Silver, Richard T.

Introduction Essential thrombocythemia (ET) and polycythemia vera (PV) patients suffer from various symptoms that worsen quality of life (QOL), yet serial data on symptom changes resulting from therapy are sparse in the literature. Patient questionnaires from 2 large multicenter trials (MPN-RC 111, 112) were used to assess change in symptom burden and QOL over 12 months and impact of baseline symptom burden on subsequent change in ET / PV patients on hydroxyurea (HU) or pegylated interferon alfa-2a (PEG). Methods Trials MPN-RC 111 was a single-arm, open-label, phase II trial evaluating response to PEG in high-risk ET / PV patients with HU resistance/intolerance or splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT; NCT01259817). MPN-RC 112 was a randomized, open-label, phase III trial comparing response to PEG versus HU in cytoreductive therapy naïve high-risk ET / PV patients diagnosed < 5 years ago (NCT01258856). Measures Patients reported disease-related symptoms via the validated Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Symptom Assessment Form (MPN-SAF), QOL via the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Core QOL Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), and (if applicable) PEG-related symptoms (flu-like symptoms, injection site irritation, blurry vision, vision change, flushing) at baseline, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Analysis Mixed models assessed mean changes from baseline in the MPN-SAF Total Symptom Score (TSS), MPN-SAF items, QOL, and PEG-related symptoms in MPN-RC 111, 112 PEG, and 112 HU patients. Mixed models also assessed the impact of baseline symptom burden (high [TSS ≥ 20] versus low) on subsequent change in PEG (MPN-RC 111 and 112) and HU patients. Results Patients Of the 135 enrolled MPN-RC 111 patients, 20 with SVT and 1 with no questionnaires were excluded. Of the remaining 114, 64 (56%) / 50 (44%) had ET / PV. Patients were 51% / 48% female. Median age was 65 / 64 years, and median time since diagnosis was 38 / 55 months. 31% / 22% had prior thrombosis, and 19% / 56% had splenomegaly. Of the 168 enrolled MPN-RC 112 patients (82 PEG, 86 HU), 2 with no questionnaires were excluded. Of the remaining 166, 79 (48%) / 87 (52%) had ET / PV. Patients were 50% / 33% female. Median age was 60 / 62 years, and median time since diagnosis was 3 / 3 months. 25% / 29% had prior thrombosis, and 11% / 37% had splenomegaly. Symptoms Questionnaire completion rates ranged from 90 - 99%, 87 - 100%, and 75 - 96% for on-treatment MPN-RC 111, 112 PEG, and 112 HU patients. At baseline, TSS (0 [absent] - 100 [worst imaginable]) and QOL (0 [very poor] - 100 [excellent]) means (SDs) were 19.5 (18.4) and 71.6 (20.1) for MPN-RC 111, 17.0 (13.6) and 67.9 (24.3) for MPN-RC 112 PEG, and 14.6 (11.4) and 73.8 (18.8) for MPN-RC 112 HU patients. On average, MPN-RC 111 patients had significant improvement of TSS, fatigue, abdominal pain, abdominal discomfort, dizziness, numbness, night sweats, and fever; MPN-RC 112 PEG patients had significant worsening of fever; and MPN-RC 112 HU patients had significant worsening of inactivity (no mean changes indicating improvement were observed). PEG patients had significant worsening of PEG-related symptoms. The greatest improvements occurred in the 46 (40%), 27 (33%), and 23 (28%) MPN-RC 111, 112 PEG, and 112 HU patients with high baseline symptom burden. On average, PEG patients with high baseline symptom burden had significant improvement of TSS, fatigue, early satiety, abdominal pain, abdominal discomfort, inactivity, headache, concentration, dizziness, numbness, insomnia, cough, night sweats, itching, bone pain, fever, weight loss, and QOL, while those with low baseline symptom burden had significant worsening of TSS, early satiety, headache, itching, and bone pain. On average, HU patients with high baseline symptom burden had significant improvement of TSS, early satiety, abdominal discomfort, headache, dizziness, numbness, insomnia, itching, and weight loss, while those with low baseline symptom burden had significant worsening of TSS, early satiety, abdominal discomfort, inactivity, concentration, and sexual desire/function (Figures 1 and 2). Conclusions Although no statistical comparisons were made across trials, overall improvements were seen in MPN-RC 111 but not 112. Patients with high baseline symptom burden experienced the greatest improvements in symptom burden and QOL during treatment with PEG or HU, which may explain the improvements seen in the more advanced patients in MPN-RC 111 compared to 112. Disclosures Mascarenhas: Celgene, Prelude, Galecto, Promedior, Geron, Constellation, and Incyte: Consultancy; Incyte, Kartos, Roche, Promedior, Merck, Merus, Arog, CTI Biopharma, Janssen, and PharmaEssentia: Other: Research funding (institution). Yacoub:Dynavax: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Ardelyx: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Cara Therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Hylapharm: Current equity holder in private company; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Agios: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Hoffman:Protagonist: Consultancy; Forbius: Consultancy; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Dompe: Research Funding. Silver:PharmaEssentia: Speakers Bureau. Mesa:Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy; LaJolla Pharmaceutical Company: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy.

