 [19%] patients in the ublituximab plus ibrutinib group and seven [12%] in the ibrutinib group), anaemia (five [8%] and five [9%]), and diarrhoea (six [10%] and three [5%]). The most common serious adverse events were pneumonia (six [10%] in the ublituximab plus ibrutinib group and four [7%] in the ibrutinib group), atrial fibrillation (four [7%] and one [2%]), sepsis (four [7%] and one [2%]), and febrile neutropenia (three [5%] and one [2%]). Two patients in the ublituximab plus ibrutinib group died due to adverse events (one cardiac arrest and one failure to thrive), neither of which were treatment-related. Five patients in the ibrutinib group died due to adverse events, including one cardiac arrest, one cerebral infarction, one intracranial haemorrhage, one Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia infection, and one unexplained death; the death due to cardiac arrest was considered to be treatment-related. Interpretation The addition of ublituximab to ibrutinib resulted in a statistically higher overall response rate without affecting the safety profile of ibrutinib monotherapy in patients with relapsed or refractory high-risk chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. These findings provide support for the addition of ublituximab to Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors for the treatment of these patients. Funding TG Therapeutics.

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.

Background: Alvocidib is an investigational cyclin-dependent kinase-9 (CDK9) inhibitor that can suppress RNA polymerase II-mediated transcription of genes implicated in leukemia cell survival, including myeloid leukemia cell-1 (MCL-1). MCL-1 is an anti-apoptotic BCL-2 family member that is a key mediator of apoptosis in AML. Alvocidib combined in a timed-sequential regimen with cytarabine and mitoxantrone (ACM) has shown clinical activity in newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory (R/R) AML through Phase I and II clinical trials. Analysis of bone marrow samples from newly diagnosed AML patients (pts) treated with ACM showed an association of complete remission (CR) with MCL-1 dependence by a BH3 profiling biomarker assay. Zella 201 was initiated based on the hypothesis that ACM may have preferential clinical activity in pts with MCL-1 dependence. We report the findings from an exploratory cohort of newly diagnosed high-risk (NDHR) AML pts with MCL-1 dependence treated with ACM. Methods: Zella 201 is a biomarker-driven Phase II study of ACM in R/R AML patients with MCL-1 dependence. Stage 1 included a cohort of R/R AML pts with various levels of MCL-1 dependence and an exploratory cohort of NDHR AML with MCL-1 dependence >40%, as determined by a BH3 profiling assay. Eligibility criteria for the NDHR cohort included pts 18-65 years with high-risk AML defined as one of the following: A) treatment-related AML, B) AML from preexisting MDS/MPN, C) adverse-risk by ELN 2017 criteria. Induction therapy consisted of alvocidib 30 mg/m2 as a 30 minute IV bolus followed by 60 mg/m2 over 4 hours on Days (D) 1-3, cytarabine 667 mg/m2/D by continuous IV infusion D6-8, and mitoxantrone 40 mg/m2 IV on D9. Up to 3 additional cycles of the same regimen (with or without mitoxantrone) were permitted in responders. The primary endpoint was CR/CRi. Key secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival (RFS), overall response rate and safety. Results: Thirteen NDHR pts were treated and evaluable in this cohort (Table 1). One pt received alvocidib on days 1-3 and withdrew from the study on day 6 due to grade 4 diarrhea, cytokine release syndrome, and acute kidney injury. This pt was excluded from the efficacy analysis. Median MCL-1 score was 56% (Range: 42-70%). This cohort was influenced by the following poor risk categories: secondary AML (n= 9; 69%), adverse-risk by ELN (n=8; 62%) and TP53 mutations (n=6; 46%). The most common ≥Grade 3 treatment-emergent non-hematologic AEs (n=14) were diarrhea (29%); TLS, hypocalcemia, sepsis, hypotension (21%), pneumonia, colitis, hyperglycemia, anorectal infection, dyspnea, and left ventricular dysfunction (all 14%). Overall, CR/CRi was 62% with 7 (54%) pts responding following 1 cycle of therapy and another pt achieving CR after a second cycle. Two of six pts with TP53 mutation achieved CR. Although all pts included in this cohort were determined to be MCL-1 dependent, there was no association of CR with increasing MCL-1 dependence. Six (46%) pts went on to an allogeneic stem cell transplant (SCT). Sixty-day mortality was 0%. Median follow-up, OS, and RFS were 8.0, 8.5, and 6.1 months, respectively. Five of 8 (68%) CR/CRi pts have relapsed, and 10 pts (77%) have expired to date. The three pts still alive all received a post-study SCT. Conclusion: ACM has clinical activity in a limited cohort of NDHR AML pts with MCL-1 dependence scores >40% in a biomarker assay. Despite observed CR rates, duration of CR was modest and overall outcomes were poor. These results are comparable to historical controls with conventional chemotherapy regimens given the high-risk subset (62% of pts had adverse-risk and 46% had TP53 mutations). Further study is warranted to better define subgroups of ND AML pts who may benefit from alvocidib-containing induction regimens. Disclosures Zeidner: AsystBio Laboratories: Consultancy; AROG: Research Funding; Forty-Seven: Other: Travel Reimbursement, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Oncology, Inc.: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Genentech: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel Reimbursement, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: Independent Review Committee; Agios: Honoraria. Lee:Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Oncology, Inc.: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Fine:Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Oncology, Inc: Current Employment. Wang:Bristol Meyers Squibb (Celgene): Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy; Stemline: Speakers Bureau; PTC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Macrogenics: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy. Bhatt:Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncoceutics: Other; National Marrow Donor Program: Research Funding; Jazz: Research Funding; Partnership for health analytic research: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Omeros: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Tolero: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kolibaba:Verastem: Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Compass Oncology: Ended employment in the past 24 months; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Atara Biotech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Oncology, Inc.: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses Paid; Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; McKesson Life Sciences: Consultancy; Cell Therapeutics: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Anthony:Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Oncology, Inc.: Current Employment; Exact Sciences: Consultancy. Bearss:Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Oncology, Inc: Current Employment. Smith:Jazz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Background: Umbralisib is an oral, once-daily, novel, dual inhibitor of phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase-delta (PI3Kδ) and casein kinase-1ε (CK1ε) that exhibits improved selectivity for the delta isoform of PI3K. Ublituximab is a novel anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody glycoengineered for enhanced antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity that targets a unique epitope on CD20. U2 has been well-tolerated and demonstrated promising activity in heavily pre-treated CLL patients. Herein, results are presented for the randomized, multicenter, Phase 3 UNITY-CLL trial (NCT02612311), which evaluated U2 vs O+Chl in patients with TN and R/R CLL. Methods: Patients ≥18 years of age with treatment-naïve (TN) or relapsed/refractory (R/R) CLL requiring treatment per iwCLL criteria with adequate organ function and ECOG PS ≤2 were eligible. Stratification factors included treatment status (TN vs R/R) and del(17p) status. Patients were initially randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive U2, O+Chl, umbralisib monotherapy, or ublituximab monotherapy. Following establishment of contribution comparing U2 to the single agents, patients were randomized 1:1 to U2 or O+Chl. Umbralisib was given orally at 800 mg once-daily until progression or removal from treatment for other reasons. Ublituximab was administered intravenously at 900 mg on Days 1/2 [split 150/750 mg], 8, and 15 of Cycle 1, Day 1 of Cycles 2 - 6, and on Day 1 every 3 cycles after Cycle 6. O was given intravenously at 1000 mg on Days 1/2 [split 100/900], 8, and 15 of Cycle 1, and Day 1 of Cycles 2 - 6. Chl was given orally at 0.5 mg/kg on Day 1 and 15 of Cycles 1 - 6. Each cycle was 28 days. The primary endpoint was independent review committee (IRC)-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) of U2 vs O+Chl. Key secondary endpoints included IRC-assessed overall response rate (ORR), complete response (CR), undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD), duration of response (DOR), and safety (assessed from the first dose until 30 days after the last dose of study medication in each arm) as well as contribution of umbralisib and ublituximab to the U2 combination. Results: From Feb 2016 - Oct 2017, 421 pts were randomized to the U2 (n=210) or O+Chl (n=211) arms. The median age was 67 y (range, 36-91); 57% of patients (n=240) were treatment-naïve; 43% (n=181) had R/R CLL (median number of prior treatments = 1); 10% had del(17p), 20% del(11q), and 56% were IgHV unmutated. 66% were male. Demographics were well-balanced between treatment arms. At a median follow-up of 36.2 mos, U2 significantly prolonged PFS vs O+Chl (median 31.9 mos vs 17.9 mos; HR 0.546, 95% CI 0.413-0.720, P The median treatment duration was 23 mos for U2 (range, 0.1 - 49 mos) and 5 mos (range, 0.1 - 7 mos) for O+Chl. G3/4 AEs of interest regardless of causality (U2 vs O+Chl) included neutropenia (30.6% vs 34.7%), thrombocytopenia (3.4% vs 13.1%), diarrhea (12.1% vs 2.5%), infusion related reaction (1.9% vs 3.5%), elevated AST/ALTs (8.3% vs 2%), colitis (3.4% vs 0%) and pneumonitis (2.9% vs 0%). AEs led to treatment discontinuation in 34 patients (16.5%) on U2 and 16 patients (7.6%) on O+Chl. Conclusions: UNITY-CLL is the first randomized Phase 3 study in CLL of a PI3Ki vs. chemoimmunotherapy, and the first randomized study of a PI3Ki in treatment-naive CLL. U2 exhibited a well-tolerated safety profile, and significantly improved PFS vs. standard of care chemoimmunotherapy in patients with treatment-naive and relapsed/refractory CLL. Figure Disclosures Gribben: Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria. Jurczak:Celgene: Research Funding; Afimed: Research Funding; Sandoz-Novartis: Consultancy; European Medicines Agency,: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Janssen China R&D: Consultancy, Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Krakow, Poland: Current Employment; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Nordic Nanovector: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Epizyme: Consultancy; Roche: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding; Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland: Ended employment in the past 24 months. Jacobs:Sanofi Genzyme: Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding. Giannopoulos:BMS-Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria. Wrobel:Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Zafar:Bristol Meyers Squibb: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Florida Cancer Specialists and Research Institute: Current Employment; Sarah Canon Research Institute: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company). Danilov:Nurix: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Aptose Biosciences: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Verastem Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Takeda Oncology: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Rigel Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bayer Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding. Burke:Gilead: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; Adaptive: Consultancy; Kura: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy. Goldschmidt:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy; Blue Ridge Cancer Care: Current Employment. Huntington:Genentech: Consultancy; Astrazeneca: Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy; DTRM: Research Funding. Pinilla Ibarz:AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Sharman:Bristol Meyers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding. Siddiqi:AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncternal: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau. Brander:MEI Pharma: Other, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other; Teva: Consultancy, Honoraria; Tolero: Research Funding; ArQule: Consultancy, Other, Research Funding; Ascentage: Other, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other, Research Funding; Tolero: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other, Research Funding; NCCN: Other; Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Teva: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Other; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; BeiGene: Other, Research Funding; DTRM: Other, Research Funding; NCCN: Other; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Juno/Celgene/BMS: Other, Research Funding. Kolibaba:TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Oncology: Consultancy, Other; Verastem: Honoraria; Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; McKesson Life Sciences: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Atara Biotech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Cell Therapeutics: Research Funding; Compass Oncology: Ended employment in the past 24 months. Ghosh:Karyopharm: Consultancy; Genmab: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Forty Seven Inc: Consultancy, Other: Research Bureau, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Juno/Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; SGN: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding. Sportelli:TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Miskin:TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. O'Connor:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Data Safety Monitoring Committee, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Kymera Therapeutics: Current equity holder in private company, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nomocan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Other: Consulting; Servier: Consultancy. Weiss:TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Flinn:Iksuda Therapeutics: Consultancy; Curis: Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding; Vincera Pharma: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Triphase Research & Development Corp.: Research Funding; Trillium Therapeutics: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; ArQule: Research Funding; Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Forma Therapeutics: Research Funding; Loxo: Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; Great Point Partners: Consultancy; IGM Biosciences: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Other; Yingli Pharmaceuticals ≠: Consultancy, Research Funding; Rhizen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Curio Science: Consultancy; Nurix Therapeutics: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Calithera Biosciences: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding.

