Kremyanskaya, Marina

Abstract Background: The functional importance of bone marrow adipocytes (BMA) is frequently overlooked even though they are critical components of the BM (bone marrow) microenvironment. BMA have been proposed to play a supportive role within the hematopoietic niche and to directly sustain hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) survival as well as to preferentially support leukemia cell survival and proliferation (Sabbah Cell Commun Signal 2023). Although significant ex-vivo data implicates direct and indirect crosstalk between BMA and neoplastic HSCs (Venti Front Endocrinol 2022), the possible role of BMA in myeloproliferative neoplasms and their dynamics following therapy have yet to be characterized. Adiponectin, an anti- inflammatory adipokine that maintains metabolic homeostasis through regulation of insulin sensitivity, lipid metabolism and pro-inflammatory signaling is low in MPN patients and increases with IFN-α therapy (Avcu Int J Hematol. 2006). IFN-α has also been implicated in inhibiting adipogenesis via JAK-STAT1 signaling (Lee Biochim Biophys Act. 2016). A single institutional study of IFN-α in patients with essential thrombocythemia (ET) and polycythemia vera (PV) confirmed the potential for BM histopathologic responses and a correlation with molecular responses (Masarova Exp Hematol Oncol 2017). The aim of this analysis was to characterize the change in BM cellularity and fat composition with pegylated IFN α-2a (Pegasys; PEG) and the relationship with both hematologic and molecular response from tissue collected in prospective, global clinical trials of PEG in patients with ET/PV. Methods: A total of 24 subjects from the phase 2 MPN-RC 111 (Yacoub Blood 2019) salvage PEG study and 16 subjects from the MPN-RC 112 (Mascarenhas Blood 2022) phase 3 study comparing PEG to HU with available clinical, BM H&E slides, laboratory and molecular data were included in this retrospective analysis of prospective clinical trial data. We assigned a semi-quantitative score for changes in cellularity, fat distribution, and megakaryocyte (MK) histo-topography for changes from baseline, at 12, 24 and 36 months when available. Changes in BMA content and para-trabecular distribution were assessed on whole slide digital images with machine learning models. BMA content was quantified with a QuPath pixel classifier that distinguished adipocytes from other marrow components (Bankhead Scientific Reports 2017). Para-trabecular adipocyte distribution was assessed by leveraging UNI2-h, a self-supervised Vision Transformer (ViT-H/14) model and successor to UNI (Mahmood Nature 2024). UNI2-h was pre-trained on 200 million image tiles from over 300,000 H&E and IHC slides. In this study, UNI2-h was adapted to distinguish between high and low para-trabecular adiposity using image tiles centered on trabeculae. Trabeculae with a surrounding layer of adipocytes were labeled as ‘high’ adiposity, while ‘low’ para-trabecular fat distribution was defined by the direct contact of cellular marrow with trabeculae, lacking surrounding adipocytes. Results: A total of 40 PEG-treated ET (n=18) and PV (n=22) patients were included in this analysis with a median age of 64 years (26-85), 77% JAK2V617F+, 23% CALRmut+, and 40% treatment-naïve. The median JAK2V617F variant allele fraction (VAF) was 26% (range 3-96%). A complete hematologic response (CHR) was obtained with PEG in 58%, 61% attained >20% reduction in driver VAF and 48% attained a >50% reduction in VAF (MR) within 24 months of baseline. We observed an increase in BMA content and notable increase in para-trabecular distribution (confirmed by morphology and ML, independently) in 93% and 53% of PEG treated patients attaining a MR versus only 31% and 6% who did not attain MR, respectively (P Value=0.0004). There was more notable improvement towards normalization of MK histo-topography and orderly erythropoiesis in MR (86.6%) than in non-MR (31.2%) (P value=0.001). Increase in BMA content, BMA para-trabecular distribution, or improvement in MK histo-topography were not associated with achievement of CHR or changes in CALR VAF in this small cohort. Cytokine correlation with BMA dynamics is currently ongoing and will be reported at the meeting. Conclusion: Treatment of MPN patients with IFN-α resulted in reproducible changes in BM cellularity including MK histo-topography, erythropoiesis, BMA number and distribution. Changes in BMA were closely associated with reduction in JAK2V617F VAF following PEG treatment.

