Faculty Bibliography

Objective: Brentuximab vedotin (BV) plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (A+CHP) significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) in patients with systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (sALCL) or other CD30-positive peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCL) in ECHELON-2 (Horwitz S et al., Lancet 2019). We report updated results; median follow-up was 47.6 months for PFS and 66.8 months for OS.
Design(s): This phase 3, double-blind study (NCT01777152) randomized patients aged >=18 years with previously untreated CD30-positive PTCL (targeting 75% +/- 5% with sALCL) to A+CHP or CHOP for 6 or 8 cycles. Primary endpoint of PFS was assessed per investigator in this updated analysis. Key secondary endpoints included OS and PFS in sALCL. BV or BV-containing regimens were permitted as subsequent/retreatment therapies.
Result(s): 452 patients were enrolled (226 patients in each arm); 316 (70%) patients had sALCL. Patients with advanced disease were included (stage III [27%] and stage IV [53%]; International Prognostic Index >=2 [78%]). Data continues to favor A+CHP: HRs were 0.70 (95% CI: 0.53-0.91, P=0.0077) for PFS per investigator and 0.72 (95% CI: 0.53-0.99, P=0.0424) for OS. 5-year PFS was 51.4% (95% CI: 42.8-59.4) with A+CHP versus 43.0% (95% CI: 35.8-50.0) with CHOP; median PFS was 62.3 months (95% CI: 42.0-not evaluable) with A+CHP and 23.8 months (95% CI: 13.6-60.8) with CHOP. 5-year OS was 70.1% (95% CI: 63.3-75.9) and 61.0% (95% CI: 54.0-67.3) with A+CHP and CHOP, respectively. Median OS was not reached in either arm. PFS favored A+CHP (HR: 0.55 [95% CI: 0.39-0.79]) in sALCL. 29 (13%) and 54 (24%) patients with A+CHP and CHOP received subsequent BV, respectively. Treatment-emergent peripheral neuropathy (PN), resolved/improved in 72% (n=84/117) and 78% (n=97/124) of patients with PN on A+CHP and CHOP, respectively; 98% and 97% of ongoing PN events were grade 1/2 with A+CHP and CHOP, respectively.
Conclusion(s): At this important 5-year milestone, A+CHP still provides clinically meaningful improvement in both PFS and OS versus CHOP, with a manageable safety profile, including continued resolution/improvement of PN. Funded by NIH/NCI Support Grant P30 CA008748.
Copyright

Data addressing prognostication in patients with HIV related Burkitt lymphoma (HIV-BL) currently treated remain scarce. We present an international analysis of 249 (United States: 140; United Kingdom: 109) patients with HIV-BL treated from 2008 to 2019 aiming to identify prognostic factors and outcomes. With a median follow up of 4.5 years, the 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 61% (95% confidence interval [CI] 55% to 67%) and 66% (95%CI 59% to 71%), respectively, with similar results in both countries. Patients with baseline central nervous system (CNS) involvement had shorter 3-year PFS (36%) compared to patients without CNS involvement (69%; P < .001) independent of frontline treatment. The incidence of CNS recurrence at 3 years across all treatments was 11% with a higher incidence observed after dose-adjusted infusional etoposide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone, cyclophosphamide (DA-EPOCH) (subdistribution hazard ratio: 2.52; P = .03 vs other regimens) without difference by CD4 count 100/mm3. In multivariate models, factors independently associated with inferior PFS were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 2-4 (hazard ratio [HR] 1.87; P = .007), baseline CNS involvement (HR 1.70; P = .023), lactate dehydrogenase >5 upper limit of normal (HR 2.09; P < .001); and >1 extranodal sites (HR 1.58; P = .043). The same variables were significant in multivariate models for OS. Adjusting for these prognostic factors, treatment with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, and high-dose methotrexate, ifosfamide, etoposide, and high-dose cytarabine (CODOX-M/IVAC) was associated with longer PFS (adjusted HR [aHR] 0.45; P = .005) and OS (aHR 0.44; P = .007). Remarkably, HIV features no longer influence prognosis in contemporaneously treated HIV-BL.

Background: ECHELON-2 (NCT01777152), a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, active-comparator, multicentre study, established the superiority of frontline brentuximab vedotin + cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (A+CHP) vs cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) for the treatment of patients (pts) with systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma (sALCL) or other CD30-expressing peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs) (Horwitz, Lancet 2019). Both risk of progression-free survival (PFS) per blinded independent central review (primary endpoint) and overall survival (OS) events favoured A+CHP over CHOP at the primary analysis. A+CHP was the first treatment regimen to increase OS compared with CHOP in this population.
Aim(s): We report the 5-year data from ECHELON-2, including PFS per investigator (INV) data and the following key secondary endpoints: OS, PFS in sALCL, complete remission (CR) rate, and objective response rate (ORR) in re-treated pts.
Method(s): Adults with untreated CD30-positive PTCL (targeting 75% +/- 5% with sALCL) were randomized 1:1 to receive 6-8 cycles of A+CHP or CHOP. Pts were stratified by histological subtype and international prognostic index (IPI) score. Brentuximab vedotin-based subsequent therapies were allowed.
Result(s): Of 452 pts enrolled, the majority had sALCL (n=316 [70%]; 218 [48%] anaplastic lymphoma kinase [ALK]-negative, and 98 pts [22%] ALK-positive) and had advanced disease (27% Stage III, 53% Stage IV; 78% IPI >=2). At data cutoff, median follow-up was 47.6 months for PFS and 66.8 months for OS. A+CHP was favoured over CHOP with a hazard ratio (HR) for PFS per INV of 0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53, 0.91; p=0.0077) and OS HR of 0.72 (95% CI: 0.53, 0.99; p=0.0424). Median PFS was 62.3 months (95% CI: 42.0, not evaluable) for A+CHP, and 23.8 months (95% CI: 13.6, 60.8) for CHOP. Estimated 5-year PFS was 51.4% (95% CI: 42.8, 59.4) and 43.0% (95% CI: 35.8, 50.0) with A+CHP and CHOP, respectively. Median OS was not reached in either arm. Estimated 5-year OS was 70.1% (95% CI: 63.3, 75.9) for A+CHP vs 61.0% (95% CI: 54.0, 67.3) for CHOP. PFS in prespecified subgroups and overall PFS were generally consistent (Figure). The HR for PFS (0.55 [95% CI: 0.39, 0.79]) also favoured A+CHP over CHOP in pts with sALCL, with an estimated 5-year PFS of 60.6% (95% CI: 49.5, 69.9) for the A+CHP arm vs 48.4% (95% CI: 39.6, 56.7) for the CHOP arm. Subsequent systemic therapy with brentuximab vedotin was administered to a total of 29 pts (13%) in the A+CHP arm (sALCL [n=19]; PTCL not otherwise specified [n=5], angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma [n=5]) and 54 pts (24%) in the CHOP arm. Median time to retreatment for pts in the A+CHP arm was 15.0 months (range, 3-64); 17 pts (ORR: 59%) had CR (n=11) or partial remission (n=6) after retreatment with brentuximab vedotin monotherapy (n=25) or a brentuximab vedotin-containing regimen (n=4). Of the treatment-emergent peripheral neuropathy (PN) in the A+CHP (n=117) and CHOP arms (n=124), 72% in the A+CHP arm and 78% in the CHOP arm had resolved or improved. In pts with ongoing events at last follow-up (A+CHP [n=47] vs CHOP [n=42]) PN was grade 1, 2 and 3 in 70% vs 71%, 28% vs 26% and 2% vs 2%, respectively. Summary/Conclusion: After 5 years' follow-up, frontline A+CHP continued to provide clinically meaningful improvements in PFS and OS vs CHOP, including sustained remission in 59% of re-treated pts with sALCL, as well as a manageable safety profile, including continued resolution or improvement of PN

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Burkitt lymphoma (BL) has unique biology and clinical course but lacks a standardized prognostic model. We developed and validated a novel prognostic index specific for BL to aid risk stratification, interpretation of clinical trials, and targeted development of novel treatment approaches. METHODS:We derived the BL International Prognostic Index (BL-IPI) from a real-world data set of adult patients with BL treated with immunochemotherapy in the United States between 2009 and 2018, identifying candidate variables that showed the strongest prognostic association with progression-free survival (PFS). The index was validated in an external data set of patients treated in Europe, Canada, and Australia between 2004 and 2019. RESULTS:In the derivation cohort of 633 patients with BL, age ≥ 40 years, performance status ≥ 2, serum lactate dehydrogenase > 3× upper limit of normal, and CNS involvement were selected as equally weighted factors with an independent prognostic value. The resulting BL-IPI identified groups with low (zero risk factors, 18% of patients), intermediate (one factor, 36% of patients), and high risk (≥ 2 factors, 46% of patients) with 3-year PFS estimates of 92%, 72%, and 53%, respectively, and 3-year overall survival estimates of 96%, 76%, and 59%, respectively. The index discriminated outcomes regardless of HIV status, stage, or first-line chemotherapy regimen. Patient characteristics, relative size of the BL-IPI groupings, and outcome discrimination were consistent in the validation cohort of 457 patients, with 3-year PFS estimates of 96%, 82%, and 63% for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk BL-IPI, respectively. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The BL-IPI provides robust discrimination of survival in adult BL, suitable for use as prognostication and stratification in trials. The high-risk group has suboptimal outcomes with standard therapy and should be considered for innovative treatment approaches.