Summary Spleen tyrosine kinase (Syk) mediates B‐cell receptor signalling in normal and malignant B cells. Entospletinib is an oral, selective Syk inhibitor. Entospletinib monotherapy was evaluated in a multicentre, phase 2 study of patients with relapsed or refractory indolent non‐Hodgkin lymphoma or mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). Subjects received 800 mg entospletinib twice daily. Forty‐one follicular lymphoma (FL), 17 lymphoplasmacytoid lymphoma/Waldenström macroglobulinaemia (LPL/WM), 17 marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) and 39 MCL patients were evaluated. The primary endpoint was a progression‐free survival (PFS) rate (defined as not experiencing progression or death) at 16 weeks for patients with MCL and at 24 weeks for patients with FL, LPL/WM and MZL. The most common treatment‐emergent adverse events were fatigue, nausea, diarrhoea, vomiting, headache and cough. Common laboratory abnormalities were anaemia, neutropenia and thrombocytopenia; aspartate transaminase, alanine transaminase, total bilirubin and serum creatinine were all increased. PFS at 16 weeks in the MCL cohort was 63·9% [95% confidence interval (CI) 45–77·8%]; PFS at 24 weeks in the FL, LPL/WM, MCL and MZL cohorts was 51·5% (95% CI 32·8–67·4%), 69·8% (95% CI 31·8–89·4%), 56·6% (95% CI 37·5–71·8%) and 46·2% (95% CI 18·5–70·2%), respectively. Entospletinib had limited single‐agent activity with manageable toxicity in these patient populations.

Summary Purpose This first-in-human study evaluated SGN-CD70A, an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) directed against the integral plasma membrane protein CD70 and linked to a pyrrolobenzodiazepine (PBD) dimer, in patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) CD70-positive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) including diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL), mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), and Grade 3b follicular lymphoma (FL3b). Methods SGN-CD70A was administered intravenously on Day 1 of 3-week cycles beginning at 8 mcg/kg with planned dose escalation to 200 mcg/kg. Due to observations of prolonged thrombocytopenia, the study was amended to dose every 6 weeks (q6wk). Results Twenty patients were enrolled and treated with SGN-CD70A. The maximum tolerated dose of SGN-CD70A was 30 mcg/kg q6wk. The most common adverse events (AEs) reported were thrombocytopenia (75%), nausea (55%), anemia (50%), and fatigue (50%). The onset for treatment-related thrombocytopenia typically occurred during Cycle 1. Most of the treatment-related events of thrombocytopenia were ≥ Grade 3. Antitumor activity in patients included 1 complete remission (CR) and 3 partial remissions (PRs), 2 of which were ongoing for at least 42.9 weeks. SGN-CD70A exposures were approximately dose proportional, with a mean terminal half-life of 3 to 5 days. Conclusions While modest single-agent activity was observed in heavily pretreated NHL patients, the applicability of SGN-CD70A is limited by the frequency and severity of thrombocytopenia, despite the long-term response with limited drug exposure. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10637-018-0655-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: Patients with relapsed indolent NHL (iNHL) have limited standard treatment options. Lenalidomide combined with rituximab (R 2) has shown complimentary clinical activity and is a tolerable regimen in both untreated and relapsed or refractory (R/R) patients with iNHL (RELEVANCE : N Engl J Med 2018;379:934 and AUGMENT: J Clin Oncol. 2019;37:1188). Methods: MAGNIFY is a multicenter, phase 3b trial in patients with R/R follicular lymphoma (FL) grades 1-3b, transformed FL (tFL), marginal zone lymphoma (MZL), or mantle cell lymphoma (MCL; NCT01996865) exploring optimal lenalidomide duration. In the induction phase, lenalidomide 20 mg PO on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle + rituximab IV at 375 mg/m 2/week cycle 1 and then every 8 weeks starting with cycle 3 (R 2) are administered for 12 cycles. Patients with stable disease, partial response, or complete response/complete response unconfirmed (CR/CRu) were randomized 1:1 to R 2 vs rituximab maintenance for 18 months. Data presented here are the complete analysis from the induction phase in efficacy-evaluable patients with FL grades 1-3a or MZL (FL grade 3b, tFL, and MCL not included). The focus of this interim analysis was overall response rate (ORR) by 1999 IWG criteria in the induction intention-to-treat population. Results: As of March 5, 2021, 394 patients (318 [81%] FL gr1-3a; 76 [19%] MZL) were enrolled. The median follow-up was 40.6 mo (range, 0.6-79.6). Median age was 66 y (range, 35-91), 328 (83%) had stage III/IV disease, with a median of 2 prior therapies (94% prior rituximab-containing). ORR was 71% (n = 279) with 42% (n = 164) CR/CRu (Table). All patients have completed R 2 induction (n = 232, 59%) or discontinued study treatment (n = 162, 41%). 141 patients (36%) prematurely discontinued both lenalidomide and rituximab, primarily due to adverse events (AEs) (n = 54, 14%) or progressive disease (n = 42, 11%). The majority of patients who have completed induction have been randomized and entered maintenance (n = 217). Median duration of response in the induction period was not reached (95% CI, 43.9 mo-NR), and median progression-free survival in the induction safety population (n = 393) was 50.5 mo (95% CI, 39.5-NR). Efficacy results are reported in the table by histology subgroups (FL vs MZL), and rituximab-refractory, double-refractory, and early relapse statuses. Most common all-grade AEs were 47% fatigue, 43% neutropenia, 37% diarrhea, 30% nausea, and 30% constipation. Grade 3/4 AEs occurring in ≥ 5% of patients included 37% neutropenia (10 patients [3%] had febrile neutropenia), 8% leukopenia, 6% thrombocytopenia, 5% anemia, and 5% fatigue. Conclusions: These data represent complete analysis of all patients in the induction phase of MAGNIFY which continue to support that R 2 is active with a tolerable safety profile in patients with R/R FL grade 1-3a and MZL, including rituximab-refractory, double-refractory, and early relapse patients. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Lansigan: Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Andorsky: Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Epizyme: Research Funding. Coleman: immunomedics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company; Abbvie: Research Funding; Bristol Myers: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; Innocare: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding. Yacoub: Dynavex: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Cara: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Ardelyx: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; ACCELERON PHARMA: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CTI Biopharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Hylapharm: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Melear: TG Therapeutics: Speakers Bureau; Astrazeneca: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Fanning: Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; Genmab: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TG Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; ADC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Speakers Bureau. Kolibaba: TG Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company; Atara Biotechm: Consultancy; McKesson Specialty Health: Consultancy; Sunitomo Dainippon Pharma: Consultancy; Tolero Pharma: Consultancy, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company). Nowakowski: Incyte: Consultancy; Kymera Therapeutics: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy; Nanostrings: Research Funding; Curis: Consultancy; Selvita: Consultancy; Zai Labolatory: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Bantham Pharmaceutical: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Ryvu Therapeutics: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kyte Pharma: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy. Gharibo: BMS: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Ahn: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; ADC therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Li: BMS: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company), Research Funding. Sharman: BeiGene: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Lilly: Consultancy; Centessa: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy.

Background: Venetoclax (VEN), an oral B-cell lymphoma 2 inhibitor, is approved for use in adult patients (pts) with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). As a targeted and highly active antitumor agent, VEN induces rapid and profound tumor reduction. Inpatient monitoring for initial doses of VEN is recommended by US Prescribing Information for pts with medium tumor burden and reduced renal function or high tumor burden. Administration of debulking agents, such as obinutuzumab (G), help reduce tumor burden and, consequently, facilitate subsequent administration of VEN in the outpatient setting. However, tumor reduction data are needed to definitively establish the utility of a debulking strategy. This study performed disease restaging after every 2 cycles of debulking to evaluate the safety and efficacy of G ± bendamustine (B) as a debulking regimen before VEN treatment in the outpatient community setting. The safety and efficacy of subsequent VEN+G treatment after debulking was also evaluated. Methods: This open-label, Phase 3b study (NCT03406156) enrolled adult pts with previously untreated CLL/SLL (except those with 17p deletion) who had medium (any lymph node [LN] 5 to Results: Of 120 pts treated, 81 received G for debulking and 39 received G+B. As of 13 May 2021, 2 pts remained on study treatment, 108 were in posttreatment follow-up, and 10 had discontinued the study for reasons including death (n=7), withdrawn consent (n=2), and COVID-19 infection (n=1). At baseline, 82.5% of pts had ALC ≥25x10 9/L, 33.3% had LN ≥5 cm, and 24.2%/75.0%/0.8% had high/medium/low tumor burden, respectively. Low tumor burden was achieved in 91.6% (109/119) of evaluable pts receiving G±B debulking. In the all-treated population (N=120), the objective response rate (ORR) was 90.0% and the CR/CRi rate was 35.8%. Among pts receiving VEN with disease assessment at EoT (N=76), the ORR was 98.7% and the CR/CRi rate was 44.7% (Table). The best uMRD4 rates in peripheral blood were 89.2% (107/120) for all-treated and 98.2% (107/109) for evaluable pts. Among evaluable pts, the uMRD4 rates were 100% (100/100) and 97.1% (68/70) at EoCT and EoT, respectively. Among pts with MRD assessments at both timepoints (N=67), 19.4% had a deepening of their MRD response from EoCT to EoT, and 67.2% maintained the same MRD level (Figure). At a median follow-up of 24.0 mo, 7 deaths (6 related to COVID-19 infection and 1 from cardiac complication after pancreatic mass resection) and no incidences of disease progression were reported; the estimated 18-mo PFS was 94.1%. In pts treated with G vs G+B debulking, respectively, the incidences of Grade ≥3 TEAEs were 71.6% vs 84.6% (most common was neutropenia at 28.4% vs 41.0%) and serious AEs were 23.5% vs 17.9% (most common were pneumonia and COVID-19 pneumonia, each at 3.7% vs 2.6%). Conclusion: In this study, most (91.6%) pts achieved low tumor burden after debulking. The uMRD4 rate was 98.2% among MRD-evaluable pts (89.2% among all pts), with 100% and 97.1% uMRD4 rates at EoCT and EoT, respectively. Overall, these results highlight the utility of G±B as an effective debulking strategy that can facilitate VEN treatment initiation in the outpatient setting. The efficacy and safety results are consistent with other VEN+G trials. Preventive measures for COVID-19 should be continuously emphasized for pts with CLL. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Flinn: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Merck: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Teva: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Trillium Therapeutics: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Loxo: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Yingli Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; ArQule: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Celgene: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: All Consultancy and Research Funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Rhizen Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Incyte: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; IGM Biosciences: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Forty Seven: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Forma Therapeutics: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Curis: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Seagen: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Agios: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Calithera Biosciences: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Pfizer: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Iksuda Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Nurix Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Great Point Partners: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Triphase Research & Development Corp.: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Century Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Hutchison MediPharma: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Vincerx Pharma: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Sarah Cannon Research Institute: Current Employment; Servier Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Yingli Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Seagen: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Servier Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Andorsky: AbbVie: Research Funding; Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Epizyme: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Other: served on steering committees; AbbVie: Consultancy. Melear: TG Therapeutics: Speakers Bureau; Astrazeneca: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Manda: Morphosys: Honoraria; Genmab: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Kolibaba: TG Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company; Atara Biotechm: Consultancy; McKesson Specialty Health: Consultancy; Sunitomo Dainippon Pharma: Consultancy; Tolero Pharma: Consultancy, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES. Yimer: GSK: Speakers Bureau; Beigene: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Astrazeneca: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau; Texas Oncology: Current Employment. Burke: Kura: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; Kymera: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; MorphoSys: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; X4 Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; SeaGen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Fanning: BMS: Speakers Bureau; TG Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Genmab: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ADC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Islas-Ohlmayer: OHC/USON: Current Employment; AbbVie: Honoraria; Rigel: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Vizkelety: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Pesko: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Chyla: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Jiang: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Sharman: Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Lilly: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Centessa: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy.

Background: Umbralisib, a selective PI3Kδ and casein kinase-1epsilon (CK1ε) inhibitor, is pharmacologically distinct from other PI3K inhibitors and is administered orally once daily. Ublituximab is a novel anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody glycoengineered for enhanced antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity that targets a unique epitope on CD20. The primary analysis of the randomized, multicenter, Phase 3 UNITY-CLL trial (NCT02612311) demonstrated that the umbralisib+ublituximab (U2) combination prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) compared to chemoimmunotherapy in both treatment-naïve (TN) and previously treated (PT) populations (Gribben et al. 2020). Herein, results are presented for patients treated with U2 by treatment status. Methods: Patients ≥18 years of age with TN or PT CLL requiring treatment, per iwCLL criteria with adequate organ function and ECOG PS ≤2, were eligible. Patients were initially randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive U2, obinutuzumab+chlorambucil (O+Chl), umbralisib monotherapy, or ublituximab monotherapy. Stratification factors included treatment status (treatment-naïve vs. previously treated) and deletion 17p status. Umbralisib was administered orally at 800 mg once daily until progression or removal from treatment for other reasons. Ublituximab was administered intravenously at 900 mg on Days 1/2 [split 150/750 mg], 8, and 15 of Cycle 1, Day 1 of Cycles 2 - 6, and on Day 1 every 3 cycles after Cycle 6. The primary endpoint was independent review committee (IRC)-assessed PFS of U2 compared to O+Chl. Key secondary endpoints included IRC-assessed overall response rate (ORR), complete response, undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD), duration of response, and safety, assessed from the first dose until 30 days after the last dose of study medication. While the primary analysis reported results for the pooled intent-to-treat population, the current analysis focuses on outcomes in patients treated with U2 by treatment status. Results: At data cut-off date of May 1, 2020, U2-treated patients had a median follow-up of 35.27 months. Of the 210 patients treated with U2, 119 were TN and 91 were PT. TN patients had a median age of 68 years (39 - 88 years) and 63% were male. Median PFS for U2 in TN patients was 38.5 mos (95% CI, 33.2, NE) with an estimated 24-mo PFS rate of 76.6%. IRC-assessed ORR was 84.0% (95% CI, 77.5%-90.6%). The median duration of exposure to umbralisib and ublituximab was 26.5 and 29.5 mos, respectively. In TN patients, AEs of special interest (AESI) of grade ≥3 included: neutropenia (24.1%), diarrhea (13.8%), ALT increased (12.1%), AST increased (7.8%), non-infectious colitis (2.6%), infusion-related reaction (IRR, 0.9%), and pneumonitis (0.9%). Discontinuation of either study drug due to these grade ≥3 AESI occurred in 5.2% (neutropenia), 2.6% (diarrhea), 3.4% (ALT increase), 1.7% (AST increase), 1.7% (colitis), 0.9% (IRR), and 0.9% (pneumonitis) of patients. PT patients had a median of 2 prior (1 - 9) lines of therapy, the median age was 65 years (43 - 87 years) and 65.9% were male. Median PFS was 19.5 mos (95% CI, 14.6-27.7) with an estimated 24-mo PFS rate of 41.3%. The IRC-assessed ORR was 82.4% (95% CI, 74.6%-90.2%). Among 14 patients previously treated with ibrutinib, the ORR was 57%. The median duration of exposure to umbralisib and ublituximab were 15.6 mos and 14.6 mos, respectively. In PT patients, AESI of grade ≥3 included: neutropenia (40.0%), diarrhea (10.0%), IRR (3.3%), ALT increase (3.3%), AST increase (2.2%), and non-infectious colitis (2.2%). Discontinuation of either study drug due to these grade ≥3 AESI occurred in 1.1% (ALT increase), 1.1% (AST increase), and 1.1% (colitis) of patients. Conclusions: U2 demonstrated a tolerable safety profile in both the TN and PT populations. These results mark the first randomized Phase 3 trial of a PI3K in TN CLL, establishing a new mechanism of action in this setting. Disclosures Jacobs: Genentech: Consultancy; Jannsen: Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; SecuraBio: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; TeneoBio: Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy. Jurczak: Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; Mei Pharma: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Loxo Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Epizyme: Research Funding; Debbiopharm: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Celtrion: Research Funding; BeiGene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Flinn: ArQule: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Loxo: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Agios: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Seagen: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: All Consultancy and Research Funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Nurix Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Celgene: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Curis: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Incyte: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Forma Therapeutics: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Forty Seven: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Iksuda Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Great Point Partners: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Yingli Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Calithera Biosciences: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; IGM Biosciences: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Pfizer: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Merck: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Rhizen Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Teva: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Trillium Therapeutics: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Triphase Research & Development Corp.: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Century Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Hutchison MediPharma: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Vincerx Pharma: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Sarah Cannon Research Institute: Current Employment; Servier Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Yingli Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Seagen: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Servier Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Giannopoulos: Sandoz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Teva: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bei-Gene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Polish Myeloma Consortium, Next Generation Hematology Association: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi-Genzyme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Wróbel: Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Honoraria. Cultrera: Beigene: Research Funding. Danilov: Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers-Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda Oncology: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Rigel Pharm: Honoraria; Bayer Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; SecuraBio: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Burke: Kymera: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Epizyme: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Kura: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; SeaGen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; X4 Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Goldschmidt: Ontada: Current Employment; Blue Ridge Cancer Care: Current Employment; Amgen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria; G1 Therapeutics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Beach: TG Therapeutics: Speakers Bureau. Huntington: TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; DTRM Biopharm: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Flatiron Health Inc.: Consultancy; Bayer: Honoraria; Servier: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Thyme Inc: Consultancy; SeaGen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Pinilla Ibarz: Sellas: Other: ), patents/royalties/other intellectual property; AbbVie, Janssen, AstraZeneca, Takeda: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie, Janssen, AstraZeneca, Novartis, TG Therapeutics, Takeda: Consultancy, Other: Advisory; MEI, Sunesis: Research Funding. Sharman: TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Centessa: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy; Lilly: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. Siddiqi: AstraZeneca: 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; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Juno therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BeiGene: Other: DSM Member, Speakers Bureau; PCYC: Speakers Bureau; Jannsen: Speakers Bureau; Dava Oncology: Honoraria; ResearchToPractice: Honoraria. Brander: Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; ArQule: Research Funding; DTRM: Research Funding; Ascentage: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: informCLL registry steering committee, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; LOXO: Research Funding; NCCN: Other: panel member; ArQule/Merck: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics/Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: Biosimilars outcomes research panel. Shadman: Abbvie, Genentech, AstraZeneca, Sound Biologics, Pharmacyclics, Beigene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Morphosys, TG Therapeutics, Innate Pharma, Kite Pharma, Adaptive Biotechnologies, Epizyme, Eli Lilly, Adaptimmune , Mustang Bio and Atara Biotherapeutics: Consultancy; Mustang Bio, Celgene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pharmacyclics, Gilead, Genentech, Abbvie, TG Therapeutics, Beigene, AstraZeneca, Sunesis, Atara Biotherapeutics, GenMab: Research Funding. Pagel: AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics/AbbVie: Consultancy; Incyte/MorphoSys: Consultancy; Actinium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy; MEI Pharma: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy. Dlugosz-Danecka: Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Macrogenics: Research Funding; Beigene: Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Incyte Corp.: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Ghosh: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Epizyme: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Genmab: Consultancy, Honoraria; Adaptive Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kolibaba: TG Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company; Atara Biotechm: Consultancy; McKesson Specialty Health: Consultancy; Sunitomo Dainippon Pharma: Consultancy; Tolero Pharma: Consultancy, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company). Sportelli: TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Miskin: TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. O'Connor: Mundipharma: Consultancy; Nomocan: Consultancy; Kymera: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Dren: Consultancy, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company; Myeloid Therapeutics: Consultancy, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Weiss: TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Gribben: Takeda: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Morphosys: Honoraria; Gilead/Kite: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; AZ: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria.

PurposeTo evaluate the impact of the addition of bortezomib to rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) on outcomes in previously untreated patients with non–germinal center B-cell–like (non-GCB) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).Patients and MethodsAfter real-time determination of non-GCB DLBCL using the Hans immunohistochemistry algorithm, 206 patients were randomly assigned (1:1; stratified by International Prognostic Index [IPI] score) to six 21-day cycles of standard R-CHOP alone or R-CHOP plus bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2intravenously on days 1 and 4 (VR-CHOP). The primary end point, progression-free survival (PFS), was evaluated in 183 patients with centrally confirmed non-GCB DLBCL who received one or more doses of study drug (91 R-CHOP, 92 VR-CHOP).ResultsAfter a median follow-up of 34 months, with 25% (R-CHOP) and 18% (VR-CHOP) of patients having had PFS events, the hazard ratio (HR) for PFS was 0.73 (90% CI, 0.43 to 1.24) with VR-CHOP ( P = .611). Two-year PFS rates were 77.6% with R-CHOP and 82.0% with VR-CHOP; they were 65.1% versus 72.4% in patients with high-intermediate/high IPI (HR, 0.67; 90% CI, 0.34 to 1.29), and 90.0% versus 88.9% (HR, 0.85; 90% CI, 0.35 to 2.10) in patients with low/low-intermediate IPI. Overall response rate with R-CHOP and VR-CHOP was 98% and 96%, respectively. The overall survival HR was 0.75 (90% CI, 0.38 to 1.45); 2-year survival rates were 88.4% and 93.0%, respectively. In the safety population (100 R-CHOP and 101 VR-CHOP patients), grade ≥ 3 adverse events included neutropenia (53% v 49%), thrombocytopenia (13% v 29%), anemia (7% v 15%), leukopenia (26% v 25%), and neuropathy (1% v 5%).ConclusionOutcomes for newly diagnosed, prospectively enrolled patients with non-GCB DLBCL were more favorable than expected with R-CHOP and were not significantly improved by adding bortezomib.

