Auswahl der wissenschaftlichen Literatur zum Thema „Novartis Campus“

Abstract Introduction Treatment of chronic phase (CP) chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) proved to be almost equally effective in young and elderly patients. Three TKIs, imatinib (IM), dasatinib (DAS) and nilotinib (NIL), are approved for frontline therapy in Italy. Choice of frontline TKI is based on a combined evaluation of patient's characteristics and expectations, with age usually playing a prominent role. However, to date, few data are available on patterns of TKI selection in very elderly patients. Aim To analyse the use of frontline TKI therapy in a large and unselected cohort of very elderly CP-CML patients Methods We retrospectively evaluated 332 patients aged ≥75 year diagnosed from 1/2012 to 12/2019 at 36 Hematology Centres participating at the "Campus CML" project. Results Clinical features at diagnosis for the whole cohort and according to frontline TKI are reported in Table 1. As to frontline TKI, 285 patients (85.8%) received IM and 47 (14.2%) a 2G-TKI (DAS n=28, 59.5%; NIL n=19, 40.5%). Of the 285 IM-treated patients, 192 (67.3%) started with standard dose (400 mg/day) and 93 (32.7%) with a reduced dose (300 mg/day n=64, 22.5%; <300 mg/day n=29, 10.2%). Among the 47 patients starting a 2G-TKIs, 35 (74.4%) received standard dose and 12 (25.6%) a reduced dose (NIL <600 mg/day n=3; DAS 80 mg/day n=4 and 50 mg/day n=5). There were no differences between patients treated with imatinib or 2G-TKI (Table 1); only a previous cerebrovascular event was reported in a significantly higher rate of IM-treated patients. It is however evident that the distinct toxicity profiles of NIL and DAS had an impact on TKI choice as, for example, no patient with diabetes or ischemic heart disease received NIL. Following widespread introduction of generic IM in Italy in early 2018, patients were divided in 2 groups: among 238 patients diagnosed from 2012 to 2017, 198 (83.1%) received IM and 40 (16.9%) a 2G-TKI, while patients diagnosed in 2018-2019 were treated with IM in 87/94 (92.5%) cases and with a 2G-TKI in 7 (7.5%) cases only (p=0.028). Conclusions IM remains the frontline drug of choice in very elderly CML patients, and this trend seems to increase after the introduction of the generic formulation. However, 2G-TKI are used in a small but sizeable group of patients, without a clear correlation with baseline CML features, thus probably reflecting a physician's evaluation of patient's fitness and/or expectation. Efficacy and safety of initial reduced TKIs doses in the setting of very elderly patients warrant further analyses. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Latagliata: Novartis: Honoraria; BMS Cellgene: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Bonifacio: Novartis: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Elena: CELGENE: Other: funding for meeting participation; PFIZER: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; NOVARTIS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GILEAD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Iurlo: Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau. Sportoletti: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Stagno: Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Support for attending meetings and/or travel; InCyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Support for attending meetings and/or travel, Research Funding. Abruzzese: Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Breccia: Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria.

Abstract Introduction. The recent spread of the COVID-19 infection has represented an important challenge in the management of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) patients. Aims and methods. To investigate the incidence, features, source of contagion and outcome of patients with ALL who developed a COVID-19 infection, a survey was conducted among 34 hematology centers throughout Italy within the Campus ALL network. The period covered by the survey spanned from February 2020 to April 2021 and included 756 adult ALL patients actively followed during this time period. Results. Sixty-three of the 756 ALL patients (8.3%) developed a COVID-19 infection, with an equal distribution among the various regions. The majority of cases (90.5%) was recorded during the second wave of the pandemic, between September 2020 and April 2021. The source of the infection was nosocomial in 26 cases (41.3%), familial in 23 (36.5%), unknown in 13 (20.6%) and work-related in 1 (1.6%). The infected patients were prevalently male (n=43, 68.2%) with a similar distribution among age groups: 21 patients aged 18-35 years, 17 35-50, 15 50-65 and 10 older than 65. Seventeen patients (27%) had a diagnosis of T-ALL, 28 (44.4%) of Ph- B-ALL and 18 (28.6%) of Ph+ ALL. Thirty-six (57.1%) of the infected patients had no concomitant comorbidities, whereas 27 (42.9%) had one or more comorbidities. The infection was documented at the onset of the disease in 4 patients (6.3%), during induction in 10 (15.9%), consolidation in 13 (20.6%), chemotherapy maintenance in 11 (17.5%), after allogenic transplant in 15 (23.8%), during maintenance with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) treatment or off-treatment in 8 (12.7%) and at relapse in 2 (3.2%). Of the infected patients, 9 were asymptomatic, 10 had only isolated fever, 36 had respiratory symptoms and 8 presented other symptoms, including - but not limited to - ageusia and anosmia. As a consequence, management of the infection was variable: 29 (46%) patients did not require hospitalization, 28 (44.4%) were hospitalized in a COVID ward and 13 of them required respiratory assistance; finally, 6 (9.5%) patients were transferred to an ICU. Importantly, in 54 patients (85.7%) there were no sequelae, in 1 patient a pulmonary fibrosis was documented and in 1 patient the delay in treatment led to a relapse of the disease, while 7 (11.1%) succumbed to the infection. Finally, in 6 cases (9.5%) the infection was still ongoing at the time of the survey, and at the last update (July 2021) it had resolved in all. Since a key aspect in the management of ALL is the adherence to the timing of treatment, we also investigated if COVID-19+ patients stopped treatment during the infection. Out of the 42 evaluable patients (patients who had undergone an allogeneic transplant or were off-treatment were excluded from this analysis), ALL treatment was suspended in 28 (66.6%). Importantly, while in Ph+ ALL only very few patients stopped treatment (3/12), in Ph- B-ALL the majority did interrupt it (18/22, p<0.001); likewise, also in T-ALL most patients suspended treatment (7/8). Conclusions. The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in adult ALL patients in Italy over a 15 month period has been similar to that observed in the general population and has been recorded mostly during the second wave of the pandemic. The contagion was mainly nosocomial, suggesting that outward care should be pursued as much as possible in ALL. The infection was manageable, with 46% of patients not requiring any medical intervention and an overall death rate of 11%. Strikingly, in line with previous reports 1, it appears that Ph+ ALL patients were more manageable, with less treatment interruptions. These findings underline the advantage of the TKI-based induction/consolidation strategy without systemic chemotherapy in Ph+ ALL used in the GIMEMA (Gruppo Italiano Malattie EMatologiche dell'Adulto) protocols and further point to a possible protective role of TKIs in COVID-19-infected patients. Foà R et al, Br J Haematol. 2020;190(1):e3-e5 Disclosures Chiaretti: Incyte: Consultancy; novartis: Consultancy; pfizer: Consultancy; amgen: Consultancy. Bonifacio: Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Marco: Jazz: Consultancy; Insight,: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Curti: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Delia: Gilead: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; abbvie: Consultancy; Jazz pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Forghieri: Jannsen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Honoraria. Lussana: Amgen: Honoraria; Astellas Pharma: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria.

INTRODUCTION: Frontline therapy with second generation (2G) tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in chronic phase (CP) chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients demonstrated higher efficacy as compared to imatinib, with less patients experiencing treatment failure and progression to advanced disease. However, limited information are currently available on the management and outcome of those CML pts not achieving an optimal response to first-line treatment with a 2G-TKI. AIM: To describe the clinical outcome of CP CML patients without an optimal response to a frontline 2G-TKI that switched to alternative TKIs. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis in 22 Centers cooperating within the Italian CML Campus Project. Main inclusion criteria were: 1) diagnosis of CP-CML after 2010; 2) first-line treatment with a 2G-TKI; 3) switch to second-line treatment in case of non-optimal response (either following ELN recommendations or as for clinical practice); 4) CML in CP at the time of switching to second-line treatment. The main exclusion criteria were a switch to second-line treatment for intolerance or for low adherence to therapy. RESULTS: The main findings of this analysis are summarized in the table. Seventy-one pts meeting the inclusion/exclusion criteria were identified; the median age of pts at CML diagnosis was 46 (21-80) years. Sokal risk score was low, intermediate, and high in 24 (34%), 30 (42%), and 17 (24%) pts, respectively. First-line treatment was performed with nilotinib in 47 (66%) pts and dasatinib in 24 (34%) pts. According to the ELN 2020 recommendations, 51 (72%) pts fulfilled the criteria for "failure" and 20 (28%) pts those for "warning". BCR-ABL mutations were identified in 12 of 65 (18%) evaluable pts (T315I in 1 pt). Additional chromosomal abnormalities in Ph+ cells were identified in 6 of 54 (11%) evaluable pts. Second-line treatment was started after a median time of 16 (4-72) months, with ponatinib (40 pts, 56%), dasatinib (21 pts, 30%), nilotinib (7 pts, 10%), or bosutinib (3 pts, 4%). Median follow-up from start of second-line treatment was 25 (2-90) months. Best response to second-line treatment was MR2 in 18 (25%) pts and MR3 in 37 (51%) pts. Nineteen (27%) pts (13 for resistance and 6 for intolerance) switched to third-line treatment (ponatinib, 11 pts; nilotinib, 3 pts; dasatinib, 4 pts; imatinib, 1 pt), after a median time of 8 (1-72) months. Mutations were identified in 2 of 17 evaluable pts, and both patients harbored a T315I mutation. MR3 