Zhang, Jennie

Introduction: MF is a clonal stem cell disorder characterized by progressive bone marrow failure, extramedullary hematopoiesis, and debilitating constitutional symptoms. Approximately 60% of pts develop anemia within a year of diagnosis; pts who are transfusion dependent have worse survival and quality-of-life outcomes (Tefferi A, et al. Mayo Clin Proc 2012;87:25-33). Treatment for MF-associated anemia remains critically unaddressed, with no approved therapies available. Luspatercept is a first-in-class erythroid maturation agent that has been shown to increase hemoglobin and reduce transfusion burden in pts with myelodysplastic syndromes (Fenaux P, et al. N Engl J Med 2020;382:140-51) and β-thalassemia (Cappellini MD, et al. N Engl J Med 2020;382:1219-31). Pts have also achieved multiple response episodes with luspatercept (Fenaux P, et al. Blood 2019;134:841). We previously reported findings from the ongoing open-label, phase 2 ACE-536-MF-001 trial evaluating luspatercept in pts with MF-associated anemia (Gerds AT, et al. Blood 2019;134:557). Here we report updated study results, focusing on response in pts requiring RBC transfusions. Methods: 79 pts with MF and anemia were enrolled (Figure). Of these, 43 were requiring RBC transfusions, defined as 6-12 U/84 d prior to treatment, or 4-12 U/84 d for the 3 expansion cohort pts. Pts in Cohort 3B received a stable ruxolitinib (RUX) dose for ≥ 16 wks (40 wks for expansion cohort pts), whereas Cohort 2 pts did not (Figure). Pts in Cohort 3B received a median RUX dose of 20 mg/d (range 5-40) for a median of 73 wks (range 29-359) prior to treatment. Pts received luspatercept every 21 d at a starting dose of 1.0 mg/kg (1.33 mg/kg for 3 expansion cohort pts in Cohort 3B), with doses escalating up to 1.75 mg/kg; 81% and 50% of pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B escalated to 1.75 mg/kg. Primary endpoint for pts receiving transfusions was RBC transfusion-independence (RBC-TI) for ≥ 12 consecutive wks within the first 24 wks on study. However, as responses were observed that did not fall within the 24-wk response window, additional assessments were conducted for the entire treatment duration for RBC-TI and ≥ 50% decrease in RBC transfusions (minimum 4 RBC U decrease) from baseline. Intent-to-treat data were analyzed as of March 29, 2020. Results: Pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B received a median of 8 cycles of luspatercept (range 1-39), for a median (mean) duration of 24 (31) and 23 (39) wks, respectively. Pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B received a median of 2.7 RBC U/28 d (range 1-5) and 2.7 RBC U/28 d (range 2-4), respectively. For the primary endpoint, 2/21 (10%) and 6/22 (27%) pts receiving transfusions in Cohorts 2 and 3B achieved RBC-TI over any consecutive 12 wks during the first 24 wks. Median time to start of first RBC-TI response period in Cohorts 2 and 3B was 1.5 days and 37 days; median duration of response was 49 wks (range 16-82) and 42 wks (range 12-111), respectively. When assessing the entire treatment period, 4/21 (19%) and 8/22 (36%) pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B achieved RBC-TI ≥ 12 wks, respectively. 25% of the RBC-TI responders in both cohorts experienced 2 separate episodes of RBC-TI ≥ 12 wks. Median cumulative duration of all individual ≥ 12-wk response episodes of RBC-TI was 59 wks (range 24-82) in Cohort 2 and 55 wks (range 12-116) in Cohort 3B. 8/21 (38%) and 10/22 (46%) pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B achieved a ≥ 50% reduction in RBC transfusion burden (minimum ≥ 4 U reduction) over 12 wks; of these, 38% and 20% of responders in Cohorts 2 and 3B experienced 2 separate ≥ 12-wk response episodes, and 1 pt (13%) in Cohort 2 experienced 3 separate responses. 4/15 (27%) and 8/14 (57%) pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B who reached 24 wks of treatment achieved clinical benefit and therefore continued luspatercept on an ongoing basis. Safety is reported for all 79 pts on study. 5 (6%) pts had grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs); these AEs were diarrhea (n = 2), dehydration (n = 1), and hypertension (n = 3). There were no treatment-related deaths. Treatment-related AEs (any grade) occurring in ≥ 5% of pts were hypertension (13%), bone pain (9%), and diarrhea (5%). 8 (10%) pts had ≥ 1 AE leading to discontinuation. 16 (20%) pts remain on treatment. Conclusions: These longer-term findings suggest durable activity of luspatercept in pts with MF-associated anemia. In addition, a quarter of pts receiving transfusions achieved more than one ≥ 12-wk episode of RBC-TI response with luspatercept. The incidence of grade 3-4 AEs with luspatercept was low. Disclosures Gerds: Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Research Funding; AstraZeneca/MedImmune: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Apexx Oncology: Consultancy; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Imago Biosciences: Research Funding. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Blueprint: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Passamonti:Novartis: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Kremyanskaya:Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Protagonist Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Gotlib:CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Kartos: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding. McCaul:BMS: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau. Ribrag:argenX: Research Funding; pharmamar: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; servier: Consultancy; nanostring: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AZD: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Infinity: 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; Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; gustave roussy comprehensive cancer center: Current Employment; EPZ: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; epizyme (EPZ): Research Funding. Mead:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; CTI: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy. Harrison:Roche: Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; CTI Biopharma Corp: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Promedior: Honoraria. Mesa:Sierra Oncology: Consultancy; LaJolla Pharmaceutical Company: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Incyte: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding. Kiladjian:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Barosi:Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Gerike:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Shetty:BMS: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Pariseau:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Miranda:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Schwickart:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Giuseppi:BMS: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Zhang:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Backstrom:Acceleron Pharma: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; BMS: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Verstovsek:AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma Corp: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; ItalPharma: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines Corp: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Protagonist Therapeutics: Research Funding.

Introduction: Approximately two-thirds of patients with primary or post-essential thrombocythemia/polycythemia vera myelofibrosis (MF) have anemia, many of whom require red blood cell (RBC) transfusions. In this heavily transfused population there are severely limited treatment options; effective treatment for anemia in MF is a critically unmet medical need. Luspatercept is a first-in-class erythroid maturation agent which binds to select TGF-β superfamily ligands to reduce aberrant Smad2/3 signaling and enhance late-stage erythropoiesis. Here we report the interim results of the ongoing open-label, phase 2 trial evaluating luspatercept in patients with MF and anemia. Methods: Seventy-four patients with MF and anemia were enrolled, including 41 not receiving concomitant ruxolitinib at study entry who received either no RBC transfusions (n = 20; Cohort 1) or 2-4 RBC U/28 d in the 12 wks prior to treatment (n = 21; Cohort 2). Thirty-three enrolled patients were receiving a stable dose of ruxolitinib for at least 16 wks, of which 14 were not receiving RBC transfusions (Cohort 3A) and 19 were (Cohort 3B). Patients in Cohorts 3A and 3B received a median dose of ruxolitinib of 20 mg/d (range, 5-50 mg/d) for a median of 41 and 43 wks, respectively. Patients received luspatercept every 21 d at a starting dose of 1.0 mg/kg in doses escalating up to 1.75 mg/kg. The primary endpoint in patients not receiving transfusions was a hemoglobin (Hb) increase ≥ 1.5 g/L at every assessment from baseline for ≥ 12 consecutive wks, within the first 24 wks on study. In patients receiving RBC transfusions, the primary endpoint was RBC transfusion-independence (RBC-TI) for ≥ 12 consecutive wks, within the first 24 wks on study. Additional endpoints included proportion of patients achieving mean Hb increase ≥ 1.5 g/dL in Cohorts 1 and 3A, and ≥ 50% decrease in RBC transfusions (minimum 4 RBC U decrease from baseline) in Cohorts 2 and 3B, with both responses lasting ≥ 12 consecutive wks, within 24 wks of study entry. Intent-to-treat (ITT) data were analyzed as of May 10, 2019. Results: Median age was 71 y (range, 50-88 y) and 42 (57%) were male. Median interval from MF diagnosis to study entry was 3.3 y (range, 19 d-13.5 y). Seven patients were Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) intermediate-1, 58 were intermediate-2, and 8 were high risk. Median Hb concentration at study entry was 8.8 g/dL (range, 6.7-9.8 g/dL) for Cohort 1 and 8.6 g/dL (range, 6.7-9.1 g/dL) for Cohort 3A. Patients in Cohort 2 received a median of 2.7 RBC U/28 d (range, 1-5 U/28 d) and patients in Cohort 3B received a median of 2.3 RBC U/28 d (range, 2-4 U/28 d). Patients received a median of 8 cycles of luspatercept (range, 1-24 cycles). Efficacy data are displayed in the Table, per ITT data. Two of twenty (10%) and 3/14 (21%) patients in Cohorts 1 and 3A, respectively, achieved an absolute Hb increase ≥ 1.5 g/dL at every measurement from baseline over any consecutive 12 wks. Two of twenty-one (10%) and 6/19 (32%) patients in Cohorts 2 and 3B, respectively, achieved RBC-TI over any consecutive 12 wks. Median duration of Hb response was 20 wks (range, 12-27 wks) in Cohort 1 and 12 wks (range, 12-13 wks) in Cohort 3A. Median duration of RBC-TI was 23 wks (range, 16-31 wks) in Cohort 2 and 32 wks (range, 12-65 wks) in Cohort 3B. Three (15%) and 8 (57%) patients in Cohorts 1 and 3A, respectively, achieved a mean Hb increase of ≥ 1.5 g/dL. Eight (38%) and 10 (53%) patients in Cohorts 2 and 3B, respectively, achieved a ≥ 50% reduction in RBC transfusion burden from baseline. Ruxolitinib exposure remained stable throughout the 24-wk treatment period in both Cohorts 3A and 3B. There was no difference in spleen size between responders and non-responders. Four (5%) patients had grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs). There were no treatment-related deaths. Treatment-related AEs occurring in ≥ 3% of patients were hypertension (11%), bone pain (8%), and diarrhea (4%). Seven (9%) patients had ≥ 1 AE resulting in treatment discontinuation; 23 (31%) remain on study. Conclusions: The initial results from this ongoing study suggest clinically significant activity of luspatercept in patients with MF-associated anemia, including those receiving concomitant ruxolitinib. A minority of AEs were grade 3-4 in severity, consistent with previous studies in MDS and beta-thalassemia. Disclosures Gerds: CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Imago Biosciences: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Research Funding. Vannucchi:Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CTI: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Passamonti:Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Kremyanskaya:La Jolla: Consultancy; Incyte, Celgene, Constellation, Protagonist.: Research Funding. Gotlib:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Promedior: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kartos: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding. Ribrag:BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AZ: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; argenX: Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Epizyme: Honoraria, Research Funding; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mead:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/accommodation expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Harrison:Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; CTI: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria; Promedior: Honoraria; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AOP: Honoraria; Shire: Speakers Bureau. Mesa:Shire: Honoraria; Promedior: Research Funding; Genotech: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; LaJolla: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Samus: Research Funding; Baxalta: Consultancy; Galena Biopharma: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy; PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; Incyte: Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding. Kiladjian:AOP Orphan: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Gale:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Laadem:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pariseau:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Gerike:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Zhang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Linde:Abbott Laboratories, Inc.: Equity Ownership; Acceleron Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership; Fibrogen, Inc.: Equity Ownership. Reynolds:Acceleron Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership. Verstovsek:Gilead: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma Corp: Research Funding; Genetech: Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines Corp: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Research Funding; Pharma Essentia: Research Funding; Astrazeneca: Research Funding; Ital Pharma: Research Funding; Protaganist Therapeutics: Research Funding; Constellation: Consultancy; Pragmatist: Consultancy; Roche: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Luspatercept is an investigational therapy that is not approved for any use in any country. Luspatercept is currently being evaluated for potential use in patients with anemia due to myelodysplastic syndromes, beta-thalassemia, or myelofibrosis.

Abstract Abstract 2859 Introduction: Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia who relapse following purine-analog or bendamustine-based treatments have a poor prognosis. These patients have limited therapeutic options and novel agents with alternative mechanisms of action are needed. In phase 1 and 2 trials, escalating dose regimens of the immunomodulatory agent lenalidomide demonstrated promising activity with relapsed/refractory CLL. Of interest, the data indicate that superior efficacy might be achieved by a starting dose above 2.5 mg daily lenalidomide. A phase 2 trial (CLL-009 study) was developed to investigate the safety of different starting doses of lenalidomide followed by a step-wise dose escalation as tolerated in relapsed/refractory CLL. Methods: In this ongoing trial, eligible subjects with relapsed/refractory CLL who have received at least 1 prior treatment regimen are being enrolled. Subjects are randomized 1 :1 :1 to receive a double-blinded starting dose of 5 mg, 10 mg, or 15 mg oral lenalidomide on days 1–28 of each 28-day cycle. The primary objectives are to determine the safety and efficacy of the different lenalidomide starting doses of 5 mg, 10 mg or 15 mg daily, followed by an intra-patient escalation up to a maximum of 25 mg daily using a Bayesian approach. Based on individual patient tolerability, the daily lenalidomide dose can be escalated every 28 days by 5 mg increments. Dose reductions also occur in 5 mg increments; however, dose levels below 5 mg sequentially include 2.5 mg and 1.25 mg daily. Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) prophylaxis, comprised of oral hydration and allopurinol 300 mg/day is initiated at least 3 days prior to starting study drug and for a minimum of the first 3 treatment cycles. This adaptive design trial is considering joint efficacy and toxicity outcomes to stop randomization of less promising arms. Accrual to a starting dose arm will be stopped if unacceptable toxicities and/or high progression rate are observed in that arm. A total of 90 subjects will be enrolled in the study. Results: To date, 51 subjects with a median age of 63 years (range 39–78) have been enrolled. Subjects to date are primarily male (65%) and Caucasian (84%), and slightly more than half (53%) are ≥ 65 years old. Cytogenetic data is available for 42 subjects; 10 have del(11q), 8 have del(17p), and 24 have del(13q). Overall, 31 subjects had at least one cytogenetic deletion. Based on the Binet and Rai staging systems: 3 (6%), 10 (20%) and 15 (29%) of subjects are stage A, B and C, respectively; and, 6 (12%), 7 (14%) and 7 (14%) subjects are low, intermediate or high-risk disease, respectively. For 3 (6%) subjects the Binet/Rai staging is currently unknown. The most common hematological grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) thus far include neutropenia (41% of patients) and thrombocytopenia (24%). The most common non-hematological grade 3/4 AEs include fatigue (12%) and tumor flare (12%). Only 1 subject (2%) experienced tumor lysis syndrome of grade 1. Over half of the subjects (53%) remain on therapy; 24 (47%) subjects have discontinued treatment. The longest subject has completed 17 cycles, and remains on study medication. The most common reasons for study discontinuation include disease progression (n = 8) and AEs (n = 10). To date, 20 subjects (54% of eligible patients) have successfully dose escalated above their respective starting double blinded dose level, including 3, 3, 2 and 12 subjects undergoing 4, 3, 2, and 1 dose escalations, respectively. As 14 patients are still in the first cycle of the study, a total of 20 subjects have had no dose level reduction or escalations. The average duration of treatment is 4.34 cycles, and the median number of cycles is 3. Efficacy evaluations are completed monthly after 3 months of study drug treatment. By investigator assessment, 34 subjects have been evaluated to date, including 1 (3%) complete response, 12 (35%) partial response, 7 (21%) stable disease, 10 (29%) progressive disease and 4 (12%) not evaluable. Conclusion: The independent Data Monitoring Committee, as of March 24, 2011 (N=41), recommended that accrual into all three treatment arms should continue as planned, suggesting all three starting doses were tolerated. To date, the ORR is 38% (13/34 evaluable subjects), and 54% of subjects (20/37) have dose escalated at least once. In this relapsed/refractory CLL population lenalidomide appears active, and completion of accrual will hopefully demonstrate the appropriate starting dose. Disclosures: Wendtner: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Off Label Use: lenalidomide in cll. Goldberg:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Bloor:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Stilgenbauer:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Cymbalista:Roche: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Honoraria; Genzyme: Honoraria. Kipps:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbott Industries: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; Igenica: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Purse:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhang:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mei:Celgene: Employment.

Abstract Introduction: Despite recent advances in available treatments, chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) remains an incurable disease, and the vast majority of patients (pts) will relapse and require additional lines of therapy. Thus, prolonging remission is a key treatment goal in CLL. This multicenter, randomized, double-blinded phase 3 trial (NCT00774345) was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide (LEN) vs placebo (PBO) as maintenance therapy in previously treated CLL pts. Methods: Eligible CLL pts must have had at least a partial response (PR) to second-line therapy. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive either LEN 2.5 mg once daily on days 1-28 of the first 28-day cycle, or matching PBO. If LEN was well tolerated, escalation to 5 mg/day was permitted from cycle 2, and further escalation to 10 mg/day at cycle 7 and thereafter. Pts were stratified by their response at the end of second-line therapy (PR, nodular PR, complete response [CR], or CR with incomplete bone marrow recovery; vs minimal residual disease [MRD]-negative CR by flow cytometry); age (≤ 70 vs > 70 years); and presence of at least one of the following poor prognostic factors: del(11q), del(17p), unmutated IGHV, or b2M > 0.4 mg/L (Yes vs No vs Unknown). Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS; IRAC assessed) and overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included: safety, tumor response, duration of response, second PFS (PFS2, time from randomization to second disease progression or death), and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Results: Overall, 314 pts were enrolled (LEN, n = 160; PBO, n = 154). Baseline characteristics were balanced between the treatment arms: median age was 63 years (range 37-82) and 63 years (range 37-84), 71.9% and 72.1% were male, 9.4% and 11.7% had MRD-negative CR to second-line treatment, and 47.5% and 47.4% had at least one poor prognostic factor, in the LEN and PBO arms, respectively. On review of the primary analysis, 30 Sept 2015 data cutoff, the required number of progression events to complete the co-primary analysis had occurred, and the data monitoring committee recommended that the study be unblinded. Median follow-up time was 31.5 months, and the median PFS was significantly longer for LEN vs PBO: 33.9 vs 9.2 months, respectively (HR 0.40 [95% CI 0.29, 0.55]; P < 0.001). At the time of the analysis there were 86 deaths and there was no significant difference in the OS (HR 0.96 [95% CI 0.63, 1.48]; P = 0.856). Subsequent CLL therapy was received by 35.7% of pts in the LEN arm and 58.4% of pts in the PBO arm, of these pts 16% in the LEN arm and 20% in the PBO arm were treated with a BTK or PI3K inhibitor. Median PFS2 was significantly longer for LEN vs PBO: 57.5 vs 32.7 months, respectively (HR 0.46 [95% CI 0.29, 0.70]; P <0.001). Median number of treatment cycles received was 18 vs 9 cycles, for LEN vs PBO, respectively; a higher proportion of pts in the LEN arm started ≥25 cycles vs the PBO arm (38.9% vs 24.0%, respectively). Median dose intensity in the LEN arm was 4.2 mg/day. The most common adverse events (AEs) of all grades were neutropenia (66.2% vs 30.5%) and diarrhea (40.8% vs 16.2%) in the LEN vs PBO arm, respectively. Febrile neutropenia occurred in 1.9% vs 0%, deep vein thrombosis in 1.9% vs 0%, and pulmonary embolism in 2.5% vs 0.6% of pts in the LEN vs PBO arm, respectively. Most common grade 3/4 AEs were neutropenia (59.9% vs 22.7%), thrombocytopenia (16.6% vs 6.5%), and diarrhea (8.3% vs 0.6%) in the LEN vs PBO arm, respectively; all other grade 3/4 AEs occurred in <5% of pts in either arm. While there was a significant difference in the incidence of neutropenia, the rate of grade 3/4 infections was 16.6% for LEN vs 10.4% for PBO-treated pts. There were 13 (8.3%) vs 14 (9.1%) pts with at least one invasive second primary malignancy (SPM) in the LEN vs PBO arm, respectively. Hematologic invasive SPMs occurred in 7 vs 2 pts, and solid tumor invasive SPMs occurred in 7 vs 12 pts, in the LEN vs PBO arm, respectively. Overall, 44 pts in the LEN arm and 41 pts in the PBO arm died; 1 pt died on treatment in the LEN arm, and 2 pts in the PBO arm. There was no clinically meaningful difference in HRQoL for LEN vs PBO, as measured by FACT-Leu and EQ-5D, during maintenance treatment. Conclusions: LEN maintenance therapy significantly improved PFS from 9.2 to 33.9 months following second-line treatment in pts with CLL. The incidence of invasive SPMs was similar in both arms, and LEN maintenance treatment had an expected and acceptable safety profile. Disclosures Foà: Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Gilead,: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer, Ariad: Speakers Bureau; Genentech, Janssen, BMS: Consultancy. Schuh:Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Celgene, Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Zaritskey:Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Semochkin:Celgene, Sandoz, Novartis, Astellas, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Celgene, Bayer Healthcare, Astellas Pharma Inc.: Research Funding; City Clinical Hospital 52, Moscow, Russia: Consultancy. Simpson:Amgen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Celgene, Roche, Janssen: Honoraria. Vokurka:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Zhang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Purse:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Abstract Abstract 3925 Introduction: CLL patients (pts) who relapse following purine-analog or bendamustine-based treatments have a poor prognosis. These pts have limited therapeutic options and novel agents with alternative mechanisms of action are needed. Several phase 1 and 2 trials in rel/ref CLL showed promising activity with escalating dose regimens of lenalidomide (LEN). In other phase II studies improved clinical responses to lenalidomide appeared to correlate with dose levels > 5mg/day. This phase 2 trial investigates the safety of LEN initiated at 3 different starting doses followed by a step-wise dose escalation as tolerated in rel/ref CLL. Methods: In this ongoing trial, eligible pts with rel/ref CLL who have received ≥ 1 prior treatment regimen containing purine-analog or bendamustine are being enrolled. The objectives of this study are to evaluate primarily the safety and secondarily the efficacy of different LEN dose regimens. Pts are randomized 1:1:1 to receive a double-blinded starting dose of 5 mg, 10 mg, or 15 mg oral LEN on days 1–28 of each 28-day cycle. In all 3 treatment arms, the dose is escalated by 5 mg increments every 28 days to reach a maximum dose of 25 mg/d, depending on tolerability. In instances of poor tolerability, dose reductions also occur in 5 mg steps. Pts are stratified by relapsed versus refractory status to their last purine-analog or bendamustine-based treatment regimen and according to age (< 65 vs ≥ 65 years). Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) prophylaxis comprises of oral hydration and allopurinol 300 mg/day and is initiated ≥ 3 days prior to starting study drug and for a minimum of the first 3 treatment cycles. A total of 105 pts are planned for enrollment to the study. Per protocol, unblinded interim analyses were conducted by the independent Data Monitoring Committee (DMC) after 18 subjects completed 1 cycle and continue at 13-week intervals. Results: To date, 95 pts are enrolled at a median age of 64 years (range 32–81). Enrolled pts are primarily male (67%) and Caucasian (92%). Cytogenetic data are available for 73 pts; 21% have del(17p), 55% have del(13q), 25% have del(11q), and of 72 patients evaluable for trisomy 12, 11 patients (15%) tested positive. IGVH is unmutated in 77% of 77 evaluable pts and 44% of 84 evaluable pts are ZAP70-positive. Based on the Binet and Rai staging systems 9 (10%), 25 (26%) and 24 (25%) of subjects are stage A, B and C, respectively; 7 (7%), 12 (13%) and 16 (17%) subjects are low, intermediate or high-risk disease, respectively. For 2 (2%) subjects the Binet/Rai staging is currently unknown. Overall, 19 pts (20%) received prior bendamustine-containing treatment and 71 pts (75%) received prior fludarabine-based treatment. The median number of prior therapies was 3 (range 1–10). Most common hematological grade ≥ 3 AEs include neutropenia (62%) and thrombocytopenia (34%). At baseline, 19% of pts presented with grade 1–2 neutropenia. The most common non-hematological ≥ grade 3 AEs include pneumonia (13%), tumor flare (13%), and fatigue (11%). TLS was reported in 3 pts (3%): grade 1, 3, and 4. In total, 8 grade 5 events were reported, 3 of which were suspected to be related to LEN: 2 cases of pneumonia and 1 death for unknown cause. At the time of the cut-off, 59 pts (62%) have discontinued treatment. Most common reasons for treatment discontinuation include disease progression (n = 20) and AEs (n = 20). To date, 47 pts (49%) have dose escalated above their starting dose levels of which 12 patients escalated to the highest dose level (25 mg daily). 18 subjects have had no dose level reduction or escalations and 1 patient is still in the first cycle of the study. Average duration of treatment is 6.5 cycles, and median number of cycles is 4. Efficacy evaluations are completed monthly after 3 months of study drug treatment. At time of the data reporting, 5 pts were on study drug but did not reach the first assessment at cycle. For the 90 pts evaluable for response, the investigator's assessment indicates 2 pts (2%) reached CR, 36 (40%) achieved PR, 33 (37%) patients had SD, and 19 (21%) pts progressed. Conclusion: The independent DMC, as of 14 June, 2012 (N=95), recommended that accrual into all three treatment arms should continue as planned, suggesting all three starting doses were well tolerated. To date, the ORR is 42% and 49% of pts were dose escalated at least once. In this rel/ref CLL population LEN appears active, and completion of accrual will clarify the appropriate dose at which to initiate therapy. Disclosures: Wendtner: Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Off Label Use: use of lenalidomie in relapsed/refractory CLL. Hallek:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hillmen:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria. Gregory:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Stilgenbauer:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Kipps:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Purse:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mei:Celgene Corporation: Employment.