ABSTRACT
Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) is a hematological emergency. This syndrome is characterized by metabolic derangements such as hyperkalemia and hypocalcemia, which result from rapid lysis of cells, especially rapidly growing tumors, after the initiation of chemotherapy. It is rarely seen in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and has not been previously reported to be triggered by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. We report a case of a 45-year-old male, a known case of CML in the chronic phase, who presented with fatigue and abdominal pain for four days. Initial laboratory results were consistent with leukocytosis and positive COVID-19 antigen. The patient was started on intravenous fluids and hydroxyurea; however, over the next few days, he deteriorated quickly and developed oliguric acute kidney injury (AKI) with electrolyte disturbance consistent with TLS. The patient was shifted to the intensive care unit and underwent one sustained low-efficiency dialysis (SLED) session and received rasburicase. Over the next few days, the patient started to improve and was discharged in good shape. Although CML rarely presents with TLS, physicians should monitor their patients closely, especially those who have concurrent COVID-19 infection, as this condition may result in lethal sequelae such as AKI, severe arrhythmias, and multiorgan failure. Additionally, early detection and treatment lead to a better prognosis.
ABSTRACT
Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) is an oncologic emergency characterized by the destruction of tumor cells leading to an influx of large amounts of uric acid, potassium, and phosphorus into systemic circulation. It most often occurs after the initiation of cytotoxic therapy in high-grade lymphomas and leukemias;however, rarely it may occur spontaneously. The authors report a case of spontaneous tumor lysis causing electrolyte abnormalities and acute kidney injury in a patient with subsequently diagnosed large chronic lymphocytic leukemia tumor burden. Spontaneous TLS can be the first presentation of underlying malignancy;therefore, physicians should be aware of the associated findings.
ABSTRACT
With the emergence of targeted therapies, defining the best strategy for the treatment of previously untreated CLL patients remains challenging. The aim of this phase 2 study was to compare the efficacy of an association with ibrutinib and venetoclax (IV) to the standard FCR regimen in fit patients with intermediate-risk CLL defined by either unmutated IGHV status, 11q deletion, or complex karyotype in the absence of TP53 abnormality. Patients were randomized 1:1 between two treatment arms, i.e. FCR 6 cycles or IV. After a lead-in phase of ibrutinib as a single agent from the month (M)1 to M3, the total duration of treatment with IV was based on the response achieved at M9;if bone marrow (BM) MRD was <0.01% using flow cytometry, the treatment was continued for 6 additional months until M15 and then stopped;if BM MRD at M9 was ≥0.01%, the treatment with IV was continued for 18 additional months until M27. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with BM MRD <0.01% at M27 in both arms. We present here the preliminary results on the first evaluation done at M9 including CT-scan, BM biopsy, and MRD assessment in PB and BM after the inclusion of all the 120 patients as initially planned. One hundred and twenty patients were enrolled from September 2019 to February 2021. The median age was 59 [34-72] and 61 [34-74] years in the FCR and IV arms, respectively. The characteristics of the patients were well-balanced between the 2 arms in terms of gender (male 72% FCR, 74% IV), PS ECOG 0-1 (59% FCR, 68% IV), and Binet stage (A, B, and C 15, 64, 21% for FCR;8.5, 59, and 32% for IV). No major difference in terms of cytogenetic features was noted, all patients but one had unmutated IGHV. At the time of data cut-off for this interim analysis, the median follow-up for all cohort was 12.7 [4.5.9-21.4] months. The frequency of patients presenting all grades adverse events (AE) so far was 90% (grade ≥3: 45%) in the FCR arm and 80% (grade ≥3: 45%) in the IV arm. The rate of infusion-related reactions (IRR) in the FCR arm was 35% on cycle 1-day 1 (14% grade 3-4);for the IV arm, 5% of patients experienced tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) (grade 3 for 1 patient). Ibrutinib doses were reduced for seven patients (four permanently stopped and three resumed at a lower dose because of toxicities (digestive, hepatic, or hematological). Venetoclax was permanently discontinued before M9 in four patients (digestive toxicities and grade 4 neutropenia). Fifty-two serious adverse events were reported of which 22 were in the IV arm (among them one sudden death, one ischemic stroke, one acute coronary syndrome, two atrial fibrillations, two TLS, two acute renal failures, one hepatitis, one neutropenia, two COVID pneumonitis, and one osteoporotic fracture) and 30 in the FCR arm (among them five febrile neutropenia, one hemolytic anemia, one thrombocytopenia, three IRR, three TLS, three COVID pneumonitis, one acute myeloid leukemia, one myelodysplasic syndrome). All patients with COVID pneumonitis had a favorable evolution with the need for intensive care and convalescent plasma for three of them. The first 85 patients included in the study have reached M9 and among them, nine prematurely discontinued the study, (one active hemolysis, one ischemic stroke, one TLS, one hepatitis, and one sudden death in the IV arm;three hematologic toxicities and one early progression in the FCR arm). In the evaluated patients (n=74), 69% of patients in the FCR arm and 43% of patients in the IV arm achieved bone BM MRD <0.01%. The complete (CR, CRi) and partial response rates were 56 and 44% in the FCR arm and 74 and 26% in the IV arm, respectively. In conclusion, preliminary results show a lower BM MRD rate in the IV arm compared to the FCR arm at M9, with toxicity that remains significant and relatively similar between the two arms. However, BM MRD rate may improve after longer exposure to the IV combination and the analysis of the primary endpoint at M27 will be decisive in determining the best therapeutic strategy.
ABSTRACT
Purpose of Study Postrenal causes of acute kidney injury (AKI) can generally be determined by imaging but differentiation of prerenal (PR) from intrinsic renal (IR) can be more difficult. A point of care test to quickly differentiate these two entities would be useful. Mass spectrometry (MS) can visualize small molecules in urine. We utilized a portable, single quadrupole mass spectrometer with a simple atmospheric pressure ionization interface to measure small molecules in urine. The interface allows for direct analysis of samples without the need for chromatography or other time-consuming sample preparation. The goal was to distinguish PR and IR AKI by urine analyte profiles. Methods Used Inpatients that developed AKI were eligible for enrolment. Patients with COVID-19 were excluded. Informed consent was obtained under a protocol approved by the UAMS IRB. Patients were categorized as either PR (n=9) or IR (n=7) AKI etiology using the diagnosis by the on-service nephrology attending. Etiologies for IR AKI included tumor lysis syndrome, contrast-induced nephropathy, myeloma light chain disease, pyelonephritis, and cisplatin-induced kidney injury. Two microliters of urine was dispensed onto a stainless steel probe without prior processing and analyzed by MS with an Advion Expression CMS Mass Spectrometer. Peaks within the 20 to 500 m/z range were recorded. MS spectra were processed and binned in 1 m/z increments for peak clustering using MATLAB. The frequency of binned peaks in the PR AKI group were compared to the IR group and marked as peaks of interest if the difference in number of peaks across the two categories was four or more. Missing peak values were replaced with the minimum value for that peak across all samples. Summary of Results Eleven peaks met our initial criteria for difference in frequency between intrinsic and prerenal cases. From the eleven, the mean intensity was different between the groups for only the sample at m/z 242 (p=0.03). In the PR group, mean and SD of the peak intensities were 1.7E+07 ±1.2E+07 compared to 7.0E+06 ±7.7E+06 Using a cut-off value of 1.55E+07, overall accuracy was 75%. The predictor correctly classified 6/9 in the PR group (67%) and 6/7 in the IR group (86%). Conclusions Point of care MS has the potential to rapidly differentiate PR from IR and potentially to further phenotype causes of AKI. Based on previous studies, the peaks we identified are likely small molecule metabolites. Larger sample size will be needed to better phenotype patients and will enable the use of machine learning algorithms to classify the kidney disease that is present. Further correlation of the different analytes in prerenal and intrarenal AKIs is needed, however this study shows the potential utility of mass spectrometry to rapidly phenotype AKI in the clinical setting.
ABSTRACT
With the emergence of targeted therapies, defining the best strategy for the treatment of previously untreated CLL patients remains challenging. The aim of this phase 2 study was to compare the efficacy of an association with ibrutinib and venetoclax (IV) to the standard FCR regimen in fit patients with intermediate risk CLL defined by either unmutated IGHV status, 11q deletion or complex karyotype in the absence of TP53 abnormality. Patients were randomized 1:1 between two treatment arms, ie FCR 6 cycles or IV. After a lead-in phase of ibrutinib as a single agent from month (M)1 to M3, the total duration of treatment with IV was based on the response achieved at M9;if bone marrow (BM) MRD was < 0.01% using flow cytometry, the treatment was continued for 6 additional months until M15 and then stopped;if BM MRD at M9 was ≥ 0.01%, the treatment with IV was continued for 18 additional months until M27. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with BM MRD < 0.01% at M27 in both arms. We present here the preliminary results on the first evaluation done at M9 including CT-scan, BM biopsy and MRD assessment in PB and BM after the inclusion of all the 120 patients as initially planned. One hundred and twenty patients were enrolled from September 2019 to February 2021. The median age was 59 [34-72] and 61 [34-74] years in the FCR and IV arms, respectively. The characteristics of the patients were well balanced between the 2 arms in terms of gender (male 72% FCR, 74% IV), PS ECOG 0-1 (59% FCR, 68% IV) and Binet stage (A, B and C 15%, 64%, 21% for FCR;8.5%, 59% and 32% for IV). No major difference in terms of cytogenetic features was noted, all patients but one had unmutated IGHV. At the time of data cut-off for this interim analysis, the median follow-up for the all cohort was 11 [2.9 - 19.8] months. The frequency of all grades adverse events (AE) observed so far was 53% (grade 3-4, 24%) in the FCR arm and 47% (grade 3-4, 17%) in the IV arm. The rate of infusion-related reactions (IRR) in the FCR arm was 35% on cycle 1-day 1 (14% grade 3-4);for the IV arm, 6% of patients experienced tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) (grade 4 for 4 patients). ibrutinib doses were reduced for 7 patients (4 permanently stopped and 3 resumed at a lower dose because of toxicities (digestive, hepatic or haematological)). Venetoclax was permanently discontinued before M9 in 4 patients (digestive toxicities and grade 4 neutropenia). Forty serious adverse events were reported of which 15 in the IV arm (1 sudden death, 1 ischemic stroke, 2 atrial fibrillations, 2 clinical TLS, 1 hepatitis, 1 neutropenia, 4 COVID pneumonitis and one osteoporotic fracture) and 25 in the FCR arm (2 neutropenias, 1 anemia, 1 thrombocytopenia, 1 autoimmune haemolytic anemia, 3 IRR, 4 TLS, 2 COVID pneumonitis, 4 fever episodes of undetermined origin, 1 community-acquired pneumonia, 1 gastrointestinal toxicity, 1 confusion, 2 chest pains, 1 acute myeloid leukemia, 1 myelodysplasic syndrome). The patients with COVID pneumonitis had a favorable evolution with the need for intensive care and convalescent plasma for 3 of them. The first 60 patients included in the study have reached M9 and among them, 6 prematurely discontinued the study, 3 in each arm (active hemolysis, ischemic stroke and sudden death in the IV arm;2 grade 4 hematologic toxicities and 1 early progression in the FCR arm). In the evaluated patients (n=54), 71% of patients in the FCR arm and 48% of patients in the IV arm achieved bone BM MRD < 0.01%. The complete (CR, CRi) and partial response rates were 54% and 46% in the FCR arm and 76% and 24% in the IV arm respectively. In conclusion, the preliminary results show a lower BM MRD rate in the IV arm compared to the FCR arm at M9, with a toxicity that remains significant and relatively similar between the two arms. However, BM MRD rate should improve after longer exposure to the IV combination and the analysis of the primary endpoint at M27 will be decisive in determining the best therapeutic strategy. Disclosures: Quinquenel: Abbvie: Honoraria;Jansse : Honoraria;AstraZeneca: Honoraria. Laribi: Le Mans Hospital: Research Funding;Novartis: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding;Takeda: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding;BeiGene: Other: Personal Fees;IQONE: Other: Personal Fees;AbbVie: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding;Astellas Phama, Inc.: Other: Personal Fees;AstraZeneca: Other: Personal Fees;Jansen: Research Funding. Cymbalista: Lilly-LOXO: 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;ASTRA ZENECA: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Leblond: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Lilly: Consultancy;AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support;Roche: Honoraria;Amgen: Honoraria;Beigene: 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. 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. Ferrant: Janssen: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses;AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses;AstraZeneca: Honoraria. de Guibert: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria;AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria;Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria. Feugier: Astrazeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria;Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria;Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria;Amgen: Honoraria;Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Cartron: Roche, Celgene-BMS: Consultancy;Danofi, Gilead, Novartis, Jansen, Roche, Celgene-BMS, Abbvie, Takeda: Honoraria. Ysebaert: Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Roche: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding.
ABSTRACT
Background: The BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax in combination with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody (rituximab or obinutuzumab) has demonstrated superior outcomes and manageable safety as compared to chemo-immunotherapy in phase III clinical trials for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Moreover, venetoclax-based regimens induced high rates of undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD). Prospective data on the effectiveness of venetoclax-based regimens specifically with regard to achieving uMRD in a real-world setting are still lacking. Here we report the first interim analysis for efficacy and safety of an ongoing nationwide real-world study of venetoclax based therapy for CLL/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). Method: A prospective observational nationwide multicenter study. Treatment-naïve (TN) and relapsed/refractory (R/R) CLL/SLL patients were enrolled in 13 medical centers in Israel. The primary endpoint was clinical response, per physician assessment 12-months after the initiation of venetoclax treatment. Key secondary endpoints included progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and uMRD as assessed at a central laboratory by 8-color flow-cytometry. Results: Between February 10, 2019, and Jun 17, 2021 (data cut), 199 CLL/SLL patients were enrolled from 13 medical centers in Israel to receive venetoclax based therapy. The study included 83 TN and 116 R/R evaluable CLL/SLL patients with a median age of 69 years (range, 34-85) and 70.5 years (range, 25-91), respectively (Table 1). R/R patients had received a median of one prior therapy with a range up to 8, of these patients 60 (51.7%) were previously treated with a B-cell receptor inhibitor (BCRi) including ibrutinib in 52 (44.8%) and idelalisib in combination with rituximab in 6 (5.2%). TN patients had been treated with venetoclax in combination with obinutuzumab (92.8%) or rituximab (4.8%) and R/R patients received either venetoclax with rituximab (60.3%) or obinutuzumab (9.5%), venetoclax monotherapy (25.8%) or triple therapy with venetoclax, rituximab and ibrutinib in 5 (4.3%). Dose escalation of venetoclax to the recommended dose of 400 mg daily was achieved in 80.7% (n=67) of TN and 81% (n=94) of R/R patients. The median duration of ramp-up was 38 and 42 days in TN and R\R patients, respectively. Prior to therapy, tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) risk was considered high in 12% and 29.3% of TN and R/R patients, respectively (Table 1). Laboratory TLS occurred in one TN patient and 4 R/R patients, whereas 3 of the R/R patients experienced clinical TLS. Nineteen TN and 75 R/R patients had a follow-up of at least 12 months or discontinued study prematurely. The 12-month overall response rate (ORR) for TN and R/R patients was 89.5% [complete response (CR) 13 (68.4%), partial response (PR) 4 (21.1%)] and 73.3% [CR 37 (49.3%), PR 18 (24%)], respectively. In the R/R cohort, the 12-month ORR among assessed patients was 67.6% (25/37) in BCRi-exposed versus 85.7% (30/35) in BCRi-naïve patients. At 12 months, peripheral blood uMRD (<0.01%) was achieved in 12 out of 14 (85.7%) TN and 26 out of 38 (68.4%) R/R evaluated patients. At a median follow-up of 5.1 months (range, 0.5-15.6) for TN and 10.1 months (range, 0-25.7) for R/R patients, the median PFS and OS, for both cohorts have not been reached. The estimated 12-month PFS was 90.9% for TN and 81.1% for R/R patients. For R/R patients with prior exposure to BCRi, the estimated 12-month PFS was 69.6% versus 94.8% in BCRi-naïve patients (figure 1). Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were reported in 34.9% of TN patients and 43.9% R/R patients. The most frequent grade ≥3 AEs documented were neutropenia (TN: 19.2% and R/R 17.2%), infections (TN: 4.8% and R/R: 21.5%) and febrile neutropenia (TN: 2.4% and in R/R: 2.6%). COVID-19 occurred in 7 patients including one death. At the time of data cut, 10 deaths occurred, one TN and 9 R/R patients. Causes for death included infections (5 patients), disease progression (2 patients), acute myeloid leukemia/ myelodysplastic syndrome (2 patients) and a soft-tissue sarcoma (1 patient). Conclusions: This first interim analysis of our ongoing prospective real-world study of venetoclax-based treatment for TN and R/R CLL/SLL, demonstrates high efficacy together with a high proportion of undetectable MRD levels and a favorable toxicity profile. These efficacy results are comparable to those reported in previous Phase III clinical trials for CLL, with no new safety signals. [Formula presented] Disclosures: Herishanu: AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding;Janssen: Honoraria;Roche: Honoraria;AstraZeneca: Honoraria. Goldschmidt: AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Itchaki: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding;AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Levi: AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Aviv: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Fineman: AbbVie: Research Funding. Dally: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Tadmor: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding;AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Ruchlemer: AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Abadi: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Shvidel: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Braester: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Cohen: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Frankel: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ofek: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Berelovich: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Grunspan: AbbVie: Current Employment, Other: May hold equity. Benjamini: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding;AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.
ABSTRACT
Background: Despite the efficacy of venetoclax (VEN) in frontline CLL, optimal combination regimens and duration of treatment remain unclear. We hypothesized that cytoreduction with bendamustine/rituximab (BR) induction followed by venetoclax/rituximab (VR) consolidation for a fixed 1-year duration would be associated with an increased rate of undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD) compared to historical controls and a reduction in the risk of tumor lysis syndrome (TLS). Here we report data from an ongoing phase 2 multicenter, US, single-arm, open-label study (NCT03609593) designed to assess the safety and efficacy of BR-VR in previously untreated CLL patients (pts). Methods: Previously untreated CLL/SLL pts ≥ 18 years requiring therapy per iwCLL criteria initially received 3 cycles of bendamustine 50-90 mg/m 2 daily for 2 days and rituximab 375 mg/m 2 every 28 days for 3 cycles. Following BR, VEN was initiated with a standard dose escalation from 20 mg to 400 mg daily over 5 weeks. This was followed by 6 cycles of VR with rituximab given monthly and 5 cycles of VEN alone (12 cycles of VEN in total). Additional eligibility included: ECOG PS ≤ 2, hemoglobin ≥8g/dL, ANC ≥1000/mm 3, and platelets ≥50,000/mm 3. Response was assessed by 2018 iwCLL criteria with uMRD testing by central flow cytometry at a level of <10 -4 in peripheral blood (PB) and bone marrow (BM). The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included uMRD