Stefano, Valerio De

Abstract Philadelphia-negative Myeloproliferative Neoplasms (MPN), including Polycythemia Vera (PV), Essential Thrombocythemia (ET), Myelofibrosis (Primary [PMF] and secondary to PV and ET [PPV-, PET-MF] and unclassified MPN (U-MPN), are associated with an increased risk of venous thrombosis in unusual sites, such as splanchnic vessels (SVT). SVT can lead to complications such as portal hypertension, esophageal and gastric varices, ascites,hepatic failure and biliopathy. According to a meta-analysis MPN is the underlying cause of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in 31.5% and Budd Chiari syndrome (BCS) in 40.9% of cases (Smalberg, 2012); a more in-depth analysis of clinical characteristics and evolution of MPN-associated SVT has been hampered by heterogeneity of cohorts comprising small number of cases. We conducted a retrospective multicenter study in patients (pts) with SVT associated with WHO2008-diagnosed MPN, with the aim to describe patient characteristics, disease course and prognostic factors with potential implications for clinical practice. Data were collected from 16 international hematologic centers in the framework of the Italian AGIMM and the IWG-MRT groups. We collected 519 cases of pts with PVT, splenic or mesenteric vein thrombosis (75.1%) and BCS (24.9%) associated with MPN. We used as comparator a cohort of 1686 controls (Ctr) represented by MPN without (w/o) SVT: 741 ET (43.9%), 684 PV (39.7%), 261 PMF (15.5%). Frequency of MPN associated with SVT was 37.8% ET (n=196), 36.8% PV (n=191), 15.4% MF (n=80), 10% U-MPN (n=52). Median follow-up was 89.9 months (mo) (range 0.5-430). For SVT vs Ctr group females were 54.5% vs 44.4% in PV (P=0.001), 68.4 vs 63.5% (p=0.13) in ET, 63.7% vs 29.1% in PMF (p<0.0001); median age at MPN diagnosis (dg) was 43.5 yr (range 12-90) vs 60.6 yr (range 12-93) (p<0.0001). Age at SVT dg was 44 yr (range 15-85). In 240 cases (46.7%) MPN and SVT dg were coincident, in 121 (23.6%) SVT occurred before MPN dg (median 26 mo, range 4-307) and in 153 (29.8%) during MPN follow up (median 68 mo, range 4-362). JAK2V617F mutation was found in 94% PV vs 94% in Ctr, 84% vs 61% ET (p<0.0001), 88.1% vs 68% PMF (p=0.006) and in 93% U-MPN. Erythropoietin-independent colonies (EEC) were evaluated in 111 SVT pts and found in 80 (72%), accounting for 38/48 PV (79%), 31/44 ET (70.5%), 9/12 PMF (75%) and 2/7 U-MPN (28.6%). At dg, SVT PV pts had lower hemoglobin levels than Ctr: median was 17.4 g/dL vs 18.5 g/dL (p<0.0001) in male, 16.9 g/dL vs 17.7 g/dL (p=0.0006) in female. A co-existing thrombophilic status was found in 38.5% SVT vs 11.8% of Ctr (p<0.0001). Recurrent SVT occurred in 12.2% of pts with a rate of 1.6% person/year (CI 1.2-2.1); risk of venous thrombosis other than SVT was increased in SVT group vs Ctr (p=0.02), with no difference for arterial thrombosis. Hemorrhage was more frequent in SVT group (32%) vs Ctr (7.2%)(p<0.0001), mainly related to esophageal varices, which were present in 66.9% of SVT pts. There was no difference in evolution to MF and acute leukemia (AL) for PV and ET pts with and w/o SVT, while risk of AL was lower in MF with SVT (p<0.00001). Overall survival was shorter in ET pts with SVT vs Ctr (p<0.0001). In PMF survival was better in SVT group (p<0.00001) and was associated with a higher proportion of SVT pts in lowest risk categories: IPSS low 65%, intermediate-1 20%, intermediate-2 10% and high 5% compared with 15%, 34%, 25% and 26% in Ctr group. At last FU, 79/519 pts (15.2%) had died; causes of death were evolution to AL (15.4%), other cancers (13.8%), disease progression without AL (10.8%), SVT (10.8%), hepatic failure and venous thrombosis other than SVT (7.7% each), heart failure and arterial thrombosis (6.2% each), hemorrhage (5.5%), renal failure and infection (4.6% each). Therapy after SVT included anticoagulation in 77%, antiaggregant in 21.2% and combination in 1.8%; 70% received cytotoxic drugs; 12.4% were treated with transjugular porto-systemic shunt. Beta blocker therapy was used in 48.5% of pts and correlated with improved survival (p=0.041) MPN associated with SVT correlated with younger age and female sex and might antedate the clinical phenotype in a quarter of the patients. MPN-associated SVT equally affected PV and ET, was more likely to occur in the presence of JAK2V617F or underlying thrombophilia and predicted recurrent venous but not arterial thrombosis. The apparent association of SVT with better or worse prognosis in PMF and ET, respectively, requires further investigation. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Background Interferons are recognized as active agents in the treatment of patients with high risk essential thrombocythemia (ET) or polycythemia vera (PV), both in the upfront setting as well as beyond. Several trials have shown high rates of hematologic and molecular responses with the use of interferons, however, data on direct comparison of interferon activity in patients with early disease in comparison to patients refractory or resistant to prior therapies, such as hydroxyurea (HU) are lacking. We conducted a controlled analysis of the activity of pegylated interferon alfa-2a (PEG) in two prospective parallel clinical trials conducted in these two unique patient populations. Methods The MPD-RC 111 (NCT01259817) was an international, multicenter, phase 2 open-label clinical trial that evaluated PEG therapy in patients with high risk PV and high-risk ET who were either refractory or intolerant (R/I) to HU by modified ELN criteria. The MPD-RC 112 trial (NCT01258856) enrolled patients with high risk ET/PV who were treatment-naïve (TN) (HU <3 months) and randomized them (1:1) to PEG or HU. All patients randomized to PEG were included in this analysis. Both protocols were conducted concurrently at the MPD-RC member institutions and utilized a similar primary endpoint of overall response rate (complete and partial response rates) by ELN Criteria at 12 months confirmed by the same blinded central review committee. Both studies utilized the same PEG starting dose of 45 mcg weekly and was titrated for response to a maximum of 180 mcg weekly. Secondary endpoints included safety information, impact on disease biomarkers, bone marrow (BM) response, and quality of life data. Results Patients ET: 39 TN and 65 R/I ET patients were available for this analysis. Median disease duration was 2.9 months in TN and 37.3 months in R/I patients. Baseline characteristics and demographics were similar in the two cohorts except lower baseline hemoglobin level in RI patients. (Table1A) PV: 43 TN and 50 R/I PV patients were included. Median disease duration was 2.5 months in TN and 54.8 months in R/I patients. Baseline characteristics only differed by lower frequency of phlebotomy rate in R/I patients. (Table1B) Baseline symptoms scores and quality of life were similar in TN and RI groups (Table 2) Response ET: CR/PR/ORR at 12 months were observed in 43.1%/26.2%/69.2% in R/I ET patients and in 43.6%/25.6%/69.2% in TN ET patients (p=0.99 for ORR). (Table 3, Figure 1) PV: CR/PR/ORR at 12 months were observed in 22%/38%/60% in R/I PV patients, and in 27.9%/58.1%/86% in TN PV patients (p=0.005 for ORR). (Table 3, Figure 1) Safety PEG was equally well tolerated throughout both treatment groups with treatment discontinuation due to adverse events occurring in 14.6% in TN patients and 13.9% in R/I patients. The mean (SD) dose of PEG was 102.7 (52.3) mcg in R/I ET patients and 128.7mcg (46.4) in R/I PV patients. For TN patients, mean dose was 85.7mcg (59.7) in ET and 93.5 mcg (44.0) in PV. Adverse events were consistent with historic reports of PEG use and the distribution of events was similar in R/I and TN patients. (Table 4) Conclusion This intention to treat response analysis included TN and R/I ET and PV patients with balanced baseline characteristics who received prospective therapy with PEG. Patients with ET had a higher overall response rate at 12 months that was equivalent in patients who were treatment-naïve and in patients who were intolerant or refractory to HU. By contrast, patients with PV who were treatment-naïve had a higher ORR than patients those intolerant or refractory to HU. We conclude that treatment with PEG is an effective therapeutic option both treatment naïve PV and ET as well as those previously treated with HU, however PEG as a second line agent is especially effective in ET patients. Disclosures Yacoub: Hylapharm: Equity Ownership; Agios: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ardelyx: Equity Ownership; Cara: Equity Ownership; Dynavax: Equity Ownership. Mascarenhas:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Pharmaessentia: 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, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Merus: Research Funding. Mesa:AbbVie: Research Funding; Samus: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Sierra Onc: Consultancy; Genotech: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; La Jolla Pharma: Consultancy. Rampal:Agios, Apexx, Blueprint Medicines, Celgene, Constellation, and Jazz: Consultancy; Constellation, Incyte, and Stemline Therapeutics: Research Funding. Silver:PharmEssentia: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. McMullin:Daiko Sanyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Italopharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ewing:Novartis: Honoraria, Other: Meeting attendance sponsorship ; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Other: Meeting attendance sponsorship . O'Connell:Astex: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shionogi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mead:Bristol Myers-Squibb: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/accommodation expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CTI: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy. De Stefano:Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Baer:Astellas: Research Funding; Al Therapeutics: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CTI BioPharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Kremyanskaya:La Jolla: Consultancy; Incyte, Celgene, Constellation, Protagonist.: Research Funding. Hexner:novartis: Research Funding. Rambaldi:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Omeros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau, travel support. Ritchie:Genentech: Other: Advisory board; Tolero: Other: Advisory board; agios: Other: Advisory board; Pfizer: Other: Advisory board, travel support; Celgene: Other: Advisory board; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Celgene, Novartis: Other: travel support; AStella, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, NS Pharma, Pfizer: Research Funding; Ariad, Celgene, Incyte, Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Celgene, Incyte, Novartis, Pfizer: Consultancy. Kiladjian:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; AOP Orphan: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Harrison:Promedior: Honoraria; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; CTI: Speakers Bureau; AOP: Honoraria; Shire: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Hoffman:Merus: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Pegylated Interferon Alfa-2a for in Patients with Polycythemia Vera or Essential Thrombocythemia

AbstractMyeloproliferative Neoplasms (MPN) course can be complicated by thrombosis involving unusual sites as the splanchnic veins (SVT). Their management is challenging, given their composite vascular risk. We performed a retrospective, cohort study in the framework of the International Working Group for MPN Research and Treatment (IWG‐MRT), and AIRC‐Gruppo Italiano Malattie Mieloproliferative (AGIMM). A total of 518 MPN‐SVT cases were collected and compared with 1628 unselected, control MPN population, matched for disease subtype. Those with MPN‐SVT were younger (median 44 years) and enriched in females compared to controls; PV (37.1%) and ET (34.4%) were the most frequent diagnoses. JAK2V617F mutation was highly prevalent (90.2%), and 38.6% of cases had an additional hypercoagulable disorder. SVT recurrence rate was 1.6 per 100 patient‐years. Vitamin K‐antagonists (VKA) halved the incidence of recurrence (OR 0.48), unlike cytoreduction (OR 0.96), and were not associated with overall or gastrointestinal bleeding in multivariable analysis. Esophageal varices were the only independent predictor for major bleeding (OR 17.4). Among MPN‐SVT, risk of subsequent vascular events was skewed towards venous thromboses compared to controls. However, MPN‐SVT clinical course was overall benign: SVT were enriched in PMF with lower IPSS, resulting in significantly longer survival than controls; survival was not affected in PV and slightly reduced in ET. MPN‐U with SVT (n = 55) showed a particularly indolent phenotype, with no signs of disease evolution. In the to‐date largest, contemporary cohort of MPN‐SVT, VKA were confirmed effective in preventing recurrence, unlike cytoreduction, and safe; the major risk factor for bleeding was esophageal varices that therefore represent a major therapeutic target.

