Cervantes, Francisco

Abstract Background: Nilotinib, a 2nd-generation BCR-ABL inhibitor, is 20–30 times more potent than imatinib in vitro. A phase II, open-label study of safety/efficacy of nilotinib in pts with imatinib-resistant/intolerant Ph+ CML-CP or -AP was reported. Planned starting dose was 400mg BID, with escalation to 600mg BID if response was inadequate. The objective of the post-hoc analysis was to evaluate safety/efficacy of nilotinib 600mg BID in CML-CP pts who had dose escalation. Methods: Starting dose was 400mg BID. If response was inadequate (failure to achieve complete hematologic response [CHR] by 3 mos, minimal cytogenetic response [CyR] by 6 mos, or major cytogenetic response [MCyR] by 12 mos; loss of HR, CyR, or progression), nilotinib to 600mg BID dosing was permitted. Imatinib resistance was defined as treatment with imatinib ≥600 mg/d with disease progression (≥50% increase in WBC, blasts, basophils, or platelets) or no HR in peripheral blood and/or bone marrow after 4 wks. Results: Of 320 enrolled pts in CP, 269 remained on nilotinib 400mg BID; 51 pts were dose-escalated to 600mg BID for inadequate responses (mean age 57.7 yrs; 68.6% male). All pts met the study criteria for imatinib resistance. Prior imatinib dose was ≥600mg QD in 98% pts and ≥800 mg QD in 53%. 43/51 (84%) pts had no baseline CHR; 38% had no prior history of complete cytogenetic response (CCyR). 35% had prior MCyR. Median time to dose escalation was 169 (114–211) d. 14 (27.5%) pts remain on therapy; median time to discontinuation from study was 307 (235–414) d. 5 pts with disease progression and no deaths were observed among pts who received 600mg BID. CHR was achieved in 58% of evaluable pts without CHR at baseline (n=43). MCyR occurred in 29% of evaluable pts (15/51) on 600mg BID; 10% (5/51) CCyR. Disease progression was low, occurring in 10% (5/51) of pts on 600mg BID. Median time to progression for CP pts on 600mg BID was 12 mos, substantially less than for pts who stayed on 400mg BID (median not observed yet, at least 20 mo). Nonhematologic AEs in 600mg BID pts were similar to those reported for the entire CP cohort from the phase II study. Grade 3/4 hematologic lab abnormalities were: anemia 13.8%, neutropenia 7.9%, thrombocytopenia 13.7%. Hyperglycemia and elevated bilirubin occurred in 6% and 10% of pts, respectively, on 600mg BID. Conclusions: Some HR and CyR after dose escalation to 600mg BID were observed. Safety/tolerability for 600mg BID were similar to the entire CP cohort. Based on these preliminary data, nilotinib dose escalation to 600mg BID in imatinib-resistant Ph+ CML-CP pts may be effective in pts with inadequate responses to 400mg BID. As might be expected in a more resistant population, response duration was shorter than reported for the phase II CP cohort. Additional follow-up is necessary. Use of 600mg BID is not currently recommended for imatinib-resistant CML-CP pts outside clinical studies.

Abstract Background Severe anemia with RBC-transfusion-dependence is common in persons with advanced MPN-associated myelofibrosis. Pomalidomide, an immune-modulating drug with pleiotrophic bone marrow effects, improved anemia in several phase 2 studies. Method Phase 3 double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of pomalidomide (0.5 mg/d) in subjects with MPN-associated myelofibrosis and RBC-transfusion-dependence. The primary endpoint was RBC-transfusion-independence. Criteria for RBC-transfusion-dependence and -independence were based on results of an expert consensus panel RAND-Delphi study. Subjects 252 subjects were randomized 2:1 to receive pomalidomide or placebo with stratifications for age, type of myelofibrosis, and intensity of RBC-transfusions. Median age was 70 y. 75% had primary myelofibrosis. Median units (U) RBC-transfusions/28 d pre-randomization was 3 (range, 2-13). Results Response rates in the cohorts were similar (16% [95% CI, 11-23%] vs 16% [8-26%]), as were response durations. However, median time to response for pomalidomide was 7 w (range, 0-20 w) vs only 2 w (range, 0-15 w) for placebo (p=0.22). Response in both cohorts was more common in subjects with ≤4 vs >4 U RBC/28 d pre-randomization (OR=3.1 [p=0.09] and OR=8.6 [p=0.06]). However, other variables associated with response to pomalidomide: age ≤65 vs >65 y (OR=2.4; p=0.07) and primary myelofibrosis vs other (OR=2.6; p=0.14) and response to placebo: (WBC >25 vs ≤25 x10E9/L; OR=5.0; p=0.08) and interval from diagnosis to randomization >2 vs ≤2 y (OR=5.0; p=0.04) differed. These differences would not be expected were response to pomalidomide identical to response to placebo. Also, a center effect was found in placebo but not pomalidomide responders, which persisted after adjusting for predictive associations. Several pomalidomide responders lost response when therapy was stopped but regained it when pomalidomide was re-started. No pre-randomization therapy (iron-chelation, hydroxyurea, busulfan, folate) was consistently correlated with response to placebo, and durations of RBC-transfusion-dependence pre-randomization were similar between the cohorts. In contrast, platelet response rates, a 2̍° endpoint, were significantly different between the cohorts: pomalidomide, 22% (95% CI, 11-35%) vsplacebo, 0 (0-12%; p=0.006). Platelet response was not correlated with RBC-transfusion-independence response. Conclusion There was no significant difference in rate or duration of RBC-transfusion-independence response to pomalidomide vsplacebo despite using what were thought to be sensitive and specific entry- and response-criteria. Unexpectedly, however, most variables associated with response to pomalidomide and placebo differed between the cohorts, as did distribution of times to response. These data suggest responses to pomalidomide and placebo differ but were not distinguished by our response-criteria. Pomalidomide appears to reverse RBC transfusion dependence in some persons with MPN associated MF. However, additional research designs are needed to study this impression. This abstract is presented on behalf of all RESUME Investigators. Study registration: NCT01178281. Disclosures: Cervantes: Novartis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gisslinger:AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Advisory Board Meeting Other, Honoraria; Novartis: Advisory Board Meeting, Advisory Board Meeting Other, Honoraria; Sanofi-Aventis: Advisory Board Meeting, Advisory Board Meeting Other, Honoraria; Shire: Advisory Board Meeting, Advisory Board Meeting Other, Honoraria; Celgene: Advisory Board Meeting Other, Honoraria; Janssen: Advisory Board Meeting, Advisory Board Meeting Other, Honoraria. Gupta:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Grant support through institution Other; Novartis: Consultancy, Grant support through institution, Grant support through institution Other, Honoraria. Harrison:SBio: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shire: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria; YM Bioscience: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kiladjian:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; AOP Orphan: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Schiller:Celgene: Research Funding. Mesa:Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding.

Abstract Background The JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib (RUX) is approved for treatment of myelofibrosis (MF). However, some patients do not respond to RUX, while others lose responsiveness or develop intolerance to RUX over time. Preclinical data also suggest that certain JAK2 mutations (eg the gatekeeper mutation M929I) may confer resistance to RUX (Leukemia 2012;26:708). Options for these RUX resistant/intolerant patients, particularly with regard to further JAK inhibitor therapy, are unclear. Fedratinib (SAR302503) is a JAK2-selective inhibitor which has demonstrated clinically meaningful reductions in splenomegaly and symptom burden in patients with MF, with an acceptable and consistent safety profile (J Clin Oncol 2011;29:789. Haematologica 2013;98:S1113). Fedratinib sensitivity in vitro is unaffected by the M929I mutation. This pre-specified interim analysis of the JAKARTA-2 study (NCT01523171) investigated the efficacy and safety of fedratinib in MF patients previously treated with RUX. Methods JAKARTA-2 is a Phase II, multicenter, open-label, single-arm study of patients who previously received RUX for MF. Patients ≥18 yrs with splenomegaly and platelet count ≥50 ×109/L received fedratinib 400 mg orally, once daily for consecutive 4-wk cycles (permitted dose adjustment to 200–600 mg daily). Eligible patients had received ≥14 d RUX treatment, and had discontinued RUX for ≥14 d prior to starting fedratinib. Although there is no consensus definition of RUX resistance/intolerance, for the purpose of this study patients were classed (investigator assessment) as resistant (lack or loss of response) or intolerant to RUX. Primary endpoint for the interim analysis: spleen response rate (RR) (≥35% reduction in spleen volume from baseline at Wk 12 [MRI/CT blinded central review]) in the per-protocol (PP) population. Secondary endpoints: symptom RR (≥50% reduction in total symptom score [TSS: modified Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form] from baseline to Wk 12) and safety. Results At the cut-off date for this interim analysis, 27 patients had received fedratinib treatment (median RUX exposure 10.7 months [range 1.9–34.4]): median age 69 yrs; 56% male; 67% primary MF; 63% high-risk MF; 67% JAK2V617F positive; 41% platelet count <100 × 109/L; baseline median spleen volume 3190 mL [1072–7815]; baseline median TSS 19.6 [4.9–46.0]. Eighteen patients were considered resistant by the treating physician (8 lack of response, 3 disease progression, 7 loss of response; median RUX exposure 11.1 months [range 1.9–34.4]) and 9 intolerant (6 hematologic, 3 non-hematologic toxicity; median RUX exposure 9.2 months [2.9–33.2]) to RUX. Median fedratinib exposure to cut-off date: 4 cycles (range 1–10); 19 patients remain on treatment. Spleen RRs were 40% (8/20 PP patients) and 43% (3/7) in patients with baseline platelet count <100 ×109/L. Overall, 19% (5/26 evaluable patients) had a symptom response by Wk 12 (Table). The majority of patients had a reduction in TSS at Wk 12 (Figure). The most common non-hematologic treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were gastrointestinal (nausea 67%; diarrhea 56%; vomiting 48%). Grade 3/4 diarrhea occurred in 2 patients; no Grade 3/4 vomiting or nausea. Anemia was the most common hematologic AE (all grades, 93%; Grade 3, 41%; Grade 4, 0%). Thrombocytopenia (all grades) occurred in 19 (70%) patients; Grade 3 in 6 patients and Grade 4 in 2 patients. One patient had Grade 3 AST elevations and 1 patient had Grade 3 hyperbilirubinemia. Seven patients (26%) discontinued treatment due to AEs. There were 2 deaths on study, both due to disease progression. Conclusions Interim results from the JAKARTA-2 study indicate that once-daily fedratinib provides clinical benefit, through reduced splenomegaly and symptom burden, in MF patients previously treated with RUX. The safety profile was acceptable and manageable, with safety results to date consistent with those reported in previous trials of fedratinib. Sponsored by Sanofi. Disclosures: Harrison: Novartis: Research Funding; Novartis, Sanofi, YM Bioscience, Celgene, SBio, Gilead: Honoraria; Novartis, Sanofi, Shire: Speakers Bureau; Novartis, Sanofi, YM Bioscience, SBio, Gilead: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jourdan:Sanofi: Honoraria. Kiladjian:Novartis, Celgene, AOP Orphan: Research Funding; Novartis, Sanofi, AOP Orphan: Honoraria; Novartis, Sanofi, AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cervantes:Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Novartis and Sanofi: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Niederwieser:Novartis Pharma: Consultancy. Cortes:Incyte, Sanofi: Consultancy; Incyte, Sanofi: Research Funding. Passamonti:Novartis, Celgene, Incyte, Sanofi, Roche: Honoraria. Reiter:Sanofi: Honoraria. Heidel:Novartis Inc.: Honoraria; Novartis Inc.: Research Funding; Novartis Inc.: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Silver:Sanofi: Consultancy; Sanofi: Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria. Winton:Sanofi: Research Funding. Gupta:Incyte, Novartis: Consultancy; Incyte, Novartis: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria. Gisslinger:AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Sanofi, Shire, Celgene, Janssen: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Sanofi, Shire, Celgene, Janssen: Honoraria. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Talpaz:Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Ariad, Deciphera: Research Funding; Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Ariad, Deciphera: Speakers Bureau. Zhang:Sanofi: Employment. Shi:Sanofi: Employment. Mesa:Incyte, Genentech, Lilly, MS Pharma, Gilead: Research Funding.

Abstract BACKGROUND. In primary myelofibrosis (PMF), survival from time of diagnosis is predicted by the international prognostic scoring system (IPSS), and from time of referral, by the dynamic IPSS (DIPSS) or DIPSS-plus. JAK2/CALR/MPL mutational status and presence and number of other prognostically-relevant mutations (ASXL1, SRSF2, EZH2, IDH1/2) provide IPSS/DIPSS-plus independent prognostic information. The objective in the current study was to revise IPSS, by including mutation-relevant prognostic information. METHODS. The study included 986 PMF patients divided into learning (n=588) and validation (n=398) cohorts. Previously published methods were used to screen for mutations involving JAK2,MPL, CALR, EZH2, ASXL1, IDH1/2 and SRSF2. The clinical variables assessed were those previously identified as being prognostically-relevant by IPSS or DIPSS-plus. The prognostic model (MIPSS) was developed through a stepwise selection process, based on a z-test of the regression coefficients, and its relative quality was measured by means of the Akaike information criterion. RESULTS. In the Italian learning cohort (n=588),median follow-up was 3.6years (95% CI, 0.03-30.8) for alive patients and 196 (33.3%) deaths and 67 leukemic transformations were documented. IPSS risk distribution was low in 26%, intermediate-1 in 30%, intermediate-2 in 24% and high in 20%. Mutational frequencies were approximately 63% for JAK2, 20% CALR, 6% MPL, 7% EZH2, 22% ASXL1, 2.5% IDH1/2 and 9% SRSF2. Constitutional symptoms were recorded in 28.6% of patients, splenomegaly 75% (18% >10cm from LCM) and grade 3 fibrosis 21%. Overall 252 patients were evaluable for karyotype and abnormalities were detected in 35%, including 9.5% unfavorable. Univariate analysis identified the following risk factors for inferior survival: age >60 years, constitutional symptoms, hemoglobin <100g/L, leukocytes >25x109/L, platelets <200x109/L, circulating blasts 1% or greater, splenomegaly >10cm, grade 3 fibrosis, unfavorable karyotype, triple-negativity for JAK2, MPL and CALR (TN), JAK2 or MPL mutation, and mutations in ASXL1, SRSF2, EZH2 or IDH1/2. In multivariable analysis, age >60 years, constitutional symptoms, hemoglobin <100g/L, platelets <200x109/L, TN, JAK2 or MPL mutation, ASXL1 and SRSF2 mutation remained significant; these variables were subsequently assigned the following HR-weighted adverse points: 1.5, 0.5, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 0.5, 0.5 and 0.5, respectively. Subsequently, four risk groups with no overlap in the 95% CI of their survival curves were delineated (Figure 1A): low (score 0-0.5); Intermediate-1 (score 1-1.5); Intermediate-2 (score 2-3.5); and high (score 4 or greater). The number of patients in each risk category, median survivals and HR and 95% CI values are included in figure 1A. Akaike information criterion indicated that MIPSS performed better than IPSS in predicting survival (1611.6 vs 1649.0). Leukemia-free survival was also predicted by high (p<0.01) and intermediate 1/2 (p<0.01) risk MIPSS. In the Mayo Clinic validation cohort (n=398), median age 63 years; males 64%,median follow-up for alive patients was 7.5 years and 271 (68%) deaths and 51 (13%) leukemic transformations were documented. DIPSS-plus risk distribution was low in 13%, intermediate-1 18%, intermediate-2 37% and high 32%. Mutational frequencies were approximately 51% for JAK2, 30% CALR, 7.5% MPL, 5% EZH2, 36% ASXL1, 5.6% IDH1/2 and 13% SRSF2. MIPSS performed equally well in this cohort, as illustrated in figure 1B, which includes number of patients in each risk category with their median survival and HR and 95% CI values. Leukemia-free survival in the Mayo cohort was also predicted by high (p<0.01) and intermediate-2 (p=0.04) risk MIPSS. Patients in the Mayo cohort were fully annotated for karyotype, which was MIPSS-independent in its prognostic value for both overall (p<0.01) and leukemia-free (p<0.01) survival. CONCLUSIONS. MIPSS addresses the mutation-relevant prognostic information gap in IPSS and performs equally well in the setting of patients seen at time of diagnosis or referral. Karyotype carries MIPSS-independent prognostic value that is recognized in an alternative GIPSS prognostic model (see accompanying ASH 2014 abstract), which complements MIPSS. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 3839 BACKGROUND: We have previously reported on the validation of the 18 item Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Assessment Form (MPN-SAF) (Blood 2011;118:401–408) given in conjunction with the 9 item Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) (Cancer 1999;85:1186–1196) to assess symptomatic burden in an international sample of MPN patients (pts), including validation in English, Italian, Swedish, German, French, Spanish, and Dutch. We desired to assess the utility of an average total symptom score (TSS) from the most pertinent and representative MPN symptoms for purposes of assessing the burden of symptoms in MPN pts, and subsequent tracking in response to therapy. METHODS: Data was collected among an international cohort of MPN pts and their physicians, including patient demographics and disease features and completion the BFI, MPN-SAF and the EORTC-QLQ-C30. Among pts who completed at least 5 of 10 specific items on the BFI and MPN-SAF, an average score was calculated as the TSS. TSS items included “worst” fatigue from the BFI and 9 items from the MPN-SAF including concentration, early satiety, inactivity, night sweats, itching, bone pain, abdominal discomfort, weight loss and fever. The TSS thus had a possible range of 0–10 with 10 representing the highest level of symptom severity. Data was then analyzed for internal consistency, and divergent, convergent validity, and construct validity. RESULTS: Patient Demographic and Disease Characteristics:1433 MPN pts were prospectively enrolled (Argentina 22, France 482, Germany 59, Italy 186, Netherlands 236, Puerto Rico 10, United Kingdom 57, United States 102, Spain 157, Sweden 114, Uruguay 8) including 594 ET, 538 PV and 293 MF pts (8 missing; MF: 61% Primary MF, 23% post-ET MF, 15% post-PV MF). 1408 pts completed at least 5 of the 10 items necessary to calculate a TSS. Pts were of characteristic age (mean 62, range 20–94) and gender (54% female) common to disease. TSS Burden of MPN Symptoms: Consistent with prior studies, the majority of pts (>50%) were symptomatic in each TSS item except for items associated with high disease severity, namely bone pain (48.6%), weight loss (30.6%) and fever (18.4%). Fatigue carried the highest symptom intensity (4.4, SD=2.8), followed by problems with concentration (2.5, SD=2.8) and early satiety (2.5, SD=2.7). Overall mean TSS was 2.1 (SD=1.6). Divergent Validity: TSS significantly differed among MPN disease subtypes (p<0.001) with means of 1.9 (SD=1.5), 2.2 (SD=1.6), and 2.5 (SD=1.7) for ET, PV, and MF pts, respectively. Statistically significant differences in TSS were also observed between pts with clinically deficient (>4, n=480) versus non-clinically deficient QOL (<4, n=894; mean 3.3 versus 1.5; p<0.001). When comparing to MD perceptions, TSS was significantly higher when MDs rated >2 of 6 common MPN-related symptoms as clinically significant (2.8, n=400) versus <2 symptoms (1.6, n=726; p<0.001). No significant trends were observed when comparing disease type by the presence of a current medical therapy. Convergent Validity: The TSS was strongly correlated with patient-reported QOL (r=0.59, p<0.001). Overall excellent correlations existed between the TSS and EORTC-QLQ-C30 functional subscales (all p<0.001 and r>0.50 except social functioning [r=0.48]). Additionally, excellent correlations were observed between the TSS and EORTC-QLQ-C30 fatigue and pain symptom scales (r>0.5, p<0.001). Internal Consistency and Construct Validity: The TSS had excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.83). Factor analysis identified a single underlying construct among the 10 TSS items (significant eigenvalues being >1). Factor loadings ranged from 0.43 for fever and weight loss to 0.71 for inactivity. The single factor suggests that the arithmetic mean of the 10 items is an appropriate global TSS score. CONCLUSION: The TSS demonstrated excellent psychometric properties. Overall, results of validity and internal consistency indicate that the TSS is a concise, valid, and accurate assessment of symptom burden among MPN pts. This new scoring will facilitate ease of implementation of the MPN-SAF into larger clinical trials and reduce ambiguity associated with interpreting response outcomes. Future analyses to investigate the impact of therapies on TSS are ongoing. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 3833 Background: Survival in primary myelofibrosis (PMF) is assessed by the Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) (Blood 2010;115:1703) and DIPSS-plus (JCO 2011;29:392). The latter is based on eight risk factors including age>65 years, constitutional symptoms, hemoglobin <10 g/dL, red blood cell transfusion need, leukocyte count >25 × 109/L, platelet count <100 × 109/L, peripheral blood (PB) blasts ≥1% and unfavorable karyotype. Recent studies have highlighted the prognostic significance of monosomal karyotype (MK) (Blood 2011;117:5612), unfavorable karyotype (Leukemia 2011;25:82) and platelet count <100 × 109/L ((JCO 2011;29:392), for leukemic transformation (LT) in PMF. Methods: A combination of multivariable and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were applied to a Mayo Clinic database of 884 karyotypically-annotated patients with PMF, in order to define karyotype-dependent and karyotype-independent risk models for LT. The karyotype-independent model was further validated in a separate cohort of 525 PMF patients from an international database (Blood 2010;115:1703). Patients in the Mayo cohort were evaluated at time of referral and those of the international database at time of initial diagnosis. Results I: Sixty cases of LT were documented. Karyotype (categorized into MK, inv(3)/i(17q) abnormalities, other unfavorable, and favorable), PB blast percentage (as a continuous variable), and platelet count (as a continuous variable) were the most reliable (p<0.01) in predicting leukemia-free survival (LFS). The best discriminant levels for inferior LFS were MK (HR 6.2, 95% CI 2.2–17.1), inv(3)/i(17q) abnormalities (HR 7.6, 95% CI 1.8–33.3), PB blast ≥2% (HR 2.4, 95% CI 1.4–4.2) and platelet count ≤41 × 109/L (HR 2.6, 95% CI 1.3–5.1). MK and inv(3)/i(17q) abnormalities were subsequently consolidated into one “very high risk” cytogenetic category (n =27), with a corresponding HR of 6.6 (95% CI 2.7–16.0). HR-based risk scores were assigned to “very high risk” karyotype (2 points), PB blast ≥2% (one point) and platelet count ≤50 × 109/L (one point) to classify patients into low (no adverse points; n =522), intermediate (one adverse point; n =290) and high risk (two or more adverse points; n =72) groups; the corresponding 3-year LT rates were 3%, 10% (HR 2.6; 95% CI 1.4–4.6) and 35% (HR 9.4, 95% CI 4.7–18.7) (Figure 1). Results II: The karyotype-independent model was based on PB blast percentage and platelet count only; low-risk (no adverse points; n =525), intermediate-risk (one adverse point; n =311) and high-risk (two adverse points; n =48); the corresponding 3-year LT rates were 3%, 12% (HR 3.1, 95% CI 1.8–5.4; p<0.0001) and 25% (HR 6.0, 95% CI 2.6–14.1). The karyotype-independent model was validated in a separate cohort of 525 PMF patients with 70 documented cases of LT, from an international database (Blood 2010;115:1703). Conclusions: The current leukemia risk models are applicable at diagnosis or during follow-up, in the presence or absence of cytogenetic information, and complement DIPSS-plus in the comprehensive prognostication of patients with PMF. Disclosures: Vannucchi: Novartis: Honoraria.

Abstract Abstract 1753 Background: Ruxolitinib (INC424), a potent and selective oral JAK1 and JAK2 inhibitor, has demonstrated rapid and durable reductions in splenomegaly and improved disease-related symptoms, role functioning, and quality of life (QoL) in 2 phase 3 studies in patients with myelofibrosis (MF) (the COMFORT studies). These studies compared ruxolitinib with either placebo or best available therapy (BAT). This analysis compares the efficacy outcomes between the placebo arm from COMFORT-I and the BAT arm from COMFORT-II. Methods: COMFORT-I is a randomized (1:1), double-blind, multicenter study comparing ruxolitinib 15 or 20 mg twice daily (bid) with placebo, and COMFORT-II is a randomized (2:1), open-label, multicenter study comparing ruxolitinib 15 or 20 mg bid with BAT (investigator-selected therapy, including no treatment). Both studies met their primary end points with statistical significance (ruxolitinib vs control): the percentage of patients achieving ≥35% reduction in spleen volume at week 24 (COMFORT-I, P <.0001) and week 48 (COMFORT-II, P <.0001). QoL was measured using patient responses with the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire–Core 30 (QLQ-C30) as an exploratory end point in both studies. Results: In the COMFORT-I and COMFORT-II studies, 154 patients received placebo (ruxolitinib, n=155) and 73 patients received BAT (ruxolitinib, n=146), respectively, and were included in the primary efficacy analyses. The demographic and baseline characteristics were similar between the control arms of the 2 studies, including spleen size below the costal margin (mean [standard deviation, SD] 16.4 [6.27] cm and 15.8 [6.71] cm in placebo and BAT, respectively). Only 1 patient (0.7%) who received placebo and no patients who received BAT had a ≥35% reduction in spleen volume from baseline at week 24. The median spleen volume increased from baseline at week 24 in both the placebo and BAT groups and was numerically similar (placebo, 8.5% [range, −46.4% to 48.8%]; BAT, 5.1% [range, −33.3% to 29.7%]). In contrast, patients who received ruxolitinib had median reductions in spleen volume from baseline at week 24 of −33.0% (COMFORT-I) and −27.5% (COMFORT-II). The QLQ-C30 provides a measurement of change in QoL and MF-related symptoms, including fatigue, pain, dyspnea, insomnia, and appetite loss. At 24 weeks, neither the placebo nor BAT arms had clinically meaningful changes from baseline (10 points [Osoba et al. J Clin Oncol. 1998]) in any of the QoL (decreases indicate worsening) or symptom scores (increases indicate worsening) (Table). Although differences existed between the placebo and BAT arms, the SDs are large, thus complicating comparisons between the 2 groups. Conclusions: In the COMFORT studies, ruxolitinib demonstrated significantly greater reductions in spleen size compared with placebo or BAT. This post hoc analysis of the 2 studies shows that patients who received BAT in the COMFORT-II study had similar symptom and QoL responses and numerically similar increases in spleen size as those who received placebo in the COMFORT-I study. No clinically meaningful improvements in QoL or symptoms were seen on either the placebo or BAT arms. These new data strongly suggest that current therapies for MF provide little improvement in spleen size, symptoms, or QoL as compared with placebo. Disclosures: Mesa: Incyte: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; SBio: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Verstovsek:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Cervantes:Bristol-Myers-Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Waltzman:Novartis: Employment. Mendelson:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Martin:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment. Sun:Incyte: Employment. Sandor:Incyte: Employment. Levy:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Harrison:Novartis: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; S*Bio: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria.

Abstract Background Fedratinib (SAR302503) is a JAK2-selective inhibitor that has provided clinically meaningful reductions in MF-associated splenomegaly and symptoms in Phase I and II studies (J Clin Oncol 2011;29:789. Haematologica 2013;98:S1113). Here, we present efficacy and safety data from the Phase III JAKARTA study of fedratinib versus placebo in patients with MF (NCT01437787). Methods In this international double-blind, placebo-controlled, 3-arm study, patients aged ≥18 years with IPSS intermediate-2 or high-risk MF, platelet count ≥50 × 109/L, and splenomegaly were randomized (1:1:1) to receive placebo or fedratinib 400 mg or 500 mg, orally, once daily, in consecutive 4-week cycles. Patients who received placebo were eligible to cross-over to fedratinib (randomized 1:1 to 400 mg or 500 mg) following 6 cycles of treatment, or prior to Cycle 6 if the patient had disease progression. The primary endpoint was spleen response rate (RR) (≥35% reduction in spleen volume from baseline measured by MRI or CT at Week 24, and confirmed 4 weeks later). Secondary endpoints included symptom RR (≥50% reduction in total symptom score from baseline at Week 24, measured through a daily electronic eDiary using the modified Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form [Cancer 2011;117:4869. Blood 2011;118:401]), and safety of fedratinib. Results A total of 289 patients were randomized: median age 65 years; 59% male; 63% primary MF; 48% high-risk MF; 67% JAK2V617F positive; 16% platelet count <100 × 109/L; median baseline spleen volume 2568 mL (range 316–8244); median baseline total symptom score 14.7 (0–57). Median (range) exposures for placebo, 400 mg and 500 mg groups were 24 (2–34), 30 (1–55) and 28 (1–60) weeks, respectively. Spleen RRs at Week 24 (placebo 1%; 400 mg 47%; 500 mg 49%), and confirmed at Week 28 (placebo 1%; 400 mg 36%; 500 mg 40%), were significantly (p<0.0001) higher in both fedratinib groups compared with placebo (Table). Nineteen patients had a spleen response at Week 24 not confirmed 4 weeks later (spleen reduction 25–35% [n=10]; image not available/evaluable [n=8]; image taken outside time window [n=1]). Spleen RRs by baseline platelet level are shown in the table. Patients treated with fedratinib had significantly (p<0.0001) greater improvements in MF symptoms compared with placebo (Table). The most common all grade non-hematologic treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) was diarrhea (16%, 66% and 56% of patients in the placebo, 400 mg and 500 mg groups, respectively). Grade 3/4 diarrhea was reported in 5% of patients in both the 400 mg and 500 mg dose groups. The most common hematologic TEAE was anemia (any grade 91%, 99% and 98%; Grade 3/4 25%, 43% and 60% in the placebo, 400 mg and 500 mg groups, respectively). Rates of Grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia were 9% (placebo), 17% (400 mg), and 27% (500 mg). Incidences of Grade 3/4 liver function tests (placebo/400 mg/500 mg) were: bilirubin, 2%/2%/1%; ALT, 0%/3%/3%; and AST, 1%/2%/2%. Overall treatment discontinuation rates up to 24 weeks of treatment were 25% (placebo), 22% (400 mg) and 32% (500 mg). Twenty-five patients died during the study (10, 5 and 10 in the placebo, 400 mg and 500 mg groups, respectively); the most common causes of death: disease progression (placebo [n=5]; 400 mg [n=3]; 500 mg [n=4]) and adverse events (placebo [n=4]; 400 mg [n=1]; 500 mg [n=4]). Conclusions In this Phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled, 3-arm study of 289 MF patients, treatment with fedratinib 400 mg or 500 mg once-daily demonstrated clinically meaningful and statistically significant reductions in splenic volume and MF-associated symptom burden versus placebo. Fedratinib had an acceptable safety profile, with the adverse events reported consistent with those observed in previous studies. This study was sponsored by Sanofi. Disclosures: Pardanani: Sanofi, Bristol Myers Squibb, PharmaMar and JW Pharma: Clinical trial support Other. Harrison:Novartis: Research Funding; Novartis, Sanofi, YM Bioscience, Celgene, SBio, Gilead: Honoraria; Novartis, Sanofi, Shire: Speakers Bureau; Novartis, Sanofi, YM Bioscience, SBio, Gilead: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cortes:Incyte, Sanofi: Consultancy; Incyte, Sanofi: Research Funding. Cervantes:Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Novartis and Sanofi: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mesa:Incyte, Genentech, Lilly, MS Pharma, Gilead: Research Funding. Jourdan:Sanofi: Honoraria. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Drummond:Sanofi, Novartis, Celgene: Honoraria; TargeGen, Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Sanofi, Novartis, Celgene: Consultancy. Passamonti:Novartis, Celgene, Incyte, Sanofi, Roche: Honoraria. Neumann:Sanofi: Employment. Gao:Sanofi: Employment.

Abstract Background Myelofibrosis (MF) is a clonal myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) associated with a high degree of symptomatology, progressive cytopenias and potential to transform into acute myelogenous leukemia (AML). Thrombocytopenia amongst MF patients is a proven negative prognostic indicator and predictor of transformation to AML. Ruxolitinib is an effective JAK inhibitor for MF symptoms and splenomegaly, but is not indicated in patients with severe thrombocytopenia. Phase III trials of pacritinib have shown alleviation of the MF symptom burden amongst patients with thrombocytopenia (ASCO 2015 Mesa et. al.). In this study, we assessed the symptom burden of MF patients with significant thrombocytopenia who were naïve to pacritinib. Methods Data was assessed from a prospectively collected international database of MF patients in which demographics, disease features, and MF symptoms utilizing the myeloproliferative neoplasm symptom assessment form (MPN-SAF; Scherber et al, 2011). The MPN-SAF includes the patient's perceptions of common MPN-related symptoms and overall quality of life (QOL) on a 0 (absent) to 10 (worst imaginable) scale. Total symptom score (TSS) was computed based on symptom items using the published scoring algorithm on a 0 (all reported symptoms absent) to 100 (all reported symptoms worst imaginable) scale. MF risk scores were calculated using the DIPSS criteria (Gangat, 2011). Thrombocytopenia was defined as a platelet count <100 x 10(9)/L, anemia was defined as hemoglobin<10 g/dL and leukopenia was defined as a white blood cell count <4.0 x 10(9)/L. Associations between the MPN-SAF individual symptoms were investigated using Pearson correlations. Results Demographic and Disease Features: A total of 418 patients with (n=89) and without (n=329) thrombocytopenia completed the MPN-SAF. Patients with thrombocytopenia were slightly younger (57.4 vs. 61.0, p=0.01) with longer disease durations (11.9 years vs. 8.8 years, p=0.0489) and had a higher prevalence of primary myelofibrosis (PMF; 82% vs. 66%, p=0.01). The presence of thrombocytopenia was associated with other laboratory abnormalities including anemia (60.7% vs. 25.3%, p<0.001) and leukopenia (34.8% vs. 52.3%, p<0.001), along with the need for red blood cell transfusions (34.8% vs. 14.6%, p<0.001). Patient cohorts did not differ by gender, DIPSS risk score, history of prior thrombosis or hemorrhage. In comparing patients with severe thrombocytopenia (<50 x 10(9)/L, n=43) to those with moderate thrombocytopenia (51-100 x 10(9)/L, n=46), severe thrombocytopenia patients were more likely to have anemia (74.4% vs. 47.8%, p=0.01) and require red blood cell transfusions (51.2% vs. 19.6%, p=0.002). Symptoms Scores for individual MPN-SAF items were assessed for each subgroup. Patients with thrombocytopenia had markedly higher total symptom scores than patients without thrombocytopenia (32.8 vs. 24.1, p<0.001). Individual scores were also higher for most items (fatigue, early satiety, inactivity, dizziness, sad mood, sexuality, cough, night sweats, itching, fever, weight loss, overall QOL)[Figure 1]. No significant differences in MPN SAF TSS or individual symptom scores were observed in comparing severe vs. moderate thrombocytopenia patients. Discussion MF patients with thrombocytopenia have distinctive clinical characteristics and face a significantly more severe symptom burden. Importantly, despite thrombocytopenia being a recognized risk factor for disease advancement, no correlations are noted between patient symptomatology and risk category. In addition, patients with severe thrombocytopenia do not differ symptomatically from patients with moderate thrombocytopenia despite having more severe anemia, leukopenia and transfusion requirements. This implies that the degree of symptomatology expressed by thrombocytopenic MF patients occurs independent from the exact platelet value. Conclusion The results of this study suggest that patients with thrombocytopenia will benefit from aggressive symptomatic control, potentially from targeted agents. Figure 1. MF Symptoms in Patients With and Without Thrombocytopenia Figure 1. MF Symptoms in Patients With and Without Thrombocytopenia Disclosures Kiladjian: Novartis: Consultancy; Novartis: Other: Travel grant; Research Funding paid to institution (Hôpital Saint-Louis et Université Paris Diderot); Incyte Corporation: Consultancy. Zweegman:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Harrison:Shire: Speakers Bureau; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Cervantes:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy; CTI-Baxter: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Barbui:Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Etienne:ARIAD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Congress Travel/Accomodations, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Roy:BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Vannucchi:Shire: Speakers Bureau; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Baxalta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mesa:Novartis. Research- incyte, Gilead, cti, Genentech, promedior, NS Pharma: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: The Philadelphia chromosome negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), including essential thrombocythemia (ET), polycythemia vera (PV) and myelofibrosis (MF) all have a time dependent risk of progression to either an advanced myelofibrotic state (post ET/PV MF) and/or to acute myeloid leukemia. The impact of disease duration upon the MPN symptom burden is not well understood, nor are the precise mechanisms of disease progression. We sought to better understand the impact of disease duration on MPN symptom burden. Methods: Symptom burden data was collected utilizing the Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form (MPN-SAF) amongst MPN patients, collected at the time of an office visit in an international cohort of MPN patients as previously described (Scherber et. al.). Symptom burden assessment was a previously validated 27-item symptom burden questionnaire scored on a 0-10 scale (0= as good as it can be, 10 = as bad as it could be). The patient or provider was asked to report the time since MPN diagnosis. MPN duration was determined to be early if the diagnosis was established between 0 to 5 years ago, intermediate if the diagnosis was established between 6 to 10 years ago, and late if the diagnosis was established 11 years ago or more. Anemia was defined as a red blood cell count less than 10 g/dL, leukopenia was defined as a white blood cell count was below 4 x 109, and thrombocytopenia if the platelet count was below 150 x109. Statistical significance was calculated using ANOVA f-test and chi squared. Results: Patient demographics and disease burden: A total of 1443 patients responded to the survey, including 592 (41%) ET, 549 (38%) PV, and 302 (21%) MF patients, including 181 (60%) primary MF, 67 (22%) post-ET MF, and 54 (18%) post-PV MF. Among MF patients, mean duration of MPN diagnosis was 9 years, and mean duration MF diagnosis was 4.7 years. Among respondents, 757 fit criteria for early disease duration, 353 fit criteria for intermediate disease duration, and 333 fit criteria for late disease duration. Respondent mean age was 62 years and approximately half of respondents were female (55%). Patients with longer diagnosis duration tended to be older (p=0.009) and were most likely to have anemia (0.02), leukopenia (p=0.01), or thrombocytopenia (p=0.03). These individuals were also most likely to have a history of hemorrhage (p=0.007) or require red blood cell transfusions (p<0.001). Combined cohort symptom burden: On average among the combined cohort of ET, PV and MF patients, symptoms tended to worsen with time with this effect being significant for symptom items of fatigue (BFI, p<0.04), concentration (p=0.007), insomnia (p=0.02), sexual difficulties (p=0.002), cough (p=0.03), night sweats (p=0.002), and pruritus (p=0.02). Symptoms of early satiety (p=0.004), concentration difficulties (p=0.01), insomnia (p=0.03), sexual difficulties (p=0.02), cough (p=0.01), and night sweats (p=<0.001) had significantly higher prevalence in those with longer disease duration. Similarly, the total calculated MPN-10 score (p=0.008) and quality of life assessment (0.03) demonstrated worsened outcomes with time (Table 1). No significant differences in symptoms for the combined cohort were observed among individuals diagnosed 0 to 1 years ago compared to those with a diagnosis established between 2 and 5 years ago. Symptom burden in MPN subtypes. When evaluating specific MPN types, patients with essential thrombocythemia experienced significantly greater sexual difficulties over time (p=0.03). The severity (p=0.01) and incidence (p=0.03) of pruritus and incidence of night sweats (p<0.001) were significantly increased over time for individuals with PV. For those with MF, the severity (p= 0.01) and incidence (p=0.009) of cough also significantly increased with longer diagnosis duration. Discussion Overall, significant worsening in symptom burden can be recognized over time for individuals diagnosed with MPNs. Diagnosis may not necessarily correlate with disease duration as the timing of diagnosis may be delayed from onset of disease. Given the intent of this abstract to evaluate changes with disease duration, we did not investigate correlations between symptom burden and cytopenias. We do know that risk factors for survival in the MPNs include older age and thrombosis, however, disease duration should be investigated as an alternative marker of burden in future survival studies. Disclosures Harrison: CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kiladjian:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; Novartis: Other: Travel grant; Research Funding paid to institution (Hôpital Saint-Louis et Université Paris Diderot); Novartis: Consultancy. Zweegman:Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Barbui:Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Etienne:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Congress Travel/Accomodations, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; ARIAD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. te Boekhorst:CTI Biopharma: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Other: Research Funding paid to institution (University of Florence), Research Funding; Shire: Speakers Bureau; Baxalta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mesa:Novartis. Research- incyte, Gilead, cti, Genentech, promedior, NS Pharma: Consultancy.