Search

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

Background: Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) may be more susceptible to COVID-19 related poor outcomes, including thrombosis and death, due to the advanced age, the presence of comorbidities, and the disease and treatment-related immune deficiency. In this retrospective multicenter study, conducted by ERIC, the European Research Initiative on CLL, we assessed the risk of thrombosis and bleeding in patients with CLL affected by severe COVID-19.Methods: The study included patients from 79 centers across 22 countries. Data collection was conducted between April and May 2021.Results: A total of 793 patients from 79 centers were included in the study with 593 being hospitalized (74.8%). Among these, 518 were defined as having severe COVID: 162 were admitted to the ICU while 356 received oxygen supplementation outside the ICU. Most patients (90%) were receiving thromboprophylaxis. During COVID-19 treatment, 8.8% developed a thromboembolic event, while 4.8% experienced bleeding. Thrombosis developed in 20.5% of patients who were not receiving thromboprophylaxis, but only in 8.1% of patients who were on thromboprophylaxis. Bleeding episodes were more frequent in patients receiving intermediate/therapeutic versus prophylactic doses of low-molecular-weight heparin (LWMH) (11.1% vs. 4.2%, respectively) and in elderly. In multivariate analysis, peak D-dimer level was a poor prognostic factor for thrombosis occurrence (OR=1.020, 95%CI 1.006‒1.033), while thromboprophylaxis use was protective (OR=0.194, 95%CI 0.061‒0.614). Age and LMWH intermediate/therapeutic dose administration were prognostic factors in multivariate model for bleeding (OR=1.055, 95%CI 1.013-1.103 and OR=2.490, 95%CI 1.044-5.935, respectively). Conclusions: Patients with CLL affected by severe COVID-19 are at a high risk of thrombosis if thromboprophylaxis is not used, but also at increased risk of bleeding under the LMWH intermediate/therapeutic dose administration.

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

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is a disease of the elderly, characterized by immunodeficiency. Hence, patients with CLL might be considered more susceptible to severe complications from COVID-19. We undertook this retrospective international multicenter study to characterize the course of COVID-19 in patients with CLL and identify potential predictors of outcome. Of 190 patients with CLL and confirmed COVID-19 diagnosed between 28/03/2020 and 22/05/2020, 151 (79%) presented with severe COVID-19 (need of oxygen and/or intensive care admission). Severe COVID-19 was associated with more advanced age (≥65 years) (odds ratio 3.72 [95% CI 1.79–7.71]). Only 60 patients (39.7%) with severe COVID-19 were receiving or had recent (≤12 months) treatment for CLL at the time of COVID-19 versus 30/39 (76.9%) patients with mild disease. Hospitalization rate for severe COVID-19 was lower (p < 0.05) for patients on ibrutinib versus those on other regimens or off treatment. Of 151 patients with severe disease, 55 (36.4%) succumbed versus only 1/38 (2.6%) with mild disease; age and comorbidities did not impact on mortality. In CLL, (1) COVID-19 severity increases with age; (2) antileukemic treatment (particularly BTK inhibitors) appears to exert a protective effect; (3) age and comorbidities did not impact on mortality, alluding to a relevant role of CLL and immunodeficiency.

Purpose Secondary malignancies are new cancers occurring in patients previously treated with radiation or chemotherapy for a primary tumor. Secondary cancers are not related to the primary tumor, and may develop months or years after cancer treatment: they are usually a result of the first cancer therapy. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy may increase the risk of second cancers, such as skin tumors (basal or squamous cell carcinoma) or acute leukemia. Methods A patient with B-lymphoma and a patient with multiple myeloma, previously treated for breast cancer, are presented. Results We report the cases of 2 patients treated with adjuvant therapy for breast cancer who developed secondary bone marrow malignancies 15 years after primary treatment. Conclusions By literature review, these 2 cases do not support the relationship between primary tumor treatment and secondary cancer, but strongly suggest the need for histologic samples when bone metastasis occurred after years from diagnosis of breast cancer. In this setting, the oncologist should take into account a secondary bone marrow tumor before starting treatment for breast cancer.

Acute graft-versus host disease (aGVHD) is a multi-step process occurring after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT), characterized by (I) tissue damage to the recipient by pretransplant preparative chemotherapy, (II) donor T cell activation in response to host alloantigens and (III) cytokine secretion by donor T cells (1). Notwithstanding continued improvements in outcomes after allo-SCT (2), aGVHD and chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) continue to be major causes of post-transplant morbidity, nonrelapse mortality, and health-related quality of life (3). Despite the routine use of prophylactic therapies, incidence rates of aGVHD and cGVHD reach 40% to 50% and 30% to 70% (3), respectively, even among matched sibling donor recipients of allo-SCT. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Studies performed on mice and healthy human volunteers have shown that a single dose of pegfilgrastim (Peg-GCSF) is effective in stimulating peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) mobilization. This prompted us to try the stimulation with pegfilgrastim in a patient previously non-mobilizing with a combination of chemotherapy and filgrastim. In December 2003, a 65-yr-old man was diagnosed as having stage III A IgG/k multiple myeloma. He received three courses of polichemotherapy (DC-IE) obtaining a stable response. Afterwards, the patient was treated with high-dose cyclophosphamide (CPM; 7 g/sqm) plus daily 10 mcg/kg filgrastim in order to mobilize PBSC, without success. After 2 months off therapy, the disease progressed and the patient received alternate cycles VAD (vincristine, dexamethasone, adriblastine)/high-dose dexamethasone. A second attempt to mobilize PBSC, using daily 10 mcg/kg filgrastim after the second and third VAD cycle, failed. In a further attempt to mobilize PBSC, we administered a single dose of 12 mg pegfilgrastim on day 5 after a fourth VAD course. Daily evaluation of circulatory CD34+ cells was started from day 8 after the end of chemotherapy. On day +10 postchemotherapy the CD34+ cell count was 24/microL and two aphaeresis were performed, harvesting 1.6 x 10(6) and 0.89 x 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg respectively (total 2.49 x 10(6) cells/kg). The only side effect was moderate skeletal pain. The patient underwent successful transplantation. The median times necessary to recover 0.5 x 10(9) PMN/L and 20 x 10(9) platelets/L after PBSC reinfusion were 9 and 12 d respectively. The patient did not need red blood cell or platelet transfusions. He experienced a sustained engraftment and maintains complete remission 9 months after the reinfusion. In conclusion, a single dose of pegfilgrastim was able to mobilize a sufficient number of CD34+ in a multiple myeloma patient not responsive to two previous attempts with high or standard dose chemotherapy followed by filgrastim. This approach, if confirmed on larger series and other diseases, could open new opportunities in stem cell mobilization for poor or non-mobilizers.

