With recent advances in novel chemotherapeutic agents and increasing use of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant, there has been a significant improvement in outcomes for patients with AL Amyloidosis. Daratumumab, with its excellent safety and efficacy profile, appears to be an ideal treatment option for patients with newly diagnosed as well as relapsed refractory AL amyloidosis. In this systematic review, we analyzed the published literature on the role of Daratumumab in pretreated relapsed and refractory AL-amyloidosis patients using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and clinicaltrials.gov databases. A total of 16 studies evaluated the role of Daratumumab as monotherapy (DMT) or in combination with other chemotherapeutic agents (DCT). DMT and DCT were associated with promising efficacy with hematologic and organ responses (cardiac/renal) seen in 50%-90% and 50%-80% of the patients, respectively. Daratumumab appeared to be well tolerated with no significant treatment-related adverse events as DMT or DCT.

Introduction: According to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) 2019 guidelines on multiple myeloma (MM) treatment, three-drug regimens using bortezomib (V) and dexamethasone (d) in combination with either lenalidomide (R), (VRd) or Cyclophosphamide (C) combination (VCd) are standard first-line treatment options in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), regardless of transplant eligibility. However, the two combinations have not been studied head-to-head. This systemic review aims to compare the efficacy and safety outcomes of VCd versus VRd in NDMM patients. Methods: We performed a comprehensive literature search on PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov on July 27, 2020. We used the MeSH terms for 'multiple myeloma', 'cyclophosphamide', 'bortezomib', 'dexamethasone', 'lenalidomide', and their associated keywords. The search yielded 410 articles. Screening and data extraction were done according to PRISMA guidelines. After excluding case reports, case series, observational studies, review articles, meta-analysis, and retrospective studies, 11 phase II and III clinical trials (n=1088) were included of which three assessed VCd and eight assessed VRd in NDMM. Results: There was no trial on the direct comparison of VCd with VRd. Total 111 NDMM patients were evaluable who received VCd (Table 1). Moreover, total 977 NDMM patients were evaluable who received VRd (Table 2). VCd arm results: Reeder et al. (2009, n=33) achieved the best ORR of 88% which was largely VGPR or better (61%). Tuchman et al. (2017, n=14) reported similar results of ORR (64%) with 58% achieving VGPR or better and 7% achieving PR. Contrary to these ORR distributions, Sunami et al. (2019, n=64) reported the ORR of 80% which was largely driven by PR of 41%. Moreover, a 2-year OS of 97% and PFS of 77% which is consistent with previous results. The toxicity profile with VCd was manageable with mostly hematological adverse events. Neuropathy was significantly lower when compared to VRd. VRd arm results: NDMM patients, in a phase III trial by Durie et al. (2016, n=471) achieved ORR of 82% (PR=38%, VGPR=28%, and CR=16%) with VRd. The mPFS was 43 months and mOS was 75 months, both significantly better than control. Stadtmauer et al. (2019, n=254) results were similar as well with 3-year PFS and OS as 58% and 85% respectively. Kumar et al. (2012, n=42) had a 1-year OS of 100% and PFS of 83%. O'Donnel et al. (2018, n=50) achieved mPFS of 35 months while mOS could not be reached. Luoma et al. (2019, n=78) achieved a 3-year PFS of 52% while OS of 83%. Severe neuropathy was reported with VRd regimen. The remaining toxicity profile was mostly hematological and manageable with prompt intervention. Conclusion: The two upfront regimens of VCd and VRd show favorable efficacy and safety outcomes in NDMM patients. VRd arm achieves relatively higher rates of ORR, CR and VGPR. Cost-effectiveness and lower neuropathy incidence associated with VCd makes it favorable over VRd. Disclosures Anwer: Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Celegene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals.: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

The blood transfusion (BT) system in Pakistan is fragmented, demand-driven and depends on weakly regulated transfusion practices. There is a considerable possibility that transfusion-transmissible infections (TTIs) are contributing to the current epidemic of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) (affecting 7.4% of the general population) in the country. To study this issue, we conducted a systematic review to identify articles related to TTIs and transfusion safety in Pakistan from January 1, 2010 to January 31, 2020. A review of 33 articles met the final criteria for qualitative synthesis. Analysis of these studies showed a cumulative frequency of HBV 2.04%, HCV 2.44%, HIV 0.038%, syphilis 1.1% and malaria 0.11%. The frequency of coinfections among blood donors varied from 0.0099% to 0.35%. The highest number of coinfections were HCV and syphilis, followed by HCV and HBV infections. Syphilis and malaria were tested in only 38% and 46% of all the blood donations in one study. The rate of voluntary non-remunerated donations (VNRDs) was less than 13%, and male donors were 95% to 100% in these studies. There was a significant difference in the frequency of HBV and HCV in VNRDs (0.48%) as compared to replacement donors (RDs) (4.15%). In short, this review shows a high frequency of TTIs, especially HBV, HCV and syphilis in the blood donor population in Pakistan. There is a high dependency on RDs, minimal use of healthy voluntary blood donation practices, inadequate screening of high-risk donors, repeated collections of the blood from RDs, poor quality of screening methods and limited knowledge of donor health. Without standardized safe transfusion practices, there will be an ongoing increase in transmission of TTIs, especially HBV, HCV, syphilis, and HIV leading to a significant adverse public health impact.

Introduction: With progressive aging of the worldwide population, the number of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) cases are anticipated to escalate. Disease management for elderly, frail, and transplant-ineligible patients still remains a challenge. With our systematic review, we plan to summarize the available therapeutic options for frail, elderly, and transplant-ineligible NDMM patients. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed on May 27, 2020 on PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The search was not limited to any geographical area, date, or language. The keywords used in the search were: newly diagnosed, multiple myeloma, frail, elderly, transplant-ineligible, and treatment outcome. After subsequent screening, following the PRISMA guidelines, 24 ongoing/completed studies (n= 10,095) were included in the review. Results: Two and three drug combination regimens: Among the two and three drug combinations (see tables 1 and 2), lenalidomide (R) and dexamethasone (d) (Rd) combination (n=1445) and bortezomib (V), melphalan (M) and prednisone (P) (VMP) combination (n=1059) have been the most extensively studied combinations thus far. In a phase 2 trial, Takezako et al. (2016) used 9 cycles of VMP followed by bortezomib maintenance exclusively in frail patients, which yielded an ORR of 87%, CR rate of 25%, and PFS of 36 months. The addition of bortezomib (V) to Rd (VRd) was also studied in a phase 3 (SWOG S0777) trial by Durie et al. (2017) (n=471) in transplant-ineligible patients, which showed superior therapeutic response rates (PFS 43 months, OS of 75 months, and ORR of 82%) in the VRd group compared to Rd (PFS of 30 months, OS of 64 months and ORR of 72%) alone. However, the three-drug combination of daratumumab (Dara)+Rd has overall shown the best treatment results (ORR 92.9%, CR 47.6% and VGPR 31.8%) as evidenced by Facon et. al (2019) (n=368). Although, when compared to Rd, Dara-Rd was associated with more neutropenia (50% versus 35.3%); however, Dara-Rd had an overall lower incidence of infections (32.1% versus 73.4%) and hence, lower discontinuation rate (32.4% versus 56.7%) when compared to Rd, respectively. Four or five drug combination regimens: Four and five drug combinations have been studied in two phase II/III trials (n=933) in transplant-ineligible patients. A phase two trial (Mateos, 2015) studying VMPRd in frail patients resulted in an ORR of 68%, CR 20%, and PFS of 25 months after 35 days of VMPRd induction, followed by dose de-escalation to twice monthly bortezomib-only maintenance until disease progression. Dara-VMP was compared with VMP alone in a phase 3 trial (Mateos, 2017) (n=700), in which 9 cycles of Dara-VMP (42 days each) were de-escalated to daratumumab-only maintenance. Thisshowed superior results in Dara-VMP (ORR 90.9% versus 73.9%, CR 42.6% versus 24.4%, and PFS was not reached in Dara-VMP group versus 18.1 months) compared to the VMP group. Moreover, this dose de-escalation also seemed to improve treatment tolerability, as the discontinuation rate due to adverse effects was also lower (4.9%). Currently, various trials are ongoing to explore the connection between frailty status and associated treatment outcomes (table 3). Conclusion: Combination regimens, including agents like daratumumab and bortezomib, have exhibited promising results both in terms of superior efficacy and reduced adverse effects profiles. In addition, dose de-escalated maintenance therapies following induction therapies based on multidrug combinations have exhibited noteworthy success, with comparable efficacy and reduced toxicity rates in frail and transplant-ineligible NDMM patients. However, there remains an opportunity to further tailor the dose and type of drug combinations on a 'frailty-adjusted' basis, with trials designed around this risk stratification providing the highest quality data. Disclosures Anwer: Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Celegene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals.: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Introduction: Secondary Central Nervous System Lymphoma (SCNSL) is the spread of a lymphoma to the CNS, the primary focus of which is situated elsewhere in the body. Most commonly, it is a non-Hodgkin lymphoma which either presents as a CNS involvement due to systemic relapse or progression, or as an isolated relapse in the CNS despite systemic remission. Traditionally, it has been treated by intrathecal or systemic chemotherapy and/or WBRT (Whole-brain radiation therapy) but recently, the use of high-dose chemotherapy (HDT) with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has shown encouraging results. We present a systematic review of literature displaying the treatment outcomes of HDT/ASCT in SCNSL. Methods: We performed a comprehensive literature search (following PRISMA guidelines) on July 08 2020 on PubMed, Cochrane Library and Clinicaltrials.Gov by using the relevant MeSH terms of high-dose chemotherapy, autologous stem cell transplantation, CNS lymphoma, efficacy and safety. Following screening by 2 reviewers, we selected 12 published studies (n=353) and included data from these studies in our systematic review. We manually extracted data summarized the results. Results: 232/353 patients eventually underwent sequential HDT+ASCT who were evaluable for treatment response out of which 190 patients had SCNSL (see table 1). Carmustine (BCNU) based HDT: BCNU based regimens have been the most extensively studied HDT among SCNSL patients (n=81). Korfel et al. in a phase 2 trial (2013, n=30) used HDT combination of BCNU, thiotepa and etoposide followed by ASCT in SCNSL patients. No patient was given whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT). The results yielded a PR of 8%, CR of 63% and 2-year OS of 63%. 1 toxicity related mortality (TRM) was noted and >grade 4 adverse effects included infection (4%) and stomatitis (13%). Ferreri et al. (2015, n=38) in a phase 2 trial use HDT with BCNU plus thiotepa on 38 patients 20 of whom underwent subsequent ASCT. The results showed CR of 100%, event free survival (EFS) of 40% ±9% and OS of 41% ±8% at 5 years with four patients suffering TRM. Thiotepa, busulfan and cyclophosphamide (TBC) based HDT: The combination based on TBC has been a popular option for SCNSL patients (n=53). In a retrospective analysis by Welch et al. (2014, n=17), TBC combination followed by sequential ASCT was studied in both primary and SCNSL patients (primary malignancy being diffuse large B-cell lymphoma) and the collective results showed complete response (CR) of 100%, PFS of 93% (95% CI: 61-99%) and OS of 93% (95% CI: 61-99%) at 3 years. In addition to the excellent efficacy response, no TRM or grade 4 toxicities were documented. Chen et al. (2015, n=12) in a phase 2 trial used HDT with rituximab and TBC (R-TBC) combination followed by ASCT rescue in 12 SCNSL patients. At 2 years, the progression free survival (PFS) was 51% (95% CI: 18-77%) and overall survival (OS) was 83% (95% CI: 48-96%). Two patients developed neurotoxicity and one TRM was recorded. Methotrexate (MTX) based HDT: MTX based combinations have also been widely used as HDT preceding ASCT in SCNSL patients (n=51). Fischer et al. (2008, n=20) studied HDT of MTX plus ifosfamide (IFO) in a retrospective analysis which showed PR of 30%, CR of 60% and median OS of 8.7 months and two TRM (due to sepsis in neutropenia) in SCNSL patients. Lee et al. (2015, n=31) in a prospective cohort study evaluated HDT with MTX based multidrug combination with ASCT in SCNSL patients which yielded a PR of 41.6%, CR of 50% and OS of 9 months (95% CI: 5-12 months). Five patients had suffered TRM. Conclusion: The combination of HDT with ASCT has yielded promising treatment outcomes both in terms of favorable efficacy rates and reduced rates of toxicity in SCNSL patients proving to be a comparable alternative to traditionally used chemo-radiation. However, the data at present is limited to few phase 2 trials with some being displayed collectively with data of primary CNS lymphoma patients. There is an increased need to carry out randomized phase 3 trials exclusively on SCNSL patients to better predict the efficacy and safety profile of HDT/ASCT in these patients. Anwer: Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Celegene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals.: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Introduction: Primary CNS lymphoma (PCNSL) is a highly aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) variant limited to the CNS with rare evidence of systemic spread. It constitutes 4% of all CNS malignancies. Owing to the impenetrable blood-brain barrier to routine chemo-immunotherapy, the efficacy of such treatment is less than optimal. The