Yang, Jay

Abstract Introduction: Despite advent of multiple tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and newer treatment methods for AML and ALL, the outcomes of patients (pts) with chronic myeloid leukemia in blast phase (CML-BP) remain poor. Consensus guidelines on treatment of CML-BP are scarce. A recent study from the European leukemia network blast phase registry on 240 pts reported marked heterogeneity in treatment patterns and lack of an accepted standard. Hence, we undertook this study through the H Jean Khoury Cure CML Consortium (HJKC3) to describe the treatment patterns and outcomes of pts with CML-BP in the US. Methods: This is a multi-institution, retrospective study. IRB approval was obtained at each institution and data sharing agreements were executed. All pts diagnosed with CML-BP based on modified MD Anderson Criteria (≥30% blasts in the blood or bone marrow or extramedullary (EM) disease) from 2010 to 2025 were included. Categorical variables were compared using Chi-square test. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from time of diagnosis of CML BP to death from any cause. Event free survival (EFS) was calculated from date of best response to event (death or relapse). Results: Of the 283 pts with CML-BP, 96 (33.9%) were female and 187 (66.1%) were males. At the time of diagnosis, 183 (64.6%) had CML-CP, 21 (7.4%) pts had CML-AP and 79 (27.9%) pts had de-novo CML-BP. For the 204 pts that were initially diagnosed with CML-CP or CML-AP, the median time to progression to CML-BP was 22.5 months (1-207 months). Median age at diagnosis of CML-BP was 50 years (range 16-86 years). EM disease was present in 78 (27.6%) pts (38 myeloid sarcoma, 30 central nervous system and 10 skin). Blasts were of myeloid phenotype in 168 (59.4%), lymphoid in 103 (36.4%) and mixed in 9 (3.2%) pts. The bcr-abl protein was p210 in 229 (80.9%), p190 in 8 (2.8%) and p230 in 2 (0.7%) pts. ABL kinase domain mutation was seen in 42.1% (80/190) pts, with T315I being the most common (n=32), followed by E255K (n=16). Next generation sequencing was performed in 117 pts. The most common mutations were ASXL1 (n=27), RUNX1 (n=14), BCOR (n=4), DNMT3A (n=4) and BCORL1 (n=3). Of the 283 pts, 269 underwent CML-BP directed therapy. 63 (23.4%) pts were treated with TKI monotherapy, 184 (68.4%) pts were treated with a combination of chemotherapy (chemo) and TKI and 22 (8.2%) pts were treated with chemo alone. Response rate after CML-BP directed therapy was 75.3% (n=213). Best response was return to CML-CP in 49 pts, CHR with PCyR in 18 pts, CCyR in 31 pts, MMR in 31 pts, MR4 in 18 pts, MR4.5 in 19 pts and MR5 in 47 pts. Rate of response with 2G and ponatinib was significantly better than imatinib (85.3% and 77.3% vs 63.6%; p=0.04). 149 (55.4%) pts proceeded to alloSCT. Of the 213 pts that responded, 59 (27.7%) relapsed. At a median follow-up of 47 months, the median OS for all pts was 19.7 months (95% CI: 16.3-40.2 months), with 5-year OS rate of 38% (95% CI: 32-45%). Pts with myeloid phenotype had a significantly lower OS compared to lymphoid and mixed phenotype (Median OS 14.9 vs 45.9 and 31.1 months respectively; p=0.02). OS of pts that were treated with a combination of TKI and chemo was significantly longer compared to pts treated with TKI or chemo alone (52.9 vs 16.1 or 7.5 months; p<0.0001). Dasatinib (n=99; 34.9%) and ponatinib (n=97; 34.3%) were the most used TKIs followed by imatinib (n=23; 8.1%), nilotinib (n=21; 7.4%), bosutinib (n=8; 2.8%) and asciminib (n=3; 1.1%). Pts treated with ponatinib had a numerically longer OS compared to 2G-TKI and imatinib, however this was not statistically significant (40.1 vs 30.6 and 20.3 months; p=0.52). EFS for pts treated with ponatinib was significantly longer compared to 2G-TKI or imatinib (25.9 vs 17.6 and 15.9 months; p=0.03). In a landmark analysis, pts that underwent alloSCT within 6 months of diagnosis had a significantly longer OS compared to those who did not (69.3 vs 16.0 months; p=0.006). Conclusion: CML-BP continues to have poor prognosis. Treatment is heterogenous involving various combinations of TKI and chemo. In our analysis, treatment with 2G-TKI or ponatinib led to better responses. CML-BP with myeloid phenotype had worse OS. Treatment with ponatinib was associated with a numerically longer OS and significantly longer EFS compared to 2G-TKI and imatinib. In addition, treatment with chemo in combination with TKI and alloSCT led to improved OS.

