Ritchie, Ellen K.

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

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

Introduction: 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.

PURPOSE The FMS-related tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) inhibitor gilteritinib is standard therapy for relapsed/refractory FLT3-mutated ( FLT3 mut ) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) but seldom reduces FLT3 mut burden or induces sustained efficacy. Gilteritinib combines synergistically with the BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax in preclinical models of FLT3 mut AML. METHODS This phase Ib open-label, dose-escalation/dose-expansion study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03625505 ) enrolled patients with FLT3 wild-type and FLT3 mut (escalation) or FLT3 mut (expansion) relapsed/refractory AML. Patients received 400 mg oral venetoclax once daily and 80 mg or 120 mg oral gilteritinib once daily. The primary objectives were safety, identification of the recommended phase II dose, and the modified composite complete response (mCRc) rate (complete response [CR] + CR with incomplete blood count recovery + CR with incomplete platelet recovery + morphologic leukemia-free state) using ADMIRAL phase III–defined response criteria. RESULTS Sixty-one patients were enrolled (n = 56 FLT3 mut ); 64% (n = 36 of 56) of FLT3 mut patients had received prior FLT3 inhibitor therapy. The recommended phase II dose was 400 mg venetoclax once daily and 120 mg gilteritinib once daily. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were cytopenias (n = 49; 80%). Adverse events prompted venetoclax and gilteritinib dose interruptions in 51% and 48%, respectively. The mCRc rate for FLT3 mut patients was 75% (CR, 18%; CR with incomplete blood count recovery, 4%; CR with incomplete platelet recovery, 18%; and morphologic leukemia-free state, 36%) and was similar among patients with or without prior FLT3 inhibitor therapy (80% v 67%, respectively). The median follow-up was 17.5 months. The median time to response was 0.9 months, and the median remission duration was 4.9 months (95% CI, 3.4 to 6.6). FLT3 molecular response (< 10 −2 ) was achieved in 60% of evaluable mCRc patients (n = 15 of 25). The median overall survival for FLT3 mut patients was 10.0 months. CONCLUSION The combination of venetoclax and gilteritinib was associated with high mCRc and FLT3 molecular response rates regardless of prior FLT3 inhibitor exposure. Dose interruptions were needed to mitigate myelosuppression.

Abstract Geriatric assessment (GA) predicts survival among older adults with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) treated intensively. We evaluated the predictive utility of GA among older adults treated with low-intensity therapy on a multisite trial. We conducted a companion study (CALGB 361101) to a randomized phase 2 trial (CALGB 11002) of adults ≥60 years and considered “unfit” for intensive therapy, testing the efficacy of adding bortezomib to decitabine therapy. On 361101, GA and quality of life (QOL) assessment was administered prior to treatment and every other subsequent cycle. Relationships between baseline GA and QOL measures with survival were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier estimation and Cox proportional hazards models. One-hundred sixty-five patients enrolled in CALGB 11002, and 96 (52%) of them also enrolled in 361101 (median age, 73.9 years). Among participants, 85.4% completed ≥1 baseline assessment. In multivariate analyses, greater comorbidity (hematopoietic cell transplantation-specific comorbidity index &gt;3), worse cognition (Blessed Orientation-Memory-Concentration score &gt;4), and lower European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer global QOL scores at baseline were significantly associated with shorter overall survival (P &lt; .05 each) after adjustment for Karnofsky Performance Status, age, and treatment arm. Dependence in instrumental activities of daily living and cognitive impairment were associated with 6-month mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 3.5; confidence interval [CI], 1.2-10.4; and HR, 3.1; CI, 1.1-8.6, respectively). GA measures evaluating comorbidity, cognition, and self-reported function were associated with survival and represent candidate measures for screening older adults planned to receive lower-intensity AML therapies. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01420926 (CALGB 11002).

