ALBERT

Description: INTRODUCTION. Hairy cell leukemia (HCL) is a rare indolent B-cell malignancy, mainly characterized by peripheral cytopenias and splenomegaly. The current standard of treatment for HCL are Nucleoside Analogs (NA) cladribine and pentostatin, which produce remarkably high remission rates and durable responses. Aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy, short- and long-term toxicity of NA in HCL pts treated outside clinical trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS. We retrospectively analyzed 86 HCL patients (pts) treated with NA between 1996 and 2015 in two Hematologic Centers in Italy. The study was conducted in accordance to the Helsinki Declaration of 1964, as revised in 2000. Cladribine and pentostatin were administered according to standard schedules. Response criteria published by Jones et al. (Br J Haematol 2012) were retrospectively applied. Molecular assessment of BRAF-V600E mutation before and after NA therapy using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR)-based allelic discrimination assay (sensitivity 0.1%) was performed in 10 pts. RESULTS. The median follow-up of pts (71 males and 15 females, median age 53 years) was 5.8 years (range 0.5-28). During the disease course, 86 pts were treated with NA (cladribine n=76, 88%; pentostatin n=10, 12%); 59 pts received NA front-line (cladribine in 56/59 pts, 95%). Among the other 27 pts, receiving NA as second or subsequent line of therapy, 25 had been previously treated with interferon. Median time from diagnosis to the first NA was 3.3 months (range 0-315). Hematological toxicity was observed in 53 of 77 evaluable pts (69%), and was not significantly different with cladribine (72%) or with pentostatin (37%) (p=0.1). Grade 3-4 neutropenia, anemia and thrombocytopenia were observed in 50 (65%), 7 (9%) and 7 (9%) pts respectively. Extra-hematological toxicity was reported in 48 of 79 evaluable pts (61%). The incidence of extra-hematological toxicity with cladribine (63%) and pentostatin (37%) was not statistically different (p=0.2). Grade 3-4 febrile neutropenia was observed in 24 pts (30%); 9 pts (11%) had grade 3-4 infections; 4 pts (5%) had grade 3-4 skin toxicity, 1 pt (1%) had grade 3 hepatic toxicity. Four of 86 pts (5%) developed a second malignancy (prostatic adenocarcinoma n=2, colon adenocarcinoma n=1, diffuse large B cell lymphoma n=1). The median time from NA to second malignancy was 58 months (range 49-111). Four of 86 pts (5%) developed a skin cancer (basal-cell carcinoma n=3, squamous cell carcinoma n=1), after a median time of 59 months (range 16-126). Response was assessed at a median time of 3 months after the end of therapy. Overall Response Rate (ORR) and Complete Remission (CR) Rate were respectively 93% and 63% in the entire cohort, and 98% and 72% in pts treated with NA front-line. The allelic burden of BRAF before and after therapy with NA was available in 10 cases; none of the pts in clinical CR after NA achieved a complete molecular response (Table 1). The median Progression-Free Survival (PFS) for pts treated with NA frontline was 6.5 years. There was a trend toward a longer PFS in pts receiving NA as first-line therapy as compared to those treated in second or subsequent lines (p=0.05). PFS curves according to type of NA and line of therapy are shown in Figure 1. The 5- and 10-year Overall Survival (OS) rates were 96% (95% CI: 85% - 99%) and 90% (95% CI 76%-96%) respectively. OS was similar in pts treated with cladribine orpentostatin (p=0.49). CONCLUSIONS. This study shows that: i) NA are associated with an acceptable toxicity, neutropenia and febrile neutropenia being the main complications of therapy; ii) timing of response assessment may account for a CR rate that is slightly lower than reported in the literature, confirming the importance of waiting at least 4 months for response evaluation as recommended by current guidelines; iii) the persistence of molecular disease also in pts achieving a clinical CR supports the implementation of consolidation strategies aimed at eradicating minimal residual disease to prolong disease-free survival. Table 1. BRAF allelic burden before and after therapy Patient Age (years) Sex Line of Therapy Allelic Burden (%) Clinical Response Pre- Post- 1 33 F 1 21,8 0,1 CR 2 36 M 2 5,4 0,4 CR 3 39 M 1 24,2 0,7 CR 4 54 M 1 10,8 0,3 PR 5 42 F 1 44 1,2 CR 6 53 F 1 7,9 0,2 NV 7 56 M 1 6,5 0,3 CR 8 54 M 1 12,2 0,2 CR 9 32 M 1 35,8 9,5 PR 10 38 M 2 54,4 12,2 PR Figure 1. Progression-free survival according to type of NA and line of therapy Figure 1. Progression-free survival according to type of NA and line of therapy Disclosures Arcaini: Gilead: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Board; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Board; Roche: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Board.

Description: Background : Ibrutinib is the only once-daily Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor with significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit demonstrated in 5 randomized phase 3 studies in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) compared with standard-of-care chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy (RESONATE, RESONATE-2, iLLUMINATE, Alliance 041202, and ECOG 1912), and significant overall survival (OS) benefit in 3 of these studies. To understand how treatment with single-agent ibrutinib in earlier lines impacts patient outcomes, we evaluated long-term follow-up data from RESONATE and RESONATE-2 to compare efficacy and safety by number of prior lines of therapy. Methods : This integrated analysis included patients treated with single-agent ibrutinib in the first-line (RESONATE-2, NCT01722487) and relapsed/refractory (R/R; RESONATE, NCT01578707) settings. R/R patients were grouped by number of prior lines of therapy (1-2 vs ≥3). Patients with del(17p) were excluded from this analysis given their exclusion from RESONATE-2. Patients with high-risk prognostic features were defined as having TP53 mutation, del(11q), and/or unmutated IGHV. Outcomes included investigator-assessed PFS and objective response rate (ORR), OS, and safety. Results : This analysis of 271 patients included 136 patients in the first-line and 135 patients in the R/R groups (1-2 prior: n=68; ≥3 prior: n=67). Patients in the first-line group were older (median age [range], 73 years [65-89]) than those with 1-2 prior lines (65 years [30-86]) and ≥3 prior lines (67 years [44-83]). The proportion of patients with high-risk prognostic features was lower in the first-line group (first-line: 54%; 1-2 prior: 81%; ≥3 prior: 76%). Median follow-up was 59.8 months for first-line, 66.2 months for 1-2 prior, and 65.1 for ≥3 prior. Median PFS was not reached (NR) for first-line or 1-2 prior lines and was 40.1 months for ≥3 prior lines (Figure 1A). A greater proportion of patients treated with ibrutinib in earlier lines remained progression-free or alive at 60 months (first-line: 70%; 1-2 prior: 60%; ≥3 prior: 33%). First-line treatment resulted in a 34% reduction in risk of disease progression or death compared to 1-2 prior lines (HR: 0.66 [95% CI, 0.40-1.09]). PFS was significantly prolonged for first-line vs ≥3 prior lines (HR: 0.32 [95% CI, 0.21-0.49]) and 1-2 prior vs ≥3 prior lines (HR: 0.48 [95% CI, 0.30-0.77]). For patients with high-risk prognostic features, median PFS was NR for first-line or 1-2 prior lines and was 42.5 months for ≥3 prior lines (Figure 1B); treatment in earlier lines resulted in better PFS for these patients (first-line vs 1-2 prior, HR: 0.64 [95% CI, 0.35-1.18]; first-line vs ≥3 prior, HR: 0.33 [95% CI, 0.19-0.57]; 1-2 prior vs ≥3 prior HR: 0.51 [95% CI, 0.30-0.87]). Median OS for the overall population was NR (range, 0.10+-66.04+) for first-line, NR (5.98-71.56+) for 1-2 prior, and 67.4 months (1.15-69.78+) for ≥3 prior lines. The ORR was 91%, 94%, and 82% for first-line, 1-2 prior, and ≥3 prior lines, respectively. The CR rate (CR+CR with incomplete marrow recovery) was highest for the first-line group (first-line: 30%; 1-2 prior: 12%; ≥3 prior: 10%). At the time of analysis, 58% of patients remain on ibrutinib treatment in the first-line group. Prior to study closure, 38% of patients with 1-2 prior and 18% of patients with ≥3 prior lines remained on ibrutinib treatment. In the overall population, 8 patients (6%) in the first-line group discontinued due to progressive disease while it was the most common reason for discontinuation for patients with 1-2 (n=15, 22%) and ≥3 prior lines (n=25, 37%). Across all three groups, 52 patients (19%) discontinued due to adverse events (AEs) (first-line: n=29, 21%; 1-2 prior: n=13, 19%; ≥3 prior: n=10, 15%). AEs leading to dose reduction occurred in 20% of first-line, 13% of 1-2 prior, and 22% of ≥3 prior lines. Conclusions : Overall, this integrated analysis of data with up to 6 years of long-term follow-up demonstrates that using single-agent ibrutinib in earlier lines of treatment results in better PFS, OS, and ORR with sustained efficacy for patients with CLL, including patients with high-risk prognostic features. During this extended follow-up, only 6% of patients treated in the first-line setting discontinued due to progressive disease. Ibrutinib was well tolerated with only 19% of patients across all lines of therapy discontinuing due to AEs. Disclosures Barr: Gilead: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie company: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding. Tedeschi:Janssen spa: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; SUNESIS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Munir:AbbVie: Honoraria; Alexion: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Morphosys: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sunesis: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Other: TBC; Acerta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hillmen:Acerta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Apellis: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Woyach:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Loxo: Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; Verastem: Research Funding. Byrd:Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Other: Travel Expenses, Speakers Bureau; Acerta: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ohio State University: Patents & Royalties: OSU-2S; Ohio State University: Patents & Royalties: OSU-2S; Genentech: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Acerta: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding. Ghia:ArQule: Consultancy, Honoraria; BeiGene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Juno/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Dynamo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Acerta/AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy. Mulligan:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Clinical Trial Participant, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Clinical Trial Participant, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Clinical Trial participant, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Commonwealth Serum Laboratories (CSL): Other: Clinical Trial participant; Sanofi-Aventis: Other: Clinical Trial participant; Acerta: Other: Clinical Trial participant. Dai:AbbVie: Equity Ownership; Celgene: Equity Ownership; Exelixis: Equity Ownership; Gilead: Equity Ownership; GSK: Equity Ownership; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment. Amaya-Chanaga:AbbVie: Equity Ownership; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment. Dean:AbbVie: Equity Ownership; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment. o'Brien:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Acerta: Research Funding; Alexion: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Aptose Biosciences, Inc: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Eisai: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Kite: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Vaniam Group LLC: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy.