was reached by 9 (47%) of these pts. Lastly, 7 (10%) pts switched (6 for resistance and 1 for intolerance) to fourth-line treatment (asciminib, 4pts; dasatinib, 2 pts, nilotinib, 1 pt). Overall, 44 (62%) patients reached with sequential TKI treatments a MR3 (31/51 pts among "failures"; 13/20 among "warnings"). Allogeneic stem-cell transplantation (SCT) was performed in 7 (9.5%) pts (6 among "failures"), after a median time of 20 (15-60) months from CML diagnosis. Progression to advanced phase occurred in 2 (3%) pts; both pts previously met the ELN2020 "failure" criteria. Estimated 4-y PFS was 92.5%. Death occurred in 3 (4%) pts (1 after progression to blast phase, 2 for cardiovascular adverse events). Estimated 4-y OS was 93.7% CONCLUSION Our findings show that CP-CML patients not achieving an optimal response to frontline 2G-TKI therapy, despite a complex management, still have a favorable prognosis and survival due to the availability of both multiple TKI options and SCT. Figure Disclosures Gugliotta: Novartis: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Galimberti:Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Honoraria. Abruzzese:Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bms: Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bocchia:CELGENE: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria. Castagnetti:Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria. Di Raimondo:Amgen, Takeda, Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; GILEAD, Incyte: Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Cavo:Jannsen, BMS, Celgene, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Takeda, Amgen, Oncopeptides, AbbVie, Karyopharm, Adaptive: Consultancy, Honoraria. Rosti:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Foà:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau. Saglio:Pfizer: Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Breccia:Abbvie: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Abstract Background Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) revolutionized treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). However, the first months of therapy are crucial, as optimal response is defined as the achievement of molecular milestones at 3, 6 and 12 months (mo.) and as many toxicities, also causing a TKI switch, are more frequent in the 1st year. Methods To evaluate achievement of early molecular response (MR) and incidence of events leading to a TKI change during the 1st year of therapy, we retrospectively studied 1650 CP-CML patients diagnosed from 2012 and 2019 at 31 Hematology Centres and treated with frontline imatinib (IM) or second-generation (2G) TKIs dasatinib or nilotinib. Optimal MR at 3, 6 and 12 mo. were assessed according to 2020 ELN recommendations. Results Frontline TKI was IM in 926 (56.1%) and 2G-TKIs in 724 (43.9%) cases: the main clinical features at diagnosis of the entire cohort and according to frontline treatment is reported in the Table 1. Commonest comorbidities were arterial hypertension (38.7%), previous neoplasm (13.6%), diabetes (11.3%), peripheral vascular diseases (7.8%), COPD (7.5%) and ischemic heart disease (6.8%). IM-treated patients were older (p<0.001), with higher ELTS score (int/high 47.6% vs 35.6%, p<0.001) and more comorbidities (p<0.005 for all diseases). Optimal MR was achieved at 3 mo. by 1186/1430 (82.9%), at 6 mo. by 1025/1352 (75.8%) and at 12 mo. by 826/1264 patients (65.3%), respectively. Total number of patients discontinuing TKI in the 1st year was 321/1650 (19.4%), being higher with IM (237/926, 25.5%) than 2G-TKIs (84/724, 11.6%) (p<0.001). Main causes were primary resistance (8.7%, 12.3% IM vs 4.2% 2G-TKIs, p<0.001), extra-hematologic toxicity (6.4%, 8.2% IM vs 4.2% 2G-TKIs, p>0.001), hematologic toxicity (1.7%, 2.0% IM vs 1.4% 2G-TKIs, p=0.25) and progression (1.0%, 1.2% IM vs 0.8% 2G-TKIs, p=0.56). Cumulative incidence of discontinuation at 3, 6 and 12 mo. were 5.6%, 10.7% and 19.3%, respectively; values for IM and 2G-TKIs at the three timepoints were 8.1%, 15.0%, 25.5% and 2.5%, 5.3%, 11.5% (p<0.001) (Fig. 1). Conclusions This real-world study on over 1600 CML patients shows that almost 20% discontinue frontline TKI during the 1st year, mostly for primary resistance or toxicity. Discontinuation rates are higher with IM compared to 2G-TKIs, mostly at 3 mo. and are probably due to a lower attainment of early MR. The impact of older age, higher risks and heavier burden of comorbidities in IM patients should be considered and need deeper investigation. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Elena: GILEAD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; NOVARTIS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PFIZER: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CELGENE: Other: funding for meeting participation. Sportoletti: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Stagno: InCyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Support for attending meetings and/or travel; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Support for attending meetings and/or travel, Research Funding. Iurlo: Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau. Bonifacio: Novartis: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Breccia: Pfizer: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Latagliata: Novartis: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; BMS Cellgene: Honoraria.