Abstract Gilteritinib (Gilt), a FLT3 tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), is approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) FLT3-mutated (FLT3 +)acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, long-term survival is limited by the development of drug resistance mutations in persistent FLT3 + clones. Combination regimens may deepen response and improve outcomes. Venetoclax (Ven), a BCL-2 inhibitor, is approved in combination with hypomethylating agents for newly diagnosed AML not suitable for standard induction therapy. FLT3 + AMLhas been associated with clinical resistance to Ven. Still, FLT3 TKIs + Ven have demonstrated synthetic lethality in preclinical models, prompting this multicenter, open-label, phase 1b trial (NCT03625505) to evaluate Ven + Gilt for R/R AML. Here, we report final response and survival endpoints, and molecular clearance among patients (pts) treated at the recommended phase two dose (RP2D). The study design has been previously described (Daver, et al. ASH 2020, Abstract 333). Pts in the dose expansion cohort received Ven 400 mg + Gilt 120 mg (RP2D) daily in 28-day cycles, following Ven ramp-up. The primary endpoint was mCRc (complete response [CR] + CR with incomplete platelet recovery [CRp] + CR with incomplete blood count recovery [CRi] + morphologic leukemia-free state) to align with the ADMIRAL phase III trial (Perl, et al. NEJM 2019). Baseline co-mutations and serial FLT3 internal tandem duplications (ITD) allelic burden were assessed using the MyAML panel (Invivoscribe, San Diego, CA) and FLT3-ITD MRD assay with sensitivities of 5% and 0.001%, respectively. As of the data cut off of January 31, 2021, 54 pts were treated at the RP2D. Fifty-two pts (as assessed locally) had FLT3 +AML; 41 had FLT3-ITD only, 8 had tyrosine kinase domain only, 3 had both mutations, and 2 were FLT3 wild type (wt). Additional baseline characteristics are in Table 1. Grade 3 or 4 AEs occurred in 51 (94.4%) pts, and 39 (72.2%) pts had serious AEs. Grade 3 or 4 cytopenias occurred in 43 (79.6%) pts. AEs of special interest included tumor lysis syndrome (2 [3.7%]) and QT prolongation (1 [1.9%]). AEs leading to dosing interruptions (Ven, 27 [50%]; Gilt, 26 [48.1%]), reductions (Ven, 3 [5.6%]; Gilt, 4 [7.4%]), and discontinuation (Ven, 7 [13%]; Gilt, 7 [13%]) were reported for both study drugs. There was 1 treatment-emergent death of typhlitis. Among FLT3 + pts with post-baseline assessments (51/52), mCRc was achieved by 38 pts (74.5%; CR/CRp/CRi, 19 [37.3%] pts), with a median follow-up time of 12 mo (range: 0.8 - 20.1). The mCRc in pts with prior TKI (32) or prior Ven (10) use were 78.1% and 60%, respectively. The mOS among all FLT3 +pts was 10 mo (95%CI: 6.6, NE), with a median DoR (mDoR) of 5.4 mo (95% CI: 3.3, 6.6). Pts with FLT3-ITD had a mOS of 10.5 mo (95%CI: 6.8, NE), and a mDoR of 5.6 mo (95% CI: 3.3, 8.3). For the 14 pts who had a transplant, the mOS was not reached (95%CI: 10.0, NE) vs 6.89 mo (95%CI: 3.0, 10.5) for those who did not have a transplant (37). The mOS for pts with prior TKI or Ven was 9.6 (95% CI: 4.3, NE) and 10.5 mo (95% CI: 2.0, NE), respectively, with a mDoR of 9.6 (95% CI: 4.3, NE) and 6.2 mo (95% CI: 2.6, NE), respectively. The 60-day mortality rate was 11.8% (95% CI: 4.4, 23.9). The mCRc for NPM1 + and NPM1wt were 92.3% and 61.1%, respectively. mCRc for DNMT3A + and DMNT3A wt pts were 82.4% and 64.3%, respectively. WT1 + and WT1 wt mCRc were 66.7% and 77.3%, respectively. The mCRc for NPM1 + and DNMT3A + co-mutated pts was 100%. In a post hoc analysis of the 30 analyzable mCRc pts with at least one follow-up MRD assessment, 17 (56.7%) achieved molecular clearance defined as FLT3 allelic burden &lt; 10 -2. The mOS of pts achieving mCRc with FLT3 allelic burden of &lt; 10 -2 vs mCRc with FLT3 allelic burden ≥ 10 -2 (Figure 1) was not reached (95% CI: 9.76, NE) vs 6.83 mo (4.21, NE). Ven + Gilt achieved high mCRc in patients with R/R FLT3 + AML, with or without prior TKI exposure, and an encouraging mOS. FLT3 mutation clearance was seen in a majority of patients and associated with longer OS. Encouraging remission rates were observed across many genotypes and were particularly high among pts with NPM1 + +/- DNMT3A co-mutation. Cytopenias were common but manageable with appropriate Ven or Gilt dosing modifications. Serial NGS molecular data, as well as updated survival data will be presented at the meeting. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Daver: Hanmi: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trillium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trovagene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novimmune: Research Funding; FATE Therapeutics: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sevier: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; ImmunoGen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: Data Monitoring Committee member; Dava Oncology (Arog): Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Syndax: Consultancy; Shattuck Labs: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; SOBI: Consultancy; STAR Therapeutics: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Newave: Research Funding. Perl: Actinium: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Forma: Consultancy; Syndax: Consultancy; Loxo: Consultancy; Fujifilm: Research Funding; Arog: Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onconova: Consultancy; Sumitomo Dainippon: Consultancy. Levis: Amgen, Astellas Pharma, Daiichi-Sankyo, FujiFilm, and Menarini: Honoraria; Astellas and FujiFilm: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria. Ritchie: Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Other: travel support, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz: Consultancy, Research Funding; Protaganist: Consultancy, Honoraria; ARIAD Pharmaceuticals: Ended employment in the past 24 months, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Litzow: Astellas: Research Funding; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Pluristem: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee. McCloskey: Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Smith: AbbVie: Research Funding; Revolutions Medicine: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; FUJIFILM: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria. Schiller: Takeda: Research Funding; Trovagene: Research Funding; Tolero: Research Funding; Ono: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; ASH foundation: Other: Chair-unpaid; Pfizer: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ono-UK: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onconova: Research Funding; Mateon: Research Funding; Sangamo: Research Funding; Samus: Research Funding; Regimmune: Research Funding; PrECOG: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Kaiser Permanente: Consultancy; Cyclacel: Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding; Ambit: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Elevate: Research Funding; Bio: Research Funding; Pharma: Consultancy; Johnson & Johnson: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Biomed Valley Discoveries: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Research Funding; Sellas: Research Funding; Geron: Research Funding; Genentech-Roche: Research Funding; Gamida Cell Ltd.: Research Funding; FujiFilm: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; Delta-Fly: Research Funding; Deciphera: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Astellas: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Arog: Research Funding; Actuate: Research Funding; Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Leukemia & Lymphoma Society: Research Funding; Bluebird Bio: Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingleheim: Research Funding; Cellerant: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Research Funding; National Marrow Donor Program: Research Funding; NIH: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Pharmamar: Research Funding; UC Davis: Research Funding; UCSD: Research Funding; Evidera: Consultancy; NCI: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Bradley: AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Tiu: Astellas Pharma: Current Employment; Eli Lilly and Company: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Ended employment in the past 24 months. Naqvi: Genentech/Roche: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Dail: Genentech/Roche: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Siddani: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Wang: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Chyla: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Lee: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Altman: Astellas: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Biosight: Consultancy, Other: Travel fees, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Kura Oncology: Consultancy; Syros: Consultancy; Theradex: Consultancy, Other: Advisory boards; GlycoMimetics: Other: Participation on an advisory board; ALZ Oncology: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Fujifilm: Research Funding; Immunogen: Research Funding; Kartos: Research Funding; Kura: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Venetoclax is a B-cell lymphoma 2 inhibitor approved in combination with azacitidine, or decitabine, or low-dose cytarabine for the treatment of newly-diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in adults who are age 75 years or older, or who have comorbidities that preclude use of intensive induction chemotherapy. Gilteritinib is a kinase inhibitor indicated for the treatment of adult patients who have relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with an FLT3 mutation as detected by an FDA-approved test.