Abstract Background: Patients (pts) with polycythemia vera (PV) and essential thrombocythemia (ET) suffer from difficult MPN associated symptoms which impact quality of life (QoL). The impact of initial cytoreduction on ET/PV symptoms, resulting toxicity and QoL have not been prospectively studied. Methods: MPD-RC 112 trial (NCT01258856) randomized 168 therapy-naive (hydroxyurea [HU] <3 mo) high risk ET/PV pts (<5 years of disease) to response adjusted pegylated interferon alpha 2a (PEG) or HU. MPN symptoms, in depth toxicity assessment, and QoL were measured by two symptom instruments (MPN-SAF, EORTC QLQ-C30: baseline,3, 6, 9, and 12 mo) and toxicity questions. Blinded response review by European Leukemia Net (ELN) hematological responses (HR) was conducted at 12 months. Individual time point and longitudinal group comparisons were based on mixed models adjusting for age. Results: Patients: Of 168 randomized pts (86 HU, 82 PEG), 164 (98%) completed the survey package at baseline and 151 (HU 83%; PEG 98%) completed at least 1 survey during treatment. Median age was 61 (range 18-87) with 70 (42%) females; 81 (48%) / 87 (52%) with ET / PV; 46 (27%) had a history of a thrombosis. 119 (71%) received prior HU (up to 3 months). Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms with the exception of age (median HU 63 vs. PEG 60 yrs; p=0.02). Baseline Symptom Burden /QoL: Mean MPN-SAF Total Symptom Score (TSS), scale 0 [absent]-100 [worst imaginable] was 15.8 (SD 12.6; range 0-62.0) with means of 15.1 (SD 12.6) / 16.5 (SD 12.6) for ET / PV which were slightly lower than reported means of a previous cohort receiving any line of treatment (Scherber RM, JCO 2012). Median number of moderate (defined as score >=3) symptoms in ET patients was 3.0 and PV 4.0. Most common moderate symptoms were fatigue (65.9%), insomnia (37.2%), numbness (33.5%) , itching (29.9%), dizziness (27.4%), early satiety (26.8%) , headache (23.2%), sad mood (23.2%), inactivity (22%), concentration (20.7%). 50.6% of patients had one or more symptom with a score >=6. Mean QLQ-C30 global health status/QoL (GHS/QoL) was 70.8 (SD 21.9) - comparable to a general 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). At baseline, TSS, symptoms, and QoL were similar between treatment arms. In patients with TSS >20 at baseline (highly symptomatic, n=50; ET:20, PV:30), median TSS was 28.0 (range 20.0 to 62.0); the highest scored symptom was fatigue (median=7.0), itching (median=4.5) and insomnia (median=4.0). Impact of Therapy on Symptom Burden/QoL: On HU, pts experienced worsening QoL (physical, cognitive functioning, HRQoL) and some persistent or transient worsened symptoms (inactivity, concentration (p<0.05) (Table 1)). On PEG, pts experienced worsening of fever, dyspnea, appetite loss and PEG-related symptoms including flu-like symptoms, injection site irritation, blurry vision, and visual changes (all p<0.05), but not sad mood (not corrected for antidepressants). In comparing arms, change in TSS significantly differed (p=0.01) between arms with increasing symptoms on HU vs PEG at 3 and 6 mo, but lower symptom burden at 9 and 12 mos (Figure 1). In highly symptomatic pts (with a baseline TSS > 20, n=50), improvements in weight loss, abdominal discomfort, fatigue, itching, fever, early satiety (12 m.) were observed in pts on HU. For PEG, in highly symptomatic pts, improvements were observed for overall TSS score, fatigue, inactivity, night sweats, and itching (with similar toxicities to all PEG patients). ELN Response and Symptom Burden/QoL: Among the 133 pts with 12-mo symptom data, complete hematologic response (CHR) rate was 43%. Inactivity and sad mood were worse in those patient achieving a CHR (inactivity: CHR worsening 0.68 vs PHR/NR better 0.26; p=0.03; sad mood: CHR worsening 0.67 vs PHR/NR better 0.67, p=0.002)). These latter changes were not related to higher doses utilized (in either arm), suggesting obtaining CHR may have negative effects on patient symptoms. Conclusions:In pts with a significant baseline MPN symptom burden, cytoreductive therapy has both a beneficial impact on baseline MPN symptom burden but also leads to therapy associated toxicity, although different patterns of efficacy and toxicity between HU and PEG. Achievement of a CHR in PV/ET may be associated with higher rates of drug related toxicities, and the value of achieving CHR may need further validation. Disclosures Mesa: Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; UT Health San Antonio - Mays Cancer Center: Employment; Genentech: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding. Mascarenhas:Merck: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Rambaldi:Omeros: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Italfarmaco: Consultancy; Amgen Inc.: Consultancy. Yacoub:Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Cara Therapeutics: Equity Ownership; Ardelyx, INC.: Equity Ownership; Inycte: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Dynavax: Equity Ownership. Harrison:Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; CTI BioPharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kiladjian:AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mead:Elstar: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; ARIAD: Consultancy; Cell Therapeutics: Consultancy; Evotek: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Kessler:Sangamo: Research Funding; Octapharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novo Nordisk: Honoraria, Research Funding; Dimension Advisory boards: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; DSMB: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Research Funding; Biomarin: Research Funding. Kremyanskaya:Incyte: Research Funding. Rampal:Incyte: Honoraria, Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Stemline: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria. Hoffman:Incyte: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Merus: Research Funding; Formation Biologics: Research Funding; Summer Road: Research Funding. Dueck:Pfizer: Honoraria; Bayer: Employment; Phytogine: Employment.

Abstract Introduction HU is the treatment of choice for patients (pts) with high risk ET/PV, however, PEG has been proposed as an alternative option due to its proposed potential to modify disease course. An interim analysis of MPN-RC 112 (Blood 2016 128:479;) did not reveal a difference in PR/CR rates between HU and PEG therapy after 12 months in the first evaluable 75 pts treated. Here we present the results and long-term follow-up of all pts participating in this pivotal study [NCT01259856]. Methods MPN-RC 112 was a randomized, open label, phase 3 clinical trial comparing HU and PEG in pts with high risk ET/PV. Pts were treated for up to 12 months to achieve PR or CR (ELN/IWG-MRT response criteria). Pts who achieved a PR/CR continued therapy for up to a maximum of 6 years. Minimum follow up was 1 year from the time the last pt was randomized. The primary objective was to compare the CR rate following HU vs. PEG at 12 months with 3 month confirmation. Secondary objectives included a comparison of toxicity and tolerability; PR rates; incidence of specific pre-defined toxicities and tolerance to therapy; impact of therapy on key biomarkers; survival and incidence of myelodysplastic syndrome, myelofibrosis, or leukemic transformation; and incidence of major cardiovascular events. Bone marrow pathologic responses were evaluated by central blinded expert review at baseline, 12, 24 months and end of study. Results The study accrued 168 pts; 86 were randomized to HU and 82 to PEG. A summary of pt baseline characteristics by treatment arm is shown in Table 1 and were well balanced between the treatment arms except for median age which was higher in the HU arm (p=0.02). Median duration of follow up was 89.9 weeks (range, 0 to 292.3) and the median treatment duration was 86.0 weeks (range, 0 to 287.3). At 12 months, the overall response rate (ORR= PR+CR) was 69.8% and 78% for HU and PEG, respectively (p=0.22). Figure 1 shows the distribution of responses stratified by disease type. At 24 months, 59 pts were on treatment with an ORR of 22/25 (88%) for HU and 31/34 (91%) for PEG. When considering all 106 pts who were eligible to receive treatment for 24 months (due to study closure), the ORR was 22/54 (40.7%, PR: 11 (20.4%), CR: 11 (20.4%)) for HU and 31/52 (59.6%, (PR: 15 (28.9%), CR: 16 (30.8%)) for PEG, p=0.04. Best ORR at any time on study was seen in 70.9% and 81.7% of HU and PEG treated pts, respectively, p=0.10. The median maximum change from baseline spleen volume was -6% (-100.0 - +53.8) in 112 evaluable pts and was similar between arms, p=0.99. Bone marrow morphologic responses are shown in Table 2 and the best response (CR) seen at any time on study for ET treated with HU was 52% (12/23) vs PEG 32% (8/25) and for PV treated with HU 19% (6/31) vs PEG 6% (2/34). Cytogenetic analyses at diagnosis were available in 86% (144/168). An abnormal karyotype was seen in 15% (22/144). Five PV and one ET pt lost their chromosomal abnormalities: 3 after one year (HU=1, PEG=2) and three after two years of therapy (HU=2, PEG=1). AE information is available for 162 pts (HU: 80; PEG: 82) (Table 3). Six pts randomized to HU never received treatment due to study withdrawal prior to initiation of treatment. Sixty pts had a grade 3 or higher event [HU: 22 (27.5%) and PEG: 38 (46.3%)]. 28 PV pts had a grade 3/4 [HU: 10 (24.4%) and PEG: 18 (41.9%)]. Four pts had a grade 4/5 event [HU: 3 (7.3%) and PEG: 1 (2.3%)]. 32 ET pts had a grade 3/4 [HU:12 (30.8%) and PEG:20 (51.3%)]. Two pts had a grade 4/5 event [HU:1 (2.6%), PEG:1 (2.6%)]. Additional outcomes of interest on study include one death attributed to new diagnosis of lung cancer (HU:1), progression to myelofibrosis (HU:1), vertebral artery occlusion (HU:1), and cerebral vascular accident (PEG:1). Reasons for study discontinuation are shown in Table 4. The effect of therapy on symptom burden and quality of life will be presented in a companion abstract (Mesa et al). The impact of mutation status on therapeutic outcome as well as the molecular responses will be presented at the meeting. Conclusion The final analysis of MPN-RC 112 revealed that the CR rates in pts with high risk ET/PV treated with PEG and HU at 12 and 24 months were similar. PEG was associated with a higher rate of grade 3/4 toxicity. Each drug appeared equally