Abstract Background: Polycythemia vera (PV) is a myeloproliferative neoplasm characterized by red blood cell overproduction. In the phase 2 REVIVE study (NCT04057040), rusfertide was superior to placebo in achieving hematocrit (Hct) levels <45% and reducing or eliminating the need for therapeutic phlebotomy (PHL) in patients (pts) with PV who were PHL dependent prior to study entry (Kremyanskaya M, et al. N Engl J Med. 2024;390(8):723-35). During the open-label extension portion of REVIVE (Part 3), combining rusfertide and PHL with or without cytoreductive therapy (CRT) controlled erythrocytosis, provided long-term control of Hct, and was associated with a greater than 8-fold reduction in the estimated annual PHL rate (Gerds AT, et al. Blood. 2024;144(Suppl. 1):4559). Pts who participated in REVIVE Part 3 were eligible to transition to the open-label phase 2 THRIVE extension study (NCT06033586) and receive up to 2 additional years of rusfertide treatment. Our objective is to present initial results describing the long-term durability of response and safety profile of rusfertide in pts with PV who participated in REVIVE and transitioned to THRIVE. Methods Pts with PV who participated in REVIVE, completed ≥12 months of rusfertide therapy, and had an end-of-treatment visit were eligible to transition to THRIVE. Pts who enrolled in THRIVE continued to receive subcutaneous rusfertide once weekly with or without CRT. Median Hct and the number of PHLs each pt received were assessed in all pts who received ≥1 dose of rusfertide and had ≥1 efficacy assessment on study. Safety data were also collected, including treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), non-PV malignancies, and thromboembolic events (TEs). New-onset AEs (ie, AEs that were reported in THRIVE but not REVIVE) were also recorded. Results: Forty-six/58 pts (79%) who enrolled in Part 3 of REVIVE transitioned to THRIVE. At the data cutoff date (27 May 2025), 44 of the 46 pts (96%) who enrolled in THRIVE remained on study. Median (range) age was 58 (27-77), and the majority were male (74%). More than half (57%) had high-risk PV; 54% of pts were on concurrent CRT. Median (range) treatment duration in THRIVE was 48 (22-66) weeks; median (range) treatment duration in REVIVE and THRIVE combined was 198 (154-267) weeks, or 3.8 (3.0-5.1) years. At baseline, mean (standard deviation [SD]) Hct was 42.3% (3.7) in THRIVE. At Week 60, mean (SD) Hct was 43.0% (4.2). In addition, mean hemoglobin and erythrocyte levels remained stable throughout THRIVE. Prior to study entry in REVIVE, the mean (SD) annualized PHL rate (ie, PHL/year) for the 46 pts who eventually rolled over to THRIVE was 9.2 (5.2) PHL/year. The mean (SD) annualized PHL rate during REVIVE Part 3 and THRIVE was 0.6 (0.8) and 0.7 (1.1) PHL/year, respectively. Overall, the most common AEs in the pts who participated in REVIVE and THRIVE were Grade 1-2 injection site reactions (87%), fatigue (59%), COVID-19 (50%), pruritus (44%), arthralgia (39%), dizziness (35%), anemia (30%), paresthesia (28%), headache (26%), abdominal pain and nausea (24% each), and diarrhea, dyspnea, and upper respiratory tract infection (22% each). In THRIVE, the most common new-onset AEs were anemia (20%) and fatigue (15%). Twelve pts (26%) had a prior history of non-PV cancer. Six pts (13%) had a new-onset cancer event, including basal cell carcinoma (n=3; 7%), squamous cell carcinoma (n=2, 4%), non-invasive bladder cancer (n=1, 2%), and multiple myeloma (n=1; 2%). Of these 6 pts, 5 (83%) had a prior history of non-PV cancer. Nine pts (20%) had a history of TEs prior to enrolling in REVIVE. One patient with cardiovascular risk factors and a TE prior to enrollment in REVIVE had a new-onset TE of cerebrovascular accident in THRIVE. Overall, there were no TEs in pts with low-risk PV in either REVIVE or THRIVE. Conclusions: After transitioning to THRIVE, continued treatment with rusfertide with or without CRT demonstrated consistent, long-term Hct control with reduced therapeutic PHLs compared to baseline. With a median of 3.8 years of treatment, rusfertide's safety profile was consistent with prior observations. Support Protagonist Therapeutics, Inc.

Abstract Background/rationale Primary myelofibrosis (PMF) and post-polycythemia vera/essential thrombocythemia (Post-PV/ET MF) (collectively termed MF) are chronic hematopoietic malignancies with progressive bone marrow collagen fibrosis, peripheral cytopenias, extramedullary hematopoiesis, splenomegaly, debilitating constitutional symptoms and heightened risk of transformation to acute leukemia. The only currently approved therapies for MF are JAK inhibitors (JAKi) which can provide significant improvements in splenomegaly and systemic symptoms but do not fundamentally change the pathogenesis of the disease. As a result, additional non-JAKi therapies for patients with MF after JAKi failure represent an important translational focus. Reparixin is a novel, potent and specific inhibitor of the chemokine CXCL8 (IL)-8. IL-8 is a member of a class of cytokines involved in leukocyte recruitment and activation in tissues. There are two known types of CXCL8 receptors – CXCR1 and CXCR2, which are expressed in neutrophils (Baggiolini M, Adv Immunol 1994). IL-8/CXCR1/2 signaling has been shown to be a key mediator of inflammatory signaling in MF patients. Hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells from patients with MF are enriched for a CXCL8/CXCR2 gene signature and display enhanced proliferation and fitness in response to an exogenous CXCL8 ligand in vitro. Genetic deletion or a small molecule inhibitor of CXCR2 in MF mouse adoptive transfer models ameliorates fibrosis, extends overall survival and improves hematologic parameters (Dunbar A, Blood 2023). This pre-clinical data validates targeting this pathway in clinical investigations. Study design This is an open-label, phase II study assessing the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of reparixin in patients with Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) intermediate-2, or high-risk PMF, post ET/PV MF either after prior treatment with, or those who are ineligible for treatment with a JAKi. Patients will receive oral reparixin 1200 mg three times daily on a four-week cycle for a core study period of 24 weeks. Patients who achieve at least clinical improvement (CI) or stable disease (SD) with one grade improvement in bone marrow fibrosis by International Working Group-Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Research and Treatment (IWG-MRT) criteria at the Cycle 7 response assessment may continue receiving reparixin until loss of response, disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, patients/physician withdrawal, or termination of study by sponsor. The study monitors both efficacy and toxicity using a Bayesian Optimal Phase 2 (BOP2) design. If response is observed in at least one patient out of 10 and safety is confirmed at the interim analysis, the trial will proceed to full enrollment of 26 patients. If more than three responses are observed in the total cohort, then a signal of activity is confirmed. Primary Objective: To estimate the efficacy of reparixin treatment in DIPSS intermediate-2 or high-risk subjects with PMF, post PV-MF, or post ET-MF. Secondary Objectives: To assess the efficacy of reparixin as determined by response assessment using IWG-MRT/ELN criteria at the end of Cycle 6 and Cycle 12. To assess the change in bone marrow fibrosis grade at the end of Cycle 6 and Cycle 12 with reparixin. To assess the safety of reparixin as measured by the adverse event profile of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. To assess spleen volume reduction by imaging after Cycle 6 and Cycle 12 as compared to baseline spleen volume. Key Exploratory Objectives: To evaluate changes in quality of life and patient-reported outcomes To conduct correlative studies to measure biomarkers of reparixin activity, such as Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) levels, bone marrow microvessel density, megakaryocyte number and peripheral blood CD34+ cell number, and patients with and without IL-8 secretion. Key inclusion criteria: Have a pathologically confirmed diagnosis of PMF, post-ET-MF, or post-PV-MF as per the WHO diagnostic criteria with intermediate-2 or higher risk disease by DIPSS Be refractory/resistant to or intolerant of/inappropriate for JAKi therapy Have adequate liver and kidney function Platelet count ≥ 25 x 109/L Bone marrow and peripheral blood blast count < 10% ANC ≥ 1000 mm3. MPN Research Consortium (MPN-RC) 120 is currently enrolling patients through the MPN-RC clinical sites throughout the United States. Clinical Trial Identifier NCT05835466

Background: PV is a myeloproliferative neoplasm that leads to excessive production of erythrocytes and increased platelet and leukocyte counts. The current standard of care is to use therapeutic phlebotomy (TP) with or without cytoreductive therapy (CRT) to treat PV. Over time, the CRT dose often needs to be increased to treat PV progression. Preliminary results from the phase 2 REVIVE study (NCT04057040) demonstrated that rusfertide was superior to placebo in achieving hematocrit (Hct) levels <45% and reducing or eliminating the need for TP in patients who were phlebotomy-dependent prior to study entry (Kremyanskaya et al. EHA2023. [Abstract LB2710]; Kremyanskaya et al. New Engl J Med 2024;390:723-35).Final data from REVIVE will be presented. Methods: In Part 1 (Weeks 1-29), subcutaneous rusfertide (starting dose: 20 mg q1w) was initiated and titrated to control Hct to <45%. In Part 2 (Weeks 29-41; blinded randomized withdrawal phase), patients were randomized to receive rusfertide or placebo. Randomized patients were eligible to participate in the open-label extension (OLE) portion of the study (Part 3), in which all patients could receive rusfertide and investigators could make CRT dose adjustments. Results: In Part 1, 70 patients were enrolled; 59 were randomized in Part 2. Fifty-eight patients continued to Part 3. As of 9 July 2024, 50 (71.4%), 37 (52.9%), and 17 (24.3%) patients received rusfertide for ≥2, ≥2.5, or ≥3 years, respectively.Overall, median (range) patient age was 57.5 years (27-77); the majority were male (70%) and had high-risk disease (55.7%). Overall, 52.9% and 47.1% of patients were treated with TP alone or TP plus CRT, respectively. Prior to enrollment, the estimated average (mean) phlebotomy rate (EAPR) in patients who enrolled on study was 8.5/year, which was reduced to <1.0/year in Part 1. In Part 2, the EAPR was <1.0/year and 6.6/year in the rusfertide and placebo groups, respectively. For patients who continued onto Part 3 and received rusfertide, the EAPR remained at <1.0/year. In Parts 1, 2, and 3, the mean (SD) weekly average rusfertide dose was 30.7 mg (12.2), 38.5 mg (21.3), and 44.9 mg (20.3), respectively. Rusfertide consistently maintained Hct <45%, including in patients receiving therapy for ≥3 years. Platelets increased following initiation of rusfertide therapy and stabilized over time; mean leukocyte counts remained stable. Prior to enrollment, iron-related parameters were consistent with systemic iron deficiency. Throughout the study, rusfertide resulted in the normalization of mean serum ferritin levels, increased mean transferrin saturation, and increased mean serum iron levels. Overall, mean corpuscular volume increased slightly over the duration of the study. Throughout the study, there was no evidence of increased markers of inflammation (eg, C-reactive protein or interleukin 6). The most common (≥20%) treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were injection site reactions (85.7%), fatigue (38.6%), COVID-19 (32.9%), pruritus (34.3%), arthralgia (30.0%), dizziness (30.0%), nausea (24.3%), headache (24.3%), and anemia (21.4%). Grade 3 TEAEs occurred in 25.7% of patients.There were no Grade 4 or 5 TEAEs. One patient developed acute myeloid leukemia after treatment discontinuation. After more than 150 patient-years of rusfertide exposure, malignancies (most of which were skin cancers) were reported in 11 patients (all had risk factors that may have contributed to the development of these malignancies). There was no obvious correlation between increasing exposure to rusfertide and malignancies reported. Six thrombotic events (5 arterial and 1 venous) occurred in 5 patients with high-risk PV. Conclusions: In REVIVE, rusfertide added to TP with or without CRT provided long-term durable control of Hct and decreased the need for TP. Patients are eligible to roll over to the phase 2 THRIVE OLE study (NCT06033586), which will continue to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of rusfertide for a total period of up to 5.8 years. The randomized phase 3 VERIFY study (NCT05210790) is ongoing and will evaluate rusfertide vs placebo in PV patients.

