Bonatz, K.

Abstract BACKGROUND: The presence of constitutional symptoms has been associated with increased mortality risk in myelofibrosis (MF) (Blood 2010;115(9):1703-8). New therapies exist which alleviate the severe symptom burden profile observed in MF patients but are only approved for use in those with intermediate-2 or high risk disease (N Engl J Med 2012;366:787-798). However, it has been proposed that there are patients who may benefit from symptom based treatment regardless of prognostic score (Am Soc Hematol Educ Program 2014;2014:277-286). We have recently characterized symptom score cutoffs at which patients would statistically benefit from treatment based on symptom scores alone (Scherber et. al. EHA 2016: a2250). These treatment thresholds included aMyeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form Total Symptom Score (MPN-SAF TSS or MPN-10) total score of greater than or equal to 20, a worst individual item score of greater than 5, or a combined criteria of those with both an MPN-10 total score of greater than or equal to 20 and a worst individual item score greater than 5. This abstract represents an additional analysis of our MF cohort to better characterize the profile of patients who meet criteria for symptom-based therapy. METHODS: Patient demographics, symptom burden via the MPN-10 score (JCO 2012;30(33)4098-103), and disease traits were collected from MF patients and their physicians at a single time point during therapy. Previously we identified MPN-10 cutoffs via AkaikeÕs Information Criterion (AIC) analysis (Ecology 2014;95: 631-6), which represented the optimal model among all models specified for the data at hand to determine which patients would most benefit from symptom-directed therapy. RESULTS: Demographics. 695 MF patients without previousruxolitinib therapy were included in this analysis. Overall, of 455 patients (65.4%) fit a cutoff of having a single worst symptom item of greater than 5/10. 401 patients (57.7%) had a MPN-10 score of equal to or greater than 20. A total of 381 (54.8%) patients fit both of these criteria. A distribution of worse MPN-10 individual scores is shown in Table 1. Mean TSS score was 26.4 (SD=17.7). Symptom Criteria Associations. Demographics and disease traits: Neither mean age or age greater than 60 was significantly associated with meeting any of the symptom score cutoff criteria. Females were significantly more likely to meet any of the symptom score cutoffs (for all criteria, p=0.0003 or less). Patients with splenomegaly, particularly spleen size of greater than 15cm below the LCM, were significantly more likely than those with a normal sized spleen to meet any of the three criteria (spleen enlargement of any size p=0.014 or less; spleen greater than 15cm p=0.0114 or less). Patients who met any of the three symptom criteria tended to have a longer MPN duration, although this trend did not meet significance. A prior history of thrombosis was not associated with achieving any cutoff criterions. Symptom burden: Individuals who met the any symptom criteria were significantly more likely to have higher DIPSS prognostic risk score (for all p=0.0002 or less). Laboratory values: For those meeting criteria for a worst symptom greater than 5, mean WBC was 11.7 vs 9.1 x 109/L (p=0.025) and platelet count was 238.7 versus 329.1 (p=0.023). For those meeting criteria for a TSS greater than or equal to 20, mean WBC was 11.8 vs 9.5 x 109/L (p=0.04). For individuals meeting both criteria, mean WBC was 11.9 vs 9.5 x 109/L (p=0.034). The presence of peripheral blasts were significantly more common in patients with an individual worst symptom score greater than 5 (p=0.0364). Hemoglobin level was not significantly associated with symptom criteria for any cutoffs. CONCLUSION: Our analysis indicates that patients who would be treated based on symptom criteria are similar to patients who would be treated based on high risk features such as high DIPSS prognostic score, concerning blood count abnormalities (i.e., leukocytosis, thrombocytopenia, presence of peripheral blasts), and splenomegaly (particularly massive splenomegaly). Thrombosis history and age were not associated with criterion cutoff assignment, and it is notable that elderly age nor history of thrombosis alone would likely alter treatment choice other than anticoagulation. This data supports that JAK2 inhibitor treatment be strongly considered in patients meeting symptom based criteria. Disclosures Dueck: Bayer: Honoraria. Kiladjian:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Zweegman:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding. Schouten:Sanofi: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Etienne:ARIAD: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau. Harrison:Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Baxaltra: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Radia:Novartis: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Cervantes:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Baxalta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Mesa:Promedior: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Galena: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy.