Description: The prognostic significance of the response to initial prednisone treatment in adult ALL has been recently emphasized. Prednisone response is usually defined on the basis of the peripheral leukemic blast count. The threshold value for the defintion as good or poor prednisone response is 1000 blasts/mmc on day 8 of prednisone pre-treatment. The drawback of this definition is the difficulty of classifying patients with less than 1000 blasts at diagnosis. In the LAL2000 GIMEMA study we therefore evaluated whether the blast reduction rate, which is not affected by the initial blast level, could be a factor with comparable prognostic value. The protocol design provided a 7-day (−6 to 0) pre-treatment phase with an escalating dose of prednisone up to 60 mg/sqm. On day 1 before starting the induction the response was assessed both according to the absolute blast count (〈 versus ≥ 1000/mmc) (criterion 1) and according to the blast reduction rate ≥ 75% (criterion 2) in the peripheral blood. The induction included high dose Daunorubicin; for patients in complete remission (CR) this was followed by consolidation with high dose ARA-C, chemo and radio prophylaxis of the central nervous system, and periodical reinduction over a three years maintenance period. Patients with adverse cytogenetic features [i.e. t(9;22), t(4;11), t(1;19)] who achieved a CR were treated according to the HAM protocol that included high dose ARA-C and Mitoxantrone followed by Imatinib for Ph+ ALL and by allogeneic or autologous hemopoietic stem cells transplantation for the others. Between September 2000 and December 2003 a total of 368 patients were evaluable for response to induction. The median age was 35 years (15–60) and median WBC count 15′109/L (0.3–872); 72 (20%) were T ALL and 121 (33%) had cytogenetic high risk features (104 (86%) Ph+, 4 (3%) t(4;11) and 13 (11%) t(1;19)). Eighty-seven percent of the patients were evaluable for response to steroid pre-treatment: ’responders’ were 75% according to criterion 1 (blast

Description: Abstract 3951 Poster Board III-887 Background An increased incidence of second cancers has been reported in some lymphoproliferative disorders. Whether the predisposition to other malignancies is due to disease-related immune-suppression rather than to the carcinogenic role of therapy given to treat the hematologic disease is still poorly understood. Purpose The aims of this study were to assess the frequency, characteristics and factors predicting second cancers in patients with WM and to evaluate whether WM patients are at increased risk of developing other malignancies as compared to an age- and sex-matched control population. Patients and methods The clinical records of 220 consecutive WM patients seen in two Hematologic centres of Northern Italy from 1980 to 2008 were reviewed. All cancers, with exception of non-melanoma skin cancers, were considered for this analysis. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs), defined as the ratio between observed and expected cases, were used to compare the incidence of second cancers in WM with that of the general population. The number of expected cancers was obtained from age, sex and calendar-specific incidence rates reported by AIRTUM (Associazione Italiana Registri Tumori) for Northern Italy. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to examine risk factors for the development of second cancers. Therapy was analyzed as a time-dependent covariate. Results The median age of patients was 61 years (range: 26-86), 131 (60%) were males and 89 females (40%). The median follow-up was 4.8 years (range: 0.5-25). Overall, 136 patients (62%) with symptomatic WM received therapy, whereas a watch-and-wait policy was adopted in 84 patients (38%) with asymptomatic WM. Among treated patients, first-line therapy consisted of chlorambucil in 93 cases (68%), cyclophosphamide-based regimens in 15 (11%) and nucleoside analogs-containing regimens in 17 (13%). Rituximab was associated to chemotherapy in 19 patients (14%). Details on therapy were not available in 11 cases (8%). Overall, 52 second cancers were observed in 49 patients (22%). Forty-six patients (94%) had one malignancy and 3 (6%) developed two cancers. The types of cancer were: gastrointestinal (n=9, 17%), lung (n=8, 15%), breast (n=7, 13%), urinary tract (n=6, 11%), prostate (n=5, 10%), diffuse large B cell lymphoma (n=5, 10%), myelodysplastic syndrome/acute leukemia (n=3, 6%), brain (n=3, 6%), thyroid (n=2, 4%), mouth (n=2, 4%), other cancers (n=2, 4%). The diagnosis of cancer preceded that of WM in 13 cases (27%), was concomitant (within 3 months) in 6 (12%) and subsequent in 30 (61%). The median time from diagnosis of WM to the occurrence of a subsequent cancer was 4.3 years (range: 0.2-12.9). The cumulative probability of developing a second cancer after WM was respectively 11% at 5 years, 21% at 10 years and 33% at 15 years. As compared to the control population, the risk of second cancer in WM was 1.66 times higher than expected (95% CI: 1.16-2.37, p=0.005), without significant difference between males and females (p=0.7). In multivariate analysis, the risk of second cancer was not influenced by age (p=0.91), sex (p=0.45), reduction of IgG (p=0.91) or IgA (p=0.58) levels. In a time-dependent analysis, therapy given for WM did not increase the risk of developing a second malignancy (hazard ratio: 1.12, p=0.76). Conclusions This study shows that WM are at higher risk of developing second cancers as compared to the general population. We did not find an association between the occurrence of second cancers and treatment of WM. Disease-related immune-suppression may predispose WM patients to develop other malignancies. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Description: The role of an intensified program of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) following a consolidation phase with alemtuzumab (A) in pts with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (B-CLL) who received a fludarabine-based regimen (Fbr) as debulking is still considered questionable. The reported evidence of a prolonged treatment free-survival and survival associated to the absence of minimal residual disease (MRD) in B-CLL pts treated with A doesn’t seem to justify an intensification with ASCT in case of MRD-. We have already reported our experience in B-CLL pts treated with Fbr who after a median period of discontinuation of 16 weeks, received A sc (10 mg x 3/w for six weeks) in order to obtain the maximum response of MRD negative remission. Pts obtaining a successful peripheral blood stem cell harvest (PBSC) were considered eligible for ASCT. After a longer follow-up period we analyze here the outcome of autografted pts. Furthermore results were compared with those of pts treated with the same regimen but excluded from transplant procedure. Overall 48 pts have been considered for the analysis. Twenty-nine pts underwent an ASCT. Mobilization regimen consisted in all but 1 pt of Ara-C (800 mg/ sqm/12h x 3 days) followed by granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) while the last patient received only G-CSF. Reason for exclusion from ASCT procedure in the 19 non transplanted pts was: 9 refusal, 4 progressive disease, 1 evolution to Richter syndrome, 2 priming failure, 3 physician decision. Initially, in the group of non-transplanted pts, 9 (47%) were in stage A, 9 (47%) B, 1 (6%) C; ZAP70 was positive in 4 (21%) cases. Response after consolidation with A was: 7 MRD- CR (37%), 7 MRD+ CR (37%), 1 PRn (5%), 4 PR (21%). As regards the transplanted pts: 9 (31%) were in stage Binet A, 16 (55%) B, 4 (14%) C; ZAP70 was positive in 10 (34%) cases. Disease status after A was as follows: 18 MRD- CR (62%), 6 MRD+ CR (21%), 5 PRn (17%). Median age at transplant was 55 years (range 44–64). In all pts a reassessment of response status was ruled out before transplant to exclude a disease progression. ASCT procedure was performed after a median of 12 mos from last A administration (range 6.5–16.8). One pt who reactivated a virus B hepatitis after consolidation was successfully transplanted after 16.8 mos interval from alemtuzumab. Conditioning regimen consisted of 12 Gy total body irradiation plus cyclophosphamide 120 mg/kg in 21 pts

Description: Background: Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) occurs primarily in older patients (pts) who often have increased comorbidities and cannot tolerate aggressive treatments, which leads to poorer outcomes (Balducci, Cancer Control 2015; Thurmes, Leuk Lymphoma 2008). Alkylating agents, such as chlorambucil (clb), have been commonly used to treat these pts (Eichhorst, Blood 2009). Ibrutinib (ibr), a first-in-class, once-daily, inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase, is indicated by the US FDA for the treatment of pts with CLL/SLL and allows for treatment without chemotherapy. RESONATE-2 (PCYC-1115) is a randomized phase 3 trial designed to compare the efficacy and safety of ibr vs clb in pts with treatment-naïve (TN) CLL/SLL (Tedeschi, ASH 2015). Primary results, as assessed by an independent review committee (IRC), demonstrated with a median follow-up of 18.4 mo that ibr significantly reduced the risk of progression or death by 84% (P