Introduction TP53 alterations (TP53+) are seen in <5% of patients (pts) with chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) but are more common in accelerated/blast phase (MPN-AP/BP) [Luque Paz D, et al 2020]. While pts with low-burden TP53+ (Variant allele frequency (VAF) <5%) may remain stable for years [Kubesova et al, 2018]; biallelic loss of TP53 is thought to confer higher risk for progression [Li et al, 2022] and worse overall survival (OS) than non-TP53+ pts [Rolles et al, 2023]. However, TP53 abnormalities have not been incorporated into currently utilized molecular based prediction models (MIPSS or MIPSS70) or compared with currently validated high molecular-risk (HMR) mutations (mut). We report the outcomes of the largest cohort of TP53+ MPN pts to date in comparison with HMR mut, and identify a VAF cut-off associated with highest risk of progression to MPN-AP/BP. Methods We retrospectively reviewed 2583 MPN pts from Mount Sinai Hospital (MSH) and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK) with at least one next generation sequencing (NGS) performed. Deidentified data from an additional cohort of 8 TP53+ MPN pts was received from University of Miami Sylvester Cancer Center (UMiami). Patient characteristics such as MPN subtype, gender, age at MPN diagnosis, driver mutation, thrombosis history were recorded. We also recorded date of transformation to MPN-AP/BP, dates of NGS testing, mutational and cytogenetic data, and survival status. We defined multi-hit TP53 as presence of =/>2 TP53mut, VAF > 50% or TP53 mutation + 17p deletion. Additional cohorts of pts with HMR mut (ASXL1, EZH2, IDH1/2, U2AF1, SRSF2 as per MIPSS70v.2) from MSH and non-TP53+ pts from the MPN-Research Consortium Tissue Bank were used as comparator arms. Patient characteristics were compared between TP53 single-hit and multi-hit using Chi-Sq test for categorical variables and Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables. Cumulative incidence function and Kaplan-Meier method were used to compare leukemic transformation and OS, respectively, between groups. Successive VAF levels with minimum groups of 25% of the total cohort were used to identify an optimal VAF cut-off. Results Of the 2583 MPN pts from MSH and MSK, 66 pts (2.6%) were found to have a TP53 mutation. Including 8 additional pts from UMiami, we analyzed a total of 74 TP53+ MPN pts; 40 single-hit and 34 multi-hit. Median age at MPN diagnosis was 61 years with a male predominance (60%). Distribution of driver mut was similar in single-hit vs multi-hit cohort with JAK2V617F being the most common (58%), whereas 11% of pts had triple negative disease . Thrombotic history was available for 45 TP53+ pts, with a high frequency of venous/arterial thrombosis (21/45 or 46.7%) in the TP53+ group as compared to 18.5% in the non-TP53+ MPN cohort (p= 0.0001). A significantly higher number of multi-hit TP53+ pts had a concurrent complex karyotype (79% vs 24% in single-hit; p<.001). MPN diagnosis at the time of detection of TP53+ was ET/PV (25.7%), MF (44.6%), MDS/MPN overlap syndrome (6.8%), MPN-U (2.7%) and MPN-AP/BP (20.3%), respectively. One or more genetic samples with TP53+ was available prior to transformation to MPN-AP/BP in 77% of pts (21/34 multi-hit; 36/40 single-hit) while a TP53+ was detected at the time of MPN-AP/BP diagnosis in the rest. Multi-hit TP53+ was associated with a significantly higher incidence of transformation to MPN-AP/BP as compared to single-hit; [65% vs 17.5%; HR=4.08 (1.71-9.71), p=0.0015]. Compared with HMR mut, multi-hit (HR=2.41; p=0.004) but not single-hit (HR=0.53; p=.277) TP53+ MPN pts were found to have a significantly increased risk of MPN-AP/BP transformation. One-year OS from the time of mutation detection was significantly inferior for both multi-hit (53.3%) and single-hit (75%) TP53+ pts as compared to HMR mut (98.8%, p=<.001). Cut-point analysis identified VAF >36% to be associated with the highest risk of transformation (HR=3.08) with lowest p-value (0.002). Conclusions Multi-hit TP53 alterations are associated with a significantly increased risk of leukemic evolution as compared to previously validated HMR mut, whereas both multi and single-hit TP53 mut are associated with worse OS highlighting the importance of TP53 in MPN disease progression.