6624 Background: RUX is a JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor that demonstrated significant clinical benefit in patients (pts) with MF in COMFORT-I (NCT00952289), a phase 3, randomized (1:1), double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled study (N=309). Methods: Pts assessed MF-related symptoms daily using the modified Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form v2.0; Total Symptom Score (TSS) was calculated from individual scores for abdominal discomfort, pain under left ribs, early satiety, night sweats, itching, and bone/muscle pain. Therapy was interrupted if platelet or absolute neutrophil count fell below 50,000/µL or 500/µL, respectively. AEs were evaluated during treatment interruption or discontinuation. The protocol suggested an optional tapering strategy and possible addition of steroids if RUX therapy was discontinued for reasons other than thrombocytopenia. Results: In RUX-treated patients with treatment interruption, TSS gradually returned to baseline levels over approximately 1 week. The most common AE leading to treatment interruption or discontinuation in each group was thrombocytopenia (n=11, RUX) and abdominal pain (n=4, PBO). Of these, only 1 RUX pt discontinued for thrombocytopenia. A summary of new onset/worsening AE data after treatment interruption or discontinuation is presented (Table). Of 58 pts who discontinued study treatment, 23 (n=10, RUX; n=13, PBO) experienced a total of 43 SAEs (19, RUX; 24, PBO) that showed no specific pattern or difference between treatment groups. Four of 21 RUX-treated pts had dose tapering following study drug discontinuation. Conclusions: Apart from the expected return of MF-related symptoms, there was no pattern of AEs to suggest that RUX interruption or discontinuation is associated with a specific withdrawal syndrome. [Table: see text]

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

Abstract Background: The myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), including essential thrombocythemia (ET), polycythemia vera (PV) and myelofibrosis (MF) can be characterized by heterogeneous symptoms, disease features, and prognosis. Timely monitoring of blood counts and if needed, referral for discussion of stem cell transplant (SCT), are critical to optimizing survival and quality of life. In connection with the MPN SCT Transplantation Timing Taskforce's (MS3T's) work in developing the DIPPS-based Stem Cell Spectrum Timing Tool, the survey was deployed to explore factors contributing to delayed entry to SCT. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for MPNs strongly recommend referral to specialized centers with expertise in the management of MPNs (Mesa et. al. 2017). To date, efforts to assess the timing and quality of MPN patient care from the patient's perspective have been minimal. Methods: Patients were recruited from MPN-related Facebook pages, subscribers of MPNforum Magazine and E-mail support groups including the MPN-NET, MPDchat, and the MPN Research Foundation. Hematologists, MPN patients, and advocates constructed the 11-item survey questions and content. The survey was available for patient response between July 4-11th2018. Patients were queried on MPN type, time of diagnosis, and details regarding knowledge of their MPN disease features and care. Data: Demographics.Overall 2382 MPN patients responded to the online survey. Of these, 901 (38%) patients had ET, 865 (36%) had PV, 561 (24%) had MF, 41 (2%) had MPN-unclassifiable or MPN/MDS overlap and 15 (1%) did not respond. Among MF patients, 56% reported having primary MF, 42% secondary MF, 1% prefibrotic MF, and 1% reported having already undergone SCT (1% did not specify type of MF or transplant). The majority of patients were diagnosed with their MPN by a hematology/oncology (77.8%) or family practice (15 %) physician. MPN Care provider and monitoring: Out of all respondents, 35% reported being cared for by an MPN specialist, 36% were not cared for by an MPN specialist and 27% were unsure if their provider was an MPN specialist. Overall less than half (42%) of patients reported having sought a second opinion from an MPN specialist. The majority (87%) of participants knew their mutational status relating to the highly publicized and widely tested JAK2 V617F mutation (73.8%) and CALR (10.2%). However, a statistically insignificant number of patients had any idea of other driving and secondary mutations including MPL, EZH2, SRSF2, IDH1/2 or ASLX-1. Blood counts were reviewed by a hematologist for the majority of patients (93% responded "yes", 4% responded "sometimes", 3% responded "no"). SCT Referral: Among ET and PV, <1% of patients reported being referred to SCT. For MF, 34% of participants reported having been referred for SCT discussion (30% for primary MF and 28% for secondary MF). Conclusions: MPN patients often report receiving care outside of the care of an MPN specialist. Additionally, despite the poor outcomes and higher likelihood of progression to AML, less than a third of patients with secondary MF report being referred for SCT discussion. Independent validation of patient responses, particularly in regards to MPN specialized care and timing of transplant discussion should be investigated further. However, these patient responses suggest many patients may be receiving less than optimal MPN care. These results demonstrate the importance of community hematology/oncology physician and patient education regarding optimal MPN care. Disclosures Mesa: UT Health San Antonio - Mays Cancer Center: Employment; Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding. Palmer:Novartis: Research Funding. Harrison:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; CTI BioPharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Verstovsek:Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Consultancy; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Scherber:Gilead: Honoraria.

Abstract Introduction: PRM-151, a recombinant human pentraxin-2 molecule, has been shown to prevent and reverse fibrosis in animal models of myelofibrosis (MF) by postulated targeting differentiation of fibrocytes (essential cells in fibrotic process) from monocytes. In the first stage of a two-stage trial, 27 patients (pts) with primary myelofibrosis (PMF), post-essential thrombocythemia/polycythemia vera (post-ET/PV) MF, and Grade 2 or 3 bone marrow fibrosis (BMF) received PRM-151 10 mg/kg IV ± ruxolitinib (RUX) for 6 cycles (24 weeks). A reduction in BMF, decrease in symptoms (MPN-SAF Total Symptom Score [TSS]), and a reduction of palpable splenomegaly were observed, along with a favorable safety profile. Pts experiencing clinical benefit were allowed to continue beyond 24 weeks in an open label extension (OLE) study. Here, we report interim efficacy and safety data for 18 pts enrolled in the OLE, who had been treated for up to 35 cycles (140 weeks). Methods: All pts in the OLE received a monthly infusion of PRM-151 10 mg/kg IV. Pts receiving PRM-151 alone or in combination with RUX in the main study continued with their respective drugs. Safety and hematology parameters were assessed monthly, and MPN-SAF TSS Q3 months. BM biopsies were obtained at baseline, end of main study, and at physician discretion in the OLE. These were evaluated centrally by two independent, blinded hematopathologists for the degree of reticulin and collagen fibrosis. Immunostaining for fibrocytes was performed on available biopsies. The primary objective of the OLE was to assess safety and efficacy of long-term administration of PRM-151. Results: Of the 18 pts enrolled in the OLE, 9 received PRM-151 as single agent, and 9 in conjunction with RUX. Baseline characteristics included median age of 66 years (51-78); 8 pts were DIPSS Int-1, 9 Int-2, and 1 high-risk; 6 (33%) had Hgb < 100 g/L, 12 (67%) had PLT < 100 x 109/L; 7 (39%) had PLT <50 x 109/L; 8 pts had PMF, 10 had post-ET/PV MF; 13 pts (72%) had a palpable spleen, and 9 (50%) had Grade 3 BMF. Median time on study for these 18 pts was 30.9 months (15.9-47.2 months). All pts experienced at least 1 adverse event (AE), with 8 pts (44%) reporting a possible study drug-related AE. No unexpected AEs were observed, and no deaths were reported during the study period. The mean best percent change (by palpation) in spleen size from baseline was −37%, with a median percent reduction of −26.1% (Figure). The mean best percent improvement in MPN-SAF TSS was −54%, with a median percent reduction of TSS of −64%. Pts in the PRM-151 monotherapy group showed similar improvements in MPN-SAF TSS and splenomegaly as those receiving PRM-151 + RUX (Figure). Complete data on hematology parameters will be available at the time of presentation. Improvement in BM reticulin grade was observed in 5 of 7 pts (71%) with Grade 2 BMF at baseline, and in 4 of 9 pts (44%) with Grade 3 BMF at baseline. Of the pts with Grade 3 BMF at baseline, 2 of 9 pts (22%) had a 2-grade reduction (Table). In addition, 5 of 6 pts (83%) with Grade 2 collagen fibrosis at baseline had a 1-grade reduction, with 2 of 6 pts (33%) improving to Grade 0. Also, 2 of 7 pts (28%) with Grade 3 collagen fibrosis had a reduction of 1-grade with 1 of 7 (14%) improving to Grade 0 (Table). Eight of 