Abstract Blinatumomab (Blina) and inotuzumab (InO) have improved the outcome of relapsed/refractory B-lymphoblastic leukemia (R/R B-ALL). However, many patients (pts) relapse after these treatments and little is known on their outcomes after recurrence and re-treatment with subsequent immunotherapy. We hereby describe the clinical characteristics and outcome of 71 pts with R/R B-ALL treated with both Blina and InO in any sequence - Blina/InO or InO/Blina - at different disease recurrences. At diagnosis, the median age was 34 years (15-64) and the male/female ratio was 1.6. Sixteen pts (22%) were Ph+ ALL, 3 (4%) were t(4;11)+ and 9 (13%) carried a complex karyotypes. ECOG PS was 0-1 in 66 pts (93%). At the time of the first immunotherapy, pts had received a median of 2 previous lines of treatment (1-8). All Ph- pts received intensive chemotherapy front-line; Ph+ pts received TKIs and steroids in 13 cases and intensive chemotherapy plus TKIs in 3 cases. Blina was the first salvage treatment (Blino/InO sequence) in 57 pts (80%) and InO (InO/Blina sequence) in 14 (20%). Twenty-seven pts (38%) had underwent a previous allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). At the start of Blina as first immunotherapy, the median bone marrow (BM) blast count was 40% (0-100%); at the start of InO as first immunotherapy, the median BM blast count was 64% (2-90%). An extramedullary involvement was present in 5 patients (9%) in the Blina/InO group and in 1 patients (7%) in the InO/Blina group. During immunotherapy, the median number of lumbar punctures was 2 (0-9). A median of 2 cycles were administered for both Blina (range 1-9) and Ino (range 1-4). In the Blina/InO group, after Blina a G3/4 toxicity occurred in 15 cases (26%): non-hematologic in 12 cases (21%), neurologic in 6 (8%). Infections occurred in 17 pts (30%). In the InO/Blina group, after InO a G3/4 toxicity occurred in 3 pts (21%), with extra-hematologic toxicity in 2 cases (14%, liver toxicity 1 case). Infections occurred in 4 cases (28%). In the Blina/InO group, after Blina 36 pts (63%) achieved a complete remission (CR), with a negative minimal residual disease (MRD) in 24 (42%) pts; after InO, a CR was re-achieved in 47 pts (82.4%), with 34 (59.6%) being MRD-. In the InO/Blina group, after InO a CR was reached in 13 cases (93%), with 6 pts (42.8%) being MRD-; after Blina, a CR was re-achieved in 6 pts (42.8%), with 3 (21.4%) being MRD-. This salvage immunotherapy strategy represented a bridge to alloHSCT for 26 pts (37%). From the first immunotherapy, in the Blina/InO group, the median overall survival (OS) was 19 months and after InO 6.3 months (OS in MRD- vs MRD+, p ns). Disease free survival (DFS) after Blina was 7.4 months (11.6 vs 2.7 months in MRD- vs MRD+ pts, p .03) and after InO it was 5.4 months (MRD- vs MRD+ pts, p ns). In the InO/Blina group, the median OS was 9.4 months and after Blina 4.6 months (7.5 vs 2.8 months in MRD- vs MRD+ pts, p .02). DFS after InO was 5.1 months (MRD- vs MRD+ pts, p ns) and after Blina it was 1.5 months (8.7 vs 2.5 gg in MRD- vs MRD+ pts, p .02). OS and DFS in MRD- pts after Blina was significantly better, both in the Blina/InO and the InO/Blina groups. With a median follow-up of 16.5 months from the start of immunotherapy and 33.8 months from initial diagnosis, 24 pts (34%) are alive and 16 (22%) are alive in CR. Four patients (6%) died in CR due to veno-occlusive disease during HSCT after InO treatment. Interestingly, OS and DFS from the first immunotherapy was better in pts with a previous alloHSCT (median survival 24.2 vs 13 months, p=.0135). AlloHSCT after second immunotherapy was associated with a better OS and DFS (OS 9.8 and DFS 7.2 months vs 7.8 and 4.4 months, p ns). Our real-life study in R/R B-cell ALL pts with multiple previous lines of treatment demonstrates the feasibility and efficacy of a sequential immunotherapy strategy in terms of MRD response, DFS and OS, and as a bridge to HSCT. SM and PC: equal contributors Disclosures Papayannidis: Janssen: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Curti: Jazz Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Chiaretti: amgen: Consultancy; pfizer: Consultancy; novartis: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy. Forghieri: Jannsen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Honoraria. Bonifacio: Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Cerrano: Janssen: Honoraria; Insight: Honoraria; Jazz: Honoraria. Fracchiolla: Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