Abstract The ACE-536-MF-001 trial enrolled patients with myelofibrosis (n = 95) into 4 cohorts: patients in cohorts 1 and 3A were non–transfusion dependent (NTD) and had anemia; patients in cohorts 2 and 3B were transfusion dependent (TD); and patients in cohort 3A/3B had stable ruxolitinib treatment before and during the study. All patients received luspatercept (1.0-1.75 mg/kg, 21-day cycles). Treatment was extended if clinical benefit was observed at day 169. The primary end point was anemia response rate (NTD, ≥1.5 g/dL hemoglobin increase from baseline; TD, transfusion-independence) over any 12-week period during the primary treatment period (weeks 1-24). Overall, 14% of patients in cohorts 1 and 3A, 10% in cohort 2, and 26% in cohort 3B met the primary end point. In cohorts 1 and 3A (NTD), 27% and 50% of patients, respectively, had mean hemoglobin increase of ≥1.5 g/dL from baseline. Among TD patients, ∼50% had ≥50% reduction in transfusion burden. Reduction in total symptom score was observed in all cohorts, with the greatest response rate seen in cohort 3A. Overall, 94% of patients had ≥1 adverse event (AE); 47% had ≥1 treatment-related AE (TRAE; 11% grade ≥3), most frequently hypertension (18%), managed with medical intervention. One patient had a serious TRAE leading to luspatercept discontinuation. Nine patients died on treatment (unrelated to study drug). In most patients, ruxolitinib dose and spleen size remained stable. In patients with myelofibrosis, luspatercept improved anemia and transfusion burden across cohorts; the safety profile was consistent with previous studies. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT03194542.

Abstract Ruxolitinib reduces spleen volume, improves symptoms, and increases survival in patients with intermediate- or high-risk myelofibrosis. However, suboptimal response may occur, potentially because of signaling via the phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K)/protein kinase B pathway. This phase 2 study evaluated dosing, efficacy, and safety of add-on PI3Kδ inhibitor parsaclisib for patients with primary or secondary myelofibrosis with suboptimal response to ruxolitinib. Eligible patients remained on a stable ruxolitinib dose and received add-on parsaclisib 10 or 20 mg, once daily for 8 weeks, and once weekly thereafter (daily-to-weekly dosing; n = 32); or parsaclisib 5 or 20 mg, once daily for 8 weeks, then 5 mg once daily thereafter (all-daily dosing; n = 42). Proportion of patients achieving a ≥10% decrease in spleen volume at 12 weeks was 28% for daily-to-weekly dosing and 59.5% for all-daily dosing. Proportions of patients achieving ≥50% decrease at week 12 in Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form and Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Symptom Assessment Form symptom scores were 14% and 18% for daily-to-weekly dosing, and 28% and 32% for all-daily dosing, respectively. Most common nonhematologic treatment-emergent adverse events were nausea (23%), diarrhea (22%), abdominal pain and fatigue (each 19%), and cough and dyspnea (each 18%). New-onset grade 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia were observed in 19% of patients, each dosed daily-to-weekly, and in 26% and 7% of patients dosed all-daily, respectively, managed with dose interruptions. Hemoglobin levels remained steady. The addition of parsaclisib to stable-dose ruxolitinib can reduce splenomegaly and improve symptoms, with manageable toxicity in patients with myelofibrosis with suboptimal response to ruxolitinib. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02718300.