rate, time to uMRD, and adverse events (AEs) assessed by CTCAE v 5.0. Results: As of data cutoff on 30 May 2021, 26 pts were accrued with additional recruitment ongoing. Baseline demographics were as follows: male/female (16/10), median age 60 yrs (range 44-77). Baseline prognostic studies showed unmutated IGHV in 16 (62%) pts, TP53 aberrant (either del(17p) and/or TP53 mutation) in 1 (4%) pt, del(11q) in 3 (12%) pts, and complex karyotype in 4 (15%) pts. TLS risk among 24 evaluable pts at baseline was high (H) in 3 (12.5%), medium (M) in 15 (62.5%), and low (L) in 6 (25%). At a median follow-up of 12.9 mo. (range, 1.9-27.5), 23 pts remain on study. Of 12 pts with at least 15 mo. follow-up (completing all therapy), the ORR was 100% (92% CR/CRi, 8% PR [due to small residual nodes]). 3 pts died on study (2 due to COVID-19 and 1 developed newly metastatic squamous cell carcinoma and taken off study after achieving a CR post-VEN ramp-up). Bendamustine was administered at doses of 50 mg/m 2 in 47%, 70 mg/m 2 in 11%, and 90mg/m 2 in 42% of pts. In 20 evaluable pts, response assessments after cytoreduction with BR demonstrated 15% of pts achieved CR/CRi and 85% achieved PR. For evaluable pts at 16 mo., uMRD (<0.01%) in the PB and BM was observed in 100% (10/10) and 90% (9/10) of pts, respectively. MRD was intermediate (0.01% - <1.0%) in 10% (1 patient) in BM (Figure 1 ORR and MRD). Median time to uMRD was 12 mo. (range 3-15) in PB and 14 mo. (range 5.5-15) in BM. The most common treatment-emergent AEs during BR induction were (any grade/grade ≥3) anemia in 6/2 (21%/7%) pts, nausea in 6/0 (21%/0%), neutropenia in 5/2 (18%/7%), rash in 5/0 (18%/0%), constipation 4/0 (14%/0%), and transaminitis in 3/0 (11%/0%). 2 pts (7%) developed febrile neutropenia during BR. Emergent AEs during VEN treatment included diarrhea in 10/0 (36%/0%) pts, neutropenia in 6/3 (21%/11%), leukopenia in 5/2 (18%/7%), and nausea in 4/0 (14%/0%). TLS risk was substantially reduced after BR lead-in. Of 3 H-risk pts at baseline, none remained H-risk after BR;of 15 M-risk pts, only 1 remained M-risk, with the remainder at L-risk (94% reduction in H- or M- risk TLS). Conclusions: BR-VR is a safe and well-tolerated regimen in untreated CLL pts. BR debulking substantially reduces TLS risk, and this sequential strategy achieves high rates of PB and BM uMRD across all prognostic risk groups. [Formula presented] Disclosures: Hill: Celgene (BMS): Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding;AstraZenica: Consultancy, Honoraria;Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria;Gentenech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding;AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding;Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel Support, Research Funding;Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding;Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding;Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria;Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding;Incyte/Morphysis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Jurcic: AbbVie, BMS/Celgene, Novartis: Consultancy;AbbVie, Arog Pharmaceuticals, Astellas, BMS/Celgene, Forma Therapeutics, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, PTC Therapeutics, Syros Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Heaney: CTI: Honoraria, Research Funding;Blueprint: Honoraria, Research Funding;Novartis: Honoraria;Sierra Oncology: Research Funding;Cogent: Research Funding;BMS: Research Funding;Kartos: Research Funding. Lamanna: MingSight Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding;Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy;AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding;AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding;Juno Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding;Oncternal Therapeutics: Research Funding;Celgene Corporation: Consultancy;Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding;Verastem Oncology: Research Funding;TG Therapeutics, Inc: Research Funding;Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy;BeiGene: Consultancy;Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: Venetoclax, Bendamustine, and Rituximab are all FDA approved for use in first-line CLL. The combination of these three agents and dosing schedule utilized in this clinical trial is novel and therefore technically reflects an off-label use.