Background: 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). Methods: MAGNIFY is a multicenter, phase IIIb trial in patients with R/R FL grades 1-3b, transformed FL (tFL), MZL, or mantle cell lymphoma (MCL; NCT01996865) in which optimal lenalidomide duration is being explored. Patients received 12 cycles of R2 (lenalidomide 20 mg/d, d1-21/28 + rituximab 375 mg/m2 weekly in cycle 1 and then on day 1 of cycles 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11) followed by 1:1 randomization in patients with stable disease, partial response, or complete response/complete response unconfirmed (CR/CRu) to R2 versus rituximab maintenance for 18 months. Data presented here focus on induction R2 in efficacy-evaluable MZL patients 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. The primary end point is progression-free survival (PFS) by 1999 International Working Group criteria. Results: As of November 30, 2019, 393 patients with FL grades 1-3a and MZL enrolled; 76 (19%) had MZL. The median age of MZL patients was 68 years (range, 46-90), 68 (89%) had stage III/IV disease, and 72 (95%) had prior rituximab-containing therapy. Overall response rate was 68% with 39% CR/CRu, and median duration of response was 38.6 months (95% CI, 29.4-not reached [NR]). The median PFS was 41.2 months (95% CI, 38.4-NR). Efficacy results for MZL subtypes and the overall population (FL grades 1-3a + MZL) are shown in the table. Forty-two patients (55%) have completed 12 cycles of R2, and 41 (54%) 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%), diarrhea (37%), anemia (25%), thrombocytopenia (24%), and constipation (24%). Most common (≥ 10%) grade 3/4 AEs were neutropenia (41%; 1 patient [1%] had febrile neutropenia), thrombocytopenia (13%), and leukopenia (11%). Conclusions: R2 is active with a tolerable safety profile in patients with R/R MZL. The efficacy and safety profile of R2 in MZL patients were similar to results observed in the overall MAGNIFY population. Disclosures Coleman: Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; EMD Serono Research and Development Institute Inc.: Research Funding; Innocare: Research Funding; ARCUS Biosciences: Research Funding; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, LP (Acerta Pharma BV Trials): Research Funding; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, LP: Research Funding; BMS (Celgene Corporation): Research Funding; Eli Lilly and Company: Research Funding; Genetech (F. Hoffman-LaRoche Ltd): Research Funding; Hutchinson MediPharma, LTD: Research Funding; Ipsen Group: Research Funding; Karyopharma Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding; Klus Pharma, Inc.: Research Funding; MeiPharma, Inc.: Research Funding; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Boston BIoMedical, Inc.: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding. Andorsky:CTI: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding. Yacoub:Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support; Dynavax: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Ardelyx: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Hylapharm: Current equity holder in private company; Cara Therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Agios: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Melear:Janssen: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau. Fanning:Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeautics: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Prisma Health: Current Employment; Sanofi Aventis: Speakers Bureau. Kolibaba:Atara Biotech: Consultancy; Compass Oncology: Ended employment in the past 24 months; Verastem: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Novartix: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Oncology: Consultancy, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Lansigan:BMS: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; BMS Steering Committee for MAGNIFY Program: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Spectrum Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding. Reynolds:IHA Hematology/Oncology Consultants: Current Employment. Nowakowski:Kymera: Consultancy; Ryvu: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Curis: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; Denovo: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Nanostrings: Research Funding; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gharibo:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Bayer: Ended employment in the past 24 months. Ahn:BMS: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Li:BMS: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Rummel:Roche: Honoraria; Amgen GmbH: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Novartis Pharma GmbH: Honoraria. Sharman:BeiGene: Research Funding; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Background: Venetoclax (VEN), a B-cell lymphoma 2 inhibitor, is an oral agent with demonstrated efficacy in patients (pts) with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). VEN treatment induces rapid tumor reduction, posing a risk for tumor lysis syndrome (TLS), particularly in pts with high tumor burden, and may require inpatient monitoring at the initiation of therapy. Agents such as obinutuzumab (G), ibrutinib, and bendamustine (B) have been used in clinical studies to debulk tumors prior to treatment with VEN. However, the benefits of these debulking regimens could not be established conclusively, as disease restaging was rarely performed. In the present study, disease restaging was performed every 2 cycles to evaluate the efficacy and safety of G, with or without B, as a debulking therapy in untreated pts with CLL, prior to VEN treatment in an outpatient community setting. Methods: This open-label, phase 3b trial (NCT03406156) enrolled adult pts with previously untreated CLL/small lymphocytic lymphoma (excluding those with 17p deletion) who had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of ≤1 and medium (any lymph node [LN] 5 to 10 cm or with del(11q) and LN >5 cm. Restaging data were obtained after every 2 cycles of debulking therapy. When low tumor burden was achieved, VEN was administered (5-week ramp-up schedule) as combination therapy with G (VEN+G) for 5 months, and then as monotherapy (VEN mono) for a total of 1 year. Response assessments were scheduled at week 38 and week 65 post-VEN initiation. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored throughout the study. Primary endpoints were the reduction in tumor burden after debulking therapy and the complete remission (CR)/CR with incomplete marrow recovery (CRi) rates of pts subsequently treated with VEN. We report the results of a planned interim analysis when 50 pts had completed their week 38 disease assessment. Results: As of 3 Feb 2020, 117 pts were treated with study drug(s): 80 (68%) received G and 37 (32%) received G+B for debulking; 113 pts were active in study (7 in the debulking phase; 106 completed debulking therapy and initiated VEN, including 26 in posttreatment follow-up). Four pts discontinued study due to withdrawal by pt (n=2; 1 at debulking and 1 at VEN treatment phase) and physician decision (n=1; at VEN treatment phase) and other (n=1; at debulking). At baseline, 85% of pts had ALC ≥25 × 109/L, 9% had LN ≥10 cm, 23% had LN 5-10 cm; 74%/26% had medium/high TLS risk, respectively, per investigator assessment (1 pt with low TLS risk was enrolled and subsequently discontinued). After 2 cycles of debulking therapy, low tumor burden was achieved in 85% (89/105) of evaluable pts: 86% (63/73) with G and 81% (26/32) with G+B. Reductions by pt subgroups and genetic features are presented in Figure. For pts debulked with G, similar debulking efficacy was observed among the subgroups being explored (Figure). Of the 50 pts with a week 38 disease assessment, 17 pts had an initial response of partial remission and await confirmation per IWCLL criteria. Objective response rate was 96% (48/50) overall, with 95% (37/39) for those debulked with G and 100% (11/11) for those debulked with G+B. The rate of CR or CRi was 52% (26/50) overall, with 54% (21/39) achieving CR/CRi for those debulked with G and 45% (5/11) for those debulked with G+B (Figure). More grade ≥3 AEs were observed in pts receiving G+B than those receiving G: debulking, 62% vs 40%; VEN+G, 43% vs 34%; VEN mono, 41% vs 28%. Conclusions: Most pts (85%) achieved low tumor burden after 2 cycles of G±B. Similar debulking efficacy was observed across subgroups in pts debulked with G. In this early efficacy analysis, CR/CRi at week 38 was observed in 52% of pts treated with VEN after the debulking phase. Preliminary efficacy results from this study are consistent with other VEN studies in treatment-naive pts. Current study highlights the efficacy of the debulking strategy prior to treatment with VEN; this may allow more pts to have VEN ramp-up in outpatient setting. Figure Disclosures Flinn: Calithera Biosciences: Research Funding; Forma Therapeutics: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Curio Science: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trillium Therapeutics: Research Funding; Triphase Research & Development Corp.: Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Other; Teva: Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Nurix Therapeutics: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Yingli Pharmaceuticals ≠: Consultancy, Research Funding; Rhizen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Vincera Pharma: Consultancy; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; ArQule: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; IGM Biosciences: Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Iksuda Therapeutics: Consultancy; Great Point Partners: Consultancy; Loxo: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding. Andorsky:AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria. Melear:Janssen: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau. Manda:AbbVie: Other: Investigator in AbbVie-sponsored clinical trials. Anz:AbbVie: Other: Investigator in AbbVie-sponsored clinical trials. Kolibaba:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Verastem: Honoraria; Cell Therapeutics: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Atara Biotech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Compass Oncology: Ended employment in the past 24 months; McKesson Life Sciences: Consultancy; Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Oncology: Consultancy, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, . Yimer:Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company), Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene, a Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company), Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company), Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Texas Oncology: Current Employment; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company), Speakers Bureau; Epizyme: Consultancy, Divested equity in a private or publicly-traded company in the past 24 months; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Divested equity in a private or publicly-traded company in the past 24 months, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company), Speakers Bureau. Burke:Adaptive: Consultancy; Kura: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy. Fanning:TG Therapeautics: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Prisma Health: Current Employment; Sanofi Aventis: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Courtright:AbbVie: Other: Investigator in AbbVie-sponsored clinical trials.. Islas-Ohlmayer:AbbVie: Other: Investigator in AbbVie-sponsored clinical trials.. Kambhampati:AbbVie: Other: Investigator in AbbVie-sponsored clinical trials.. Jiang:AbbVie: Current Employment, Other: may hold stock or options. Pesko:AbbVie, Inc.: Current Employment, Other: may hold stock or other options. Vizkelety:AbbVie: Current Employment, Other: may hold stock or stock options.. Sharmokh:AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Sharman:AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Background: Lenalidomide combined with rituximab (R2) has shown complimentary clinical activity and is a tolerable regimen in both untreated and relapsed or refractory (R/R) patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Patients with advanced age at diagnosis are considered to be high risk, supporting post-hoc subgroup analyses by age, with a focus on patients aged ≥ 70 years from the MAGNIFY study. Methods: MAGNIFY is a multicenter, phase IIIb trial in patients with R/R follicular lymphoma (FL) grades 1-3b, transformed FL (tFL), marginal zone lymphoma (MZL), or mantle cell lymphoma (MCL; NCT01996865) exploring optimal lenalidomide duration. Lenalidomide 20 mg on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle + rituximab 375 mg/m2/week cycle 1 and then every 8 weeks starting with cycle 3 (R2) are administered 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 months. Data presented here focus on induction R2 in efficacy-evaluable FL grade 1-3a and MZL patients (FL grade 3b, tFL, and MCL not included) receiving ≥ 1 treatment with baseline/postbaseline assessments. The primary end point is progression-free survival (PFS) by 1999 International Working Group criteria. Post-hoc analyses were performed by analyzing data from patients aged ≥ 70 years at time of study entry. Results: As of November 30, 2019, 393 patients have enrolled and 152 (39%) were aged ≥ 70 years. Baseline characteristics including histology, disease status, and prior treatments of patients ≥ 70 and the overall population are shown in the table. Median PFS in the ≥ 70 subgroup was 36.0 months (95% CI, 28.3-NR). Overall response rate and CR/CRu were 75% and 38%, with a median duration of response that was not reached (95% CI, 27.1-NR). Efficacy results for the overall population are shown in the table. In patients ≥ 70 the most common (≥ 20%) any-grade treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were fatigue (44%), neutropenia (41%), diarrhea (34%), constipation (34%), and nausea (27%). Neutropenia (35%) was the only grade 3/4 TEAE occurring in > 10% of patients (febrile neutropenia occurred in 3 patients [2%]). TEAEs led to lenalidomide dose reduction in 69 patients (46%) and discontinuation in 40 patients (26%). Seventy-eight patients ≥ 70 (51%) completed all 12 cycles of induction treatment, and 72 (47%) have entered the maintenance phase. Sixty-one patients ≥ 70 (40%), compared to 35% of patients in overall population, prematurely discontinued both lenalidomide and rituximab, due to TEAEs (n = 26; 17%), progressive disease (n = 15; 10%), patient withdrawal (n = 12; 8%), death (n = 5; 3%), and other reasons (n = 3; 2%). Neutropenia was the only TEAE leading to discontinuation of lenalidomide in more than 2 patients (n = 10; 7%). Conclusions: Similar to findings in the overall population, R2 treatment in advanced-age patients with R/R FL and MZL resulted in encouraging efficacy, and with close attention to dose reduction there is a tolerable safety profile. Table Disclosures Lansigan: BMS Steering Committee for MAGNIFY Program: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Spectrum Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy. Andorsky:AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding. Coleman:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.: Research Funding; Boston BIoMedical, Inc.: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Innocare: Research Funding; ARCUS Biosciences: Research Funding; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, LP (Acerta Pharma BV Trials): Research Funding; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, LP: Research Funding; BMS (Celgene Corporation): Research Funding; Eli Lilly and Company: Research Funding; EMD Serono Research and Development Institute Inc.: Research Funding; Genetech (F. Hoffman-LaRoche Ltd): Research Funding; Hutchinson MediPharma, LTD: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Ipsen Group: Research Funding; Karyopharma Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding; Klus Pharma, Inc.: Research Funding; MeiPharma, Inc.: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Yacoub:Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Hylapharm: Current equity holder in private company; Cara therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Ardelyx: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Dynavax: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Melear:AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Fanning:Prisma Health: Current Employment; Abbvie: Consultancy; TG Therapeautics: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi Aventis: Speakers Bureau. Kolibaba:Compass Oncology: Ended employment in the past 24 months; Atara Biotech: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Oncology: Consultancy, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company; AbbVie: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Verastem: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartix: Research Funding. Reynolds:IHA Hematology/Oncology Consultants: Current Employment. Nowakowski:Ryvu: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Nanostrings: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Curis: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kymera: Consultancy; Denovo: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gharibo:Bayer: Ended employment in the past 24 months; Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ahn:BMS: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Li:BMS: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Rummel:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen GmbH: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Novartis Pharma GmbH: Honoraria. Sharman:Bristol Meyers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Introduction:Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) is a myeloproliferative disorder characterized by the unregulated proliferation of myeloid cells in the bone marrow and their accumulation in the blood. The approval of imatinib (IM) and second-generation TKIs have substantially improved survival for patients with CML. Despite the effectiveness of these TKIs in controlling CML, continuous therapy is necessary for most patients, and may be associated with the development of unfavorable adverse events such as hepatotoxicity. Although patients with elevated liver function tests are excluded from key clinical trials, case reports and small single-center studies have described cases of TKI-associated hepatotoxicity among patients with CML. This study sought to describe the prevalence and incidence of hepatotoxicity in patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic-phase (Ph+ CP) CML treated with 1L TKIs in community oncology practices. Methods:This retrospective, observational cohort study identified adult patients newly diagnosed with Ph+ CP CML and treated with 1L dasatinib (DAS), IM, or nilotinib (NIL) within the US Oncology Network (USON) between 1 January 2008 and 30 November 2018. Patients were required to have at least one comprehensive metabolic panel (CMP) within 90 days of treatment start, and ≥ 1 CMP during follow-up. Additionally, patients had to have at least two visits within the USON, no enrollment in any clinical trial during the study period, and no documentation of other primary cancer diagnoses. Descriptive statistics were generated for baseline patient characteristics and prevalence and incidence of hepatotoxicity, and were stratified by 1L TKI treatment initiation. Grades for hepatotoxicity were derived from laboratory data using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5. Results:A total of 2743 patients with CP-CML were identified. Of those, 730 (26.6%), 1455 (53.0%), and 558 (20.3%) patients were treated with 1L DAS, IM, or NIL, respectively. With the exception of age and region, patient demographic characteristics were well balanced across cohorts. However, baseline hepatic functioning differed across TKIs (Table 1). Prevalence of any-grade liver enzyme elevation was observed in almost one-third (31.9%) of patients, including 246 (33.7%) patients treated with DAS, 416 (28.6%) patients treated with IM, and 213 (38.2%) patients treated with NIL. Among all patients with normal baseline hepatic function, 48.9% developed any-grade hepatotoxicity while on 1L therapy. Across TKI cohorts, significantly more patients treated with NIL developed any-grade hepatotoxicity (70.1%) compared to patients treated with DAS (45.5%) or IM (43.5%) (P< 0.0001). Among all patients receiving 1L treatment, 1.5% to 3.8% of patients experienced grade 3-4 hepatotoxicity. Significant differences in the proportion of patients that developed grade 3-4 hepatotoxicity were observed across treatments and were most common among patients treated with NIL (Table 2). Conclusions:Findings from this analysis suggest that hepatic dysfunction may be common at baseline among patients with CP-CML treated in real-world community oncology settings. Among patients with normal baseline hepatic function, more patients treated with NIL experienced any-grade hepatotoxicity. Patients treated with NIL were also more likely to develop grade 3-4 hepatotoxicity compared to patients treated with DAS or IM. These findings may provide insight into the effects of long-term TKI treatment on hepatic functioning and help to inform treatment choices for patients. Disclosures Kolibaba: AbbVie:Research Funding;Compass Oncology:Ended employment in the past 24 months;Janssen:Research Funding;TG Therapeutics:Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding;McKesson Life Sciences:Consultancy;Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Oncology:Consultancy, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, ;Gilead:Research Funding;Genentech:Research Funding;Cell Therapeutics:Research Funding;Celgene:Research Funding;Acerta:Research Funding;Atara Biotech:Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Verastem:Honoraria;Seattle Genetics:Research Funding;Novartis:Research Funding;Pharmacyclics:Research Funding.Zhou:McKesson Corporation:Current Employment.Keating:Bristol Myers Squibb:Current Employment.Clark:McKesson Life Sciences:Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.Brokars:Bristol Myers Squibb:Current Employment.Kee:Bristol Myers Squibb:Current Employment.Copher:Bristol Myers Squibb:Current Employment.Stwalley:Bristol Myers Squibb:Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.Jabbour:Adaptive Biotechnologies:Other: Advisory role, Research Funding;Genentech:Other: Advisory role, Research Funding;BMS:Other: Advisory role, Research Funding;Amgen:Other: Advisory role, Research Funding;Pfizer:Other: Advisory role, Research Funding;Takeda:Other: Advisory role, Research Funding;AbbVie:Other: Advisory role, Research Funding.