capable of modifying the natural history of high risk ET/PV based upon their effects on spleen size, karyotypic abnormalities, histopathological parameters and the low incidence of thrombotic complications and disease evolution in both arms. Disclosures Mascarenhas: Novartis: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Rambaldi:Amgen Inc.: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Italfarmaco: Consultancy; Omeros: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Harrison:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CTI BioPharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kiladjian:AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mead:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Elstar: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; ARIAD: Consultancy; Evotek: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Cell Therapeutics: Consultancy. Kessler:Genentech: Research Funding; Sangamo: Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Biomarin: Research Funding; Octapharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; DSMB: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novo Nordisk: Honoraria, Research Funding; Dimension Advisory boards: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kremyanskaya:Incyte: Research Funding. Rampal:Stemline: Research Funding; Incyte: Honoraria, Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Mesa:CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Genentech: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; UT Health San Antonio - Mays Cancer Center: Employment; Pfizer: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding. Dueck:Pfizer: Honoraria; Bayer: Employment; Phytogine: Employment. Hoffman:Incyte: Research Funding; Formation Biologics: Research Funding; Merus: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Summer Road: Research Funding.

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 In the recent International Prognostic Score for Thrombosis in essential thrombocythemia (IPSET-thrombosis), age and history of thrombosis were confirmed as independent risk factors for future thrombosis and the study also identified independent prothrombotic role for cardiovascular (CV) risk factors and JAK2 V617F mutation (Barbui et al. Blood 2012). Methods In the current study, we re-analyzed the original IPSET-thrombosis data in 1019 patients with WHO-defined ET in whom JAK2 mutational status was available, in order to quantify the individual contributions of JAK2 mutations and CV risk factors in conventionally-assigned low and high risk ET, as well as in age- versus thrombosis-defined high risk status. Results After a median follow-up of 6.8 and 5.0 years in conventionally-assigned low- and high-risk patients, respectively, the overall annual rate of total thrombosis (108 events) in conventionally-assigned low- and high-risk patients was 1.11%-pt/y (CI 0.81-1.52) and 2.46%-pt/y (CI 1.94-3.11) respectively (p=0.001), and the difference was mainly due to a higher frequency of arterial thrombosis in high-risk patients (p<0.001).The influence of JAK2 mutational status and CV-risk factors on the rate of thrombosis in conventionally assigned low- and high-risk groups is presented in the table. Table 1. Additional risk factors N (%) Event Rate % pts/yr (95% CI) P-value P-value P-value trend Low risk 506 (50) 39 1.11 (0.81-1.52) None 200 (40) 7 0.44 (0.21-0.92) ref Cardiovascular risk factor 36 (7) 3 1.05 (0.34-3.25) 0.220 0.227 JAK2V617F 213 (43) 21 1.59 (1.04-2.44) 0.001 0.217 Both 52 (10) 8 2.57 (1.29-5.15) <0.001 ref <0.001 High risk 513 (50) 69 2.46 (1.94-3.11) None 111 (22) 10 1.44 (0.78-2.68) ref Cardiovascular risk factor 44 (9) 4 1.64 (0.62-4.37) 0.909 0.067 JAK2V617F 222 (43) 30 2.36 (1.65-3.38) 0.168 0.082 Both 136 (27) 25 4.17 (2.82-6.17) 0.011 ref 0.005 The number of major arterial and venous thrombosis was reported as rates per 100 patient-years and the difference among groups was assessed by Mantel Cox log-rank test i) Conventionally-assigned low-risk group. Amongst 506 patients, 200 (40%) displayed neither JAK2 mutation nor CV risk factors and their annual rate of thrombosis was 0.44%, as opposed to 1.05% in the presence of CV risk factors (P=NS), 1.59% in the presence of JAK2 mutation (p=0.001) and 2.57% in the presence of both CV risk factors and JAK2 mutation (P<0.001). There was no significant difference when low-risk patients with both JAK2 mutation and CV risk factors were compared with either those with CV risk factors only (p=0.227) or those with JAK2 mutation only (p=0.217). ii) Conventionally assigned high-risk group: The absence or presence of one or both of the aforementioned additional risk factors for thrombosis were documented in 111 (22%), 44 (9%), 222 (43%) and 136 (27%) patients, respectively, with corresponding annual rates of thrombosis at 1.44%, 1.64%, 2.36% and 4.17% (Table). High-risk patients with both risk factors had a significantly higher risk of thrombosis compared to their counterparts with the absence of JAK2 mutations and CV risk factors (p=0.011). Additional analysis revealed limited enhancement of thrombosis risk by either JAK2 mutations or CV risk factors or both in patients whose high-risk status was defined by the presence of thrombosis history, regardless of age (P=NS). In contrast, the presence of JAK2 mutations, with or without CV risk factors, might have affected thrombosis risk in patients where high-risk status was defined by age alone (p=0.05). Conclusions The current study suggests the possibility of considering four risk categories in ET: "very low risk" group (age ≤60 years and without thrombosis history, JAK2 mutations or CV risk factors); "low risk" (age ≤60 years and without thrombosis history but with JAK2 mutations or CV risk factors); "intermediate risk" (age>60 years but without thrombosis history or JAK2 mutations); and "high risk" (thrombosis history at any age or JAK2 -mutated patients who are older than 60 years of age). Treatment recommendations for each one of the above-mentioned new risk categories should be examined in the context of prospective controlled studies. Disclosures Barbui: Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Vannucchi:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Speakers Bureau; Baxalta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Buxhofer-Ausch:AOP Orphan: Research Funding. De Stefano:Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen Cilag: Research Funding; Shire: Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Speakers Bureau; Bruno Farmaceutici: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Gisslinger:Janssen Cilag: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AOP ORPHAN: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Geron: Consultancy; Sanofi Aventis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Abstract Philadelphia-negative Myeloproliferative Neoplasms (MPN) include Polycythemia Vera (PV), Essential Thrombocythemia (ET) and Myelofibrosis Primary (PMF) and secondary to PV and ET (PPV-, PET-MF); included are also some less characterized entities defined as unclassified MPN (U-MPN). Risk of arterial and venous thrombosis is increased in MPN patients, and thrombosis is one of most important causes of mortality and morbidity. The risk of venous thrombosis in unusual sites, such as splanchnic vessels (SVT), is particularly associated with MPN; SVT can lead to complications such as portal hypertension, esophageal and gastric varices, ascites and hepatic failure. A recent meta-analysis reported that a MPN is the underlying cause of portal vein thrombosis in 31.5% and of Budd Chiari syndrome in 40.9% of cases (Smalberg, 2012). A significant association of SVT with JAK2V617F mutated MPN was reported (Dentali, 2009) but study of other correlations has been hampered by heterogeneity of available patient cohorts comprising relatively small number of cases. We conducted a retrospective multicenter study collecting clinical and biological data of patients (pts) with SVT associated with MPN diagnosed according to WHO2008 criteria, aiming to describe patients’ characteristics, trends and prognostic factors, and their potential implications for clinical practice. Data were collected from 15 international hematology centers in the framework of IWG-MRT. We collected 475 cases of pts with portal, splenic or mesenteric vein thrombosis (75.2%) or Budd Chiari syndrome (24.8%) associated with MPN. In 32% of cases, simultaneous involvement of portal (69.1% of total thrombosis), splenic (30.5%) and mesenteric (25.3%) veins occurred, and in 1.7% they were associated with Budd Chiari syndrome. Frequency of MPN subtype: 38.1% ET (n=181), 34.9% PV (n=166), 16.2% MF (n=77), 10.8% U-MPN (n=51). Median follow-up 87.9 mo (range 0.5-430); female 61.3% (n=292; P<0.0001 vs male); median age at MPN diagnosis (dg) 44.4 y (range 12-90), at SVT dg 44.9 y (range 17-85). In 229 cases (48%) MPN and SVT dg were coincident, while in 104 (22%) SVT occurred before MPN dg (median 40 mo, range 5-335) and in 129 (27%) during MPN follow up (median 79 mo, range 5-394). JAK2V617F mutational status is available for 361 pts: 99% PV, 84.7% ET, 88.1% PMF and 92.9% U-MPN pts were JAK2V617F positive, with a mean allele burden of 56±27.4%, 33.1±25.5%, 39.3±19.4% and 23.8±11.9%, respectively. Erythropoietin-independent colonies (EEC) were present at diagnosis in 80/110 evaluated cases (72.7%), 38/47 PV (84.4%), 32/45 ET (71.1%), 8/11 PMF (72.7%) and 2/7 U-MPN (28.6%). A concurrent thrombophilic state was found in 38.9% of cases. A 12.3% of pts experienced a recurrence of SVT after a median of 29 mo (range 1-378.3) and 35.8% developed thrombosis in other sites (17.7% arterial, 19.3% venous). Esophageal varices were found in 70.6% from which 31.9% bled. MF transformation occurred in 32/166 PV (19%) and in 23/181 ET (13%) pts, with median time to progression of 122.3 mo (range 5.4-377.3) and 125.1 mo (range 39.3-255.3), respectively. Evolution to acute leukemia (AL) occurred in 12 pts (2.7%), of which 2 PMF, 6 PV and 4 ET. In 3 PV and 1 ET pts a PPV and PET-MF transformation occurred before AL. After SVT, 77% of pts received anticoagulation, 23.5% antiaggregant therapy and 1.5% both; 68.8% received cytotoxic drugs, 11.4% of pts were treated with trans jugular porto-systemic shunt. No differences in survival were noted with these approaches. Beta blocker therapy was used in 48.5% of pts and correlated with improved survival (p=0.041) At last follow up 70/473 pts (14.8%) died; causes of death are evolution to AL (16.4%), other cancers (14.5%), disease progression without AL (12.7%), SVT (10.9%), hepatic failure and venous thrombosis other than SVT (9.1% each), heart failure and arterial thrombosis (7.3% each), hemorrhage (5.5%), renal failure and infection (3.6% each). After 10 y follow up 8/166 PV (5%), 14/181 ET (8%), 14/77 PMF (18%) and 1/51 U-MPN (1.96%) pts died (p<0.01). Survival was significantly affected by occurrence of thrombosis other than SVT (p<0.0001) but not recurrence in splanchnic vessels (p=0.068). This large study confirms the strong association between JAK2V617F-mutated MPN and SVT and identifies the category of U-MPN as the prognostically more favorable; thrombosis at sites outside the splanchnic vasculature remains the leading cause of death. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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.

Abstract Accurate prediction of thrombosis in essential thrombocythemia (ET) provides the platform for prospective studies exploring preventive measures. Current risk stratification for thrombosis in ET is 2-tiered and considers low- and high-risk categories based on the respective absence or presence of either age > 60 years or history of thrombosis. In an international study of 891 patients with World Health Organization (WHO)–defined ET, we identified additional independent risk factors including cardiovascular risk factors and JAK2V617F. Accordingly, we assigned risk scores based on multivariable analysis–derived hazard ratios (HRs) to age > 60 years (HR = 1.5; 1 point), thrombosis history (HR = 1.9; 2 points), cardiovascular risk factors (HR = 1.6; 1 point), and JAK2V617F (HR = 2.0; 2 points) and subsequently devised a 3-tiered prognostic model (low-risk = < 2 points; intermediate-risk = 2 points; and high-risk = > 2 points) using a training set of 535 patients and validated the results in the remaining cohort (n = 356; internal validation set) and in an external validation set (n = 329). Considering all 3 cohorts (n = 1220), the 3-tiered new prognostic model (low-risk n = 474 vs intermediate-risk n = 471 vs high-risk n = 275), with a respective thrombosis risk of 1.03% of patients/y versus 2.35% of patients/y versus 3.56% of patients/y, outperformed the 2-tiered (low-risk 0.95% of patients/y vs high-risk 2.86% of patients/y) conventional risk stratification in predicting future vascular events.