Background. The Philadelphia (Ph) chromosome (chr.) is the hallmark of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and typically results from the reciprocal translocation t(9;22)(q34;11.2). Complex variant translocations (CVT) involving one or more additional chr. are identified in less than 5% of newly diagnosed CML. There are conflicting reports about the prognostic impact of CVT in the achievement of optimal response to tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), and very few studies addressed the role of frontline treatment with imatinib or second generation (2G)-TKI in patients with CVT. Aims. To assess the response to imatinib or 2G-TKI in a large cohort of newly diagnosed CML with CVT, and to explore the impact of the different chr. translocations on outcome. Methods. This observational retrospective study was conducted in 19 hematologic centers in the framework of Campus CML, a network of Italian physicians involved in the management of CML patients. All newly diagnosed CML from 2000 to 2019 were evaluated and patients with CVT were selected for the present analysis. Karyotypes were defined according to the 2016 International System for Human Cytogenetic Nomenclature. Responses to frontline treatment were retrospectively categorized according to the 2013 ELN recommendations, as they include cytogenetic milestones. Deep molecular response (DMR, i.e. MR4or better) was defined as BCR-ABLIS ratio ≤0.01% or undetectable disease with ≥10,000 ABL copies. Patients with DMR lasting ≥2 years and at least a Q-PCR test every 6 months were defined as stable DMR responders. Failure-free survival (FFS) was calculated from the start of frontline TKI treatment to progression to advanced phase, death, or switch to other treatments for resistance. For FFS calculation, patients were censored at TKI stop for treatment-free remission (TFR) or in case of switch for intolerance only. Differences between subgroups according to the partner chr. were presented for descriptive purposes. Results. CVT were identified in 109 (3.2%) patients from a whole population of 3,361 subjects with newly diagnosed CML. Ninety-five out of 109 patients (87%) exhibited three-way translocations, with chr. 1, 4, 6, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15 and 17 representing the most common additional partners (figure). Four- and five-way translocations were identified in 13 and 1 patients, respectively. Additional chr. abnormalities (ACA) in the Ph+ cells were observed in 15/109 (13.8%) patients and were more common in older individuals (p=0.018). Overall, median age at diagnosis was 50.6 years (range 20-90). Risk distribution according to the ELTS score was 54%, 28% and 8% for L, I and H risk, respectively (10% missing). Cytogenetic result was available before the choice of frontline treatment in 45% of cases and represented a decisive factor in 28% of them (i.e. clinicians selected a 2G-TKI or high-dose imatinib, according to the available options). Frontline TKI treatment was imatinib in 80 cases (73%) and 2G-TKI (nilotinib n=22, dasatinib n=6, bosutinib n=1) in the remaining cases. The frequency of optimal response at 3, 6 and 12 months was 48%, 45% and 53%, respectively, for imatinib-treated patients, and 76%, 83% and 76%, respectively, for the 2G-TKI cohort (p<0.05 for all comparisons). Stable DMR was achieved by 39% of patients and 42% of them attempted a TFR. After a median follow-up of 91.3 months (range 1-236), 5-year FFS was 66% (95%CI: 53.4-76.4) and 84% (95%CI: 62.4-93.6) for imatinib and 2G-TKI treated patients, respectively (p=ns). The estimated 10-year OS for the entire cohort was 84.4% (95%CI: 73.6-91). The subtype of CVT had an impact on response and long-term outcome. Patients with CVT involving chr. 1, 4, 6, 11 or 12 had a higher frequency of MMR at 12 months than patients with CVT involving chr. 10, 14, 15 or 17 (75.8% vs 30.4%, respectively, p=0.001), higher frequency of stable DMR (48.7% vs 22.2%, respectively; p=0.04) and tended to have better median FFS (p=0.07), regardless of the type of frontline TKI and of the ELTS score. Conclusions. Due to its retrospective nature, this study does not allow to define which is the optimal therapy for CML harboring CVT at diagnosis. However, our data reinforce the usefulness of bone marrow karyotyping in CML. The observed differences between partner chr. may also depend on the breaking points, which are variable. Further dissection of CVT will help to identify which are associated to a poor response to TKIs. Figure Disclosures D'Adda: Incyte: Other: Advisory board; Novartis: Other: Advisory board; Pfizer: Other: Advisory board. Galimberti:Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Honoraria. Crugnola:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Bocchia:Incyte: Honoraria; CELGENE: Honoraria. Krampera:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Breccia:Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Saglio:Novartis: Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding.

Introduction : therapy of chronic phase (CP) chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) is based on tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in virtually all patients. Three TKIs are approved for first-line therapy in Italy: imatinib and two second-generation (2G) TKIs, dasatinib and nilotinib. Choice of the front-line TKI is based on a combined evaluation of patient's and disease characteristics, age, risk, comorbidities and concomitant medications. Treating physician's preference and, in some cases, economic considerations, particularly after the advent of generic imatinib, may play a role in TKI selection. However, to date, few data are available on TKI use in a whole nation and on the possible drivers of treatment choice. Aim of the present work was to analyse the use of front-line TKI therapy in a large, unselected cohort of Italian CP-CML patients, correlating patient's features to drug choice. Methods: in the framework of the national Campus CML program, we retrospectively evaluated 1422 patients with CP-CML diagnosed from 2012 and 2019 in 21 haematologic Centres, mostly in academic and/or tertiary hospitals, widespread through the entire Italian territory and treated frontline with imatinib, dasatinib or nilotinib. Results: median age at diagnosis was 59.9 years [interquartile range (IQR) 47.1 - 71.7], with 317 (22.3%) patients under 45 years, 552 (38.8%) between 45 and 65 years and 553 (38.9%) older than 65 years; 821 (57.7%) patients were males. Among 1364 evaluable patients, CML risk according to Sokal score was low in 540 (39.6%), intermediate in 610 (44.7%) and high in 214 (15.7%) patients respectively; the number at low, intermediate or high risk according to the novel ELTS score among 1325 evaluable patients was 759 (57.3%), 402 (30.3%) and 164 (12.4%) respectively. Considering comorbidities, 1003 (70.6%) patients had at least one active disease at the time of CML diagnosis, the most common being hypertension (n=547, 38.5%), previous neoplasms (n=185, 13.0%), diabetes (n=150, 10.6%), chronic bronchopulmonary diseases (n=114, 8.0%), acute myocardial infarction (n=95, 6.7%), previous stroke (n=36, 2.5%) and other vascular diseases (n=98, 6.9%). Among 1335 evaluable patients, 813 (60.9%) were taking at least one concomitant medication, with 280 (21.0%) taking 3-5 drugs and 140 (10.5%) taking 6+ drugs at time of TKI start. As to the frontline therapy, 794 (55.8%) received imatinib and 628 (44.2%) were treated with 2G-TKIs, (226 dasatinib and 402 nilotinib) respectively. According to age, 2G-TKIs were chosen for majority of patients aged <45 (69.1%) while imatinib was used in 76.9% of patients over 65 (p<0.001). There was a predominance of imatinib use across all Sokal (51.1% in low, 61.3% in intermediate and 51.4% in high) and ELTS (50.3% in low, 60.4% in intermediate and 66.5%) risk categories. We observed a prevalent use of 2G-TKIs in patients presenting with higher WBC counts (55.1% if WBC >100,000/mm3 vs 38.2% if WBC <100,000/mm3; p<0.001), lower Hb (53.8% if Hb <10 g/dl vs 41.9 if Hb >10 g/dl; p=0.001) and bigger spleen (65.1% if spleen >5 cm vs 44.8% if spleen 1-5 cm vs 37.3% if spleen not palpable; p<0.001). There was a decreasing use of 2G-TKIs with higher number of concomitant drugs: 64.4% for 0, 47.7% for 1-2, 27.0% for 3-5 and 13.6% for >5 drugs, respectively (p<0.001). Concordantly, there was a significant higher use of imatinib in patients with hypertension (69.8%), diabetes (70.0%), COPD (73.7%), previous neoplasms (73.0%), AMI (86.3%) or stroke (97.2%) history (p<0.001 for all conditions). Lastly, we observed a wider use of imatinib (61.1%) in patients diagnosed in years 2018-19, compared to those of the period 2012-17 (53.7%; p=0.01). In multivariable analysis, factors correlated with imatinib use were age > 45 years, intermediate or high Sokal risk, presence of some comorbidities (2nd neoplasia and stroke) and number of concomitant medications. Conclusions: preliminary results of this observational study on almost 1500 patients show that around 55% of newly diagnosed Italian CP-CML patients receive imatinib as front-line therapy, and that the use of 2G-TKI is prevalent in the younger patients and in those with no concomitant clinical conditions. The counterintuitive finding of imatinib prevalence as frontline treatment in high risk patients might be explained by the older age of these patients. Introduction of the generic formulation in 2018 seems to have fostered the use of imatinib. Figure Disclosures Breccia: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Cavazzini:Pfize: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Saglio:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding.

