Strickland, Stephen Anthony

Abstract Introduction: Midostaurin was the first multikinase inhibitor approved in combination with daunorubicin and cytarabine induction and high-dose cytarabine (HiDAC) consolidation chemotherapy for the treatment of adults with newly diagnosed FLT3-mutation-positive (mut+) acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Approval was largely based on the results from the phase 3 RATIFY trial; patients who received midostaurin had significantly improved overall and event-free survival than those who received placebo (Stone et al, N Engl J Med, 2017). RADIUS-X (NCT02624570) is an expanded treatment protocol (ETP) designed to provide access to midostaurin during the US Food and Drug Administration's review process and to extend the understanding of the safety and tolerability of midostaurin in patients with newly diagnosed FLT3-mut+ AML. The safety profile of midostaurin in preliminary data from RADIUS-X was consistent with that in the RATIFY study (Roboz et al, Blood, 2017 [abstract 1338]). Here we report updated safety data for midostaurin during induction and consolidation and safety data during the maintenance phase. Methods: In this open-label, single-arm ETP, patients (aged ≥18 years) received 1-2 cycles of induction therapy (cytarabine plus daunorubicin [60-90 mg/m2/day] or idarubicin [12 mg/m2/day]) and up to 4 cycles of HiDAC consolidation chemotherapy plus midostaurin (50 mg twice daily [bid] on days 8-21 of each 28-day cycle), followed by up to 12 months of single-agent midostaurin (50 mg bid on days 1-28). Patients could enroll at any point before completion of a second cycle of consolidation. Patients achieving complete remission (CR) or CR with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi) after induction proceeded to consolidation; patients who maintained a response were eligible to proceed to maintenance. The primary endpoints were safety and tolerability of midostaurin. Results: Of 111 patients screened, 103 were enrolled in the study: 47 during induction (46%) and 56 during consolidation (54%) (Figure). The median age was 58 y (range, 19-79 y); all patients were FLT3-mut+ (Table). Of 47 patients enrolled during induction, 15 received daunorubicin and 32 received idarubicin as the anthracycline. Of 35 patients who completed consolidation and entered maintenance, 9 had completed the protocol treatment and 3 remained on therapy at the data cutoff date (March 30, 2018). The CR/CRi rate for the induction phase was 74% (57% CR, 17% CRi). The relapse rate was 14% overall. The most common reason for study discontinuation was proceeding to transplant (overall, 52%; induction, 11%; consolidation, 42%; maintenance, 34%). The median duration of midostaurin exposure was 35 days (range, 3-426 days). Dose adjustment or interruption due to adverse events (AEs) occurred in 26 patients, most commonly due to febrile neutropenia (n=9) and gastrointestinal disorders (n=6). No new safety events were observed with longer follow-up. Most patients (99%) experienced ≥1 any-grade AE, mostly during induction and/or consolidation. Due to the timing of patient enrollment (up to the second cycle of consolidation), hematologic AEs were lower than reported in comparable studies. The most common AEs occurring in ≥20% of patients were febrile neutropenia (53%), nausea (42%), diarrhea (37%), anemia (36%), platelet count decreased (31%), fatigue (23%), headache (22%), and vomiting (22%). Serious AEs occurred in 50% of patients overall, most commonly febrile neutropenia (37%). AEs during induction were generally similar, regardless of anthracycline received. Overall, 9 patients discontinued due to AEs: 5 during induction (febrile neutropenia, blood bilirubin increased, electrocardiogram QT prolonged, renal impairment, and respiratory distress), 1 during consolidation (sepsis), and 1 during maintenance (leukocytosis). During maintenance, 16 of 35 patients (46%) reported any-grade AEs with midostaurin monotherapy; the most common any-grade and grade 3/4 AEs occurring in >1 patient were platelet count decrease (11% and 3%), nausea (9% and 0%), and oropharyngeal pain (6% and 0%).The rate of death during the study was low, with 1 death reported (disease progression). Conclusions: Midostaurin continued to demonstrate a manageable safety profile with longer follow-up and was associated with high transplant and low relapse rates. Maintenance therapy with midostaurin was well tolerated; no new safety signals were observed. Disclosures Perl: Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Arog: Consultancy; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Actinium Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Consultancy; NewLink Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sweet:Agios: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Roboz:Novartis: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Eisai: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Argenx: Consultancy; Orsenix: Consultancy; Aphivena Therapeutics: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Orsenix: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Celltrion: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Celltrion: Consultancy; Cellectis: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; Otsuka: Consultancy; Otsuka: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Eisai: Consultancy; Aphivena Therapeutics: Consultancy; Argenx: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Cellectis: Research Funding; Sandoz: Consultancy. Strickland:Astellas Pharma: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Baxalta: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bonifacio:Novartis: Employment. Haines:Novartis: Employment. Barbera:Novartis: Employment. Purkayastha:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment.

Abstract Background SAR650984 (SAR) is a naked humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody (mAb) that binds selectively to the human surface antigen CD38 highly expressed in multiple myeloma cells and other hematological malignancies. SAR kills tumor cells via 3 different biological mechanisms: Antibody-dependent cellular-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC), complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) and Induction of apoptosis (pro-apoptosis). Here we present preliminary data from the ongoing first in human, Phase I dose escalation study of SAR in patients with selected CD38+ hematological malignancies. (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01084252) Objectives The primary objective is to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Secondary objectives include characterization of safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), immunogenicity and disease response. Methods SAR is administered as a single agent IV infusion every week (QW) or every 2 weeks (Q2W) to adult patients with selected CD38+ hematological malignancies who have progressed on or after standard therapy or for whom no effective standard therapy exists. An accelerated dose escalation schedule was used for the first 5 dose levels (DL) (0.0001 mg/kg to 0.1 mg/kg Q2W), with one evaluable patient per DL unless DLT was experienced. All subsequent DL (0.3 mg/kg, 1 mg/kg, 3 mg/kg, 5mg/kg, 10 mg/kg, 20 mg/kg Q2W and 10 mg/kg QW), followed the classic 3+3 design for dose escalation based on DLT. Results 32 patients have been treated across all DLs including 3 patients with NHL, 2 with CLL, and 27 with MM. The 20 mg/kg Q2W and 10 mg/kg QW DLs are currently being evaluated and the MTD has not been reached. DLTs have been limited to Grade (G) 2 infusion reactions during cycle 1 with 1 at DL 0.3 mg/kg and 1 at DL 3.0 mg/kg. This was mitigated by the implementation of routine pretreatment with methylprednisone, diphenhydramine, ranitidine and acetaminophen. The most frequent occurring adverse events (≥ 10%) all DL, regardless of causality, are fatigue (46.9%), nausea (31.3%), pyrexia (28.1%), cough (25%), vomiting (21.9%), hypercalcemia (18.8%), with headache, constipation, bone pain, chills and diarrhea each occurring in 15.6% of patients. In addition, pneumonia, anemia, dysgeusia and hypokalemia each occurred in 12.5% of patients. Serious adverse events considered related to therapy include G 3 pneumonia (6.3%) associated with fever (3.1%), hyperglycemia (3.1%) and one Grade 2 infusion reaction (3.1%). Of the 19 patients treated at DL 1.0 mg/kg to 10 mg/kg Q2W, 1 had CLL, 1 had NHL and 17 had MM. The 17 MM patients were older and heavily pretreated patients; median age of 64 years (range: 55-74); and median of seven prior regimens (range: 2-14). All MM patients had received prior lenalidomide and bortezomib. The median time from diagnosis to first SAR650984 dosing was 6. 8 years (range 1.8 – 16.8 years). Responses in this group (fig 1), according to EBMT MM criteria, included 1 PR at 1 mg/kg (n = 3) and 5 mg/kg (n=3), and 1 MR at DL 3 mg/kg (n = 6). The 10 mg/kg DL demonstrated 3 PR and 2 SD among 6 MM patients treated. For the 19 patients treated at or above the 1 mg/kg DL the median time on treatment is 8 weeks (range 2-50 weeks). Immunogenicity studies show no anti-SAR antibodies. Receptor Occupancy could be detected from DL 1 mg/kg and reached a range of 84.1 to 97.7 % at 10 mg/kg. PK analysis show a more than dose proportional increase of exposure over the 0.03 to 10 mg/kg dose range with clearance in a similar range between 5 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg. No accumulation was observed based on Cmax at cycle 2 over the 0.03 to 3 mg/kg dose range. Tumor growth inhibition threshold was reached at Cmax for 1 patient at DL 5 mg/kg and 5 patients at DL 10 mg/kg. Conclusion The safety profile of SAR is predictable and manageable and the MTD has not been reached. SAR demonstrates encouraging single agent activity in patients with heavily pretreated RRMM and warrants further evaluation in this patient population. Disclosures: Zheng: sanofi: Employment. Daskalakis:sanofi: Employment.

Abstract Introduction: High-dose cytarabine consolidation chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) induces profound transient myelosuppression. Thrombocytopenia is a limiting factor in chemotherapy administration for maintaining dose intensity and schedule as thrombocytopenic-related hemorrhage may contribute to significant morbidity and mortality. Therapeutic and prophylactic platelet (plt) transfusions remain the treatment of choice but the benefits typically last only 3-7 days, are expensive, time consuming, and may induce alloimmunization and transmit infection. PrE0901 was a phase I multi-center study to evaluate the safety and toxicity of eltrombopag, an orally bioavailable thrombopoietin (TPO) receptor agonist, for plt recovery in AML patients (pts) receiving consolidation therapy. Methods: The primary objectives were to determine the safety, tolerability, and optimal dosing of eltrombopag while describing the kinetics of plt recovery in AML pts receiving intensive consolidation. Plt recovery was defined as a sustained plt count of ≥ 20 x 109/L following the nadir with no plt transfusions in prior 7 days or a continued upward trend in plt count for at least 2 successive measurements despite no plt transfusions in 48 hours. We used a standard 3+3 design utilizing a novel dose escalation/de-escalation strategy for pts in either first or second complete remission, ≥18 and ≤70 years of age, who had an ECOG performance status of 0-2. Cytarabine was administered at 3 g/m2 (1.5 g/m2 for pts >60 years) IV over 3 hours twice daily on days 1,3,5. Eltrombopag at assigned dose was administered with a first cycle of cytarabine only. Planned eltrombopag dose levels -2, -1, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 were 50, 100, 150, 150, 150, 200, and 300 mg, respectively (Table 1). Eltrombopag was to start on days X, X, 3, -1, -5, -5, and -5 relative to day of cytarabine start and levels -2, -1, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively, with day X being variable depending on timing of observed dose limiting toxicities (DLTs). The eltrombopag was continued until plt recovery or for up to 35 consecutive days, whichever occurred first. An exploratory objective was to determine if eltrombopag had an effect on TPO and EPO blood concentrations in this setting. Results: Accrual began on July 31, 2012 and the trial closed on January 8, 2016 upon recommendation after an independent Data and Monitoring Committee reviewed a separate trial of eltrombopag therapy in MDS which demonstrated futility. 104 pts were screened. 54 declined participation and 35 were deemed medically ineligible. A total of 15 eligible pts were enrolled; 14 were treated on study with one pt being withdrawn prior to starting treatment due to infection. Three pts were treated at each of dose levels 1-4 and two were treated on dose level 5. No DLTs were observed. Median time to plt recovery of all pts treated on study was 22.5 (range 16-43) days. Pts in cohort 1 dosed with eltrombopag 150 mg daily starting on day 3 of consolidation demonstrated the fastest plt recovery (median =19 days; range 19, 19, 19) compared to cohort 2 who received 150 mg daily starting on day -1 of consolidation and recovered the slowest (median 23 days; range 16, 23, 43). Dose escalation in terms of starting eltrombopag further in advance of chemotherapy exposure as within cohort 3 (150 mg starting day -5) was associated with a median plt recovery of 27 (range 22, 27, 27) days. Eltrombopag dose intensification with cohort 4 at 200 mg daily and cohort 5 at 300 mg daily was associated with median plt recoveries of 24 (range 18, 24, 26) and 23 (range 19, 27) days, respectively. Kinetics of plt recovery for all cohorts are represented in Figure 1 and duration of eltrombopag exposure for each individual patient is represented in Table 2. Conclusions: Endogenous cytokine (TPO and EPO) levels varied inversely with plt and hematocrit values and did not appear to be affected by eltrombopag dose / schedule (details to be provided at ASH Annual Mtg). Unusually high screen fail numbers warrant examination to guide future trial design in the post-remission setting. The addition of eltrombopag to high-dose cytarabine consolidation therapy was well-tolerated and no DLTs were observed. The results for cohort 1 [eltrombopag 150 mg daily starting on day 3 of consolidation] demonstrated the fastest plt recovery. Further investigation is needed to define the optimal role, dose, and schedule of eltrombopag in the treatment of chemotherapy associated myelosuppression. Disclosures Strickland: Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Ambit: Consultancy; Baxalta: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Cyclacel: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutica: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 579 Background: In AML, age and cytogenetics remain among the major prognostic factors. Age above 55 years and a complex karyotype (CK; ≥ 3 abnormal clones) or the presence of monosomy 7 (M7) are universally associated with unfavorable prognosis. Recent data from HOVON-SAKK (J Clin Onc 26: 4791) suggest that in patients under the age of 60 years, subgroups with poor risk versus very poor risk can be delineated based on the presence of a MK. MK was defined as either the presence of at least two autosomal monosomies or one monosomy plus at least one structural abnormality. Limited data exists regarding the impact of MK in AML patients over the age of 55 years. Methods: Data from 935 AML patients above age 55 enrolled on three prospective ECOG therapeutic clinical trials (E1490, E3993, E3999) between 1990 and 2005 were retrospectively reviewed to identify those with MK with single and/or multiple monosomies, MK in the presence or absence of a CK, CK with/without MK, MK with/without M7, and normal karyotype (CN). CK was defined as ≥ 3 clonal abnormalities for the purposes of this study. Complete remission (CR), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Results: The median age of evaluable patients was 68 years (range 56 – 93) with a male/female ratio of 391/299. Cytogenetic data were evaluable in 690 (74%) subjects. Clonal cytogenetic abnormalities occurred in 399 (58%). Core-binding factor (CBF) abnormalities accounted for 16/399 (4%) whereas CK was detected in 181/399 (45%). MK was present in 172 (25%) evaluable cases, predominantly in the setting of CK (140/172, 81%). Overall CR was 44%. CR was achieved in 49% MK−, 29% MK+, 31% CK+, and 49% of CK−. Data for the combinations of MK and CK are presented in Table 1. Median follow-up for survivors was 5.0 years. OS at 4-years was 9% for all evaluable patients and 4y-DFS was 12% in those achieving CR. Median OS of MK+/CK+ (0.3y) was significantly worse (p<0.001) than MK+/CK−(0.6y), MK−/CK+ (0.8y), and MK−/CK−(0.9y). Median DFS of MK+/CK+ (0.3y) was also significantly poorer (p<0.001) than MK+/CK− (0.9y), MK−/CK+ (0.8y), and MK−/CK− (0.9y). M7 was present in 82 (13%) enrolled patients with 98% (80/82) of M7 occurring within a MK. CR was achieved in 31% of MK+/M7+ and 27% of MK+/M7−. Neither median OS nor DFS were significantly impacted by M7 status as noted in Table 2. Conclusions: AML patients above the age of 55 years have an unfavorable prognosis with the majority of patients harboring adverse clonal cytogenetic abnormalities and failing to achieve a CR. Fewer than 10% survive 4-years from diagnosis. Results from the ECOG experience demonstrate the prognostic predictive value of MK in older AML patients. In contrast to the data presented by the HOVAN-SAKK group, the prognostic value of MK in patients over 55 years is limited to those with MK in combination with CK. These results also demonstrate the failure of monosomy 7 to provide prognostic value in the setting of MK. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Background: A majority of younger pts with AML receive initial therapy with a 7+3 scheme. Escalated doses of daunorubicin (dauno) in combination with standard doses of ara-C may lead to improved outcomes (Fernandez; NEJM 2009). A phase II trial of idarubicin and high-dose ara-C (IA) in combination with the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat (IA+V) resulted in historically high response rates compared to IA or 7+3 (Garcia-Manero; JCO 2011). SWOG 1203 tested whether a high-dose ara-C induction with or without vorinostat could result in improved outcomes for younger AML pts compared to 7+3. Methods: The primary endpoints were comparison of event-free survival (EFS) of 7+3 vs IA vs IA+V and evaluating the frequency of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. Secondary endpoints included toxicity, remission rate, relapse-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS) according to treatment arm, and by cytogenetic and molecular subgroups. Because of the historical trend of cured pts in S0106, EFS was modeled with an exponential cure model, and it was assumed IA or IA+vorinostat increased the proportion of pts cured from 35% to 45% and increased median EFS among those not cured from 4.7 months to 7.1 months. Main inclusion criteria included a diagnosis of previously untreated non-APL AML by WHO criteria, age 15 to 60 years, and preserved cardiac function but no severe comorbidities. Pts with known CBF rearranged or FLT3 mutant leukemias were eligible if no other alternative clinical trials existed. Treatment was as follows: Induction: 7+3 arm: dauno 90 mg/m2 IV QD x 3 on days 1-3 with ara-C CI 100 mg/m2 QD x 7 days on days 1 to 7. IA arm: ida 12 mg/m2 QD x 3 on days 1 to 3 with 24 hours CI ara-C 1.5 gm/m2 QD for 4 days on days 1 to 4. IA+vorinostat was as IA but with vorinostat 500 mg orally TID for 3 days on days 1 to 3. Consolidation: 7+3 arm: standard high-dose ara-c at 3 gm/m2 over 3 hrs q12 hours x 6 doses for 1 to 4 cycles depending on transplant availability. IA arm: idarubicin 8 mg/m2 IV QD x 2 days on days 1 to 2 with ara-C 0.75 gm/m2 CI for 3 days on days 1 to 3 for 4 cycles. The number of consolidation cycles depended on transplant indication; a secondary aim of the study was to transplant all cytogenetically-determined high risk pts (presented in a different abstract). Results: Of 754 pts randomized, 738 were eligible (261 to 7+3, 261 to IA, and 216 to IA+V). Baseline characteristics were well balanced among all three groups. Most (75%) pts were between 40 and 60 years, 51% were male, median (range) WBC and platelets were 10.8 (0.3-800) and 49 (3-3900), respectively; marrow blast percentage was 60% (0%-100%); cytogenetics were favorable in 13% of pts, intermediate in 63%, and high-risk in 22%; FLT-3 was mutated in 21% and unknown in 31%; NPM1 was mutated in 20% and was unknown in 37%. Complete remission (CR) rates were 75% for 7+3, 79% for IA, and 77% for IA+V (p=0.58). Significantly more pts received reinduction with 7+3 (24%) versus 11% with IA and 9% with IA+V (p=0.001). 48% of intermediate and unfavorable risk pts received transplant in CR1, with no significant differences among arms (p=0.44). There were no significant differences in EFS, RFS or OS among all three arms (Figure 1, all p>0.5). By cytogenetic or molecular group, there were no differences in outcome for any standard risk subset (FLT-3, NPM1, or CEBPα or cytogenetic subset), although pts with favorable cytogenetics had significantly better EFS, RFS and OS with 7+3 therapy compared to IA or IA+V (Figure 2, all p≤0.015). 30% of pts received 1 consolidation cycle, 18% 2, 16% 3, and 37% 4 cycles. Grade 5 induction toxicity rates were 4% (7+3), 8% (IA), and 9% (IA+V) by arm (p=0.07), and for toxicities related to therapy, 2%, 7%, 8%, respectively (p=0.01). Grade 4 induction toxicity rates were similar across arms (p=0.38). Conclusion: Treatment with IA is not more effective than 7+3 in younger pts with AML. Outcomes with IA or IA plus vorinostat are similar. In pts with favorable cytogenetics, outcomes were inferior with IA or IA+V when compared to 7+3, perhaps related to use of lower doses of ara-C during consolidation. Clinical Trials Registry: NCT #0180233 Support: NIH/NCI grants CA180888, CA180819, CA18020, CA180821, CA180863, CA077202; CCSRI grant #021039 Disclosures Othus: Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Radich:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy. Strickland:Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Baxalta: Consultancy; Cyclacel: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Ambit: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutica: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Savoie:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Lundbeck: Consultancy. Sekeres:Millenium/Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Stone:Amgen: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Jansen: Consultancy; Xenetic Biosciences: Consultancy; Celator: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Abbvie: 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; Novartis: Consultancy; ONO: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Erba:Sunesis: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Gylcomimetics: Other: DSMB; Ariad: Consultancy; Astellas: Research Funding; Gylcomimetics: Other: DSMB; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Gylcomimetics: Other: DSMB; Astellas: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Juno: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jannsen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, DSMB, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy; Agios: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, DSMB, Speakers Bureau; Jannsen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Juno: Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; Jannsen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, DSMB, Speakers Bureau; Juno: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Agios: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Celator: Research Funding; Jannsen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Juno: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Gylcomimetics: Other: DSMB.

Abstract Background: Gilteritinib (ASP2215) is a novel, highly selective, potent oral FLT3/AXL inhibitor with preclinical activity against FLT3-ITD activating and FLT3-D835 resistance mutations. The objectives of this phase 1/2 study were to assess gilteritinib safety/tolerability, pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles after single- and multiple-day dosing, and antileukemic effects in patients with R/R AML. Methods: This open-label study (NCT02014558) enrolled patients (≥18 yr) into 1 of 7 dose-escalation cohorts (20-450 mg once daily [QD]) or concomitant dose-expansion cohorts. While confirmed FLT3 mutation was not an inclusion criterion, each expanded dose level enrolled ≥10 patients with FLT3 mutations (FLT3mut+); 120 and 200 mg dose levels were further expanded with ≥40 FLT3mut+ patients. The choice to expand these dose cohorts was based upon FLT3 inhibition in correlative assays and clinical activity seen during dose escalation. Safety and tolerability were primary endpoints; blood samples were drawn from patients in the dose-escalation cohorts to evaluate gilteritinib PK parameters and PD effects. Antileukemic response rates (eg, complete remission [CR], CR with incomplete platelet recovery [CRp], CR with incomplete hematological recovery [CRi], overall response rate [ORR]) were secondary endpoints. Results: Patients (N=252; 129M:123F, median age 62 yr [range: 21-90]) enrolled between October 2013 and August 2015 received ≥1 dose of gilteritinib. The study population was heavily pretreated: 70% (n=177) had ≥2 prior AML therapies, 29% (n=73) had a prior stem cell transplant, and 25% (n=63) had prior TKI treatment with sorafenib most commonly used. Across the study, 194 patients had a locally confirmed FLT3 mutation (ITD, n=159; D835, n=13; ITD-D835, n=16; other, n=6). For all enrolled patients, progressive disease (n=75), lack of efficacy (n=44), adverse events (n=34), and death (n=29) were the most common reasons for treatment discontinuation. Seven deaths were considered possibly/probably related to treatment: pulmonary embolism, respiratory failure, hemoptysis, intracranial bleed, ventricular fibrillation, septic shock, and neutropenia (all n=1). Maximum tolerated dose was determined to be 300 mg when 2 of 3 patients in the 450 mg cohort experienced diarrhea and/or hepatic transaminase elevation as dose-limiting toxicities. Diarrhea (16%) and fatigue (15%) were the most commonly reported treatment-related adverse events of any grade. Less than 5% of patients (11/252) had a maximum post-baseline QTcF interval >500 msec. Gilteritinib concentrations were generally dose proportional and showed both a long-elimination half-life (45-159 h) and substantial accumulation (3.2-10 fold) by day 15. An exposure-related increase in the inhibition of FLT3 phosphorylation with increasing doses of gilteritinib was also observed. Gilteritinib showed strong antileukemic activity in FLT3mut+ patients (ORR=49%); response was observed less frequently in patients with wild-type FLT3 (ORR=12%). While CR, CRi, and CRp occurred at all doses, responses were enriched among FLT3mut+ patients with gilteritinib steady-state trough concentrations ≥100 ng/mL, which correlated with potent FLT3 inhibition in PD assays and corresponded to doses ≥80 mg. The ORR in 169 FLT3mut+ patients receiving ≥80 mg was 52% (Table); median overall survival in this patient population was ~31 wk (range: 1.7-61; Figure) and median duration of response was 20 wk (range: 1.1-55). Clinical responses occurred in FLT3mut+ patients with -ITD, -D835, and both mutations (ORR: 55%, 17%, and 62%, respectively) as well as in FLT3mut+ patients with or without prior TKI treatment (ORR: 42% vs 56%, respectively). Conclusions: This PD-driven, first-in-human study shows that gilteritinib was well tolerated and generated frequent, prolonged, clinically important responses in FLT3mut+ patients with R/R AML. Antileukemic responses were enriched in FLT3mut+ patients treated at doses that consistently and potently inhibited FLT3 phosphorylation. The survival of these patients appears better than expected for this patient population when treated with standard therapy. Our data suggest that FLT3 inhibition may improve survival in patients with FLT3mut+R/R AML; as such, phase 3 testing of oral gilteritinib 120 mg QD in patients with FLT3mut+R/R AML after first-line therapy is underway (NCT02421939). Disclosures Perl: Astellas US Pharma Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Asana Biosciences: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Arog Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Actinium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Altman:Janssen: Other: advisory board; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Spectrum: Other: advisory board; Ariad: Other: advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: advisory board; Syros: Other: advisory board. Cortes:ARIAD: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding. Smith:Astellas: Research Funding. Erba:Jannsen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; Juno: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, DSMB, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Gylcomimetics: Other: DSMB; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celator: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy. Gill:Astellas: Employment. Goldberg:Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy; COTA Inc: Employment; Pfizer: Honoraria; Neostem: Equity Ownership. Jurcic:Astellas: Research Funding. Larson:Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Liu:Astellas: Employment. 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. Schiller:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Strickland:Celator: Research Funding; Cyclacel: Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutica: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Baxalta: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ambit: Consultancy; Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Wang:Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Immunogen: Research Funding. Stuart:Sunesis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding. Martinelli:Ariad: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Bahceci:Astellas: Employment. Levis:Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: ASP2215 is a highly selective inhibitor of AXL and FMS-like tyrosine kinase-3 (FLT3) receptors. ASP2215 is active against both FLT3 internal tandem duplication [ITD] and D835 mutations. Prior analyses of an open-label, dose-escalation/dose-expansion study in subjects with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (R/R AML) show ASP2215 was well tolerated from 20-300 mg and associated with antileukemic activity in FLT3 mutation-positive (FLT3+) patients at ≥80 mg with minimal activity observed in wild-type FLT3 subjects. Here we describe the tolerability and potent activity of ASP2215 in a large cohort of FLT3+ patients. Methods: Patients (≥18 years) with R/R AML were assigned to treatment in dose-escalation cohorts or were randomized to an open dose level in the dose-expansion cohorts. Although FLT3 mutation was not an inclusion criterion, each expanded dose level enrolled ≥10 FLT3+ subjects; 120 mg and 200 mg dose levels were further expanded with ≥40 FLT3+ subjects. Tolerability was assessed by adverse event (AE) monitoring. Response assessment was based on modified Cheson criteria and duration of response and overall survival were calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Results: As of June 19, 2015,215 patients with a median age of 61 yr (range: 21-90) had received ≥1 dose of ASP2215 (safety population). Across the safety population, 65% of subjects received ≥2 prior lines of AML therapy, 29% had a hematopoietic stem cell transplant prior to ASP2215 treatment, and 23% had prior tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment. Approximately 73% of patients were FLT3+, of which 137 had FLT3-ITD mutation, 7 were FLT3-D835+, and 9 had both FLT3-ITD and D835. Treatment-related AEs of all Grades, reported in ≥10% of the safety population were diarrhea (16%), fatigue (13%), and increased AST (11%); <2% of subjects reported a Grade ≥3 QTc prolongation. Activity was assessed in the 133 FLT3+ patients treated with ASP2215 ≥80 mg. Overall response rate (ORR; composite complete [CRc] plus partial remission [PR]) for all FLT3+ subjects was 55% (Table). Median overall survival for FLT3+ patients receiving ASP2215 ≥80 mg was ~29 weeks (95% CI: 22-32) and was similar for patients who achieved CRc or PR (Figure). Treatment with ≥80 mg ASP2215 was associated with an ORR of 60% in FLT3-ITD subjects; ORR for the other FLT3 populations was 29% (Table). No difference was observed in median ORR of ASP2215 (≥80 mg) in TKI-naïve patients (55%) and patients with prior TKI treatment (55%). Conclusions: ASP2215, a novel AXL/FLT3 TKI, was well tolerated in subjects with R/R AML and demonstrated a strong antileukemic activity in FLT3+ subjects. Importantly, the ASP2215 response rate in these FLT3+ patients was independent of prior TKI treatment. Even in this heavily pretreated population, the survival of R/R FLT3+ AML patients who received ≥80 mg ASP2215 was longer than prior reports of cytotoxic chemotherapy or other FLT3 inhibitors. Table. ASP2215 Response Assessment 80 mg 120 mg 200 mg 300 mg 450 mg Total All FLT3+ Subjects Population, n 12 52 57 10 2 133 CRc, n (%) 5 (42) 25 (48) 28 (49) 3 (30) 0 61 (46) PR, n (%) 3 (25) 3 (6) 3 (5) 3 (30) 0 12 (9) ORR, n (%) 8 (67) 28 (54) 31 (54) 6 (60) 0 73 (55) Subjects with FLT3-ITD Only Population, n 10 46 50 8 0 114 CRc, n (%) 4 (40) 23 (50) 26 (52) 3 (38) 0 56 (49) PR, n (%) 3 (30) 3 (7) 3 (6) 3 (38) 0 12 (11) ORR, n (%) 7 (70) 26 (57) 29 (58) 6 (75) 0 68 (60) Subjects with FLT3-D835 and Subjects with FLT3-ITD and FLT3-D835 Population, n 2 5 5 1 1 14 CRc, n (%) 1 (50) 1 (20) 2 (40) 0 0 4 (29) PR, n (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 ORR, n (%) 1 (50) 1 (20) 2 (40) 0 0 4 (29) CRc, composite complete remission (complete remission + complete remission with incomplete platelet recovery + complete remission with incomplete hematologic recovery); ORR, overall response rate; PR, partial response. NR, no response. Subjects with non-evaluable data (N=8) were not included in this curve. Figure 1. Overall Survival by Best Overall Response Achieved with ASP2215 ≥80 mg Across All FLT3+ Subjects Figure 1. Overall Survival by Best Overall Response Achieved with ASP2215 ≥80 mg Across All FLT3+ Subjects Disclosures Altman: BMS: Other: Advisory board; Novartis: Other: Advisory board; Spectrum: Other: Advisory board; Ariad: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Astellas: Other: Participation in an advisory board December 2013. Off Label Use: ASP2215 is currently under investigation for the treatment of AML and is not yet approved.. Perl:Arog Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Asana Biosciences: Consultancy; Actinium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Ambit/Daichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Astellas US Pharma Inc.: Consultancy. Cortes:Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; BerGenBio AS: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ambit: Consultancy, Research Funding; Arog: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Jenssen: Consultancy. Levis:Arog: Research Funding; Ambit: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy. Smith:Plexxikon: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding. Claxton:NCI: Research Funding; Medimmune, Inc: Research Funding; Ambit Biosciences Corp: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding. Erba:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; GlycoMimetics: Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committees ; Jannsen (J&J): Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committees ; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy; Celator: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Astellas: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; GlycoMimetics: Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committees ; Jannsen (J&J): Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committees ; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy. Gill:Astellas Pharma US, Inc: Employment. Goldberg:Cyclacel: Research Funding; Celetor: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Ambit: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding. Jurcic:Astellas Pharma: Research Funding. Larson:Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lui:Astellas Pharma US, Inc: Employment. Ritchie:Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Other: Advisory Board; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Speakers Bureau. Sargent:Astellas Pharma US, Inc: Employment. Schiller:Sunesis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Strickland:Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Other: Steering Committee and Advisory Board Participation; Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Other: Advisory Board Particpation; Amgen: Other: Advisory Board Particpation; Daiichi-Sankyo: Other: Advisory Board Particpation; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Other: Advisory Board Particpation. Wang:Immunogen: Research Funding. Stuart:Sunesis: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Astellas Pharma, Inc: Research Funding. Baldus:Novartis: Research Funding. Martinelli:MSD: Consultancy; ARIAD: Consultancy; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy. Bahceci:Astellas Pharma Global Development: Employment.

Abstract Abstract 47 Background In adults with newly diagnosed, poor-risk AML we previously demonstrated that induction therapy with Flavopiridol in combination with Ara-C and Mitoxantrone (FLAM,) in a timed-sequential manner, yields complete remission (CR) rates of 67% and median disease-free survival (DFS) of 13.6 months. These data suggest that FLAM might improve outcomes relative to standard “7+3” in newly diagnosed AML with poor-risk features. Thus, we are conducting a phase II randomized trial comparing the CR rates with FLAM vs. 7+3 induction for all newly diagnosed adult patients with AML with intermediate and poor-risk features. We also previously identified a population of CD34+CD38− cells with intermediate aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH) activity that appears to represent a leukemic stem cell (LSC) population. We are examining the effects of FLAM vs. 7+3 in eradicating this LSC population and determining if persistence of LSC's predicts for relapse. Objectives The primary objective is to compare the rate of CR after 1 cycle of FLAM vs. 1 cycle of 7+3. The secondary objectives are to compare toxicities, survival rates, and presence or absence of minimal residual disease (MRD) after both induction regimens. Methods All newly diagnosed adult patients aged 18–70 without favorable risk features were randomized in a 2:1 fashion between FLAM and 7+3 at 90 mg/m2 of Daunorubicin. To achieve balanced randomization, patients were stratified by age, secondary AML and leukocyte count. CD34+ cell subsets were analyzed by flow cytometry for CD38 expression and ALDH activity by Aldefluor. The trial is ongoing. Results To date, 62 patients are evaluable for the primary end point. Demographics and results are depicted in table 1. Patient characteristics were similar in both arms, although there were more patients with poor risk features in the FLAM arm than 7+3. Overall grade > 3 toxicity was similar between both arms. However, there were 3 cases of grade > 3 tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) with FLAM, with 1 death, vs. 0 with 7+3. There were also 3 deaths with FLAM before day 60 vs. 0 with 7+3. CR rate with FLAM was 68% (28/41), with 1 cycle of 7+3 was 48% (10/21) (p = 0.17), and with 2 cycles (7+3 + 5+2) was 52% (11/21). CR rates based on specific risk factors are depicted in table 2. There was a trend toward improved CR rates in patients with adverse genetics with FLAM (p = 0.17). Putative AML LSC's were distinguished from normal hematopoietic stem cells based on ALDH activity. The persistence of putative LSC's in patients after therapy was highly predictive of subsequent clinical relapse. Conclusions Based on the current CR rate of 68%, FLAM holds promise as a therapeutic option for patients with newly diagnosed AML with intermediate and poor risk features. In this preliminary analysis, there is a suggestion that FLAM leads to higher CR rates in patients with adverse genetics than 7+3. Additionally, the detection of MRD consisting of a residual putative LSC population strongly portended subsequent relapse, even in patients without evidence of leukemia. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Flavopiridol (Alvocidib) is an anti-leukemia agent.

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is the most common form of acute leukemia among adults and accounts for the largest number of annual deaths due to leukemias in the United States. Recent advances have resulted in an expansion of treatment options for AML, especially concerning targeted therapies and low-intensity regimens. This portion of the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for AML focuses on the management of AML and provides recommendations on the workup, diagnostic evaluation and treatment options for younger (age <60 years) and older (age ≥60 years) adult patients.