Summary Background Polatuzumab vedotin, an antibody–drug conjugate targeting the CD79b component of the B-cell receptor, has demonstrated activity as a single agent and in combination with rituximab in relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. In this study, we evaluated the safety and preliminary activity of polatuzumab vedotin in combination with rituximab or obinutuzumab and cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (CHP) in patients with previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Methods This was an open-label, non-randomised study composed of a phase 1b dose escalation and a phase 2 dose expansion at 11 hospitals and health centres in the USA and France. Patients aged 18 years or older with B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma were eligible. Exclusion criteria included peripheral neuropathy with grade greater than 1, major surgery within 4 weeks before enrolment, known CNS involvement of lymphoma, and uncontrolled heart disease. Phase 1b dose escalation had a three-plus-three design and established the recommended phase 2 dose. Phase 2 expansion evaluated the recommended phase 2 dose of polatuzumab vedotin in patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma with an International Prognostic Index (IPI) of 2–5. Patients received cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m2 on day 1 intravenously, doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 on day 1 intravenously, and prednisone 100 mg once daily on days 1–5 of each 21-day cycle orally (CHP), plus either rituximab 375 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 of each cycle (R-CHP) or obinutuzumab 1000 mg intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of cycle 1 and on day 1 of the following cycles (G-CHP). Polatuzumab vedotin was administered on day 2 of cycles 1 and 2, and on day 1 of the following cycles at 1·0–2·4 mg/kg during the escalation phase and at the recommended phase 2 dose during the expansion phase. Treatment could last six or eight cycles, depending on investigator preference. The primary endpoints of the study were safety and tolerability, and determination of the maximum tolerated dose (or recommended phase 2 dose) of polatuzumab vedotin. All endpoints were analysed per protocol in the safety evaluable population, defined as all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01992653. Findings Between Dec 4, 2013, and July 26, 2016, 85 patients were enrolled. 82 patients were included in the safety and activity evaluable populations, 25 in phase 1b and 57 in phase 2. In light of information from other studies using polatuzumab vedotin reported during this study, in which the safety profile associated with exposure to polatuzumab vedotin at doses higher than 1·8 mg/kg every 3 weeks was not outweighed by any clinical benefit, the recommended phase 2 dose was set to 1·8 mg/kg in the R-CHP cohort and no higher doses were explored in this study. 66 patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma received the polatuzumab vedotin recommended phase 2 dose (45 R-CHP; 21 G-CHP). In 66 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma who received the recommended phase 2 dose, the most common adverse events of grade 3 or worse were neutropenia (20 [30%]), febrile neutropenia (12 [18%]), and thrombocytopenia (six [9%]). Among the 70 patients (any histology) who received the recommended phase 2 dose, 19 (27%) had grade 1 peripheral neuropathy, eight (11%) grade 2, and two (3%) grade 3. Four deaths were reported during follow-up: two treatment-related (one complication of atrial fibrillation and one septic shock) and two due to disease progression. As of the cutoff date of Dec 29, 2017, median follow-up time was 21·5 months (IQR 16·7–24·3) for the untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma cohort treated at the polatuzumab vedotin recommended phase 2 dose. 59 (89%) patients achieved an overall response at end of treatment (51 [77%] patients had a complete response, and eight [12%] patients had a partial response). Interpretation The safety of incorporating polatuzumab vedotin to R-CHP or G-CHP was as expected and managable. Preliminary clinical activity in newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma seems promising and encouraged a phase 3 trial comparing polatuzumab vedotin with R-CHP to R-CHOP. Funding F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.

PURPOSE The BRIGHT study ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00877006) was initiated to compare the efficacy and safety of bendamustine plus rituximab (BR) with either rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) or rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CVP) for treatment-naive patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma or mantle-cell lymphoma. This publication provides long-term follow-up data. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were monitored for a minimum of 5 years after completion of study treatment for the time-to-event end points of progression-free survival (PFS), event-free survival, duration of response, and overall survival per investigator assessment. Data on the number of patients who received second-line anticancer treatment and the occurrence of other malignancies were also collected. RESULTS The medians were not reached for any of the time-to event end points for either the BR or R-CHOP/R-CVP study treatment groups by study completion. PFS rates at 5 years were 65.5% in the BR treatment group and 55.8% in the R-CHOP/R-CVP group. The difference in PFS was considered significant with a hazard ratio of 0.61 (95% CI, 0.45 to 0.85; P = .0025). The hazard ratio for event-free survival and duration of response ( P = .0020 and .0134, respectively) also favored the BR regimen over R-CHOP/R-CVP. However, no significant difference in overall survival was observed. The overall safety profiles of BR, R-CHOP, and R-CVP were as expected; no new safety data were collected during long-term follow-up. A higher number of secondary malignancies was noted in the BR treatment group. CONCLUSION Overall, BR demonstrated better long-term disease control than R-CHOP/R-CVP and should be considered as a first-line treatment option for patients with indolent and mantle-cell lymphoma.

8022 Background: The BTK inhibitor ibrutinib (IB) has advanced the treatment for patients (pts) with CLL, however, among pts with high-risk CLL, disease control with IB is less durable. Ublituximab (UTX) is a glycoengineered mAb with enhanced ADCC. The GENUINE study evaluated the addition of UTX to IB vs. IB alone in high-risk rel/ref CLL. With a median follow up now 3.5+ yrs, we present the final results. Methods: Eligible pts having rel/ref CLL with centrally confirmed del17p, del11q, and/or a TP53 mutation, were randomized 1:1 to IB (420 mg QD) alone or with UTX (900 mg on D1, 8, 15 of Cy 1, D1 of Cy 2-6, and Q3 Cy thereafter). No limit on # of prior Tx; prior IB excluded. Primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) by iwCLL 2008 (excludes PR-L); secondary endpoints were CR rate, peripheral blood MRD negativity (analyzed centrally), PFS, and safety. Response was by blinded independent review. Results: 117 pts were treated (59 in UTX + IB arm; 58 in IB arm). Med age was 66 yrs and med # of prior Tx was 1 (range 1-5) for each arm. Baseline features were relatively balanced including ECOG, gender, and med time since diagnosis (6+ yrs). 17p del was greater in the IB arm (50% vs 44%); bulky disease was greater in UTX + IB arm (47% vs 28%); IGHV-unmut was 83% for both arms. At data-cutoff of Sep 1, 2019, AEs were comparable between the arms, except infusion reactions (UTX + IB: All G 53% / G 3/4 3%) and neutropenia (All G 36% vs 21%, G 3/4 19% vs. 12%) which were higher for UTX + IB. At a med follow up of 42 mos, all efficacy endpoints were in favor of UTX + IB (see Table). Conclusions: In contrast to prior studies adding rituximab to IB, GENUINE is the first randomized trial to demonstrate a PFS benefit with the addition of an anti-CD20 to IB. Increasing depth of response (CR rate, MRD-neg) post first year of Tx supports maintenance therapy with UTX. Clinical trial information: NCT02301156 . [Table: see text]

8046 Background: Patients (pts) with relapsed iNHL have limited standard treatment options. The immunomodulatory agent lenalidomide shows enhanced activity with rituximab (ie, R2), which recently reported 39.4-mo median PFS in R/R iNHL pts (AUGMENT; J Clin Oncol. 2019;37:1188). Methods: MAGNIFY is a multicenter, phase IIIb trial in pts with R/R FL gr1-3a, MZL, or MCL (NCT01996865) exploring optimal lenalidomide duration. Lenalidomide 20 mg/d, d1-21/28 + rituximab 375 mg/m2/wk c1 and then q8wk c3+ (R2) are given for 12c followed by 1:1 randomization in pts with SD, PR, or CR to R2 vs rituximab maintenance for 18 mo. Data presented here focus on induction R2 in efficacy-evaluable FL and MZL pts (MCL not included) receiving ≥ 1 treatment with baseline/post-baseline assessments to analyze the primary end point of ORR by 1999 IWG criteria. Results: As of June 16, 2019, 393 pts (81% FL gr1-3a; 19% MZL) were enrolled with a median follow up of 23.7 mo (range, 0.6-57.8) for censored pts (n = 335). Median age was 66 y (range, 35-91), 83% had stage III/IV disease, with a median of 2 prior therapies (95% prior rituximab-containing). ORR was 69% with 40% CR/CRu (Table). Median DOR was 39.0 mo, and median PFS was 40.1 mo. 199 pts (51%) have completed 12c of R2, and 188 (48%) have been randomized and entered maintenance. 139 pts (35%) prematurely discontinued both lenalidomide and rituximab, primarily due to AEs (n = 52, 13%) or PD (n = 45, 11%). Most common all-grade AEs were 48% fatigue, 43% neutropenia, 36% diarrhea, 31% nausea, and 30% constipation. Grade 3/4 AE neutropenia was 36% (9 pts [2%] had febrile neutropenia); all other grade 3/4 AEs occurred in < 7% of pts. Conclusions: R2 is active with a tolerable safety profile in pts with R/R FL and MZL, including rituximab-refractory, double-refractory, and early relapse pts. Clinical trial information: NCT01996865 . [Table: see text]