Introduction: Despite advent of multiple tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and newer treatment methods for both AML and ALL, the outcomes of patients (pts) with chronic myeloid leukemia in blast phase (CML-BP) remain poor. Consensus guidelines on treatment of CML-BP are scarce. A recent study from the European leukemia network (ELN) blast phase registry reported outcomes of 240 CML-BP pts. They also reported marked heterogeneity in treatment patterns and lack of an accepted standard. Hence, we are undertaking this study through the H Jean Khoury Cure CML Consortium (HJKC3) to study the treatment patterns and outcomes of pts with CML-BP in the US. Methods: This is a multi-institution, retrospective study. IRB approval was obtained at each institution separately and data sharing agreements were executed. All pts diagnosed with CML-BP based on modified MD Anderson Criteria (≥30% blasts in the blood or bone marrow or extramedullary (EM) disease) from 2010 to 2024 were included. Categorical variables were compared using the Chi-square test. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the time of diagnosis to death from any cause. Survival probabilities were computed using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test. Results: Of the 72 pts with CML-BP included in this analysis, 29 (40.3%) were female and 43 (59.7%) were males. At the time of diagnosis, 36 (50%) had CML-CP (chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase), 11 (15.3%) pts were diagnosed with CML-AP (accelerated phase CML) and 25 (34.7%) pts with de-novo CML-BP. For the 47 pts that were initially diagnosed with CML-CP or CML-AP, the median time to progression to CML-BP was 26 months (1-207 months). Median age at diagnosis of CML-BP was 54 years (range 21-86 years). EM disease was present in 17 (23.6%) pts (7 myeloid sarcoma, 5 central nervous system and 5 skin) with 3 pts presenting with EM disease only. Blasts were of myeloid phenotype in 41 (56.9%), lymphoid in 29 (40.3%) and mixed in 2 (2.8%) pts. The bcr-abl protein was p210 in 59 (81.9%), p190 in 5 (6.9%) and p230 in 1 (1.4%) pt. Four pts had prior allogeneic stem cell transplant (alloSCT) for CML-CP. Of the pts who had an ABL kinase domain mutation tested, 42.9% (18/42) pts were found to have an ABL kinase domain mutation. The most common TKD mutation was T315I (n=6). Next generation sequencing was performed in 32 pts. The most common mutations were ASXL1 (n=10), RUNX1 (n=4), BCOR (n=2), BCORL1 (n=2), DNMT3A (n=2) and 1 each in CSF3R, KMT2A, EZH2, NF1 and TP53. Of the 72 pts, 68 underwent CML-BP directed therapy. While only 9 (13.2%) pts were treated with TKI alone (4 dasatinib, 2 imatinib, 2 ponatinib and 1 asciminib), 54 (79.4%) pts were treated with a combination of chemotherapy with TKI (24 dasatinib, 13 ponatinib, 9 imatinib, 6 nilotinib, 1 bosutinib and 1 asciminib), and 5 (7.4%) pts were treated with chemotherapy alone. The response rate after CML-BP directed therapy was 72.1% (n=49). Best response was return to CML-CP in 17 pts, CHR with PCyR in 1 pt, CCyR in 11 pts, MMR in 5 pts, MR4 in 4 pts, MR4.5 in 5 pts and MR5 in 6 pts. Rate of response with third and second generation TKI was significantly better than first generation TKI (80% and 77.1% vs 36.3%; p=0.02287). 30 (44.1%) pts proceeded to alloSCT. Of the 49 pts that responded, 16 (32.6%) relapsed. The median time to relapse was 5 months (range 1-46 months). At a median follow up of 57 months, the median OS for all pts was 18 months. There was no difference in OS based on blast phenotype (14 months for myeloid, 21 for lymphoid and 7.5 for mixed; p=0.1185), initial diagnosis (38 months CP-CML, 13 for CML-AP and 16 for de-novo BP pts; p=0.6380), or TKI (13 months for first generation, 20 for second and not reached for third generation TKI; p=0.1729). The OS of pts that were treated with a combination of TKI and chemotherapy was significantly longer compared to pts treated with TKI or chemo alone (28 vs 13 or 4.5 months; p=0.0003). Of the 32 pts that responded, OS for pts that underwent alloSCT was significantly longer compared to pts that did not (not reached vs 14 months; p= 0.0022). Conclusion: CML-BP continues to have a dismal prognosis. Treatment is heterogenous involving various combinations of TKI and chemotherapy. In our analysis, treatment with second or third generation TKI led to better responses. In addition, treatment with chemotherapy in combination with TKI and alloSCT led to improved OS. Updated results from further multi-institution analysis will be presented at the meeting.