Abstract BACKGROUND: Symptom burden in essential thrombocythemia (ET) and polycythemia vera (PV) is severe even among individuals with low risk disease (Blood 2012. 12;123(24):3803-10). New therapies exist which alleviate the severe symptom burden and reduce splenomegaly in ET and PV patients (N Engl J Med 2015; 372:426-435). This analysis is the first to date to evaluate thresholds at which symptom-based treatment can be considered for ET and PV patients who are intolerant or resistant to hydroxyurea (HU). METHODS: Patient demographics, symptom burden, and disease traits were collected from ET and PV patients at a single time point during therapy. The MPN-10 total symptom score (TSS, JCO 2012;30(33)4098-103) was utilized to assess symptom burden. Symptom criteria models were determined as previously described among a population of MF patients (Scherber et. al. EHA 2016: a2250). Cutoffs were then evaluated in a cohort of ET and PV patients to assess for utility as a symptom model among this population. RESULTS: Demographics and symptom burden: 838 PV and 867 ET patients with previous hydroxyurea therapy were included in this analysis. Patients were of mean age (54.9 years ET, 64.0 years PV) and gender (69.2% female ET, 55.7% female). Mean disease duration was 6.0 years for ET and 7.3 years for PV.Among ET and PV patients, 15.0% and 24.2% had prior thrombosis respectively. In evaluating prognostic risk, ET patients tended to be low (45.5%) or intermediate risk (42.9%) with only a minority of patient meeting criteria forhigh risk disease (11.6%). Laboratory findings: ET patients had a mean platelet value of 598.7x 109/L(SD=283.4). Among PV patients, mean hematocrit was 45.8% (SD=8.1) and 42.6% of patients had a hematocrit of greater than 45%. White blood cell count was normal between the two groups (ET mean 8.3 x 109/L, PV mean 9.0 x 109/L). Symptoms: Mean worst symptom severity was 6.4 out of 10 (SD=2.7). Among ET patients, worst symptom was most frequently fatigue (32.7%, mean 5.0/10, SD=3.1, overall prevalence 88%) followed by night sweats (13.6%, mean 2.0/10, SD=3.0, overall prevalence 53%) and concentration difficulties (8.6%, mean 3.1/10, SD=3.0, overall prevalence 68%). For PV, worst individual symptom items were most frequently fatigue (29.2%, mean 5.2/10, SD=3.0, overall prevalence 91%), pruritus (14.1%, mean 3.2/10, SD=3.2, overall prevalence 69%), and night sweats (12.8%, mean 2.5/10, SD=3.0, overall prevalence 57%). Cutoff Scoring: 47.0% of ET patients fit criteria for TSSgreater than to equal to 20; 59.0%% had a single itemgreater than 5; and 45.7% had both a TSS greater than or equal to 20 and a single item greater than 5. Among PV participants, 54.5% had aTSS greater than to equal to 20; 66.1% had a single itemgreater than 5; and 51.5% had both a TSS greater than or equal to 20 and a single item greater than 5. Each scoring method was significantly associated with individual item scores (Table 1). Prognostic scoring was not significantly associated with any of the symptom cutoffs evaluated. Correlations: Among ET patients, a prior history of thrombosis was significantly associated with having a worst symptom item greater than 5 (p=0.043). ET patients with lower hemoglobin were significantly more likely to meet criteria for a MPN-10 score greater than or equal to 20 or to meet combined criteria for a MPN-10 greater than or equal to 20 and single worst item greater than 5 (for both p=0.01 or less). For PV, lower hematocrit levels were significantly associated with having an individual worst symptom score of greater than 5 (44.9% versus 46.7%, p=0.0376). CONCLUSION: Assessment of ET and PV symptoms, now measurable through standardized and practical instruments such as the MPN-10, is an integral part of determining therapeutic impact of newer therapies in both clinical practice and trial settings. In our modeling, patients with severe symptom burden profiles are well represented by utilizing cutoff criteria including aworst individual symptom item of greater than 5 out of 10, an MPN-10 score of greater than or equal to 20, or combined criteria of both cutoffs. These cutoffs can be considered when determiningwhich HU intolerant or resistant patients would most benefit fromsymptom orientedtreatment. Disclosures Kiladjian: AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Schouten:Novartis: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy. Etienne:BMS: Speakers Bureau; ARIAD: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Harrison:Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Baxaltra: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Radia:Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Cervantes:AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Baxalta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Mesa:Promedior: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Galena: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy.