ALBERT

Description: Abstract 2860 Introduction: In the last decade, important progress has been achieved in the treatment of CLL through the use of purine analog-based chemoimmunotherapies. Several conditions remain a challenge, often with a poor outcome. Amongst these therapeutic problems are Richter's transformation (RT), refractoriness to F-based therapies (Fref), and the occurrence of AIC, which are sometimes induced by F. Fref and RT pts have a very poor prognosis with an estimated overall survival (OS) of only 10 and 8 months (mos), respectively. Therefore, therapeutic alternatives are urgently warranted. CHOP-R has improved the outcome of pts with aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. To test the efficacy and tolerability of the CHOP-R regimen in CLL patients with RT, Fref, or AIC, the GCLLSG initiated a prospective phase II trial. Material and Methods: 62 patients were included in the study. Due to protocol violations, 2 patients were excluded. Within the group of Fref pts, the medical review detected 11 patients who had received pre-treatment with F (Fpret), but were not refractory according to the updated guidelines (Hallek et al., Blood 2008). Thus, 26 pts were classified as Fref/pret, 19 pts as AIC and 15 pts as RT. All patients received CHOP every 3 weeks (cyclophosphamide 750mg/m2, adriamycin 50mg/m2 and vincristine 1, 4mg/m2 d1; prednisone 100mg/m2 d1–5). Rituximab was added starting with the 2nd cycle (375mg/m2 on each d0, and 21 days after the last CHOP-R). RT pts received up to 8, Fref/pret and AIC up to 6 courses of CHOP-R. In case of PD after 3 cycles, pts went off-study. The primary endpoints were remission rate, quality and duration of response. Results: 79%, 73%, and 40% of AIC, Fref/pret, and RT pts were male, respectively. The median age was 65 years (y) for Fref/pret-pts, 66y in the AIC and 69y in the RT group. Binet stages for Fref/pret pts were: A: 8%; B: 27% C: 65 %. All but 3 AIC pts were at Binet stage C. Initial RT stages according to Ann Arbor were: II: 13%, III: 13%, IV 73%. The median number of previous therapies were 3 for Fref/pret, 2 for AIC and 2 for RT. A total of 314 cycles were administered, with a median number of 3 cycles for AIC and Fref pts and a median number of 4 cycles for the RT group. Due to toxicity 73% of cycles in the Fref/pret group, 66% in the AIC and 87% in the RT group were dose-reduced. 69% of Fref/pret-pts and 58% of AIC-pts received full 6 cycles of therapy and only 40% of RT-pts completed 8 cycles of therapy. Treatment was stopped in 6 pts because of PD. Due to treatment related toxicity treatment was stopped in 16 pts (27%). Treatment related mortality was 3% (2 pts). Treatment toxicity was reported according to NCI common toxicity criteria (CTC) version 2.0. Adverse events grade 3 or 4 for anemia, neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were documented in 75%, 55% and 65% of patients, respectively. Infections were the most common non-hematologic toxicity and occurred in 67%; severe infections CTC grade 3 or 4 occurred in 28%. All 26 Fref/pret-pts were available for response evaluation. CHOP-R achieved 54% PR, 35% SD and 12% PD. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and median treatment-free survival (TFS) were 11 and 14 mos. OS was 27 mos with a significant difference concerning F-ref (n=15) and F-pret (n=11) pts (17 vs. 35m; p=0.05). We evaluated the response of all 15 RT-pts with 60% PR, 7% CR, 13% SD and 20% PD. The PFS was 15 mos, TFS was 17 mos and OS 27 mos. 17 AIC pts were available for response evaluation with 82% PR, 6% SD and 12% PD. The PFS and TFS were only 14 and 16 mos. The OS was 50 mos. The population had a high incidence of unfavourable genetic markers: deletion of chromosome 17p [del(17p)] was detected in 24%, del(11q) in 34% and unmutated IGHV in 70%. 85% had high levels of serum thymidine kinase (sTK 〉 10 U/l), and 49% had high levels of ß2-microglobulin (ß2M 〉 3.5 mg/l). Patients with del(17p) had an unfavourable response rate and achieved significant less a PR or CR (36% vs. 76%; p=0.03). Multivariate analyses showed that del(17p) and ECOG performance status had a negative prognostic impact on OS (p

Description: Introduction: Bortezomib is a novel proteasome inhibitor that has shown important clinical efficacy either as a single agent or in combination with other cytostatic agents in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM). The combinated treatment of bortezomib with bendamustine and prednisone (BPV) was assessed to determine the efficacy and toxicity of this regiment in patients with advanced MM. Methods: Between January 2005 and July 2007, 46 patients (median age 63; range 31–77 years) with relapsed or refractory MM (29 patients stage III a, 17 patients III b) were treated with bendamustine 60 (−80) mg/qm on day 1 and 2, bortezomib 1,3 mg/qm on day 1, 4, 8 and 11, and prednisone 100 mg on day 1, 2, 4, 8 and 11. Cycles were repeated every 21 days until maximum response or progressive disease. The time from first diagnosis ranged from 1 to 183 (median 36) months. The duration of the last remission before beginning the BPV-therapy was 6 (range 0–36) months. Previous therapy lines (median 2, range 1–6) included 18 × thalidomide, 10 × autologous PBSCT, and 9 × autologous/allogeneic PBSCT. 16 patients were refractory to the last treatment. 22 patients had preexistent severe thrombocytopenia, leukocytopenia or anemia (WHO grade 3 or 4). Response was assessed using EBMT criteria modified to include near complete remission (nCR) and very good partial remission (VGPR). Results: 36 patients (78%) responded after at least one cycle of chemotherapy with 2 CR, 5 nCR, 6 VGPR, 15 PR and 8 MR. 4 patients had stable disease and 6 patients had a progress. With a median follow up of 13 months, EFS, and OS at twelve months for patients without severe haematological toxicities due to previous treatments (n=24) were 46% and 79%, respectively. Outcome for these patients was significantly better compared to patients with severe haematological toxicities (grade 3 or 4, n=22) where EFS, and OS were 10% and 22%, respectively (p

Description: Abstract 1855 Introduction: Bortezomib and bendamustine have turned out to be effective, rapid action drugs in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM). Bortezomib is a proteasome inhibitor that has shown important clinical efficacy either as a single agent or in combination with other cytostatic agents in MM. Bendamustine is a bifunctional alkylating agent with low toxicity that produces both single- and double-strand breaks in DNA, and shows only partial cross resistance with other alkylating drugs. The combination of bendamustine and prednisone with bortezomib (BPV) was assessed to determine the efficacy and toxicity of this regimen in patients with relapsed or refractory MM. Methods: Between January 2005 and December 2011, 78 patients (median age 62; range 31–81 years) with relapsed or refractory MM were treated with bendamustine 60 (–120) mg/qm on day 1 and 2, bortezomib 1.3 mg/qm on days 1, 4, 8 and 11, and prednisone 100 mg on days 1, 2, 4, 8 and 11. Cycles were repeated every 21 days until maximum response or progressive disease. Maximum response was achieved if three weeks of therapy did not further reduce myeloma protein by more than 10 %. The median number of prior therapies was 2 (range 1–9). Previous therapies included 31 × thalidomide, 10 × lenalidomide, 14 × bortezomib, 24 × autologous PBSCT, and 19 × autologous-allogeneic PBSCT. In contrast to other clinical studies, patients with pronounced pancytopenia due to stem-cell toxic pre-treatment or advanced disease were also included. Patients were divided into two groups: group A (n = 45) comprised patients with normal bone marrow function and group B (n = 33) patients with pre-existing restricted bone marrow function and pronounced pancytopenia (CTC-Criteria grade III and IV). Patients were excluded from this retrospective analysis if they had other secondary malignancies. To exclude myelodysplastic syndroma or secondary acute myeloid leukemia cytological and cytogenetic examination of bone marrow was performed in patients with pre-existent severe pancytopenia. Response was assessed using EBMT criteria modified to include near complete remission (nCR) and very good partial remission (VGPR). Results: The median number of BPV-treatment cycles was 2 (1–7). 54 patients (69 %) responded after at least one cycle of chemotherapy with 3 CR, 10 nCR, 10 VGPR, and 31 PR. Nine patients had MR, 9 patient's stable disease and 6 patients underwent progression. A follow up of surviving patients at a median of 34 months revealed median PFS and OS for patients without preexisting severe haematological toxicities (group A) of 11 months and 50 months respectively. Outcome was significantly better than that of patients with pre-existing severe haematological toxicities (group B) who had a median PFS, and OS of 3 months and 5 months, respectively (p 〈 0.001). The regimen was well-tolerated with few significant side effects in patients without preexisting severe haematological toxicities. New cytopenias occured infrequently with thrombocytopenia grade 3 in 11 patients, grade 4 in 8 patients and neutropenia grade 3 in 7 patients. Six patients experienced a moderate new polyneuropathy (grade 2). Summary: BPV therapy was well tolerated in patients with relapsed/refractory MM, with a response rate of approximately 70 %. The high efficacy and the favourable toxicity profile of BPV warrant further evaluation in clinical trials. Disclosures: Poenisch: Mundipharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Description: Introduction For patients (pts) with aggressive B-cell lymphoma immunochemotherapy with R-CHOP (Rituximab, Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, Vincristine, Prednisolone) represents the standard of care with curative intention. For elderly pts a dose-reduced R-mini-CHOP protocol is feasible. No standard of care exists for frail or very old (〉80 yrs) pts not eligible for CHOP-like treatment. Here we present the final results of the prospective DSHNHL-phase-2 trial for old or frail pts receiving Rituximab/Bendamustine (RB) for 1st-line treatment of aggressive B-cell lymphoma. Our goal was to determine feasibility, toxicity of the BR regimen in this pt cohort, and to determine which pts groups might potentially benefit from this reduced-intensity approach. Methods The open-label, multicenter, prospective, non-randomized phase-II trial "Subcutaneous Rituximab and Intravenous Bendamustine in very Elderly Patients or Elderly Medically Non Fit Patients ("Slow Go") with Aggressive CD20-positive B-cell Lymphoma" (B-R-ENDA, DSHNHL 2010-1, EudraCT 2010-024004-98) included all pts aged ≥81 yrs or 61-80 yrs and elevated CIRS 〉6, not qualifying for R- CHOP, with histologically confirmed CD20+aggressive lymphoma of any Ann Arbor-stage and IPI score, and ECOG 80 yr cohort), and treatment-associated deaths, frequency of grade 3/4 adverse events and SAEs, adherence to the protocol, complete and partial remission rate, rate of primary progression and relapse, and quality of life assessed by geriatric assessment and EORTC-QLQ-C30 for feasibility. Results: From 2012 to 2016, 68 pts (22 male, 46 female) were recruited in 24 centers into the trial and included into this intent-to-treat analysis (ITT). The median age was 81 yrs with 21% of pts older than 85 yrs. The median CIRS score was 8 and 72% had a CIRS 〉6. The IPI was 〉2 in 59% of pts. The patient population was per protocol divided into two subgroups: pts 61 to 80 yrs old and medically non-fit (29 pts) and pts older than 80 yrs (39 pts). For the 61 to 80 yrs old medically non-fit patients median age was 77 yrs (64-80), median CIRS score was 10 (2-22), IPI was 〉 2 in 76% of pts, 66% of pts had stage 3 or 4 disease, and ECOG was 〉1 in 52% of pts. For the subgroup of pts 〉 80 yrs, median age was 84 yrs (81-95), median CIRS score was 7 (1-17), IPI was 〉 2 in 46% of pts, 51% of pts had stage 3 or 4 disease, and ECOG was 〉1 in 23% of pts. 49% of pts received the complete treatment as planned (61-80 yrs: 38%; 〉80 yrs: 56%). Reasons for early termination of treatment were PD in 15% (17%; 13%) and toxicity in 24% (24%; 23%) of pts. 29% 95% Confidence interval 19-42% of pts (38%; 23%) had grade 3-5 infections. Treatment related mortality was 15% (17%; 13%). Overall response rate (ORR) was 41% (28%; 51%) with 31% CR (10%; 46%). Median observation time was 29 months for EFS, PFS and OS. 2-yrs EFS was 23% (10%; 37%), PFS was 40% (32%; 45%), OS was 42% (37%; 46%). In a multivariate analysis adjusted for IPI factors elevated LDH and ECOG 〉1 constituted the most significant risk factors for poor outcome. Conclusions: We describe a frail patient cohort with a median CIRS score of 8, with 72% pts with a CIRS 〉6, considerable comorbidities and a high percentage of high-risk IPI. The primary efficacy endpoint (2 yr PFS 〉 80 yrs 45%) was met; for R-mini-CHOP, this was reported at 47% (Peyrade et al., Lancet Haemat, 2011). The IPI predicts outcome in the 〉80 yrs cohort reliably. The RB regimen is active even in very elderly and frail pts up to 90 yrs of age. Therefore, in pts not eligible for full- or reduced dose R-CHOP treatment, it represents a tolerable and efficient alternative, albeit with a limited curative potential preferably in IPI low/intermediate-risk pts. Biomarker, comorbidity and QoL data will be analysed subsequently. Disclosures Zettl: Roche: Other: travel grants, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding. Viardot:Kite/Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Korfel:Mundipharma: Consultancy, Research Funding. Dreyling:Janssen: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Other: scientific advisory board; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Other: scientific advisory board; Acerta: Other: scientific advisory board; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: scientific advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Speakers Bureau. Illmer:Roche: Other: travel support. Schmitz:Novartis: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Celgene: Equity Ownership; Riemser: Consultancy, Honoraria. Klapper:Roche, Takeda, Amgen, Regeneron: Honoraria, Research Funding. Poeschel:Hexal: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Other: Travel support; Amgen: Other: Travel support; Abbvie: Other: Travel support; Astra Zeneca: Other: Travel support. Truemper:Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Janssen Oncology: Consultancy; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy.

Description: Introduction: Poor adherence and persistence to anticancer treatment are serious issues in the management of cancer patients since nonadherence has been shown to lead to higher treatment failure rates, worse outcome and higher total costs of care. The combination of the proteasome inhibitor carfilzomib (Kyprolis®) with lenalidomide (Revlimid®) and dexamethasone (CAR/LEN/DEX) or with dexamethasone alone (CAR/DEX) is approved for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma who have received at least one prior therapy. According to the current approved schedule, carfilzomib has to be given twice weekly in both regimens. Real-world data on the implementation of this treatment recommendation are still limited. Methods: The prospective, multicenter, non-interventional, observational CARO study was designed to collect data on 300 patients with multiple myeloma (CAR/LEN/DEX: 200, CAR/DEX: 100) from 90 sites across Germany. Primary objective is patients' adherence and persistence to carfilzomib therapy as prescribed by the treating physician according to current Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC). Secondary objectives are patients' adherence and persistence to lenalidomide and dexamethasone as well as the real-world implementation of the recommended CAR/LEN/DEX or CAR/DEX dosing regimen in clinical routine (i.e., the comparison of actually administered medication versus recommended medication according to current SmPC). Exploratory objectives are effectiveness, safety and health-related quality of life. The first interim analysis of the CARO study was scheduled to assess the primary and secondary endpoints 12 months after the recruitment of the first patient. Results: Between October 2016 and October 2017, 102 patients had been enrolled, thereof 68 patients into the CAR/LEN/DEX cohort and 32 patients into the CAR/DEX cohort at the time of the pre-specified interim analysis (database cut: 25 October 2017). Here, the focus is on the adherence of the twice weekly carfilzomib schedule in evaluable patients who received CAR/LEN/DEX (N=64) and on the implementation of the SmPC in terms of timing, dosing and frequency. Median age of patients was 72.3 years (range 43.4-84.3), 45.3% were female and 70.3% of the patients had a good performance status (PS) with a Karnofsky PS score of 80 to 100. The relative mean dose intensity of carfilzomib was 88.1%. 1368 of the scheduled 1591 carfilzomib administrations (86.0%) were given in time. 7.9% (n=125) of administrations were omitted, 5.0% (n=80) of administrations were delayed and 1.1% (n=18) of doses were administered earlier. Carfilzomib was omitted at least once in 43.8% of patients (n=28). 62.5% (n=40) and 18.8% (n=12) of patients, respectively, had a delayed or earlier carfilzomib administration documented at least once during their course of treatment. Reasons for deviations from the recommended carfilzomib dosing schedule concerning timing are depicted in Table 1. 1328 of 1466 carfilzomib administrations (90.6%) were given at the recommended dose. 6.2% (n=91) of doses were reduced. The main reason for dose reduction was the occurrence of adverse events (4.0%, n=58). Other reasons were: nonadherence (1.2%, n=18), organizational reasons (0.1%, n=2) and others (0.9%, n=13). 23.4% (n=15) of patients received at least one reduced carfilzomib dose during their course of treatment. The mean adherence to the carfilzomib dosing regimen (i.e., the percentage of doses administered as scheduled by the treating physician and not modified for adherence reasons) was 94.8%. Conclusion: According to our interim results, 86% of carfilzomib administrations were given in time and more than 90% of administrations were given at the recommended dose. Deviations from the recommended carfilzomib regimen were mainly due to safety issues or organizational reasons, but not due to nonadherence. Carfilzomib treatment adherence was almost 95%. Though, despite the required twice weekly dosing schedule, the carfilzomib regimen seems to be a convenient treatment option for multiple myeloma patients. Results have to be confirmed at final analysis. Disclosures Knauf: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Mundipharma: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Marschner:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; IOMEDICO: Employment, Equity Ownership; Sandoz: Honoraria.

Description: Thrombosis is the major cause of morbidity and mortality in polycythemia vera (PV) and essential thrombocythemia (ET). Age ≥60 years (y) and/or history of thrombosis labels patients (pts) as high-risk for thrombosis. Yet, thrombosis frequently occurs prior to the diagnosis of PV/ET. In a multicenter study of the East German Study Group (HINC-207; OSHO #091), the interaction between age and time occurrence of the first thrombosis as risk factors for thrombosis after diagnosis was studied. Methods After IRB approvals, JAK2 mutated adults with PV or ET were prospectively enrolled in 9 centers and centrally stratified in a one to two ratio (group A: pts with a history of thrombosis; group B: pts without thrombosis) with a pre-planned minimum of 60:120 pts. Based on a longitudinal and cross-sectional design, clinical and laboratory data at diagnosis, last follow-up, and thrombosis (for group A) were collected. Thrombosis prior to diagnosis was labeled as A1 and thrombosis after diagnosis as A2. Thrombosis risk factors were grouped into age-, previous thrombosis-, thrombosis prior to PV/ET-, cardiovascular (CV)-, thrombophilia-, and disease- (JAK2 allele burden, Hct, and WBC) related. Additionally, therapies [aspirin (ASS), anticoagulation, phlebotomy, and cytoreduction] and data from a study-own patient questionnaire were included. All pts signed informed consent. The primary endpoint was the phenotypic diversity in JAK2-mutated ET and PV pts with or without thrombosis. Results From April to Dec, 2019, 246 pts were recruited. Data on 237 pts (median age 62y; 59% females, 58% PV) are available. At diagnosis, pts in group A (n=71, median age 59.5y) tended to be younger than those in group B (n=166, median age 63y) (p=0.07). Yet, 70.4% thrombotic events (venous: median age 46.5y; arterial: median age 57y) occurred in A1 and correlated with younger age (p=0.03). Only 3 pts developed a second event after diagnosis. These were counted in A2 (n=24, median age at thrombosis: 61y). Overall, thrombosis occurred either prior to or within the first 3y after diagnosis in 63/71 (89%) pts. Age〉60y could not be identified as a risk factor for thrombosis or type of thrombosis at any time point. The 5 y probability of no thrombotic event after diagnosis in pts 〉60y was 90.4% vs. 89.2% for pts 3y after diagnosis in pts 〉60y was 3.7% vs. 4.9% for pts 60y (p=0.003) and was not associated with thrombosis. Irrespective of age, hypertension (65%, p=0.03), hyperlipidemia (19%, p=0.008), and diabetes (16.4%, p=0.05) were frequent and correlated with A2 while atrial fibrillation (p=0.03) and inherited thrombophilia risk factors (p45% (median 45%) at diagnosis correlated strongly with age 〉60y (p=0.005) but not with A, A1, or A2, although Hct 〉45% at diagnosis correlated with A2 in PV (p=0.001). Surprisingly, a Hct 〉45% at thrombosis was more frequently present in A1 (55%) vs A2 (30%) (p60y (p15% at thrombosis did not correlate with A. Age rather than thrombosis was the trigger for cytoreduction [82% hydroxyurea (HU) in B pts 〉60y vs 53% in A pts 60y and less with thrombosis. Their value as surrogate markers for therapeutic interventions to reduce thrombosis needs to be critically evaluated in larger series. Whether adequate PV/ET- or CV-risk- treatments account for the low rate of CV events after diagnosis (despite a higher incidence of CV-risk factors) compared to the general population could not be answered due to study design and needs to be addressed prospectively. Disclosures Al-Ali: Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding.