McMullin, Mary Frances

Abstract Background: Patients (pts) with polycythemia vera (PV) and essential thrombocythemia (ET) suffer from disease related events linked to risk of vascular events, splenomegaly, progression to myelofibrosis/acute leukemia, and disease related symptoms arising from both elevated cytokines and issues of vascular flow. Impact of front line therapy on ET/PV symptoms has not been reported in a systematic fashion. Methods: MPD-RC 112 trial (NCT01258856) enrolled cytoreductive therapy naïve (hydroxyurea [HU] <3 mo) pts with high risk ET or PV within 3 years of diagnosis. Pts were randomized (1:1, stratified by ET vs PV) to either response adjusted pegylated interferon alpha 2a (PEG) or HU. MPN symptoms, treatment toxicities, and quality of life (QoL) were measured by the MPN-SAF and EORTC QLQ-C30 at baseline and 3, 6, 9, and 12 mo. PEG related toxicities were assessed with 5 questions on PEG arm only. European Leukemia Net (ELN) complete hematological responses (CHR) at 12 mo were determined by central blinded review. Individual time point and longitudinal group comparisons were based on mixed models adjusting for age. T-tests were used to compare change scores at 12 mo between pts with and without CHR. Results: Patients: MPD-RC 112 enrolled 168 pts from 9/2011 to 7/2016, with 75 pts included in the interim analysis. 73 (97%; HU 37, 95%; PEG 36, 100%) completed surveys at baseline of which 66 (90%; HU 30, 81%; PEG 36, 100%) completed at least 1 survey during treatment. Median age was 60 (range 19-84) with 32 (44%) females; 30 (41%) / 43 (59%) with ET / PV; 19 (26%) had a history of thrombosis; and 16 (22%) had palpable spleen. Baseline characteristics where balanced between arms with the exception of age (median age: HU 66, PEG 54; p<0.001). Baseline Symptom Burden/QoL: Mean MPN-SAF Total Symptom Score (TSS, scale 0 [absent]-100 [worst imaginable]) was 15.4 (SD 12.5; range 0-52.2) with means of 12.6 (SD 11.7) / 17.3 (SD 12.7) for ET / PV which were somewhat better than reported means of a previous cohort receiving any line of treatment (ET mean 18.7, SD 15.3; PV mean 21.8, SD 16.3; Emanuel RM, JCO 2012). Symptoms (scale 0 [absent]-10 [worst imaginable]) with the highest prevalence (score >0) included fatigue (65/73, 89%) and insomnia (47/73, 64%). The symptom with the lowest prevalence was fever (8/72, 11%). Mean QLQ-C30 global health status/QoL (GHS/QoL) was 73.3 (SD 19.1) which is comparable to a general healthy population (mean 71.2, SD 22.4) and better than a general cancer population (mean 61.3, SD 24.2; QLQ-C30 Reference Manual 2008). TSS, symptoms, and QoL did not differ between arms. Impact of Therapy on Symptom Burden/QoL: On HU, pts initially experienced worsening of TSS, fatigue, early satiety, itching, bone pain, and fever (all p<0.05) with some symptoms returning to baseline after 6 mo (Table 1). On PEG, pts experienced improved abdominal pain and discomfort, but worsening of headache, cough, injection site irritation, blurry vision, and vision change (all p<0.05). Sad mood did not worsen on PEG, although this may be confounded by concurrent use of mood stabilizers. Concentration problems on PEG were significantly worse at 9 mo (p=0.04). Both arms experienced worsened QoL (MPN-SAF single item: HU p=0.009, PEG p=0.003). In comparing between arms, TSS significantly differed (p=0.009) with higher symptoms on HU vs PEG at 3 and 6 mo, but lower symptoms at 9 and 12 mo (Figure 1). Similar descriptive profiles were observed for most individual symptoms; however, the only symptom profiles which significantly differed between arms was early satiety (p=0.03). ELN Response and Symptom Burden/QoL: Among 62 pts with symptom and response data at 12 mo, CHR rate was 37% (23/62). Change in sad mood and sexuality were the only significant differences between pts with and without CHR regardless of arm though in the unanticipated direction (sad mood: mean change 1.5 vs -0.8, p<0.001; sexuality: mean change 2.33 vs 0.3, p=0.03). Conclusions: PEG was associated with an initial decrease in MPN symptom burden when compared to HU. However, with longer duration of therapy, this superiority dissipated. Patient-reported PEG toxicities worsened over time. On both arms, symptom worsening was observed in pts achieving an ELN CHR, possibly leading to the observed negative impact on mood and sexuality. Future research on the impact of PEG on disease progression and molecular features will be important to assess whether increased side effects with PEG are justified. Disclosures Mesa: CTI: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Galena: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Harrison:Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Baxaltra: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. McMullin:Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Yacoub:Alexion: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kiladjian:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Mead:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Kessler:Pfizer: Consultancy; Octapharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Research Funding; Grifols: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Biogen: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Baxalta: Consultancy, Research Funding; LFB: Other: Member of DSMB. Ritchie:Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Arian: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau. Schlenk:Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Mascarenhas:Promedior: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Other: DSMB , Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Incyte: Other: Clinical Trial Steereing Committee, Research Funding.

Abstract Background and purpose of the study: Several reports have documented that histone deacetylase inhibitors induce neoplastic cells to undergo growth arrest, differentiation and/or apoptotic cell death. Among these agents, Givinostat inhibits proliferation of cells bearing the JAK2V617F mutation and has shown clinical significant activity with good tolerability in patients with chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms, including polycythemia vera (PV). In two phase II studies [Rambaldi et al. Br J Haematol 2010;150:446, Finazzi et al. Br J Haematol 2013;161:688] the maximum administered dose (150 mg/day) was generally well tolerated. Assuming a linear relationship between dose and efficacy, greater clinical efficacy could be expected with increased doses of Givinostat. Methods: This is a two-part, multicenter, open label, non-randomized, phase Ib/II study to assess the safety and tolerability, maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and preliminary efficacy of Givinostat in patients with JAK2V617F positive PV. Part A (i.e. phase Ib) is the dose escalation portion of the study, while Part B assesses the preliminary clinical efficacy of Givinostat at the MTD defined in Part A. Eligible patients for this study include JAK2V617F positive PV patients, who have active and/or uncontrolled disease, defined as: (i) Hematocrit (HCT) ≥ 45% or HCT <45% normalized by phlebotomy, and (ii) PLT > 400 x109/L, and (iii) WBC > 10 x109/L. Study therapy is administered in 28 day cycles (cycle is defined as 4 weeks of treatment). Disease response has been evaluated according to the clinico-haematological European LeukemiaNet (ELN) criteria [Barosi et al. Blood 2009;113:4829] at Cycles 3 and 6. Disease-related symptoms have been reported directly by the patients who completed the MPN-SAF QoL form. The study lasts up to a maximum of 24 weeks of treatment. However, after completion of the trial, all patients achieving clinical benefit are allowed to continue treatment with Givinostat in a long-term study (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01761968). In Part A, the Cycle 1 has been used to define the MTD of Givinostat. Only dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) experienced during Cycle 1 were considered for dose escalation decisions. Part B is the cohort expansion part of the study to assess the preliminary clinical efficacy of Givinostat at the MTD in evaluable patients Results: In Part A, 12 patients with active and/or uncontrolled disease, were treated with Givinostat, 6 patients at DL1 (100 mg b.i.d.), 3 patient at DL6 (150 mg/die) and 3 patients at DL0 (50 mg b.i.d.). Only one DLT .(grade 3 dyspepsia) was observed in the 6 patients treated at DL1 during the Cycle 1. Givinostat treatment was generally well tolerated: one patient developed grade 4 and two patients grade 3 thrombocytopenias at DL1 after the Cycle 1. Complete/partial response was observed in 100% of evaluable patients at Cycle 3 (Figure). At that time, an important reduction of WBC and PLT count (about 50% in both cases), an HCT control without phlebotomy, a net decrease of MPN-SAF total score and JAK2V617F allele burden (about 50% and 30%, respectively) have been noted and generally maintained at Cycle 6. One out of 3 (33%) patients with splenomegaly at baseline normalized the spleen at Cycle 6. PK/PD evaluations are currently under analysis. Part B started on December 2015 and is currently recruiting patients. At the time of ASH Meeting, a presentation of the preliminary results of the interim analysis (IA) is planned. The objective of this IA is to evaluate the response rate of the first 12 treated and evaluable patients. Conclusions: Taking into account the continuous schedule of the drug as prescribed in this current study, the daily dosage of 200 mg has been identified as the MTD of Givinostat in PV patients. Givinostat treatment is generally well tolerated and shows preliminary clinical efficacy in PV patients with an active/uncontrolled disease. Response rate of patients in Part A C3D28 = Cycle 3 Day 28, or three months of treatment. C6D28 = Cycle 6 Day 28, or six months of treatment. Two patients dropped-out the study Part A, due to Informed Consent Form withdrawal, while 1 patient left the study for AE (i.e. grade 3 dyspepsia, DLT). At C3D28, 1 Complete Response (CR) and 8 Partial Response (PR) have been observed. At C6D28, 1 Complete Response (CR), 7 Partial Response (PR) and 1 No Response (NR) have been observed Figure Figure. Disclosures McMullin: Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Vannucchi:Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Mesa:Ariad: Consultancy; CTI: Research Funding; Galena: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding. Tibes:Italfarmaco S.p.A.: Consultancy, Honoraria. Bettica:Italfarmaco S.p.A.: Employment. DI Tollo:Italfarmaco S.p.A.: Employment.

Abstract Introduction The Classic Myeloproliferative Neoplasms (MPNs), characterised by an over production of one or more cells of the myeloid lineage, are classified into polycythaemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythaemia (ET) and primary myelofibrosis (PMF). Despite the identification of numerous genetic mutations, a paucity of information relating to medical and lifestyle factors contributing to the aetiology of these diseases remains. Methods The MOSAICC Study was an exploratory case-control study of MPNs. MPN patients were recruited between two sites, Belfast and Southampton, in preparation for a planned UK-wide investigation. Population controls (identified by General Practitioners) and non-blood relative/friend controls were also recruited. Participants completed a telephone-based questionnaire seeking information on a range of medical, environmental, lifestyle and occupational risk factors. Risk factors were assessed using unconditional logistic regression with adjustment for potential confounders. Results Risk factors identified included smoking [≥25 pack years vs. never: odds ratio (OR) 3.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26-7.87], increasing childhood household density [>2 vs <1 Child(ren)/room: OR 3.29, 95% CI 1.31-8.30], history of heart disease (OR 3.31, 95% CI 1.23-8.87), CT scans (≥3 vs. none: OR 4.92, 95% CI 1.55-15.67), having an implant (OR 10.77, 95% CI 1.01-3.10), and pig ownership (OR 5.92, 95% CI 1.17-29.92). Alcohol was associated with a reduced risk of MPNs (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.88) as was home working on car exhausts (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.12-0.88), painting at home (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.86) and short haul air travel (p for trend 0.012). Participants working in occupations with high exposure to environmental tobacco smoke had an excess risk of MPN (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.12-5.37). Work-based radiation and solvent exposure also appeared to increase risk of MPNs (p<0.05). Conclusions This exploratory study has confirmed a reported association between cigarette smoking and MPNs. It has identified some potential novel risk factors including work-based radiation and solvent exposure. The findings of this study need to be replicated in a larger, adequately powered, study in order to identify important risk factors for the classic MPNs. Conflict of Interest The authors declare no conflict of interest. Acknowledgments: The MOSAICC Study team acknowledges the support of the National Institute for Health Research, through the Northern Ireland Cancer Research Network (NICRN) and for Southampton the Central South Coast Cancer Network (CSCCN). The team thank those who have participated in the MOSAICC study and the personnel who assisted in the recruitment of patients. Disclosures Mesa: CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: The myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) including polycythaemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythaemia (ET) and primary myelofibrosis (PMF) are rare diseases which contribute to significant morbidity. Symptom management is a prime objective in MPN treatment but current symptom assessment tools have not been validated compared to the general population. Materials and Methods: The MPN Symptom Assessment Form (MPN-SAF) is a reliable and validated clinical tool used to assess MPN symptom burden. The MPN-SAF was administered to MPN patients (n=106) and, for the first time, General Practice and non-blood relative/family controls (n=124) as part of a UK pilot case-control study. Mean scores for individual MPN-SAF items and for the Total Symptom Score were previously compared between cases and controls adjusting for potential confounding variables (Anderson LA, et al. Am J Hematol. 2015). The current analysis employed linear discriminant analysis (a multivariate technique) to compare MPN-10 symptom profiles between controls and cases, and between controls and patient groups by MPN diagnosis (ET n=55, PV n=37, PMF n=14). Results: MPN patients as a single group had significantly different MPN-10 symptom profiles compared to controls (multivariate analysis of variance [MANOVA] p<0.001). Discriminant loadings which represent correlations between each individual MPN-10 item and the single significant canonical variable were >0.30 for all MPN-10 items, and >0.50 for weight loss, fatigue, night sweats, bone pain, abdominal discomfort, inactivity, concentration problems, and itching. This suggests that all MPN-10 items contribute to distinguishing between patients and controls. The linear discriminate function correctly categorized 72% of all subjects. When considering patients by diagnosis, MPN-10 symptom profiles significantly differed across patients with ET, PV, and PMF and controls (MANOVA p<0.001). Three canonical variables were significant, with discriminant loadings of the first canonical variable being >0.50 for the same MPN-10 items as the previous analysis; of the second canonical variable for fever; and of the third canonical variable for bone pain. This suggests that MPN-10 items are broadly useful in differentiating between patients and controls, with particular symptoms (e.g., fever and bone pain) contributing to differentiating between patients with different diagnoses. The linear discriminate function correctly categorized 58% of all subjects. Conclusions: MPN patients experience significant morbidity when compared to the general population highlighting the need to manage symptoms effectively. Symptom profiles can not only distinguish MPN patients from general population participants, but also distinguish among patients with ET, PV, and PMF. The results further validate the use of the MPN-SAF as a discriminatory tool to assess MPN symptomatic disease burden. The MOSAICC Study team acknowledges the support of the National Institute for Health Research, through the Northern Ireland Cancer Research Network (NICRN) and for Southampton the Central South Coast Cancer Network (CSCCN). Disclosures Mesa: Novartis. Research- incyte, Gilead, cti, Genentech, promedior, NS Pharma: Consultancy.

Abstract Abstract 1736 Background: Histone deacetylase inhibition (HDACi) has shown a potent inhibitory activity on the autonomous proliferation of hematopoietic cells of PV and ET patients carrying the JAK2V617F mutation (Leukemia. 2008;22(4):740–7). Hematological responses have been recorded during treatment with the HDACi givinostat in patients with PV and myelofibrosis (Blood. 2011; 118:a1748). Additionally, combinational use of givinostat and hydroxyurea (HU) have shown encouraging clinical response in PV (Br J Haematol. 2010;150:446–55). Recent laboratory studies of vorinstat-treated JAK2V617F knock-in mice have observed normalization of peripheral blood counts, markedly reduced splenomegaly and decreased mutant allele burden (Blood 2012; 119, 3779–89). Despite this evidence of hematologic response, to date no studies have evaluated specific changes in symptom burden among PV and ET patients treated with HDACi. METHODS ET and PV patients from the UK were enrolled in a non-randomized, open-label phase II multicenter study of the HDACi vorinostat (Haematologica 2011;96(s2):a1023). Patients were asked to complete the 18 item Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Assessment Form (MPN-SAF) (Blood 2011;118:401–408), 9 item Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) (Cancer 1999;85:1186–1196) and 30 item EORTC QLQ-C30 (J Natl Cancer Inst 1993; 85(5):365-76) at enrollment, week 12, week 24, and week 36. From weeks 1 through 24, participants were given 400mg of vorinostat daily and were observed from weeks 24 to 36. RESULTS Participant Demographics and Mutational Status: 15 PV and 10 ET patients were enrolled in the study. Median age of participants was 65 and 48% of participants were female. JAK2 mutations were present in 5/10 (50%) of ET and 14/15 (93%) of PV patients. Change in Symptom Severity with Vorinostat: Although most symptom severity changes did not reach statistical significance likely due to the small sample size, individual symptoms of headache (mean 1.6 baseline to 0.5 wk 36, mean maximum improvement 0.5 from baseline), dizziness (mean 1.6 baseline to 0.9 wk 36, mean maximum improvement 0.6 from baseline), sad mood (mean 2.6 baseline to 1.9 wk 36, mean max improvement 0.2 from baseline), and bone pain (mean 2.7 baseline to 0.8 wk 36, mean max improvement 0.7 from baseline) indicated consistent reductions in severity. Change in Symptom Incidence with Vorinostat: Non-sustained reductions in symptom incidence were seen with initiation of therapy for items of dizziness (50% baseline, 43% wk12, 55% wk 24, and 38% wk 36), numbness (65% baseline, 38% wk 12, 36% wk 24, 63% wk 36), sad mood (55% baseline, 47% wk 12, 40% wk 24, 50% wk 36), and itching (65% baseline, 50% wk 12, 40% wk 24, 75% wk 36). Change in MPN-SAF TSS Score with Vorinostat: Overall, MPN-SAF TSS did not vary significantly for the cohort over the course of the study (score change −.4 week 12, −0.5 week 24, −1.2 week 36, Figure 1). However, 9/17 participants who had a TSS of at least 6 at baseline had an overall improvement of at least 6 points (a moderate improvement) on at least one assessment after baseline. Of these, 5 of those 9 participants had an improvement of at least 10 points, which constitutes a large improvement in symptom burden based on a distributional definition of clinical significance using the standard deviation from a previous cohort. CONCLUSION This study represents the first analysis of symptom burden among PV and ET patients receiving vorinostat to date. In addition to previously identified changes in clinical and hematologic response, reductions in symptom burden including QOL and fatigue were observed in patients receiving vorinostat therapy which was most noticeable in patients with high baseline burden. The toxicity profile of vorinostat also suggests that better results might have observed if individualized assessment of clinicohematological responses including an integrated a marker for response into daily clinical practice and tailoring pharmacotherapy based on side effect profile (Leukemia. 2012;26(5):1148–9). Although further investigation among larger cohorts is needed, preliminary data is encouraging for successful therapeutic use of vorinostat in a clinical setting and with possible combinational therapy to reduce symptom burden among PV and ET patients. Disclosures: Harrison: Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; YM Bioscience: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria; Shire: Honoraria, Research Funding. Mesa:Incyte: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; YM Bioscience: Research Funding.

Abstract MAJIC is a phase II trial of Ruxolitinib (RUX) vs Best Available Therapy (BAT) in essential thrombocythemia (ET) patients with resistance/intolerance to Hydroxycarbamide (HC) per European LeukemiaNet (ELN) criteria. Primary outcome was rate of complete hematological response (CHR) within 1 year (ELN criteria); secondary outcomes included partial HR, safety, thrombosis, hemorrhage, progression free survival (including transformation), molecular response (MR), symptom & quality of life (QOL) assessment. We present new data concerning molecular, symptom & clinical responses. Patients were stratified by JAK2V617F status, patient-reported symptoms & QOL determined using EQ5D, MDASI & MPN Symptom Assessment Form (MPN10), & compared using linear mixed models of post-baseline scores through month 12 adjusting for baseline; response was defined as ≥50% reduction in MPN10 total symptom score (TSS). JAK2/CALR/MPL allele burdens were assessed at baseline & 4 monthly. 110 patients were eligible for the modified ITT analysis, 58 (52%) & 52 (48%) in RUX & BAT arms respectively, comprising 44 males, 66 females, mean age 64.2ys, & resistant (24.5%), intolerant (51.8%) or both (22.7%) to HC. CHR was achieved in 27 (46.6%) of RUX patients vs 23 (44.2%) BAT patients (χ2 test p= 0.81). PHR occurred in 26 (44.8%) & 27 (51.9%) of RUX & BAT treated respectively. Grade 3 or 4 anemia occurred in 19% & 0% for RUX arm vs 0% (both grades) for BAT arm, grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia in 5.2% & 1.7% of RUX vs 0% (both grades) of BAT patients respectively. Grade 3 or 4 infections occurred in 10.3% of RUX patients vs 3.6% BAT arm. 9 RUX treated patients had 10 thrombotic events & 1 RUX patient a hemorrhage; vs 5 thrombotic & 5 hemorrhagic events in BAT patients (adjusted following central review). Transformations to post-ET MF occurred in 8 RUX vs 3 BAT treated patients, 1 RUX patient developed AML. 2 non-treatment related deaths occurred in each arm. Mean MPN-10 TSS & individual symptoms of early satiety & itching during the first 12 months were all significantly lower for RUX vs BAT (all p<0.05). Patients who achieved CHR had significantly better TSS, fatigue, inactivity, concentration problems, & MDASI symptom interference (all p<0.05) at baseline vs those without; however, scores during treatment did not appear to differ between CHR & non CHR groups after adjusting for these baseline differences. Allele burden during study & MRs (per ELN-IWG criteria Barosi Blood 2013) are shown in Table 1. Assays for JAK2 V617F were performed independently in 3 centres using qPCR (Guy's), TSCA NGS (Oxford) & amplicon-based NGS (Salisbury) & revealed Mean (range): JAK2 (Guy's): 33.2 (0.1-94.6), N=52; JAK2 (Oxford): 38.0 (0.5-92.2), N=52; JAK2 (Sal): 38.3 (0-90.0), N=50 (limited to JAK2 positive only). With Interclass Correlation Coefficient as follows ICC (Guy's v Oxford): 0.92 (95% CI 0.86-0.95) ICC (Guy's v Sal): 0.92 (95% CI 0.86-0.95) ICC (Oxford v Sal): 0.997 (95% CI 0.994-0.998). Notably MRs (n=5) only occurred with RUX treatment. There was no pattern of MR or progression with C/PHR or transformation, but 1 patient who transformed to PET MF had a complete MR. In a separate analysis baseline symptoms & QOL were not associated with JAK2, CALR, nor MPL status. Within RUX, baseline symptoms & QOL did not predict MR; however, fatigue, early satiety & abdominal discomfort (all p<0.05, Table 1) were significantly lower among those with MR vs not during treatment with a descriptively higher symptom response rate (2/4 [50%] vs 9/30 [30%]). Three non pre-specified multivariate analyses were performed to assess baseline factors influencing CHR (modelled for: treatment received, HC resistance or intolerance, white cell count, platelets, Hb & JAK2/CALR status); occurrence of ≥ grade 3 anemia or thrombocytopenia (modelled for: Hb (≥ 100g/dl) JAK2/CALR status); & transformation to PET-MF (modelled for: treatment, Hb ≤100g/dl). Only baseline Hb ≤100g/dl was significant for grade 3+ anemia (OR [95% CI]=0.17 [0.04, 0.72]), & PET-MF only occurred in patients with baseline WBC <10x109/L. This updated analysis shows that HC resistant/intolerant ET is clinically & molecularly diverse. We confirm that these patients are at high risk of thrombosis & transformation as suggested in prior retrospective studies. Molecular responses were limited to RUX & for the first time we demonstrate such responses may correlate with symptom improvement but not always with progression events. Disclosures Harrison: Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Baxaltra: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Mead:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Aliman:Novartis: Other: Institutional funding and grant for international conference. . Chen:Novartis: Other: Advisory Board. Coppell:Novartis: Other: Travel, accommodation and conference attendance. Knapper:ONO pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Other: Travel and expenses for international conferences. Ali:Novartis: Honoraria, Other: Conference sponsorship, advisory board meetings. Hamblin:Novartis: Other: Advisory Board. Dueck:Bayer: Honoraria. Cross:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Mesa:Celgene: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Galena: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. McMullin:Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau.

Abstract Background: Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) including polycythemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET), and myelofibrosis (MF) are clonal hemopathies characterized by burdensome symptom profiles and impaired quality of life. Few studies have evaluated patient-reported outcomes during treatment with non-experimental pharmacological regimens. Aims: The Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Quality of Life (MPN-QOL) Study Group aims to objectively quantify MPN symptom severity, frequency and quality of life at baseline and throughout treatment with non-experimental therapies utilizing the Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form - Total Symptom Score (MPN-SAF TSS; JCO 2012). In this abstract, we provide updated results for the prospective international cohort trial currently in active enrollment: the MPN Experimental Assessment of Symptoms by Utilizing Repetitive Evaluation (MEASURE) trial. Methods: This study aims to recruit 180 international ET, PV, and MF (including primary MF and post-ET or post-PV MF) patients receiving non-experimental medical therapy and/or phlebotomy. Patients complete the MPN-SAF for seven consecutive days at enrollment and repeat the survey for an additional seven consecutive days between 90 days and six months. Patients also complete the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) instruments at enrollment and on the first day of the second assessment. At visits, physicians acquired demographic, laboratory, physical examination, and radiographic data. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize data. Results: Clinical Data The MEASURE trial opened for enrollment in 2012 and remains in recruitment phase with 15 participating international sites. To date, 39 patients have been enrolled and 25 have completed both study visits. Participants include ET (28%), PV (24%), and MF (48%; 50% primary MF, 8% post-ET, 42% post-PV) patients. The majority of patients are male (64%) and of expected age (mean 69.3, range 39-89) for the disorders. Seventeen percent had prior thrombosis, 9% required red blood cell transfusion, and none reported prior splenectomy or hemorrhage. Mean hematologic measures included hemoglobin 13.2 g/dL, WBC count 11.4 x109/L, ANC 8.5 x109/L, and platelets 514 x109/L. Therapies received prior to enrollment included aspirin (n=16), hydroxyurea (n=11), phlebotomy (n=8), warfarin/clopidogrel/anticoagulation (n=8), erythropoietin (n=2), and interferon (n=1). The most common current MPN therapies were hydroxyurea (n=9), aspirin (n=9), interferon (n=4), and phlebotomy (n=2). Symptom Assessment In comparing MPN-SAF TSS mean symptom scores, all symptoms except bony pain improved between the first and second visits, including fatigue, early satiety, abdominal discomfort, inactivity, concentration, night sweats, itching, fever, weight loss, and overall quality of life (Figure1). Total MPN-SAF TSS scores improved from a mean of 32.3 to 25.9. On the EORTC, mean scores for physical, role, emotional, and social functioning improved from the first to the second visit (Figure 2). Cognitive functioning showed a slight decline. Global health status measure improved from 60.2 to 72.9. On the MDASI, symptom severity scores decreased from 3.6 to 2.8 from the first to second visit (Figure 3). Symptom distress measure decreased from 4.1 to 3.0. Discussion: Interim results from the MEASURE trial demonstrate that standard, non-experimental treatment regimens offer improvement in quality of life-related symptoms on multiple patient-reported survey instruments including the MPN-SAF TSS, EORTC QLQ-C30, and MDASI. Updated data including symptom correlations and mutational analysis to be presented at the 2016 ASH conference. Disclosures Ross: Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria. Radia:Novartis: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. McMullin:Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Cargo:Novartis: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Sekhar:Novartis: Research Funding. Mesa:Gilead: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Galena: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy; Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Cytoreductive therapy with hydroxyurea (HU) has been considered first line therapy for patients with high risk polycythemia vera (PV) and essential thrombocythemia (ET) since the results of the PVSG-08 trial demonstrated thrombotic risk reduction (Fruchtman SM et al 1997) for PV and PT1 for ET (Harrison CN et al 2005). Although HU is well tolerated by most patients and has been shown to reduce thrombotic risk in this setting, concern regarding the leukemogenic potential of this oral ribonucleotide reductase inhibitor balanced by the observation of molecular responses with interferon-α (IFN-α) led us to compare the clinical response and tolerability of pegIFN-α (PEG) and HU in a global, randomized, phase III trial. Methods : MPD-RC 112 trial (NCT01258856) enrolled patients with high risk (age >60 years, history of thrombosis, extreme thrombocytosis, symptomatic splenomegaly, uncontrolled cardiovascular risk factors), newly diagnosed (<5 years), WHO defined ET/PV that were treatment naïve (HU <3 months) and randomized (1:1) to PEG or HU. The primary endpoint was complete hematologic response (CHR) rate by European LeukemiaNet (ELN) criteria between the arms after 12 months of therapy. A planned interim analysis based on intent-to-treat with testing boundaries for efficacy and futility was conducted after 75 patients were on study for 12 months. Response assessment by ELN criteria were conducted by blinded review by 4 investigators (JM, RAM, AY, RH). Intent-to-treat analysis was conducted for efficacy endpoints (HU n=39; PEG n=36). Safety analysis included all patients who received treatment (HU n=36; PEG n=36). Results: Patients: The MPD-RC 112 trial involved 24 centers in 6 countries; enrollment began 09/2011 and concluded 7/2016 prior to full accrual due to study drug availability with 168 patients enrolled (Table 1 for 75 patients in the interim analysis). There was no imbalance between arms with respect to history of thrombosis, erythromelalgia, diabetes, hypertension, but age was significantly older on HU. This remained true when analyzing by ET/PV disease strata with the exception of diabetes which was slightly imbalanced within the PV cohort (HU 5/23, 22%; PEG 0/21, 0%; p<0.05). Response: CHR and PHR were observed in 13 (33%) and 14 (36%) patients for an overall response rate (ORR) of 69% (27/39) for HU, and 10 (28%) and 19 (53%) for an ORR of 81% (29/36) for PEG (CHR comparison p=0.60 based on z-test which did not cross either testing boundary). 10 patients randomized to HU were not evaluable for 12-month response due to never initiating treatment (n=3) or early study discontinuation for AEs (n=1), patient withdrawal (n=5), or treatment non-compliance (n=1). 3 patients were not evaluable for response on PEG due to early study discontinuation for AEs (n=1), physician decision (n=1), or patient withdrawal (n=1). Excluding patients who never initiated treatment did not impact the primary endpoint comparison (HU 13/36, 36%; PEG 10/36, 28%; p=0.45). For ET, CHR and PHR were observed in 7 (44%) and 4 (25%) patient on HU, and 6 (40%) and 6 (40%) for PEG (CHR comparison p=0.83). For PV, CHR and PHR were observed in 6 (26%) and 10 (44%) patients on HU, and 4 (19%) and 13 (62%) for PEG (CHR comparison p=0.58). Normalization of spleen by palpation at 12 months was seen in 2/7 (29%) and 5/7 (71%) of the HU and PEG treated patients with palpable spleen at baseline, respectively. Among 38 PV patients, rate of phlebotomy use at 12 months was 0/18 (0%) vs 5/20 (20%) on HU and PEG (p=0.02). From baseline to best score through 12 months, 9/28 (32%) and 12/34 (35%) patients with data on HU and PEG, respectively, had a ≥50% reduction in MPN-SAF Total Symptom Score (p=0.79). Toxicity: No Grade 4 AEs occurred in either treatment arm. Overall, Grade 3 AEs occurred in 5/36 (14%) HU patients and 16/36 (44%) PEG patients (Grade 3 hematologic: 4/36 [11%] HU vs 8/36 [22%] PEG; Grade 3 non-hematologic: 5/36 [14%] HU vs 16/36 [44%] PEG). See Table 2 for Grade 3 AEs regardless of attribution occurring in >10% of patients in either arm. Conclusions: This interim analysis does not show a clear difference in primary endpoint of CHR between HU and PEG. A comparative analysis of the quality of life and symptom burden will provide further insight into the tolerability of these agents (Mesa et al ASH 2016). The final results of this pivotal trial will provide necessary data required to firmly establish the optimal first line therapy for patients with high risk ET/PV. Disclosures Mascarenhas: CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Novartis: Other: DSMB , Research Funding; Incyte: Other: Clinical Trial Steereing Committee, Research Funding. Mesa:Celgene: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Galena: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Yacoub:Alexion: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Harrison:Baxaltra: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. McMullin:Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Vannucchi:Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kiladjian:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Mead:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Kessler:Incyte: Honoraria. Ritchie:Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding. Schlenk:Amgen: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Key Points After hydroxycarbamide therapy in high-risk ET, ruxolitinib showed no improvement for complete or partial response rates compared with BAT. Ruxolitinib significantly improved some disease-related symptoms, but rates of thrombosis, hemorrhage, or transformation were not different.

The myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) including polycythaemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythaemia and primary myelofibrosis (PMF) are rare diseases contributing to significant morbidity. Symptom management is a prime treatment objective but current symptom assessment tools have not been validated compared to the general population. The MPN‐symptom assessment form (MPN‐SAF), a reliable and validated clinical tool to assess MPN symptom burden, was administered to MPN patients (n = 106) and, for the first time, population controls (n = 124) as part of a UK case–control study. Mean symptom scores were compared between patients and controls adjusting for potential confounders. Mean patient scores were compared to data collected by the Mayo Clinic, USA on 1,446 international MPN patients to determine patient group representativeness. MPN patients had significantly higher mean scores than controls for 25 of the 26 symptoms measured (P < 0.05); fatigue was the most common symptom (92.4% and 78.1%, respectively). Female MPN patients suffered worse symptom burden than male patients (P < 0.001) and substantially worse burden than female controls (P < 0.001). Compared to the Mayo clinic patients, MPN‐UK patients reported similar symptom burden but lower satiety (P = 0.046). Patients with PMF reported the worst symptom burden (88.3%); significantly higher than PV patients (P < 0.001). For the first time we report quality of life was worse in MPN‐UK patients compared with controls (P < 0.001). Am. J. Hematol. 90:864–870, 2015. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.