Novel therapies targeting BTK (ibrutinib), PI3Kδ (idelalisib) and BCL2 (venetoclax) are active in poor-risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and are widely administered to patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R)-CLL. Given the activity of ibrutinib in high-risk CLL patients, including those with del17p/TP53 mutation or germline IGHV genes, we assumed that this drug could diminish the prognostic utility of the CLL-IPI, because the outcome of patients with high- and very high-risk CLL-IPI scores may improve. Recently, Soumerai et al (Lancet Hematology, 2019) proposed a new risk score for overall survival (OS) based on four accessible markers, called BALL (β2-microglobulin, anemia, LDH, last therapy), in the setting of R/R-CLL patients receiving chemo-immunotherapy or targeted therapies in clinical trials. This model segregates CLL patients into three groups with significantly different OS. This multicenter, observational retrospective study aimed at validating the proposed BALL score for R/R-CLL real-world patients treated with ibrutinib. The primary objectives were to determine whether: i) the BALL score is of prognostic value for ibrutinib R/R-CLL patients, ii) the BALL score is predictive of progression-free survival (PFS); and iii) the CLL-IPI retains its prognostic power also in R/R patients treated with ibrutinib. This study, from an institutional Italian multicenter working group on CLL ('Campus CLL'), included CLL patients collected from 18 Italian centers and 1 Israeli center, who received ibrutinib 420 mg/day outside of clinical trials as salvage therapy with available data for the calculation of the BALL and CLL-IPI scores at the time of the start of treatment. OS was estimated for all subgroups according to both scores. Additionally, risk-specific PFS was assessed. Kaplan-Meier curve, log-rank test and Cox regression analyses were performed. The prognostic accuracy of the predictive model was assessed by the Harrell's C-index. Overall, 541 CLL patients were included in this analysis. The majority of patients were Binet stages B and C (87.2%). The median age was 70.4 years (range 37 - 88) and 353 cases (65.2%) were male. The median number of previous therapies was 2 (range 1-9). The baseline patients' features are listed in Table 1. After a median follow-up of 1.8 years (range 1 month to 5.8 years), 101 patients had died and 206 experienced an event (death or progression). According to the BALL score, 372 patients (68.8%) were classified as low-risk, 132 (24.4%) as intermediate-risk and 37 (6.8%) as high-risk. Stratification of patients according to the BALL score predicted significant differences in terms of OS. Thus, low-risk patients had a 2-year OS probability of 89.2% (HR=1), intermediate-risk of 79.9% (HR=2.8, 95%CI 1.8-4.4, P<0.0001) and high-risk of 48.2% (HR=6.6, 95%CI 3.9-11, P<0.0001) (Figure 1). The C-statistic was 0.66 (P<0.001) for OS prediction. The CLL-IPI score indicated that 32 patients (5.9%) were classified as low-risk, 123 (22.7%) as intermediate-risk, 252 (46.6%) as high-risk and 134 (24.8%) as very high-risk. Stratification of patients according to the CLL-IPI score did not allow to predict significant differences in OS. Indeed, low-risk patients had a 2-year OS probability of 92.7% (HR=1), intermediate-risk patients of 88.4% (HR=2.3, 95%CI 0.5-9.9, P=0.26), high-risk of 84% (HR=3.3, 95%CI 0.8-13.7, P=0.1) and very high-risk of 76.4% (HR=4.3, 95%CI 1.038-17, P=0.046). Both the BALL and CLL-IPI scores failed to stratify patients significantly in terms of PFS. Our multicenter retrospective study confirms the prognostic power of the BALL score in this real-world series of R/R-CLL patients treated with ibrutinib, as previously reported in the setting of clinical trials (Soumerai et al, Lancet Hematology 2019). Furthermore, the CLL-IPI did not retain a discriminative power in the current retrospective study of ibrutinib-treated patients, possibly due to i) the well-known activity of ibrutinib in high-risk CLL patients, i.e. those with TP53 disruption and/or germline IGHV genes, which represent the most heavily weighted adverse risk factors contributing to the CLL-IPI, and to ii) the fact that the CLL-IPI was designed for patients receiving front-line chemo-immunotherapy. Conversely, the BALL score may identify higher risk R/R-CLL patients potentially requiring alternative and more effective therapeutic strategies. Disclosures Mauro: Jannsen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Shire: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding. Coscia:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Herishanu:Roche: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria. Varettoni:ABBVIE: Other: travel expenses; Roche: Consultancy; Gilead: Other: travel expenses; Janssen: Consultancy. Rigolin:AbbVie: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Research Funding. Rossi:Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Other: Scientific advisory board; Janseen: Honoraria, Other: Scientific advisory board; Roche: Honoraria, Other: Scientific advisory board; Astra Zeneca: Honoraria, Other: Scientific advisory board. Gaidano:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sunesys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria. Cuneo:Amgen: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Foà:Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract HER2Pro: A Phase 1b dose de-escalation study of high dose prochlorperazine added to paclitaxel, trastuzumab and pertuzumab in patients with previously untreated HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer Authors Teesha Downton1,2, Emma Karlsen1, Katharine Cuff3,4, Euan Walpole3,4, Fiona Simpson3,4, Elgene Lim1,2. Affiliations 1Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst NSW, Australia; 2School of Clinical Medicine, St Vincent’s Healthcare Clinical Campus, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales Sydney, Australia; 3Diamantina Institute, University of Queensland, Woolloongabba QLD, Australia; 4Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane QLD, Australia Disclosures T. Downton: None. E. Karlsen: None. K. Cuff: None. E. Walpole: None. F. Simpson: None. E. Lim. Advisory Board for Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, Lilly, Roche, Novartis, Gilead Australia. Research Funding from Pfizer, Novartis, Bayer. Abstract Background: The anti-emetic prochlorperazine reversibly inhibits dynamin-mediated endocytosis. Preclinical studies have demonstrated that through this mechanism, high dose prochlorperazine can temporarily increase tumor cell antigen presentation, enhance interaction of tumor antigens with therapeutic monoclonal antibodies, and improve antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (Chew H et al. Cell 2020). High dose prochlorperazine has been well tolerated and proof of mechanism demonstrated in a pilot study (ACTRN12619001051134), and in a phase Ib trial (ACTRN12619001527156) of prochlorperazine with cetuximab in patients with EGFR-expressing advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma or breast cancer. Prochlorperazine potentially offers a novel approach to improve the efficacy of a range of therapeutic antibodies. This study HER2Pro (ACTRN12622000016730) aims to evaluate the feasibility and safety of high dose prochlorperazine in combination with paclitaxel, trastuzumab, and pertuzumab in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Trial Design: In this phase Ib single-arm trial, patients receive standard of care trastuzumab and pertuzumab 3-weekly and paclitaxel weekly. From cycle 2, patients in addition receive de-escalating doses of prochlorperazine weekly for 6 weeks, though an additional 6 weeks may be given if there are no treatment associated serious adverse events. Dose de-escalation will be evaluated using a 3+3 design, commencing at a prochlorperazine intravenous dose of 0.8mg/kg weekly. Eligibility: Eligible patients must have previously untreated HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, and baseline left ventricular ejection fraction 50%. Key exclusion criteria include current daily treatment with corticosteroids at a dose &gt;10mg prednisolone or equivalent, blood pressure &lt; 90/50 mmHg, prolonged QT interval, and Parkinson’s disease. Objectives: The primary objective is to determine the recommended phase 2 dose. Secondary objectives include determining the frequency and severity of adverse events, rates of cardiotoxicity, objective response rate, duration of response and progression free survival. Tertiary objectives include analysis of receptor trafficking and immune system activation on paired tumor biopsies obtained before and after first prochlorperazine dose. Accrual: 6-12 patients will be enrolled across 2 Australian sites. Enrollment for this trial is expected to commence late 2022. Citation Format: Teesha Downton, Emma Karlsen, Katharine Cuff, Euan Walpole, Fiona Simpson, Elgene Lim. HER2Pro: A Phase 1b dose de-escalation study of high dose prochlorperazine added to paclitaxel, trastuzumab and pertuzumab in patients with previously untreated HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr OT2-10-05.