Background: The FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) inhibitor gilteritinib (Gilt) improves survival compared with standard salvage chemotherapy in relapsed/refractory (R/R) FLT3-mutated (FLT3mut+) acute myeloid leukemia (AML); however, relapses are common and long-term survival remains poor. Combination therapies of FLT3 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) with agents that induce apoptosis have demonstrated preclinical synthetic lethality and enhanced cytotoxicity against FLT3mut+ clones. This may delay or prevent drug resistance. We present updated data from the dose-escalation and expansion cohorts of an ongoing, multicenter, open-label, Phase 1b trial (NCT03625505) of Gilt in combination with B-cell lymphoma 2 (BCL-2) inhibitor venetoclax (Ven) in patients (pts) with R/R FLT3mut+ AML. Methods: Pts with R/R AML with ≥1 prior line of therapy and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2 were eligible. The expansion cohort required FLT3mut+ R/R AML at enrollment. Pts received the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of Ven 400 mg in combination with Gilt 120 mg daily in 28-day cycles, following a 3-day ramp-up of Ven. Pts with prior Gilt were excluded from expansion, and none were enrolled in dose escalation; prior Ven or other FLT3 inhibitor was permitted. Concurrent use of moderate or strong CYP3A4 inhibitor was allowed. Interruptions of Ven or both drugs simultaneously were permitted for management of adverse events (AEs), and subsequent cycles could include dose adjustments to minimize myelosuppression or other drug-related AEs. The primary endpoint was modified composite complete remission (mCRc; complete response [CR] + CR with incomplete platelet recovery [CRp] + CR with incomplete blood count recovery [CRi]) + morphologic leukemia-free state (MLFS). Responses were graded by the International Working Group (IWG) for AML criteria (with adapted CRi criteria as presented in the ADMIRAL trial) for comparison with composite CR (CRc) used in Gilt development. All criteria for response used by IWG were maintained in these response definitions. Secondary endpoints included CR + CR with partial hematologic recovery (CRh) and duration of response (DOR) of mCRc. Results: At data cutoff, April 15, 2020, 39 R/R pts started therapy at the RP2D (internal tandem duplications [ITD] only [n=32]; tyrosine kinase domain [TKD] mutation only [n=5]; both TKD and ITD [n=2]). Median age was 63 years (range 23-85) and the majority had an ECOG status of 1-2 (87.2%). Most pts (n=29; 74.4%) had received ≥2 prior lines of therapy, including ≥1 FLT3 TKI (n=25, 64.1%; midostaurin, n=19; sorafenib, n=5; crenolanib, n=1). Twelve pts (30.8%) had prior stem-cell transplant (SCT); 3 (7.7%) had received prior Ven. Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were reported in 37 pts (94.9%), and 28 (71.8%) reported serious AEs. The only Grade 3/4 nonhematologic TEAE reported in &gt;20% of pts was febrile neutropenia (48.7%). Four pts (10.3%) experienced a fatal AE, including colitis, disease progression, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (all n=1). AEs leading to Ven and Gilt interruptions occurred in 19 pts (48.7%) and 18 pts (46.2%), respectively, and AEs leading to dose reductions occurred in 2 pts (5.1%) for each treatment. Six pts (15.4 %) and 5 pts (12.8%) discontinued Ven and Gilt, respectively, owing to AEs. mCRc was achieved by 83.8% of pts (n=31/37; Table). With median duration of follow-up of 2.9 (range 0.8−11.0) months in all pts, median event-free survival was 5.1 (95% confidence interval: 2.8, 8.3) months but administrative censoring after short follow-up for a large number of recently enrolled patients limits interpretation; median DOR has not been reached. Eight pts (21.6%), all ITD only, proceeded to SCT. CR + CRh was achieved by 7 pts (18.9%). Conclusions: Ven plus Gilt achieved a very high overall rate of marrow and blood blast elimination and mCRc rate (84%) in this expansion cohort of heavily pretreated FLT3mut+ pts, the majority of whom had prior FLT3 TKI exposure. Using similar response assessment criteria, the high mCRc rate here suggests substantially greater antileukemic activity from Ven plus Gilt compared with single-agent Gilt. Cytopenias were prominent but manageable with dose interruption/modification on