18 pts had BM fibrocyte immunostaining done: mean fibrocyte count in the hematopoietic BM decreased from 378.0 ± 255.3 per mm2 (11.2 ± 7.7% of total cells) at study baseline to 81.3 ± 86.5 per mm2 (2.0 ± 2.1% of total cells; 7 of 8 pts evaluable) at cycle 25, with continuous reduction in fibrocyte numbers observed at interim. Over the same period, improvement in BM reticulin grade was detected in 4 of 7 pts (57%), and collagen fibrosis grade was decreased in 3 of 7 pts (43%). Conclusions: This long-term follow-up study of 18 pts with MF who received PRM-151 for a median of 31 months showed the drug to be well tolerated. An overall improvement in BM reticulin and collagen fibrosis grade, as well as reductions in MPN-SAF TSS and splenomegaly were observed. In a subset of pts for whom bone marrow fibrocyte immunostaining data were available, a mean reduction in fibrocyte counts was observed, as well as improved bone marrow reticulin and collagen fibrosis grade. These data warrant confirmation in a larger controlled study. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Verstovsek: Incyte: Consultancy; Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Pozdnyakova:Promedior, Inc.: Consultancy. Mesa:Promedior: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Galena: Consultancy; Gilead: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding. Foltz:Incyte: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Mascarenhas:Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding. Ritchie:Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; ARIAD Pharmaceuticals: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Palmer:Novartis: Research Funding. Kremyanskaya:Incyte: Research Funding. van den Blink:Promedior, Inc.: Employment. Gupta:Promedior, Inc.: Employment. Gotlib:Deciphera: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kartos: Consultancy; Promedior: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

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 We investigated a new method using fluorescence in situ hybridization and DNA probes that span the common breakpoints of t(9;22)(q34;q11.2) and that detect double BCR/ABL fusion (D-FISH) in bone marrow cells with this translocation, one on the abnormal chromosome 9 and one on the Philadelphia chromosome (Ph chromosome). D-FISH patterns were abnormal in 30 of 30 specimens with classic, simple, complex, and masked Ph chromosomes. Based on 200 nuclei from each of 30 normal specimens, the mean percentage of false-positive cells was 0.25 ± 0.39. Thirty-seven specimens from 10 patients were studied before treatment and two or more times at 4-month intervals after treatment with interferon-α2b (IFN-α2b) with or without ara-C. Based on 200 nuclei, the results of D-FISH in these specimens correlated closely with quantitative cytogenetics and accurately quantified disease within a few percent. We studied 6,000 nuclei for each of six specimens, three normal and three from patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in cytogenetic remission. The normal cutoff for 6,000 nuclei was 0.079% and patients in cytogenetic remission had residual disease ranging from 7 (0.117%) to 53 (0.883%) Ph-positive nuclei. We conclude that D-FISH can detect the Ph chromosome and its variant translocations and accurately quantify disease in CML at diagnosis and at all times after treatment, including cytogenetic remission.

Abstract Using a highly sensitive fluorescence in situ hybridization method with probes for BCR and ABL1 (D-FISH), we studied 37 paired sets of bone marrow and blood specimens, collected within 24 to 96 hours of each other, from 10 patients before and during treatment for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). The normal range for 500 interphase nuclei was ≤4 (≤0.8%) nuclei based on 10 bone marrow and 10 blood specimens from normal individuals. The percentage of neoplastic nuclei was usually lower in blood than bone marrow. However, changes in the percentage of neoplastic nuclei in blood and bone marrow tracked closely over the course of therapy and with the results of quantitative cytogenetic studies on bone marrow. This result indicates that D-FISH is useful to test blood from patients with CML to monitor therapy. Moreover, by analysis of 6,000 nuclei with D-FISH, residual disease was identified in bone marrow and blood for patients in complete cytogenetic remission. Consequently, D-FISH analyses of interphase nuclei from blood could substitute for Q-cytogenetic studies on bone marrow. Thus, it may not be necessary to collect bone marrow samples so frequently to monitor therapy in CML.

Abstract Abstract 278 Background: Overactive JAK-STAT signaling as a result of gain-of-function mutations (eg, JAK2V617F) and/or high circulating levels of inflammatory cytokines is considered to play a key role in the pathogenesis of myeloproliferative neoplasms. Ruxolitinib, a selective oral inhibitor of JAK1 and JAK2, demonstrated a significant reduction in spleen volume (SV) and improvements in myelofibrosis (MF)-related symptoms in a double-blind placebo-controlled trial (COMFORT-I). The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of ruxolitinib across patient (pt) subgroups in COMFORT-I. Methods: Pts with MF were randomized to start placebo or ruxolitinib at a dose of 15 mg or 20 mg PO BID depending on baseline platelet count (100–200 ×109/L or >200 ×109/L, respectively). The dose was optimized for efficacy and safety during treatment. SV change was measured by MRI; MF symptoms were assessed using a daily diary (modified Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form [MFSAF] v2.0) over 1 wk prior to dosing and throughout the 24 wks of dosing. The percent changes from baseline to wk 24 in SV and MFSAF Total Symptom Score (TSS, a measure of combined scores for abdominal discomfort, pain under ribs on left side, early satiety, itching, night sweats, and bone/muscle pain) were compared for ruxolitinib and placebo pts across the following subgroups: MF disease subtype, age, International Prognosis Scoring System (IPSS) risk group, presence/absence of JAK2V617F mutation, baseline hemoglobin, baseline spleen size (palpable spleen length), and baseline TSS. Survival was estimated by Kaplan-Meier method. Changes in SV and TSS Across Subgroups: 309 pts were randomized: 155 to ruxolitinib and 154 to placebo. Ruxolitinib demonstrated consistent benefit compared with placebo in both SV and TSS across all subgroups evaluated (Table). The impact of symptom severity on response was evaluated by baseline TSS quartiles (maximum score for TSS = 60). Ruxolitinib pts with baseline TSS of <8.5, 8.5-<16.5, 16.5-<25.5 and ≥25.5 had mean percent changes in SV of −28.0, −31.4, −31.7 and −34.8, respectively, vs +8.1 for all placebo pts combined. The mean percent change in TSS for these same subgroups was −40.5, −47.2, −48.1 and −48.2 vs +41.8 for all placebo pts combined. These data indicate that pts with modest to marked symptoms all benefit from ruxolitinib therapy in terms of both SV and TSS. Survival Analysis: 13 ruxolitinib and 24 placebo pts died during the study or during extended follow-up (median follow-up of 52 and 51 wks, respectively), representing a hazard ratio (95% CI) of 0.499 (0.254, 0.98) (p=0.0395). For ruxolitinib- and placebo-treated pts, respectively, the probability of survival (95% CI) >48 wks was 0.98 (0.92, 0.99) and 0.90 (0.81, 0.95) for pts with baseline hemoglobin values ≥10 g/dL and 0.84 (0.72, 0.91) and 0.77 (0.63, 0.86) for pts with baseline hemoglobin <10 g/dL. Conclusions: Pts receiving ruxolitinib had higher response rates than placebo based on reductions in SV and improvements in TSS at wk 24 regardless of baseline subgroup: MF disease subtype, age (≤65 or >65 y), IPSS risk group (intermediate-2 or high-risk), presence or absence of JAK2V617F mutation, hemoglobin level (≥10 g/dL or <10 g/dL), palpable spleen length (≤10 cm or >10 cm), and symptom severity (TSS quartile). In addition, the overall survival analysis suggested a benefit with ruxolitinib therapy over placebo. Disclosures: Verstovsek: Incyte: Research Funding. Mesa:Incyte: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; SBio: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Gotlib:Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding. Levy:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gupta:Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Catalano:Incyte: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Deininger:BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding. Miller:Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Winton:Incyte: Consultancy. Arcasoy:Incyte: Research Funding. Lyons:Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria; Telik: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Vaddi:Incyte: Employment. Erickson-Viitanen:Incyte: Employment. Sun:Incyte: Employment. Sandor:Incyte: Employment. Kantarjian:Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding.