Abstract: Background: Diagnostic-to-treatment interval (DTI) was recently described as a strong prognostic factor for newly diagnosed systemic diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients (DLBCL) with an improvement of event-free survival (EFS) for patients with a longer DTI. These results have some implications for patient selection and result interpretations in clinical trials. This association has not been previously evaluated in DLBCL Primary CNS Lymphoma (PCNSL) patients who also present a clinically aggressive disease. Patients and Methods: The cohort constited of all consecutive DLBCL PCNSL patients treated in two Hematology Departments of the University of Lyon between 1984 and 2018 (N=244). All patients had DLBCL histology at diagnosis, obtained by brain biopsy (N=235, 96%), vitrectomy (N=4, 2%) or CSF evaluation (N=5, 2%). As first line treatments, all patients but 5 (2%) received high-dose (HD) methotrexate-based chemotherapy, associated with intra-venous rituximab for 154 patients (63%) and HD cytarabine for 182 patients (75%). Consolidation treatment by whole-brain radiotherapy was performed in seventy-six patients (31%). DTI was defined as the number of days between the date of diagnosis (i.e. biopsy) and the date of treatment initiation. Association between DTI and patient characteristics was assessed by chi-square tests or Student t-tests. EFS was defined from the start of therapy to progression, relapse, or death from any cause. As we previously described, prognostic factors such as age and performance status (PS) demonstrate a time-dependent effect on overall survival (OS) in PCNSL limiting the validity of traditional Cox proportional hazard models. We thus used a piecewise Cox model to allow assessment of prognostic effect over different time periods. All survival analyses were done in univariate and multivariate settings and stratified on rituximab use during first-line therapy. Results: With a median follow-up of 73.5 months, the 5-year EFS and OS rates were 31.6% and 48.4% for whole cohort, respectively. Median DTI was 16 days (range, 1 to 67 days). Short DTI (≤16 days) was associated with a poor PS (ECOG PS 2-4, 53.3% versus 38.5%), altered Karnofsky score ( & lt;70%, 49.2% versus 32.0%) but not median of age (63 versus 64 years), CSF level, deep brain involvement, type of symptoms at diagnosis, diagnosis modality, treatment period, inclusion in clinical trial and rituximab used. However, patients with elevated LDH level presented more frequently a longer DTI (41.8% versus 32.0%). DTI was associated with MSKCC risk score but not IELSG score. For prognostic analyses, 205 patients were considered (39 patients with missing data [LDH or PS]). The 5-year EFS rates were 24.6% versus 39.4% for patients with DTI ≤ and & gt; 16 days, respectively (Figure 1). Using a standard cox model, in univariate analyses, PS (2-4 vs. 0-1) (HR: 1.40, 95%CI, 1.00 - 1.94, P=0.045) and age (per 10-year increase) (HR: 1.19, 95%CI, 1.05-1.36, P=0.006) were associated with EFS but not DTI (≤ or & gt; 16 days) (HR: 0.80, P=0.19), deep involvement (HR: 0.97, P=0.85) and LDH level (HR=1.02, P=0.91). In multivariate analysis, only age was associated with EFS (HR: 1.27, 95%CI, 1.11-1.46, P=0.001). Using a piecewise Cox model over two periods of time (before and after 12 months), we confirmed in multivariate analyses, the time varying effect of PS and age on EFS with a high-risk period before 12 months and no prognostic effect after 12 months (Table 1). We also observed a time-dependent effect for DTI as shown by a significant interaction with time (P=0.02) (Table 1). Indeed, longer DTI was not associated with EFS before 12 months (HR: 1.14, 95%CI, 0.74-1.76, P=0.56) however, it had a strong protective effect after 12 months (HR: 0.44, 95%CI, 0.24-0.86, P=0.02). Conclusions: In this large cohort of DLBCL PCNSL, a short DTI was mainly associated with poor PS at diagnosis. We confirmed that prognostic factors for PCNSL outcome such as age and PS had time-varying effects with a good predictability of EFS only before 12 months. However, DTI allows prediction of long-term EFS ( & gt;12 months) after first line treatment. These results could be related to different biological patterns of tumor aggressiveness. If confirmed in independent PCNSL cohorts, DTI should also be taken in consideration for patient selection and the interpretation of clinical trial results especially for long-term outcome. Disclosures Karlin: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, personal fees; Sanofi: Honoraria; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, personal fees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, personal fees; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Other: Personal fees. Salles:Autolus: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Educational events; BMS: Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational events; Novartis, Servier, AbbVie, Karyopharm, Kite, MorphoSys: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational events; Roche, Janssen, Gilead, Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational events; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational events; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria. Bachy:Amgen: Research Funding; Roche, Gilead: Consultancy; Beigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche, Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Gilead, Novartis, Sanofi: Honoraria.

Abstract: Median age at diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia is 72 years. However, only few patients over 80 years of age are included in clinical trials, even in those devoted to unfit patients. In order to evaluate both efficiency and safety of venetoclax in this category of patients, we conducted a multicentric retrospective study and collected data from 77 CLL patients from 19 FILO centers who started venetoclax after 80 years of age. Median age at venetoclax initiation was 86 years old (81-97). 63% of patients had a history of heart disease, 62% had renal failure (moderate 59% and severe 3%) and 29% had a history of severe infections. Despite their comorbidities and a CIRS greater than 6 in 70% of cases, their autonomy was preserved with a median performans status of 1 (0-4). In this comorbid geriatric population, pretherapeutic geriatric assessment was only performed in a single patient. The median number of prior therapies was 2 (0-6) with an exposure to a BCR inhibitor in 56% of cases. 11q and 17p deletion were found in 39% and 30% of cases respectively, 39% of patients had a complex karyotype and 30% harbored a TP53 mutation. However, in this real life population, these prognostic factors were only performed in half of patients. IGHV mutational status was only available in 11 patients, and 83% of them had unmutated IGHV. At the time of venetoclax initiation, the tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) risk was moderate in 57% of cases and high in 8% of cases. Venetoclax was administered as a single agent (42%) or in association with rituximab (58%). In total, half of the patients were hospitalized at each dose ramp-up, and only 3 patients were treated on outpatient basis. 82% of the cohort was able to reach the daily dose of 400mg. Half of the patients were included in a phone call monitoring program with oncology nurses to pre-emptively manage side effects and foster therapy adherence. The safety study reported 14% of TLS, with 2 discontinuations of treatment within the first month: one of which led to dialysis and the other to death. As in the previously published studies, 25% of patients had infectious complications, and grade 3 haematological and digestive toxicities were reported in 42% and 22% of cases, respectively. The reduction of the daily dose of venetoclax was necessary for 33%. Permanent discontinuation of venetoclax occurred in 40% of subjects, including 29% of early withdrawal (within the first 3 months). Main reasons for discontinuation were intolerance (21%), CLL progression (21%), death (21%) and scheduled treatment discontinuation (10%). The overall response rate was 86%, consisting of 49% of complete response (unconfirmed by bone marrow biopsy) and 37% of partial response. With a median follow-up of 21months, estimated progression free survival and overall survival were 29 and 38 months respectively. Prior exposure to a BCR inhibitor had no impact on progression free survival. To conclude, venetoclax has a manageable safety profile in elderly patients with comorbidities and can induce prolonged responses. Finally, if additional follow-up by oncology nurses seems to be more and more implemented, the pre-therapeutic onco-geriatric evaluation remains underexploited in this population. Disclosures Ferrant: AstraZeneca: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Janssen: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses. Feugier: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Astrazeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria. Laribi: AstraZeneca: Other: Personal Fees; Le Mans Hospital: Research Funding; AbbVie: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding; Novartis: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding; IQONE: Other: Personal Fees; Astellas Phama, Inc.: Other: Personal Fees; BeiGene: Other: Personal Fees; Takeda: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding. Tchernonog: JANSSEN: Consultancy; ABBVIE: Consultancy; ASTRAZENECA: Consultancy. Dartigeas: Astra-Zeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel grants/Congress; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel grants/Congress; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel grants/Congress. Quinquenel: Abbvie: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria.

Abstract: Introduction Primary cerebral lymphoma (PCNSL) is an uncommon subtype of diffused large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) with a particular poor outcome as compared to systemic DLBCL, especially in elderly. For patients older than 60 years, standard treatment consists of high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) chemotherapy without consolidation brain radiotherapy to reduce the risk of leukoencephalopathy. Rituximab in combination with HD-MTX, procarbazine, vincristine followed by HD-cytarabine consolidation is one of standard of treatments for PCNSL patients with a 2-year PFS rate of 47% for patients aged of 60 or older in prospective trial (Morris JCO 2013). Etoposide and Ifosfamide are two drugs that can diffuse across blood-brain barrier and commonly used for relapsed/refractory PCNSL. To improve efficacy of R-MPVA protocol, we developed a new regimen which consisted in adding etoposide and ifosfamide for patients with a newly diagnosed PCNSL aged between 60 and 75 years old. Patients & Methods The protocol consisted of 3 cycles every 28 days of rituximab (375mg/m2, J1 and J15), MTX (3.5 g/m2, J1 and J15), vincristine (1.4 mg/m2, J1 and J15), vepeside (100mg/m2, J2) and procarbazine (100mg/m2, J1-7). Consolidation therapy consisted of 2 cycles every 21 days rituximab (375mg/m2, J1) in combination with cytarabine (3g/m2, J1-2) with ifosfamide (1.5 g/m2, J1-3). Response evaluations were planned after the 3 cycles of induction (R-MPV-VP16) and after consolidation (R-AraC-Ifo). We retrospectively reviewed treatment modalities, toxicities, response and outcome with this protocol and compared results with a matched group of patients with the same range age (60 - 75 years) treated with R-MPVA. Results Between 2013 and 2018, 28 PCNSL patients were treated with this protocol. The median age was 67.5 years old (range, 61-74). Poor performance status (PS 3-4) was presented in 9 patients (32%). As compared to 31 patients treated between 2007 and 2018 with R-MPVA, patients treated with intensive protocol were younger (66 vs. 69 years, P=0.01) and had less frequently a poor PS 3-4 (32% vs. 61%, P=0.04). In intent-to-treat analysis, 27 patients received 3 cycles of R-MPV-VP16 but one received only 2. Among them, five patients achieved PR and then received 1 to 2 additional cycles of R-MPV-VP16. Following this induction, 25 patients underwent 2 cycles R-AraC-ifo consolidation, 3 of them did not received ifosfamide for the second cycle because of hematological toxicity and poor PS. One patient in complete response (CR) after whole treatment received high-dose therapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation. After R-MPV-VP16, 10 patients (36%) achieved CR and 14 partial responses (50%) (PR) as compared to 12 CR (39%) and 12 PR (39%) for patients treated with R-MPVA. After consolidation phase, 23 patients (82%) achieved CR after R-AraC-Ifo as compared to 21 CR (68%) after R-AraC in the historical arm. Differences were not statistically significant. R-MPV-VP16 regimen was associated with favorable toxicity profile with 13 (46%) grade 4 hematological toxicity, 8 (28%) grade 3 and one grade 4 (3%) renal toxicity, 3 (10%) grade 3 and one grade 4 (3%) hepatic toxicity, 6 (21%) grade 3 and 4 grade 4 (14%) and infectious toxicity. With a median follow-up of 46.5 months, patients treated with R-MPV-VP16 followed by R-AraC-ifo had a median event-free survival (EFS) of 33.2 months (95%CI, 17.6 - not reached [NR] ) with a 2-year EFS rate of 52%; the median overall survival (OS) was not reached (95%CI, 58.6-NR) with a 2-year OS rate of 70%. With a median follow-up of 94.2 months, patients treated with R-MPVA had a median EFS of 18.3 months with a 2-year EFS rate of 39% (P=0.14, Fig 1); the median OS was 65.9 months with 2-year OS rate of 64% (P=0.33, Fig 1). Conclusions In this retrospective analysis of two HD-MTX and HD-AraC based regimens for PCNSL patients aged between 60 and 75 years performed in real-life setting, R-MPVA was more frequently proposed for older patients with a poorer PS. Combination of vepeside to R-MPV and ifosfamide to R-AraC was feasible with a favorable toxicity profile. Despite not statistically different, we observed a trend for an improvement of response rate at the end of treatment (82% vs. 68% of CR) and reduced rate of relapses (2-year EFS rates: 52% vs. 39%) with the intensified protocol. These first results deserve a confirmative larger prospective study of R-MPV-VP16 followed by R-AraC-ifosfamide for elderly PCNSL patients. Disclosures Ferrant: AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Karlin:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, personal fees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, personal fees; Celgene: Other: Personal fees; Sanofi: Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, personal fees; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support. Bachy:Beigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche, Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Gilead, Novartis, Sanofi: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding; Roche, Gilead: Consultancy.

Abstract: Introduction: standard treatment for relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) but this strategy is not appropriate for elderly DLBCL patients (pts) related to a high risk of toxicities. Multiple chemotherapy regimens had been developed for heavily pretreated elderly DLBCL patients such as R-bendamustine, R-gemcitabine-oxaliplatin (R-GEMOX) and pixantrone; the median progression free survival (PFS) of these regimens were 2, 4 and 3.5 months, respectively in prospective phase II studies for patients previously treated with R (Sehn 2017, Mounier 2013, Pettengel 2016). Adapted dose of ifosfamide and etoposide was firstly developed as sequential consolidation regimen after high-dose CHOP (ACVBP regimen) in first line therapy of young DLBCL patients (Tilly 2003). This regimen with a safe toxicity profile was then used in combination with R in Lyon University Hospital in elderly R/R DLBCL ineligible to intensive strategy. Methods: we retrospectively reviewed the efficacy and the safety profile of this regimen performed in two Lyon University Hospitals (Centre Hospitalier Lyon Sud and Leon Berard Cancer Center). Between June 2004 and March 2017, 75 pts with R/R DLBCL (63 de novo DLBCL, 12 transformed DLBCL) received R (375 mg/m2) in combination etoposide (300 mg/m2) and ifosfamide (1500 mg/m2) on day 1 (N=72, 96%) and on days 1-2 (N=3, 4%) at 2 (N=46, 61%) or 3-week (N=29, 39%) intervals. All medical records were reviewed for clinical and biological characteristics, modality of treatment and supportive care, toxicities, responses and outcome. Results: the median age was 79 years (range, 64-92) at the beginning of R-ifosfamide/VP16 treatment with 46% of the patients over 80 years. 13% of pts had a CIRS-G grade 3 or 4 〉 2 categories and 35% had a cumulative CIRS-G score more than 6. The performance status according to EORTC scale was 2-4 in 37% of the pts and 93% had III-IV Ann Arbor stages. Age-adjusted IPI were 0-1 in 20 pts (27%) and 2-3 in 55 pts (73%). All patients were previously treated in first-line therapy by R in combination with chemotherapy (CHOP, N=56, 75%, low-dose CHOP, N=14, 19%, other, N=5, 6%). The patients received a median number of 1 previous line (range, 1-8) and no patient was previously treated by ASCT. The median time between initial diagnosis and R-ifosfamide/VP16 was 20 months (range 4-187). The median time between the last treatment and R-ifosfamide/VP16 was 5 months (range 0-181). A refractory disease to first-line treatment was showed in 14 pts (19%). 31% of the patients had a refractory disease to the last regimen performed before R-ifosfamide/VP16. Patients received a median of 6 cycles (1-12). At the end of treatment, the overall response rate (ORR), defined by the rate of complete response (CR) and partial response (PR) was 37%, with 18% of CR. Evaluations were assessed for 29% of the pts by TEP scanner. For toxicity, among the 387 cycles, 10 patients developed febrile neutropenia (2.6%); 15 (20%) a grade 3-4 neutropenia; 7 (9%) a grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia; 5 patients needed platelet units and 16 patients received packed red blood cell units. No grade 3-4 non-hematological toxicity was observed and no toxic death occurred. With a median follow up of 31.3 months (range, 5.0-202.8), the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.3 months with a 1-year PFS rate of 26.0% (95%CI, 17.7-38.3) (Figure 1A). The median overall survival (OS) was 8.2 months with a 1-year OS rate of 40.8% (95%CI, 30.9-54.0) (Figure 1B). The median duration of response was 4 months (range 1-97). The median PFS was adversely affected by response (refractory versus CR/PR) to the last treatment (3.0 months versus 5.5 months, P=0.001) (Figure 1C). Conclusions: in this retrospective study, R-Ifosfamide/VP16 regimen provided effective results in R/R DLBCL transplant-ineligible pts with 37% of ORR and a median of PFS of 4.3 months with a safe toxicity profile. This regimen could also be considered as a platform for combinations with novel targeted agents in these categories of patients. Disclosures Karlin: Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sarkozy:ROCHE: Consultancy. Bachy:Gilead Sciences: Honoraria; Takeda: Research Funding; Sandoz: Consultancy; Amgen: Honoraria; Roche: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Honoraria. Salles:Abbvie: Honoraria; Epizyme: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Acerta: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Takeda: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Merck: Honoraria; Morphosys: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Ghesquieres:Sanofi: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy.

Abstract: Purpose International Prognostic Index (IPS) is the most widely used risk stratification index for advanced stage Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL). The use of (18F)-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT at diagnosis allows a better characterization of extra-nodal involvement (ENI). We investigated if the type of ENI could affect the prognosis of stage IV HL patients diagnosed with PET/CT and if a specific prognostic index could be defined for these patients (pts). Patients and methods We retrospectively analyzed 220 stage IV HL patients treated from 2005 to 2015 in three LYSA centers. We considered the local investigator interpretation based on the nuclear medicine physician PET/CT report. Regarding ENI, six subgroups were identified: involvement of lung and/or pericard and/or pleural, liver, diffuse and/or focal bone involvement, digestive system, and other involvements; we also considered bone marrow involvement based on the results of bone marrow biopsy. The main outcome was event free survival (EFS) defined by relapse, progression, death from any cause and initiation of a new therapy. For prognostication, we first evaluated the six variables of IPS-6 (corresponding to IPS without "stage IV" item) in this population. ENI was tested adjusted on the retained IPS variables. Univariate and multivariate Cox models were used to assess their prognostic ability for EFS. Cross-validation (10-fold) was used to select the more robust variables avoiding optimism. The finally selected variables constituted a score that was tested on overall survival (OS). Results Among the 220 stage IV patients, 135 (61%) were male. Median age was 33 years (range, 16-86) and 72 pts (33%) were ≥45 years. 130 pts (59%) presented constitutional symptoms. Nodular sclerosis subtype was observed in 163 pts (74%), mixed cellularity subtype in 25 pts (11%) and 47/157 pts (30%) presented EBV-positive HL. For biological parameters of IPS, 158 pts (80%) had low albumin level 〈 4g/dL, 66 pts (30%) hemoglobin values 〈 10.5g/dL, white blood cell (WBC) count was 〉 15G/L in 42pts (19%) and lymphocyte count 〈 600/mm3 in 75 pts (34%). The IPS-6 score was 0-2 in 93 pts (47%) and ≥3 in 104 pts (53%). ENI distribution according to PET/CT was: diffuse and/or focal bone involvement (155 pts, 71%), lung-pericard-pleural (94 pts, 43%), liver (37pts, 17%), digestive system (11 pts, 5%), 38 pts (17%) had other ENI; bone marrow involvement according to biopsy concerned 40 pts (21%). Only 1 extra-nodal site was involved in 49% of pts, 2 sites in 33%, 3 sites in 16% and 4 sites in 2%. With a median follow-up of 4.8 years, the 5-year EFS and OS rates were 73% and 89.9%, respectively for the whole cohort. The IPS-6 remained a strong prognostic index in our cohort. Patients with an IPS-0-2 and 3-6 had a 5-year EFS rate of 81.8% and 64% (p=0.008), respectively. The evaluation in univariate analysis of the prognostic value of each individual variable of IPS showed that only age influenced EFS (p=0.002) but albumin level (p=0.92), hemoglobin level (p=0.28), lymphocyte count (p=0.16), WBC count (p=0.10) and sex (p=0.21) had no significant prognostic effect. Regarding ENI, all 6 subgroups were studied: liver involvement was the only extra-nodal site with prognostic impact (HR=1.67 [0.92-3.04], p=0.093) in univariate analysis. We then performed a multivariate analysis integrating age and liver involvement: age was significantly associated with EFS (HR=2.20 [1.32-3.65] , p=0.002); liver involvement also presented an influence on EFS (HR=1.72 [0.94-3.13], p=0.076). Thus, we developed a prognostic index with these two variables that defined two distinct risk groups: low risk (age 〈 45 years or no liver involvement, N=206 pts, 94%) and high risk (age ≥45 years and liver involvement, N=14 pts, 6%) (HR=5.09 [2.64-9.85], p 〈 10-3). 5-year EFS rates were respectively 76.8% and 17.9% (Figure 1A). This model also influenced OS with a 5-year OS rate of 91.8% and 61.4% for low and high risk groups, respectively (Figure 1B). Conclusions: For stage IV HL defined by PET/CT, we developed a simple prognostic score based on age (≥45y) and liver involvement that identify a subgroup of patients with a poor outcome. These findings need to be validated in independent cohorts. Based on these results, whether HL pathogenesis differs by ENI sites should be investigated. Disclosures Bachy: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Research Funding; Beigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Karlin:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support. Sarkozy:ROCHE: Consultancy. Traverse-Glehen:Takeda: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Other: Travel. Salles:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Servier: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Morphosys: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Abbvie: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Epizyme: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Acerta: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Casasnovas:Takeda: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy. Ghesquieres:Celgene: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy.

Abstract: Two autologous anti‐CD19 chimeric antigen receptors (CAR) T cells (axicabtagene ciloleucel [axi‐cel] and tisagenlecleucel [tisa‐cel] ) are commercially approved in Europe for relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). We performed a retrospective study to evaluate patterns of use, efficacy and safety for axi‐cel and tisa‐cel. Data from 70 patients who underwent apheresis for commercial CAR T cells between January 2018 and November 2019 in our institution were retrospectively collected. Sixty‐one patients were infused. The median age at infusion was 59 years old (range 27‐75 years). The median number of prior therapies was 3 (range, 2‐6). The overall response rates (ORRs) at 1 month and 3 months were 63% and 45%, respectively, with 48% and 39% achieving a complete response (CR), respectively. After a median follow‐up after infusion of 5.7 months, the median progression‐free survival (PFS) was 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.8‐8.8 months), and the median overall survival (OS) was 11.8 months (95% CI, 6.0‐12.6 months). In multivariate analysis, factors associated with poor PFS were the number of previous lines of treatment before CAR T cells (≥4) ( P = .010) and a C reactive protein (CRP) value 〉 30 mg/L at the time of lymphodepletion ( P  〈 .001). Likewise, the only factor associated with a shorter OS was CRP 〉 30 mg/L ( P = .009). Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) of any grade occurred in 85% of patients, including 8% of patients with CRS of grade 3 or higher. Immune cell‐associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) of any grade occurred in 28% of patients, including 10% of patients with ICANS of grade 3 or higher. Regarding efficacy and safety, no significant difference was found between axi‐cel and tisa‐cel. This analysis describes one of the largest real‐life cohorts of patients treated with axi‐cel and tisa‐cel for R/R aggressive B cell lymphoma in Europe.

Abstract: Introduction: For relapsed or refractory (R/R) CLL patients (pts), combination of bendamustine and rituximab appears safe and effective (Fischer 2011). Ofatumumab monotherapy gives 58% ORR in heavily pre-treated (median 4 prior lines) R/R CLL pts (Wierda JCO 2010). High doses (HD) steroids are also active in poor prognosis pts with bulky nodal involvement or p53 impairment (Castro 2008, Xu 2010). We report a planned interim analysis of the ICLL01-BOMP phase II trial evaluating the association of Bendamustine, Ofatumumab and high-dose MethylPrednisolone for fit R/R CLL pts after 1-3 previous lines (NCT01612988). Patients and Methods: Primary endpoint was CR rate after 6 cycles (cy) of the BOMP regimen [i.e. bendamustine (70 mg/m2 d1, d2), ofatumumab (1000 mg d1;15 on cy#1-2 and d1 on cy#3-6) and HD methylprednisolone (1 g/m2 d1-3)]. The c#1 was preceded by an ofatumumab (300 mg) prephase. Response evaluation (IWCLL 2008) was done 3 months (m) after the last cy along with blood and bone marrow 10-color flow MRD analysis. Results: Among the 55 pts of this analysis, median age was 64 years (44-76). CIRS-G comorbidity score was 2-6 in 61% and pts had received 2-3 lines in 37% of the cases. Prior FCR-like regimens (50 (91%) patients) had been followed by relapse within 2y in 22/55 and 5/55 pts were fludarabine-refractory (FR). IGVH was unmutated (UM) in (47/52) 90.4%. Karyotypes were complex in 18/46 (39%) cases. Distribution according to FISH hierarchical model was: del(17p) in 15 (27%), del(11q) in 14 (26%), trisomy 12 in 4 (7%), del(13q) in 17 (31%) and normal in 5 (9%). Mutations on the TP53, SF3B1 and NOTCH1 genes occurred in 17 (31%), 14 (26%) and 5 (9%) pts, respectively. According to published risk stratification (Zenz, 2012), 34/55 pts (62%) belonged to the “highest-risk” group with either TP53 disruption (deletion and/or mutation) (n=19) and/or early relapse within 2 years post-FCR (n=22). The remaining patients belonged to either the “high-risk” group (UM-IGVH and/or Highb2mic and/or del11q) accounting for 17 pts (31%) or to the “low-risk” group (or non evaluable) accounting for 4 (7%) pts. Overall, 292 BOMP cy (mean 5.3 cy/pts) were delivered. Safety analysis recorded 158 grade 3-4 adverse events (G3-4/AE) with according to cy: neutropenia: 20.8%, thrombocytopenia: 11.3%, anemia: 2.4%, infection: 5,8%, hyperglycemia: 7,5%, liver enzyme elevation: 1,4%, cutaneous reaction: 1,4%, ofatumumab infusion related reaction: 0,3% and other AE: 3,4%. Overall 43 out of 55 pts (78.2%) had at least one G3-4/AE. Twenty-eight severe adverse events were reported in 20 pts. Treatment interruption before planned 6 cy occurred for pts' decision (n=3), excessive toxicity (n=5) or early progressive disease (PD) (n = 4). Response in the ITT population was 76.4% ORR with 20% CR (n=11), 56.4% PR (n=31 including 5 nPR and 1 CRi), 9.1% stable disease (n=5), 10.9% PD (n=6) and 3.6% (n=3) non evaluable. Blood MRD obtained in 45 pts was negative ( 〈 10-4) in 13 (28.8%) cases. Following evaluation, 5 responding pts (9%) had RIC allogeneic (RIC-Allo) transplantation with a persistent remission. With median follow-up of 16.2 (5.1-23.6) months (m) we observed 9 deaths, related to PD (n=5), EBV-induced lymphoproliferation (n=1), PML encephalitis (n=1), sepsis/pancytopenia (n=1) or unknown origin (n=1). We recorded 22 relapses (including 4 Richter Syndromes) resulting in treatment in 17 cases, with a BTK inhibitor in 8 cases. The median OS has not been reached (estimation 84% at 18 m) (Fig 1B). The median PFS was 18.4 m (95%CI, 14.6-22.2) and the median time to next treatment 17.6 m (95%CI, 12.9-22.4). With 5 cases censored at time of RIC-Allo, the PFS (censored analysis) was 17.5 m (95%CI, 13.2-21.8). (Fig 1A) After univariate analysis, ORR was lower in the “highest-risk” (64,6%, p=0.01), del(17p) (40%, p=0.003), TP53 mutation (47.1%, p=0.01) and complex karyotype (61.2%, p=0.024) groups. PFS was shorter in the “highest-risk” (14 m, p=0.046), FR (4.96 m, p 〈 0.001), del(17p) (9.5 m, p=0.017) and TP53 mutation (9.5 m, p=0.007) groups. Conclusion: Relapse treatment of CLL is a challenge especially after prior FCR-like treatments, accounting for 〉 90% of this trial population. These results in terms of response and survival appear noteworthy considering that 〉 60% are “highest-risk” pts. This study provides important information for forthcoming comparison with next emerging CLL therapies. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures de Guibert: Roche: Honoraria. Feugier:Roche: Honoraria. Schuh:Roche, Gilead, GSK, NAPP, Celgene: Honoraria. Leblond:Roche: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Tournilhac:mundipharma: Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Other, Research Funding.

Abstract: Abstract Ibrutinib has revolutionized the management of RR CLL in the past 5 years, improving overall survival (OS) over standard chemo-immunotherapies (CIT) in the registration trials HELIOS and RESONATE. Recently, based on these two studies, a score has been validated able to predict 3 groups with different OS (acronym BALL, further validated in cohorts of patients treated with CIT or other targeted agents) (1). The BALL model consists of four factors with 1 point each (serum ß2-microglobulin 〉 5mg/dL, lactate dehydrogenase 〉 upper limit of normal, hemoglobin 〈 110g/L for women or 〈 120g/L for men, and time from initiation of last therapy 〈 24 months). It separates patients into low (score 0-1), intermediate (score 2-3), and high risk (score 4) groups. Yet, BALL score has never been validated in large cohorts of ibrutinib patients. Methods We collected survival data and causes of death across 10 FiLO centers, in patients treated with ibrutinib monotherapy as per label for RR disease. We included patients across performans statuses, irrespective of previous line of therapies (LOT) or age, with 3 (n=329) or 4 (n=250) available BALL criteria at the time of initiation. Results Median FU was 29.3 months. Stratification of BALL scores in 250 patients (with 4 parameters known) was as follows: low risk (n=88, 35.2%), intermediate risk (n=122, 48.8%), and high risk (n=40, 16%), with estimated 2-years OS rates of 87.3%, 82.3% and 58.8%, respectively (Figure 1A, C-statistics index 0.64). These results are very similar (all 3 groups) to what Soumerai J et al.reported in their ibrutinib/CIT training dataset of 581 patients (1). Causes of 60/250 deaths were as follows: CLL 28.3%, Richter transformation 15%, infectious (33.3%) or cardiovascular (18.3%) toxicity, second cancer (5%). High risk score was significantly associated to deletion 17p/TP53 mutational status (69.4% vs47%, p 〈 0.001), LOT3+ (65.8% vs33.8%, p=0.02), but not age or gender. We also calculated a "worse BALL score" by adding 1 point to 79 more patients with 3 known parameters (n=329 in total). Stratification was as follows: low risk (6.7%, 2y-OS 100%), intermediate risk (45.6%, 2y-OS 82.9%), and high risk (47.7%, 2y-OS 74.6%) (Figure 1B). The latter results were very comparable to the internal validation dataset of ibrutinib/CIT in 242 patients. Causes of 79/329 deaths were as follows: CLL 27.8%, Richter transformation 17.7%, infectious (35.4%) or cardiovascular (15.2%) toxicity, second cancer (3.8%). Altogether, the BALL score was useful to delineate 3 risk-groups with statistically different survivals in real-world ibrutinib patients, despite 50% of deaths were due to toxicity. By Cox univariate analysis for OS (n=227, events=57), variables with significant impact on prognosis were: age 〉 79y (HR 2.09, p=0.003), male gender (HR 1.5, p=0.046), del17p/TP53 mutation (HR 1.45, p=0.049), previous lines of therapy (LOT1-2 vs 3+, HR 2.17, p 〈 0.0001), and BALL score (2-3 vs0-1 HR 1.8, and 4 vs0-1 HR 5.69, p 〈 0.0001). By multivariate analysis, only LOT3+ (HR 2.6, p=0.003) and BALL score (2-3 vs0-1 HR 2.16, p=0.05, and 4 vs0-1 HR 5.2, p 〈 0.001) were shown as independent factors significantly associated with shorter OS. These results further advocated for the use of BALL score in our practice, because we validated its use even in elderly RR patients. In the clinical trials used for model building, median age was 〈 65y, and we included 23.1% of patients 〉 79y. On the other hand, LOT was excluded from the model, and so its impact left unanswered by the first publication. Our data suggested that OS of multi-relapsing patients (3 or more previous lines of therapy) was not adequately predicted by the BALL score. On the other hand, we confirmed that deletion 17p/TP53mutational status was not an independent factor for OS, because predicted by the BALL score parameters (1). Conclusions In our series, the BALL score also identified a well-defined cohort of real-world RR CLL patients with an unmet clinical need despite the use of ibrutinib (median OS 27 months). We suggest that patients in the high-risk group should be thoroughly monitored, or even proposed clinical trials with drug combinations, or even cellular therapies approaches (CAR-T cells, bispecific antibodies) due their shorter OS. (1) Soumerai J, et al. Risk Model for Overall Survival in Relapsed or Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia in the Era of Targeted Therapies. Lancet Haematol 2019. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.