Background: First-line therapies for chronic-phase (CP) CML include the tyrosine kinase inhibitors(TKIs) dasatinib, nilotinib, bosutinib or imatinib, while ponatinib and asciminib are indicated only in later lines. There are typically high response rates to first-line therapy in CP-CML, with responses to second- and third-line therapy lower and highly dependent on the specific TKI. Our goal in this study is to evaluate the role of ponatinib in the treatment of patients with CML using data from routine clinical practice. Study design and methods: Data will come from the H. Jean Khoury Cure CML Consortium (HJKC3) CML registry, a North American multi-site research database. Participating sites include the HJKC3 members (curecml.org). Patient inclusion criteria include a diagnosis CML in chronic phase, receiving second line therapy after initial therapy with a second generation TKI (dasatinib, nilotinib, or bosutinib) or receiving third or later line TKI therapy for CML. Participating patients provide consent to collect their data both retrospectively and prospectively for 1 year. Clinical data, including toxicities and complications of TKI therapy, are abstracted from the electronic health record. Participating patients are invited to complete a questionnaire to assess health-related quality of life. Data are managed using REDCap, a secure web application. Study Objectives: The primary objective is to compare the outcome of patients treated with ponatinib vs. other TKIs as second or later line therapy. Secondary objectives are to evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PRO) for CML treated with second or later line therapy and to determine if there are any patient or disease characteristics that can predict outcomes. Statistical plan for clinical outcomes: Descriptive statistics will be used to compare baseline demographic characteristics. Categorical variables will be compared using the Chi-square test. Continuous variables will be compared using ANOVA. Overall survival will be calculated from the time of diagnosis to death from any cause and patients will be censored if they were alive at the last follow-up. Survival probabilities will be computed using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-ranktest. Cox regression analyses will be used to determine significant factors that influence survival, and hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals will be presented. Event free survival (EFS) and transformation free survival (TFS) will be calculated for patients. For EFS, loss of complete hematologic remission, loss of major cytogenetic response, progression to accelerated or blast phase, or death from any cause at any time will be considered an event. For TFS, transformation to accelerated or blast phase while on therapy or death on study will be considered an event. Statistical plan for PRO: Different PRO domains will be analyzed separately (for example, depression separate from fatigue, etc.). Descriptive statistics for each PRO measure will be reported and compared to previously published studies. Differences by treatment type will be evaluated.

Background and significance: There are typically high response rates to first line TKI therapies in chronic phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CP-CML). However, responses in later lines (second line and beyond) are diminished and highly dependent on the specific tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) used. Asciminib received FDA approval in October 2021 for the treatment of adult patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) CML-CP who were previously treated with two or more TKIs, and in patients with Ph+ CML-CP with the T315I mutation. Our goal in this study is to evaluate the role of asciminib therapy for patients with CML beyond clinical studies, in routine clinical practice. Study Design and methods: Data for this study will be abstracted from the HJKC3 (H. Jean Khoury Cure CML Consortium) CML registry project (HJKC3-0005); the HJKC3 CML Registry is a collaborative academic multi-site registry. Patients will be consented to allow collection of both retrospective and prospective data for the HJKC3 CML Registry. The data forms and surveys will be built and managed through the Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap), a secure web application managed by the Clinical & Translational Science Institute. Participating sites include members of the HJKC3 (curecml.org). This study will be an opportunity to evaluate asciminib usage in ‘real-world’ academic practices across the United States. This observational study will include cohorts of patients diagnosed with CP-CML previously treated with two or more tyrosine kinase inhibitors and/or receiving asciminib and/or those with a T315I mutation, not currently enrolled in a randomized controlled trial. The HJKC3 CML Registry intends to collect clinical and patient reported outcome (PRO) data. After obtaining patient consent, patients will be invited to complete PRO assessments. The study will attempt to collect PRO data regardless of disease or treatment status. PRO assessments will be primarily administered online, though study staff will offer alternatives (e.g., phone) for participants without internet access. Study subjects will be emailed a link to access a secure platform hosted by one of the study sites, Medical College of Wisconsin (MCW), using the REDCap platform. Study Objectives: The primary objective of the study is to describe characteristics of patients who were previously treated with two or more TKIs and treated with asciminib or with any other TKIs. The secondary objectives are to describe the clinical outcomes and PRO of those patients. Exploratory objectives include description of characteristics, treatment outcome and PRO for patients with T315I mutation. Statistical plan: The sample size of approximately 225 participants during the 5-year recruitment period is based on the available clinical expertise and ongoing recruitment data in the HJKC3 CML registry in lieu of statistical power analysis. We estimate that 150 patients in the HJKC3 CML registry will be treated with other TKI and 75 treated with asciminib. Among a total of 225 patients, we estimate that 75 patients with the T315I mutation will be enrolled in the registry. No formal statistical inference will be drawn to compare the outcomes between these two groups. Bayesian predictive probability (PP) will be utilized for the exploratory analysis of Major Molecular Response (MMR). Survival probabilities will be computed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the p-values from the log-rank test will be provided. Different PRO domains of the patient's symptoms and functioning will be analyzed separately (e.g., depression separate from fatigue, separate from GI symptoms, etc.) since combining them into a summary score may dilute the effects of the individual (and not necessarily related) components and mask actual change. The main objective for the analyses of PRO data from the registry is to describe any differences by treatment type in patients treated with asciminib and other TKIs.

BackgroundThe availability of novel agents (NAs), including blinatumomab and inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO), has improved the outcomes of patients with relapsed/refractory (RR) B‐cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Because of the relative effectiveness, it is often a challenge for clinicians to determine how to best sequence these NAs with respect to efficacy and toxicity.MethodsIn this multicenter, retrospective study of patients with RR ALL treated with blinatumomab, InO, or both, their efficacy as a first or second NA was compared.ResultsAmong 276 patients, 221 and 55 received blinatumomab and InO, respectively, as a first NA therapy. The complete remission (CR)/complete remission with incomplete count recovery (CRi) rate was 65% and 67% for the blinatumomab and InO groups, respectively (P = .73). The rate of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events was 4% and 7% in the blinatumomab and InO groups, respectively. Ninety‐two patients (43%) in the blinatumomab group and 13 patients (29%) in the InO group proceeded with allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. The median overall survival (OS) was 15 and 11.6 months in the blinatumomab and InO groups, respectively. A subset analysis was performed for 61 patients who received both NAs (blinatumomab and then InO [n = 40] or InO and then blinatumomab [n = 21]). The CR/CRi rate was 58% for patients who received InO as the second NA and 52% for patients who received blinatumomab as the second NA. The median OS was 10.5 for patients who received InO as the second NA and 5.9 months for patients who received blinatumomab as the second NA (P = .09).ConclusionsAlthough the limited power of this study to detect a significant difference between subgroups is acknowledged, the data suggest that blinatumomab and InO may have comparable efficacy as a first or second NA therapy in RR ALL.

Abstract The availability and use of blinatumomab symbolizes a paradigm shift in the management of B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). We conducted a retrospective multicenter cohort analysis of 239 ALL patients (227 relapsed refractory [RR], n = 227; minimal residual disease [MRD], n = 12) who received blinatumomab outside of clinical trials to evaluate safety and efficacy in the “real-world” setting. The median age of patients at blinatumomab initiation was 48 years (range, 18-85). Sixty-one (26%) patients had ≥3 prior therapies and 46 (19%) had allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation before blinatumomab. The response rate (complete remission/complete remission with incomplete count recovery) in patients with RR disease was 65% (47% MRD−). Among 12 patients who received blinatumomab for MRD, 9 (75%) patients achieved MRD negativity. In patients with RR disease, median relapse-free survival and overall survival (OS) after blinatumomab was 32 months and 12.7 months, respectively. Among patients who received blinatumomab for MRD, median relapse-free survival was not reached (54% MRD− at 2 years) and OS was 34.7 months. Grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome, neurotoxicity, and hepatotoxicity were observed in 3%, 7%, and 10% of patients, respectively. Among patients who achieved complete remission/complete remission with incomplete count recovery, consolidation therapy with allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation retained favorable prognostic significance for OS (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.30-0.97; P = .04). In this largest “real-world” experience published to date, blinatumomab demonstrated responses comparable to those reported in clinical trials. The optimal sequencing of newer therapies in ALL requires further study.

11564 Background: Epithelioid sarcoma (ES) is a rare, aggressive soft tissue sarcoma characterized by loss of inhibitor of integrase 1 (INI1), allowing enhancer of zeste homologue 2 (EZH2) to repress cell differentiation and promote tumorigenesis. Tazemetostat (TAZ) is a selective inhibitor of EZH2 approved by the FDA for treatment of patients (pts) aged ≥16 years with metastatic or locally advanced ES ineligible for complete resection. Methods: This open-label, multicenter, multi-cohort phase 2 study (NCT02601950) evaluated safety and efficacy of TAZ in pts with INI1-negative tumors. ES pts were enrolled in Cohorts 5 and 6; pts in Cohort 6 underwent mandatory pre-dose (at screening) and post-dose biopsies (at Day 1 of cycle 2). Herein, we report the interim efficacy and safety data from Cohort 6. Results: As of July 31 2019, 44 pts were enrolled into Cohort 6 and treated with TAZ 800 mg BID. The objective response rate (ORR) was 11.4%; 4 pts (9.1%) had a partial response and 1 pt (2.3%) had a complete response (Table). Another 17 pts (38.6%) had stable disease (SD). 18 pts had progressive disease; 13 of these pts remained on study beyond progression. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) at 56 weeks were 19.4% and 59.4%, respectively. In a pooled posthoc analysis of 106 ES pts from Cohorts 5 (n = 62), and 6, ORR was 13.2%. Grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) were reported in 16 pts (36.4%), most commonly anemia (6.8%; n = 3) and tumor pain (6.8%; n = 3). 3 pts (6.8%) experienced grade 3–4 treatment-related AEs. One pt discontinued study drug and there were no treatment-emergent dose reductions or treatment-related deaths. These safety data from Cohort 6 are consistent with previously reported data from Cohort 5. 19 paired biopsies were included for translational endpoint analyses. Preliminary RNA seq and pathway analyses are currently ongoing and updated data, including additional biomarker data will be presented. Conclusions: Consistent with previously reported data from the completed Cohort 5, TAZ demonstrated clinically meaningful, durable, single agent activity in ES pts. Efficacy data from Cohort 6 continue to mature with 8 patients still on treatment. TAZ was well tolerated with a low incidence of treatment related AEs. Clinical trial information: NCT02601950 . [Table: see text]

9058 Background: Breast cancer gene 1 (BRCA1)-associated protein 1 (BAP1), a nuclear deubiquitinase, is commonly inactivated in malignant mesothelioma. Preclinical data showed that BAP1 inactivation sensitizes mesothelial cells to inhibition of enhancer of zeste-homolog 2 (EZH2), a methyltransferase implicated as an oncogenic driver in this tumor. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of tazemetostat (TAZ), a potent and selective EZH2 inhibitor, in relapsed/refractory (R/R) malignant mesothelioma with BAP1-inactivation. Methods: EZH-203 (NCT02860286) was a 2-part, open-label, phase 2 study that assessed the pharmacokinetics (PK), safety, and efficacy of TAZ in pts with R/R malignant mesothelioma. In part 1, pts received TAZ 800 mg QD on day 1 (D1) and 800 mg BID, beginning day 2 of cycle 1 (C1). In part 2, pts received 800 mg of TAZ BID on D1 of C1. A two-stage Green-Dahlberg design was used for part 2. Primary endpoints were PK profiling of TAZ in all pts (part 1), and disease control rate (DCR) at week 12 in pts with BAP1-deficient R/R malignant mesothelioma (part 2). Secondary endpoints included safety, overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival, overall survival, and duration of response (DOR). Results: The study enrolled 74 pts with R/R malignant mesothelioma, 70 pts (95%) were centrally confirmed to be BAP1-deficient. Median prior lines of therapy were 2 (range, 1-9). Observed clinical data in the presence of CYP3A4 inhibitors and inducers suggest a low DDI potential of TAZ. The 12 week DCR was 47% (n = 35). The ORR per RECIST version 1.1 was 3% [complete response: 0%; partial response (PR): 3% (n = 2)]. Of the 2 patients with PR, 1 had a DOR of 21 weeks and the other is ongoing (15.3 weeks at data cut off). 47 pts (64%) and 21 pts (28%) had stable disease (SD) and progressive disease, respectively. Overall, 91% pts discontinued, either due to disease progression (n = 65), death (n = 5), or treatment discontinuation (n = 1). Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in ≤5% of patients, most commonly anemia (5%) and dyspnea (4%). No pts discontinued due to TEAEs. There were no treatment related deaths. Conclusions: Based on disease control rate and stable disease, TAZ showed antitumor activity in pts with BAP1-deficient R/R malignant mesothelioma. TAZ monotherapy was generally well-tolerated. The current data support further clinical evaluation of TAZ in these pts. Furthermore, this trial presents an optimal paradigm for drug development in molecularly-enriched cohorts in mesothelioma. Clinical trial information: NCT02860286.

11003 Background: ES is a rare soft tissue sarcoma that metastasizes in approximately 30% to 50% of cases. More than 90% of ES tumors lack expression of INI1, an important component of epigenetic regulation. Loss of INI1 function allows another epigenetic modifier, EZH2, to become an oncogenic driver in tumor cells. Tazemetostat, a first-in-class, selective, oral inhibitor of EZH2, has demonstrated tumor regression and favorable safety in phase 1/2 trials. Methods: Data from a phase 2 open-label, multicenter trial of pts with locally advanced or metastatic ES are reported. Efficacy was assessed with primary and secondary endpoints including objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1, disease control rate (DCR; objective confirmed response of any duration or stable disease [SD] lasting ≥32 weeks), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS); safety and tolerability were also evaluated. Results: As of September 17, 2018, 62 INI1-negative ES pts were enrolled and treated with tazemetostat 800 mg BID. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 1 (range: 0-9). There were 9/62 (15%) confirmed partial responses (PRs) with an ORR of 15% and DCR of 26%. The DOR ranged from 7.1+ weeks to 103.0+ weeks (median: not reached) with a median OS of 82.4 weeks (95% CI: 47.4, not estimable) for all 62 pts. Tazemetostat was generally well tolerated. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were generally mild to moderate with the most commonly reported adverse events (AEs; ≥10% incidence) regardless of attribution being fatigue (24/62; 39%), nausea (22/62; 35%), and cancer pain (20/62; 32%). Any treatment-related TEAEs of grade ≥3 were reported in 10/62 (16%) pts. TEAEs grade ≥3 reported in ≥2 pts included anemia (6%) and decreased weight (3%). There were no drug-related deaths and a low discontinuation rate (1.7%). Conclusions: In the largest prospective clinical trial of ES to date, tazemetostat achieved disease control in 26% of pts with advanced ES who entered this study. Durable clinical response of the drug was documented. Tazemetostat demonstrated favorable safety with few pts with treatment-related AEs grade ≥3. Clinical trial information: NCT02601950.

Background: Heterozygous somatic mutations in the genes encoding RNA splicing factors SF3B1, U2AF1, SRSF2 or ZRSR2 induce aberrant splicing in cancer cells and are among the most common mutations in patients with MDS, AML or CMML. H3B-8800 is an orally available small molecule that binds to the SF3b complex and induces alternative splicing changes in cells. Because splicing factor mutant cells depend on residual wild-type function of splicing factors for survival, we hypothesized that H3B-8800 would induce preferential cell killing of mutant cells by further perturbing splicing to synthetic lethality. In pre-clinical models, H3B-8800 preferentially kills spliceosome mutant cells and induces antitumor activity in xenograft leukemia models with core spliceosome mutations (Seiler M et al Nature Medicine 2018). Therefore, we conducted a phase I clinical trial (NCT02841540) of H3B-8800 in patients with MDS, AML or CMML. Here we describe the safety profile and clinical outcomes of the dose escalation cohorts in this phase I trial. Methods: This phase I trial explored the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics (PD) of H3B-8800 in patients with myeloid cancers. Dose escalation cohorts, employing a standard 3+3 design, examined 2 different once daily dosing regimens (schedule I: 5 days on/9 days off; schedule II: 21 days on/7 days off) in a 28-day cycle, with stratification based on lower-risk (LR) versus higher-risk (HR) myeloid neoplasms. Results: As of June 16th, 2019, 84 patients were enrolled at 24 centers in the US and Europe. Dose ranged from 1-40 mg among 65 patients on schedule I, while 19 patients were enrolled with dose ranging from 7-20 mg on schedule II. The patient population included AML (n=38), CMML (n=4), HR-MDS (n=20), LR-MDS (n=21) and 1 MDS with unknown risk level. Most patients (88%) had spliceosome mutations of interest. The most common mutations were in SRSF2 (p.P95H in 17, p.P95L in 9, p.P95_R102Del in 4), SF3B1 (p.K700E in 11, p.R625C in 4), and U2AF1 (p.Q157P in 6, p.S34F in 4). Patients remained on treatment from 7 to 819 days; 25 patients (30%) had time on treatment greater than 180 days, 20% more than 1 year and 2% over 2 years. The median therapy duration for LR-CMML/MDS, HR-CMML/MDS, and AML patients were 216, 62, and 47 days respectively. Most observed treatment related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were Grade 1 or 2. The most common treatment-related (as judged by the investigator, >10% frequency) TEAEs in the patients treated on schedule I were diarrhea (75%), nausea (37%), fatigue (28%) and vomiting (27%). The most common treatment-related TEAEs in the patients treated on schedule II were diarrhea (68%), vomiting (42%), QTc prolongation (21%), nausea (16%), and fatigue (16%). The most common dose limiting toxicity was prolongation of the QTcF interval >500 msec (n=2, 40 mg on schedule I and n=1, 20 mg on schedule II, all ≥Grade 3) and bradycardia without other arrhythmias (n=1, 14 mg on schedule II, ≥Grade 3). No ophthalmic AEs were observed; 1 patient (LR-MDS) experienced durable marrow aplasia. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) has not been confirmed for either Schedule I or Schedule II. PK analysis indicates that H3B-8800 is rapidly absorbed and exhibits dose-proportional increase in plasma exposure. Consistent dose-dependent target engagement (i.e., alteration in mature mRNA transcripts) was observed in blood mononuclear cells from patients enrolled in the 2 mg up to 40 mg dose cohorts on both schedules. Despite this splicing modulation, no objective complete responses (CR) or partial responses (PR) meeting International Working Group criteria were observed. One patient with CMML had a durable platelet response that began in Cycle 1 and persisted through Cycle 13. Nine red blood cell (RBC) transfusion-dependent patients with MDS or CMML and 2 patients with AML did not require RBC transfusions for ≥8 weeks (up to 28 weeks) while on study. One platelet transfusion-dependent patient with LR-MDS did not require platelet transfusions for ≥8 weeks. Conclusion: Results from this first-in-human multicenter prospective clinical trial of a splicing modulator in myeloid neoplasms demonstrate dose-dependent target engagement and predictable PK profile of H3B-8800, and safety even with prolonged dosing. Although no objective CR or PR were achieved, decreased RBC or platelet transfusion requirements were observed in 12 (14%) of enrolled patients. Disclosures Steensma: H3 Biosciences: Other: Research funding to institution, not investigator.; Pfizer: Consultancy; Aprea: Research Funding; Stemline: Consultancy; Arrowhead: Equity Ownership; Summer Road: Consultancy; Astex: Consultancy; Onconova: Consultancy. Wermke:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Greenberg:Notable Labs: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; H3 Biotech: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Font:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: 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. Komrokji:Agios: Consultancy; JAZZ: Speakers Bureau; DSI: Consultancy; JAZZ: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; celgene: Consultancy; pfizer: Consultancy. Yang:Agios: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Research Funding. Brunner:Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Forty Seven Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Research Funding. Ades:Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Silence Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Research Funding; Helsinn Healthcare: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Al-Kali:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Coombs:H3 Biomedicine: Research Funding. Foran:Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding. Garcia-Manero:Helsinn: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amphivena: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; H3 Biomedicine: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Micol:AbbVie: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Perez De Oteyza:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Wang:Abbvie: Other: Advisory role; Kite: Other: Advisory role; Jazz: Other: Advisory role; Astellas: Other: Advisory role, Speakers Bureau; celyad: Other: Advisory role; Pfizer: Other: Advisory role, Speakers Bureau; Stemline: Other: Advisory role, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi: Other: Advisory role; Amgen: Other: Advisory role; Agios: Other: Advisory role. Watts:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Buonamici:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Kim:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Gourineni:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Marino:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Rioux:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Schindler:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Smith:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Yao:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Yuan:Eisai: Employment. Yu:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Platzbecker:Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: H3B-8800 (experimental, unapproved)