subsequent cycles. Nonhematologic toxicities were modest, and the combination was well tolerated. Disclosures Daver: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novimmune: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Trovagene: Research Funding; Fate Therapeutics: Research Funding; ImmunoGen: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Trillium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syndax: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Altman:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Fujifilm: Research Funding; Astellas: Other: Advisory Board, Speaker (no payment), Steering Committee (no payment), Research Funding; Agios, Theradex, Abbvie: Other: Advisory Board; Astellas, Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Other: Data safety and monitoring committee; Daiichi Sankyo: Other: Advisory Board - no payment but was reimbursed for travel; Kura Oncology: Patents & Royalties: Scientific Advisory Board - no payment accepted; Biosight: Other: No payment but was reimbursed for travel . Levis:Menarini: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; FujiFilm: Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria, Research Funding. Ritchie:Abbvie: Honoraria; Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria; Jazz pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding. McCloskey:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria. Smith:Abbvie: Other: Research Support, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Astellas Pharma: Honoraria, Other: Research Support, Research Funding; FujiFilm: Other: Research support, Research Funding; Revolution Medicines: Other: Research Support, Research Funding; Daiichi Sanyko: Consultancy, Honoraria. Schiller:Johnson & Johnson: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sangamo: Research Funding; Tolero: Research Funding; Trovagene: Research Funding; Kaiser Permanente: Consultancy; Genentech-Roche: Research Funding; Geron: Research Funding; DeltaFly: Research Funding; Deciphera: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; FujiFilm: Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; Cyclacel: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Mateon: Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Gamida: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Stemline: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ono Pharma: Consultancy; Forma: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onconova: Research Funding; Pfizer: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding; Regimmune: Research Funding; Samus: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Sanofi: Speakers Bureau. Bradley:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Tiu:Astellas Pharma Global Development: Current Employment; Eli Lilly & Company: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Ended employment in the past 24 months. Hong:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Genentech, Inc.: Current Employment. Tong:AbbVie, Inc.: Current Employment, Other: may hold stock or other options. Qin:AbbVie: Current Employment, Other: may hold stock or other options. Dilley:AbbVie Inc.: Current Employment, Other: may hold stock or stock options. Perl:Leukemia & Lymphoma Society.: Other; AbbVie Inc, Astellas, Actinium, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Daiichi Sankyo Inc, FUJIFILM Pharmaceuticals USA Inc: Research Funding; AbbVie Inc, Actinium Pharmaceuticals Inc, Astellas, Daiichi Sankyo Inc, FORMA Therapeutics, Loxo Oncology Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly & Company, NewLink Genetics: Other; AbbVie Inc, Arog Pharmaceuticals Inc, Astellas, Daiichi Sankyo Inc: Consultancy; Astellas, AbbVie Inc, Daiichi Sankyo, Actinium, Forma, Syndax, Loxo: Consultancy, Honoraria. OffLabel Disclosure: Venetoclax is a B-cell lymphoma 2 inhibitor approved in combination with azacitidine, or decitabine, or low-dose cytarabine for the treatment of newly-diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in adults who are age 75 years or older, or who have comorbidities that preclude use of intensive induction chemotherapy. Gilteritinib is a kinase inhibitor indicated for the treatment of adult patients who have relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with an FLT3 mutation as detected by an FDA-approved test.