We examined adults with untreated Burkitt lymphoma (BL) from 2009 to 2018 across 30 US cancer centers. Factors associated with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated in univariate and multivariate Cox models. Among 641 BL patients, baseline features included the following: median age, 47 years; HIV+, 22%; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 2 to 4, 23%; >1 extranodal site, 43%; advanced stage, 78%; and central nervous system (CNS) involvement, 19%. Treatment-related mortality was 10%, with most common causes being sepsis, gastrointestinal bleed/perforation, and respiratory failure. With 45-month median follow-up, 3-year PFS and OS rates were 64% and 70%, respectively, without differences by HIV status. Survival was better for patients who received rituximab vs not (3-year PFS, 67% vs 38%; OS, 72% vs 44%; P < .001) and without difference based on setting of administration (ie, inpatient vs outpatient). Outcomes were also improved at an academic vs community cancer center (3-year PFS, 67% vs 46%, P = .006; OS, 72% vs 53%, P = .01). In multivariate models, age ≥ 40 years (PFS, hazard ratio [HR] = 1.70, P = .001; OS, HR = 2.09, P < .001), ECOG PS 2 to 4 (PFS, HR = 1.60, P < .001; OS, HR = 1.74, P = .003), lactate dehydrogenase > 3× normal (PFS, HR = 1.83, P < .001; OS, HR = 1.63, P = .009), and CNS involvement (PFS, HR = 1.52, P = .017; OS, HR = 1.67, P = .014) predicted inferior survival. Furthermore, survival varied based on number of factors present (0, 1, 2 to 4 factors) yielding 3-year PFS rates of 91%, 73%, and 50%, respectively; and 3-year OS rates of 95%, 77%, and 56%, respectively. Collectively, outcomes for adult BL in this real-world analysis appeared more modest compared with results of clinical trials and smaller series. In addition, clinical prognostic factors at diagnosis identified patients with divergent survival rates.

Introduction: There are few data about prognostication and outcomes in patients (pts) with HIV-BL treated in the cART era. Optimal treatment strategies to minimize treatment-related mortality (TRM) remain unclear and current recommendations are based on small studies. We conducted a multicenter international analysis to identify prognostic factors and outcomes in pts with HIV-BL treated in the cART era.
Method(s): This retrospective analysis included a subcohort from a recent study across 30 US sites (Evens et al. Blood 2020) augmented by data from 5 UK centers treated 2009-2018. Progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated by Kaplan-Meier & differences assessed by log-rank test. Univariate (UVA) associations were derived via Cox model and multivariable (MVA) models were constructed by forward selection of significant variables with P<0.05.
Result(s): 249 (US: 140 & UK: 109) pts with newly diagnosed HIV-BL were included. Clinical features included median age 43 (IQR 35-50 years [yrs]); male sex: 84%; ECOG PS: 2-4: 48%; elevated LDH: 85% (> 3x upper limit of normal (ULN) 49% & >5xULN 39%); >1 extranodal (EN) site: 60%; any CNS involvement (CNSinv) 25%; and +bone marrow (BM) 46%. MYC rearrangement was reported in 93% of pts with t(8;14) in 49%, break-apart probe in 41% and MYC-light chain in 3%; the rest had classical BL with negative MYC testing (4%) or missing result (3%) (otherwise classical BL). Median CD4 count was 217 (IQR 90-392 cells/microL) with 68% pts having CD4>100 cells/microL. At BL diagnosis, HIV viral load was detectable in 55%; 39% of pts were on cART. Baseline features were similar between the US & UK cohorts with significant differences only in ECOG PS 2-4 (32% vs 65%; P<0.001) & baseline CNSinv (30% vs 17%, respectively; P=0.02). Tx regimens included: CODOX-M/IVAC (Magrath) 60%, DA-EPOCH 25%, HyperCVAD/MA 13%, & other 1%; most pts (87%) received rituximab (R). Similar regimens were used in pts with baseline CNSinv: Magrath 64%, DA-EPOCH 24% & HyperCVAD 12%. In the US, pts most frequently received DA-EPOCH (42%) followed by Magrath (32%) & HyperCVAD/MA (24%), whereas in the UK, 96% received Magrath. R was more frequently given in the US (94% vs 79%, P<0.001). Similar baseline features were seen in US pts selected for DA-EPOCH as those selected for Magrath or HyperCVAD/MA except for lower median CD4 count (144 vs 260 cells/microL; P=0.04). Overall response to Tx was: CR 70%, PR 9%, PD 14%, not evaluable 7%. TRM was 18% following HyperCVAD/MA, 13% after DA-EPOCH & 7% in patients treated with Magrath. Overall, 33% of pts had a relapse of HIV-BL with 23% systemic only & 10% CNS. With median follow-up of 4.5 yrs, 3-yr PFS & OS were 61% & 66%, respectively, and nearly identical in both countries (Fig A). Pts with CD4>100 cells/microL had better 3-yr PFS (Fig B) & OS (68% vs 57% P=0.03). We observed significantly worse outcomes in pts with baseline CNSinv (3-yr PFS 36% vs 69%, P<0.001; OS 41% vs 73%, P<0.001; Fig C). Magrath was associated with the highest 3-yr PFS (66%) compared with 63% after HyperCVAD/MA & 51% after DA-EPOCH, but the difference was not significant (P=0.13; Fig D). Pts receiving R had numerically higher PFS, but also not statistically significant (63% vs 53% P=0.16). We observed poor outcomes in pts with baseline CNSinv regardless of frontline Tx (3-yr PFS HyperCVAD/MA 40%, Magrath 39%, DA-EPOCH 32%; P=0.93; Fig E). The incidence of CNS recurrence at 3 yr across all Tx was 11%. Higher incidence was observed with DA-EPOCH (P=0.032 vs other regimens; Fig F) with no difference according to CD4 count. Variables associated with PFS & OS on UVA included: ECOG PS 2-4, >1 EN, +BM, baseline CNSinv, LDH>ULN, CD4 <100 cells/microL. On MVA, the variables independently associated with inferior PFS were ECOG PS 2-4 (HR 1.87 P=0.007); baseline CNSinv (HR 1.70, P=0.023); LDH >5xULN (HR 2.09, P<0.001); and >1 EN sites (HR 1.58 P=0.043). The same variables were significant on MVA for OS. Adjusting for all of the prognostic variables, Tx with Magrath was associated with longer PFS (adjusted HR, 0.45, P=0.005).
Conclusion(s): These data represent the largest analysis of HIV-BL to date. There were favorable tolerance and outcomes with intensive R-containing regimens with Magrath being associated with lower TRM and the highest PFS. In addition, prognostic factors for pt outcomes were associated with lymphoma characteristics rather than with HIV-related features. Pts with baseline CNSinv represent a high-risk group with unmet therapeutic needs. [Formula presented] Disclosures: Alderuccio: Oncinfo: Honoraria; Puma Biotechnology: Other: Family member; ADC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; OncLive: Honoraria; Inovio Pharmaceuticals: Other: Family member; Foundation Medicine: Other: Family member; Forma Therapeutics: Other: Family member; Agios Pharmaceuticals: Other: Family member. Olszewski: Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding. Evens: Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Mylteni: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Research To Practice: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Collins: Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Taekda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Speakers Bureau; Celleron: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria. Danilov: Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Verastem Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda Oncology: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Bayer Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Nurix: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Aptose Biosciences: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Rigel Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy. Jagadeesh: Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Debiopharm Group: Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Verastem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Regeneron: Research Funding. Reddy: Genentech: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; KITE Pharma: Consultancy. Farooq: Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria. Bond: Seattle Genetics: Honoraria. Khan: Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Yazdy: Bayer: Honoraria; Genentech: Research Funding; Octapharma: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy. Karmali: Karyopharm: Honoraria; Takeda: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Speakers Bureau; BMS/Celgene/Juno: Honoraria, Other, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead/Kite: Honoraria, Other, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Martin: Janssen: Consultancy; Regeneron: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; I-M Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Cellectar: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Teneobio: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding. Diefenbach: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Denovo: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; MEI: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding. Klein: Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Haverkos: Viracta THerapeutics: Consultancy. Epperla: Verastem Oncology: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria. Caimi: Amgen: Other: Advisory Board; Bayer: Other: Advisory Board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory Board; ADC Therapeutics: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Other: Advisory Board. Kamdar: Roche: Research Funding. Feldman: Eisai: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy, Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Trillium: Research Funding; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Other, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Viracta: Research Funding; Rhizen: Research Funding; Corvus: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Smith: AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Millenium/Takeda: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Ayala: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma BV: Research Funding; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Ignyta: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; De Novo Biopharma: Research Funding. Portell: Amgen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding. Naik: Celgene: Other: advisory board; Sanofi: Other: advisory board. Lossos: Janssen Biotech: Honoraria; Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria; Stanford University: Patents & Royalties; NCI: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Other; Janssen Scientific: Consultancy, Other. Cwynarski: Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support; Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Atara: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support, Speakers Bureau.
Copyright

[Formula presented] Background. BL is a rare, high-grade B-cell lymphoma that is often studied in trials with small sample sizes. Historical definitions of "low-risk BL" vary between studies, use arbitrary cutoffs for lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and identify a small favorable group, leaving >80-90% of patients (pts) in an undifferentiated "high-risk" category. A validated prognostic index will help compare study cohorts and better define good-prognosis pts for whom reduced treatment would be appropriate vs a poor-prognosis group in need of new approaches. Herein, we constructed and validated a simplified prognostic model for BL applicable to diverse clinical settings across the world. Methods. We derived the BL-IPI from a large real-world evidence cohort of US adults treated for BL in 2009-2018 (Evens A, Blood 2020). Progression-free survival (PFS) from diagnosis until BL recurrence, progression, death, or censoring was the primary outcome. We first determined the best prognostic cutoffs for age, LDH (normalized to local upper limit normal, ULN), hemoglobin (Hgb), and albumin. Independent risk factors were ascertained by forward stepwise selection into Cox regression from candidate variables: age, sex, HIV+ status, ECOG performance status (PS) >=2, advanced stage (3/4), involvement of >1 extranodal site, bone marrow, central nervous system (CNS), values of LDH, Hgb, and albumin. Derivation models used multiple imputation to mitigate bias from missing data and reported hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). BL-IPI groups, defined by inspection of survival curves, were compared using log-rank test for trend. We validated performance of the BL-IPI in an external retrospective dataset of BL pts treated contemporaneously in centers from the United Kingdom, Scandinavia, Canada, and Australia. Results. Characteristics of pts in the derivation (N= 633) and validation (N=457) cohorts are shown in the Table. Age >=40 years (yr), LDH >3xULN, Hgb <11.5 g/dL, and albumin <3.5 g/dL were determined as optimal prognostic cutoffs. Age >=40 yr, PS >=2, stage 3/4, involvement of marrow, CNS, LDH >3xULN, low Hgb, and low albumin were associated with inferior PFS in univariate tests. In the multivariable model age >=40 yr, LDH >3xULN, PS >=2, and CNS involvement were selected as 4 independent prognostic factors; adding stage did not enhance the model. The model was simplified to 3 groups with 0 (low risk; 18% of pts), 1 (intermediate risk; 36% of pts; HR=3.14; 95%CI, 1.61-6.14), or 2-4 factors (high risk; 46% of pts; HR=6.52; 95%CI, 3.48-12.20; Fig A) with 3 yr PFS of 92%, 72%, and 53%, respectively (P<.001, Fig. B); median PFS was reached only in the high-risk group (46 months, 95%CI, 19-53). BL-IPI was similarly prognostic for overall survival (OS, P<.001; Fig. C). Among pts with stage III/IV (historically classified as "high-risk" and constituting 78% of all pts in the cohort), the BL-IPI further discriminated subgroups with 3 yr PFS of 87%, 71%, and 52%, respectively (P<.001; Fig. D), and OS of 95%, 75%, and 57%, respectively (P<.001; Fig. E). In addition, BL-IPI was prognostic regardless of HIV status, in the subcohort treated with rituximab (3 yr PFS: 92%, 73%, and 55%, respectively, P<.001), and among pts treated with specific regimens: CODOX-M/IVAC+/-R (3 yr PFS: 88%, 67%, 61%, respectively, P=.004), DA-EPOCH-R (3 yr PFS, 87%, 73%, 51%, respectively, P<.001), or hyperCVAD/MA+/-R (3yr PFS: 100%, 80%, 54%, respectively, P<.001). In the international validation cohort, fewer pts had CNS involvement; most received CODOX-M/IVAC+R; and PFS/OS estimates at 3 yr were higher. BL-IPI categories were of similar size (low-risk 15%, intermediate-risk 35%, high-risk 50%), and provided similar risk discrimination (Harrell's C=.65 in both datasets). PFS at 3 yr was 96%, 82%, and 63%, respectively (P<.001; Fig. F), and OS was 99%, 85%, and 64%, respectively (P<.001; Fig. G). In the validation cohort, BL-IPI remained prognostic in the subsets receiving rituximab (P<.001) and in advanced stage (P<.001). Conclusions. BL-IPI is a novel prognostic index specific to BL, which was validated to allow for simplified stratification and comparison of risk distribution in geographically diverse cohorts. The index identified a low-risk group with PFS >90-95%, which could be targeted with future strategies for treatment de-escalation. Conversely, only about 55-60% of pts in the high-risk group achieved cure with currently available immunochemotherapy. [Formula presented] Disclosures: Olszewski: Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding. Jakobsen: Takeda: Honoraria. Collins: ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celleron: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Taekda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria; Celgene: Research Funding. Cwynarski: Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support; Atara: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support, Speakers Bureau. Bachanova: Incyte: Research Funding; Karyopharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Research Funding; FATE: Research Funding; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gamida Cell: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Danilov: Abbvie: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Nurix: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Takeda Oncology: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Bayer Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Verastem Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Aptose Biosciences: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Rigel Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Diefenbach: Trillium: Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; MEI: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Denovo: Research Funding. Epperla: Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Verastem Oncology: Speakers Bureau. Farooq: Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria. Feldman: Pfizer: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Viracta: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Rhizen: Research Funding; Corvus: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Amgen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Other, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Eisai: Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gerrie: AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astrazeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Sandoz: Consultancy. Jagadeesh: Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Debiopharm Group: Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Verastem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kamdar: BMS: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau. Karmali: Takeda: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Honoraria; BMS/Celgene/Juno: Honoraria, Other, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead/Kite: Honoraria, Other, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Khan: Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Klein: Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lossos: Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria; Stanford University: Patents & Royalties; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Other; Janssen Biotech: Honoraria; NCI: Research Funding; Janssen Scientific: Consultancy, Other. Lunning: ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Legend: Consultancy; Acrotech: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Aeratech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Curis: Research Funding; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Martin: I-M Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Teneobio: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Cellectar: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Regeneron: Consultancy. Martinex-Calle: Abbvie: Other: Travel grant. Naik: Celgene: Other: advisory board; Sanofi: Other: advisory board. Palmisiano: Genentech: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding. Phillips: Beigene: Honoraria; Roche: Research Funding. Phillips: Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Other: travel expenses; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cardinal Health: Consultancy. Portell: Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Reddy: Celgene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; KITE Pharma: Consultancy. Yazdy: Abbvie: Consultancy; Genentech: Research Funding; Octapharma: Consultancy; Bayer: Honoraria. Smith: Bristol Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Ayala: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Ignyta: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; De Novo Biopharma: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Millenium/Takeda: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Bayer: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma BV: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy. Cheah: Celgene, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Abbvie, MSD: Research Funding; Celgene, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, MSD, Janssen, Gilead, Ascentage Pharma, Acerta, Loxo Oncology, TG therapeutics: Honoraria. El-Galaly: F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current Employment, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Evens: Research To Practice: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Mylteni: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria.
Copyright

BACKGROUND:Hodgkin lymphoma is potentially curable. However, 15-35% of older patients (ie, >60 years) have a lower response rate, worse survival outcomes, and greater toxicity than younger patients. Brentuximab vedotin and nivolumab exhibit activity in patients with relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma. We therefore aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of brentuximab vedotin and nivolumab in untreated older patients with Hodgkin lymphoma or in younger patients considered unsuitable for standard ABVD (ie, doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine) therapy. METHODS:We did a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial at eight cancer centres in the USA. Previously untreated patients with classic Hodgkin lymphoma were eligible for study enrolment if they were 60 years or older, or younger than 60 years but considered unsuitable for standard chemotherapy because of a cardiac ejection fraction of less than 50%, pulmonary diffusion capacity of less than 80%, or a creatinine clearance of 30 mL/min or more but less than 60 mL/min, or those who refused chemotherapy. Patients were also required to have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2. Patients received brentuximab vedotin at 1·8 mg/kg (dose cap at 180 mg) and nivolumab at 3 mg/kg both intravenously every 21 days for 8 cycles. The primary endpoint was the overall response, defined as a partial metabolic response or complete metabolic response at the end of 8 cycles of treatment. A per protocol analysis was done including all patients who received treatment in the activity and safety analyses. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02758717. FINDINGS/RESULTS:Between May 13, 2016, and Jan 30, 2019, the study accrued 46 patients. The median age was 71·5 years (IQR 64-77), with two (4%) of 46 patients younger than 60 years. Median follow-up was 21·2 months (IQR 15·6-29·9), and 35 (76%) of 46 patients completed all 8 cycles of therapy. At the interim analysis on Oct 11, 2019, the first 25 evaluable patients had an overall response rate of 64% ([95% CI 43-82] 16 of 25 patients; 13 [52%] had a complete metabolic response and three [12%] had a partial metabolic response). The trial was closed to accrual on Oct 14, 2019, after the interim analysis failed to meet the predefined criteria. In all 46 evaluable patients, 22 (48%) patients achieved a complete metabolic response and six (13%) achieved a partial metabolic response (overall response rate 61% [95% CI 45-75]). 14 (30%) of 46 patients had 16 dose adjustments, primarily due to neurotoxicity. 22 (48%) of 46 patients had peripheral neuropathy (five [11%] patients had grade 3 peripheral neuropathy). Grade 4 adverse events included increased aminotranferases (one [2%] of 46), increased lipase or amylase (two [4%]), and pancreatitis (one [2%]). One (2%) patient died from cardiac arrest, possibly treatment related. INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:Although the trial did not meet the prespecified activity criteria, brentuximab vedotin plus nivolumab is active in older patients with previously untreated Hodgkin lymphoma with comorbidities. The regimen was also well tolerated in the majority of patients in this older population. Future trials should be based on optimising the dose and schedule, perhaps combined with other targeted agents that might permit chemotherapy-free strategies in older patients with Hodgkin lymphoma. FUNDING/BACKGROUND:Seattle Genetics and Bristol Myers Squibb.

Background: Despite recent advances, follicular lymphoma (FL) remains incurable for most patients. Relapsed/refractory (r/r) FL is associated with decremental treatment responses, accumulating toxicity, and poor survival among early failures of 1st line chemoimmunotherapy. Underscored by the recent approvals of idelalisib, copanlisib, and duvelisib, targeting B-cell receptor (BCR) signaling produces ORR of ~50% in r/r patients; however, new agents with a better therapeutic index over long-term administration are needed. SYK is a key regulator of BCR signaling (upstream of BTK and PI3K), and its inhibition results in clinical activity in FL. Compared with unaffected nodes, lymph nodes from FL patients have greater numbers of follicular helper T cells that express high levels of IL-4, which may support the tumor via the JAK1/3 pathway. Cerdulatinib, an oral, reversible inhibitor of SYK and JAK kinases (JAK1, JAK3, TYK2), previously reported a ~45% overall response rate (ORR) in r/r FL as a single agent. Xenograft studies suggest cerdulatinib may combine with rituximab to enhance antitumor activity. We report updated results from a phase 2a study of single-agent cerdulatinib and initial results in combination with rituximab in r/r FL.
Method(s): This phase 2a study confirmed the safety and efficacy of cerdulatinib 30 mg BID in r/r B- and T-cell lymphoma patients. Dose reductions were permitted to 15 mg BID. Response was assessed by Lugano criteria.
Result(s): A planned interim analysis was performed on July 18, 2019, in which enrollment was 40 patients in the single-agent cohort and 19 patients in the rituximab combination cohort. For the single-agent cohort, median age (range) was 64 (42-81) years and median prior therapies (range) was 3 (1-9). Ninety-five percent of patients had prior anti-CD20 therapy, and 25% had prior therapy with BCR pathway inhibitors. For the combination cohort, median age (range) was 67 (47-85) years and median prior therapies (range) was 3 (1-10). Eighty-eight percent of patients had prior anti-CD20 therapy, and 32% had prior therapy with BCR pathway inhibitors. The safety profile appeared similar in both cohorts. The most common treatment-emergent grade 3+ adverse events in >=5% of patients for both cohorts were lipase increase (27%), neutropenia (18%), diarrhea (12%), amylase increase (10%), hypertension (8%), nausea (7%), and pneumonia (5%). Grade 3+ infections occurred in 17.5% of single-agent cohort patients and 15.8% of combination cohort patients. Amylase and lipase increases generally were not associated with abdominal pain or pancreatitis. In addition, to date there has been no evidence of cumulative toxicity. The ORR was 45% as a single agent (12.5% complete response [CR], 32.5% partial response [PR], with 25% stable disease [SD] and 5% progressive disease [PD] in 40 evaluable patients) and 59% in the combination cohort (11.7% CR, 47% PR, with 27.8% SD and no PD in 17 evaluable patients). Responses typically occurred after 2 cycles, generally improved over time, and were durable in the single-agent cohort, with 10 patients on drug for >1 year. Enrollment in the combination cohort is ongoing. Updated safety and efficacy will be presented.
Conclusion(s): The recommended cerdulatinib phase 2 dose of 30 mg BID was tolerable and efficacious in heavily pretreated r/r FL. The cerdulatinib + rituximab combination appears to be well tolerated, with tumor reductions in all evaluable patients. The safety profile and unique mechanism of action of cerdulatinib support further combination studies in FL. Disclosures: Smith: Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Denovo Biopharma: Research Funding; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma BV: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb (spouse): Research Funding; Ignyta (spouse): Research Funding; Ayala (spouse): Research Funding; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp: Consultancy, Research Funding. Munoz: AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics LLC an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Fosunkite: Speakers Bureau; Kyowa: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. Stevens: Astellas: Consultancy. Smith: Portola Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Feldman: Kite Pharma: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Viracta: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Corvus: Research Funding; Eisai: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Portola Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Ye: MingSight: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. de Vos: Verastem: Consultancy; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Consultancy. Miller: Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Birrell: Portola Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Leeds: Portola Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Coffey: Portola Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership, Research Funding. Conley: Portola Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Michelson: Portola Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Curnutte: Portola Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership.
Copyright

Introduction: Historically, outcomes for BL have improved in adults using dose intensive chemotherapy regimens and early CNS prophylaxis. More recent data using a less intensive regimen, DA-EPOCH, have been reported. We analyzed detailed patient (pt) & disease characteristics and treatment patterns across 26 US CCs over a recent 9 year (yr) period and also determined survival rates & prognostication. XXMethod(s): We conducted a large multicenter retrospective study of newly diagnosed (dx) adult BL pts (6/2009 - 6/2018). Dx was established by institutional expert pathology review; all cases were verified for BL based on 2016 WHO criteria (high grade B cell lymphoma, BL like, etc were excluded). Survival rates were estimated by Kaplan-Meier with differences assessed by log rank test. Univariate (UVA) associations were derived via Cox model with variables P <=0.05 entered stepwise into a multivariate (MVA) model. Using significant factors from the MVA, a prognostic survival model was constructed. XXResult(s): Among N=557 verified BL cases, clinical features included: median age 47 yrs (17-88 yrs; 24% >=60 yrs); male 76%; HIV+ 22%; ECOG PS 0/1 76%; B symptoms 51%; elevated LDH 78% (3, 5, & 10x elevation: 44%, 29% & 15%, respectively); hemoglobin <10.5 gm/dL 32%; albumin <3.5 30%; bone marrow (BM) involved 35%; non-BM extranodal (EN) in 80%; >1 EN 43%; and 76% stage 3-4 disease (10% stage 1). Additionally, 16% and 3% of pts had baseline leptomeningeal (CSF or cranial nerve palsy) or parenchymal CNS involvement, respectively (see Zayac A et al. ASH 2019 for details). For MYC partner, 68% had t(8;14), 4% light chain, 5% negative FISH (otherwise classic BL) and 23% + break apart probe. HIV+ pts had several clinical differences: CSF+ 23% vs 12% P=0.003; CNS 19% vs 8% P<0.001; ECOG PS 2-4 32% vs 21% P=0.002; BM 64% vs 34% P=0.03; and >1 EN 60% vs 38% P<0.001. For all pts, 87% had Tx at an academic CC (13% at community CC). Tx regimens were: CODOX-M/IVAC (Magrath) 31%, HyperCVAD/MA 29%, DA-EPOCH 28%, other 10% (mostly CHOP-based & CALGB Tx) & 1% were never treated. 90% of pts received rituximab as part of Tx (69% inpatient (inpt) & 31% outpatient) & 2% had consolidative autologous SCT. Response among all pts were CR 72%, PR 6%, SD 1%, PD 14%, 7% not evaluable. The treatment related mortality (TRM) rate across all pts was 8.9% (HIV+ vs not: 13% vs 8% P=0.09); most common: sepsis 48%, GI bleed/perforation 14% & respiratory failure 12%. TRM by Tx: hyperCVAD/MA 11.5%, EPOCH 6.4%, Magrath 6.3% & other 18.9%. With 39 month median follow-up, 3 year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 65% and 72%, respectively (Fig 1A). Among all pts who experienced disease progression, 90% occurred <12 months from dx (4% after 2 yrs). There were 20 cases (4%) of 2XX cancers seen including 7 secondary MDS/AML (median 26 months) & 6 cases of Hodgkin or other NHL (median 54 months). For prognostication, outcomes were inferior for pts ages >=40 yrs & LDH >3x normal (Fig 1B/C). Notably, survival rates were not different based on HIV status (Fig 1D) or by the 3 most common Tx regimens (Fig 1E). However, there were important Tx differences based on presence of CNS involvement (see Zayac A et al. ASH 2019). Additionally, use of rituximab was associated with improved PFS & OS (Fig 1F), while outcomes were similar whether rituximab was given inpt vs outpatient (inpt PFS HR 1.25, P=0.19). Furthermore, Tx at an academic CC was associated with improved outcomes, which persisted on MVA (PFS HR 0.54, 95%CI 0.33-0.88 P=0.01; OS HR 0.50, 95%CI 0.29-0.87 P=0.01) & achievement of initial CR was strongly prognostic (Fig 1G). Baseline factors significant on UVA for PFS & OS were: age >=40 yrs; PS 2-4; LDH >3x; anemia, low albumin; BM involvement; Stage 3-4; CSF+; & >1 EN. On MVA, factors associated with inferior survival were: age >=40 yrs (PFS HR 1.57, P<0.001; OS HR 1.89, P=0.001); PS 2-4 (PFS HR 1.57, P=0.002; OS HR 2.16, PXX3x (PFS HR 2.28, P<0.0001; OS HR 1.96, P<0.0001). Collectively, these factors yielded a BL survival model (Fig 1H/I). XXConclusion(s): Outcomes for adult BL in this contemporary, large, multicenter RW analysis appear inferior to smaller published series. Interestingly, despite increased adverse prognostic factors, survival rates appeared similar in HIV+ pts. In addition, use of rituximab, achievement of initial CR, and Tx at an academic CC were associated with improved survival. Finally, a novel BL-specific survival model identified pts with markedly divergent outcomes. [Formula presented] Disclosures: Evens: Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Tesaro: Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria. Danilov: Janssen: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; MEI: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Takeda Oncology: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Curis: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Aptose Biosciences: Research Funding; Verastem Oncology: Consultancy, Other: Travel Reimbursement, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; MEI: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Research Funding. Reddy: KITE Pharma: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Genentech: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy. Farooq: Celgene: Honoraria; Kite Pharma: Research Funding. Khan: Janssen: Other: Educational Content/Symposium; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers: Other: Research Funds; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Yazdy: Genentech: Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; Octapharma: Consultancy. Karmali: Gilead/Kite; Juno/Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Astrazeneca: Speakers Bureau; Takeda, BMS: Other: Research Funding to Institution. Martin: Janssen: Consultancy; Teneobio: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; I-M Consultancy. Diefenbach: LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; MEI: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Denovo: Research Funding. Epperla: Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Verastem Oncology: Speakers Bureau. Feldman: Eisai: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Corvus: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Viracta: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Kite Pharma: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Portola Pharma: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding. Lossos: Janssen Scientific: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; NIH: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Naik: Celgene: Other: Advisory board. Kamdar: Celgene: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; University of Colorado: Employment; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Portell: AbbVie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy. Olszewski: Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding. Alderuccio: Agios: Other: Immediate family member; Puma Biotechnology: Other: Immediate family member; Foundation Medicine: Other: Immediate family member; Targeted Oncology: Honoraria; Inovio Pharmaceuticals: Other: Immediate family member; OncLive: Consultancy.XXCopyright