combination of chemoradiotherapy has substantial associated risk of late neurotoxicity and increased disease recurrence. High dose chemotherapy (HDT) with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) as rescue has been shown to be effective. We performed a systematic review of literature to explore the efficacy of HDT and ASCT in patients with PCNSL. Methods: We performed a comprehensive literature search (following PRISMA guidelines) on May 28, 2020 on Pubmed, Cochrane Library and Clinicaltrials.Gov by using the MeSH terms related to high-dose chemotherapy, autologous transplantation and primary CNS lymphoma which yielded 561 relevant articles. Following subsequent screening by 2 reviewers, we selected 16 published trials (n=745) and included data from these studies in our systematic review. We manually extracted data summarized the results. Results: 405/745 patients eventually underwent sequential HDT+ASCT the results of which are illustrated in table 1 and 2 stratified on the basis of newly diagnosed (ND) (n=641) and relapsed, refractory (RR) PCNSL patients (n=104) respectively. ND PCNSL: Among ND PCNSL patients, carmustine and thiotepa based regimens were the most widely studied HDT regimens (n= 351). Illerhaus et al. (2016, n= 81) in a phase 2 trial used HDT of intravenous (IV) combinations of rituximab, thiotepa and carmustine followed by ASCT on 73 patients which yielded partial response (PR) 13.9 %, complete response (CR) 77.2% and overall survival (OS) 81% at 36 months. 4 patients suffered transplant related mortality (TRM), mucositis (8%) and arrhythmias (2%) were the most common nonhematologic >grade 4 adverse effects. Ferreri et al. (2017) [n=122] in a phase 2 trial (n=59) used ASCT following Carmustine + Thiotepa HDT and reported 2-year OS of 71% and CR of 93% with a modest toxicity profile (infections (8%), mucositis (5%) and 2 (3%) treatment related deaths). IV thiotepa, busulfan and cyclophosphamide (TBC) combination was used as HDT / ASCT in ND PCNSL patients (n=208). Omuro et al. (2015) (n=32) used HDT with TBC followed by ASCT in 26 patients. Whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) was not given to any patient regardless of recurrence or relapse. At 5 years, the study reported PR=11%, CR=81%, and OS=81%. In a phase 2 trial, Houillier et al. (2019, n=140) used TBC combination as HDT followed by either WBRT or ASCT (2 separate arms), 44 patients of the latter arm exhibited a CR of 38% and OS of 66% at 5 years with 5 treatment related deaths. An IV combinations of carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine and melphalan (BEAM) have also been used as HDT with ASCT in 3 phase 2 trials (n=59). Abrey et al. (2003, n=28) in a phase 2 trial used high-dose BEAM therapy followed by ASCT which yielded PR of 14%, CR of 57% and OS of 55% at 28 months. Only 1 treatment related mortality occurred. RR PCNSL: TBC combination has been the most extensively used HDT regimen for RR PCNSL patients undergoing ASCT (n=65). Soussain et al. (2008, n=43) conducted a phase 2 trial in which high-dose TBC sequentially followed by ASCT was studied in 27 RR PCNSL patients. The results showed median PFS of 41.1 months with OS of 45% at 2 years however, 3 toxicity related deaths were observed. Kasenda et al. (2017, n=39) in a phase 2 trial used high-dose combination of rituximab, carmustine and thiotepa coupled with ASCT on RR PCNSL patients which yielded PR of 15.4%, CR of 56% and median PFS of 12.4 months with an OS of 56.4% at 2 years. However, there were 4 treatment related deaths and an extensive toxicity spectrum with widespread pancytopenia (thrombocytopenia =96.9%, leukopenia =100%, anemia =65.6%) and nonhematologic infections (65.6%) observed. Conclusion: HDT followed by ASCT rescue has exhibited favorable outcomes and can be used an alternative to WBRT especially in ND PCNSL patients. Evidence is limited by mainly phase II non randomized data. Although, hematologic adverse effects due to HDT were observed on a widespread basis, transplant related mortality was however minimal. There is need to carry out prospective randomized phase III trials to access the safety and efficacy profile of HDT / ASCT for ND and RR PCNSL. Table Disclosures Anwer: Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Celegene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals.: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.