The objective of this study was to assess the utility of C-reactive protein (CRP) on differential diagnosis of pulmonary infiltrates occurring in 143 febrile patients with hematologic malignancies. Serum CRP level, measured on the first day of pneumonia, was significantly higher in patients with fungal lung infiltrates than in those with nonfungal pneumonia (22.3 mg/dl vs 7.3 mg/dl; p

Although advanced stage aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas and Hodgkin’s disease are thought to be chemotherapy-responsive cancers, a considerable number of patients either relapse or never attain a remission. High-dose therapy (HDT) followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is often the only possibility of cure for most of these patients. However, many controversial issues still remain with respect to HDT/ASCT for lymphomas, including its role for, the optimal timing of transplantation, the best conditioning regimen and the potential use of localized radiotherapy or immunologic methods to decrease post-transplant recurrence. Recently, mainly due to the unavailability of carmustine, several novel conditioning protocols have been clinically developed, with the aim of improving the overall outcome by enhancing the anti-lymphoma effect and, at the same time, by reducing short and long-term toxicity. Furthermore, the better safety profiles of novel approaches would definitively allow patients aged more than 65-70 years to benefit from this therapeutic option. In this review, we will briefly discuss the most relevant and recent data available regarding HDT/ASCT in lymphomas.

Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) represents a rare malignancy in the elderly and few authors have specifically focused on the treatment of ALL in this setting. We recently published the results of a prospective phase II study comprising an induction therapy with vincristine, Daunoxome, cyclophosphamide and prednisone (VDXD) given to 15 patients aged ≥ 60 years. Here, we updated the results after enrolling 17 patients treated from 1999 to 2002 (median age 69 years, range 61–79) and we compared these with the results obtained in 17 elderly patients treated according to the GIMEMA ALL 0288 protocol from 1994 to 1998 (median age 70, range 61–76). Most of patients in both groups had B-lineage ALL and an initial WBC count less than 30 x 109/L. The most frequent karyotypic abnormality resulted the Ph which was detected in 4 (23%) and in 3 patients (17%) treated with 0288 and VDXD, respectively. BCR-ABL translocation was present in 45 % of patients treated with VDXD. Comorbidities were documented in 11 (65 %) patients treated with VDXD compared with 9 (58%) receiving 0288 regimen. With VDXD combination elderly ALL had a higher CR rate than with 0288 protocol (76.5% vs 41%; p=0.037) likely due to both lower induction mortality (17.5% vs 35%; p=0.028) and less resistant disease (6% vs 24%; p=0.025). Infectious complications rate was similar (64% vs 53%) but they were the primary cause of death in 2 and 5 patients receiving VDXD and 0288, respectively. Non-hematological side effects were comparable. Median DFS was similar and resulted 18 months and 20 months with 0288 and VDXD treatment, respectively. Median EFS was 3.9 and 12.8 months, respectively (p = 0.0486). Particularly, 1-year EFS resulted 35% in patients receiving 0288 treatment compared with 53% in those given VDXD. Median OS was 4.5 an 21 months in the first and in the latter group of patients (p = 0.0239) with a two-year OS of 29% in 0288 and 38% in VDXD group. Our results are encouraging and show that the administration of high-dose daunorubicin as liposomal compound in elderly ALL patients is not only feasible but also able to improve CR rate, EFS and OS without increase in toxicity.

BACKGROUND The mortality rate associated with fever accompanied by pulmonary infiltrates after chemotherapy for hematologic malignancies remains higher than the corresponding rate associated with febrile neutropenia without pulmonary infiltrates. Nonetheless, few studies have focused on the factors that predict outcome for patients with lung infiltrates. The purpose of the current study was to construct a risk model for clinical use by assessing the factors that affect outcome for patients with fever and pulmonary infiltrates. METHODS A historical cohort of 110 patients with hematologic malignancies who developed fever and pulmonary infiltrates was examined. Using parameters for which data were available at the onset of lung infiltrates, univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess factors affecting outcome. After a value of one point was assigned to each significant variable, a prediction score was calculated for each patient; scores were used to generate a system for identifying patients with a low risk of death due to fever accompanied by pulmonary infiltrates. RESULTS The crude mortality rate associated with pulmonary infiltrates was 23%; factors associated with cure included a favorable change in white blood cell counts (odds ratio [OR], 5.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7–18.9; P = 0.001), C-reactive protein levels < 10 mg/dL (OR, 4.6; 95% CI, 1.6–13.8; P = 0.001), and serum albumin levels ≥ 3 g/dL (OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.4–7.3; P = 0.004). Low-risk patients (risk score, 2–3) and high-risk patients (risk score, 0–1) had survival rates of 95% and 46%, respectively (P < 0.0001). The risk model had a specificity of 88% and a positive predictive value of 95%. CONCLUSIONS The risk model tested in the current study accurately predicted the survival of patients with hematologic malignancies who developed fever with pulmonary infiltrates. Once prospectively validated, the model could be used to select patients for trials involving novel diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. Cancer 2004. © 2004 American Cancer Society.

Objectives: Thalidomide has demonstrated a remarkable efficacy in the treatment of multiple myeloma but its use may cause several toxicities. We have investigated the common and rare side-effects, especially analysing peripheral neuropathy, in order to optimise the thalidomide dose for minimizing this harmful side-effect. Methods: Fifty-nine patients were treated with thalidomide alone or combined with oral melphalan. The median age was 69 yr. The initial dose of thalidomide was 100 mg/day increasing weekly by 100 mg increments until a maximum dose of 400 mg was attained. Melphalan was administered at a dose of 0.20 mg/kg/d for 4 d every 28 d. Results and conclusions: Nearly one-fourth of patients discontinued thalidomide because of toxicity. Constipation (71%), somnolence (36%) and fatigue (20%) were the most common side-effects and they were not dose dependent. Peripheral neuropathy occurred in 39% of patients and a thalidomide median daily dose of more than 150 mg was significantly associated with higher frequency and actuarial risk of peripheral neuropathy without improving the response rate. Deep venous thrombosis was observed in 7% of patients and other side-effects were rare. In patients with advanced multiple myeloma we found that a thalidomide daily dose of 150 mg minimizes peripheral neuropathy without jeopardizing response and survival.

Thalidomide, the prototype of a new class of agents active against multiple myeloma (MM), exerts synergistic/additive effects when combined with other drugs. The aim of this study was to compare the toxicity and efficacy of thalidomide alone and in combination with oral melphalan. Patients with advanced MM received 100 mg/day oral thalidomide escalated weekly up to 600 mg/day (n=23; T group), alone or with 0.20 oral mg/kg/die melphalan administered monthly for four consecutive days (n=27; TM group). A>/=50% paraprotein reduction was observed in 59% of TM compared with 26% of T patients (P=0.009); three TM patients were found to have an absence of paraprotein by immunofixation. After a median follow-up of 13 months (range 6-32), progression-free survival (PFS) at 2 years was significantly longer in the TM group (61 versus 45%; P=0.0376), whereas overall survival did not differ significantly. Toxicity was not significantly greater with the combination therapy; although DVT was more frequent (11 versus 4%), as was grade 3 leukopenia (30 versus 13%; P=0.073), there were no cases of severe infection. Thalidomide administered with oral melphalan improved response rates and PFS in patients with advanced MM without significantly increasing severe toxicity.

Elderlyacute ly mphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is a rare condition associated with low complete remission (CR) rate and short survival. In order to improve these results, we evaluate the efficacyand toxicityof Daunoxome s , a liposomal daunorubicin, exhibiting toxicityprofile and pharmacokinetic indices better than standard daunorubicin. In total, 15 consecutive patients with nonmature ALL were enrolled on a prospective phase II study. No exclusion was made because of older age, poor performance status and organ dysfunctions. Median age was 69 years; performance status resulted X2 in nine patients (60%), six patients (40%) were bcr-abl positive and two-thirds of the patients had comorbidities. Induction therapyconsisted of vincristine, Daunoxome s and dexamethasone. Patients in CR received one or two consolidation cycles of cyclophosphamide, cytarabine and topotecan followed, in patients achieving CR, by a two-year rotating maintenance course including vincristine, Daunoxome s , cyclophosphamide and prednisone. In all, 11 patients (73%) achieved CR, three patients (20%) died earlyduring the induction phase and one patient (7%) had resistant disease. Five patients (33%) relapsed after 5–21 months. With a median follow-up of 20 months, disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) at 2 years were 36 and 38%, respectively. Major toxicity included myelosuppression and infection. Our experience demonstrates that a high dose of daunorubicin as liposomal compound can be safelyadministered in elderlyALL, exhibiting high antitumor activity. Our therapeutic program shows evidence of benefit in DFS and OS. The Hematology Journal (2003) 4, 47–53. doi:10.1038/sj.thj.6200222

Bendamustine, a bi-functional alkylating agent comprising a purine-like benzimidazole ring an a nitrogen mustard group, exerts a peculiar mechanism of action if compared to most conventional alkylators and this may partially explain its effectiveness in alkylator-resistant cells. In patients with MM several studies demonstrated the efficacy and tolerability of bendamustine as monotherapy or in combination with new drugs, particularly bortezomib that was found to enhance the in vitro sensitivity of MM cells to bendamustine. These observations represented the rationale for our protocol design namely to evaluate the combination bendamustine (70 mg/m2 days 1, 8), bortezomib (1.3 mg/ m2 days 1, 4, 8, 11) and dexamethasone (20 mg days 1-2, 4-5, 8-9, 11-12) (BVD). Cycles were administered every 4 weeks up to four cycles. Patients achieving a response less than a PR were taken off-study. Patients obtaining at least a PR received two additional treatment cycles followed by a 12-months consolidation phase with cycles repeated every 2 months. Therefore, patients with a PR after the induction phase could receive up to 18 months of treatment and up to 12 cycles of BVD. Patients with relapsed/refractory MM of any age, with adequate cardiac, liver and hematological function, not refractory to bortezomib and treated with no more than four previous lines of therapy were enrolled in this prospective, single-arm, open-label, phase II study conducted in 21 Italian centres. The primary endpoint was achievement of a response at least PR after four cycles of BVD and response was assessed according to to IMWG criteria. From March 2011 to June 2012, 75 patients were included. Median age was 68 years (range 41-85), 26.5% had ISS stage 3, 19% IgA myeloma and 9% renal failure. In total, 8 of 36 evaluable patients (22%) had adverse cytogenetics. All patients had received prior treatment with new drugs, including targeted agents such as thalidomide (57%), lenalidomide (54.5%) or bortezomib (46.5%). Patients had received a median of one prior line of therapy (range 1-4), including alkylators (69%), anthracyclines (29%) and ASCT (44%). Twenty-four patients (32%) were refractory to IMIDs. The response rate ≥ PR after four cycles of BVD was 71.5%, including 11 patients with CR (16%), 13 VGPRs (18.5%) and 26 PRs (37%). Also, 14 patients (20%) had disease stabilization while 6 (8.5%) had progressive disease. Median time to response was 1.2 months (range 0.9-1.4 months). Only prior treatment with bortezomib significantly reduced the response rate ≥ PR (54.5% vs 86.5%; P = 0.003). At a median follow-up of 12 months (range 6-24), 30 patients had progressed and 18 had died. Median TTP and PFS were 16.5 months and 15.5 months, respectively while median OS had not been reached and 78% of patients were alive at 1 year. The Cox regression analysis identified prior therapy with bortezomib plus lenalidomide as the only factor that significantly reduced TTP (9 vs 17 months; HR = 4.5; 95% CI = 1.7-12.3; P = 0.005) Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 55% of patients leading to therapy reduction in 20% and to protocol discontinuation in 10.5% of patients. The most frequent severe adverse events were thrombocytopenia (30.5%), neutropenia (18.5%), infections (12%), peripheral neuropathy (8%), gastrointestinal and cardiovascular events (both 6.5%). Compared with younger, patients aged > 70 years had a significantly higher incidence of grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia (22% vs 37%; p=0.042) and severe infections (7 vs 19%; p=0.047) and consequently a higher rate of therapy reduction (9% vs 34.5%; p=0.007) and therapy discontinuation (7% vs 15.5%; p=0.043). Moreover, 4/5 early deaths occurred in patients aged more than 70 years. BVD combination is an effective regimen in relapsed-refractory MM patients since it elicits rapid, high (> 70%) and good quality of response (more than a third of patients achieved CR + VGPR). Moreover, BVD combination is a feasible and well tolerated regimen provided that adapted therapy and adequate antibiotic prophylaxis are employed in patients older than 70 years. Disclosures: Offidani: Mundipharma: Honoraria, Research Funding. Off Label Use: Bendamustine.

The role of high-dose therapy (HDT) followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in the treatment armamentarium of aggressive B- and T-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) is still a matter of debate. In the pre-Rituximab era, the PARMA study demonstrated the superiority of HDT/ASCT over conventional salvage chemotherapy in chemosensitive, relapsed patients. Subsequently, HDT/ASCT has become a standard approach for relapsed NHL. With the advent of Rituximab in the landscape of NHL, transplantation as part of first-line therapy has been challenged. However, no benefit in terms of disease-free or overall survival of HDT/ASCT over standard therapy was shown when Rituximab was added to both arms. Moreover, the superiority of HDT/ASCT over conventional salvage therapy in patients relapsing from first-line therapy including Rituximab was not confirmed. From these disappointing results, novel strategies, which can enhance the anti-lymphoma effect, at the same time reducing toxicity have been developed, with the aim of improving the outcome of HDT/ASCT in aggressive NHL.In T-cell lymphoma, few publications demonstrated that consolidation of complete remission with HDT/ASCT is safe and feasible. However, up to one-third of patients may never receive transplant, mostly due to progressive disease, and relapse still remains a major concern even after transplant.

In newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM), three/four-drug combinations as induction therapy seem to be more effective compared with two-drug associations in terms of response rate and duration of remission. Moreover, there is an emergent body of evidences that consolidation/maintenance therapy improves the quality of response and remission duration. However, the impact of these strategies in relapsed/refractory MM (r–rMM) is still unknown. This phase II study explored the four-drug combination of thalidomide, dexamethasone, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (pLD), and bortezomib (ThaDD-V) as induction followed by consolidation therapy based on bortezomib–dexamethasone and thalidomide–dexamethasone and maintenance therapy with thalidomide in r–rMM patients. The primary end points of this study were best response and toxicity of the planned therapy. Forty-six patients were enrolled. At the end of therapy, the best response was as follows: 37% complete response (CR), 34.5% VGPR, and 4.5% PR with an ORR of 76%. Patients receiving ≤2 prior regimens had a CR rate significantly higher than those heavily treated (41% vs 0%; p = 0.010). With a median follow-up of 31 months, median time to progression (TTP) and OS were 18.5 months and 40 months, respectively. By a 6-month landmark analysis, patients who completed the protocol had a significantly longer TTP compared with those who did not because of toxicity (not reached vs 7 months; p

We designed a phase 1-2 study to evaluate the safety and the efficacy of increasing doses of bendamustine (160 mg/m2, 180 mg/m2, and 200 mg/m2 given on days -7 and -6) coupled with fixed doses of etoposide, cytarabine, and melphalan (BeEAM regimen) as the conditioning regimen to autologous stem cell transplantation for resistant/relapsed lymphoma patients. Forty-three patients (median age, 47 years) with non-Hodgkin (n = 28) or Hodgkin (n = 15) lymphoma were consecutively treated. Nine patients entered the phase 1 study; no patients experienced a dose-limiting toxicity. Thirty-four additional patients were then treated in the phase 2. A median number of 6 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg (range, 2.4-15.5) were reinfused. All patients engrafted, with a median time to absolute neutrophil count > 0.5 × 109/L of 10 days. The 100-day transplantation-related mortality was 0%. After a median follow-up of 18 months, 35 of 43 patients (81%) are in complete remission, whereas 6 of 43 relapsed and 2 of 43 did not respond. Disease type (non-Hodgkin lymphomas vs Hodgkin disease) and disease status at transplantation (chemosensitive vs chemoresistant) significantly influenced DFS (P = .01; P = .007). Remarkably, 4 of 43 (9%) patients achieved the first complete remission after receiving the high-dose therapy with autologous stem cell transplantation. In conclusion, the new BeEAM regimen is safe and effective for heavily pretreated lymphoma patients. The study was registered at European Medicines Agency (EudraCT number 2008-002736-15). © 2011 by The American Society of Hematology., The study was supported in part by AIL Pesaro Onlus.

Abstract 31 Background: BEAM (Carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, and melphalan) regimen is the most used conditioning regimen before autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in lymphoma patients. However, patients receiving BEAM show a significant number of side effects, and relapse rate after transplant is still a matter of concern. Therefore, new regimens with a higher efficacy and a better toxicity profile in comparison to BEAM are highly needed. Aims: We designed a phase I-II study to evaluate the safety and the efficacy of increasing doses of Bendamustine for the conditioning regimen to ASCT for resistant/relapsed lymphoma patients. Methods: Forty-four patients (median age 47 years, range 18–70) with resistant/relapsed non-Hodgkin (29) or Hodgkin (15) lymphoma were consecutively enrolled in the study. The new conditioning regimen consisted of increasing doses of Bendamustine coupled with fixed doses of Etoposide (200mg/m2/day on days -5 to -2), Cytarabine (400mg/m2 on days -5 to -2) and Melphalan (140 mg/m2 on day -1) (BeEAM regimen). Three cohorts of 3 patients each were treated starting with Bendamustine 160 mg/m2/daily given on days -7 and -6. The dose of Bendamustine was then escalated according to the Fibonacci's increment rule until the onset of severe adverse events and/or the attainment of the expected MTD, but not higher than 200 mg/m2. Patients were carefully monitored for adverse events. The study was registered at EMEA with the EUDRACT no 2008–002736-15. Results: The administration of Bendamustine was safe in all the 3 cohorts of patients. The major side effect was a grade III-IV oral mucositis developed by 9 patients during neutropenia. We then fixed the dose of Bendamustine 200 mg/m2 as safe and effective for the Phase II study. A median number of 5.68×106CD34+/kg cells (range 2.4–15.5) collected from peripheral blood was reinfused to patients. All patients engrafted, with a median time to ANC>0.5×109/l of 10 days. Median times to achieve a platelet count >20×109/l and >50×109/l were 13 and 16 days respectively. Twenty-two out of 44 patients presented a fever of unknown origin (50%). The median number of days with fever was 2 (range: 0–7), with a median number of 9 days of intravenous antibiotics (range: 3–22). All patients received G-CSF after transplant for a median time of 9 days (range: 8–25). Two patients developed a viral infection (1 HSV-6, 1 CMV) early after transplant. Thirty-nine out of 44 patients are evaluable up to now for the response to treatment. All evaluable patients are alive. 32/39 are in complete remission whereas 4/39 are in partial response, after a median follow-up of 11 months from transplant. Three out of 39 patients relapsed after a median time of 3 months from transplant. It is of note that 4/39 patients achieved the first complete remission after receiving the high-dose therapy with autologous stem cell rescue. Conclusions: The new BeEAM regimen is safe and seems to have a high efficacy in heavily pretreated lymphoma patients. Basing on this experience, future studies incorporating Bendamustine in conditioning regimens pre-ASCT in lymphoma patients should use Bendamustine 200 mg/m2/day over 2 days. Acknowledgments: supported in part by AIL Pesaro Onlus. Disclosures: Malerba: celgene, Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria.

Fifteen consecutive resistant/relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients (median age: 65 years) received alemtuzumab for 16 consecutive weeks. All patients had negative CMV anti genemia at baseline. Five patients received oral acyclovir 800 mg twice a day for CMV prophylaxis and 10 patients got intravenous (iv) ganciclovir 7.5 mg/kg once a week. A total of five CMV reactivations occurred, four in the acyclovir and one in the ganciclovir prophylaxis group. Alemtuzumab was then discontinued and all patients were treated with iv ganciclovir 7.5 mg/kg per day. All patients achieved negative CMV anti genemia after a median of 15 days of therapy. Weekly iv ganciclovir prophylaxis and alemtuzumab treatment were then restarted without any further CMV reactivations. In conclusion, weekly iv ganciclovir appears feasible and effective in preventing CMV reactivation and disease in this setting of high-risk immunocompromised patients, allowing an easier management of a therapy otherwise difficult to be routinely used.

Introduction: Bendamustine, a bifunctional alkylating agent, exerts a mechanism of action different from that of other conventional alkylators despite it remains mostly unknown. In patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed-refractory MM bendamustine has proven to be active either as monotherapy or in combination with new drugs, particularly bortezomib and immunomodulatory agents. Methods: The preliminary results of this prospective, phase II study conducted in 22 Italian centres are recently published (Blood Cancer J. 2013, 3: e162). Here we present the conclusive results of the combination Bendamustine (70 mg/m2 days 1, 8), Bortezomib (1.3 mg/ m2 days 1, 4, 8, 11) and Dexamethasone (20 mg days 1-2, 4-5, 8-9, 11-12) (BVD) administered every 4 weeks in patients with relapsed-refractory MM of any age, with adequate cardiac, liver and hematological function, not refractory to bortezomib and treated with no more than four previous lines of therapy. The primary endpoint of this study was achievement of a response at least PR, as to IMWG criteria, after four cycles of BVD. Patients achieving a response less than a PR were taken off-study. Patients obtaining at least a PR received two additional treatment cycles followed by a 12-months consolidation phase with cycles repeated every 2 months. Therefore, patients with a PR after the induction phase could receive up to 18 months of treatment and up to 12 cycles of BVD. Results: 75 patients were included in the study. Median age was 68 years (range 41-85 years), 26.5% had ISS stage 3, 19% IgA myeloma and 9% renal failure. Eight of 36 evaluable patients (22%) had high-risk cytogenetics. Patients had received a median of one prior line of therapy (range 1-4). All patients had received prior treatment with new drugs, such as thalidomide (57%), lenalidomide (54.5%), bortezomib (46.5%) or both (20%). Twenty-four patients (32%) were refractory to IMIDs. Best response rate was 75%, including 14 CRs (20%), 22 VGPRs (24%) and 27 PRs (31%). Five patients (6.5%) died early. Only prior treatment with bortezomib significantly reduced the response rate ≥ PR (48.5% vs 80%; P = 0.004). At a median follow-up of 27 months (range 18-38), 45 patients had progressed and 43 had died. Median TTP and PFS were 17 and 12.5 months, respectively while median OS was 24 months (40% at 3 years). After longer follow-up, prior therapy with bortezomib plus lenalidomide was confirmed as the only factor that significantly reduced TTP (9 vs 19 months; HR = 2.7; 95% CI = 1.3-5.8; P = 0.009), PFS (9 vs 15 months; HR = 2.1; 95% CI = 1.2-3.8; P = 0.020) and OS (17 vs 32 months; HR = 2.1; 95% CI = 1.2-3.9; P = 0.043). Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 55% of patients leading to therapy reduction in 24% and to protocol discontinuation in 11% of patients. The most frequent severe adverse events were thrombocytopenia (28%), neutropenia (20%), infections (12%), peripheral neuropathy (9%), gastrointestinal (5%) and cardiovascular events (4%). Compared with younger, patients aged > 70 years had a significantly higher incidence of grade 3-4 side effects particularly thrombocytopenia and infections with, consequently, a higher rate of therapy reduction and discontinuation. Moreover, 4/5 early deaths occurred in patients aged more than 70 years. Conclusions: BVD combination is an effective and well tolerated regimen in relapsed-refractory MM. Data suggest that the optimal target of BVD maybe patients younger than 70 years who has not previously received both bortezomib and lenalidomide. Disclosures Offidani: Mundipharma, Janssen: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Bendamustine. Corvatta:Janssen: Honoraria. Ballanti:Janssen: Honoraria. Brunori:Janssen: Honoraria.

(2005). Cyclophosphamide, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (CDOP) plus rituximab is effective and well tolerated in poor performance status elderly patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Leukemia & Lymphoma: Vol. 46, No. 3, pp. 477-479.

Fludarabine-based cycles severely impair mobilisation and collection of peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) in acute myeloid leukaemia (AML). In an effort of reversing this side-effect, we studied the action on mobilisation and collection of PBSC of a low-dose regimen: 5-d Mini-ICE (oral idarubicin and etoposide; subcutaneous cytosine arabinoside) administered after fludarabine-based regimens in seven adult AML patients. Leukapheresis were started when the CD34+ cell count was more than 10/microL. The median number of harvested CD34+ cells was 8.1 x 10(6)/kg (range 3.08-15.2). All the patients were successfully submitted to PBSC transplantation. Median times to neutrophil and platelet recovery were rapid with a normal transfusional support. We suggest that the Mini-ICE programme is feasible, well tolerated and effective in terms of PBSC mobilisation and collection in low-yield AML patients previously treated with fludarabine. It is well known that a negative effect on stem cell mobilisation and harvest is observed not only after fludarabine administration in AML or low-grade lymphomas, but also after cycles based on different agents, such as thalidomide in multiple myeloma. This preliminary experience, if confirmed on larger series and/or other haematological malignancies, could open new opportunities to perform autologous PBSC transplantation in heavily pretreated cases, allowing a full source of therapeutic options before the start of the mobilisation process.

Literature provides no specific data concerning the type and the risk factors for infection in adult patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). We retrospectively analyzed 97 adult ALL patients who underwent conventional chemotherapy during a 14-year period with the aim to assess the incidence and the factors affecting onset and outcome of infections. We found that during induction therapy 50% of patients developed infection, mainly caused by Gram-negative bacteria and with a mortality rate of 11%. In multivariate analysis age 4 60 years was significantly associated with more infections (P = 0.04) and higher related mortality (P = 0.03). Moreover, in 22% of patients infectious complications occurred during consolidation or maintenance therapy. Mortality rate of these infections, mostly due to opportunistic pathogens, was 16%. Factors affecting mortality was the cumulative dose of methylprednisolone given during induction therapy ( 4 2600 mg = 31% vs. 4 2600 mg = 69%; P = 0.03). Among neutropenic patients, adults with ALL represent a peculiar population since they frequently develop Gram negative infections during induction and opportunistic infections during post-remission treatments. Advanced age and high-dose methylprednisolone result the major risk factors for infection related mortality in the former therapeutic phase and in the latter one, respectively.

Gemcitabine is a pyrimidine nucleoside analog with antitumor activity against solid tumor malignancies and leukemia. We evaluated its activity as a single agent and combining it with cisplatin in relapsed-refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Sixteen patients with advanced MM received intravenous gemcitabine 1250 mg/mq (days 1, 8 and 15) as a single agent for a total of 3 monthly courses. The responders received another three courses, and the non-responders received three courses of gemcitabine 1000 mg/mq (days 1, 8 and 15) plus cisplatin 80 mg/mq (day 1). No grade 4 hematological toxicity was seen after gemcitabine treatment, whereasor = 3 grade neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were seen in 21 and 13% of the gemcitabine-cisplatin infusions, respectively. Non-hematological toxicity was negligible for both the regimens. After three courses of gemcitabine as a single agent, th e response rate was 31% (1 complete response, 1 partial response and 3 minimal response). Eight patients (50%) achieved stable disease and 3 (19%) had disease progression. Ten patients received gemcitabine-cisplatin and were evaluable for the response. Two patients progressed, four maintained stable disease whereas four patients, unresponsive to gemcitabine, obtained a response (3 partial response and 1 minimal response). With a median follow-up of 13 months (range 8-17.5), 7 patients (44%) died, 5 (31%) had disease progression, 1 (6%) relapsed, 1 was still in partial response (+11 months) and 2 (13%) had a stable disease. Median time to treatment failure (TTF) was 8 months (CI95%: 7.6-8.4) and median overall survival (OS) was 16 months (CI95%: 10-22). These results showed that gemcitabine and gemcitabine-cisplatin were feasible regimens and well tolerated in advanced relapsed-refractory MM. The response rates, the TTF and OS were similar to other salvage chemotherapy regimens; nevertheless, the quality of response was modest particularly after gemcitabine alone. Better results might be obtained combining gemcitabine with other chemotherapy compounds or with biologically based therapies.

Bendamustine demonstrated synergistic efficacy with bortezomib against multiple myeloma (MM) cells in vitro and seems an effective treatment for relapsed-refractory MM (rrMM). This phase II study evaluated bendamustine plus bortezomib and dexamethasone (BVD) administered over six 28-day cycles and then every 56 days for six further cycles in patients with rrMM treated with ⩽4 prior therapies and not refractory to bortezomib. The primary study end point was the overall response rate after four cycles. In total, 75 patients were enrolled, of median age 68 years. All patients had received targeted agents, 83% had 1–2 prior therapies and 33% were refractory to the last treatment. The response rate⩾partial response (PR) was 71.5% (16% complete response, 18.5% very good PR, 37% partial remission). At 12 months of follow-up, median time-to-progression (TTP) was 16.5 months and 1-year overall survival was 78%. According to Cox regression analysis, only prior therapy with bortezomib plus lenalidomide significantly reduced TTP (9 vs 17 months; hazard ratio=4.5; P=0.005). The main severe side effects were thrombocytopenia (30.5%), neutropenia (18.5%), infections (12%), neuropathy (8%) and gastrointestinal and cardiovascular events (both 6.5%). The BVD regimen is feasible, effective and well-tolerated in difficult-to-treat patients with rrMM.

Background We previously demonstrated (Visani et al, Blood 2011) the safety of a new conditioning regimen with bendamustine, etoposide, cytarabine, and melphalan (BeEAM) prior to autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in resistant/relapsed lymphoma patients (EUDRACTnumber2008-002736-15). Furthermore, this regimen showed significant anti-lymphoma activity (80% CR). At the time of publication (2011), disease type (NHL versus HL) and disease status at transplant (chemosensitive versus chemoresistant) were the only statistically significant variables influencing PFS (p=0.01; p=0.007). However, median follow-up for surviving patients was short (18 months), therefore, it was not possible to draw final conclusions on the efficacy. Aims We evaluated the efficacy of the BeEAM regimen in terms of disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) after a median follow-up of 41 months. Methods Forty-three patients (median age 47 years, range 18-70) with resistant/relapsed NHL (28) or Hodgkin lymphoma (HL, 15) were consecutively enrolled in the study. Twenty-one patients had primary refractory disease, whereas 22 had relapsed disease, 5 of whom where in second or subsequent relapse, at the time of enrolment. The study was designed according to Fleming’s method. The primary objective of the study was to determine the 36-months event free survival rate. We fixed the lowest acceptable rate as 40% and the successful rate as 60%, with a significance level a=0.05 and a power 1-b =0.80. At the time of publication, the median follow-up was 18 months, and therefore it was not possible to establish if we had met the primary end-point of the study. Results we updated the follow-up at 41 months after transplant. Thirty-one out of 43 patients are still in CR (72%), as documented by both PET and CT scan. Two patients with HL were refractory and rapidly died, whereas 10/43 patients (23%) relapsed after a median time of 7.5 months (range:3-23) from transplant. Five patients died (3 NHL, 2 HL), whereas 5 patients are still alive after relapse. Median PFS and OS were still not reached. Conversely, 3-year PFS was 75%, allowing our study to met its primary end-point. Interestingly, disease type (HL versus NHL) at transplant is no longer influencing PFS (p=0.7), and still does not influence OS (p=0.1). On the other hand, disease status at transplant (chemosensitive vs chemoresistant) is still a strong predictor of both PFS and OS (p=0.03 and p=0.009, respectively). At present, one patient developed myelodisplasia after transplant. No other late effects were observed up to now. Conclusions The new BeEAM regimen met the primary end-point of the study and confirms its safety, after 41 months of follow-up. Interestingly, NHL and HL were not statistically different in terms of both PFS and OS at 41 months of observation. These data confirm the high efficacy of this regimen in heavily pretreated non-Hodgkin, as well as Hodgkin lymphoma. Acknowledgments supported in part by AIL Pesaro Onlus. Disclosures: Ocio: Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Array Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract 3020 Background. In patients with newly diagnosed MM, three/four-drug combinations seem to be more effective compared with two-drug associations in terms of both rate and duration of remission. Moreover, there is an emergent body of evidences that consolidation/maintenance therapy improves quality of response and remission duration. However, the impact of these strategies in relapsed/refractory MM (r-rMM) are still unknown. Methods. This is a multicenter, phase II study including patients with r-rMM having measurable disease, no more than 4 prior lines of therapy, adequate performance status, cardiac and liver function. As induction therapy patients received 6 28-day cycles of oral thalidomide 100 mg/day continuously at bedtime, oral dexamethasone 20 mg on day 1–2, 4–5, 8–9, 11–12, pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin (pLD) 30 mg/m2 iv on day 4 and bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 iv on day 1, 4, 8, 11 (ThaDD-V). As consolidation patients underwent 6 28-day cycles of rotating bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 iv on day 1, 4, 8, 11 plus oral dexamethasone 20 mg on day 1–2, 4–5, 8–9 (3 courses) or thalidomide 100 mg/day continuously at bedtime plus oral dexamethasone 20 mg on day 1–4 (3 courses). Patients eligible and having suitable stem cell storage underwent ASCT instead of standard consolidation at the discretion of attending physician. Maintenance therapy included thalidomide 100 mg/day until relapse or intolerable toxicity. Since in the first 20 patients we recognized an excess of peripheral neuropathy, protocol was amended as follow: bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 on day 1, 4, 11 and thalidomide 50 mg/day in all therapeutic phases. The primary end-points of this study were best response and toxicity of the planned therapy. Results. Forty-six patients were enrolled. Median age was 63.5 years (range 31–80 years) and the median number of prior regimens was 1 (range 1–4). Twenty-four patients (52%) had undergone autologous stem cell transplantation, 30 (65%) had received anthracyclines, 27 (59%) thalidomide, 8 (17.5%) bortezomib and 16 (35%) were refractory to the last regimen. After induction 16 patients (34.5%) achieved CR (6=13% sCR), 15 (32.5%) VGPR and 4 (8.5%) PR with a ORR of 76.5%. Seven patients (15%) progressed. Out of 46 patients undergone induction, 26 (20 standard, 6 ASCT) received consolidation therapy since 1 patients died during induction, 8 had progressive disease, 1 had second neoplasm, 7 had severe toxicities and 3 undergone allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Excluding 6 patients who have obtained sCR before, 5 (25%) out of 20 patients had further improvement in response. Therefore, best response after induction and consolidation were: 25 CR (54%; 8 sCR=17.5%), 16 VGPR (34.5%) and 2 PR (4.5%). Maintenance therapy did not further improve response. Patients receiving ≤ 2 prior regimens had a CR rate significantly higher than those heavily treated (41% vs 0%; p= 0.010) whereas prior ASCT, thalidomide or bortezomib, refractory disease and bortezomib dose-intensity did not affect quality of response. After a median follow-up of 31 months (range 12–53), 28 patients relapsed and 20 died. Median TTP was 18.5 months, median PFS was 17.5 months and median survival was 40 months. Median TTP of patients achieving PR-VGPR was 16 months (3 years= 10%) whereas in those obtaining CR it was 32.5 months (3 years= 45%; p=0.032) vs not reached (3 years= 85%) in patients achieving sCR (p=0.003). Main toxicity was peripheral neuropathy (PN). Indeed, in the first 20 patients we observed 6 (30%) grade 2 and 3 (15%) grade 3 PN. After amendment, grade 2 and 3 PN occurred in 3 (11.5%) and 2 patients (7.5%), respectively. DVT occurred in 2 patients (4.5%) and severe infection in 7 (15%). Grade 3–4 neutropenia, anemia and thrombocytopenia occurred in 4 (8.5%), 2 (4%) and 7 patients (15%), respectively. Finally, only one patients died of myocardial infarction during induction. During consolidation therapy other 2 patients developed grade 3 peripheral neuropathy. During maintenance with thalidomide no patients developed severe neuropathy requiring discontinuation. Conclusions. Multi-drug combination namely ThaDD-V as induction followed by consolidation-maintenance therapy seems to be very effective in patients with r-rMM provided that this procedure is used early on relapse when very deep responses are still possible. A reduced dose-intensity of bortezomib significantly decreases PN without jeopardizing outcome. Disclosures: Offidani: Celcene, Janssen Cilag: Honoraria. Polloni:Celgene: Honoraria. Corvatta:Celgene: Honoraria. Gentili:Celgene: Honoraria. Brunori:Celgene, Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Catarini:Cerlgene, Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Malerba:celgene, Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Leoni:Celgene, Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria.

Abstract 4351 We designed a phase I study to evaluate the safety and the efficacy of increasing doses of Bendamustine, coupled with fixed doses of Etoposide, Cytarabine and Melphalan in the conditioning regimen to autologous stem cell transplant for resistant/relapsed lymphoma patients. Nine patients (median age 54 years, range 18-70) with resistant/relapsed non-Hodgkin's (6) or Hodgkin's (3) lymphoma were consecutive enrolled in the study, starting from August, 1st 2008. The new conditioning regimen (BeEAM) consisted of increasing doses of Bendamustine coupled with fixed doses of Etoposide (200mg/m2/day on days -5 to -2), Cytarabine (400mg/m2 on days -5 to -2) and Melphalan (140 mg/m2 on day -1) (BeEAM regimen). Three cohorts of three patients each were treated starting with Bendamustine 160 mg/m2 given on days -7 and -6. The dose of Bendamustine was then escalated according to the Fibonacci's increment rule until the onset of severe adverse events and/or the attainment of the expected maximum tolerated dose, but not higher than 200 mg/m2. Patients were carefully monitored for any adverse event, particularly for cardiotoxicity. Electrocardiography and troponin monitoring was performed at baseline and thereafter at 24, 72 and 96 hours after the two-days Bendamustine administration. The administration of Bendamustine was safe in all the three cohorts of patients. No grade III or IV non hematological toxicities were observed at any dose of the drug. In particular, we did not observe any grade III-IV cardiotoxicity. All patients engrafted, with a median time to ANC>0.5×109/l of 11 days (range: 11-27). Median times to achieve a platelet count >20×109/l and >50×109/l were 13 and 15 days respectively. Six out of 9 patients experienced an episode of FUO (66%), whereas 1/9 (11%) presented a bacteriemia. However, the median number of days with fever was 2 (range: 0-5), with a median number of 9 days of intravenous antibiotics (range: 3-22). All patients received G-CSF after transplant for a median time of 8 days (range: 8-24). At the time of writing all patients are alive and in complete remission, after a median follow-up of 5 months from transplant. It is of note that 2/9 patients achieved the first complete remission after receiving the high-dose therapy with autologous stem cell rescue. However, the small number of the patients and the short duration of follow-up might be taken in account when analyzing these preliminary data. In conclusion, the new BeEAM regimen is safe and seems to have a high efficacy in heavily pretreated lymphoma patients. Further studies are warranted to compare the efficacy of this new regimen with the conventional BEAM regimen for resistant/relapsed lymphoma patients submitted to ASCT. All the future studies who want to incorporate Bendamustine on such conditioning regimens for ASCT in lymphoma patients should use Bendamustine at a dose of 200 mg/m2 daily given overt 2 days. The study was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Helsinki Declaration, Good Clinical Practices and the current National Rules for conducting clinical studies. The study was registered at European Medicines Agency (EMEA) with the EUDRACT no 2008-002736-15. Acknowledgments We kindly acknowledge Mundipharma Italy and Mundipharma Europe for providing us the drug for the study free of charge. The study was supported in part by AIL Pesaro Onlus, Disclosures: Off Label Use: Bendamustine is used in adjunct to etoposide, cytarabine and melphalan in a novel strategy of high-dose therapy followed by autologous stem cell rescue.

New drugs such as thalidomide, bortezomib and lenalidomide have expanded the therapeutic options for MM while improving outcome in both young and elderly patients. However, the best novel agents sequence in the therapeutic strategy for MM is still not definitely delineated as relapsed MM right after first line thalidomide therapy seems to be more resistant jeopardizing final outcome as per overall survival while still making questionable when to administer it, either at the beginning or later during the course of the disease. We analyzed 72 relapsed MM patients who were enrolled in two salvage study protocols which included bortezomib, dexamethasone and chemotherapy (Offidani et al, ASH 2007 and EHA 2008) and who had been treated with thalidomide first (18 patients) or subsequently (30 patients) or not treated at all with thalidomide (24 patients). We compared these three groups of patients in terms of response rate, post-relapse PFS and post-relapse OS with the aim to assess the role of previous administration of thalidomide on final outcome in this patient population. Median age for the 72 patients was 65 years (range 31–82); ISS stage 2–3 assessed in 51% of patients and unfavourable cytogenetics in 42%. Thirty four patients had been rescued in first relapse, 19 in second and 19 in third or subsequent relapse. Median disease history was 34 months (range 8–173). Forty four patients relapsed after high-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation. The 48 patients were previously treated with thalidomide a median time of 8 months (range 4–48 months). VGPR or better response rate in the groups of patients treated with thalidomide in first line, second or subsequent line or never treated with thalidomide were 44%, 42% (p=0.795) and 79% (p=0.003; p=0.002), respectively.. Multivariate stepwise regression analysis selected only previous thalidomide treatment (OR=1.9; 95%CI=1.5–2.4; p=0.024) as factors affecting response whereas age, previous therapy lines, previous remission duration, previous transplant, previous disease history, sCRP, ISS stage and cytogenetics were not significantly associated to response. In the same groups post-relapse PFS was 9 months, 14 months (p=0.308) and not reached (p=0.018; p=0.055) while post-relapse 2 years OS was 51%, 50% (p=0.564) and 72% (p=0.074; p=0.135). Cox regression analysis showed that the presence of ISS 2–3 (p=0.010), previous thalidomide administration (p=0.052), and response < VGPR (p