Summary Background Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) polatuzumab vedotin (pola) and pinatuzumab vedotin (pina) showed clinical activity and tolerability in phase 1 trials. The aim of this multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study was to compare rituximab plus pola (R-pola) or pina (R-pina) in patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma. Methods In this phase 2 randomised study at 39 investigational sites in six countries, patients were randomly assigned (1:1), by use of a dynamic hierarchical randomisation scheme, to receive R-pola or R-pina (375 mg/m2 rituximab plus 2·4 mg/kg ADCs) every 21 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity up to 1 year. Treatment allocations were not masked to the investigator, patients or sponsor after the patients were enrolled and randomly assigned. The primary objectives were safety and tolerability, and antitumour response. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01691898 , and is closed to accrual. Findings 81 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and 42 with follicular lymphoma were recruited between Sept 27, 2012, and Oct 10, 2013, and were assigned to treatment. 81 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and 41 patients with follicular lymphoma were eligible for analysis. Of the 42 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma who received R-pina, 25 (60%, 95% CI 43–74) achieved an objective response and 11 (26%, 95% CI 14–42) achieved a complete response. Of the 39 patients in this cohort who received R-pola, 21 (54%, 95% CI 37–70) achieved an objective response, and eight (21%, 95% CI 9–36) achieved a complete response. Of the 21 patients in the follicular lymphoma cohort who received R-pina, 13 (62%, 95% CI 38–82) achieved an objective response, and one (5%, 95% CI 0·1–24) achieved a complete response. Of the 20 patients in this cohort who received R-pola, 14 (70%, 95% CI 46–88) achieved an objective response, and nine (45%, 95% CI 23–68) achieved a complete response. In the diffuse large B-cell lymphoma cohort, grade 3–5 adverse events occurred in 33 (79%) of 42 patients receiving R-pina (most common were neutropenia [29%] and hyperglycaemia [10%]; nine [21%] grade 5 adverse events, five of which were infection-related), and in 30 (77%) of 39 patients receiving R-pola (most common were neutropenia [23%], anaemia [8%] and diarrhoea [8%]; no grade 5 adverse events). In the follicular lymphoma cohort, grade 3–5 adverse events occurred in 13 (62%) of 21 patients receiving R-pina (most common were neutropenia [29%] and hyperglycaemia [14%]; no grade 5 adverse events) and in ten (50%) of 20 patients receiving R-pola (most common were neutropenia [15%] and diarrhoea [10%]; one grade 5 adverse event). Interpretation R-pina and R-pola are potential treatment options in patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma. Pola was selected by the study funder for further development in non-Hodgkin lymphoma, partly because of longer durations of response than pina, and an overall benefit–risk favouring R-pola. Funding F Hoffmann-La Roche.

CC‐486 (oral azacitidine) is an epigenetic modifier in clinical development for treatment of hematological cancers. This study of extended CC‐486 dosing included patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDSs), chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML), or acute myeloid leukemia (AML). After a pharmacokinetic assessment period, 31 patients (MDS n = 18, CMML n = 4, and AML n = 9) entered a clinical phase in which they received CC‐486 300 mg once‐daily for 21 days of repeated 28‐day cycles. Median age was 71 years (range: 53‐93); 42% of patients were aged ≥75 years. A total of 5 patients with AML (63%) had prior MDS. Median number of CC‐486 treatment cycles was 4 (range: 1‐32). The most common treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were gastrointestinal (84% of patients) and hematologic (81%). Most common grade 3‐4 TEAEs were neutropenia (n = 13, 42%) and anemia (n = 9, 29%). Ten patients experienced grade 4 neutropenia. Infrequently, CC‐486 dose was interrupted or reduced due to gastrointestinal (n = 5, 16%) or hematologic (n = 6, 19%) TEAEs. Overall response rate (complete remission [CR], CR with incomplete hematological recovery [CRi], partial remission [PR], marrow CR) in the MDS/CMML subgroups was 32% and in the AML subgroup (CR/CRi/PR) was 22%. Red blood cell transfusion independence rates in the MDS/CMML and AML subgroups were 33% and 25%, respectively, and 2 MDS/CMML patients attained hematologic improvement as a best response on‐study. No baseline gene mutation was predictive of response/nonresponse. CC‐486 allows flexible dosing and schedules to improve tolerability or response. Neutropenia in early treatment cycles deserves scrutiny and may warrant initiation of prophylactic antibiotics. KEY POINTS The safety profile of oral CC‐486 was comparable to that of injectable azacitidine; most adverse events were hematological and gastrointestinal. Extended (21‐day/cycle) CC‐486 dosing induced responses in patients with hematological malignancies, many of whom had prior DNMTi failure.

BACKGROUND: Venetoclax is an effective oral agent for frontline treatment of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Due to the rapid induction of cell death caused by the targeted activity of venetoclax, some patients require inpatient monitoring for tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) at initiation of therapy. In the recent CLL14 study, 64% and 22% of venetoclax-treated patients were medium and high risk for TLS, respectively. This study used disease re-staging every two cycles to explore the efficacy of using of obinutuzumab, with or without bendamustine prior to initiation of venetoclax, to reduce tumor burden and thus eliminate the need for hospitalizations, as well as reduce the risk for TLS at the initiation of venetoclax therapy. METHODS: This is a single arm open-label, phase 3b trial (NCT03406156). Patients had previously untreated CLL/SLL (excluding those with 17p deletion), an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score of ≤1, and a medium (any lymph node 5 - RESULTS: A majority of patients were 10 cm were debulked to 30%) were infusion-related reactions (71%; all grade 1-2), nausea (39%), headache (35%) and fatigue (32%). Neutropenia (28%) and thrombocytopenia (10%) were the most frequently reported Grade 3+ AEs. AEs of TLS were reported in the debulking phase in 7% (5/69) of patients. A retrospective analysis using Howard criteria for TLS identified three additional patients with laboratory TLS: two occurred during the debulking phase and one during the venetoclax phase, all driven by phosphate and uric acid. Uric acid levels were below the institutional upper limit of normal for the patient with TLS during venetoclax treatment and did not require management. No patients were hospitalized during venetoclax ramp up. CONCLUSIONS: Two cycles of obinutuzumab prior to initiation of venetoclax was an effective debulking strategy for patients with ALC >25 × 109 /L and lymph nodes 5 cm treated with obinutuzumab or >10 cm treated with obinutuzumab plus bendamustine may need >2 cycles to achieve low tumor burden. Debulking via obinutuzumab, with or without bendamustine, may allow more patients to be administered venetoclax in the outpatient setting, eliminating the need for hospitalization during venetoclax initiation. Figure Disclosures Sharman: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Acerta: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Andorsky:Genetech: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; CTI: Research Funding. Melear:Texas Oncology: Employment; DARA: Speakers Bureau. Kolibaba:Atara Bio: Consultancy; AbbVie, Acerta, Celgene, Genentech, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pharmacyclics, Seattle Genetics, TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Verastem: Honoraria. Yimer:Clovis Oncology: Equity Ownership; Celgene: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy; Puma Biotechnology: Equity Ownership. Burke:Celgene: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy. Fanning:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau. Masud:AbbVie: Employment, Other: Stock/stock options. Zimmerman:AbbVie: Employment, Other: stock or options. Nielsen:AbbVie: Employment, Other: and may hold stock or stock options. Vizkelety:AbbVie: Employment, Other: stock or options. Jiang:AbbVie: Employment, Other: stock or options. Flinn:AbbVie, Seattle Genetics, TG Therapeutics, Verastem: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics, Trillum Therapeutics, Abbvie, ArQule, BeiGene, Curis, FORMA Therapeutics, Forty Seven, Merck, Pfizer, Takeda, Teva, Verastem, Gilead Sciences, Astra Zeneca (AZ), Juno Therapeutics, UnumTherapeutics, MorphoSys, AG: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics, Trillum Therapeutics, Abbvie, ArQule, BeiGene, Curis, FORMA Therapeutics, Forty Seven, Merck, Pfizer, Takeda, Teva, Verastem, Gilead Sciences, Astra Zeneca (AZ), Juno Therapeutics, UnumTherapeutics, MorphoSys, AG: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma, Agios, Calithera Biosciences, Celgene, Constellation Pharmaceuticals, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, Incyte, Infinity Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Kite Pharma, Novartis, Pharmacyclics, Portola Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding.

Background: Rituximab (RTX) alone or in combination with chemotherapy has substantially improved treatment outcomes for patients (pts) with marginal zone lymphoma (MZL), but relapse is common and not all pts are acceptable candidates for, or respond to, current salvage therapies. Umbralisib is a novel, next-generation PI3K-delta inhibitor with unique inhibition of casein kinase-1ϵ (CK1ϵ) and, compared to earlier generation PI3K-delta inhibitors, exhibits a differentiated tolerability profile with reduced rates of immune-mediated toxicity (Burris et al, 2018). This registration-directed study evaluates the efficacy and safety of umbralisib in pts with relapsed/refractory (R/R) MZL. Methods: Pts had histologically confirmed MZL, ECOG PS ≤2, and had previously received ≥1 prior therapy including at least one CD20 monoclonal antibody (mAb)-containing regimen. All pts received umbralisib 800 mg orally once daily until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary study endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) as assessed by an independent review committee (IRC) according to 2007 IWG criteria. ORR by investigator assessment is reported here, and ORR by IRC is forthcoming. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety. Results: Sixty-nine pts were enrolled; we report on the first 38 who are eligible for at least 6 months (mos) of follow-up as of the data cutoff date. Disease status for the 38 pts: extranodal (n=23), nodal (n=8), and splenic (n=7). Median age was 67 years (range, 34-81). Median number of prior systemic therapies was 2 (range, 1-5). Seven pts (18%) had received monotherapy RTX only, and 26 (68%) had received at least one CD20 mAb-containing chemoimmunotherapy. As of the cut-off date, the median follow-up was 9.6 mos. Per investigator assessment, ORR was 55% (4 CRs and 17 PRs), 29% of pts (n=11) had stable disease (SD) of which 6 of these SD pts remain on study with durations ranging from 7-12+ mos. The clinical benefit rate (CR+PR+SD) was 84%, and 91% of pts with at least 1 post-baseline assessment experienced tumor reductions. The median time to initial response was 2.7 mos, while the median DOR was not reached (95% CI: 8.4-not reached). The 12-month PFS was 71%. The most common (≥20%) adverse events (AE) of any grade included: diarrhea (45%), nausea (29%), fatigue (26%), headache (26%), cough (24%), and decreased appetite (21%). The most common Grade 3/4 events were neutropenia (8%), febrile neutropenia (5%), and diarrhea (5%). As of the cutoff date, 16 pts discontinued treatment (PD: 18%; AEs: 8%; pt decision: 8%; physician decision: 8%) and 58% continue treatment. Conclusions: PI3K-delta inhibition with single-agent umbralisib is active and well tolerated in pts with R/R MZL, achieving durable responses with chemotherapy-free therapy. Citation Format: Nathan H. Fowler, Felipe Samaniego, Wojciech Jurczak, Ewa Lech-Maranda, Nilanjan Ghosh, Bertrand Anz, Piers Patten, James A. Reeves, Lori A. Leslie, Piotr Smolewski, Julio C. Chavez, Paolo Ghia, Corrado Tarella, John M. Burke, Jeff Sharman, Kathryn Kolibaba, Owen A. O'Connor, Chan Y. Cheah, Hari P. Miskin, Peter Sportelli, Michael S. Weiss, Pier Luigi Zinzani. Umbralisib monotherapy demonstrates efficacy and safety in patients with relapsed/refractory marginal zone lymphoma: A multicenter, open-label, registration directed Phase II study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT132.