Introduction HMAs are the only approved therapy for CMML. In order to improve response rates and survival, the addition of VEN has been utilized in both CMML and after blast transformation (CMML-BT) with conflicting results in small single center studies. To clarify the role of upfront HMA+VEN in CMML and CMML-BT, we performed a large multicenter analysis. Methods We included patients with HMA-naïve CMML and CMML-BT treated with combination HMA and VEN from 4 academic centers. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) with secondary outcomes including overall response rate (ORR) by 2015 MDS/MPN IWG criteria for CMML and 2022 ELN criteria for CMML-BT. To better appreciate the benefit of adding VEN to HMA treatment, we also performed 1:1 propensity score matched (PSM) analysis of patients treated with HMA alone as upfront therapy for CMML or CMML-BT. Matching was based on age, sex, ECOG performance status, CPSS-Mol, blood counts, peripheral and bone marrow blasts. Results Eighty-nine patients were treated with frontline HMA+VEN, 51 CMML and 38 CMML-BT (5 had received HMA alone for prior CMML). The median age was 71 years, 70% were male, and 83% had ECOG 0-1. Among CMML patients, 55% had MP-CMML subtype, 65% had CMML-2 and 12%, 30%, 58% were CPSS-mol intermediate-1, intermediate-2 and high risk, respectively. In the entire cohort, ASXL1 (63%), TET2 (47%), SRSF2 (39%) and RUNX1 (27%) were the most commonly mutated genes and 55% of patients harbored a RAS mutation ( KRAS [20%], NRAS [18%], CBL [13%], NF1 [11%], PTPN11 [9%]). For HMA combination partner, 46 (52%) were treated with azacitidine, 35 (39%) with decitabine, and 8 (9%) with both during their VEN course. During a median follow-up time of 15.8 months (mos) 52 patients (58%) died: 23 (45%) with CMML and 29 (76%) with CMML-BT. Among CMML patients, the ORR was 90%, including complete remission (CR) in 22%, complete cytogenic remission (CCR) in 4%, optimal marrow response (CMR) in 50%, and partial marrow response (PMR) in 6%. The OS of CMML patients was 25.1 mo (95% CI 15.7 - NR). A PSM population of HMA patients matched to HMA+VEN treated patients showing similar baseline characteristics. ORR was significantly higher with HMA+VEN (95%) as compared those treated with HMA alone (46%), p < 0.001. However, there was no significant OS difference between HMA+VEN vs HMA alone (19.1 mos vs 19.1 mos, p = 0.85, Figure 1). For CMML-BT patients, the ORR of HMA+VEN was 81% including CR in 17%, CR with partial hematologic recover (CRh) in 3%, CR with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi) in 28%, morphologic leukemia-free state (MLFS) in 22% and partial response (PR) in 11%. The OS of CMML-BT patients was 8 mos (95% CI 4.6 - 26.2). A PSM population of CMML-BT patients treated with HMA alone showed a significantly increased ORR with HMA+VEN (82% vs 40%, p = 0.039). However, there was no difference in OS (7.49 mos vs 9.26 mos, p = 0.83, Figure 2). Among HMA-VEN treated patients, achievement of a CR was associated with an improved OS in the CMML (HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.13 - 0.75) and CMML-BT (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.19 - 0.74). No predictors of response were identified, including the presence of a RAS mutation. In terms of safety, 7 patients (7.9%) had a grade 3/4 (G3/4) neutropenic infection and 2 patients (2.2%) had a G3/4 hemorrhagic event while being treated with HMA+VEN. A total of 29 patients went on to receive allogeneic transplant (alloSCT): 22 (43%) with CMML and 7 (18%) with CMML-BT. CMML patients who underwent alloSCT after HMA+VEN were younger as compared to non-transplanted patients (64 vs 74 years, p < 0.0001), but had otherwise similar baseline characteristics including stage, CPSS-mol category and prevalence of RAS mutations. Similarly, CMML-BT patients bridged to alloSCT were younger (66 vs 74 years, p < 0.002) and had a better ECOG performance status (p = 0.047). Of patients who received alloSCT, 10 patients (34%) died, 5 with CMML and 5 with CMML-BT. The median OS after alloSCT was 26.7 mo. Conclusions Although the use of VEN with HMA in the upfront treatment of CMML and AML secondary to CMML results in higher response rates compared to HMA alone, this combination does not improve survival based on this multi-center PSM analysis. The current sample size of CMML-BT may limit detection of OS differences between treatment groups. The role of VEN to reduce blasts and serve as a bridge to alloSCT, particularly after HMA failure, requires further investigation in larger studies in both the CMML and CMML-BT populations.