7513 Background: Standard treatment is lacking for patients with relapsed indolent NHL (iNHL). PI3K inhibitors reported a median PFS of < 1 y in R/R iNHL. The immunomodulatory agent lenalidomide shows enhanced activity with rituximab (ie, R2), which recently reported a 39.4-mo median PFS in R/R iNHL patients (AUGMENT; Leonard. ASH 2018:445). Methods: MAGNIFY is a multicenter, non-registrational phase IIIb trial in patients with R/R FL grade 1-3a and MZL designed to determine the optimal duration of lenalidomide. Lenalidomide 20 mg/d, d1-21/28 + rituximab 375 mg/m2/wk c1 and q8wk c3+ (R2) are given for 12c followed by 1:1 randomization in patients with stable disease or better to continued R2 vs rituximab maintenance. These analyses evaluate the primary endpoint of ORR by 1999 IWG criteria for induction R2 in efficacy-evaluable patients receiving ≥ 1 treatment with baseline/post-baseline assessments. Results: At a median 16.7 mo follow-up, 370 patients (80% FL grade 1-3a; 20% MZL) were enrolled with a median age of 66 y, 83% stage III/IV disease, and a median of 2 prior therapies (95% prior rituximab-containing). Efficacy-evaluable patients showed a 73% ORR and 45% CR (Table). Median TTR was 2.7 mo, median DOR was 36.8 mo, and median PFS was 36.0 mo. 142 of 370 patients have been randomized and entered maintenance. The most common all-grade AEs were 48% fatigue, 40% neutropenia, 35% diarrhea, 30% nausea, and 29% constipation. Grade 3/4 AE neutropenia was 34%; all other grade 3/4 AEs were < 6%. Conclusions: R2 therapy is active with a tolerable safety profile in patients with R/R FL and MZL, and in patients refractory to rituximab. Clinical trial information: NCT01996865. [Table: see text]

7519 Background: Acalabrutinib, a highly selective, potent, covalent Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor, has a 24% overall response rate (ORR) as a single agent in R/R DLBCL. Pem targets PD-1, an immune checkpoint that limits anticancer responses. Pem showed responses in patients (pts) with Richter transformation who failed ibrutinib and can augment acalabrutinib activity in vitro. This study assessed acalabrutinib + Pem in R/R DLBCL. Methods: Pts with DLBCL, ≥1 prior chemoimmunotherapy and no prior allogeneic transplant received acalabrutinib 100 mg PO BID until progressive disease (PD) + Pem 200 mg/kg IV Q3W up to 2 y. Germinal center B-cell (GCB) vs non-GCB subtype was assessed by immunohistochemistry. Primary endpoint was safety. Results: Sixty-one pts (30 GCB; 31 non-GCB) were accrued, with a median age (range) of 67 y (30-85) and a median of 3 (1-8) prior therapies; 1 pt had prior autologous transplant. The most common Gr 3/4 adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia (15%) and anemia (11%). Gr 5 AEs were respiratory failure (n=3), sepsis, septic shock and abdominal abscess (n=1 each). All Gr atrial fibrillation was 5% (n=3), and major hemorrhage (≥ Gr 3) was 11% (4 gastrointestinal, 1 pulmonary, 1 epistaxis, 1 hematuria). Gr 3/4 immune-mediated events were elevated alanine aminotransferase (n=4), pneumonitis (n=2) and colitis (n=1). The ORR was 26% (Table) and was similar in GCB (27%) and non-GCB (26%) tumors. The median time on study was 5.2 mo (0.4-30.4+). Acalabrutinib/Pem discontinuations were due to PD (62%/56%) and AEs (15%/26%). As of June 2018, 10 pts remain on study; 6 on active therapy and 7 without PD. Conclusions: Acalabrutinib + Pem was well tolerated, with meaningful activity and some exceptional responders (>24 mo) in these R/R DLBCL pts. Randomized trials of the combination vs single agent are needed. Clinical trial information: NCT02362035. [Table: see text]

Purpose Survival and progression of mature B-cell malignancies depend on signals from the B-cell antigen receptor, and Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) is a critical signaling kinase in this pathway. We evaluated ibrutinib (PCI-32765), a small-molecule irreversible inhibitor of BTK, in patients with B-cell malignancies. Patients and Methods Patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell lymphoma and chronic lymphocytic leukemia received escalating oral doses of ibrutinib. Two schedules were evaluated: one, 28 days on, 7 days off; and two, once-daily continuous dosing. Occupancy of BTK by ibrutinib in peripheral blood was monitored using a fluorescent affinity probe. Dose escalation proceeded until either the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) was achieved or, in the absence of MTD, until three dose levels above full BTK occupancy by ibrutinib. Response was evaluated every two cycles. Results Fifty-six patients with a variety of B-cell malignancies were treated over seven cohorts. Most adverse events were grade 1 and 2 in severity and self-limited. Dose-limiting events were not observed, even with prolonged dosing. Full occupancy of the BTK active site occurred at 2.5 mg/kg per day, and dose escalation continued to 12.5 mg/kg per day without reaching MTD. Pharmacokinetic data indicated rapid absorption and elimination, yet BTK occupancy was maintained for at least 24 hours, consistent with the irreversible mechanism. Objective response rate in 50 evaluable patients was 60%, including complete response of 16%. Median progression-free survival in all patients was 13.6 months. Conclusion Ibrutinib, a novel BTK-targeting inhibitor, is well tolerated, with substantial activity across B-cell histologies.

Summary Ibrutinib is effective in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL); however, treatment resistance remains a problem. Ublituximab is a novel, glycoengineered anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody with single-agent activity in relapsed CLL. We report the results of a phase 2 study evaluating combination therapy with ibrutinib and ublituximab in patients with relapsed or refractory CLL. Patients received ibrutinib 420 mg once daily. Ublituximab was administered on days 1, 8 and 15 of cycle 1 followed by day 1 of cycles 2–6. Response assessments were completed at cycles 3 and 6; patients then continued on ibrutinib monotherapy per standard of care. Forty-one of 45 enrolled patients were evaluable for efficacy. Safety was consistent with prior experience for each drug, with infusion reactions the most prevalent adverse event. Combination therapy resulted in an overall response rate (ORR) of 88% at 6 months. In the 20 patients with high-risk features (17p or 11q deletions or TP53 mutation) and evaluable for efficacy, the ORR was 95%, with three patients (15%) achieving negative minimal residual disease. Median time to response was 8 weeks. Ublituximab in combination with ibrutinib resulted in rapid and high response rates. The long-term clinical benefit of ublituximab will be defined by an ongoing phase 3 trial (NCT 02301156).

7504 Background: Patients (pts) with high-risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) defined by interruptions in TP53 (either by mutation or deletion) or loss of chromosome 11q experience inferior outcomes with ibrutinib (IB) monotherapy (O’Brien ASH 2016). Ublituximab (UTX) is a novel glycoengineered mAb with enhanced ADCC targeting a unique epitope on the CD20 antigen. GENUINE is the first randomized Ph 3 trial conducted assessing the addition of a novel agent to ibrutinib in high-risk rel/ref CLL, and evaluates IB monotherapy vs. UTX + IB. Methods: Eligible pts with rel/ref CLL and centrally confirmed del17p, del11q, and/or a TP53 mutation were randomized 1:1 to receive IB (420 mg QD) alone or with UTX (900 mg on D1, 8, 15 of Cycle 1, D1 of Cycle 2-6, and Q3 Cycles thereafter). There was no limit on number of prior therapies. Prior IB exposure was excluded. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) per iwCLL 2008 criteria, with secondary endpoints including CR rate, MRD negativity, PFS, time to response (TTR) and safety. Results: 126 pts were randomized at sites in the US and Israel, with 117 pts treated (59 on UTX + IB, 58 on IB alone). Median age 67, median 3 prior therapies (range 1-8), > 70% of were male. High-risk cytogenetics were relatively balanced with ~ 50% of pts having del17p. UTX+IB was well tolerated, with infusion reactions the most prevalent AE (44%, GR3/4 5%). Neutropenia was comparable with the combination (17%, Gr3/4 7% vs. 10%, Gr3/4 9%), and other AE’s were similar or lower with UTX+IB vs. IB alone (all grades), including fatigue (17% vs. 31%), dizziness (12% vs. 21%), contusion (12% vs. 26%), anemia (10% vs. 16%), and myalgia (9% vs. 14%). At median follow-up of 12 mo, best ORR per independent central review was 80% for UTX + IB vs. 47% for IB alone (p < 0.001). While not powered for secondary endpoints, observed advantages were seen in PFS and radiographic CR rate in the UTX + IB arm. CR and MRD confirmation is ongoing. Median TTR for the combo was 1.97 mo vs. 3.8 mo for IB alone. Both arms have responses pending confirmatory assessments. Conclusions: The addition of UTX to IB demonstrated a superior response rate compared to IB alone without additional clinically significant toxicity. Clinical trial information: NCT02301156.

7516Background: In the relapsed/refractory (R/R) setting for indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL), duration of response (DOR) to and types of prior therapy are important factors in predicting outco...

This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of single-agent bortezomib in indolent B-cell lymphoma that had relapsed from or was refractory to rituximab. Sixty patients enrolled: 59 were treated with bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 for up to eight 21-day cycles; responders could receive 4 additional cycles; maintenance was optional. Fifty-three evaluable patients completed more than 2 cycles. The median age was 70 years, 53% female, Ann Arbor stage III-IIIE (28%) and IV (65%); 43 patients (72%) had more than 2 prior regimens; and 6 patients went on to maintenance. Overall responses are as follows: 1 complete response (1.9%), 3 unconfirmed complete response (5.7%), 3 partial response (5.7%), 34 stable disease (64.2%), and 12 progressive disease (22.6%). Median time to response = 2.2 months (range, 1.2-5.3 months); duration of response = 7.9 months (2.8-21.3 months); 1-year survival was 73% and 2-year survival was 58%; median survival = 27.7 months (range, 1.4-30.9 months); median progression-free survival = 5.1 months (range, 0.2-27.7 months), median time to progression = 5.1 months (range, 0.2-27.7 months), and median event-free survival = 1.8 months (range, 0.2-27.7 months). Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events included: thrombocytopenia (20%), fatigue (10%), neutropenia (8.5%), and neuropathy and diarrhea (6.8% each). This study demonstrates that bortezomib has modest activity against marginal zone and follicular lymphoma; it has the potential for combination with other agents in low-grade lymphomas. Maintenance therapy should be explored further.

Background: Gemcitabine (G) has shown activity in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) as a single agent. The combination of mitoxantrone (M) and rituximab (R) is also active in MCL. The primary objective of this study was to determine the efficacy of G+M+R in relapsed or refractory MCL. Patients and Methods: Sixteen patients were enrolled between April 2005 and January 2007, 88% had Stage IV MCL, Median patient age was 74 years. Patients received gemcitabine 900 mg/m2 IV (30–60 min infusion) on Days 1 and 8, mitoxantrone 10 mg/m2 IV (5–10 min infusion) on day 1, and rituximab 375 mg/m2 IV on Day 1 (max 400 mg/hour) of the 21-day cycle. Patients received a median of 6 cycles (range, 1–8). Results: Best responses were CR 20% (95%CI, 0, 40.2), PR 27% (95%CI, 4.3, 49.1), SD 40% (95%CI, 15.2, 64.8), and PD 13% (95%CI, 0, 30.5). Median survival and PFS have not been reached with a median follow-up of 10.7 months. The most common Grade 3–4 toxicities were neutropenia (100%), thrombocytopenia (67%), leukopenia (53%), and anemia (33%). The study was closed early due to slow accrual owing to an alternative treatment which became available at the time. Conclusion: The combination of G+M+R in MCL was well-tolerated with manageable toxicity using growth factors to minimize neutropenia; further studies are warranted.

Small-molecule inhibitors of kinases involved in B-cell receptor signaling are an important advance in managing lymphoid malignancies. Entospletinib (GS-9973) is an oral, selective inhibitor of spleen tyrosine kinase. This multicenter, phase 2 study enrolled subjects with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL; n = 41) or non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n = 145). Participants received 800 mg entospletinib twice daily. We report efficacy outcomes in the CLL cohort (n = 41) and safety outcomes in all cohorts (N = 186). The primary end point was a progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 24 weeks in subjects with CLL. The PFS rate at 24 weeks was 70.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 51.3%-82.7%); median PFS was 13.8 months (95% CI, 7.7 months to not reached). The objective response rate was 61.0% (95% CI, 44.5%-75.8%), including 3 subjects (7.3%) who achieved nodal response with persistent lymphocytosis. Fifty-four subjects (29.0%) had serious adverse events (SAEs). The most common treatment-emergent SAEs included dyspnea, pneumonia, febrile neutropenia, dehydration, and pyrexia. Common grade 3/4 laboratory abnormalities included neutropenia (14.5%) and reversible alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase elevations (13.4%). Entospletinib demonstrates clinical activity in subjects with relapsed or refractory CLL with acceptable toxicity. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01799889.

Obinutuzumab is a glycoengineered, type 2 anti-CD20 humanized antibody with single-agent activity in relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). With other CD20 antibodies, a dose-response relationship has been shown. We therefore performed a randomized phase 2 study in symptomatic, untreated CLL patients to evaluate if an obinutuzumab dose response exists. Obinutuzumab was given at a dose of 1000 mg (100 mg IV day 1, 900 mg day 2, 1000 mg day 8 and day 15 of cycle 1; 1000 mg day 1 of cycles 2-8) or 2000 mg (100 mg IV day 1, 900 mg day 2, 1000 mg day 3, 2000 mg day 8 and day 15 of cycle 1; 2000 mg day 1 of cycles 2-8). The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR). Eighty patients were enrolled with similar demographics: median age 67 years, 41% high-risk Rai disease, and 10% del(17p)(13.1). ORR (67% vs 49%, P = .08) and complete response (CR) or CR with incomplete cytopenia response (20% vs 5%) favored 2000 mg obinutuzumab. Overall, therapy was well tolerated, and infusion events were manageable. This study demonstrates significant efficacy of obinutuzumab monotherapy, for 1000 mg as well as for 2000 mg, in untreated CLL patients with acceptable toxicity. Although exploratory, a dose-response relationship may exist, but its relevance to improving progression-free survival is uncertain and will require further follow-up. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01414205.

7565 Background: ENTO is an orally bioavailable, selective inhibitor of spleen tyrosine kinase (Syk, a mediator of B-cell receptor [BCR] signaling). Targeting the BCR-signaling pathway has been a focus in B-cell related hematological malignancies including LPL/WM. Methods: This reports the LPL cohort in a phase 2 trial that more broadly evaluated efficacy and safety of ENTO (800 mg BID) in patients with relapsed and refractory (R/R) B-cell malignancies. Tumor response was assessed at weeks 8, 16, 24, and then every 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was PFS at week 24. Results: 17 LPL patients (median age 72 years [range: 47–89], 65% male, and median of 3 prior regimens [range: 1–8]) were enrolled. Prior therapies included anti-CD20 antibodies (100%), alkylating agents (71%; bendamustine 24%), purine analogues (24%), and vinca alkaloid (41%). No patient had prior ibrutinib. Median treatment duration was 16 weeks (range: 1-84), with 3 patients continuing on treatment. The most common treatment-emergent AEs (any grade/≥grade 3, independent of causality) were fatigue (53%, 6%), constipation (47%, 0%), nausea (47%, 6%), diarrhea (29%, 6%), insomnia (29%, 0%) and lab abnormalities including neutropenia (53%, 12%), increased creatinine (53%, 0%), increased ALT (41%, 6%) and decreased WBC (41%, 6%). One death due to progressive disease (PD) was reported within 30 days from last dose. 12 (71%) patients were evaluable for tumor response. 5 patients (29%) discontinued prior to initial tumor assessment: PD (n = 2), withdrawal consent (n = 2) and AE (n = 1). ORR was 24% (90% CI: 9%, 46%), with 1 (6%) patient achieving PR, 3 with minor response (18%) and 7 (41%) maintaining stable disease. Reductions of IgM from baseline were greatest in the patient with PR. PFS rate at week 24 was 82% (95% CI: 44%, 95%). Median time to treatment failure and median time to response were 3.7m and 1.9 m respectively. Median duration of response has not been reached. Conclusions: ENTO was well tolerated and demonstrated limited activity in patients with R/R LPL. Further development of ENTO in LPL will focus on its role in combination therapies. Clinical trial information: NCT01799889.

7502 Background: Chemoresistant patients with FL and those who progress within 2 y after initial diagnosis have poor outcomes (Casulo. JCO. 2015) and highlight an unmet need. Methods: MAGNIFY (NCT01996865) is a phase IIIb, multicenter, open-label study of relapsed/refractory (R/R) NHL patients, including grades 1-3b or transformed FL (tFL). Patients receive 12 cycles of lenalidomide plus rituximab (R2); those with stable disease or better are randomized 1:1 to maintenance R2 or rituximab alone. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS). This analysis focuses on FL: double-refractory (DR) patients are refractory to both rituximab (as monotherapy or combination) and an alkylating agent, and early relapse (ER) patients progressed or relapsed within 2 y of initial diagnosis. Results: As of July 19, 2016, the R/R FL population (N = 117) included 32 (27%) DR and 43 (37%) ER patients, median ages of 64 and 65 y, respectively, mostly grade 1-3a FL (94%; 91%) and 2 tFL (1 DR; 1 ER); 72% and 49% were stage IV at study entry. Patients had a median of 2 prior regimens (DR 3; ER 2). Of ER patients, 31 had first-line R-chemo vs 12 with R-mono/other. Response rates are in Table 1. Median time to response was 2.8 mo for DR and 2.7 mo for ER patients, with median duration not reached. 1-y PFS for FL patients was 66% (DR 66%; ER 45%); 1-y PFS for ER patients with first-line R-chemo was 50% vs 27% in others. Common grade ≥3 treatment-emergent AEs for DR and ER patients were neutropenia (53%; 33%), leukopenia (9%; 12%), and lymphopenia (9%; 5%). Conclusions: R2 followed by maintenance showed favorable activity and tolerable safety profiles in FL patients who are double-refractory or had early relapse ( < 2 years) after initial diagnosis. Enrollment in MAGNIFY is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT01996865. [Table: see text]

This randomized, noninferiority (NI), global, phase 3 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of bendamustine plus rituximab (BR) vs a standard rituximab-chemotherapy regimen (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone [R-CHOP] or rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone [R-CVP]) for treatment-naive patients with indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma or mantle cell lymphoma. Investigators preassigned the standard treatment regimen they considered most appropriate for each patient; patients were randomized to receive BR (n = 224) or standard therapy (R-CHOP/R-CVP, n = 223) for 6 cycles; 2 additional cycles were permitted at investigator discretion. Response was assessed by a blinded independent review committee. BR was noninferior to R-CHOP/R-CVP, as assessed by the primary end point of complete response rate (31% vs 25%, respectively; P = .0225 for NI [0.88 margin]). The overall response rates for BR and R-CHOP/R-CVP were 97% and 91%, respectively (P = .0102). Incidences of vomiting and drug-hypersensitivity reactions were significantly higher in patients treated with BR (P < .05), and incidences of peripheral neuropathy/paresthesia and alopecia were significantly higher in patients treated with standard-therapy regimens (P < .05). These data indicate BR is noninferior to standard therapy with regard to clinical response with an acceptable safety profile. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00877006.

Chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML), a malignancy of a hematopoietic stem cell, is caused by the Bcr-Abl tyrosine kinase. STI571(formerly CGP 57148B), an Abl tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has specific in vitro antileukemic activity against Bcr-Abl–positive cells and is currently in Phase II clinical trials. As it is likely that resistance to a single agent would be observed, combinations of STI571 with other antileukemic agents have been evaluated for activity against Bcr-Abl–positive cell lines and in colony-forming assays in vitro. The specific antileukemic agents tested included several agents currently used for the treatment of CML: interferon-alpha (IFN), hydroxyurea (HU), daunorubicin (DNR), and cytosine arabinoside (Ara-C). In proliferation assays that use Bcr-Abl–expressing cells lines, the combination of STI571 with IFN, DNR, and Ara-C showed additive or synergistic effects, whereas the combination of STI571 and HU demonstrated antagonistic effects. However, in colony-forming assays that use CML patient samples, all combinations showed increased antiproliferative effects as compared with STI571 alone. These data indicate that combinations of STI571 with IFN, DNR, or Ara-C may be more useful than STI571 alone in the treatment of CML and suggest consideration of clinical trials of these combinations.

The SH2-SH3 domain-containing adaptor protein CRKL is the predominant tyrosine phosphorylated protein in chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) neutrophils and BCR-ABL-expressing cell lines. The amino terminal CRKL SH3 domain binds directly to a proline-rich region in the C-terminus of BCR-ABL. BCR-ABL mutants with deletions of this region were constructed to assess biologic effects of eliminating the CRKL binding site. Yeast two-hybrid analysis and gel overlay assays show eradication of the direct interaction of CRKL with BCR-ABL in the proline deletion mutants. However, these BCR-ABL mutants transform myeloid cells to growth factor independence, and in these cells CRKL is tyrosine phosphorylated and associates with BCR-ABL. These findings suggest both direct and indirect interactions of CRKL with BCR-ABL. Thus, disruption of the direct interaction with BCR-ABL has not excluded a role for CRKL in BCR-ABL-mediated transformation.

4. Tyrosine kinase activation by mutation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F222 4.1. BCR–ABL and human leukemia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F222 4.2. TEL–ABL and human leukemia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F224 4.3. TEL–PDGF receptor and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F224 4.4. ALK and lymphoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F225 4.5. RET and multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F226 4.6. Other mutations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F229

To discuss the importance of regular, consistent use of molecular testing to monitor treatment response and minimal residual disease in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), as recommended in established practice guidelines.This review outlines the efficacy of BCR-ABL1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in eliciting significant treatment responses in patients with CML; describes the positive effect of achieving molecular responses on long-term outcomes; discusses the importance of regular, consistent molecular monitoring in CML; and highlights issues critical to the implementation of molecular monitoring in routine practice.Published literature pertaining to molecular monitoring of the response to BCR-ABL1 TKI therapy for CML was searched and reviewed.BCR-ABL1 TKI therapy for CML can reduce the disease burden to a level detectable only by molecular methods. Although practice guidelines recognize the importance of molecular monitoring of disease

Objectives: Bendamustine is a unique cytotoxic agent active against various human malignancies, including chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). In vitro studies suggest that cytotoxic activity of bendamustine on CLL-derived cells is synergized by rituximab. A retrospective chart review was conducted to characterize treatment-naïve outpatients and those with relapsed disease aged 70 years and over with CLL receiving bendamustine (with or without rituximab) and to evaluate real-world patterns of care, safety, and effectiveness. Methods: Using McKesson Specialty Care/US Oncology Network iKnowMed databases, 91 outpatients with at least two recorded visits and at least two cycles of bendamustine monotherapy or bendamustine–rituximab combination therapy were identified and included. Mean age at diagnosis and start of first therapy was 70.3 and 77.4 years respectively, and 63.7% of patients were men. Results: Observed overall response rate was 56.3% in pooled treatment-naïve patients [ n = 9; complete response (CR) 18.8%; partial response (PR) 37.5%; nodular partial response (nPR) 0%] and 58.7% in pooled patients with relapsed disease ( n = 44; CR 13.3%; PR 44.0%; nPR 1.3%). Median time to progressive disease has not been reached for the 16 treatment-naïve patients (median follow up 15.1 months), and was 18.4 months for those with relapsed disease ( n = 73). No unexpected toxicities were observed. Overall rate of blood/bone marrow toxicities (all grades) was 40.7%; grade 3/4 rates were 18.8% in treatment-naïve patients and 25.3% in those with relapsed disease. Most frequent nonhematologic adverse events were fatigue and rash. Conclusion: In this retrospective chart review of 91 outpatients with CLL aged 70 years and over, bendamustine (with or without rituximab) was an effective therapeutic option with manageable toxicity.